clarify-spec
Skill517 starsChanged 3 days agoMITView on GitHub
Full execution protocol for MODE: CLARIFY-SPEC -- resolving spec clarification markers and maintaining spec/planning alignment.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
8 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 20
Read the effective spec resolved by /swarm sdd status (native .swarm/spec.md OR OpenSpec openspec/ OR Spec-Kit .specify/ — read the …
- Distinctive: line 35
After each accepted answer, write the resolution to the resolved effective source (source-aware write-back):
- Distinctive: line 42
If the answer invalidates an earlier requirement, update it to remove the contradiction.
- Distinctive: line 43
Stop when: all critical ambiguities are resolved, user says "done" or "stop", or 8 questions have been asked.
- Distinctive: line 49
Do not modify any part of the spec that was not affected by the accepted answer.
- Very specific: line 50
Always write the accepted answer back to the resolved effective source before presenting the next question.
- Very specific: line 52
Do not create, overwrite, or shadow the spec file — only refine what exists.
- Very specific: line 61
Apply the Overconfidence guard: If the critic supplies a RESOLVE verdict with a default answer, but that default is not directly supported …
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Clarify Spec Protocol
This protocol is loaded on demand by the architect runtime. The architect prompt keeps only activation, action, and hard safety constraints; the full execution details live here.
MODE: CLARIFY-SPEC
Activates when: /swarm sdd status reports a single resolved EFFECTIVE spec (non-null) AND it contains [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers; OR user says "clarify", "refine spec", "review spec", or "/swarm clarify" is invoked; OR architect transitions from MODE: SPECIFY or MODE: BRAINSTORM with open markers.
/swarm sdd status reflects readEffectiveSpecSync, which returns null (NO effective spec) for: no sources at all, multiple competing sources (e.g. openspec/ AND .specify/), multi-feature Spec-Kit without a selected feature, or any other unresolvable state. CLARIFY-SPEC does NOT activate in these null cases — tell the user: "No resolved effective spec exists. Disambiguate with /swarm sdd project --source <source> or --feature <feature>, or run /swarm specify to generate one first." and stop.
CONSTRAINT: CLARIFY-SPEC must NEVER create a spec. Always consult /swarm sdd status to determine the effective spec source before proceeding.
- Read the effective spec resolved by
/swarm sdd status(native.swarm/spec.mdOR OpenSpecopenspec/OR Spec-Kit.specify/— read the resolved spec FIRST before making any changes). - Scan for ambiguities beyond explicit
[NEEDS CLARIFICATION]markers:- Vague adjectives ("fast", "secure", "user-friendly") without measurable targets
- Requirements that overlap or potentially conflict with each other
- Edge cases implied but not explicitly addressed in the spec
- Acceptance criteria (SC-###) that are not independently testable
- Present all spec modifications using delta format with ## ADDED/MODIFIED/REMOVED Requirements sections:
ADDED Requirements: New requirements being added to the spec
MODIFIED Requirements: Existing requirements being revised (show old vs new)
REMOVED Requirements: Requirements being deleted (show what was removed)
- Delegate to
the active swarm's sme agentfor domain research on ambiguous areas before presenting questions. - Present questions to the user ONE AT A TIME (max 8 per session):
- Offer 2–4 multiple-choice options for each question
- Mark the recommended option with reasoning (e.g., "Recommended: Option 2 because…")
- Allow free-form input as an alternative to the options
- After each accepted answer, write the resolution to the resolved effective source (source-aware write-back):
- NATIVE effective spec (
.swarm/spec.mdexists): update.swarm/spec.mdwith the resolution directly. - NON-NATIVE effective spec (openspec/specify-only, NO native
.swarm/spec.md): do NOT write.swarm/spec.md— this would silently shadow the non-native source. Instead:- (a) If the resolved source supports in-place edits (e.g., OpenSpec sections), update the source artifacts directly.
- (b) If no in-place edit path exists, ask the user: "The effective spec lives in
<source>. To persist this resolution as a native spec, run/swarm sdd projectfirst to materialize one, or I can stop here. Proceed?" — if the user consents to project, materialize via/swarm sdd projectthen write.swarm/spec.md; otherwise stop. - (c) If neither (a) nor (b) applies, stop and tell the user the clarification cannot be auto-written to a non-native source without a projection step.
- Replace the relevant
[NEEDS CLARIFICATION]marker or vague language with the accepted answer. - If the answer invalidates an earlier requirement, update it to remove the contradiction.
- NATIVE effective spec (
- Stop when: all critical ambiguities are resolved, user says "done" or "stop", or 8 questions have been asked.
- Report a ## Clarification Summary: total questions asked, requirements added/modified/removed, remaining open ambiguities (if any), and suggest next step (
PLANif spec is clear, or continue clarifying).
CLARIFY-SPEC RULES:
- FR-ID increment rule: When adding new requirements, find the highest existing FR-ID and increment from there (FR-001 → FR-002). Never reuse or skip FR-IDs.
- One question at a time — never ask multiple questions in the same message.
- Do not modify any part of the spec that was not affected by the accepted answer.
- Always write the accepted answer back to the resolved effective source before presenting the next question. Never write
.swarm/spec.mdin a non-native (openspec/specify-only) repo — see step 5 source-aware write-back rule. - Max 8 questions per session — if limit reached, report remaining ambiguities and stop.
- Do not create, overwrite, or shadow the spec file — only refine what exists. In non-native (openspec/specify-only) repos, never silently materialize a
.swarm/spec.mdthat would shadow the effective source.
Scoped Funnel Protocol (CLARIFY-SPEC only)
CLARIFY-SPEC handles already-surfaced [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers and spec ambiguities — it does not perform open-ended discovery of new uncertainties. The full four-stage clarification funnel (inventory, classify, consult critic, surface) described in the clarify skill applies to MODE: CLARIFY and MODE: PLAN, not here.
However, before surfacing each marker question to the user, CLARIFY-SPEC MUST:
- Consult
critic_sounding_boardwith the candidate marker question and surrounding spec context to check whether the question wording can be improved or the item can be resolved from existing context. - Apply the Overconfidence guard: If the critic supplies a
RESOLVEverdict with a default answer, but that default is not directly supported by user request, spec, or recorded context, classify the item asuser_decisionrather thanself_resolved. - Apply always-surface protection: If the marker belongs to an always-surface category (scope boundaries, destructive behavior, security/privacy, backward compatibility, breaking API changes, new dependencies, deprecations, cross-platform impact, cost/performance tradeoffs, user-visible UX, rollout strategy, QA gates), the item MUST NOT receive
UNNECESSARY/DROPfrom the critic — override toAPPROVED/ASK_USER.
Critic verdict mapping (SoundingBoardVerdict): UNNECESSARY→DROP, RESOLVE→RESOLVE, REPHRASE→REPHRASE, APPROVED→ASK_USER.
This scoped protocol is lighter than the full funnel because CLARIFY-SPEC starts from known markers rather than open uncertainty inventory, but it still protects against overconfident self-resolution and premature dropping of important questions.
Other versions4 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- zaxbysauce/opencode-swarm★ 517100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 3
- Svenja-dev/claude-code-skills★ 38same name
- Greg-Klein/implementation-factory★ 2same name
- Greg-Klein/implementation-harness★ 2same 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 repository66 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- .github/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- ci-fix-monitorSkill
- codebase-review-swarmSkill
- commit-prSkill
- contributingSkill
- engineering-conventionsSkill
- fork-pr-operationsSkill
- guardrail-patternsSkill
- issue-tracerSkill
- mock-to-internals-migrationSkill
- pr-review-fixSkill
- qa-sweepSkill
- research-firstSkill
- running-testsSkill
- subprocess-safetySkill
- swarm-ci-monitorSkill
- swarm-implementSkill
- swarm-pr-feedbackSkill
- swarm-pr-reviewSkill
- swarm-pr-subscribeSkill
- swarmSkill
- tech-debt-ci-reviewSkill
- test-file-splitSkill
- unswarmSkill
- writing-testsSkill
- brainstormSkill
- clarifySkill
- codebase-review-swarmSkill
- commit-prSkill
- consultSkill
- councilSkill
- critic-gateSkill
- deep-diveSkill
- deep-researchSkill
- design-docsSkill
- discoverSkill
- durable-session-stateSkill
- editing-skillsSkill
- engineering-conventionsSkill
- executeSkill
- fork-pr-operationsSkill
- graphifySkill
- issue-ingestSkill
- issue-tracerSkill
- orchestrating-subagentsSkill
- phase-wrapSkill
- pre-phase-briefingSkill
- qa-sweepSkill
- research-firstSkill
- rust-crate-ciSkill
- specifySkill
- swarm-ci-monitorSkill
- swarm-implementSkill
- swarm-planSkill
- swarm-pr-feedbackSkill
- swarm-pr-reviewSkill
- swarm-pr-subscribeSkill
- swarm-resumeSkill
- The first 60 shown.
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.

