Explain

Spec 065 introduces this skill as jig's on-demand explainer — the third consumer of the shipped lexicon (065-01). The barrier jig is lowering is vocabulary: the artifacts are dense with opinionated jargon (SPIDR, ADR, vertical slice, reconciliation, deviation log, DoR/AC/DoD, frontmatter) and almost none of it is explained where the reader meets it. The hook (065-02) surfaces one-line defs just-in-time; this skill is the strong-handholding escalation — define a term in depth, or translate a whole dense spec/ADR into plain language for a junior.

Like /jig:clarify, /jig:pr-review, and /jig:arch-review, explain is a judgment skill — it ships no .py helper. The only determinism it needs (load the merged lexicon, read the named artifact, resolve the refs it links) Claude runs inline via Read + the 065-01 loader. The plain-language quality is judgment exercised by this prompt, not something a unit test can assert — the same accepted shape as every judgment-only jig skill.

What this skill does

Translates jig's vocabulary and artifacts into plain language for a reader who is new here — a junior, or anyone meeting spec-driven work for the first time. It has three modes, selected by what the argument is:

• Term mode — the argument is a word or short phrase (/jig:explain reconciliation). The skill returns that term's plain-language definition from the merged lexicon (jig's shipped lexicon.json with the project's docs/memory/glossary.md overlaid on top — 065-01), plus its example and see-also when present. If the term is not in the lexicon, the skill says so plainly rather than inventing a definition.
• Artifact mode — the argument is a path to a spec or ADR (/jig:explain docs/specs/062-refactor-workflow/spec.md). The skill produces a fixed-shape, junior-grade walkthrough of that artifact, defining every jig term it uses inline and auto-pulling the ADRs/specs it links so the reader doesn't have to chase references.
• Passage mode — the argument is a pasted snippet of jig output that is neither a single term nor a file path: a review VERDICT: envelope, a status-board row like IN_PROGRESS (wt-me), a hook's "Unrecognized references in prompt…" message, a workflow.py transition refusal, a session-plan block. The skill scans the snippet for jig terms (defining each inline) and explains what it is and what — if anything — the reader should do. When the snippet carries no jig vocabulary at all, it gives a plain generic read. This is the mode for the most common confusion moment: a reader pastes the thing that stumped them.

All three modes are ephemeral: the output is chat-only. The skill writes nothing to disk — no --save flag, no appended section, no file mutation. This keeps the hot path clean (the 055/057 context-cost discipline) and matches the clarify-Q3 resolution that explain output is always chat-only.

This is a best-effort comprehension floor, not a guarantee the reader will understand everything — the same honest framing as jig's security floor (ADR-0013) and the soft context mechanisms (055/057). The skill surfaces and explains; it does not certify understanding.

When to use vs. when to defer

Defer to a richer installed skill first. If another installed skill's description identifies it as handling plain-language explanation, onboarding, or artifact/codebase walkthroughs, prefer it — jig's explain is a slim baseline. This skill does not defer to the generic built-in (a bare explain/init with no onboarding framing); it only steps aside for a skill whose description names the explanation/onboarding/walkthrough job.

Three sibling jig skills are easy to confuse with this one:

• /jig:independent-review — reviews a finished implementation against its spec's ACs. It evaluates whether the code is correct; this skill explains what the spec says to a reader who finds it dense. Reach for independent-review after a slice is implemented; reach for explain when a reader is stuck on the vocabulary or shape of an artifact.
• /jig:analyze — cross-artifact consistency analysis: does spec A contradict ADR B? It hunts for drift between artifacts. This skill explains one artifact (and the refs it pulls in) to a human. Reach for analyze to audit alignment; reach for explain to understand.
• /jig:memory-sync — persists a new term to the project glossary or hot cache. It writes vocabulary. This skill reads the existing lexicon to explain a term; it never authors one. Reach for memory-sync to record a term; reach for explain to look one up. (If explain flags a term as absent and the user wants it captured, route them to /jig:memory-sync.)

Rule of thumb: understand an artifact or term → this skill. Persist a term → /jig:memory-sync. Check the implementation → /jig:independent-review. Audit across artifacts → /jig:analyze.

Inputs — mode precedence

The argument selects the mode by a fixed resolution order:

path → artifact mode · exact / normalized lexicon key → term mode · otherwise → passage mode.

1. A resolvable path to a spec or ADR → artifact mode. Examples: /jig:explain docs/specs/062-refactor-workflow/spec.md, /jig:explain docs/decisions/adr-0021-lexicon-home-and-overlay.md. A spec directory (docs/specs/065-lower-vocabulary-barrier/) resolves to its spec.md.
2. A word or short phrase that is an exact / normalized lexicon key → term mode. Examples: /jig:explain SPIDR, /jig:explain "vertical slice", /jig:explain deviation log. Matching is case-insensitive and whitespace-collapsed (the lexicon's key convention).
3. Anything else → passage mode (a pasted snippet of jig output, or any text that is neither a resolvable path nor a lexicon key).

Two carve-outs sit on top of that order:

• Term-mode honesty (do not let passage mode swallow the absent-term signal). An unknown short query phrase — a brief, single-line argument that looks like it wants a definition but isn't a lexicon key — still routes to term mode and gets its honest "that term isn't in the lexicon" flag (see Term mode step 4). It is not silently absorbed into a passage-mode guess. Distinguish by shape, not word count: a short single-line phrase is a term query (some lexicon keys are themselves 3+ words, e.g. closed-spec drift policy); a multi-line block or output-shaped paste is a passage. Passage mode is for pasted output, not a greedy catch-all that erodes the absent-term signal.
• Path-shaped-but-unresolvable input — ask, don't guess (clarify Q1). When the argument looks like a repo file path — it sits under docs/ (e.g. docs/specs/…, docs/decisions/…) or ends in a doc/code extension like .md — but no file exists there, the most likely cause is a typo, a stale path, or a path from another repo. Ask the user whether they meant a file path (and offer to retry with a corrected one) or a snippet to explain — don't silently fall through to passage mode and answer the path string as if it were prose. (A bare / alone — as in a pasted command line or URL — does not count as path-shaped; that's a passage.)

Term mode

1. Load the merged lexicon. Resolve the project root, then load jig's shipped lexicon with the project's glossary overlaid on top, using the 065-01 loader. Run it inline via Bash — the loader is stdlib-only:

   python3 -c "
   import sys, os, json
   # Auto-resolve the loader across both layouts (copy-paste-safe):
   #   jig repo -> skills/_common; scaffolded project -> .claude/skills/_common.
   for d in ('skills/_common', '.claude/skills/_common'):
       if os.path.isfile(os.path.join(d, 'lexicon.py')):
           sys.path.insert(0, d); break
   import lexicon
   merged = lexicon.load('.')             # project root; reads docs/memory/glossary.md overlay
   print(json.dumps(merged, indent=2))
   "
   

   (The loader lives at .claude/skills/_common/lexicon.py in a scaffolded project and skills/_common/lexicon.py in the jig repo itself — the snippet above probes both. The project glossary overlay wins on a collision — a project that redefines a term gets its own definition, per ADR-0021.)

2. Look up the term. Normalize the argument (lowercase, collapse internal whitespace) and find its key in the merged lexicon.

3. Present the definition. When the term is found, render:

   • the plain-language definition (the plain field — a junior-readable paragraph, not just the one-line short);
   • the example, if the entry has one;
   • the see-also terms, if present, so the reader can follow related vocabulary.

4. Flag an absent term — never invent. If the term is not in the merged lexicon, say so explicitly: "<term> isn't in jig's lexicon or this project's glossary." Offer the nearest matches if any look close, and suggest /jig:memory-sync if the user wants to capture it. Do not fabricate a definition for a term the lexicon doesn't carry — a confident wrong answer is worse than an honest gap (the clarify/AC-honesty boundary).

Artifact mode — strong handholding

The argument is a path to a spec or ADR. Read it, resolve the artifacts it links, and produce a junior-grade walkthrough with this fixed shape:

1. In one sentence. What this artifact is and what it decides/delivers, in a single plain sentence a newcomer can hold onto.
2. Why it exists. The problem or pressure that made someone write this — the motivation, not the mechanism.
3. Words you'll need first. The jig terms a newcomer won't know, defined inline from the merged lexicon (the plain field) — the ones load-bearing for this artifact, not a glossary dump of every term it uses. This is the vocabulary-barrier fix: the reader gets the words before the prose that uses them. If a term the artifact uses is not in the lexicon, flag the gap (don't invent) and define it from the artifact's own context if you can, marking it as not-from-the-lexicon.
4. Walkthrough. Section by section, in plain language. Translate the dense prose: spell out acronyms, unpack jargon, and say what each section is actually doing. Keep the artifact's own order.
5. The decisions & why (ADRs especially). For an ADR, lay out the alternatives considered and the trade-off that settled it — the reasoning, so the reader understands why this and not the others. For a spec, summarize the load-bearing choices (the Clarifications / Design notes).
6. If you had to work on this. A short, concrete orientation: where the real work lives, what the reader would touch first, and the one or two things that would trip them up.

Auto-pull linked refs. While reading the artifact, follow the ADRs and specs it links (e.g. [ADR-0021](...), [spec 055](...), sibling slice files) and read them too, so you can resolve those references for the reader inside the walkthrough instead of leaving a trail of links to chase. Pull what the artifact directly depends on; don't recurse the entire graph — one hop of the links that carry the artifact's meaning is the target. If a linked artifact is missing or unreadable, note it briefly and keep going (fail-soft).

Passage mode — explain a pasted snippet

The argument is a chunk of text the reader copy-pasted because it confused them — typically jig output. Reuse the term-scan primitive from artifact mode, then explain the snippet:

1. Load the merged lexicon (the same inline loader recipe shown under Term mode) and scan the passage for jig terms — the "Words you'll need first" primitive, applied to the pasted text instead of a file. Define each jig term present, inline, from the plain field. Not capped at the 065-02 hook's per-prompt N (clarify Q4): this is an explicit, on-demand request, so define as many as the passage genuinely needs — but scope to the terms that are load-bearing for understanding it, not every term present.

2. Say what the passage is and what to do. In plain language: what this snippet is telling the reader, and what — if anything — they should do next (e.g. "this is a review verdict saying the slice passed; nothing to do" or "this transition was refused because another branch holds the claim — release it with … --release or pick a different slice").

3. Identify the source — best-effort, never fabricated (clarify Q3 / AC3). When the snippet is recognizably from a known jig surface, name it and explain accordingly:

   • a VERDICT: … block → a review verdict (compliance / craft / arch / reconciliation pass);
   • a | … | … | DONE | … | row → a docs/specs/README.md status-board row;
   • "Jig terms in this prompt…" / "Unrecognized references in prompt…" → the jig-memory-scan hook's additionalContext;
   • "refuses a foreign still-IN_PROGRESS claim" / "transitioned … →" → a workflow.py transition / claim message;
   • a numbered implement → compliance → … block → a session-plan dispatch plan.

   When the source is not recognizable, say so plainly ("I don't recognize which jig surface produced this") and still explain the content — do not invent a source.

4. No jig vocabulary at all → explain generically (clarify Q2). If the passage contains no recognizable jig terms (generic prose, or output from a non-jig tool), give a plain-language read of what it appears to be, with no jig framing — explain it the way a general assistant would. (This doesn't conflict with the deferral clause: that only steps aside for a richer installed explanation skill, not for the absence of jig content.)

5. Hold the honesty line (never invent). Any jig-shaped token in the passage (an ADR-####, a NNN-NN slice id, a /jig:* skill, a STATUS word) that is not in the merged lexicon is flagged as unrecognized rather than given a fabricated meaning — the same never-invent rule as term mode.

6. Large, artifact-like pastes → nudge toward artifact mode (clarify Q3). Passage mode still processes a big block, but if the paste looks like a whole spec or ADR (it has the section shape, or names its own path), suggest /jig:explain <path> for the richer six-block walkthrough with auto-pulled linked refs — passage mode reads only the pasted text, artifact mode resolves the references too.

Passage mode is ephemeral like the others — it explains in chat and writes nothing.

Ephemeral output (writes nothing)

The skill's output is always chat-only. It does not:

• write or append to the explained artifact (no ## Explanation section);
• create any new file;
• offer a --save flag or any disk-writing option.

This was resolved at clarify (Q3): explain is always ephemeral, for zero context-cost risk and a clean hot path (055/057). If a reader wants the explanation preserved, that's a deliberate, separate act they take (copy it into a doc, or run /jig:memory-sync to capture a term) — explain itself never writes.

No .py helper

Like /jig:clarify, this skill ships no helper script. The only determinism it needs runs inline:

• lexicon lookup via the 065-01 loader (skills/_common/lexicon.py — a one-line python3 -c invocation, shown above);
• artifact + linked-ref reading via the Read tool.

There is no explain.py; section surgery and lookups happen inline. The trade-off, accepted for a judgment skill: the walkthrough is generated prose, so its quality is judgment exercised by this prompt, not asserted by a unit test (the AC-testability gap flagged at clarify, accepted — the structural surface is tested: registration, ephemeral contract, no-helper, deferral language).

Gotchas

• Never invent a definition. A term absent from the merged lexicon is flagged as absent, not fabricated. Honesty over a confident-sounding guess.
• Project glossary wins. The merged lexicon overlays the project's docs/memory/glossary.md on jig's shipped lexicon.json; a project that redefines a term gets its own definition (ADR-0021). Always load via the loader, never read lexicon.json alone — that would miss the overlay.
• Ephemeral, always. No file writes, ever. If you catch yourself about to Edit/Write the artifact, stop — that's not this skill.
• One hop of links, not the whole graph. Auto-pull the refs the artifact directly links; don't recurse indefinitely or you'll blow the reader's (and the orchestrator's) context budget.
• Fail-soft on a degraded lexicon. The loader returns shipped-only (or empty) on a missing/malformed glossary and never raises; if the lexicon is empty, term mode still works for whatever is shipped, and artifact mode just defines fewer terms in "Words you'll need first."
• Mode is chosen by the argument, not a flag. Resolution order: resolvable path → artifact mode; exact/normalized lexicon key → term mode; otherwise → passage mode. An unknown single term still goes to term mode (honest "absent" flag), and a path-shaped-but-missing argument is asked about, not routed to passage (see Inputs — mode precedence). There is no silent "ambiguous → give up" dead-end any more: a snippet that is neither a path nor a key is explained in passage mode.
• Passage provenance is best-effort, never fabricated. Name the producing jig surface only when you actually recognize the shape; otherwise say you don't recognize it and explain the content anyway. Don't invent a source.

Relationship to other skills

• /jig:memory-sync — complementary. memory-sync persists a term to the glossary/hot cache; explain reads the merged lexicon to define one. When explain flags an absent term the user wants kept, route them to memory-sync.
• /jig:independent-review — downstream and different. independent-review checks a finished slice against its spec; explain helps a reader understand the spec (or ADR) in the first place.
• /jig:analyze — sibling, different scope. analyze surfaces drift between artifacts; explain illuminates one artifact (plus the refs it pulls in) for a human.
• /jig:clarify — sibling judgment skill, opposite direction. clarify asks the author questions to remove ambiguity from a DRAFT spec; explain helps a reader get through an already-written dense artifact. Both are no-helper judgment skills.
• The 065-02 hook (jig-memory-scan) — the just-in-time sibling. The hook surfaces a one-line short def of any lexicon term that appears in a prompt, automatically; this skill is the on-demand, strong-handholding escalation (full plain def, or a whole-artifact walkthrough).