charter
Establish or amend the project constitution — the standing principles and constraints that bind every SPARK phase. Use once at project start to give the team…
Start the Act phase of the SPARK loop: build the increment strictly following the approved plan, task by task, with progress tracked in the plan. Use after the plan is approved, or to fix findings that came back from /peer-review or /demo-day.
$ npx -y skills add a-lottes/aSPARK --skill increment --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
/incrementContext preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Start the Act phase of the SPARK loop: build the increment strictly following the approved plan, task by task, with progress tracked in the plan. Use after the plan is approved, or to fix findings that came back from /peer-review or /demo-day.
name: increment description: > Start the Act phase of the SPARK loop: build the increment strictly following the approved plan, task by task, with progress tracked in the plan. Use after the plan is approved, or to fix findings that came back from /peer-review or /demo-day.
You are running the **Act** ceremony — and this time *you* are the team member: the developer. No delegation; you build the increment yourself, in this conversation, so the user can watch and steer.
Optional argument: the feature name. Resolve as usual.
1. **Check the gate.** `.spark/<feature-name>/plan.md` must exist with status `approved`. If not, STOP and point to `/sprint-plan`. 2. **Load the working set — not the whole files.** From `plan.md`: §1 Architecture Decision, §2 Affected Components, §3 Task Breakdown, §4 Test Strategy. From `spec.md`: §4 User Stories with their ACs, §5 Non-Functional Requirements, §6 Out of Scope. That is your backlog, your definition of correct, and your scope fence. The rest — personas, assumptions, the clarification log, the design review, the risk table — is material the Plan phase already consumed and turned into tasks; re-reading it here buys nothing and costs the context that the tasks themselves need. Pull a further section only when a task actually calls for it. The plan is your backlog — the task table top to bottom, dependencies respected. 3. **Work task by task.** For each task:
existing conventions;
hit the endpoint, render the page), don't assert it;
4. **Stay inside the plan.** If a task turns out wrong, impossible or missing:
*Deviations* note appended to the plan;
`/sprint-plan` (revision) or `/story-time`. You do not improvise architecture — that's the whole point of aSPARK. 5. **Fix-mode.** When invoked to fix findings from `/peer-review` or `/demo-day`: read the report's **Handoff** block first — it names the open Blocker/Major IDs, which is your task list; read the Findings / Exploratory Findings table by exception, for the rows the block points at, not the whole report. Fix each, and re-run the affected tests. You are not that report's owner and never bump its `Round` field — that is the owner's call, made at the start of its own re-review/re-test pass, not yours to guess. In the same edit: overwrite the finding's `Status` cell to exactly `fixed` — no round number, since you don't know which round will confirm it — and **overwrite the Handoff block in place** with the new state — never append a round, the block holds one current state. Create no new section and no "Fixes applied" heading; the fixed row, in place, is the record. A stale block left behind after your edit is a defect, not a cosmetic issue. 6. **Close the phase.** All tasks `done`, full test suite green, project builds. Report to the user: tasks completed, deviations recorded, test results.
improvements don't happen. Park ideas for the next `/story-time`.
(**`/peer-review`** re-review or **`/demo-day`** re-test)
A gated agile delivery process for Claude Code: an AI product team (PO, Designer, EM, Reviewer, QA, Release) where every feature must pass a quality gate before it moves on — including real-browser QA.
Repo: a-lottes/aSPARK
Establish or amend the project constitution — the standing principles and constraints that bind every SPARK phase. Use once at project start to give the team…
Hands-on QA in a real browser: the QA Tester clicks through the running app, verifies every acceptance criterion from the spec, explores beyond the happy path…
Start the Keep phase of the SPARK loop: the Release Manager runs fresh pre-flight checks, writes the user-facing changelog, prepares tag/PR/ deploy, publishes…
Run the Designer over a spec (design risks, usability heuristics, accessibility) or over an implemented UI (screenshots, running app). Use after /story-time…
Have the Product Owner survey the project's current state — shipped features, in-flight work, open findings, standing goals — and propose one concrete next…
Start the Review phase of the SPARK loop: the Reviewer audits the diff produced by /increment — plan conformance, correctness, edge cases, security, test…