sdd-design
Skill1 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Create technical design document with architecture decisions and approach. Trigger: When the orchestrator launches you to write or update the technical design for a change.
8 other projects use a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- GabrielaStark/starktheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- svg153/skillsedited, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- PedroMosquera/squadaitheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- luanmorenommaciel/agentspectheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- pchemguy/Skill-SDD-Managertheir own version, first seen Oct 6, 2026
- duviolin/sdd-kittheir own version, first seen Sep 19, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use sdd-requirements.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
GabrielaStarkSkillsdd-requirements
Use this skill whenever generating, validating, or editing a requirements.md file for Spec-Driven Development. Defines the canonical structure (Kiro-strict format), EARS notation rules in English, mandatory validation checklist, and good/bad examples. Trigger whenever the task involves transforming raw input (interviews, transcripts, legacy code analysis) into a formal requirements.md, or when reviewing an existing requirements.md for compliance.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions8 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- callingcard1973/claude-skills★ 0100% same
Edited · 1
- svg153/skills★ 157% same
Wrote their own version · 6
- luanmorenommaciel/agentspec★ 256same name
- PedroMosquera/squadai★ 10same name
- GabrielaStark/SDD★ 1same name
- GabrielaStark/stark★ 1same name
- duviolin/sdd-kit★ 0same name
- pchemguy/Skill-SDD-Manager★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository10 other files it gives its agents.
- agent-team-orchestratorSkill
- sdd-applySkill
- sdd-archiveSkill
- sdd-exploreSkill
- sdd-initSkill
- sdd-proposeSkill
- sdd-specSkill
- sdd-tasksSkill
- sdd-verifySkill
- skill-registrySkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
20 rules. 0 are common, 11 are distinctive, and 9 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.
11
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
9
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 24
Read and follow skills/_shared/persistence-contract.md for mode resolution rules.
- Very specific: line 26
If mode is engram:
- Very specific: line 32
If found: mem_get_observation(id: {id from step 3}) → full spec content
- Very specific: line 47
If mode is openspec: Read and follow skills/_shared/openspec-convention.md.
- Very specific: line 48
If mode is hybrid: Follow BOTH conventions — persist to Engram AND write design.md to filesystem.
- Very specific: line 49
If mode is none: Return result only.
- Very specific: line 58
If engram not available or not found: read .atl/skill-registry.md from the project root
- Distinctive: line 59
If neither exists: proceed without skills (not an error)
- Distinctive: line 65
Before designing, read the actual code that will be affected:
- Distinctive: line 69
Test infrastructure (if any)
- Distinctive: line 73
Create the design document:
- Very specific: line 162
If mode is openspec or hybrid: the file was already written in Step 3.
- Very specific: line 164
If mode is hybrid: also call mem_save as above (write to BOTH backends).
- Distinctive: line 166
If you skip this step, the next phase (sdd-tasks) will NOT be able to find your design and the pipeline BREAKS.
- Distinctive: line 193
ALWAYS read the actual codebase before designing — never guess
- Distinctive: line 194
Every decision MUST have a rationale (the "why")
- Distinctive: line 196
Use the project's ACTUAL patterns and conventions, not generic best practices
- Distinctive: line 197
If you find the codebase uses a pattern different from what you'd recommend, note it but FOLLOW the existing pattern unless the change …
- Distinctive: line 198
Keep ASCII diagrams simple — clarity over beauty
- Distinctive: line 200
If you have open questions that BLOCK the design, say so clearly — don't guess
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Purpose
You are a sub-agent responsible for TECHNICAL DESIGN. You take the proposal and specs, then produce a design.md that captures HOW the change will be implemented — architecture decisions, data flow, file changes, and technical rationale.
What You Receive
From the orchestrator:
- Change name
- Artifact store mode (
engram | openspec | hybrid | none)
Execution and Persistence Contract
Read and follow skills/_shared/persistence-contract.md for mode resolution rules.
If mode is
engram:Read dependencies (two-step — search returns truncated previews):
mem_search(query: "sdd/{change-name}/proposal", project: "{project}")→ get observation IDmem_get_observation(id: {id from step 1})→ full proposal content (REQUIRED)mem_search(query: "sdd/{change-name}/spec", project: "{project}")→ get observation ID (optional — may not exist if running in parallel with sdd-spec)- If found:
mem_get_observation(id: {id from step 3})→ full spec content
Save your artifact:
mem_save( title: "sdd/{change-name}/design", topic_key: "sdd/{change-name}/design", type: "architecture", project: "{project}", content: "{your full design markdown}" )topic_keyenables upserts — saving again updates, not duplicates.(See
skills/_shared/engram-convention.mdfor full naming conventions.)- If mode is
openspec: Read and followskills/_shared/openspec-convention.md. - If mode is
hybrid: Follow BOTH conventions — persist to Engram AND writedesign.mdto filesystem. Retrieve dependencies from Engram (primary) with filesystem fallback. - If mode is
none: Return result only. Never create or modify project files.
What to Do
Step 1: Load Skill Registry
Do this FIRST, before any other work.
- Try engram first:
mem_search(query: "skill-registry", project: "{project}")→ if found,mem_get_observation(id)for the full registry - If engram not available or not found: read
.atl/skill-registry.mdfrom the project root - If neither exists: proceed without skills (not an error)
From the registry, identify and read any skills whose triggers match your task. Also read any project convention files listed in the registry.
Step 2: Read the Codebase
Before designing, read the actual code that will be affected:
- Entry points and module structure
- Existing patterns and conventions
- Dependencies and interfaces
- Test infrastructure (if any)
Step 3: Write design.md
Create the design document:
openspec/changes/{change-name}/
├── proposal.md
├── specs/
└── design.md ← You create thisDesign Document Format
# Design: {Change Title}
## Technical Approach
{Concise description of the overall technical strategy.
How does this map to the proposal's approach? Reference specs.}
## Architecture Decisions
### Decision: {Decision Title}
**Choice**: {What we chose}
**Alternatives considered**: {What we rejected}
**Rationale**: {Why this choice over alternatives}
### Decision: {Decision Title}
**Choice**: {What we chose}
**Alternatives considered**: {What we rejected}
**Rationale**: {Why this choice over alternatives}
## Data Flow
{Describe how data moves through the system for this change.
Use ASCII diagrams when helpful.}
Component A ──→ Component B ──→ Component C
│ │
└──────── Store ───────────────┘
## File Changes
| File | Action | Description |
|------|--------|-------------|
| `path/to/new-file.ext` | Create | {What this file does} |
| `path/to/existing.ext` | Modify | {What changes and why} |
| `path/to/old-file.ext` | Delete | {Why it's being removed} |
## Interfaces / Contracts
{Define any new interfaces, API contracts, type definitions, or data structures.
Use code blocks with the project's language.}
## Testing Strategy
| Layer | What to Test | Approach |
|-------|-------------|----------|
| Unit | {What} | {How} |
| Integration | {What} | {How} |
| E2E | {What} | {How} |
## Migration / Rollout
{If this change requires data migration, feature flags, or phased rollout, describe the plan.
If not applicable, state "No migration required."}
## Open Questions
- [ ] {Any unresolved technical question}
- [ ] {Any decision that needs team input}Step 4: Persist Artifact
This step is MANDATORY — do NOT skip it.
If mode is engram:
mem_save(
title: "sdd/{change-name}/design",
topic_key: "sdd/{change-name}/design",
type: "architecture",
project: "{project}",
content: "{your full design markdown from Step 3}"
)If mode is openspec or hybrid: the file was already written in Step 3.
If mode is hybrid: also call mem_save as above (write to BOTH backends).
If you skip this step, the next phase (sdd-tasks) will NOT be able to find your design and the pipeline BREAKS.
Step 5: Return Summary
Return to the orchestrator:
## Design Created
**Change**: {change-name}
**Location**: openspec/changes/{change-name}/design.md
### Summary
- **Approach**: {one-line technical approach}
- **Key Decisions**: {N decisions documented}
- **Files Affected**: {N new, M modified, K deleted}
- **Testing Strategy**: {unit/integration/e2e coverage planned}
### Open Questions
{List any unresolved questions, or "None"}
### Next Step
Ready for tasks (sdd-tasks).Rules
- ALWAYS read the actual codebase before designing — never guess
- Every decision MUST have a rationale (the "why")
- Include concrete file paths, not abstract descriptions
- Use the project's ACTUAL patterns and conventions, not generic best practices
- If you find the codebase uses a pattern different from what you'd recommend, note it but FOLLOW the existing pattern unless the change specifically addresses it
- Keep ASCII diagrams simple — clarity over beauty
- Apply any
rules.designfromopenspec/config.yaml - If you have open questions that BLOCK the design, say so clearly — don't guess
- Return a structured envelope with:
status,executive_summary,detailed_report(optional),artifacts,next_recommended, andrisks
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

