Compare commits

..

1 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Drew Ritter
fa07663322 fix(skills): plans reference the spec instead of restating it (SUP-333 #1)
writing-plans told agents to "document everything they need to know"
assuming zero context — every agent in the 2026-06-09 six-agent quorum
sweep obeyed and restated the entire spec inline in the plan
(cost-spec-plan-duplication failed 5/5 completed agents; pi's plan was
683 lines of duplicated spec).

- writing-plans: state the division of labor — spec owns WHAT/WHY,
  plan owns HOW; cite the spec by path/section, never restate it.
  "Zero context" means mechanically executable steps, not duplication.
  Add a **Spec:** line to the plan header template.
- brainstorming: close the path loophole the re-run exposed — claude
  shortened docs/superpowers/specs/ to docs/specs/ in 2/2 runs; both
  path mentions now explicitly forbid the shortening.

TDD evidence (quorum):
- RED: batch-20260609T023452Z-68aa et al — 5/5 agents fail
- GREEN: cost-spec-plan-duplication-claude-20260609T234142Z-9625 pass
  (plan: "this plan does not restate them" + spec cited by path;
  both docs in docs/superpowers/)
- Canary: triggering-writing-plans-claude pass (skill still fires)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-06-09 16:52:21 -07:00
4 changed files with 11 additions and 13 deletions

2
evals

Submodule evals updated: f8e5a9949f...ff3ee83f94

View File

@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ You MUST create a task for each of these items and complete them in order:
3. **Ask clarifying questions** — one at a time, understand purpose/constraints/success criteria
4. **Propose 2-3 approaches** — with trade-offs and your recommendation
5. **Present design** — in sections scaled to their complexity, get user approval after each section
6. **Write design doc** — save to `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` and commit
6. **Write design doc** — save to `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` and commit (exactly this path — not `docs/specs/`)
7. **Spec self-review** — quick inline check for placeholders, contradictions, ambiguity, scope (see below)
8. **User reviews written spec** — ask user to review the spec file before proceeding
9. **Transition to implementation** — invoke writing-plans skill to create implementation plan
@@ -109,6 +109,7 @@ digraph brainstorming {
**Documentation:**
- Write the validated design (spec) to `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md`
- The `docs/superpowers/` prefix is the convention; do not shorten it to `docs/specs/`
- (User preferences for spec location override this default)
- Use elements-of-style:writing-clearly-and-concisely skill if available
- Commit the design document to git

View File

@@ -11,8 +11,6 @@ Execute plan by dispatching fresh subagent per task, with two-stage review after
**Core principle:** Fresh subagent per task + two-stage review (spec then quality) = high quality, fast iteration
**Proportionality:** Review fanout scales with the change. When the entire plan is one trivial, fully-specified mechanical change — a log statement, a typo fix, a constant bump with no security or behavioral consequences — implement it directly (or with a single implementer subagent), verify per superpowers:verification-before-completion (run the relevant command, confirm output), commit, and skip all review subagents, including the final reviewer: three review dispatches cost more than a one-line diff. Trivial is a property of the diff — it changes no logic, no control flow, and nothing security-relevant — not of the plan's self-description. Any doubt means not trivial: run the full pipeline. Within a multi-task plan, never skip reviews, regardless of task size.
**Continuous execution:** Do not pause to check in with your human partner between tasks. Execute all tasks from the plan without stopping. The only reasons to stop are: BLOCKED status you cannot resolve, ambiguity that genuinely prevents progress, or all tasks complete. "Should I continue?" prompts and progress summaries waste their time — they asked you to execute the plan, so execute it.
## When to Use
@@ -63,16 +61,11 @@ digraph process {
}
"Read plan, extract all tasks with full text, note context, create todos" [shape=box];
"Entire plan = one trivial, fully-specified mechanical change? (any doubt = no)" [shape=diamond];
"Implement directly, verify, commit (no review fanout)" [shape=box];
"More tasks remain?" [shape=diamond];
"Dispatch final code reviewer subagent for entire implementation" [shape=box];
"Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightgreen];
"Read plan, extract all tasks with full text, note context, create todos" -> "Entire plan = one trivial, fully-specified mechanical change? (any doubt = no)";
"Entire plan = one trivial, fully-specified mechanical change? (any doubt = no)" -> "Implement directly, verify, commit (no review fanout)" [label="yes — see Proportionality"];
"Implement directly, verify, commit (no review fanout)" -> "Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch";
"Entire plan = one trivial, fully-specified mechanical change? (any doubt = no)" -> "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)" [label="no"];
"Read plan, extract all tasks with full text, note context, create todos" -> "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)";
"Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)" -> "Implementer subagent asks questions?";
"Implementer subagent asks questions?" -> "Answer questions, provide context" [label="yes"];
"Answer questions, provide context" -> "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)";
@@ -244,7 +237,7 @@ Done!
**Never:**
- Start implementation on main/master branch without explicit user consent
- Skip reviews — sole exception: a plan that is entirely one trivial change (see Proportionality)
- Skip reviews (spec compliance OR code quality)
- Proceed with unfixed issues
- Dispatch multiple implementation subagents in parallel (conflicts)
- Make subagent read plan file (provide full text instead)

View File

@@ -7,10 +7,12 @@ description: Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, bef
## Overview
Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the engineer has zero context for our codebase and questionable taste. Document everything they need to know: which files to touch for each task, code, testing, docs they might need to check, how to test it. Give them the whole plan as bite-sized tasks. DRY. YAGNI. TDD. Frequent commits.
Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the engineer has zero context for our codebase and questionable taste. Document everything they need to execute: which files to touch for each task, code, testing, docs they might need to check, how to test it. Give them the whole plan as bite-sized tasks. DRY. YAGNI. TDD. Frequent commits.
Assume they are a skilled developer, but know almost nothing about our toolset or problem domain. Assume they don't know good test design very well.
**Plans reference the spec; they never restate it.** The spec owns the WHAT and WHY — requirements, acceptance criteria, design decisions. The plan owns the HOW — tasks, files, code, commands. Cite the spec by path in the header and by section where a task needs context. Re-deriving spec content inline doubles the documents and lets them drift apart. "Zero context" means the engineer can execute each step mechanically; it does not mean the plan repeats what the spec already says — they can read the spec at the cited path.
**Announce at start:** "I'm using the writing-plans skill to create the implementation plan."
**Context:** If working in an isolated worktree, it should have been created via the `superpowers:using-git-worktrees` skill at execution time.
@@ -53,6 +55,8 @@ This structure informs the task decomposition. Each task should produce self-con
**Goal:** [One sentence describing what this builds]
**Spec:** [Path to the spec doc, e.g. `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` — requirements and design decisions live there; do not restate them here]
**Architecture:** [2-3 sentences about approach]
**Tech Stack:** [Key technologies/libraries]
@@ -145,7 +149,7 @@ After saving the plan, offer execution choice:
**If Subagent-Driven chosen:**
- **REQUIRED SUB-SKILL:** Use superpowers:subagent-driven-development
- Fresh subagent per task + two-stage review (review fanout scales with the change — see that skill's Proportionality rule)
- Fresh subagent per task + two-stage review
**If Inline Execution chosen:**
- **REQUIRED SUB-SKILL:** Use superpowers:executing-plans