From smith
Creates or updates feature specifications from natural language descriptions. Useful when starting a new feature or clarifying requirements.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/smith:smith-specifyThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
> **Workflow requirement (Smith 20+):** This skill must be invoked from inside an active top-level workflow (`/smith-new`, `/smith-bugfix`, `/smith-debug`, `/smith-build`). The workflow-gate hook will block standalone invocation. To use this skill standalone, start a top-level workflow first.
Workflow requirement (Smith 20+): This skill must be invoked from inside an active top-level workflow (
/smith-new,/smith-bugfix,/smith-debug,/smith-build). The workflow-gate hook will block standalone invocation. To use this skill standalone, start a top-level workflow first.
Throughout this action, log significant events to the vault session log. Read the session log path from .smith/vault/.current-session. If the file is missing or the vault is not initialized, skip all logging silently.
Append entries using this format:
### [HH:MM:SS] /smith-specify <event>
**User Request:**
> <verbatim user message that triggered this action>
**Synthesized Input:** <brief summary>
**Outcome:** <what happened>
**Artifacts:** <files created/modified>
**Systems affected:** <system IDs>
Log at these points:
$ARGUMENTS
You MUST consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
The text the user typed after /smith-specify in the triggering message is the feature description. Assume you always have it available in this conversation even if $ARGUMENTS appears literally below. Do not ask the user to repeat it unless they provided an empty command.
Given that feature description, do this:
Generate a concise short name (2-4 words) for the branch:
Check for existing branches before creating new one:
a. First, fetch all remote branches to ensure we have the latest information:
git fetch --all --prune
b. Find the highest feature number across all sources for the short-name:
git ls-remote --heads origin | grep -E 'refs/heads/[0-9]+-<short-name>$'git branch | grep -E '^[* ]*[0-9]+-<short-name>$'specs/[0-9]+-<short-name>c. Determine the next available number:
d. Run the script .specify/scripts/bash/create-new-feature.sh --json "$ARGUMENTS" with the calculated number and short-name:
--number N+1 and --short-name "your-short-name" along with the feature description.specify/scripts/bash/create-new-feature.sh --json "$ARGUMENTS" --json --number 5 --short-name "user-auth" "Add user authentication".specify/scripts/bash/create-new-feature.sh --json "$ARGUMENTS" -Json -Number 5 -ShortName "user-auth" "Add user authentication"IMPORTANT:
Auto-detect primary system:
.specify/systems/system-*/spec.mdprimary_system (the system most directly impacted) and also_affects (other systems touched).specify/systems/<primary-system>/features/<NNN-short-name>/ instead of under specs/mkdir -p .specify/systems/<primary-system>/features/<NNN-short-name>/checklists.specify/systems/cross-system/features/<NNN-short-name>/Load .specify/templates/spec-template.md to understand required sections.
Follow this execution flow:
Write the specification to the system-routed feature folder (from step 3). Include YAML frontmatter at the top of spec.md:
---
feature: <NNN-short-name>
primary_system: <system-folder-name>
also_affects:
- <other-system-folder-name>
branch: <branch-name>
created: <YYYY-MM-DD>
status: in-progress
---
Fill 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.md using 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 `/smith-clarify` or `/smith-plan`
b. Run Validation Check: Review the spec against each checklist item:
c. Handle Validation Results:
If all items pass: Mark checklist complete and proceed to step 6
If items fail (excluding [NEEDS CLARIFICATION]):
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:
| Content | not |Content||--------|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 (/smith-clarify or /smith-plan).
NOTE: The script creates and checks out the new branch and initializes the spec file before writing.
When creating this spec from a user prompt:
Examples of reasonable defaults (don't ask about these):
Success criteria must be:
Good examples:
Bad examples (implementation-focused):
npx claudepluginhub attckdigital/smithGenerates structured feature specifications with demoable units, functional requirements, and proof artifacts. Use when defining what to build before writing code.
Creates or updates functional specifications from natural language feature descriptions by analyzing codebase impact, generating context, and writing structured spec documents.
Converts vague feature ideas into written, agreed specifications through structured questioning across nine dimensions. Produces docs/specs/*.md with acceptance criteria for planning, scaffolding, and TDD tools.