np-dms/lcbp3
0
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

260304:1233 20260304:1200 update app to lcbp3
Some checks failed
Build and Deploy / deploy (push) Failing after 1m32s
Details

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
admin
2026-03-04 12:33:22 +07:00
parent 56b5d87abd
commit ad77a2ae94
43 changed files with 1708 additions and 434 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

236
.agents/skills/speckit.specify/SKILL.md
View File

@@ -1,7 +1,8 @@
---
name: speckit.specify
description: Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
handoffs:
version: 1.0.0
handoffs:
- label: Build Technical Plan
agent: speckit.plan
prompt: Create a plan for the spec. I am building with...
@@ -44,27 +45,28 @@ Given that feature description, do this:
- "Fix payment processing timeout bug" → "fix-payment-timeout"
2. **Check for existing branches before creating new one**:
a. First, fetch all remote branches to ensure we have the latest information:
```bash
git fetch --all --prune
```
```bash
git fetch --all --prune
```
b. Find the highest feature number across all sources for the short-name:
- Remote branches: `git ls-remote --heads origin | grep -E 'refs/heads/[0-9]+-<short-name>$'`
- Local branches: `git branch | grep -E '^[* ]*[0-9]+-<short-name>$'`
- Specs directories: Check for directories matching `specs/[0-9]+-<short-name>`
- Remote branches: `git ls-remote --heads origin | grep -E 'refs/heads/[0-9]+-<short-name>$'`
- Local branches: `git branch | grep -E '^[* ]*[0-9]+-<short-name>$'`
- Specs directories: Check for directories matching `specs/[0-9]+-<short-name>`
c. Determine the next available number:
- Extract all numbers from all three sources
- Find the highest number N
- Use N+1 for the new branch number
- Extract all numbers from all three sources
- Find the highest number N
- Use N+1 for the new branch number
d. Run the script `../scripts/bash/create-new-feature.sh --json "{{args}}"` with the calculated number and short-name:
- Pass `--number N+1` and `--short-name "your-short-name"` along with the feature description
- Bash example: `.specify/scripts/bash/create-new-feature.sh --json "{{args}}" --json --number 5 --short-name "user-auth" "Add user authentication"`
- PowerShell example: `.specify/scripts/bash/create-new-feature.sh --json "{{args}}" -Json -Number 5 -ShortName "user-auth" "Add user authentication"`
- Pass `--number N+1` and `--short-name "your-short-name"` along with the feature description
- Bash example: `.specify/scripts/bash/create-new-feature.sh --json "{{args}}" --json --number 5 --short-name "user-auth" "Add user authentication"`
- PowerShell example: `.specify/scripts/bash/create-new-feature.sh --json "{{args}}" -Json -Number 5 -ShortName "user-auth" "Add user authentication"`
**IMPORTANT**:
- Check all three sources (remote branches, local branches, specs directories) to find the highest number
- Only match branches/directories with the exact short-name pattern
@@ -77,30 +79,29 @@ Given that feature description, do this:
3. Load `templates/spec-template.md` to understand required sections.
4. Follow this execution flow:
1. Parse user description from Input
If empty: ERROR "No feature description provided"
2. Extract key concepts from description
Identify: actors, actions, data, constraints
3. For unclear aspects:
- Make informed guesses based on context and industry standards
- Only mark with [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: specific question] if:
- The choice significantly impacts feature scope or user experience
- Multiple reasonable interpretations exist with different implications
- No reasonable default exists
- **LIMIT: Maximum 3 [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers total**
- Prioritize clarifications by impact: scope > security/privacy > user experience > technical details
4. Fill User Scenarios & Testing section
If no clear user flow: ERROR "Cannot determine user scenarios"
5. Generate Functional Requirements
Each requirement must be testable
Use reasonable defaults for unspecified details (document assumptions in Assumptions section)
6. Define Success Criteria
Create measurable, technology-agnostic outcomes
Include both quantitative metrics (time, performance, volume) and qualitative measures (user satisfaction, task completion)
Each criterion must be verifiable without implementation details
7. Identify Key Entities (if data involved)
8. Return: SUCCESS (spec ready for planning)
1. Parse user description from Input
If empty: ERROR "No feature description provided"
2. Extract key concepts from description
Identify: actors, actions, data, constraints
3. For unclear aspects:
- Make informed guesses based on context and industry standards
- Only mark with [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: specific question] if:
- The choice significantly impacts feature scope or user experience
- Multiple reasonable interpretations exist with different implications
- No reasonable default exists
- **LIMIT: Maximum 3 [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers total**
- Prioritize clarifications by impact: scope > security/privacy > user experience > technical details
4. Fill User Scenarios & Testing section
If no clear user flow: ERROR "Cannot determine user scenarios"
5. Generate Functional Requirements
Each requirement must be testable
Use reasonable defaults for unspecified details (document assumptions in Assumptions section)
6. Define Success Criteria
Create measurable, technology-agnostic outcomes
Include both quantitative metrics (time, performance, volume) and qualitative measures (user satisfaction, task completion)
Each criterion must be verifiable without implementation details
7. Identify Key Entities (if data involved)
8. Return: SUCCESS (spec ready for planning)
5. Write the specification to SPEC_FILE using the template structure, replacing placeholders with concrete details derived from the feature description (arguments) while preserving section order and headings.
@@ -108,91 +109,90 @@ Given that feature description, do this:
a. **Create Spec Quality Checklist**: Generate a checklist file at `FEATURE_DIR/checklists/requirements.md` using the checklist template structure with these validation items:
```markdown
# Specification Quality Checklist: [FEATURE NAME]
**Purpose**: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
**Created**: [DATE]
**Feature**: [Link to spec.md]
## Content Quality
- [ ] No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs)
- [ ] Focused on user value and business needs
- [ ] Written for non-technical stakeholders
- [ ] All mandatory sections completed
## Requirement Completeness
- [ ] No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain
- [ ] Requirements are testable and unambiguous
- [ ] Success criteria are measurable
- [ ] Success criteria are technology-agnostic (no implementation details)
- [ ] All acceptance scenarios are defined
- [ ] Edge cases are identified
- [ ] Scope is clearly bounded
- [ ] Dependencies and assumptions identified
## Feature Readiness
- [ ] All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria
- [ ] User scenarios cover primary flows
- [ ] Feature meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
- [ ] No implementation details leak into specification
## Notes
- Items marked incomplete require spec updates before `/speckit.clarify` or `/speckit.plan`
```
```markdown
# Specification Quality Checklist: [FEATURE NAME]
**Purpose**: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
**Created**: [DATE]
**Feature**: [Link to spec.md]
## Content Quality
- [ ] No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs)
- [ ] Focused on user value and business needs
- [ ] Written for non-technical stakeholders
- [ ] All mandatory sections completed
## Requirement Completeness
- [ ] No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain
- [ ] Requirements are testable and unambiguous
- [ ] Success criteria are measurable
- [ ] Success criteria are technology-agnostic (no implementation details)
- [ ] All acceptance scenarios are defined
- [ ] Edge cases are identified
- [ ] Scope is clearly bounded
- [ ] Dependencies and assumptions identified
## Feature Readiness
- [ ] All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria
- [ ] User scenarios cover primary flows
- [ ] Feature meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
- [ ] No implementation details leak into specification
## Notes
- Items marked incomplete require spec updates before `/speckit.clarify` or `/speckit.plan`
```
b. **Run Validation Check**: Review the spec against each checklist item:
- For each item, determine if it passes or fails
- Document specific issues found (quote relevant spec sections)
- For each item, determine if it passes or fails
- Document specific issues found (quote relevant spec sections)
c. **Handle Validation Results**:
- **If all items pass**: Mark checklist complete and proceed to step 6
- **If all items pass**: Mark checklist complete and proceed to step 6
- **If items fail (excluding [NEEDS CLARIFICATION])**:
1. List the failing items and specific issues
2. Update the spec to address each issue
3. Re-run validation until all items pass (max 3 iterations)
4. If still failing after 3 iterations, document remaining issues in checklist notes and warn user
- **If items fail (excluding [NEEDS CLARIFICATION])**:
1. List the failing items and specific issues
2. Update the spec to address each issue
3. Re-run validation until all items pass (max 3 iterations)
4. If still failing after 3 iterations, document remaining issues in checklist notes and warn user
- **If [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain**:
1. Extract all [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: ...] markers from the spec
2. **LIMIT CHECK**: If more than 3 markers exist, keep only the 3 most critical (by scope/security/UX impact) and make informed guesses for the rest
3. For each clarification needed (max 3), present options to user in this format:
- **If [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain**:
1. Extract all [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: ...] markers from the spec
2. **LIMIT CHECK**: If more than 3 markers exist, keep only the 3 most critical (by scope/security/UX impact) and make informed guesses for the rest
3. For each clarification needed (max 3), present options to user in this format:
```markdown
## Question [N]: [Topic]
```markdown
## Question [N]: [Topic]
**Context**: [Quote relevant spec section]
**What we need to know**: [Specific question from NEEDS CLARIFICATION marker]
**Suggested Answers**:
| Option | Answer | Implications |
|--------|--------|--------------|
| A | [First suggested answer] | [What this means for the feature] |
| B | [Second suggested answer] | [What this means for the feature] |
| C | [Third suggested answer] | [What this means for the feature] |
| Custom | Provide your own answer | [Explain how to provide custom input] |
**Your choice**: _[Wait for user response]_
```
**Context**: [Quote relevant spec section]
4. **CRITICAL - Table Formatting**: Ensure markdown tables are properly formatted:
- Use consistent spacing with pipes aligned
- Each cell should have spaces around content: `| Content |` not `|Content|`
- Header separator must have at least 3 dashes: `|--------|`
- Test that the table renders correctly in markdown preview
5. Number questions sequentially (Q1, Q2, Q3 - max 3 total)
6. Present all questions together before waiting for responses
7. Wait for user to respond with their choices for all questions (e.g., "Q1: A, Q2: Custom - [details], Q3: B")
8. Update the spec by replacing each [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] marker with the user's selected or provided answer
9. Re-run validation after all clarifications are resolved
**What we need to know**: [Specific question from NEEDS CLARIFICATION marker]
**Suggested Answers**:
| Option | Answer | Implications |
| ------ | ------------------------- | ------------------------------------- |
| A | [First suggested answer] | [What this means for the feature] |
| B | [Second suggested answer] | [What this means for the feature] |
| C | [Third suggested answer] | [What this means for the feature] |
| Custom | Provide your own answer | [Explain how to provide custom input] |
**Your choice**: _[Wait for user response]_
```
4. **CRITICAL - Table Formatting**: Ensure markdown tables are properly formatted:
- Use consistent spacing with pipes aligned
- Each cell should have spaces around content: `| Content |` not `|Content|`
- Header separator must have at least 3 dashes: `|--------|`
- Test that the table renders correctly in markdown preview
5. Number questions sequentially (Q1, Q2, Q3 - max 3 total)
6. Present all questions together before waiting for responses
7. Wait for user to respond with their choices for all questions (e.g., "Q1: A, Q2: Custom - [details], Q3: B")
8. Update the spec by replacing each [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] marker with the user's selected or provided answer
9. Re-run validation after all clarifications are resolved
d. **Update Checklist**: After each validation iteration, update the checklist file with current pass/fail status