agentleFS
martinffxmartinffx/atelier/skills/spec-finish/SKILL.md

spec-finish

Skill49 starsChanged 24 days agoMITView on GitHub

Post-implementation completion workflow for Spec-backed Plans. Use after spec-implement completes to validate, review, create stacked commits, and open a PR via code-pull-request. Triggers only with an active Spec-backed Plan after spec-implement completes, including when the user says "finish", "done", or "complete" in that context.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

14 rules. About 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈12

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    All Spec-backed Plan tasks are complete

    line 18
  2. Very specific:

    If not complete, go back to spec-implement.

    line 22
  3. Very specific:

    If the implementation faithfully follows an unnecessarily large design, stop and return to spec-plan.

    line 32
  4. Distinctive:

    Update the finished SDD to describe the smaller result.

    line 35
  5. Distinctive:

    Check whether README, API documentation, or changelog updates are needed.

    line 43
  6. Distinctive:

    All changed files since the intended base branch's merge base

    line 98
  7. Distinctive:

    No debug code left

    line 101
  8. Distinctive:

    Do not rewrite history by default.

    line 113
  9. Distinctive:

    Before creating the PR, present a summary to the human:

    line 126
  10. Distinctive:

    Only when the summary shows Ready for PR: yes, invoke the code-pull-request skill to create the PR.

    line 142
  11. Distinctive:

    If implementation is still in progress, use spec-implement

    line 164
  12. Distinctive:

    If tests are failing, go back to spec-implement

    line 165
  13. Distinctive:

    If review found blocking findings or ones requiring user approval, go back to spec-implement

    line 166
  14. Distinctive:

    If the implementation follows an unnecessarily large design, go back to spec-plan

    line 167

≈ “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.

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

Spec Finish

Post-implementation workflow: simplify → synchronize docs → validate → review → prepare PR.

Prerequisites

Before starting, verify:

  1. All Spec-backed Plan tasks are complete
  2. Working directory has no unresolved staged or unstaged changes
  3. Tests pass

If not complete, go back to spec-implement.


Step 1: Compare Scope and Simplify

Compare the implementation with the original behavior and user goal before documentation or validation. Remove unrequested scope, duplicate concepts, one-consumer abstractions, and custom machinery that replaces sufficient platform behavior.

If the implementation faithfully follows an unnecessarily large design, stop and return to spec-plan. Get approval for the smaller plan before continuing.

Update the finished SDD to describe the smaller result. Replace rejected architecture in the normative design and plan instead of preserving it as precedent; mention it only as a rejected alternative when that history remains useful.


Step 2: Update Documentation

Check whether README, API documentation, or changelog updates are needed. Make and commit any necessary documentation changes through code-commit before final validation.


Step 3: Validate

Run validation checks.

Test Suite

npm test
# or
pytest
# or
cargo test

Type Check

npm run typecheck
# or
python -m mypy
# or
cargo check

Lint

npm run lint
# or
ruff check .
# or
cargo clippy

Build

npm run build
# or
go build ./...

If any fail: Return to spec-implement to fix.

If all pass: Proceed.


Step 4: Review

Invoke the installed code-review skill through the harness's skill mechanism for one comprehensive review of the final change.

What to Review

  • All changed files since the intended base branch's merge base
  • Test coverage
  • Documentation updates
  • No debug code left

If code-review finds issues

  • Minor fixes may be made here, then re-validated and reviewed.
  • Findings with blocking: true or requires_user_approval, and scope-changing fixes, return to spec-implement. Non-blocking findings and follow-ups do not.

Step 5: Prepare Commits

Review current commits with git log --oneline. Use code-commit for any uncommitted work. Do not rewrite history by default. If a rebase would materially improve an unpublished stack, show the affected range and ask for separate approval before rebasing.


Step 6: Prepare the PR

Steps 1-5 (simplification, documentation, validation, review, commits) must all be complete before proceeding. If code-review found blocking findings or ones requiring user approval, stop and return to spec-implement to fix them. Do not proceed to Step 6b.

Step 6a: Present Completion Summary

Before creating the PR, present a summary to the human:

## Completion Summary

**Feature:** [name]
**Tests:** [passed/failed]
**Type Check:** [passed/failed]
**Lint:** [passed/failed]
**Review:** [passed/issues found]
**Commits:** [N commits in stack]
**Ready for PR:** [yes/no]

Step 6b: Invoke code-pull-request

Only when the summary shows Ready for PR: yes, invoke the code-pull-request skill to create the PR. It detects the platform (GitHub/GitLab), checks for an existing PR, finds a template, generates the body from commits, and opens the PR via gh or glab.

Handoff

"Implementation complete. [N] commits are ready. PR package ready for approval."


Integration

This skill orchestrates other skills:

  • Invokes code-review for quality check
  • Invokes code-pull-request as the final step to open the PR

When NOT to Use

  • If implementation is still in progress, use spec-implement
  • If tests are failing, go back to spec-implement
  • If review found blocking findings or ones requiring user approval, go back to spec-implement
  • If the implementation follows an unnecessarily large design, go back to spec-plan

Download now (ZIP)

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.