Define

/define - Manifest Builder

Goal

Build a comprehensive Manifest that captures:

• What we build (Deliverables with Acceptance Criteria)
• Rules we must follow (Global Invariants)

Why thoroughness matters: Every criterion discovered NOW is one fewer rejection during implementation/review. The goal is a PR that passes on first submission—no "oh, I also needed X" after the work is done.

Comprehensive means surfacing latent criteria—requirements the user doesn't know they have until probed. Users know their surface-level needs; your job is to discover the constraints and edge cases they haven't thought about.

You can't get to 100% upfront—some criteria only emerge during implementation. But strive for high coverage. The manifest supports amendments for what's discovered later.

Output: /tmp/manifest-{timestamp}.md

Input

$ARGUMENTS = task description, optionally with context/research

If no arguments provided, ask: "What would you like to build or change?"

Principles

1. Verifiable - Every criterion has a verification method (bash, subagent, manual). If you can't verify it, it's not a criterion.

2. Validated - You drive the interview. Generate concrete candidates; learn from user reactions.

3. Complete - Surface hidden requirements through outside view (what typically fails in similar projects?), pre-mortem (what could go wrong?), and non-obvious probing (what hasn't user considered?).

Constraints

Todo list immediately - Adapt to task. Required: log file (/tmp/define-interview-{timestamp}.md), →log after discovery, (expand: ...) for emerging areas, Refresh: read full log before synthesis, acceptance criteria ("; done when X"). Update after every action.

Write to log as you go - Don't wait until the end.

Refresh before synthesis - Read full interview log to restore context.

Stop when converged - When probing yields no new criteria, or user signals "enough", move to synthesis.

Insights become criteria - Outside view findings, pre-mortem risks, non-obvious discoveries → convert to INV-G* or AC-*. No standalone value.

What the Manifest Needs

Both can cover output or process:

• Global Invariants - "Don't do X" (negative constraints, ongoing). Output: "No breaking changes to public API." Process: "Don't edit files in /legacy."
• Deliverables + ACs - "Must have done X" (positive milestones). Three types:
  • Functional: "Clicking Login redirects to Dashboard"
  • Non-Functional: "Response time < 200ms"
  • Process: "README.md contains section 'Authentication'"

Code Quality Gates (for coding tasks)

For tasks involving code, ask users to multi-select which quality aspects they care about. Present both questions together.

Filter through project preferences: CLAUDE.md is auto-loaded into context—check it for quality gate preferences. Users may have disabled certain default gates (e.g., "skip documentation checks") or added custom ones (e.g., "always run security scan"). Exclude disabled gates from the selection, and include any custom gates the user has defined.

questions: [
  {
    question: "Which code quality checks should apply as global invariants?",
    header: "Quality",
    options: [
      { label: "No HIGH/CRITICAL bugs (Recommended)", description: "Logic errors, race conditions, error handling" },
      { label: "Type safety", description: "No any abuse, proper narrowing, invalid states unrepresentable" },
      { label: "Maintainability", description: "DRY, low coupling, consistency, no dead code" },
      { label: "Simplicity", description: "No over-engineering, appropriate complexity" }
    ],
    multiSelect: true
  },
  {
    question: "Additional quality checks:",
    header: "More quality",
    options: [
      { label: "Test coverage", description: "New/changed code has adequate tests" },
      { label: "Testability", description: "Code structure allows easy testing (low mock count)" },
      { label: "Documentation", description: "Docs and comments match code" },
      { label: "CLAUDE.md adherence", description: "Follows project-specific standards" }
    ],
    multiSelect: true
  }
]

Map selections to reviewer agents:

Add selected quality gates as Global Invariants with subagent verification:

verify:
  method: subagent
  agent: [agent-name-from-table]
  prompt: "Review for [quality aspect] issues in the changed files"

Project Gates (auto-detect from CLAUDE.md)

For coding tasks, read CLAUDE.md and extract verifiable commands (typecheck, lint, test, format). Add as Global Invariants with bash verification:

verify:
  method: bash
  command: "[command from CLAUDE.md]"

Question Format

When presenting options, mark the first as "(Recommended)" to reduce cognitive load.

The Manifest Schema

# Definition: [Title]

## 1. Intent & Context
- **Goal:** [High-level purpose]
- **Mental Model:** [Key concepts to understand]

## 2. Global Invariants (The Constitution)
*Rules that apply to the ENTIRE execution. If these fail, the task fails.*

- [INV-G1] Description: ... | Verify: [Method]
  ```yaml
  verify:
    method: bash | subagent | manual
    command: "[if bash]"
    agent: "[if subagent]"
    prompt: "[if subagent]"
  ```

## 3. Deliverables (The Work)
*Ordered by dependency, then importance.*

### Deliverable 1: [Name]

**Acceptance Criteria:**
- [AC-1.1] Description: ... | Verify: ...
  ```yaml
  verify:
    method: bash | subagent | codebase | manual
    [details]
  ```

### Deliverable 2: [Name]
...

ID Scheme

Amendment Protocol

Manifests support amendments during execution:

• Reference original ID: "INV-G1.1 amends INV-G1"
• Track in manifest: ## Amendments

Complete

Manifest complete: /tmp/manifest-{timestamp}.md

To execute: /do /tmp/manifest-{timestamp}.md