agentleFS
svg153svg153/skills/skills/sdd-spec/SKILL.md

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
  1. Very specific:

    If you ARE the sdd-spec sub-agent (NOT the orchestrator), the gate above does NOT apply to you.

    line 21
  2. Distinctive:

    If Spanish technical artifacts are explicitly requested, use neutral/professional Spanish unless the user explicitly asks for a regional …

    line 28
  3. Very specific:

    engram: Read sdd/{change-name}/proposal (required).

    line 46
  4. Very specific:

    openspec: Read and follow skills/_shared/openspec-convention.md.

    line 47
  5. Distinctive:

    hybrid: Follow BOTH conventions — persist to Engram (single concatenated artifact) AND write domain files to filesystem.

    line 48
  6. Very specific:

    Follow Section A from skills/_shared/sdd-phase-common.md.

    line 54
  7. Distinctive:

    Read the proposal's Capabilities section — this is your primary contract:

    line 58
  8. Distinctive:

    If the proposal has no Capabilities section (older format), fall back to inferring from "Affected Areas".

    line 70
  9. Very specific:

    IF mode is openspec or hybrid: If openspec/specs/{domain}/spec.md exists, read it to understand CURRENT behavior.

    line 74
  10. Very specific:

    IF mode is openspec or hybrid: Create specs inside the change folder:

    line 82
  11. Very specific:

    IF mode is engram or none: Do NOT create any openspec/ directories or files.

    line 92
  12. Very specific:

    When writing a ## MODIFIED Requirements section, follow this exact workflow:

    line 96
  13. Distinctive:

    If this is a completely new domain, create a FULL spec (not a delta):

    line 174
  14. Very specific:

    Follow Section C from skills/_shared/sdd-phase-common.md.

    line 200
  15. Very specific:

    ALWAYS use Given/When/Then format for scenarios

    line 230
  16. Distinctive:

    ALWAYS use RFC 2119 keywords (MUST, SHALL, SHOULD, MAY) for requirement strength

    line 231
  17. Distinctive:

    Read the proposal's Capabilities section first — it tells you exactly which spec files to create

    line 232
  18. Very specific:

    If existing specs exist, write DELTA specs (ADDED/MODIFIED/REMOVED sections)

    line 233
  19. Distinctive:

    If NO existing specs exist for the domain, write a FULL spec

    line 234
  20. Distinctive:

    Every requirement MUST have at least ONE scenario

    line 235
  21. Distinctive:

    Keep scenarios TESTABLE — someone should be able to write an automated test from each one

    line 237
  22. Distinctive:

    DO NOT include implementation details in specs — specs describe WHAT, not HOW

    line 238
  23. Distinctive:

    If adding new behavior without changing existing behavior → use ADDED, not MODIFIED

    line 240

“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.

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

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 dedicated sdd-spec sub-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 as sdd/{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 it

If 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 spec

IF 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 instead

Delta 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.specs from openspec/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

KeywordMeaning
MUST / SHALLAbsolute requirement
MUST NOT / SHALL NOTAbsolute prohibition
SHOULDRecommended, but exceptions may exist with justification
SHOULD NOTNot recommended, but may be acceptable with justification
MAYOptional

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.