Update an existing Spectra change — from a plan file or conversation context.
Plan file support is available when the tool has a plan directory (~/.claude/plans/). Otherwise, use conversation context to update artifacts.
Prerequisites: This skill requires the spectra CLI. If any spectra command fails with "command not found" or similar, report the error and STOP.
Input: Optionally specify a plan file path or name.
/spectra-ingest ~/.claude/plans/agile-discovering-rocket.md/spectra-ingest agile-discovering-rocket/spectra-ingest(use conversation context or auto-detect plan file)
Steps
Locate the requirement source
a. Argument provided → treat as plan file reference (prepend
~/.claude/plans/and append.mdif needed)- If the file exists → use it as the plan file source, proceed to Step 2
- If the file does NOT exist → report the error and stop
b. No argument, plan file detectable:
- Check conversation context for plan file path (plan mode system messages include the path like
~/.claude/plans/<name>.md) - If found and the file exists → use the AskUserQuestion tool to ask:
- Option 1: Use the plan file
- Option 2: Use conversation context
- If the user picks plan file → proceed to Step 2
- If the user picks conversation context → skip Step 2, go to Step 3
c. No argument, no plan file detectable:
- Check
~/.claude/plans/for recent files - If recent files exist → list 5 most recent with the AskUserQuestion tool, include "Use conversation context" as an additional option
- If the user picks a file → proceed to Step 2
- If the user picks conversation context → skip Step 2, go to Step 3
d. Conversation context fallback (no plan files found at all):
- Use conversation context to update artifacts
- If conversation context is insufficient, use the AskUserQuestion tool to get more details
- Warn: "No plan file found. Using conversation context."
Parse the plan structure (skip if using conversation context)
Claude Code plan files typically contain:
- Title (
# ...) — the high-level goal - Context section — background, motivation, current state
- Stages/Steps — numbered implementation stages with goals and file lists
- Files involved — list of files to modify/create
- Verification section — how to test the changes
Extract:
plan_title: from the H1 headingplan_context: from the Context sectionplan_stages: each numbered stage with its goal and file listplan_files: all file paths mentionedplan_verification: verification steps
- Title (
Check for active changes (REQUIRED — ingest only updates existing changes)
spectra list --jsonAlso check for parked changes:
spectra list --parked --jsonParse both JSON outputs to get the full list of changes (active + parked). Parked changes should be annotated with "(parked)" in any selection list.
- If one change exists (active or parked) → use the AskUserQuestion tool to confirm updating it
- If multiple changes exist → use the AskUserQuestion tool to let user pick which one to update
- If no changes at all (neither active nor parked) → tell the user: "No active change found. Use
/spectra-proposefirst to create one." and stop
Select the change
After selecting the change, check if it is parked:
spectra list --parked --jsonIf the selected change appears in the
parkedarray:- Inform the user that this change is currently parked(暫存)
- Use AskUserQuestion tool to ask: continue (unpark) or cancel
- If continue: run
spectra unpark "<name>"then proceed - If cancel: stop the workflow
If there is no AskUserQuestion tool available (non-Claude-Code environment): Inform the user that this change is currently parked(暫存)and ask via plain text whether to unpark and continue, or cancel. Wait for the user's response. If the user confirms, run
spectra unpark "<name>"then proceed.Read existing artifacts for context before updating.
Update artifacts
For each artifact, get instructions first:
spectra instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --jsonUse the
templatefrom instructions as the output structure. Applycontextandrulesas constraints but do NOT copy them into the file.The instructions JSON includes
locale— the language to write artifacts in. If present, you MUST write the artifact content in that language. Exception: spec files (specs/*/*.md) MUST always be written in English regardless of locale, because they use normative language (SHALL/MUST).Plan-to-Artifact Mapping (when using a plan file):
Plan Section Artifact How to Map Title Change name Convert to kebab-case Context proposal: Why Direct content transfer Stages overview proposal: What Summarize all stages Individual stages tasks.md groups One stage = one ##heading, sub-items =- [ ]File paths proposal: Impact Affected code list Verification steps tasks.md Final verification task group Context-to-Artifact Mapping (when using conversation context):
Conversation Element Artifact How to Map Goal / requirement proposal: Why Extract motivation from discussion Discussed approach proposal: What Summarize agreed approach Mentioned files proposal: Impact Affected code list Discussion phases tasks.md groups One topic = one ##headingWhen updating an existing change:
- Merge new context into existing proposal (don't replace)
- Add new tasks from plan stages or conversation, preserve completed
[x]items - Preserve existing
[P]markers on tasks that still qualify - Do NOT remove existing content
Parallel task markers (
[P]): When creating or updating the tasks artifact, first read.spectra.yaml. Ifparallel_tasks: trueis set, add[P]markers to new tasks that can be executed in parallel. Format:- [ ] [P] Task description. A task qualifies for[P]if it targets different files from other pending tasks AND has no dependency on incomplete tasks in the same group. Whenparallel_tasksis not enabled, do NOT add[P]markers — but still preserve any existing[P]markers already in the file.After creating each artifact, re-check status:
spectra status --change "<name>" --jsonContinue until all
applyRequiresartifacts are complete. Show progress: "✓ Created "Inline Self-Review (before CLI analysis)
After updating all artifacts, scan them manually. Fix issues inline, then proceed to the CLI analyzer.
Check 1: No Placeholders
These patterns are artifact failures — fix each one before proceeding:
- "TBD", "TODO", "FIXME", "implement later", "details to follow"
- Vague instructions: "Add appropriate error handling", "Handle edge cases", "Write tests for the above"
- Delegation by reference: "Similar to Task N" without repeating specifics
- Steps describing WHAT without HOW: "Implement the authentication flow" (what flow? what steps?)
- Empty template sections left unfilled
- Weasel quantities: "some", "various", "several" when a specific number or list is needed
Check 2: Internal Consistency
- Does every capability in the proposal have a corresponding spec?
- Does the design reference only capabilities from the proposal?
- Do tasks cover all design decisions, and nothing outside proposal scope?
- Are file paths consistent across proposal Impact, design, and tasks?
Check 3: Scope Check
- More than 15 pending tasks → consider decomposing into multiple changes
- Any single task would take more than 1 hour → split it
- Touches more than 3 unrelated subsystems → consider splitting
Check 4: Ambiguity Check
- Are success/failure conditions testable and specific?
- Are boundary conditions defined (empty input, max limits, error cases)?
- Could "the system" refer to multiple components? Be explicit.
Check 5: Preservation Check (ingest-specific)
- Are all completed tasks
[x]still present and unchanged? - Were existing
[P]markers preserved on tasks that still qualify? - Was existing content merged (not replaced)?
Check 6: Durable Handoff Review (run BEFORE the CLI analyzer)
The updated change has to survive being parked or handed to another agent. Reject and fix any of the following on incomplete design and task content (do not rewrite completed
[x]tasks):- File-path-only tasks: a pending task whose entire description is "edit file X" with no behavior, contract, or verification target. File paths are locator context — the task SHALL still describe what is observably true when complete.
- Line-number-coupled instructions: design or task content that points to "line 42" / "the function on lines 80-95" as the only way to identify the work. Source line numbers drift; name the function, command, struct, or behavior instead.
- Vague acceptance criteria: success conditions like "works correctly", "behaves as expected", "handles edge cases" without naming the observable behavior or the verification target (test name, CLI invocation, analyzer rule, manual assertion).
- Missing scope boundaries on non-trivial work: design lacking explicit "in scope" / "out of scope" lines for any change that touches more than one subsystem or introduces new behavior. Trivial artifact-only edits MAY skip this; runtime, build, or tooling effects MUST NOT.
Fix every failure inline using the existing context and the new plan/conversation source before running the CLI analyzer. Update incomplete design and task content so behavior contracts, verification criteria, and scope boundaries stay current with the new context. Preserve completed tasks unchanged.
Rationalization Table
| What You're Thinking | What You Should Do |
|---|---|
| "The existing artifacts are close enough, just adjust the tasks" | Read the new context carefully. "Close enough" means you're missing something |
| "The proposal doesn't need updating, the change is the same" | If new context exists, the proposal likely needs updates. At minimum, check |
| "I can merge these tasks, they're basically the same" | Keep tasks granular. Merged tasks are harder to track |
| "The completed tasks still apply, no need to review" | Verify they're still relevant to updated scope. Don't blindly keep stale work |
| "This spec change is minor, skip the scenario update" | If the requirement changed, the scenario must change |
| "The conversation didn't discuss this artifact, so skip it" | Absence of discussion doesn't mean absence of impact. Check |
Analyze-Fix Loop (max 2 iterations)
spectra analyze <name> --json- Filter findings to Critical and Warning only (ignore Suggestion)
- If no Critical/Warning findings → show "Artifacts look consistent ✓" and proceed
- If Critical/Warning findings exist:
a. Show: "Found N issue(s), fixing... (attempt M/2)"
b. Fix each finding in the affected artifact
c. Re-run
spectra analyze <name> --jsond. Repeat up to 2 total iterations - After 2 attempts, if findings remain:
- Show remaining findings as a summary
- Proceed normally (do NOT block)
Validation
spectra validate "<name>"If validation fails, fix errors and re-validate.
Summary and next steps
Show:
- Source used: plan file (
<path>) or conversation context - Change name and location
- Artifacts created/updated
- Validation result
Use AskUserQuestion tool to confirm the workflow is complete. This ensures the workflow stops even when auto-accept is enabled. Provide exactly these options:
- First option (will be auto-selected): "Done" — End the ingest workflow. Inform the user they can run
/spectra-apply <change-name>when ready. - Second option: "Apply" — Invoke
/spectra-apply <change-name>to start implementation.
If AskUserQuestion tool is not available, display the summary and inform the user to run
/spectra-apply <change-name>when ready. Then STOP — do not continue.After the user responds, if they chose "Done", the workflow is OVER. If they chose "Apply", invoke
/spectra-apply <change-name>to begin implementation.- Source used: plan file (
Guardrails
- NEVER modify the original plan file in
~/.claude/plans/ - NEVER write application code — this skill only creates/updates Spectra artifacts
- NEVER create new changes — ingest only updates existing changes. If no active change exists, direct user to
/spectra-propose - When updating existing changes, preserve all completed tasks (
[x]) — never revert progress - If the source content is too brief to fill all artifact sections, use the AskUserQuestion tool to get more details rather than inventing content
- If
spectraCLI is not available, report the error and stop - Verify each artifact file exists after writing before proceeding to next
- NEVER skip the artifact workflow to write code directly
- If AskUserQuestion tool is not available, ask the same questions as plain text and wait for the user's response