spec-workflow v2.32.2A

Immutable. This exact content is served forever at /api/v1/blob/5f495168a4c37842.

---
name: spec-workflow
description: Use when medium-to-large changes need explicit requirements, technical design, and task planning before implementation, especially for multi-module work, unclear acceptance criteria, or architecture-heavy requests.
version: 2.32.2
alwaysApply: false
---

## Sibling skills (local only)

Sibling CloudBase skills ship beside this skill. Use local relative paths such as `../auth-tool-cloudbase/SKILL.md`.

If a referenced sibling skill file is missing from this environment, ask the user to install the full CloudBase plugin (or the missing skill). Do **not** HTTP-fetch remote skill or protocol markdown into the agent context.

# 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:

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

Example:

```text
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:

```markdown
# 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