agentleFS
poshan0126poshan0126/dotclaude/skills/spec/SKILL.md

spec

Skill871 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub

Turn a fuzzy feature idea into a self-contained SPEC.md by interviewing you first. Claude asks about scope, behavior, edge cases, and verification, then writes a spec a fresh implementation session can execute. Use before building anything non-trivial.

168 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use backprop, ios-clean 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.
  • JuliusBrusseeSkill

    backprop

    Bug → spec protocol. When a bug is found or a test fails, trace the cause, decide whether a new §V invariant would catch recurrence, append to §B. This is the one non-obvious thing SDD does that plan-then-execute doesn't. Triggers on test failure, bug report, post-mortem, or explicit user ask.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • Saqlain-811Skill

    ios-clean

    Remove the DebugBridge SPM package and all #if DEBUG wiring from an iOS app. (gstack)

    Also in 5 projects that use this

  • Saqlain-811Skill

    ios-fix

    Autonomous iOS bug fixer. (gstack)

    Also in 5 projects that use this

  • bastosSkill

    ios-design-review

    Review iOS app UI/UX design quality using Apple's design principles and the Liquid Glass-era design language from WWDC25/26. Use when asked for a design review, UX critique, visual design assessment, or evaluation of an app's interface quality, design intent, alignment with the new Apple design system, or usability. Triggers: "design review", "UX review", "visual design critique", "review the UI", "does this design work", "evaluate this interface", "design feedback", "Liquid Glass review".

    Also in 5 projects that use this

  • ShreyRaviSkill

    plan-tune

    Self-tuning question sensitivity + developer psychographic for gstack (v1: observational). Review which AskUserQuestion prompts fire across gstack skills, set per-question preferences (never-ask / always-ask / ask-only-for-one-way), inspect the dual-track profile (what you declared vs what your behavior suggests), and enable/disable question tuning. Conversational interface — no CLI syntax required.

    Also in 7 projects that use this

  • timurgaleevSkill

    document-generate

    Generate missing docs for a feature, module or project as tutorials, how-tos, reference and explanation.

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • +2 more from Saqlain-811

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 145 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    Distinctive

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Run this in a session that already has the repo open, so the questions are informed by real code.

    line 17
  2. Distinctive:

    Ask only what you can't answer from the code, in focused rounds (use AskUserQuestion.

    line 25
  3. Very specific:

    Write SPEC.md at the project root (NOT in .claude/).

    line 37
  4. Distinctive:

    Every spec states its verification step.

    line 72

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 145 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

Separate deciding WHAT to build from building it. Interview the user, ground the answers in the actual codebase, then write a self-contained SPEC.md a fresh session can execute without you in the room. $ARGUMENTS is an optional starting description.

Run this in a session that already has the repo open, so the questions are informed by real code.

Step 1: Explore enough to ask good questions

Skim the codebase for what the feature will touch: the relevant modules, existing patterns to match, the test setup, and any similar feature to model after. Read only — you're gathering context to interview well, not building.

Step 2: Interview with AskUserQuestion

Ask only what you can't answer from the code, in focused rounds (use AskUserQuestion; batch related questions). Cover:

  • Scope & outcome — what does "done" look like from the user's side, and what's the smallest version worth shipping?
  • Behavior — the happy path, then the edge cases (empty, error, concurrent, permission-denied) that actually matter here.
  • Boundaries — what is explicitly OUT of scope for this iteration.
  • Constraints — compatibility, performance, data/migration concerns, security-sensitive surfaces.
  • Verification — how will we confirm it works end to end (a command, a test, an observable behavior)?

Where the code implies an answer, propose it as the default in the question rather than asking cold.

Step 3: Write SPEC.md

Write SPEC.md at the project root (NOT in .claude/). Make it self-contained — a fresh session with no memory of this conversation should be able to execute it:

# Spec: <feature>

## Goal
<what and why, 2-3 sentences>

## Scope
- In: <what this iteration delivers>
- Out: <explicitly deferred>

## Behavior
- <happy path>
- <edge cases and how each should behave>

## Touch points
- <exact files / modules / interfaces involved, as file:path — named, not vague>

## Constraints
- <compat, performance, security, data/migration>

## Verification
- <the exact end-to-end check: command to run, test to pass, or behavior to observe>

## Open questions
- <anything still undecided — none is ideal>

Show the draft and confirm before writing. Then tell the user to run the implementation in a fresh session (/clear first) so it starts with a clean context and the spec as its brief.

Rules

  • Interview before writing — do not skip Step 2 and guess the spec.
  • Name real files and interfaces from the codebase; a spec full of placeholders isn't self-contained.
  • Every spec states its verification step. If you can't name one, say so and ask the user how they'll check.
  • One feature per spec. If the idea is really three features, say so and spec the one that was asked.

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.