agentleFS
jasonkneenjasonkneen/kiro/skills/spec-driven-development/SKILL.md

spec-driven-development

Skill753 starsChanged 11 months agoMITView on GitHub

Systematic three-phase approach to feature development using Requirements, Design, and Tasks phases. Transforms vague feature ideas into well-defined, implementable solutions that reduce ambiguity, improve quality, and enable effective AI collaboration.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

6 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 92 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 6

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Purpose: Create a comprehensive technical plan for implementation

    line 64
  2. Distinctive:

    Validate: Ask AI to review outputs against checklists

    line 159
  3. Distinctive:

    Missing error cases: Always consider what happens when things go wrong

    line 181
  4. Distinctive:

    After completing a spec:

    line 185
  5. Distinctive:

    Update spec if implementation reveals gaps

    line 188
  6. Distinctive:

    Document learnings for future specs

    line 190

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 92 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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Spec-Driven Development

A comprehensive methodology for systematic software feature development that ensures quality, maintainability, and successful delivery through structured planning.

When to Use This Skill

Ideal scenarios:

  • Complex features with multiple components, integrations, or user interactions
  • High-stakes projects where rework costs are significant
  • Team collaboration requiring shared understanding
  • AI-assisted development where clear structure improves output quality
  • Knowledge preservation for future maintainers

Less suitable:

  • Simple bug fixes with obvious solutions
  • Experimental prototypes for rapid iteration
  • Time-critical hotfixes requiring immediate action
  • Well-established patterns with minimal ambiguity

The Three-Phase Workflow

Phase 1: Requirements Gathering

Purpose: Transform vague feature ideas into clear, testable requirements

Process:

  1. Capture user stories expressing value and purpose
  2. Define acceptance criteria using EARS format (Easy Approach to Requirements Syntax)
  3. Identify edge cases and constraints
  4. Validate completeness and feasibility

EARS Format Patterns:

WHEN [event] THEN [system] SHALL [response]
IF [precondition] THEN [system] SHALL [response]
WHEN [event] AND [condition] THEN [system] SHALL [response]

Example:

**User Story:** As a new user, I want to create an account, so that I can access personalized features.

**Acceptance Criteria:**
1. WHEN user provides valid email and password THEN system SHALL create new account
2. WHEN user provides existing email THEN system SHALL display "email already registered" error
3. WHEN user provides password shorter than 8 characters THEN system SHALL display "password too short" error
4. WHEN account creation succeeds THEN system SHALL send confirmation email

Phase 2: Design Documentation

Purpose: Create a comprehensive technical plan for implementation

Process:

  1. Research technical approaches and constraints
  2. Define system architecture and component interactions
  3. Specify data models and interfaces
  4. Plan error handling and testing strategies

Design Document Structure:

## Overview
[High-level summary of approach]

## Architecture
[System components and their relationships]

## Components and Interfaces
[Detailed component descriptions]

## Data Models
[Data structures and validation rules]

## Error Handling
[Error scenarios and response strategies]

## Testing Strategy
[Testing approach for different layers]

Decision Documentation:

### Decision: [Title]
**Context:** [Situation requiring decision]
**Options Considered:**
1. [Option 1] - Pros: [benefits] / Cons: [drawbacks]
2. [Option 2] - Pros: [benefits] / Cons: [drawbacks]
**Decision:** [Chosen option]
**Rationale:** [Why this was selected]

Phase 3: Task Planning

Purpose: Break design into actionable, sequential implementation steps

Process:

  1. Convert design elements into specific coding tasks
  2. Sequence tasks to enable incremental progress
  3. Define clear objectives and completion criteria
  4. Reference requirements for traceability

Task Structure:

- [ ] 1. [Epic/Major Component]
- [ ] 1.1 [Specific implementation task]
  - [Implementation details]
  - [Files/components to create]
  - _Requirements: [Requirement references]_

Task Sequencing Strategies:

  • Foundation-First: Core interfaces before dependent components
  • Feature-Slice: End-to-end vertical slices for early validation
  • Risk-First: Tackle uncertain areas early
  • Hybrid: Combine approaches based on project needs

Quality Checklists

Requirements Checklist

  • All user roles identified and addressed
  • Normal, edge, and error cases covered
  • Requirements are testable and measurable
  • No conflicting requirements
  • EARS format used consistently

Design Checklist

  • All requirements addressed in design
  • Component responsibilities well-defined
  • Interfaces between components specified
  • Error handling covers expected failures
  • Security considerations addressed

Tasks Checklist

  • All design components have implementation tasks
  • Tasks ordered to respect dependencies
  • Each task produces testable code
  • Requirements references included
  • Scope is appropriate (2-4 hours each)

Integration with AI Workflows

For Claude Code / AI Assistants:

  1. Start with context: Provide project background, constraints, and goals
  2. Work in phases: Complete requirements before design, design before tasks
  3. Iterate: Refine outputs through conversation rather than single requests
  4. Validate: Ask AI to review outputs against checklists
  5. Trace: Maintain links between requirements, design, and tasks

Example prompt for starting a spec:

I'm working on [project context]. We need to add [feature description].

Context:
- Technology: [stack]
- Users: [target audience]
- Constraints: [key limitations]

Please help me develop requirements using the EARS format, starting with user stories and acceptance criteria.

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

  1. Skipping phases: Each phase builds on the previous; shortcuts create problems
  2. Vague requirements: "System should be fast" vs specific, measurable criteria
  3. Implementation details in requirements: Focus on what, not how
  4. Over-engineering design: Solve current requirements, not hypothetical future ones
  5. Monolithic tasks: Break down into 2-4 hour increments
  6. Missing error cases: Always consider what happens when things go wrong

Next Steps

After completing a spec:

  1. Begin implementation following task sequence
  2. Track progress by marking tasks complete
  3. Update spec if implementation reveals gaps
  4. Validate completed work against requirements
  5. Document learnings for future specs

Download now (ZIP)

  • Other versions98 projects use a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 98

    1. addyosmani/agent-skills★ 112ksame name
    2. ollaya-dev/ollaya★ 1.4ksame name
    3. kdlbs/kandev★ 1ksame name
    4. rizqinrr/viserys-agent★ 556same name
    5. shashankswe2020-ux/whoop-mcp★ 174same name
    6. magnus919/agent-skills★ 162same name
    7. FredAntB/Spec-Driven-Development★ 153same name
    8. tranhieutt/software_development_department★ 71same name
    9. drvoss/everything-copilot-cli★ 49same name
    10. vinvcn/addyosmani-agent-skills-zh★ 46same name

    88 more not listed

    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.

  • Used alongsideProjects with it also use using-agent-skills, idea-refine and 10 more.

    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.
    • LLl0k0laDSkill

      using-agent-skills

      Use when starting a session or when you need to discover which skill applies to the current task. This is the meta-skill that governs how all other skills are discovered and invoked.

      Also in 39 projects that use this

    • LLl0k0laDSkill

      idea-refine

      Refine ideas through structured divergent and convergent thinking. Use "idea-refine" or "ideate" to trigger.

      Also in 47 projects that use this

    • MrCipherSmithSkill

      constraint-driven-development

      Use when a project needs a persistent, measurable quality bar — starting a project without documented standards, 'set up constraints', or when coverage/perf/a11y thresholds get re-debated per-PR. Produces CONSTRAINTS.md with enforceable numbers, ratchets, and a guard against silent weakening. NOT for throwaway prototypes or a one-off CI setup.

      Also in 13 projects that use this

    • HK-hubSkill

      observability-and-instrumentation

      Instruments code so production behavior is visible and diagnosable. Use when adding logging, metrics, tracing, or alerting. Use when shipping any feature that runs in production and you need evidence it works. Use when production issues are reported but you can't tell what happened from the available data.

      Also in 30 projects that use this

    • HK-hubSkill

      deprecation-and-migration

      Manages deprecation and migration. Use when removing old systems, APIs, or features. Use when migrating users from one implementation to another. Use when deciding whether to maintain or sunset existing code.

      Also in 34 projects that use this

    • +7 more from LLl0k0laD
  • In this repository7 other files it gives its agents.

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.