sdd-spec
Skill1 starsChanged 51 days agoMITView on GitHub
Write SDD delta specs with requirements and scenarios. Trigger: orchestrator launches spec work for a change.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
23 rules. 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 11 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.
12
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
11
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 21
If you ARE the sdd-spec sub-agent (NOT the orchestrator), the gate above does NOT apply to you.
- Distinctive: line 28
If Spanish technical artifacts are explicitly requested, use neutral/professional Spanish unless the user explicitly asks for a regional …
- Very specific: line 46
engram: Read sdd/{change-name}/proposal (required).
- Very specific: line 47
openspec: Read and follow skills/_shared/openspec-convention.md.
- Distinctive: line 48
hybrid: Follow BOTH conventions — persist to Engram (single concatenated artifact) AND write domain files to filesystem.
- Very specific: line 54
Follow Section A from skills/_shared/sdd-phase-common.md.
- Distinctive: line 58
Read the proposal's Capabilities section — this is your primary contract:
- Distinctive: line 70
If the proposal has no Capabilities section (older format), fall back to inferring from "Affected Areas".
- Very specific: line 74
IF mode is
openspecorhybrid: If openspec/specs/{domain}/spec.md exists, read it to understand CURRENT behavior. - Very specific: line 82
IF mode is
openspecorhybrid: Create specs inside the change folder: - Very specific: line 92
IF mode is
engramornone: Do NOT create any openspec/ directories or files. - Very specific: line 96
When writing a ## MODIFIED Requirements section, follow this exact workflow:
- Distinctive: line 174
If this is a completely new domain, create a FULL spec (not a delta):
- Very specific: line 200
Follow Section C from skills/_shared/sdd-phase-common.md.
- Very specific: line 230
ALWAYS use Given/When/Then format for scenarios
- Distinctive: line 231
ALWAYS use RFC 2119 keywords (MUST, SHALL, SHOULD, MAY) for requirement strength
- Distinctive: line 232
Read the proposal's Capabilities section first — it tells you exactly which spec files to create
- Very specific: line 233
If existing specs exist, write DELTA specs (ADDED/MODIFIED/REMOVED sections)
- Distinctive: line 234
If NO existing specs exist for the domain, write a FULL spec
- Distinctive: line 235
Every requirement MUST have at least ONE scenario
- Distinctive: line 237
Keep scenarios TESTABLE — someone should be able to write an automated test from each one
- Distinctive: line 238
DO NOT include implementation details in specs — specs describe WHAT, not HOW
- Distinctive: line 240
If adding new behavior without changing existing behavior → use ADDED, not MODIFIED
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 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.
Files
ORCHESTRATOR GATE: If you loaded this skill via the
skill()tool, you are the ORCHESTRATOR — STOP. Do NOT execute these instructions inline. Delegate to the dedicatedsdd-specsub-agent using your platform's delegation primitive (e.g.,task(...), sub-agent invocation, etc.). This skill is for EXECUTORS only.
Executor Override
If you ARE the sdd-spec sub-agent (NOT the orchestrator), the gate above does NOT apply to you. Continue with the phase work below. Do NOT delegate. Do NOT call the Skill tool. You are the executor — execute.
Language Domain Contract
Generated technical artifacts default to English. Do not inherit the user's conversational language or the active persona's regional voice for SDD artifacts unless the user explicitly requests that artifact language or the project convention requires it.
If Spanish technical artifacts are explicitly requested, use neutral/professional Spanish unless the user explicitly asks for a regional variant.
Public/contextual comments follow the target context language by default. Explicit user language or tone overrides win; Spanish comments default to neutral/professional Spanish unless the user or target context clearly calls for regional tone.
Purpose
You are a sub-agent responsible for writing SPECIFICATIONS. You take the proposal and produce delta specs — structured requirements and scenarios that describe what's being ADDED, MODIFIED, REMOVED, or RENAMED from the system's behavior.
What You Receive
From the orchestrator:
- Change name
- Artifact store mode (
engram | openspec | hybrid | none)
Execution and Persistence Contract
Follow Section B (retrieval) and Section C (persistence) from
skills/_shared/sdd-phase-common.md.
- engram: Read
sdd/{change-name}/proposal(required). If specs span multiple domains, concatenate into a single artifact with domain headers. Save assdd/{change-name}/spec. - openspec: Read and follow
skills/_shared/openspec-convention.md. - hybrid: Follow BOTH conventions — persist to Engram (single concatenated artifact) AND write domain files to filesystem.
- none: Return result only. Never create or modify project files.
What to Do
Step 1: Load Skills
Follow Section A from skills/_shared/sdd-phase-common.md.
Step 2: Identify Affected Domains
Read the proposal's Capabilities section — this is your primary contract:
FOR EACH entry under "New Capabilities":
├── This becomes a NEW full spec: openspec/specs/<capability-name>/spec.md
└── Write a complete spec (not a delta) — no existing behavior to reference
FOR EACH entry under "Modified Capabilities":
├── This becomes a DELTA spec: openspec/changes/{change-name}/specs/<capability-name>/spec.md
└── Read existing openspec/specs/<capability-name>/spec.md first — your delta modifies itIf the proposal has no Capabilities section (older format), fall back to inferring from "Affected Areas". But always prefer the explicit Capabilities mapping when present.
Step 3: Read Existing Specs
IF mode is openspec or hybrid: If openspec/specs/{domain}/spec.md exists, read it to understand CURRENT behavior. Your delta specs describe CHANGES to this behavior.
IF mode is engram: Existing specs were already retrieved from Engram in the Persistence Contract. Skip filesystem reads.
IF mode is none: Skip — no existing specs to read.
Step 4: Write Delta Specs
IF mode is openspec or hybrid: Create specs inside the change folder:
openspec/changes/{change-name}/
├── proposal.md ← (already exists)
└── specs/
└── {domain}/
└── spec.md ← Delta specIF mode is engram or none: Do NOT create any openspec/ directories or files. Compose the spec content in memory — you will persist it in Step 5.
MODIFIED Requirements Workflow (CRITICAL — read before writing deltas)
When writing a ## MODIFIED Requirements section, follow this exact workflow:
1. Locate the requirement in openspec/specs/{domain}/spec.md
2. COPY the ENTIRE requirement block — from `### Requirement:` through ALL its scenarios
3. PASTE it under `## MODIFIED Requirements`
4. EDIT the copy to reflect the new behavior
5. Add "(Previously: {one-line summary of what changed})" under the requirement text
Why copy-full-then-edit?
→ The archive step REPLACES the requirement in main specs with your MODIFIED block
→ If your block is partial, the archive will lose scenarios you didn't copy
→ Common pitfall: only writing the changed scenario and losing the rest
→ If adding NEW behavior WITHOUT changing existing behavior, use ADDED insteadDelta Spec Format
# Delta for {Domain}
## ADDED Requirements
### Requirement: {Requirement Name}
{Description using RFC 2119 keywords: MUST, SHALL, SHOULD, MAY}
The system {MUST/SHALL/SHOULD} {do something specific}.
#### Scenario: {Happy path scenario}
- GIVEN {precondition}
- WHEN {action}
- THEN {expected outcome}
- AND {additional outcome, if any}
#### Scenario: {Edge case scenario}
- GIVEN {precondition}
- WHEN {action}
- THEN {expected outcome}
## MODIFIED Requirements
### Requirement: {Existing Requirement Name}
{Full updated requirement text — replaces the existing one entirely}
(Previously: {what it was before, in one line})
#### Scenario: {Unchanged scenario — keep if still valid}
- GIVEN {precondition}
- WHEN {action}
- THEN {outcome}
#### Scenario: {Updated or new scenario}
- GIVEN {updated precondition}
- WHEN {updated action}
- THEN {updated outcome}
## REMOVED Requirements
### Requirement: {Requirement Being Removed}
(Reason: {why this requirement is being deprecated/removed})
(Migration: {what replaces it, or "None" if no migration is needed})
## RENAMED Requirements
### Requirement: {Old Requirement Name} → {New Requirement Name}
(Reason: {why the requirement is being renamed})
(Migration: {how references/tests/docs should update, or "None" if no migration is needed})For NEW Specs (No Existing Spec)
If this is a completely new domain, create a FULL spec (not a delta):
# {Domain} Specification
## Purpose
{High-level description of this spec's domain.}
## Requirements
### Requirement: {Name}
The system {MUST/SHALL/SHOULD} {behavior}.
#### Scenario: {Name}
- GIVEN {precondition}
- WHEN {action}
- THEN {outcome}Step 5: Persist Artifact
This step is MANDATORY — do NOT skip it.
Follow Section C from skills/_shared/sdd-phase-common.md.
- artifact:
spec - topic_key:
sdd/{change-name}/spec - type:
architecture
Step 6: Return Summary
Return to the orchestrator:
## Specs Created
**Change**: {change-name}
### Specs Written
| Domain | Type | Requirements | Scenarios |
|--------|------|-------------|-----------|
| {domain} | Delta/New | {N added, M modified, K removed} | {total scenarios} |
### Coverage
- Happy paths: {covered/missing}
- Edge cases: {covered/missing}
- Error states: {covered/missing}
### Next Step
Ready for design (sdd-design). If design already exists, ready for tasks (sdd-tasks).Rules
- ALWAYS use Given/When/Then format for scenarios
- ALWAYS use RFC 2119 keywords (MUST, SHALL, SHOULD, MAY) for requirement strength
- Read the proposal's Capabilities section first — it tells you exactly which spec files to create
- If existing specs exist, write DELTA specs (ADDED/MODIFIED/REMOVED sections)
- If NO existing specs exist for the domain, write a FULL spec
- Every requirement MUST have at least ONE scenario
- Include both happy path AND edge case scenarios
- Keep scenarios TESTABLE — someone should be able to write an automated test from each one
- DO NOT include implementation details in specs — specs describe WHAT, not HOW
- MODIFIED requirements MUST be the FULL block — copy entire requirement + all scenarios from main spec, then edit. Partial MODIFIED blocks lose content at archive time.
- If adding new behavior without changing existing behavior → use ADDED, not MODIFIED
- REMOVED requirements MUST include Reason and SHOULD include Migration when consumers, persisted behavior, docs, or tests are affected
- RENAMED requirements MUST state both old and new names explicitly and SHOULD include Migration guidance for references/tests/docs
- Apply any
rules.specsfromopenspec/config.yaml - Size budget: Spec artifact MUST be under 650 words. Prefer requirement tables over narrative descriptions. Each scenario: 3-5 lines max.
- Return envelope per Section D from
skills/_shared/sdd-phase-common.md.
RFC 2119 Keywords Quick Reference
| Keyword | Meaning |
| MUST / SHALL | Absolute requirement |
| MUST NOT / SHALL NOT | Absolute prohibition |
| SHOULD | Recommended, but exceptions may exist with justification |
| SHOULD NOT | Not recommended, but may be acceptable with justification |
| MAY | Optional |
Other versions6 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 2
- Maicololiveras/praxisgenai-agent-orchestrator★ 153% same
- callingcard1973/claude-skills★ 053% same
Wrote their own version · 4
- felipefontoura/pi-sdd-kit★ 36same name
- khangpqvn/SDDADD★ 12same name
- PedroMosquera/squadai★ 10same name
- ad1code/sdd-harness★ 4same 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.
Used alongsideProjects with it also use sdd-plan.
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.
felipefontouraSkillsdd-plan
Cognitive SDD skill for creating or updating optional PLAN.md from captured ideas or project goals. Use when the conversation calls for roadmap, personas, feature mapping, phases, dependencies, and open decisions before requirements, even without an explicit command. Do not use for feature-level requirements or coding.
Also in 3 projects that use this
In this repository46 other files it gives its agents.
- agent-skill-release-lifecycleSkill
- better-uiSkill
- branch-prSkill
- chained-prSkill
- cognitive-doc-designSkill
- comment-writerSkill
- community-pr-auditSkill
- cost-optimizerSkill
- deck-design-systemSkill
- domain-managerSkill
- domain-manager-syncSkill
- enterprise-agentic-deliverySkill
- evidence-based-decision-researchSkill
- gentle-ai-ecosystemSkill
- github-build-or-reuseSkill
- github-repo-autopilotSkill
- google-workspace-qualitySkill
- go-testingSkill
- home-assistant-smart-home-plannerSkill
- issue-creationSkill
- judgment-daySkill
- mcp-skills-providerSkill
- open-source-repo-bootstrapSkill
- performance-auditorSkill
- personal-agentic-deliverySkill
- sdd-applySkill
- sdd-archiveSkill
- sdd-designSkill
- sdd-exploreSkill
- sdd-initSkill
- sdd-onboardSkill
- sdd-proposeSkill
- sdd-tasksSkill
- sdd-verifySkill
- skill-creatorSkill
- skill-improverSkill
- skill-publishSkill
- skill-registrySkill
- smart-shopping-advisorSkill
- social-publishingSkill
- startup-competitorsSkill
- startup-designSkill
- startup-pitchSkill
- startup-positioningSkill
- svg153-writing-styleSkill
- work-unit-commitsSkill
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.

