10 KiB
description
| description |
|---|
| 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).
Outline
The text the user typed after /speckit.specify in the triggering message is the feature description. Assume you always have it available in this conversation even if $ARGUMENTS appears literally below. Do not ask the user to repeat it unless they provided an empty command.
Given that feature description, do this:
-
Run the script
.specify/scripts/bash/create-new-feature.sh --json "$ARGUMENTS"from repo root and parse its JSON output for BRANCH_NAME and SPEC_FILE. All file paths must be absolute. IMPORTANT You must only ever run this script once. The JSON is provided in the terminal as output - always refer to it to get the actual content you're looking for. -
Load
.specify/templates/spec-template.mdto understand required sections. -
Follow this execution flow:
- Parse user description from Input 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
FEATURE_DIR/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.clarify` or `/speckit.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 step 6
-
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
-
Report completion with branch name, spec file path, checklist results, and readiness for the next phase (
/speckit.clarifyor/speckit.plan).
NOTE: The script creates and checks out the new branch and initializes the spec file before writing.
General Guidelines
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: RESTful APIs unless specified otherwise
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)