agentsclimarketplace

Spec execute

Skill ainova-systems/intelligence-dev-packs/packs/spec/skills/spec-execute

Intelligence pack for software engineering based on Ainova Systems best practices

Install
npx -y skills add ainova-systems/intelligence-dev-packs --skill spec-execute

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 2 stars2 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Executes a planned spec via parallel subagents - one testable slice per subagent, gates re-run until dry. Supervised mode ends with unstaged changes for the developer's review; autonomous mode commits at milestones and ends at an outcome-labeled PR.

SKILL.md

7.0 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Execute a Spec

Orchestrate a planned spec to done. You delegate; subagents write code. Your leverage is prompt quality, sibling references, and consistency gates - not hand-writing code.

Prime directive - consistency

The spec is the contract. Two sessions executing the same spec must produce convergent output; the mechanism is both reading the same plan phase + the same skill files + the same sibling files, never orchestrator-authored instructions. Speed and creative variants are bugs. Full doctrine: spec-orchestration rule.

Preconditions (refuse, don't work around)

  • No open question stands. Read the plan's ## Open questions; one standing question stops the whole run and the refusal names each - spec-answer is the path. An ambiguity that can be resolved is not a question; it is unfinished work.
  • The spec is approved for its mode: supervised - plan present, coverage complete; autonomous - status: approved via spec-approve.
  • Clean tree (git status --porcelain); dirty - stop and surface, never sweep foreign work in.

Phase A - Deep learning (never skip)

  1. Read the spec end-to-end (requirements + plan), multiple passes. Read the feature doc it changes.
  2. Read the project rules and the profile (branch model, verification commands, PR platform, execution_mode).
  3. Inventory siblings: for every artefact in the plan, pin the concrete sibling file path. No sibling for an artefact - halt and ask the owner; never improvise a new pattern.
  4. Reconcile plan vs reality: stubs already wired, helpers that already exist, rules the plan contradicts (rules win - flag and override).

Phase B - Branch

  1. git fetch origin && git switch <base> && git pull --ff-only && git switch -c feature/<spec-slug> where <base> is the integration branch when one exists, else the default branch. One spec = one branch.
  2. autonomous mode only: set the spec's status: in-progress (the queue reads written status; in supervised mode status is read from the ticked steps and nothing is written).

Phase C - Execute (parallel subagents)

  1. Unit of work = a testable slice (backend entity + endpoints + tests in one shot; a full frontend feature in one shot) - never split by layer.
  2. Parallel by default: disjoint file sets spawn subagents in one batch; serialize only on real dependencies.
  3. Prompts are pointers, not instructions. Each prompt: goal (one sentence) + read-first list (rule files, feature-doc section, plan phase, sibling paths with the verbatim line "Start by reading <sibling>. Copy its structure verbatim. Adapt only fields / labels / types.") + skills to invoke + scope fence (in/out files). Re-explaining what a skill or sibling already says is the #1 divergence source. Keep prompts under ~60 lines.
  4. Cross-cutting consistency gate before every commit point: grep every removed/renamed symbol across the whole tree (backend, frontend, tests, docs, spec). Subagents see only their scope; only the orchestrator catches cross-layer drift.
  5. Verify per slice via dev-run-tests (scoped); full suite at phase boundaries. A work step is ticked only when a re-run of its gate comes back dry. Each within-scope rework is one line in the plan's ## Corrections - what was wrong, what was done, its source (auto from a gate, dev from a review comment naming an in-scope defect), and the root cause. A beyond-scope observation goes to ## Review findings for the developer; a comment that changes a requirement is drift and goes back through the intake.
  6. Tick ## Work steps boxes in the plan as slices land - ticked progress is what makes execution resumable.
  7. Milestones, by mode. autonomous: commit at milestones via git-commit-push - one commit = one shippable-for-testing unit; reactive CI wait (push freely between tasks; block on CI only at phase boundaries or when the baseline is red). supervised: no commits - work accumulates on the branch for the developer's review.
  8. Top-down reasoning on surprises (red pipeline, failing test, odd diff): what is happening - what changed since last green - fix or delete per the feature doc - does an existing primitive already cover this. Trivial 1-2 line fixes are yours; larger ones go to a subagent.

Phase D - Docs reconciliation

Apply every needed doc update automatically (via spec-document conventions) so the substrate matches the shipped behavior - never leave it stale or for a human.

  1. Update the feature doc to the new behavior - it must describe TODAY after this change; fold the spec's one-off requirements into the feature doc's durable EARS criteria.
  2. Reconcile the model and glossary when aggregates or terms changed; extract durable business rules into the project's rules area; conventions into intelligence rules; decisions via spec-decision.
  3. Append new lessons to the spec's MUST READ FIRST so the next spec inherits them.
  4. spec-audit-docs over the touched docs.

Phase E - Hand-off, by mode

supervised (default): STOP here. Changes stay uncommitted on the feature branch - no commit, no push, no PR. Report: work steps ticked, gates green, ## Corrections summary, ## Review findings for the developer, and the diff stat. The developer reviews the diff by hand and runs the git flow (git-commit-push -> git-open-pr) himself.

autonomous:

  1. Push; open the PR (gh pr create --base <target> ...) using the project's own PR template when one exists, else the pack default assets/pr-template.md.
  2. Run git-finalize-pr - CI to green plus every review comment handled.
  3. End with exactly one outcome label: ai:ready-to-merge | ai:manual (an owner decision is needed - state which) | ai:failed (state what blocked and what was tried). Never merge.
  4. Report: PR URL, outcome label, anything that needs the owner. Final close (spec-close) runs after the owner accepts and the PR merges, not here.

Verify

  • Plan ## Work steps fully ticked with every tick's gate re-run dry; feature doc matches shipped behavior; supervised - unstaged diff reported to the developer; autonomous - the PR carries exactly one ai:* label.

Scope / hand-off

  • No spec yet - spec-pull / spec-create first. Plan not yet fact-checked - spec-validate. Open questions - spec-answer.
  • Resuming a half-done spec - spec-continue.
  • Merging - git-merge-pr, only after owner accept.

CRITICAL

  • Refuse to start while any open question stands; name each.
  • Never push to the integration/default branch; never merge; never amend or force-push pushed commits.
  • No new patterns without a sibling citation or explicit owner approval.
  • Phase A is mandatory - silence there causes most rework.
  • Black boxes (DB rows, deploy internals) are out of reach: solve via code analysis or escalate; never probe infra blindly.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.