spec-creator
Skill7 starsChanged 11 days agoMITView on GitHub
Create, update, or review engineering-grade technical specifications for a codebase, following spec-driven development (SDD) conventions. Use whenever the user asks for a spec, requirements or design doc, feature specification, API contract, data model, or wants a feature planned on paper before implementation — including phrases like "write a spec for X", "draft the spec first", "update the specs", or any spec-first workflow (e.g. with Ralph). Produces implementation-ready, testable specs using the bundled SPEC_TEMPLATE.md.
3 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Lausbub198/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 6, 2026
- felipeArnold/filament-ai-skillstheir own version, first seen Jun 13, 2026
- jornalistainclusivo/jinc-skillstheir own version, first seen Apr 22, 2026
Other versions3 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 3
- felipeArnold/filament-ai-skills★ 9same name
- jornalistainclusivo/jinc-skills★ 1same name
- Lausbub198/claude-skills★ 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 repository5 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- specs/agents.mdAGENTS.md
- agent-implementationSkill
- agent-spec-creationSkill
- skill-creatorSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
19 rules. About 0 are common, 18 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈18
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 17
Prefer concrete examples over vague descriptions.
- Distinctive: line 18
Use consistent naming and types across the document.
- Distinctive: line 20
Avoid assumptions; write them down.
- Distinctive: line 23
Keep implementation details out of the spec: no algorithms, file/package layouts, or internal design choices.
- Distinctive: line 24
Never reference source code: no file paths, no function, class, or module names, no code snippets from the codebase.
- Distinctive: line 31
Follow this structure exactly, but customize content to the project.
- Distinctive: line 35
Use precise, plain english language.
- Distinctive: line 36
Prefer tables for enums, options, or matrices.
- Distinctive: line 38
Write what and why, never how: justify decisions and constraints.
- Distinctive: line 39
Never reference source code artifacts: no file paths, no function, class, or module names, no code snippets.
- Distinctive: line 41
Keep naming consistent across entities, APIs, and SDKs.
- Distinctive: line 42
If a behavior depends on policy, state it explicitly.
- Distinctive: line 43
If a data model is shared across domains, treat one spec as the source of truth and reference it rather than re-defining it.
- Distinctive: line 50
All core entities and relationships are defined.
- Distinctive: line 51
Every endpoint has auth and payloads.
- Distinctive: line 52
All critical workflows are described step-by-step.
- Distinctive: line 55
Every requirement reads as intended, observable behavior (what and why).
- Distinctive: line 56
No implementation details and no source-code references remain.
- Very specific: line 60
When the new spec is complete, update specs/README.md to include it in the list of available specs.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 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
Spec Authoring
Purpose
Produce detailed, engineering-grade specifications similar in depth and structure to a full platform spec. The output must be explicit, testable, and implementation-ready without needing back-and-forth clarification. Specs state intended behavior — what the system must do and why — and leave how to implementation.
Core Principles
- State intent clearly and early.
- Define scope and non-scope to avoid ambiguity.
- Make every requirement verifiable.
- Prefer concrete examples over vague descriptions.
- Use consistent naming and types across the document.
- Include failure modes and edge cases.
- Avoid assumptions; write them down.
- Define canonical data models in a single spec and reference them elsewhere to prevent duplication.
- Describe intended, observable behavior: what the system must do, not how it does it.
- Keep implementation details out of the spec: no algorithms, file/package layouts, or internal design choices.
- Never reference source code: no file paths, no function, class, or module names, no code snippets from the codebase.
- Give the why: justify decisions and constraints so implementers understand the intent behind them.
Required Structure
See the SPEC_TEMPLATE.md for a template with detailed section descriptions and writing guidelines.
Follow this structure exactly, but customize content to the project.
Writing Rules
- Use precise, plain english language.
- Prefer tables for enums, options, or matrices.
- Describe requirements as intended behavior: given X, the system must Y — including error and edge cases.
- Write what and why, never how: justify decisions and constraints; leave algorithms, file/package organization, and library choices to implementation.
- Never reference source code artifacts: no file paths, no function, class, or module names, no code snippets.
- Include code blocks only to illustrate examples (inputs, outputs, commands, data formats); never source code.
- Keep naming consistent across entities, APIs, and SDKs.
- If a behavior depends on policy, state it explicitly.
- If a data model is shared across domains, treat one spec as the source of truth and reference it rather than re-defining it.
Output Quality Checklist
Before finalizing, confirm:
- Scope is explicit and non-goals are listed.
- All core entities and relationships are defined.
- Every endpoint has auth and payloads.
- All critical workflows are described step-by-step.
- Security and permissions are not implicit.
- At least one example is given for each major section.
- Every requirement reads as intended, observable behavior (what and why).
- No implementation details and no source-code references remain.
Related docs
When the new spec is complete, update specs/README.md to include it in the list of available specs.
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.

