bug-investigator
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior during spec-superflow execution, before proposing fixes. Invoked automatically when…
Primary entry point for the spec-superflow state-machine workflow. Invoke when the user is inside an active spec-superflow change directory (look for .spec-superflow.yaml, changes/<name>/, proposal.md, specs/, design.md, tasks.md, or execution-contract.md) and asks to start,
$ npx -y skills add MageByte-Zero/spec-superflow --skill workflow-start --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
/workflow-startContext preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Primary entry point for the spec-superflow state-machine workflow. Invoke when the user is inside an active spec-superflow change directory (look for .spec-superflow.yaml, changes/<name>/, proposal.md, specs/, design.md, tasks.md, or execution-contract.md) and asks to start,
name: workflow-start description: Primary entry point for the spec-superflow state-machine workflow. Invoke when the user is inside an active spec-superflow change directory (look for .spec-superflow.yaml, changes/<name>/, proposal.md, specs/, design.md, tasks.md, or execution-contract.md) and asks to start, continue, resume, implement, plan, or figure out the next workflow step. Also invoke when the user explicitly asks to start a new spec-superflow change or route through the spec-superflow workflow. Do not invoke for unrelated coding tasks that happen to use words like start, continue, implement, or plan.
Primary entry point for `spec-superflow`. Jobs: inspect change context, check for updates, confirm DP-0, determine state, route to correct skill, block invalid transitions.
Only invoke when spec-superflow context is present: `.spec-superflow.yaml` exists, artifacts like `proposal.md`/`specs/`/`design.md`/`tasks.md`/`execution-contract.md` are present, or user explicitly invokes spec-superflow by name. When in doubt, check for `.spec-superflow.yaml` first.
Do NOT invoke for: general coding tasks outside spec-superflow changes, casual questions, unrelated work.
`exploring` → `specifying` → `bridging` → `approved-for-build` → `executing` → `closing`, with `debugging` side-path from `executing`, and `abandoned` as terminal. After `closing`, Full/legacy Hotfix changes complete the physical archive with `ssf finish` (owned by release-archivist); lightweight paths end at `closing` itself. If a transition is ambiguous, run `ssf runtime asset read docs/state-machine.md`.
Before update checks or recovery overlays, inspect the persisted state. If it is `closing`, stop immediately: `closing` is a successful terminal state and the next skill is `none`. Report the terminal state and its persisted evidence. Do not run `handoff list`, `checkpoint list`, the execution-control recovery scan, or `release-archivist`; do not resume, hand off, or route any more work.
Note: `closing` is the logical terminal of the state machine; the physical archive (merge + worktree cleanup) for Full/legacy Hotfix is performed by `ssf finish` in release-archivist. Lightweight paths have no physical archive step.
1. **Update check**: Run `ssf runtime check-update`. Exit 0 → continue. Exit 1 → non-blocking upgrade reminder. Exit 2 → skip. 2. **Inspect change folder**: Check for `proposal.md`, `specs/`, `design.md`, `tasks.md`, `execution-contract.md`. Answer: Is the change fuzzy? Artifacts missing/unstable? Contract exist? User approved contract? Execution in progress or blocked? In verification/wrap-up?
3. **Overlay recovery scan**: Run `ssf handoff list <change-dir> --json` and `ssf checkpoint list <change-dir> --json`. A `result-ready` handoff requires explicit review and `ssf handoff resolve` before resuming the affected work. An `active` handoff is non-blocking side work. Show a non-stale checkpoint as recovery context; show a stale checkpoint only as historical evidence.
4. **Execution-control recovery scan**: For Full or legacy Hotfix in `approved-for-build`, `executing`, or `debugging`, run `ssf execution show <change-dir> --json`. Treat only `current: true` plus `waves[].eligible: true` as permission to start a wave. Do not require this scan for Quick, Tweak, or a valid direct Hotfix receipt.
For a clearly bounded Quick or incident Hotfix request, recommend and accept in the same turn. Do not collect the eight intake facts as a questionnaire: infer them from the request and repository, show the observed facts, recommendation, and qualification reason, then ask the user to choose `tdd`, `new-test`, or `bounded` verification before running:
ssf state init <change-dir> ssf workflow recommend <change-dir> --task-count <n> --file-count <n> --config-doc-only no --schema-api-change no --new-module no --behavioral-constraint-change <yes|no> --cross-module-change <yes|no> --uncertainty low --request-kind <standard|incident> ssf workflow accept <change-dir> --source direct-request --verification <tdd|new-test|bounded>
Quick is ≤3 tasks/files of low-risk code. Hotfix is an incident with a reproducible symptom and ≤2 tasks/files. Display `Observed`, `Recommended`, `Why`, and any risk reasons; acceptance is the user's direct request to proceed and their explicit verification choice. Do not create planning artifacts, a contract, an execution plan, wave receipts, or DP approvals. Transition through the receipt-aware guard, execute bounded work, and require `test_result: pass` before closing. A fourth code file, behavioral-constraint change (PRD/spec/design/API/data/permission), cross-module work, a new module, high uncertainty, or failed verification does not auto-escalate: show Quick and Full, then wait for the user's choice. A user selecting Quick must acknowledge the recommendation and choose `tdd`, `new-test`, or `bounded` verification in the receipt. Tweak is only ≤4 config/doc-only tasks/files with no risk signals; it cannot be selected as an override. A legacy Hotfix without a valid direct receipt remains on the Full contract/DP-3/plan/review path.
After Direct Short-Path Intake does not apply, run DP-0 when: change folder doesn't exist, planning artifacts are missing/empty, `dp_0_confirmed` is not `true`, or a legacy change still has an `auto`/empty workflow. Resolve the artifact language first, then complete the workflow path intake. Do not set `dp_0_confirmed=true` while path facts or the user's path choice are still missing.
Before the first planning artifact is generated, resolve one concrete artifact language in this priority order:
1. explicit user language 2. the conversation's primary language 3. an explicit non-`auto` `e
源码级融合 OpenSpec 规划引擎 + Superpowers 执行纪律的 AI 编程工作流插件。17 平台支持,9 skills,Spec-first,契约驱动。
Repo: MageByte-Zero/spec-superflow
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior during spec-superflow execution, before proposing fixes. Invoked automatically when…
Govern implementation from an approved execution contract. Invoke when execution-contract.md is approved and the user wants disciplined build work, TDD…
Review completed implementation batches for spec compliance and code quality. Invoke after execution batches complete, before merging, or when a review gate is…
Convert approved planning artifacts into an execution contract. Invoke when the user wants to start building, asks to move from planning to implementation, or…
Clarify intent, scope, constraints, and success criteria before artifact creation. Invoke when the request is fuzzy, the user is comparing options, or the…
Close out a spec-superflow change with verification, summary, and archive readiness. Invoke when implementation is complete, verification is underway, or the…