Merge pull request #491 from github/quizme

Update with extra commands

Author: localden

CHANGELOG.md

@@ -7,6 +7,14 @@ All notable changes to the Specify CLI will be documented in this file.
 The format is based on [Keep a Changelog](https://keepachangelog.com/en/1.0.0/),
 and this project adheres to [Semantic Versioning](https://semver.org/spec/v2.0.0.html).
 
+## [0.0.17] - 2025-09-22
+
+### Added
+
+- New `/clarify` command template to surface up to 5 targeted clarification questions for an existing spec and persist answers into a Clarifications section in the spec.
+- New `/analyze` command template providing a non-destructive cross-artifact discrepancy and alignment report (spec, clarifications, plan, tasks, constitution) inserted after `/tasks` and before `/implement`.
+	- Note: Constitution rules are explicitly treated as non-negotiable; any conflict is a CRITICAL finding requiring artifact remediation, not weakening of principles.
+
 ## [0.0.16] - 2025-09-22
 
 ### Added

README.md

@@ -206,8 +206,10 @@ After running `specify init`, your AI coding agent will have access to these sla
 |-----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
 | `/constitution` | Create or update project governing principles and development guidelines |
 | `/specify`      | Define what you want to build (requirements and user stories)        |
+| `/clarify`      | Clarify underspecified areas (must be run before `/plan` unless explicitly skipped; formerly `/quizme`) |
 | `/plan`         | Create technical implementation plans with your chosen tech stack     |
 | `/tasks`        | Generate actionable task lists for implementation                     |
+| `/analyze`      | Cross-artifact consistency & coverage analysis (run after /tasks, before /implement) |
 | `/implement`    | Execute all tasks to build the feature according to the plan         |
 
 ### Environment Variables
@@ -392,9 +394,19 @@ At this stage, your project folder contents should resemble the following:
     └── tasks-template.md
 ```
 
-### **STEP 3:** Functional specification clarification
+### **STEP 3:** Functional specification clarification (required before planning)
 
-With the baseline specification created, you can go ahead and clarify any of the requirements that were not captured properly within the first shot attempt. For example, you could use a prompt like this within the same Claude Code session:
+With the baseline specification created, you can go ahead and clarify any of the requirements that were not captured properly within the first shot attempt.
+
+You should run the structured clarification workflow **before** creating a technical plan to reduce rework downstream.
+
+Preferred order:
+1. Use `/clarify` (structured) – sequential, coverage-based questioning that records answers in a Clarifications section.
+2. Optionally follow up with ad-hoc free-form refinement if something still feels vague.
+
+If you intentionally want to skip clarification (e.g., spike or exploratory prototype), explicitly state that so the agent doesn't block on missing clarifications.
+
+Example free-form refinement prompt (after `/clarify` if still needed):
 
 ```text
 For each sample project or project that you create there should be a variable number of tasks between 5 and 15

pyproject.toml

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 [project]
 name = "specify-cli"
-version = "0.0.16"
+version = "0.0.17"
 description = "Specify CLI, part of GitHub Spec Kit. A tool to bootstrap your projects for Spec-Driven Development (SDD)."
 requires-python = ">=3.11"
 dependencies = [

scripts/bash/check-prerequisites.sh

@@ -82,14 +82,20 @@ source "$SCRIPT_DIR/common.sh"
 eval $(get_feature_paths)
 check_feature_branch "$CURRENT_BRANCH" "$HAS_GIT" || exit 1
 
-# If paths-only mode, output paths and exit
+# If paths-only mode, output paths and exit (support JSON + paths-only combined)
 if $PATHS_ONLY; then
-    echo "REPO_ROOT: $REPO_ROOT"
-    echo "BRANCH: $CURRENT_BRANCH"
-    echo "FEATURE_DIR: $FEATURE_DIR"
-    echo "FEATURE_SPEC: $FEATURE_SPEC"
-    echo "IMPL_PLAN: $IMPL_PLAN"
-    echo "TASKS: $TASKS"
+    if $JSON_MODE; then
+        # Minimal JSON paths payload (no validation performed)
+        printf '{"REPO_ROOT":"%s","BRANCH":"%s","FEATURE_DIR":"%s","FEATURE_SPEC":"%s","IMPL_PLAN":"%s","TASKS":"%s"}\n' \
+            "$REPO_ROOT" "$CURRENT_BRANCH" "$FEATURE_DIR" "$FEATURE_SPEC" "$IMPL_PLAN" "$TASKS"
+    else
+        echo "REPO_ROOT: $REPO_ROOT"
+        echo "BRANCH: $CURRENT_BRANCH"
+        echo "FEATURE_DIR: $FEATURE_DIR"
+        echo "FEATURE_SPEC: $FEATURE_SPEC"
+        echo "IMPL_PLAN: $IMPL_PLAN"
+        echo "TASKS: $TASKS"
+    fi
     exit 0
 fi
 

scripts/powershell/check-prerequisites.ps1

@@ -63,14 +63,25 @@ if (-not (Test-FeatureBranch -Branch $paths.CURRENT_BRANCH -HasGit:$paths.HAS_GI
     exit 1 
 }
 
-# If paths-only mode, output paths and exit
+# If paths-only mode, output paths and exit (support combined -Json -PathsOnly)
 if ($PathsOnly) {
-    Write-Output "REPO_ROOT: $($paths.REPO_ROOT)"
-    Write-Output "BRANCH: $($paths.CURRENT_BRANCH)"
-    Write-Output "FEATURE_DIR: $($paths.FEATURE_DIR)"
-    Write-Output "FEATURE_SPEC: $($paths.FEATURE_SPEC)"
-    Write-Output "IMPL_PLAN: $($paths.IMPL_PLAN)"
-    Write-Output "TASKS: $($paths.TASKS)"
+    if ($Json) {
+        [PSCustomObject]@{
+            REPO_ROOT    = $paths.REPO_ROOT
+            BRANCH       = $paths.CURRENT_BRANCH
+            FEATURE_DIR  = $paths.FEATURE_DIR
+            FEATURE_SPEC = $paths.FEATURE_SPEC
+            IMPL_PLAN    = $paths.IMPL_PLAN
+            TASKS        = $paths.TASKS
+        } | ConvertTo-Json -Compress
+    } else {
+        Write-Output "REPO_ROOT: $($paths.REPO_ROOT)"
+        Write-Output "BRANCH: $($paths.CURRENT_BRANCH)"
+        Write-Output "FEATURE_DIR: $($paths.FEATURE_DIR)"
+        Write-Output "FEATURE_SPEC: $($paths.FEATURE_SPEC)"
+        Write-Output "IMPL_PLAN: $($paths.IMPL_PLAN)"
+        Write-Output "TASKS: $($paths.TASKS)"
+    }
     exit 0
 }
 

src/specify_cli/__init__.py

@@ -1060,9 +1060,11 @@ def init(
     steps_lines.append(f"{step_num}. Start using slash commands with your AI agent:")
     steps_lines.append("   2.1 [cyan]/constitution[/] - Establish project principles")
     steps_lines.append("   2.2 [cyan]/specify[/] - Create specifications")
-    steps_lines.append("   2.3 [cyan]/plan[/] - Create implementation plans")
-    steps_lines.append("   2.4 [cyan]/tasks[/] - Generate actionable tasks")
-    steps_lines.append("   2.5 [cyan]/implement[/] - Execute implementation")
+    steps_lines.append("   2.3 [cyan]/clarify[/] - Clarify and de-risk specification (run before [cyan]/plan[/cyan])")
+    steps_lines.append("   2.4 [cyan]/plan[/] - Create implementation plans")
+    steps_lines.append("   2.5 [cyan]/tasks[/] - Generate actionable tasks")
+    steps_lines.append("   2.6 [cyan]/analyze[/] - Validate alignment & surface inconsistencies (read-only)")
+    steps_lines.append("   2.7 [cyan]/implement[/] - Execute implementation")
 
     steps_panel = Panel("\n".join(steps_lines), title="Next Steps", border_style="cyan", padding=(1,2))
     console.print()

templates/commands/analyze.md

@@ -0,0 +1,104 @@
+---
+description: Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
+scripts:
+  sh: scripts/bash/check-prerequisites.sh --json --require-tasks --include-tasks
+  ps: scripts/powershell/check-prerequisites.ps1 -Json -RequireTasks -IncludeTasks
+---
+
+The user input to you can be provided directly by the agent or as a command argument - you **MUST** consider it before proceeding with the prompt (if not empty).
+
+User input:
+
+$ARGUMENTS
+
+Goal: Identify inconsistencies, duplications, ambiguities, and underspecified items across the three core artifacts (`spec.md`, `plan.md`, `tasks.md`) before implementation. This command MUST run only after `/tasks` has successfully produced a complete `tasks.md`.
+
+STRICTLY READ-ONLY: Do **not** modify any files. Output a structured analysis report. Offer an optional remediation plan (user must explicitly approve before any follow-up editing commands would be invoked manually).
+
+Constitution Authority: The project constitution (`/memory/constitution.md`) is **non-negotiable** within this analysis scope. Constitution conflicts are automatically CRITICAL and require adjustment of the spec, plan, or tasks—not dilution, reinterpretation, or silent ignoring of the principle. If a principle itself needs to change, that must occur in a separate, explicit constitution update outside `/analyze`.
+
+Execution steps:
+
+1. Run `{SCRIPT}` once from repo root and parse JSON for FEATURE_DIR and AVAILABLE_DOCS. Derive absolute paths:
+   - SPEC = FEATURE_DIR/spec.md
+   - PLAN = FEATURE_DIR/plan.md
+   - TASKS = FEATURE_DIR/tasks.md
+   Abort with an error message if any required file is missing (instruct the user to run missing prerequisite command).
+
+2. Load artifacts:
+   - Parse spec.md sections: Overview/Context, Functional Requirements, Non-Functional Requirements, User Stories, Edge Cases (if present).
+   - Parse plan.md: Architecture/stack choices, Data Model references, Phases, Technical constraints.
+   - Parse tasks.md: Task IDs, descriptions, phase grouping, parallel markers [P], referenced file paths.
+   - Load constitution `/memory/constitution.md` for principle validation.
+
+3. Build internal semantic models:
+   - Requirements inventory: Each functional + non-functional requirement with a stable key (derive slug based on imperative phrase; e.g., "User can upload file" -> `user-can-upload-file`).
+   - User story/action inventory.
+   - Task coverage mapping: Map each task to one or more requirements or stories (inference by keyword / explicit reference patterns like IDs or key phrases).
+   - Constitution rule set: Extract principle names and any MUST/SHOULD normative statements.
+
+4. Detection passes:
+   A. Duplication detection:
+      - Identify near-duplicate requirements. Mark lower-quality phrasing for consolidation.
+   B. Ambiguity detection:
+      - Flag vague adjectives (fast, scalable, secure, intuitive, robust) lacking measurable criteria.
+      - Flag unresolved placeholders (TODO, TKTK, ???, <placeholder>, etc.).
+   C. Underspecification:
+      - Requirements with verbs but missing object or measurable outcome.
+      - User stories missing acceptance criteria alignment.
+      - Tasks referencing files or components not defined in spec/plan.
+   D. Constitution alignment:
+      - Any requirement or plan element conflicting with a MUST principle.
+      - Missing mandated sections or quality gates from constitution.
+   E. Coverage gaps:
+      - Requirements with zero associated tasks.
+      - Tasks with no mapped requirement/story.
+      - Non-functional requirements not reflected in tasks (e.g., performance, security).
+   F. Inconsistency:
+      - Terminology drift (same concept named differently across files).
+      - Data entities referenced in plan but absent in spec (or vice versa).
+      - Task ordering contradictions (e.g., integration tasks before foundational setup tasks without dependency note).
+      - Conflicting requirements (e.g., one requires to use Next.js while other says to use Vue as the framework).
+
+5. Severity assignment heuristic:
+   - CRITICAL: Violates constitution MUST, missing core spec artifact, or requirement with zero coverage that blocks baseline functionality.
+   - HIGH: Duplicate or conflicting requirement, ambiguous security/performance attribute, untestable acceptance criterion.
+   - MEDIUM: Terminology drift, missing non-functional task coverage, underspecified edge case.
+   - LOW: Style/wording improvements, minor redundancy not affecting execution order.
+
+6. Produce a Markdown report (no file writes) with sections:
+
+   ### Specification Analysis Report
+   | ID | Category | Severity | Location(s) | Summary | Recommendation |
+   |----|----------|----------|-------------|---------|----------------|
+   | A1 | Duplication | HIGH | spec.md:L120-134 | Two similar requirements ... | Merge phrasing; keep clearer version |
+   (Add one row per finding; generate stable IDs prefixed by category initial.)
+
+   Additional subsections:
+   - Coverage Summary Table:
+     | Requirement Key | Has Task? | Task IDs | Notes |
+   - Constitution Alignment Issues (if any)
+   - Unmapped Tasks (if any)
+   - Metrics:
+     * Total Requirements
+     * Total Tasks
+     * Coverage % (requirements with >=1 task)
+     * Ambiguity Count
+     * Duplication Count
+     * Critical Issues Count
+
+7. At end of report, output a concise Next Actions block:
+   - If CRITICAL issues exist: Recommend resolving before `/implement`.
+   - If only LOW/MEDIUM: User may proceed, but provide improvement suggestions.
+   - Provide explicit command suggestions: e.g., "Run /specify with refinement", "Run /plan to adjust architecture", "Manually edit tasks.md to add coverage for 'performance-metrics'".
+
+8. Ask the user: "Would you like me to suggest concrete remediation edits for the top N issues?" (Do NOT apply them automatically.)
+
+Behavior rules:
+- NEVER modify files.
+- NEVER hallucinate missing sections—if absent, report them.
+- KEEP findings deterministic: if rerun without changes, produce consistent IDs and counts.
+- LIMIT total findings in the main table to 50; aggregate remainder in a summarized overflow note.
+- If zero issues found, emit a success report with coverage statistics and proceed recommendation.
+
+Context: {ARGS}