Clarification Gate
Use this skill before product, spec, planning, or implementation work when the request is new, broad, ambiguous, risky, or likely to affect multiple files or governance surfaces.
Goal
Turn an unclear request into a decision-ready handoff without creating a new documentation program.
The gate should decide:
- what the user wants
- what is out of scope
- which facts are already known from the repository
- which assumptions are risky
- which source-of-truth docs should carry the result
- whether implementation can start
Workflow
- Inspect existing repository evidence before asking questions:
- README and package metadata
- agent guide
docs/PROJECT_BRIEF.md
docs/CODE_STYLE.md
docs/PRD.md
- latest
docs/specs/*
docs/DESIGN.md only for UI, frontend, desktop, mobile, or component work
docs/BRAND.md only for public brand, naming, marketing, identity, or copy work
docs/TASKS.md
docs/CHANGELOG_AI.md
- relevant source files, tests, assets, or configs
- Separate:
- known facts
- unknowns
- contradictions
- risky assumptions
- reusable existing systems
- Ask only material questions that cannot be answered from repository evidence.
- Produce a short clarification handoff.
- Route the work to the smallest next OpenArc workflow:
product-governance when product intent or scope must be captured
spec-workflow when behavior, acceptance criteria, or compatibility must be specified
planning-engine when implementation order, validation, or migration needs structure
repository-governance or workspace-migration when setup or migration is the real task
- direct implementation when scope, constraints, and validation are already clear
Question Budget
Ask 0-5 questions. Ask zero when repository evidence already resolves every material gap.
Each question must:
- change the implementation or documentation result
- include a recommended answer
- state the trade-off behind that recommendation
- avoid asking for facts that can be discovered from the repository
If confidence is high enough to proceed, record non-blocking ambiguity under Open Questions in an existing relevant PRD, spec, or plan instead of creating a document or blocking all work.
Handoff Shape
Use this structure in the conversation, or paste it into the target PRD, spec, or plan when the repository keeps persistent docs:
## Clarification Gate
- Goal:
- Non-goals:
- Audience / users:
- Constraints:
- Known facts:
- Unknowns:
- Risky assumptions:
- Decisions:
- Target docs:
- Implementation readiness:
Implementation readiness must be one of:
ready: implementation can begin now; update a target document only when the change needs one
needs PRD: product intent or scope is not stable enough
needs spec: behavior, acceptance criteria, or compatibility is not stable enough
needs plan: implementation order, migration, rollback, or validation is not stable enough
blocked: a material user or external decision is required
Documentation Targets
Prefer existing OpenArc documents over new document families:
- Product intent, audience, goals, and non-goals ->
docs/PRD.md
- Behavior, compatibility, acceptance criteria, and feature scope ->
docs/specs/*
- Implementation sequence, validation, rollback, and migration ->
docs/plans/*
- Active execution status ->
docs/TASKS.md
- Recent AI-assisted changes and decisions ->
docs/CHANGELOG_AI.md
- Code conventions and guardrails ->
docs/CODE_STYLE.md
- UI implementation rules ->
docs/DESIGN.md
Do not create docs/intake/ or another permanent intake tree by default.
Decision Records
Do not default to ADRs.
Prefer the existing PRD, spec, plan, task, changelog, code-style, or design document that already owns the decision.
Only suggest an ADR when all of these are true:
- The decision is hard to reverse.
- The choice will look surprising without context.
- Real alternatives were considered and rejected for specific reasons.
If the repository already has an ADR convention, follow it. Otherwise, ask before creating docs/adr/.
Rules
- Do not implement until the gate has established
ready.
- When readiness is
ready and the original request already authorizes implementation, continue in the same turn; do not ask the user to say "continue" again.
- When the user requested clarification only, stop after the handoff even if readiness is
ready.
- Do not create PRD, design, brand, or ADR documents just because the gate ran.
- Do not ask unlimited interview questions.
- Do not import third-party skills as core dependencies.
- Reuse existing repository vocabulary, but challenge overloaded terms when they would change the work.
- Treat script, CLI, automation, library, and docs-only repositories as non-UI unless the repository or user request shows UI, visual, or brand signals.
1---2name: clarification-gate3description: Use when a new goal, feature request, migration, or non-trivial change needs focused clarification before PRD, spec, plan, or implementation work begins.4---56# Clarification Gate78Use this skill before product, spec, planning, or implementation work when the request is new, broad, ambiguous, risky, or likely to affect multiple files or governance surfaces.910## Goal1112Turn an unclear request into a decision-ready handoff without creating a new documentation program.1314The gate should decide:1516- what the user wants17- what is out of scope18- which facts are already known from the repository19- which assumptions are risky20- which source-of-truth docs should carry the result21- whether implementation can start2223## Workflow24251. Inspect existing repository evidence before asking questions:26 - README and package metadata27 - agent guide28 - `docs/PROJECT_BRIEF.md`29 - `docs/CODE_STYLE.md`30 - `docs/PRD.md`31 - latest `docs/specs/*`32 - `docs/DESIGN.md` only for UI, frontend, desktop, mobile, or component work33 - `docs/BRAND.md` only for public brand, naming, marketing, identity, or copy work34 - `docs/TASKS.md`35 - `docs/CHANGELOG_AI.md`36 - relevant source files, tests, assets, or configs372. Separate:38 - known facts39 - unknowns40 - contradictions41 - risky assumptions42 - reusable existing systems433. Ask only material questions that cannot be answered from repository evidence.444. Produce a short clarification handoff.455. Route the work to the smallest next OpenArc workflow:46 - `product-governance` when product intent or scope must be captured47 - `spec-workflow` when behavior, acceptance criteria, or compatibility must be specified48 - `planning-engine` when implementation order, validation, or migration needs structure49 - `repository-governance` or `workspace-migration` when setup or migration is the real task50 - direct implementation when scope, constraints, and validation are already clear5152## Question Budget5354Ask 0-5 questions. Ask zero when repository evidence already resolves every material gap.5556Each question must:5758- change the implementation or documentation result59- include a recommended answer60- state the trade-off behind that recommendation61- avoid asking for facts that can be discovered from the repository6263If confidence is high enough to proceed, record non-blocking ambiguity under `Open Questions` in an existing relevant PRD, spec, or plan instead of creating a document or blocking all work.6465## Handoff Shape6667Use this structure in the conversation, or paste it into the target PRD, spec, or plan when the repository keeps persistent docs:6869```markdown70## Clarification Gate7172- Goal:73- Non-goals:74- Audience / users:75- Constraints:76- Known facts:77- Unknowns:78- Risky assumptions:79- Decisions:80- Target docs:81- Implementation readiness:82```8384`Implementation readiness` must be one of:8586- `ready`: implementation can begin now; update a target document only when the change needs one87- `needs PRD`: product intent or scope is not stable enough88- `needs spec`: behavior, acceptance criteria, or compatibility is not stable enough89- `needs plan`: implementation order, migration, rollback, or validation is not stable enough90- `blocked`: a material user or external decision is required9192## Documentation Targets9394Prefer existing OpenArc documents over new document families:9596- Product intent, audience, goals, and non-goals -> `docs/PRD.md`97- Behavior, compatibility, acceptance criteria, and feature scope -> `docs/specs/*`98- Implementation sequence, validation, rollback, and migration -> `docs/plans/*`99- Active execution status -> `docs/TASKS.md`100- Recent AI-assisted changes and decisions -> `docs/CHANGELOG_AI.md`101- Code conventions and guardrails -> `docs/CODE_STYLE.md`102- UI implementation rules -> `docs/DESIGN.md`103104Do not create `docs/intake/` or another permanent intake tree by default.105106## Decision Records107108Do not default to ADRs.109110Prefer the existing PRD, spec, plan, task, changelog, code-style, or design document that already owns the decision.111112Only suggest an ADR when all of these are true:1131141. The decision is hard to reverse.1152. The choice will look surprising without context.1163. Real alternatives were considered and rejected for specific reasons.117118If the repository already has an ADR convention, follow it. Otherwise, ask before creating `docs/adr/`.119120## Rules121122- Do not implement until the gate has established `ready`.123- When readiness is `ready` and the original request already authorizes implementation, continue in the same turn; do not ask the user to say "continue" again.124- When the user requested clarification only, stop after the handoff even if readiness is `ready`.125- Do not create PRD, design, brand, or ADR documents just because the gate ran.126- Do not ask unlimited interview questions.127- Do not import third-party skills as core dependencies.128- Reuse existing repository vocabulary, but challenge overloaded terms when they would change the work.129- Treat script, CLI, automation, library, and docs-only repositories as non-UI unless the repository or user request shows UI, visual, or brand signals.