* Initial plan * Extract agent context updates into bundled agent-context extension * Potential fix for pull request finding 'Unused import' Co-authored-by: Copilot Autofix powered by AI <223894421+github-code-quality[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * Potential fix for pull request finding 'Unused import' Co-authored-by: Copilot Autofix powered by AI <223894421+github-code-quality[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * fix: address review comments on agent-context extension - bash: parse init-options.json with a single python3 invocation instead of three separate read_json_field calls, for parity with the PowerShell ConvertFrom-Json approach and to avoid divergent error semantics - bash: use parameter expansion to strip PROJECT_ROOT prefix from plan path instead of sed interpolation, avoiding special-character fragility - powershell: limit Get-ChildItem to -Depth 1 so plan.md discovery matches the bash glob specs/*/plan.md (one level deep) — fixes cross-platform inconsistency with nested plan.md files - powershell: replace Substring+Length relative-path with [System.IO.Path]::GetRelativePath for robustness across case/PSDrive differences - __init__.py: move agent-context extension install to after save_init_options so init-options.json is present when hooks run - __init__.py: seed context_markers in init-options only when context_file is truthy; avoids noise for integrations without a context file - integrations/base.py: narrow blanket except Exception in _resolve_context_markers to ImportError / (OSError, ValueError) so unexpected bugs surface instead of being silently swallowed * fix: gate context_markers in _update_init_options_for_integration on context_file Apply the same gating logic used during `specify init`: only write context_markers to init-options.json when the integration actually has a context_file set. When switching to an integration without a context file the stale markers are removed, keeping the two init paths consistent. * fix: move context_file/context_markers from init-options.json to agent-context extension config * Potential fix for pull request finding 'Unused global variable' Co-authored-by: Copilot Autofix powered by AI <223894421+github-code-quality[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * fix: clarify local import comment in agents.py * Fix remaining agent-context review findings * Fix follow-up agent-context review issues * Address review feedback: narrow except, improve PyYAML messaging, surface config-written note * Fix double-space in PyYAML install hint message * Potential fix for pull request finding 'Empty except' Co-authored-by: Copilot Autofix powered by AI <223894421+github-code-quality[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * Potential fix for pull request finding 'Empty except' Co-authored-by: Copilot Autofix powered by AI <223894421+github-code-quality[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * Address latest agent-context review feedback * Harden bash config parse output handling * Clarify ImportError-only fallback comment * Apply review feedback: drop dead try/except, guard ext-config creation, explicit ConvertFrom-Yaml check * Remove redundant $Options = $null in PS1 catch block * Add constitution directives, deprecation warning, agent-context auto-install, and init flow fix - Add constitution-loading directive to specify, clarify, tasks, checklist, taskstoissues commands - Add deprecation warning (v0.12.0) in upsert_context_section() - Auto-install agent-context extension during specify init - Move context_file from init-options.json to agent-context extension config - Add tests: deprecation warning, corrupt config, constitution directives - Update file inventories across all integration tests * Address review: fix init ordering, test coverage, and hermes inventory - Move agent-context extension install after init-options.json is saved so skill registration can read ai_skills + integration key - Write extension config after install (avoids template overwriting context_file) - Fix test_defaults_when_markers_field_missing to truly test missing markers key - Update hermes tests to allow extension-installed agent-context skill * Address review: chmod ordering, preserve markers, PS1 Python check, YAML key order - Move ensure_executable_scripts after agent-context extension install so extension scripts get execute bits set - Use preserve_markers=True on reinit to keep user-customized markers - Add Python 3 version check in PowerShell fallback (matching bash behavior) - Add sort_keys=False to yaml.safe_dump for stable config output * Address review: path traversal guards and docstring fix - Reject absolute paths and '..' segments in context_file in both bash and PowerShell scripts to prevent writes outside the project root - Fix docstring in _update_init_options_for_integration to accurately describe marker preservation behavior * Address review: strict enabled check, docstring, segment-level path traversal - Use 'is not False' for enabled check so only literal False disables - Update upsert_context_section docstring to mention disabled-extension return - Fix path traversal guards to check actual path segments, not substrings (allows filenames like 'notes..md' while rejecting '../' traversal) * Address review: UnicodeError handling, missing extension warning - Add UnicodeError to exception tuples in _load_agent_context_config and _resolve_context_markers so garbled UTF-8 config files fall back to defaults - Emit error (with reinstall command) instead of silent skip when bundled agent-context extension is not found during init * Address review: bash backslash traversal guard, wheel packaging - Reject backslash separators and Windows drive-letter paths in bash context_file validation (prevents traversal on Git-Bash/Windows) - Add extensions/agent-context to pyproject.toml force-include so the bundled extension is included in wheel builds * Address review: write extension config before init-options.json - Reorder writes in _update_init_options_for_integration so the agent-context extension config is updated first; if it fails, init-options.json remains consistent with the previous state --------- Co-authored-by: copilot-swe-agent[bot] <198982749+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Manfred Riem <15701806+mnriem@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Copilot Autofix powered by AI <223894421+github-code-quality[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
17 KiB
description, handoffs
| description | handoffs | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description. |
|
User Input
$ARGUMENTS
You MUST consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
Pre-Execution Checks
Check for extension hooks (before specification):
- Check if
.specify/extensions.ymlexists in the project root. - If it exists, read it and look for entries under the
hooks.before_specifykey - If the YAML cannot be parsed or is invalid, skip hook checking silently and continue normally
- Filter out hooks where
enabledis explicitlyfalse. Treat hooks without anenabledfield as enabled by default. - For each remaining hook, do not attempt to interpret or evaluate hook
conditionexpressions:- If the hook has no
conditionfield, or it is null/empty, treat the hook as executable - If the hook defines a non-empty
condition, skip the hook and leave condition evaluation to the HookExecutor implementation
- If the hook has no
- For each executable hook, output the following based on its
optionalflag:- Optional hook (
optional: true):## Extension Hooks **Optional Pre-Hook**: {extension} Command: `/{command}` Description: {description} Prompt: {prompt} To execute: `/{command}` - Mandatory hook (
optional: false):## Extension Hooks **Automatic Pre-Hook**: {extension} Executing: `/{command}` EXECUTE_COMMAND: {command} Wait for the result of the hook command before proceeding to the Outline.
- Optional hook (
- If no hooks are registered or
.specify/extensions.ymldoes not exist, skip silently
Outline
The text the user typed after __SPECKIT_COMMAND_SPECIFY__ in the triggering message is the feature description. Assume you always have it available in this conversation even if {ARGS} appears literally below. Do not ask the user to repeat it unless they provided an empty command.
Given that feature description, do this:
-
Generate a concise short name (2-4 words) for the feature:
- Analyze the feature description and extract the most meaningful keywords
- Create a 2-4 word short name that captures the essence of the feature
- Use action-noun format when possible (e.g., "add-user-auth", "fix-payment-bug")
- Preserve technical terms and acronyms (OAuth2, API, JWT, etc.)
- Keep it concise but descriptive enough to understand the feature at a glance
- 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"
- "Fix payment processing timeout bug" → "fix-payment-timeout"
-
Branch creation (optional, via hook):
If a
before_specifyhook ran successfully in the Pre-Execution Checks above, it will have created/switched to a git branch and output JSON containingBRANCH_NAMEandFEATURE_NUM. Note these values for reference, but the branch name does not dictate the spec directory name.If the user explicitly provided
GIT_BRANCH_NAME, pass it through to the hook so the branch script uses the exact value as the branch name (bypassing all prefix/suffix generation). -
Create the spec feature directory:
Specs live under the default
specs/directory unless the user explicitly providesSPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY.Resolution order for
SPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY:- If the user explicitly provided
SPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY(e.g., via environment variable, argument, or configuration), use it as-is - Otherwise, auto-generate it under
specs/:- Check
.specify/init-options.jsonforbranch_numbering - If
"timestamp": prefix isYYYYMMDD-HHMMSS(current timestamp) - If
"sequential"or absent: prefix isNNN(next available 3-digit number after scanning existing directories inspecs/) - Construct the directory name:
<prefix>-<short-name>(e.g.,003-user-author20260319-143022-user-auth) - Set
SPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORYtospecs/<directory-name>
- Check
Create the directory and spec file:
mkdir -p SPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY- Copy
templates/spec-template.mdtoSPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY/spec.mdas the starting point - Set
SPEC_FILEtoSPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY/spec.md - Persist the resolved path to
.specify/feature.json:Write the actual resolved directory path value (for example,{ "feature_directory": "<resolved feature dir>" }specs/003-user-auth), not the literal stringSPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY. This allows downstream commands (__SPECKIT_COMMAND_PLAN__,__SPECKIT_COMMAND_TASKS__, etc.) to locate the feature directory without relying on git branch name conventions.
IMPORTANT:
- You must only create one feature per
__SPECKIT_COMMAND_SPECIFY__invocation - The spec directory name and the git branch name are independent — they may be the same but that is the user's choice
- The spec directory and file are always created by this command, never by the hook
- If the user explicitly provided
-
Load
templates/spec-template.mdto understand required sections. -
IF EXISTS: Load
/memory/constitution.mdfor project principles and governance constraints. -
Follow this execution flow:
- Parse user description from arguments If empty: ERROR "No feature description provided"
- Extract key concepts from description Identify: actors, actions, data, constraints
- 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
- Fill User Scenarios & Testing section If no clear user flow: ERROR "Cannot determine user scenarios"
- Generate Functional Requirements Each requirement must be testable Use reasonable defaults for unspecified details (document assumptions in Assumptions section)
- Define Success Criteria Create measurable, technology-agnostic outcomes Include both quantitative metrics (time, performance, volume) and qualitative measures (user satisfaction, task completion) Each criterion must be verifiable without implementation details
- Identify Key Entities (if data involved)
- Return: SUCCESS (spec ready for planning)
-
Write the specification to SPEC_FILE using the template structure, replacing placeholders with concrete details derived from the feature description (arguments) while preserving section order and headings.
-
Specification Quality Validation: After writing the initial spec, validate it against quality criteria:
a. Create Spec Quality Checklist: Generate a checklist file at
SPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY/checklists/requirements.mdusing the checklist template structure with these validation items:# Specification Quality Checklist: [FEATURE NAME] **Purpose**: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to 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 (no implementation details) - [ ] 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_COMMAND_CLARIFY__` or `__SPECKIT_COMMAND_PLAN__`b. Run Validation Check: Review the spec against each checklist item:
- For each item, determine if it passes or fails
- Document specific issues found (quote relevant spec sections)
c. Handle Validation Results:
-
If all items pass: Mark checklist complete and proceed to the Mandatory Post-Execution Hooks section
-
If items fail (excluding [NEEDS CLARIFICATION]):
- List the failing items and specific issues
- Update the spec to address each issue
- Re-run validation until all items pass (max 3 iterations)
- If still failing after 3 iterations, document remaining issues in checklist notes and warn user
-
If [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain:
-
Extract all [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: ...] markers from the spec
-
LIMIT CHECK: If more than 3 markers exist, keep only the 3 most critical (by scope/security/UX impact) and make informed guesses for the rest
-
For each clarification needed (max 3), present options to user in this format:
## Question [N]: [Topic] **Context**: [Quote relevant spec section] **What we need to know**: [Specific question from NEEDS CLARIFICATION marker] **Suggested Answers**: | Option | Answer | Implications | |--------|--------|--------------| | A | [First suggested answer] | [What this means for the feature] | | B | [Second suggested answer] | [What this means for the feature] | | C | [Third suggested answer] | [What this means for the feature] | | Custom | Provide your own answer | [Explain how to provide custom input] | **Your choice**: _[Wait for user response]_ -
CRITICAL - Table Formatting: Ensure markdown tables are properly formatted:
- Use consistent spacing with pipes aligned
- Each cell should have spaces around content:
| Content |not|Content| - Header separator must have at least 3 dashes:
|--------| - Test that the table renders correctly in markdown preview
-
Number questions sequentially (Q1, Q2, Q3 - max 3 total)
-
Present all questions together before waiting for responses
-
Wait for user to respond with their choices for all questions (e.g., "Q1: A, Q2: Custom - [details], Q3: B")
-
Update the spec by replacing each [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] marker with the user's selected or provided answer
-
Re-run validation after all clarifications are resolved
-
d. Update Checklist: After each validation iteration, update the checklist file with current pass/fail status
Mandatory Post-Execution Hooks
You MUST complete this section before reporting completion to the user.
Check if .specify/extensions.yml exists in the project root.
- If it does not exist, or no hooks are registered under
hooks.after_specify, skip to the Completion Report. - If it exists, read it and look for entries under the
hooks.after_specifykey. - If the YAML cannot be parsed or is invalid, skip hook checking silently and continue to the Completion Report.
- Filter out hooks where
enabledis explicitlyfalse. Treat hooks without anenabledfield as enabled by default. - For each remaining hook, do not attempt to interpret or evaluate hook
conditionexpressions:- If the hook has no
conditionfield, or it is null/empty, treat the hook as executable - If the hook defines a non-empty
condition, skip the hook and leave condition evaluation to the HookExecutor implementation
- If the hook has no
- For each executable hook, output the following based on its
optionalflag:- Mandatory hook (
optional: false) — You MUST emitEXECUTE_COMMAND:for each mandatory hook:## Extension Hooks **Automatic Hook**: {extension} Executing: `/{command}` EXECUTE_COMMAND: {command} - Optional hook (
optional: true):## Extension Hooks **Optional Hook**: {extension} Command: `/{command}` Description: {description} Prompt: {prompt} To execute: `/{command}`
- Mandatory hook (
Completion Report
Report completion to the user with:
SPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY— the feature directory pathSPEC_FILE— the spec file path- Checklist results summary
- Readiness for the next phase (
__SPECKIT_COMMAND_CLARIFY__or__SPECKIT_COMMAND_PLAN__)
NOTE: Branch creation is handled by the before_specify hook (git extension). Spec directory and file creation are always handled by this core command.
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.
- DO NOT create any checklists that are embedded in the spec. That will be a separate command.
Section Requirements
- Mandatory sections: Must be completed for every feature
- Optional sections: Include only when relevant to the feature
- When a section doesn't apply, remove it entirely (don't leave as "N/A")
For AI Generation
When creating this spec from a user prompt:
- Make informed guesses: Use context, industry standards, and common patterns to fill gaps
- Document assumptions: Record reasonable defaults in the Assumptions section
- Limit clarifications: Maximum 3 [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers - use only for critical decisions that:
- Significantly impact feature scope or user experience
- Have multiple reasonable interpretations with different implications
- Lack any reasonable default
- Prioritize clarifications: scope > security/privacy > user experience > technical details
- Think like a tester: Every vague requirement should fail the "testable and unambiguous" checklist item
- Common areas needing clarification (only if no reasonable default exists):
- Feature scope and boundaries (include/exclude specific use cases)
- User types and permissions (if multiple conflicting interpretations possible)
- Security/compliance requirements (when legally/financially significant)
Examples of reasonable defaults (don't ask about these):
- Data retention: Industry-standard practices for the domain
- Performance targets: Standard web/mobile app expectations unless specified
- Error handling: User-friendly messages with appropriate fallbacks
- Authentication method: Standard session-based or OAuth2 for web apps
- Integration patterns: Use project-appropriate patterns (REST/GraphQL for web services, function calls for libraries, CLI args for tools, etc.)
Success Criteria Guidelines
Success criteria must be:
- Measurable: Include specific metrics (time, percentage, count, rate)
- Technology-agnostic: No mention of frameworks, languages, databases, or tools
- User-focused: Describe outcomes from user/business perspective, not system internals
- Verifiable: Can be tested/validated without knowing implementation details
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"
- "Task completion rate improves by 40%"
Bad examples (implementation-focused):
- "API response time is under 200ms" (too technical, use "Users see results instantly")
- "Database can handle 1000 TPS" (implementation detail, use user-facing metric)
- "React components render efficiently" (framework-specific)
- "Redis cache hit rate above 80%" (technology-specific)
Done When
- Specification written to
SPEC_FILEand validated against quality checklist - Extension hooks dispatched or skipped according to the rules in Mandatory Post-Execution Hooks above
- Completion reported to user with feature directory, spec file path, and checklist results