spectra-propose-e063ed— agent skill

Create a complete Spectra change proposal — from requirement to validated artifacts — in a single workflow.

Input: The argument after $spectra-propose is the requirement description. Examples:

• $spectra-propose add dark mode
• $spectra-propose fix the login page crash
• $spectra-propose improve search performance

If no argument is provided, the workflow will extract requirements from conversation context or ask.

Prerequisites: This skill requires the spectra CLI. If any spectra command fails with "command not found" or similar, report the error and STOP.

Steps

1. Determine the requirement source

a. Argument provided (e.g., "add dark mode") → use it as the requirement description, skip to deriving the change name below.

b. Plan file available:

• Check if the conversation context mentions a plan file path (plan mode system messages include the path like <name>.md)
• If found, check if the file exists at ``
• If a plan file is found, use the AskUserQuestion tool to ask:
• Option 1: Use the plan file
• Option 2: Use conversation context
• If conversation context has no relevant discussion, mention this when presenting the choice
• If the user picks the plan file → read it and extract:
• plan_title (H1 heading) → use as requirement description
• plan_context (Context section) → use as proposal Why/Motivation content
• plan_stages (numbered implementation stages) → use for artifact creation
• plan_files (all file paths mentioned) → use for Impact section
• If the user picks conversation context → fall through to (c)

c. Conversation context → attempt to extract requirements from conversation history

• If context is insufficient, use the AskUserQuestion tool to ask what they want to build

From the resolved description, derive a kebab-case change name (e.g., "add dark mode" → add-dark-mode).

IMPORTANT: Do NOT proceed without understanding what the user wants to build.

1. Classify the change type

Based on the requirement, classify the change into one of three types:

This determines the proposal template format in step 5.

1. Scan existing specs for relevance

Before creating the change, check if any existing specs overlap:

1. Use the Glob tool to list all files matching openspec/specs/*/spec.md
2. Extract directory names as the spec identifier list
3. Compare against the user's description to identify related specs (max 5 candidates)
4. For each candidate (max 3), read the first 10 lines to retrieve the Purpose section
5. If related specs are found, display them as an informational summary

IMPORTANT:

• If related specs are found, display them but do NOT stop or ask for confirmation — continue to the next step
• If no related specs are found, silently proceed without mentioning the scan

1. Create the change directory

   spectra new change "<name>" --agent codex

If a change with that name already exists, suggest continuing the existing change instead of creating a new one.

1. Write the proposal

Get instructions:

   spectra instructions proposal --change "<name>" --json

Write the proposal file using the template from instructions, with the following format based on change type:

Feature

   ## Why

   <!-- Why this functionality is needed -->

   ## What Changes

   <!-- What will be different -->

   ## Non-Goals (optional)

   <!-- Scope exclusions and rejected approaches. Required when design.md is skipped. -->

   ## Capabilities

   ### New Capabilities

   - `<capability-name>`: <brief description>

   ### Modified Capabilities

   (none)

   ## Impact

   - Affected specs: <new or modified capabilities>
   - Affected code: <list of affected files>

Bug Fix

   ## Problem

   <!-- Current broken behavior -->

   ## Root Cause

   <!-- Why it happens -->

   ## Proposed Solution

   <!-- How to fix -->

   ## Non-Goals (optional)

   <!-- Scope exclusions and rejected approaches. Required when design.md is skipped. -->

   ## Success Criteria

   <!-- Expected behavior after fix, verifiable conditions -->

   ## Impact

   - Affected code: <list of affected files>

Refactor / Enhancement

   ## Summary

   <!-- One sentence description -->

   ## Motivation

   <!-- Why this is needed -->

   ## Proposed Solution

   <!-- How to do it -->

   ## Non-Goals (optional)

   <!-- Scope exclusions and rejected approaches. Required when design.md is skipped. -->

   ## Alternatives Considered (optional)

   <!-- Other approaches considered and why not -->

   ## Impact

   - Affected specs: <affected capabilities>
   - Affected code: <list of affected files>

1. Get the artifact build order

   spectra status --change "<name>" --json

Parse the JSON to get:

• applyRequires: array of artifact IDs needed before implementation
• artifacts: list of all artifacts with their status and dependencies

1. Create remaining artifacts in sequence

Loop through artifacts in dependency order (skip proposal since it's already done):

a. For each artifact that is `ready` (dependencies satisfied):

• Check if the artifact is optional: If the artifact is NOT in the dependency chain of any applyRequires artifact (i.e., removing it would not block reaching apply), it is optional. Get its instructions and read the instruction field. If the instruction contains conditional criteria (e.g., "create only if any apply"), evaluate whether any criteria apply to this change based on the proposal content. If none apply, skip the artifact and show: "⊘ Skipped <artifact-id> (not needed for this change)". Then continue to the next artifact.
• Get instructions:

     spectra instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json

• The instructions JSON includes:
• context: Project background (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
• rules: Artifact-specific rules (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
• template: The structure to use for your output file
• instruction: Schema-specific guidance
• outputPath: Where to write the artifact
• dependencies: Completed artifacts to read for context
• locale: The language to write the artifact in (e.g., "Japanese (日本語)"). If present, you MUST write the artifact content in this language. Exception: spec files (specs/\*_/_.md) MUST always be written in English regardless of locale, because they use normative language (SHALL/MUST).
• Read any completed dependency files for context
• Create the artifact file using template as the structure
• Apply context and rules as constraints - but do NOT copy them into the file
• Show brief progress: "✓ Created <artifact-id>"

b. Continue until all `applyRequires` artifacts are complete

• After creating each artifact, re-run spectra status --change "<name>" --json
• Check if every artifact ID in applyRequires has status: "done"
• Stop when all applyRequires artifacts are done

c. If an artifact requires user input (unclear context):

• Use AskUserQuestion tool to clarify
• Then continue with creation

1. Inline Self-Review (before CLI analysis)

After creating 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.

Rationalization Table

1. Analyze-Fix Loop (max 2 iterations)
2. Run spectra analyze <change-name> --json
3. Filter findings to Critical and Warning only (ignore Suggestion)
4. If no Critical/Warning findings → show "Artifacts look consistent ✓" and proceed
5. 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 <change-name> --json d. Repeat up to 2 total iterations

1. After 2 attempts, if findings remain:

• Show remaining findings as a summary
• Proceed normally (do NOT block)

1. Validation

    spectra validate "<name>"

If validation fails, fix errors and re-validate.

1. Show final status and end workflow

Show summary:

• Change name and location
• List of artifacts created
• Validation result

Use AskUserQuestion tool to ask what to do next. This ensures the workflow stops even when auto-accept is enabled. Provide exactly these options:

• First option (will be auto-selected): "Park" — Execute spectra park "<name>" to park the change, then inform the user they can run $spectra-apply <change-name> when ready (which will auto-unpark).
• Second option: "Apply" — Invoke $spectra-apply <change-name> to start implementation.

If AskUserQuestion tool is not available, execute spectra park "<name>" and inform the user to run $spectra-apply <change-name> when ready. Then STOP — do not continue.

After the user responds, if they chose "Park", execute spectra park "<name>" and the workflow is OVER. If they chose "Apply", invoke $spectra-apply <change-name> to begin implementation.

Artifact Creation Guidelines

• Follow the instruction field from spectra instructions for each artifact type
• Read dependency artifacts for context before creating new ones
• Use template as the structure for your output file - fill in its sections
• IMPORTANT: context and rules are constraints for YOU, not content for the file
• Do NOT copy <context>, <rules>, <project_context> blocks into the artifact
• These guide what you write, but should never appear in the output
• Parallel task markers (`[P]`): When creating the tasks artifact, first read .spectra.yaml. If parallel_tasks: true is set, add [P] markers to 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. When parallel_tasks is not enabled, do NOT add [P] markers.

Guardrails

• Create all artifacts needed for implementation. Optional artifacts (those not in the applyRequires dependency chain) may be skipped if their inclusion criteria don't apply.
• Always read dependency artifacts before creating a new one
• If context is critically unclear, ask the user - but prefer making reasonable decisions to keep momentum
• If a change with that name already exists, suggest continuing that change instead
• Verify each artifact file exists after writing before proceeding to next
• NEVER write application code or implement features during this workflow
• NEVER skip the artifact workflow to write code directly
• NEVER reinterpret requirements by ignoring the proposal file
• NEVER invoke $spectra-apply — this workflow ends after artifact creation. The user decides when to start implementation
• If AskUserQuestion tool is not available, ask the same questions as plain text and wait for the user's response