Speckit 01 Specify

Spec-Kit Specify

Create or update a feature specification from a natural language feature description.

User Input

$ARGUMENTS

You MUST consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).

Constitution Loading (REQUIRED)

Before ANY action, load and internalize the project constitution:

1. Read constitution:

   cat .specify/memory/constitution.md 2>/dev/null || echo "NO_CONSTITUTION"
   

2. If file doesn't exist:

   WARNING: Project constitution not found at .specify/memory/constitution.md
   
   Proceeding without constitution.
   Recommendation: Run /speckit-00-constitution first to define project principles.
   

3. If exists, parse all principles, constraints, and governance rules.

Execution Flow

The text the user typed after /speckit-01-specify is the feature description.

1. Generate Branch Name

Analyze the feature description and create a 2-4 word short name:

• Use action-noun format when possible (e.g., "user-auth", "fix-payment-timeout")
• Preserve technical terms and acronyms (OAuth2, API, JWT, etc.)
• Keep it concise but descriptive

Examples:

• "I want to add user authentication" -> "user-auth"
• "Implement OAuth2 integration for the API" -> "oauth2-api-integration"
• "Create a dashboard for analytics" -> "analytics-dashboard"

2. Create Feature Branch and Directory

2.1 Branch Creation Decision

Before creating a feature branch, check context and ask user:

1. Check current branch:

   git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD 2>/dev/null || echo "no-git"
   

2. Decide whether to prompt:

   • If already on a feature branch (matches ^[0-9]{3}-): suggest skipping branch creation
   • If on main/master/develop: suggest creating a new branch (default)

3. Ask user (with context-aware default):

   Create feature branch? [Y/n]
   - Y (default): Create new branch 'NNN-feature-name'
   - n: Stay on current branch, create feature directory only
   

4. If user declines branch creation (answers 'n', 'no', or 'skip'):

   • Add --skip-branch flag to the script

2.2 Run Feature Creation Script

Unix/macOS/Linux:

# With branch creation (default):
bash .tessl/tiles/tessl-labs/spec-kit/skills/speckit-core/scripts/bash/create-new-feature.sh --json "$ARGUMENTS" --short-name "your-short-name"

# Without branch creation (if user declined):
bash .tessl/tiles/tessl-labs/spec-kit/skills/speckit-core/scripts/bash/create-new-feature.sh --json --skip-branch "$ARGUMENTS" --short-name "your-short-name"

Windows (PowerShell):

# With branch creation (default):
pwsh .tessl/tiles/tessl-labs/spec-kit/skills/speckit-core/scripts/powershell/create-new-feature.ps1 -Json "$ARGUMENTS" -ShortName "your-short-name"

# Without branch creation (if user declined):
pwsh .tessl/tiles/tessl-labs/spec-kit/skills/speckit-core/scripts/powershell/create-new-feature.ps1 -Json -SkipBranch "$ARGUMENTS" -ShortName "your-short-name"

Parse the JSON output for BRANCH_NAME, SPEC_FILE, and FEATURE_NUM.

IMPORTANT: Only run this script ONCE per feature. The JSON output contains the paths you need.

3. Load Spec Template

Read spec-template.md to understand required sections.

4. Generate Specification

Follow this execution flow:

1. Parse user description from Input

   • If empty:

     ERROR: No feature description provided.
     
     Usage: /speckit-01-specify <feature description>
     Example: /speckit-01-specify Add user authentication with OAuth2 support
     

2. Extract key concepts from description

   • Identify: actors, actions, data, constraints

3. For unclear aspects:

   • Make informed guesses based on context and industry standards
   • Only mark with [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: specific question] if:
     • The choice significantly impacts feature scope or user experience
     • Multiple reasonable interpretations exist with different implications
     • No reasonable default exists
   • LIMIT: Maximum 3 [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers total
   • Prioritize clarifications by impact: scope > security/privacy > user experience > technical details

4. Fill User Scenarios & Testing section

   • Each user story must be INDEPENDENTLY TESTABLE
   • Assign priorities (P1, P2, P3) to each story

5. Generate Functional Requirements

   • Each requirement must be testable
   • Use reasonable defaults for unspecified details

6. Define Success Criteria

   • Create measurable, technology-agnostic outcomes
   • Include quantitative and qualitative measures

7. Identify Key Entities (if data involved)

5. Write Specification

Write to SPEC_FILE using the template structure.

6. Phase Separation Validation (REQUIRED)

Before finalizing, scan the draft specification for implementation details that belong in /speckit-03-plan:

Check for violations - specification MUST NOT mention:

• Programming languages (Python, JavaScript, TypeScript, Go, Rust, Java, C#, etc.)
• Frameworks (React, Django, Express, Spring, Rails, FastAPI, Next.js, etc.)
• Databases (PostgreSQL, MySQL, MongoDB, SQLite, Redis, DynamoDB, etc.)
• Infrastructure (Docker, Kubernetes, AWS, GCP, Azure, Terraform, etc.)
• Specific libraries or packages (lodash, pandas, axios, etc.)
• API implementation details (REST endpoints, GraphQL schemas, gRPC)
• File structures or code organization
• Data schemas or table definitions
• Architecture patterns (microservices, monolith, serverless)

Allowed technical terms (these describe WHAT, not HOW):

• Domain concepts (authentication, authorization, encryption)
• User-facing features (search, filter, export, import)
• Data concepts (user profile, order, transaction)
• Performance requirements (response time, throughput) - but not implementation

If violations found:

╭─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────╮
│  PHASE SEPARATION VIOLATION DETECTED                           │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│  Specification contains implementation details:                │
│  - [list each violation]                                       │
│                                                                 │
│  Implementation decisions belong in /speckit-03-plan.          │
│  Specification defines WHAT users need, not HOW to build it.   │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│  ACTION: Removing implementation details...                    │
╰─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────╯

Auto-fix: Rewrite violating sections to be implementation-agnostic:

• "Store in PostgreSQL database" → "Persist data reliably"
• "Build REST API endpoints" → "Expose functionality to external systems"
• "Use React for the frontend" → "Provide web-based user interface"
• "Response time under 200ms" → "Users experience responsive interactions"

Re-validate after fixes until no violations remain.

7. Create Spec Quality Checklist

Generate a checklist file at FEATURE_DIR/checklists/requirements.md:

# Specification Quality Checklist: [FEATURE NAME]

**Purpose**: Validate specification completeness and quality before planning
**Created**: [DATE]
**Feature**: [Link to spec.md]

## Content Quality

- [ ] No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs)
- [ ] Focused on user value and business needs
- [ ] Written for non-technical stakeholders
- [ ] All mandatory sections completed

## Requirement Completeness

- [ ] No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain
- [ ] Requirements are testable and unambiguous
- [ ] Success criteria are measurable
- [ ] Success criteria are technology-agnostic
- [ ] All acceptance scenarios are defined
- [ ] Edge cases are identified
- [ ] Scope is clearly bounded
- [ ] Dependencies and assumptions identified

## Feature Readiness

- [ ] All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria
- [ ] User scenarios cover primary flows
- [ ] Feature meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
- [ ] No implementation details leak into specification

## Notes

- Items marked incomplete require spec updates before `/speckit-02-clarify` or `/speckit-03-plan`

8. Handle Clarifications

If [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain (max 3):

Present each question in this format:

## Question [N]: [Topic]

**Context**: [Quote relevant spec section]

**What we need to know**: [Specific question]

**Suggested Answers**:

| Option | Answer | Implications |
|--------|--------|--------------|
| A      | [First answer] | [Impact] |
| B      | [Second answer] | [Impact] |
| C      | [Third answer] | [Impact] |
| Custom | Provide your own | [Instructions] |

**Your choice**: _[Wait for user response]_

9. Report Completion

Output:

• Branch name
• Spec file path
• Checklist results
• Readiness for next phase (/speckit-02-clarify or /speckit-03-plan)

Guidelines

Quick Guidelines

• Focus on WHAT users need and WHY
• Avoid HOW to implement (no tech stack, APIs, code structure)
• Written for business stakeholders, not developers

Success Criteria Guidelines

Success criteria must be:

1. Measurable: Include specific metrics
2. Technology-agnostic: No frameworks, languages, databases
3. User-focused: Describe outcomes from user/business perspective
4. Verifiable: Can be tested without knowing implementation

Good examples:

• "Users can complete checkout in under 3 minutes"
• "System supports 10,000 concurrent users"
• "95% of searches return results in under 1 second"

Bad examples:

• "API response time is under 200ms" (too technical)
• "Database can handle 1000 TPS" (implementation detail)

Semantic Diff on Re-run

If spec.md already exists, perform semantic diff before overwriting:

1. Detect Existing Artifact

test -f "$SPEC_FILE" && echo "EXISTING_SPEC_FOUND"

2. If Existing Spec Found

1. Read and parse existing spec.md

2. Extract semantic elements:

   • User story count and titles
   • Requirement IDs and descriptions
   • Success criteria
   • Key entities

3. Compare with new content:

   ╭─────────────────────────────────────────────────────╮
   │  SEMANTIC DIFF: spec.md                             │
   ├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
   │  User Stories:                                      │
   │    + Added: US4 "Export Tasks"                      │
   │    ~ Changed: US2 title updated                     │
   │    - Removed: None                                  │
   │                                                     │
   │  Requirements:                                      │
   │    + Added: FR-011, FR-012                          │
   │    ~ Changed: FR-003 description modified           │
   │    - Removed: FR-008 (verify intentional)           │
   │                                                     │
   │  Success Criteria:                                  │
   │    + Added: SC-008                                  │
   │    ~ Changed: None                                  │
   │    - Removed: None                                  │
   ├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
   │  DOWNSTREAM IMPACT:                                 │
   │  ⚠ plan.md may need updates (new requirements)     │
   │  ⚠ tasks.md may need regeneration                  │
   │  ⚠ checklists may be invalidated                   │
   ╰─────────────────────────────────────────────────────╯
   

4. Ask for confirmation:

   • "Proceed with these changes? (yes/no)"
   • If user declines, preserve existing spec

3. Downstream Impact Warning

If changes detected, warn about affected artifacts:

• Removed requirements → tasks may reference deleted items
• Changed requirements → plan may be inconsistent
• New requirements → tasks.md needs regeneration

Next Steps

After completing the specification:

1. Recommended: Run /speckit-02-clarify to resolve ambiguities

   • Identifies underspecified areas you may have missed
   • Asks targeted questions (max 5) to improve spec quality
   • Especially valuable for complex features

2. Required: Run /speckit-03-plan to create the technical implementation plan

Suggest to user:

Specification complete! Next steps:
- /speckit-02-clarify - (Recommended) Resolve any ambiguities and improve spec quality
- /speckit-03-plan - Create technical implementation plan