pig-farm-controller/openspec/AGENTS.md

OpenSpec Instructions

Instructions for AI coding assistants using OpenSpec for spec-driven development.

TL;DR Quick Checklist

• Search existing work: openspec spec list --long, openspec list (use rg only for full-text search)
• Decide scope: new capability vs modify existing capability
• Pick a unique change-id: kebab-case, verb-led (add-, update-, remove-, refactor-)
• Scaffold: proposal.md, tasks.md, design.md (only if needed), and delta specs per affected capability
• Write deltas: use ## ADDED|MODIFIED|REMOVED|RENAMED Requirements; include at least one #### Scenario: per requirement
• Validate: openspec validate [change-id] --strict and fix issues
• Request approval: Do not start implementation until proposal is approved

Three-Stage Workflow

Stage 1: Creating Changes

Create proposal when you need to:

• Add features or functionality
• Make breaking changes (API, schema)
• Change architecture or patterns
• Optimize performance (changes behavior)
• Update security patterns

Triggers (examples):

• "Help me create a change proposal"
• "Help me plan a change"
• "Help me create a proposal"
• "I want to create a spec proposal"
• "I want to create a spec"

Loose matching guidance:

• Contains one of: proposal, change, spec
• With one of: create, plan, make, start, help

Skip proposal for:

• Bug fixes (restore intended behavior)
• Typos, formatting, comments
• Dependency updates (non-breaking)
• Configuration changes
• Tests for existing behavior

Workflow

1. Review openspec/project.md, openspec list, and openspec list --specs to understand current context.
2. Choose a unique verb-led change-id and scaffold proposal.md, tasks.md, optional design.md, and spec deltas under openspec/changes/<id>/.
3. Draft spec deltas using ## ADDED|MODIFIED|REMOVED Requirements with at least one #### Scenario: per requirement.
4. Run openspec validate <id> --strict and resolve any issues before sharing the proposal.

Stage 2: Implementing Changes

Track these steps as TODOs and complete them one by one.

1. Read proposal.md - Understand what's being built
2. Read design.md (if exists) - Review technical decisions
3. Read tasks.md - Get implementation checklist
4. Implement tasks sequentially - Complete in order
5. Confirm completion - Ensure every item in tasks.md is finished before updating statuses
6. Update checklist - After all work is done, set every task to - [x] so the list reflects reality
7. Approval gate - Do not start implementation until the proposal is reviewed and approved

Stage 3: Archiving Changes

After deployment, create separate PR to:

• Move changes/[name]/ → changes/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-[name]/
• Update specs/ if capabilities changed
• Use openspec archive <change-id> --skip-specs --yes for tooling-only changes (always pass the change ID explicitly)
• Run openspec validate --strict to confirm the archived change passes checks

Before Any Task

Context Checklist:

• Read relevant specs in specs/[capability]/spec.md
• Check pending changes in changes/ for conflicts
• Read openspec/project.md for conventions
• Run openspec list to see active changes
• Run openspec list --specs to see existing capabilities

Before Creating Specs:

• Always check if capability already exists
• Prefer modifying existing specs over creating duplicates
• Use openspec show [spec] to review current state
• If request is ambiguous, ask 1–2 clarifying questions before scaffolding

Search Guidance

• Enumerate specs: openspec spec list --long (or --json for scripts)
• Enumerate changes: openspec list (or openspec change list --json - deprecated but available)
• Show details:
  • Spec: openspec show <spec-id> --type spec (use --json for filters)
  • Change: openspec show <change-id> --json --deltas-only
• Full-text search (use ripgrep): rg -n "Requirement:|Scenario:" openspec/specs

Quick Start

CLI Commands

# Essential commands
openspec list                  # List active changes
openspec list --specs          # List specifications
openspec show [item]           # Display change or spec
openspec validate [item]       # Validate changes or specs
openspec archive <change-id> [--yes|-y]   # Archive after deployment (add --yes for non-interactive runs)

# Project management
openspec init [path]           # Initialize OpenSpec
openspec update [path]         # Update instruction files

# Interactive mode
openspec show                  # Prompts for selection
openspec validate              # Bulk validation mode

# Debugging
openspec show [change] --json --deltas-only
openspec validate [change] --strict

Command Flags

• --json - Machine-readable output
• --type change|spec - Disambiguate items
• --strict - Comprehensive validation
• --no-interactive - Disable prompts
• --skip-specs - Archive without spec updates
• --yes/-y - Skip confirmation prompts (non-interactive archive)

Directory Structure

openspec/
├── project.md              # Project conventions
├── specs/                  # Current truth - what IS built
│   └── [capability]/       # Single focused capability
│       ├── spec.md         # Requirements and scenarios
│       └── design.md       # Technical patterns
├── changes/                # Proposals - what SHOULD change
│   ├── [change-name]/
│   │   ├── proposal.md     # Why, what, impact
│   │   ├── tasks.md        # Implementation checklist
│   │   ├── design.md       # Technical decisions (optional; see criteria)
│   │   └── specs/          # Delta changes
│   │       └── [capability]/
│   │           └── spec.md # ADDED/MODIFIED/REMOVED
│   └── archive/            # Completed changes

Creating Change Proposals

Decision Tree

New request?
├─ Bug fix restoring spec behavior? → Fix directly
├─ Typo/format/comment? → Fix directly  
├─ New feature/capability? → Create proposal
├─ Breaking change? → Create proposal
├─ Architecture change? → Create proposal
└─ Unclear? → Create proposal (safer)

Proposal Structure

1. Create directory: changes/[change-id]/ (kebab-case, verb-led, unique)

2. Write proposal.md:

## Why
[1-2 sentences on problem/opportunity]

## What Changes
- [Bullet list of changes]
- [Mark breaking changes with **BREAKING**]

## Impact
- Affected specs: [list capabilities]
- Affected code: [key files/systems]

3. Create spec deltas: specs/[capability]/spec.md

## ADDED Requirements
### Requirement: New Feature
The system SHALL provide...

#### Scenario: Success case
- **WHEN** user performs action
- **THEN** expected result

## MODIFIED Requirements
### Requirement: Existing Feature
[Complete modified requirement]

## REMOVED Requirements
### Requirement: Old Feature
**Reason**: [Why removing]
**Migration**: [How to handle]

If multiple capabilities are affected, create multiple delta files under changes/[change-id]/specs/<capability>/spec.md—one per capability.

4. Create tasks.md:

## 1. Implementation
- [ ] 1.1 Create database schema
- [ ] 1.2 Implement API endpoint
- [ ] 1.3 Add frontend component
- [ ] 1.4 Write tests

5. Create design.md when needed: Create design.md if any of the following apply; otherwise omit it:

• Cross-cutting change (multiple services/modules) or a new architectural pattern
• New external dependency or significant data model changes
• Security, performance, or migration complexity
• Ambiguity that benefits from technical decisions before coding

Minimal design.md skeleton:

## Context
[Background, constraints, stakeholders]

## Goals / Non-Goals
- Goals: [...]
- Non-Goals: [...]

## Decisions
- Decision: [What and why]
- Alternatives considered: [Options + rationale]

## Risks / Trade-offs
- [Risk] → Mitigation

## Migration Plan
[Steps, rollback]

## Open Questions
- [...]

Spec File Format

Critical: Scenario Formatting

CORRECT (use #### headers):

#### Scenario: User login success
- **WHEN** valid credentials provided
- **THEN** return JWT token

WRONG (don't use bullets or bold):

- **Scenario: User login**  ❌
**Scenario**: User login     ❌
### Scenario: User login      ❌

Every requirement MUST have at least one scenario.

Requirement Wording

• Use SHALL/MUST for normative requirements (avoid should/may unless intentionally non-normative)

Delta Operations

• ## ADDED Requirements - New capabilities
• ## MODIFIED Requirements - Changed behavior
• ## REMOVED Requirements - Deprecated features
• ## RENAMED Requirements - Name changes

Headers matched with trim(header) - whitespace ignored.

When to use ADDED vs MODIFIED

• ADDED: Introduces a new capability or sub-capability that can stand alone as a requirement. Prefer ADDED when the change is orthogonal (e.g., adding "Slash Command Configuration") rather than altering the semantics of an existing requirement.
• MODIFIED: Changes the behavior, scope, or acceptance criteria of an existing requirement. Always paste the full, updated requirement content (header + all scenarios). The archiver will replace the entire requirement with what you provide here; partial deltas will drop previous details.
• RENAMED: Use when only the name changes. If you also change behavior, use RENAMED (name) plus MODIFIED (content) referencing the new name.

Common pitfall: Using MODIFIED to add a new concern without including the previous text. This causes loss of detail at archive time. If you aren’t explicitly changing the existing requirement, add a new requirement under ADDED instead.

Authoring a MODIFIED requirement correctly:

1. Locate the existing requirement in openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md.
2. Copy the entire requirement block (from ### Requirement: ... through its scenarios).
3. Paste it under ## MODIFIED Requirements and edit to reflect the new behavior.
4. Ensure the header text matches exactly (whitespace-insensitive) and keep at least one #### Scenario:.

Example for RENAMED:

## RENAMED Requirements
- FROM: `### Requirement: Login`
- TO: `### Requirement: User Authentication`

Troubleshooting

Common Errors

"Change must have at least one delta"

• Check changes/[name]/specs/ exists with .md files
• Verify files have operation prefixes (## ADDED Requirements)

"Requirement must have at least one scenario"

• Check scenarios use #### Scenario: format (4 hashtags)
• Don't use bullet points or bold for scenario headers

Silent scenario parsing failures

• Exact format required: #### Scenario: Name
• Debug with: openspec show [change] --json --deltas-only

Validation Tips

# Always use strict mode for comprehensive checks
openspec validate [change] --strict

# Debug delta parsing
openspec show [change] --json | jq '.deltas'

# Check specific requirement
openspec show [spec] --json -r 1

Happy Path Script

# 1) Explore current state
openspec spec list --long
openspec list
# Optional full-text search:
# rg -n "Requirement:|Scenario:" openspec/specs
# rg -n "^#|Requirement:" openspec/changes

# 2) Choose change id and scaffold
CHANGE=add-two-factor-auth
mkdir -p openspec/changes/$CHANGE/{specs/auth}
printf "## Why\n...\n\n## What Changes\n- ...\n\n## Impact\n- ...\n" > openspec/changes/$CHANGE/proposal.md
printf "## 1. Implementation\n- [ ] 1.1 ...\n" > openspec/changes/$CHANGE/tasks.md

# 3) Add deltas (example)
cat > openspec/changes/$CHANGE/specs/auth/spec.md << 'EOF'
## ADDED Requirements
### Requirement: Two-Factor Authentication
Users MUST provide a second factor during login.

#### Scenario: OTP required
- **WHEN** valid credentials are provided
- **THEN** an OTP challenge is required
EOF

# 4) Validate
openspec validate $CHANGE --strict

Multi-Capability Example

openspec/changes/add-2fa-notify/
├── proposal.md
├── tasks.md
└── specs/
    ├── auth/
    │   └── spec.md   # ADDED: Two-Factor Authentication
    └── notifications/
        └── spec.md   # ADDED: OTP email notification

auth/spec.md

## ADDED Requirements
### Requirement: Two-Factor Authentication
...

notifications/spec.md

## ADDED Requirements
### Requirement: OTP Email Notification
...

Best Practices

Simplicity First

• Default to <100 lines of new code
• Single-file implementations until proven insufficient
• Avoid frameworks without clear justification
• Choose boring, proven patterns

Complexity Triggers

Only add complexity with:

• Performance data showing current solution too slow
• Concrete scale requirements (>1000 users, >100MB data)
• Multiple proven use cases requiring abstraction

Clear References

• Use file.ts:42 format for code locations
• Reference specs as specs/auth/spec.md
• Link related changes and PRs

Capability Naming

• Use verb-noun: user-auth, payment-capture
• Single purpose per capability
• 10-minute understandability rule
• Split if description needs "AND"

Change ID Naming

• Use kebab-case, short and descriptive: add-two-factor-auth
• Prefer verb-led prefixes: add-, update-, remove-, refactor-
• Ensure uniqueness; if taken, append -2, -3, etc.

Tool Selection Guide

Task	Tool	Why
Find files by pattern	Glob	Fast pattern matching
Search code content	Grep	Optimized regex search
Read specific files	Read	Direct file access
Explore unknown scope	Task	Multi-step investigation

Error Recovery

Change Conflicts

1. Run openspec list to see active changes
2. Check for overlapping specs
3. Coordinate with change owners
4. Consider combining proposals

Validation Failures

1. Run with --strict flag
2. Check JSON output for details
3. Verify spec file format
4. Ensure scenarios properly formatted

Missing Context

1. Read project.md first
2. Check related specs
3. Review recent archives
4. Ask for clarification

Quick Reference

Stage Indicators

• changes/ - Proposed, not yet built
• specs/ - Built and deployed
• archive/ - Completed changes

File Purposes

• proposal.md - Why and what
• tasks.md - Implementation steps
• design.md - Technical decisions
• spec.md - Requirements and behavior

CLI Essentials

openspec list              # What's in progress?
openspec show [item]       # View details
openspec validate --strict # Is it correct?
openspec archive <change-id> [--yes|-y]  # Mark complete (add --yes for automation)

Remember: Specs are truth. Changes are proposals. Keep them in sync.