Author brief

Skill: author-brief

Turn any unstructured external input into a DoR-compliant product brief, then queue it so workspace-status can surface it immediately.

author-brief stops at draft — it does not decompose the brief into specs and does not set Status: Ready. Those are receive-brief's job. The two skills have distinct entry points and must stay distinct.

When to invoke

• The user has an email thread, a prose description, a Linear Issue body, or a stakeholder message they want to turn into a brief.
• The unit of work is larger than one feature (otherwise use new-spec).
• The brief does not yet exist as a file in docs/product/briefs/.

If the input is already a well-formed brief file, go directly to receive-brief. If the user wants to record a decision already made, use new-adr.

Procedure

1. Ingest

Accept whatever the user provides: a pasted email, a prose block, issue text, a verbally-described idea. Do not reject partial or messy input — the brief template is a guide, not a form. The goal is to extract enough signal to elicit what is missing.

2. Identify

Scan the input for DoR fields already present:

• Outcome — a user-facing or system change the input is trying to achieve; often in the subject or opening sentence.
• Appetite — a time or effort constraint ("this needs to ship before the conference", "a sprint, not a quarter").
• Rabbit holes — named design traps, constraints, or things to avoid ("don't touch the billing system", "not the API redesign").

Name what you found and what is missing. Be specific: "I found an Outcome ('reduce checkout abandonment by surfacing error messages inline') but no Appetite and no Rabbit holes."

3. Elicit

Ask for each missing DoR field conversationally. Rules:

• Insist on Outcome. If the input contains no clear outcome, ask for it before proceeding. Do not fabricate an outcome.
• Offer defaults for the rest. If no Appetite is stated, offer a default ("no Appetite stated — shall I default to 'a few weeks, not a quarter'?") rather than blocking.
• Surface the Rabbit holes gap. ≥1 Rabbit hole is required for the DoR gate. If the input contains none, ask the user to name at least one design trap or out-of-bound exploration before proceeding.
• Do not invent. Never fabricate missing fields. Do not silently derive a Rabbit hole from the problem description without confirmation.

4. Create

1. Confirm the slug with the user (kebab-case, matches the filename).
2. Check for a slug collision: if docs/product/briefs/<slug>.md already exists, stop and prompt the user before proceeding — do not silently overwrite an existing brief.
3. Write the brief file at docs/product/briefs/<slug>.md using the updated template (_template.md in that directory). Populate all fields gathered in steps 1–3. Set Status: Draft. Leave a Spec map placeholder row (do not run decomposition — that is receive-brief's job).
4. Stage the file.

5. Queue

Check workspace.toml in the working directory:

• Absent or unparseable: create the brief file only. Emit the named diagnostic below — do not throw an error.
• Present and parseable:
  • If multiple sections have status = "active", prompt the user to select which initiative's brief_queue.draft list the new brief joins. Do not guess.
  • If no active initiative exists, or the active initiative has no brief_queue sub-table: emit the named diagnostic below and continue with file-only operation.
  • Otherwise: append the brief's path as a string element to ["<initiative-slug>".brief_queue].draft using a comment-preserving edit (targeted text insertion or tomlkit; never a full tomllib + tomli_w round-trip). Stage the file.

Named diagnostic (all no-write cases): "workspace.toml not available — brief created at docs/product/briefs/<slug>.md; add the path manually as a string element in [\"<initiative-slug>\".brief_queue].draft (e.g. append \"docs/product/briefs/<slug>.md\" to the list)."

6. Hand off

Tell the user:

"Brief is queued as draft at docs/product/briefs/<slug>.md. Run receive-brief to decompose it into specs and mark it ready."

DoR gate

A brief is eligible for Ready when it carries:

• Outcome — non-empty outcome statement.
• Appetite — a time/effort constraint.
• ≥1 Rabbit hole — at least one named design trap or uncertainty.
• Spec map skeleton — at least one placeholder row.

author-brief elicits these fields but does not set Status: Ready, even when all four are populated. The brief exits this skill as Status: Draft. Only receive-brief's write-back step (after decomposition is confirmed) sets Status: Ready.

Anti-patterns to refuse

• Running decomposition. That is receive-brief's job. Stop at draft.
• Setting Status: Ready. That is receive-brief's write-back step.
• Inventing a slug the user did not confirm. Confirm it in step 4.
• Fabricating missing DoR fields. If Outcome is absent, ask. Do not derive it silently from the problem description.
• Silently overwriting an existing brief file. Prompt before proceeding if docs/product/briefs/<slug>.md already exists.
• Guessing the target initiative when multiple active ones exist in workspace.toml. Prompt for selection in step 5.
• Making workspace.toml writes blocking. A missing, unparseable, or no-brief_queue file degrades to file-only operation with the named diagnostic. Never stop skill execution for a TOML write failure.