Skip to content
Open
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
37 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
19413dd
feat: initialize github speckit
Sai-everest Jun 11, 2026
eb02f22
feat: create constitition.md file
Sai-everest Jun 11, 2026
4fe77c7
create spec and clarify
Sai-everest Jun 11, 2026
d6ccf7e
[Spec Kit] Add checklist
Sai-everest Jun 11, 2026
2e3a754
[Spec Kit] Add implementation plan
Sai-everest Jun 11, 2026
f6ba653
[Spec Kit] create tasks for 001-create-join-room
Sai-everest Jun 11, 2026
d9a6385
[Spec Kit] Analyse tasks and fix assumptions for 001-create-join-room
Sai-everest Jun 11, 2026
bb34a3a
[Spec Kit] checklist fix for 001-create-join-room
Sai-everest Jun 11, 2026
7008719
[Feat] implement all 001-create-join-room tasks
Sai-everest Jun 11, 2026
51fb4fd
fix create room bug
Sai-everest Jun 11, 2026
02bc6c4
Merge pull request #1 from Sai-everest/001-create-join-room
Sai-everest Jun 11, 2026
8a821b3
[Spec Kit] Add specification for 002-game-start-drawer
Sai-everest Jun 11, 2026
2e219ae
feat(002): record clarification workshop answers in spec
Sai-everest Jun 11, 2026
8118db2
[Spec Kit] Clarify specification
Sai-everest Jun 11, 2026
b815ad3
[Spec Kit] Add implementation plan
Sai-everest Jun 11, 2026
7baa843
[Spec Kit] generate tasks for 002-game-start-drawer
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
53616b6
[Spec Kit] analyse and missing tasks
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
3104c62
[Feat] implement 002-game-start-drawer
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
64b2997
Merge pull request #2 from Sai-everest/002-game-start-drawer
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
e6bf578
spec: 003-draw-guess-score - round drawing, guessing, and scoring
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
a83f4cf
clarify: clarify 003-draw-guess-score specs
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
d6baf0b
plan(003): add implementation plan, research, data-model, contracts, …
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
03585e6
feat(003): generate tasks.md for draw-guess-score feature
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
ba38125
feat: implement drawing, guessing, and scoring (003)
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
9b5bd80
fix: add max guess length and canvas limits; update checklists as ver…
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
4ed7604
Merge pull request #3 from Sai-everest/003-draw-guess-score
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
7ba5d71
spec: add 004-round-results-restart specification
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
7fca625
[Spec Kit] Clarify specification
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
41f64a4
plan: implementation plan for 004-round-results-restart
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
dc3bd4f
feat(004): generate tasks.md for round results and game restart
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
338367e
fix(specs): resolve inconsistencies from /speckit.analyze for 004-rou…
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
268f3d6
feat: round results and game restart
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
7d775dd
docs(checklists): mark all checkpoints as met for features 003 and 004
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
257eab1
Merge pull request #4 from Sai-everest/004-round-results-restart
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
629ed35
feat: create reflection.md file
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
bd17c6c
fix(roomStore): transition to results on first correct guess
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
aff45c3
Add dedicated discovery.md documents for all four feature specs
Sai-everest Jun 12, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension


Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
5 changes: 5 additions & 0 deletions .devin/rules/specify-rules.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
<!-- SPECKIT START -->
For additional context about technologies to be used, project structure,
shell commands, and other important information, read the current plan at:
`specs/001-create-join-room/plan.md`
<!-- SPECKIT END -->
29 changes: 29 additions & 0 deletions .devin/workflows/speckit.agent-context.update.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
---
description: Refresh the managed Spec Kit section in the coding agent context file
---


<!-- Extension: agent-context -->
<!-- Config: .specify/extensions/agent-context/ -->
# Update Coding Agent Context

Refresh the managed Spec Kit section inside the active coding agent's context/instruction file (e.g. `CLAUDE.md`, `.github/copilot-instructions.md`, `AGENTS.md`).

## Behavior

The script reads the agent-context extension config at
`.specify/extensions/agent-context/agent-context-config.yml` to discover:

- `context_file` — the path of the coding agent context file to manage.
- `context_markers.start` / `.end` — the delimiters surrounding the managed section. Defaults to `<!-- SPECKIT START -->` and `<!-- SPECKIT END -->` when the field is missing.

It then creates, replaces, or appends the managed block so that the section points at the most recent plan path when one can be discovered (`specs/<feature>/plan.md`).

If `context_file` is empty or the file cannot be located, the command reports nothing to do and exits successfully.

## Execution

- **Bash**: `.specify/extensions/agent-context/scripts/bash/update-agent-context.sh [plan_path]`
- **PowerShell**: `.specify/extensions/agent-context/scripts/powershell/update-agent-context.ps1 [plan_path]`

When `plan_path` is omitted, the script auto-detects the most recently modified `specs/*/plan.md`.
249 changes: 249 additions & 0 deletions .devin/workflows/speckit.analyze.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,249 @@
---
description: Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
---

## User Input

```text
$ARGUMENTS
```

You **MUST** consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).

## Pre-Execution Checks

**Check for extension hooks (before analysis)**:
- Check if `.specify/extensions.yml` exists in the project root.
- If it exists, read it and look for entries under the `hooks.before_analyze` key
- If the YAML cannot be parsed or is invalid, skip hook checking silently and continue normally
- Filter out hooks where `enabled` is explicitly `false`. Treat hooks without an `enabled` field as enabled by default.
- For each remaining hook, do **not** attempt to interpret or evaluate hook `condition` expressions:
- If the hook has no `condition` field, 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
- For each executable hook, output the following based on its `optional` flag:
- **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 Goal.
```
- If no hooks are registered or `.specify/extensions.yml` does not exist, skip silently

## Goal

Identify inconsistencies, duplications, ambiguities, and underspecified items across the three core artifacts (`spec.md`, `plan.md`, `tasks.md`) before implementation. This command MUST run only after `/speckit.tasks` has successfully produced a complete `tasks.md`.

## Operating Constraints

**STRICTLY READ-ONLY**: Do **not** modify any files. Output a structured analysis report. Offer an optional remediation plan (user must explicitly approve before any follow-up editing commands would be invoked manually).

**Constitution Authority**: The project constitution (`.specify/memory/constitution.md`) is **non-negotiable** within this analysis scope. Constitution conflicts are automatically CRITICAL and require adjustment of the spec, plan, or tasks—not dilution, reinterpretation, or silent ignoring of the principle. If a principle itself needs to change, that must occur in a separate, explicit constitution update outside `/speckit.analyze`.

## Execution Steps

### 1. Initialize Analysis Context

Run `.specify/scripts/bash/check-prerequisites.sh --json --require-tasks --include-tasks` once from repo root and parse JSON for FEATURE_DIR and AVAILABLE_DOCS. Derive absolute paths:

- SPEC = FEATURE_DIR/spec.md
- PLAN = FEATURE_DIR/plan.md
- TASKS = FEATURE_DIR/tasks.md

Abort with an error message if any required file is missing (instruct the user to run missing prerequisite command).
For single quotes in args like "I'm Groot", use escape syntax: e.g 'I'\''m Groot' (or double-quote if possible: "I'm Groot").

### 2. Load Artifacts (Progressive Disclosure)

Load only the minimal necessary context from each artifact:

**From spec.md:**

- Overview/Context
- Functional Requirements
- Success Criteria (measurable outcomes — e.g., performance, security, availability, user success, business impact)
- User Stories
- Edge Cases (if present)

**From plan.md:**

- Architecture/stack choices
- Data Model references
- Phases
- Technical constraints

**From tasks.md:**

- Task IDs
- Descriptions
- Phase grouping
- Parallel markers [P]
- Referenced file paths

**From constitution:**

- Load `.specify/memory/constitution.md` for principle validation

### 3. Build Semantic Models

Create internal representations (do not include raw artifacts in output):

- **Requirements inventory**: For each Functional Requirement (FR-###) and Success Criterion (SC-###), record a stable key. Use the explicit FR-/SC- identifier as the primary key when present, and optionally also derive an imperative-phrase slug for readability (e.g., "User can upload file" → `user-can-upload-file`). Include only Success Criteria items that require buildable work (e.g., load-testing infrastructure, security audit tooling), and exclude post-launch outcome metrics and business KPIs (e.g., "Reduce support tickets by 50%").
- **User story/action inventory**: Discrete user actions with acceptance criteria
- **Task coverage mapping**: Map each task to one or more requirements or stories (inference by keyword / explicit reference patterns like IDs or key phrases)
- **Constitution rule set**: Extract principle names and MUST/SHOULD normative statements

### 4. Detection Passes (Token-Efficient Analysis)

Focus on high-signal findings. Limit to 50 findings total; aggregate remainder in overflow summary.

#### A. Duplication Detection

- Identify near-duplicate requirements
- Mark lower-quality phrasing for consolidation

#### B. Ambiguity Detection

- Flag vague adjectives (fast, scalable, secure, intuitive, robust) lacking measurable criteria
- Flag unresolved placeholders (TODO, TKTK, ???, `<placeholder>`, etc.)

#### C. Underspecification

- Requirements with verbs but missing object or measurable outcome
- User stories missing acceptance criteria alignment
- Tasks referencing files or components not defined in spec/plan

#### D. Constitution Alignment

- Any requirement or plan element conflicting with a MUST principle
- Missing mandated sections or quality gates from constitution

#### E. Coverage Gaps

- Requirements with zero associated tasks
- Tasks with no mapped requirement/story
- Success Criteria requiring buildable work (performance, security, availability) not reflected in tasks

#### F. Inconsistency

- Terminology drift (same concept named differently across files)
- Data entities referenced in plan but absent in spec (or vice versa)
- Task ordering contradictions (e.g., integration tasks before foundational setup tasks without dependency note)
- Conflicting requirements (e.g., one requires Next.js while other specifies Vue)

### 5. Severity Assignment

Use this heuristic to prioritize findings:

- **CRITICAL**: Violates constitution MUST, missing core spec artifact, or requirement with zero coverage that blocks baseline functionality
- **HIGH**: Duplicate or conflicting requirement, ambiguous security/performance attribute, untestable acceptance criterion
- **MEDIUM**: Terminology drift, missing non-functional task coverage, underspecified edge case
- **LOW**: Style/wording improvements, minor redundancy not affecting execution order

### 6. Produce Compact Analysis Report

Output a Markdown report (no file writes) with the following structure:

## Specification Analysis Report

| ID | Category | Severity | Location(s) | Summary | Recommendation |
|----|----------|----------|-------------|---------|----------------|
| A1 | Duplication | HIGH | spec.md:L120-134 | Two similar requirements ... | Merge phrasing; keep clearer version |

(Add one row per finding; generate stable IDs prefixed by category initial.)

**Coverage Summary Table:**

| Requirement Key | Has Task? | Task IDs | Notes |
|-----------------|-----------|----------|-------|

**Constitution Alignment Issues:** (if any)

**Unmapped Tasks:** (if any)

**Metrics:**

- Total Requirements
- Total Tasks
- Coverage % (requirements with >=1 task)
- Ambiguity Count
- Duplication Count
- Critical Issues Count

### 7. Provide Next Actions

At end of report, output a concise Next Actions block:

- If CRITICAL issues exist: Recommend resolving before `/speckit.implement`
- If only LOW/MEDIUM: User may proceed, but provide improvement suggestions
- Provide explicit command suggestions: e.g., "Run /speckit.specify with refinement", "Run /speckit.plan to adjust architecture", "Manually edit tasks.md to add coverage for 'performance-metrics'"

### 8. Offer Remediation

Ask the user: "Would you like me to suggest concrete remediation edits for the top N issues?" (Do NOT apply them automatically.)

### 9. Check for extension hooks

After reporting, check if `.specify/extensions.yml` exists in the project root.
- If it exists, read it and look for entries under the `hooks.after_analyze` key
- If the YAML cannot be parsed or is invalid, skip hook checking silently and continue normally
- Filter out hooks where `enabled` is explicitly `false`. Treat hooks without an `enabled` field as enabled by default.
- For each remaining hook, do **not** attempt to interpret or evaluate hook `condition` expressions:
- If the hook has no `condition` field, 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
- For each executable hook, output the following based on its `optional` flag:
- **Optional hook** (`optional: true`):
```
## Extension Hooks

**Optional Hook**: {extension}
Command: `/{command}`
Description: {description}

Prompt: {prompt}
To execute: `/{command}`
```
- **Mandatory hook** (`optional: false`):
```
## Extension Hooks

**Automatic Hook**: {extension}
Executing: `/{command}`
EXECUTE_COMMAND: {command}
```
- If no hooks are registered or `.specify/extensions.yml` does not exist, skip silently

## Operating Principles

### Context Efficiency

- **Minimal high-signal tokens**: Focus on actionable findings, not exhaustive documentation
- **Progressive disclosure**: Load artifacts incrementally; don't dump all content into analysis
- **Token-efficient output**: Limit findings table to 50 rows; summarize overflow
- **Deterministic results**: Rerunning without changes should produce consistent IDs and counts

### Analysis Guidelines

- **NEVER modify files** (this is read-only analysis)
- **NEVER hallucinate missing sections** (if absent, report them accurately)
- **Prioritize constitution violations** (these are always CRITICAL)
- **Use examples over exhaustive rules** (cite specific instances, not generic patterns)
- **Report zero issues gracefully** (emit success report with coverage statistics)

## Context

$ARGUMENTS
Loading