spec-creation
Creates validated technical specifications for new features and bug fixes.
Install
mkdir -p .claude/skills/spec-creation && curl -L -o skill.zip "https://agentskills.codes/api/skills/download/13636" && unzip -o skill.zip -d .claude/skills/spec-creation && rm skill.zipInstalls to .claude/skills/spec-creation
Activation
This is the description your AI agent reads to decide when to run this skill — the better it matches your request, the more reliably it fires.
Шаг ① workflow: Создание ТЗ + ветка + коммит. Triggers: "создай ТЗ", "new feature", "новая фича", "bugfix". Использует IEEE 29148:2018 для валидации требований (≥85%). После валидации создаёт ветку feature/* или bugfix/* и коммитит spec.Key capabilities
- →Create technical specifications (ТЗ)
- →Validate requirements using IEEE 29148:2018 standards
- →Create feature or bugfix branches
- →Perform initial commits of spec files
- →Refine requirements through multi-round validation
- →Assess requirements quality based on core attributes, context, description completeness, traceability, and prioritization
How it works
This skill creates technical specifications by iteratively validating requirements against IEEE 29148:2018 standards, then creates a new git branch and commits the validated spec.
Inputs & outputs
When to use spec-creation
- →Creating technical specifications
- →Initializing feature branches
- →Validating project requirements
About this skill
Spec Creation Skill
Шаг ① workflow — создание ТЗ с валидацией по IEEE 29148:2018, ветки и коммита.
Workflow Contract
entry:
branch: main | master
trigger:
- "создай ТЗ"
- "new feature"
- "новая фича"
- "bugfix"
- "исправь баг"
exit:
artifacts:
- .ai/specs/{branch-type}-{slug}.md
branch: feature/* | bugfix/*
commit: "docs: add spec for {feature-name}"
recommended_next_skill: spec-implementer # Рекомендуемый следующий skill для Codex
When to Use This Skill
- User requests creating a technical specification (ТЗ, техническое задание)
- User says "создай ТЗ", "напиши спецификацию", "создай spec"
- User reports a bug → создать bugfix spec с красным тестом
- Starting workflow step ① (per project workflow guide)
Output Location
Specifications are created in .ai/specs/ directory with naming pattern:
feature-{slug}.mdfor new featuresbugfix-{slug}.mdfor bug fixes
A git branch will be created with pattern:
feature/{slug}for new featuresbugfix/{slug}for bug fixes
The spec file will be committed to the new branch.
Core Principles
Iterative Requirement Refinement
This skill uses multi-round validation with IEEE 29148:2018 quality criteria:
Critical: A specification is NOT complete until validation achieves ≥85% score.
Progressive Disclosure
- Keep spec template concise in SKILL.md
- Reference detailed templates in
references/directory - Load templates only when needed
IEEE 29148:2018 Quality Assessment Framework
The requirements quality score is calculated from 5 sections, each containing specific criteria with maximum weight of 5 per criterion.
Section 1: Core Quality Attributes (40 points total)
| Criterion | Weight | Check |
|---|---|---|
| Necessary | 5 | Does the requirement define an essential capability/characteristic? |
| Unambiguous | 5 | Is there only one possible interpretation? |
| Complete | 5 | Are all necessary capabilities/characteristics/constraints described? |
| Consistent | 5 | Is it free of conflicts with other requirements? |
| Singular | 5 | Does it address only one concern (not compound)? |
| Feasible | 5 | Is it achievable with given constraints (time, budget, technology)? |
| Traceable | 5 | Can it be linked to stakeholder needs and business objectives? |
| Verifiable | 5 | Can fulfillment be measured through testing/inspection? |
Section 2: Context & Rationale (20 points total)
| Criterion | Weight | Check |
|---|---|---|
| Implementation-free | 5 | Does it avoid dictating HOW to implement (WHAT vs HOW)? |
| Affordable | 5 | Is it within budget/resource constraints? |
| Bounded | 5 | Are scope boundaries clearly defined? |
| Rationale stated | 5 | Is the reason for this requirement explained? |
Section 3: Completeness of Description (20 points total)
| Criterion | Weight | Check |
|---|---|---|
| Inputs defined | 5 | Are all inputs clearly specified (data, parameters, user actions)? |
| Outputs defined | 5 | Are expected outputs clearly described (return values, UI changes, side effects)? |
| Constraints identified | 5 | Are technical/business/environmental constraints noted? |
| Edge cases covered | 5 | Are error scenarios and boundary conditions addressed? |
Section 4: Traceability & Stakeholders (10 points total)
| Criterion | Weight | Check |
|---|---|---|
| Stakeholder mapping | 5 | Can the requirement be linked to specific stakeholders/users? |
| Business value | 5 | Does it align with stated business objectives or user needs? |
Section 5: Acceptance & Prioritization (10 points total)
| Criterion | Weight | Check |
|---|---|---|
| Prioritization clear | 5 | Is priority level specified (must-have vs nice-to-have)? |
| Success criteria | 5 | Are measurable acceptance criteria defined? |
Maximum Score: 100 points Threshold: 85 points minimum to proceed
Iterative Validation Process
Round Structure
For each validation round:
- Display Current Requirements Version - Show the accumulated requirements in markdown format
- Calculate IEEE 29148 Score - Evaluate each criterion and calculate total
- Decision Point:
- If score ≥ 85: Proceed to next phase
- If score < 85: ask the user a concise clarification question
- Enrich & Re-evaluate - Update requirements with answers and re-score
Round 1: Core Requirements Validation
Initial Requirements Gathering:
## Initial Requirements
### Feature Overview
- **Feature name**: {from user}
- **Type**: {new feature/bug fix/enhancement}
- **Vision**: {one sentence}
### Core Requirements
- {Must-have requirements from user}
### Stakeholders
- {Target users, roles}
### Constraints
- {Technical/business constraints}
Evaluate using Section 1 (Core Quality Attributes) + Section 2 (Context & Rationale)
Common Gaps to Address via direct user questions:
- Unambiguous: "Which specific notification channels?" (email, in-app, SMS?)
- Complete: "What data needs to be stored for each notification?"
- Feasible: "Are there rate limits or API constraints?"
- Implementation-free: "What business outcome, not which library?"
Round 2: Technical Completeness Validation
Extended Requirements:
## Technical Requirements
### Functional Requirements
- {Specific functional behaviors}
### Non-Functional Requirements
- {Performance, security, usability}
### API & Database Changes
- {Endpoints, schemas, migrations}
### Frontend Changes
- {Pages, components, templates}
Evaluate using Section 3 (Completeness of Description)
Common Gaps to Address:
- Inputs defined: "What parameters does the API accept?"
- Outputs defined: "What response format/status codes?"
- Constraints identified: "Are there authentication requirements?"
- Edge cases covered: "What happens if the external service is down?"
Round 3: Traceability & Acceptance Validation
Final Requirements:
## Implementation Plan
### Stages
- {Logical breakdown with dependencies}
### Acceptance Criteria per Stage
- {Measurable, testable criteria}
### File Changes
- {Concrete paths: src/...}
### Documentation Updates
- {ARCHITECTURE.md, API docs, etc.}
Evaluate using Section 4 (Traceability) + Section 5 (Acceptance)
Common Gaps to Address:
- Stakeholder mapping: "Which user role triggers this workflow?"
- Business value: "What problem does this solve for the user?"
- Success criteria: "How do we verify this works?" (not "it works")
- Prioritization: "Is this must-have for MVP or can it wait?"
Output Format
After all validation rounds pass, generate the specification file AND create branch with commit:
Step 1: Confirm Branch Creation with User
Ask the user directly for confirmation:
ТЗ готово (оценка IEEE 29148: ≥85%). Создать ветку и закоммитить ТЗ?
- Да, создать ветку и закоммитить
- Только создать файл спецификации (без ветки и коммита)
Step 2: Determine Branch Type
If user confirms "Да", determine branch type:
- Feature: for new functionality, enhancement (
feature/{slug}) - Bugfix: for fixing bugs (
bugfix/{slug}orbugfix/{issue-id}-{slug}) - Refactor: for code restructuring without behavior change (
feature/refactor-{area}) - Hotfix: for urgent production fixes (
hotfix/{description})
Infer from spec type or ask the user directly if unclear:
Какой тип ветки создать?
- feature (новая функциональность)
- bugfix (исправление бага)
- refactor (рефакторинг)
- hotfix (срочный фикс для production)
Step 3: Check Current Branch
git branch --show-current
git status
Protection Policy: If on main or master, warn user:
⚠️ Вы находитесь на ветке main/master. Прямые изменения не рекомендуются.
Создать feature branch?
Ensure no uncommitted changes remain before creating new branch.
Step 4: Create Branch
git checkout -b {branch-type}/{slug}
Examples:
feature/thermocalc-response-differentiationbugfix/login-validation-errorbugfix/142-auth-token-expiryfeature/refactor-user-servicehotfix/payment-gateway-timeout
Branch naming conventions:
- Use lowercase letters
- Separate words with hyphens
- Keep descriptions short but descriptive
- For bugfixes, include issue ID if available
- For hotfixes, use prefix
hotfix/for urgent production fixes
Step 5: Verify Branch Creation
git status
Ensure:
- New branch is created
- It's based on the correct starting point (typically main)
- No uncommitted changes remain on main branch
Step 6: Write Spec File and Commit
# Write spec to .ai/specs/{filename}.md
git add .ai/specs/{filename}.md
git commit -m "docs
---
*Content truncated.*
When not to use it
- →When the user does not want to create a technical specification
- →When the project does not follow a workflow guide with specific steps
Limitations
- →Requires validation score of ≥85% to proceed
- →Spec template is concise and references detailed templates externally
- →Commit in small chunks (≤250 lines) during implementation
How it compares
This workflow integrates IEEE 29148:2018 validation directly into spec creation and branch initialization, ensuring high-quality requirements and a structured start to development, unlike a manual, less standardized approach.
Compared to similar skills
spec-creation side by side with the closest alternatives in the catalog.
| Skill | Installs | Updated | Safety | Difficulty |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| spec-creation (this skill) | 0 | 4mo | Review | Intermediate |
| sdd | 0 | 2mo | No flags | Intermediate |
| project-planner | 32 | 10mo | Review | Intermediate |
| spec-kit-workflow | 11 | 8mo | No flags | Intermediate |
Try saying
Example prompts that trigger this skill in your AI assistant.
More by SchurupIK72
View all by SchurupIK72 →You might also like
sdd
Tai-ch0802
本專案標準開發流程:分級 Spec-Driven Development (SDD)。動工前先做分級判定 — T0 直接做(typo/文案/樣式微調)、T1 單檔 SPEC.md 與實作同步並隨 PR 審(一般 bug fix / 小中型功能,預設層級)、T2 完整 PRD → SA 先審後寫(storage schema / 權限 / 跨 context 協定 / 大型功能)。產出物放 /docs/specs/{type}/{ID-PREFIX}_{desc}/,目錄前綴採 ISSUE-/PR-/BASE- 三類。當使用者提到「新功能、修 bug、重構、SDD、規格驅動、要做一個 X、開新功
project-planner
adrianpuiu
Comprehensive project planning and documentation generator for software projects. Creates structured requirements documents, system design documents, and task breakdown plans with implementation tracking. Use when starting a new project, defining specifications, creating technical designs, or breaking down complex systems into implementable tasks. Supports user story format, acceptance criteria, component design, API specifications, and hierarchical task decomposition with requirement traceability.
spec-kit-workflow
jmanhype
Guides specification-driven development workflow. Automatically invoked when discussing new features, specifications, technical planning, or implementation tasks. Ensures proper workflow phases (specify → clarify → plan → checklist → tasks → analyze → implement).
specification-architect
adrianpuiu
A rigorous, traceability-first system that generates five interconnected architectural documents (blueprint.md, requirements.md, design.md, tasks.md, and validation.md) with complete requirements-to-implementation traceability. Use this skill when users need to architect systems, create technical specifications, or develop structured project documentation with guaranteed traceability.
architecture
davila7
Architectural decision-making framework. Requirements analysis, trade-off evaluation, ADR documentation. Use when making architecture decisions or analyzing system design.
context-driven-development
wshobson
Use this skill when working with Conductor's context-driven development methodology, managing project context artifacts, or understanding the relationship between product.md, tech-stack.md, and workflow.md files.