The text the user typed after
__SPECKIT_COMMAND_SPECIFY__
in the triggering message
is the feature description. Assume you always have it available in this conversation even if
appears literally below. Do not ask the user to repeat it unless they provided an empty command.
-
Generate a concise short name (2-4 words) for the feature:
- Analyze the feature description and extract the most meaningful keywords
- Create a 2-4 word short name that captures the essence of the feature
- Use action-noun format when possible (e.g., "add-user-auth", "fix-payment-bug")
- Preserve technical terms and acronyms (OAuth2, API, JWT, etc.)
- Keep it concise but descriptive enough to understand the feature at a glance
- Examples:
- "I want to add user authentication" → "user-auth"
- "Implement OAuth2 integration for the API" → "oauth2-api-integration"
- "Create a dashboard for analytics" → "analytics-dashboard"
- "Fix payment processing timeout bug" → "fix-payment-timeout"
-
Branch creation (optional, via hook):
If a
hook ran successfully in the Pre-Execution Checks above, it will have created/switched to a git branch and output JSON containing
and
. Note these values for reference, but the branch name does
not dictate the spec directory name.
If the user explicitly provided
, pass it through to the hook so the branch script uses the exact value as the branch name (bypassing all prefix/suffix generation).
-
Create the spec feature directory:
Specs live under the default
directory unless the user explicitly provides
SPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY
.
Resolution order for SPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY
:
- If the user explicitly provided
SPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY
(e.g., via environment variable, argument, or configuration), use it as-is
- Otherwise, auto-generate it under :
- Check
.specify/init-options.json
for (preferred) or (deprecated, migration only — will be removed in a future release)
- If : prefix is (current timestamp)
- If or absent: prefix is (next available 3-digit number after scanning existing directories in )
- Construct the directory name: (e.g., or
20260319-143022-user-auth
)
- Set
SPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY
to
- If was used (and was absent), emit a one-line warning: "⚠️ in init-options.json is deprecated. Rename to ."
Create the directory and spec file:
mkdir -p SPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY
- Resolve the active through the Spec Kit preset/template resolution stack (equivalent to
specify preset resolve spec-template
)
- Copy the resolved file to
SPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY/spec.md
as the starting point
- Set to
SPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY/spec.md
- Persist the resolved path to :
json
{
"feature_directory": "<resolved feature dir>"
}
Write the actual resolved directory path value (for example, ), not the literal string SPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY
.
This allows downstream commands (, __SPECKIT_COMMAND_TASKS__
, etc.) to locate the feature directory without relying on git branch name conventions.
IMPORTANT:
- You must only create one feature per
__SPECKIT_COMMAND_SPECIFY__
invocation
- The spec directory name and the git branch name are independent — they may be the same but that is the user's choice
- The spec directory and file are always created by this command, never by the hook
-
Load the resolved active
file to understand required sections.
-
IF EXISTS: Load
for project principles and governance constraints.
-
Follow this execution flow:
- Parse user description from arguments
If empty: ERROR "No feature description provided"
- Extract key concepts from description
Identify: actors, actions, data, constraints
- For unclear aspects:
- Make informed guesses based on context and industry standards
- Only mark with [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: specific question] if:
- The choice significantly impacts feature scope or user experience
- Multiple reasonable interpretations exist with different implications
- No reasonable default exists
- LIMIT: Maximum 3 [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers total
- Prioritize clarifications by impact: scope > security/privacy > user experience > technical details
- Fill User Scenarios & Testing section
If no clear user flow: ERROR "Cannot determine user scenarios"
- Generate Functional Requirements
Each requirement must be testable
Use reasonable defaults for unspecified details (document assumptions in Assumptions section)
- Define Success Criteria
Create measurable, technology-agnostic outcomes
Include both quantitative metrics (time, performance, volume) and qualitative measures (user satisfaction, task completion)
Each criterion must be verifiable without implementation details
- Identify Key Entities (if data involved)
- Return: SUCCESS (spec ready for planning)
-
Write the specification to SPEC_FILE using 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
SPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY/checklists/requirements.md
using the checklist template structure with these validation items:
markdown
# 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 `__SPECKIT_COMMAND_CLARIFY__` or `__SPECKIT_COMMAND_PLAN__`
b. Run Validation Check: Review the spec against each checklist item:
- For each item, determine if it passes or fails
- Document specific issues found (quote relevant spec sections)
c. Handle Validation Results:
-
If all items pass: Mark checklist complete and proceed to the Mandatory Post-Execution Hooks section
-
If items fail (excluding [NEEDS CLARIFICATION]):
- List the failing items and specific issues
- Update the spec to address each issue
- Re-run validation until all items pass (max 3 iterations)
- If still failing after 3 iterations, document remaining issues in checklist notes and warn user
-
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:
markdown
## Question [N]: [Topic]
**Context**: [Quote relevant spec section]
**What we need to know**: [Specific question from NEEDS CLARIFICATION marker]
**Suggested Answers**:
|--------|--------|--------------|
| 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:
- Use consistent spacing with pipes aligned
- Each cell should have spaces around content: not
- Header separator must have at least 3 dashes:
- Test that the table renders correctly in markdown preview
-
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
Check if
exists in the project root.
NOTE: Branch creation is handled by the
hook (git extension). Spec directory and file creation are always handled by this core command.