Spec Workflow

Activation Contract

Use this first when

• The request is a new feature, multi-step product change, cross-module integration, or architecture/design task.
• Acceptance criteria are unclear and need to be made explicit before implementation.
• The work involves multiple files, user flows, database design, or UI design that needs staged confirmation.

Read before writing code if

• You are unsure whether the task should go straight to coding or should first go through requirements, design, and task planning.
• The request mentions a new page, a new system, a redesign, a workflow, or a multi-module refactor.

Then also read

• Frontend page or visual design work -> ../ui-design/SKILL.md
• Advanced data-model work -> ../data-model-creation/SKILL.md

Do NOT use for

• Small bug fixes with clear scope.
• One-file documentation updates.
• Straightforward config changes.
• Tiny refactors where the user already gave exact implementation instructions.

Common mistakes / gotchas

• Jumping into coding before acceptance criteria are explicit.
• Skipping user confirmation between requirements, design, and tasks.
• Writing vague tasks that do not map back to user-visible outcomes.
• Treating UI work as purely technical implementation without clarifying design intent.

Minimal checklist

• Decide whether the change really needs the full spec flow.
• If yes, stop and produce requirements first.
• If the change is small, low-risk, and acceptance is already clear, allow direct execution without forcing spec artifacts.
• Use EARS-style acceptance criteria.
• Get confirmation before moving to the next phase.

When to use this skill

Use this workflow for structured development when you need to:

• Define or refine a new feature
• Design complex architecture
• Coordinate changes across modules
• Plan database or UI-heavy work
• Improve requirement quality and acceptance boundaries

Decision rule

Use the full workflow when

• The task is medium or large
• The impact spans multiple modules
• Acceptance boundaries are fuzzy
• The user wants disciplined planning before implementation

Skip the full workflow when

• The task is small, low-risk, and already precise
• Goal, scope, and acceptance are already clear enough to execute directly
• The user explicitly wants a direct code change with no planning phase

Core workflow

Phase 1: Requirements

Create specs/<spec_name>/requirements.md.

What to do:

• Restate the problem and scope
• Write user stories
• Write acceptance criteria in EARS style
• Clarify business rules, constraints, and non-goals

EARS pattern:

While <optional precondition>, when <optional trigger>, the <system name> shall <system response>

Example:

When the user submits the form, the booking system shall validate required fields before creating the record.

Phase 2: Design

Create specs/<spec_name>/design.md.

What to do:

• Describe architecture and module boundaries
• Explain technology choices and trade-offs
• Define data model, API, security, and testing strategy as needed
• Use Mermaid only when a diagram materially improves clarity

Phase 3: Tasks

Create specs/<spec_name>/tasks.md.

What to do:

• Break the design into executable tasks
• Keep tasks specific and reviewable
• Link each task back to the relevant requirement
• Update task status as work progresses

Task format:

# Implementation Plan

- [ ] 1. Task title
  - Specific work item
  - Another concrete step
  - _Requirement: 1

Phase 4: Execution

Only start implementation after the user confirms the task plan.

During execution:

• Keep task status current
• Finish one meaningful unit at a time
• Preserve traceability from change -> task -> requirement

Working rules for the agent

1. Ask follow-up questions when the request is underspecified; do not guess core product behavior.
2. Require confirmation between requirements, design, and task breakdown.
3. Pull in ui-design early when the change includes end-user pages or visual decisions.
4. Keep documents concise but testable.
5. Prefer user-visible outcomes over implementation-detail task names.

Output expectations

• requirements.md -> problem, scope, user stories, EARS acceptance criteria
• design.md -> architecture, technical approach, data/API/security/test notes
• tasks.md -> actionable implementation checklist tied to requirements