Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

spec-coder(规格编码器)

spec-coder 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 OpenClaw 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

spec-coder 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为只读;许可证为 MIT-0,第三方扫描有提醒项,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 15,038。

总安装 8,136周安装 339GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 2,712核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
MIT-0
版本
0.1.4

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:spec-coder(规格编码器)
来源仓库:https://github.com/xhuaustc/spec-coder
安装命令:
openclaw skills install spec-coder
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 OpenClaw 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install spec-coder

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

采用多专家评审门机制推进结构化开发流程。spec-coder 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。覆盖需求澄清、设计文档编写到任务拆解全环节。适合复杂系统开发前期规范制定与评审支持。在OpenClaw中直接调用以生成标准化SPEC文档。建议配合版本控制工具管理生成的规范文件变更历史。

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 openclaw skills install spec-coder;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它标注为只读,先用只读任务试一次,确认行为符合预期再扩大使用范围。

常见问题

6 条

spec-coder 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install spec-coder。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

spec-coder 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

spec-coder 需要什么权限?

权限级别是只读。该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

spec-coder 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT-0。本站不代收任何费用,也不托管安装包;能否商用、要不要署名,以许可证原文为准。

spec-coder 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 8,136 次,近一周安装 339 次,下载 2,712 次。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

spec-coder 安全吗?

第三方扫描有提醒项,说明存在需要人工确认的行为。安装前请打开源码看清它读了什么、联网到哪里。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 专注 OpenClaw 一种宿主,触发方式和使用习惯不用来回切换。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT-0,商用和分发边界好判断。
  • 标注为只读权限,试用阶段不容易误改本地文件。

先想清楚的地方

  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 OpenClaw,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。
  • 只想先试试效果、不希望它改动本地文件的人。

不太适合

  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
spec-coder

规格编码器 · 本页

8,136—只读MIT-0有提醒

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

name
spec-coder
description
>-

Spec Coding Workflow

Write specs first, then generate code. 5 phases, each producing artifacts that feed the next. Expert review gates between phases catch issues early.

Session Start

On every new session:

  1. Read specs/status.md to identify current phase, active changes, and deferred items.
  2. Read phase-relevant spec files — see Quick Reference table below for which artifacts each phase produces/consumes. Skip specs/changes/archive/ — archived changes represent completed/merged work and must not be read or referenced.
  3. Confirm with the user which phase/gate to continue from. If mid-phase, summarize progress so far.
  4. No specs/status.md? This is a new project — start from Phase 0 (existing codebase) or Phase 1 (greenfield).

Workflow Overview

Phase 0 ──→ Phase 1 ──→ ║Gate 1║ ──→ Phase 2a ──→ Phase 2b ──→ ║Gate 2║
(scan)      (clarify)    (req.)       (design)      (preview)     (design)
                                                                     │
    ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
    ▼
Phase 2c ──→ Phase 2d ──→ ║Gate 3║ ──→ Phase 3 ──→ ║Gate 4║ ──→ Phase 4 ──→ Phase 5
(tasks)      (specs)       (plan)       (code)       (code)       (verify)    (iterate)
                                                                                  │
                                                                    ┌─────────────┘
                                                                    ▼
                                                              Re-trigger Gate
                                                              2 / 3 / 4 based
                                                              on change scope

Gates auto-approve when no Critical/Major issues. See Expert Review Protocol for details.

Quick Reference

PhaseInputOutputGateNext
0. Codebase Scancodebase filesstatus.md § Codebase Context—Phase 1
1. Clarify & Scopeuser requirements + Phase 0 contextrequirements.mdGate 1 (req.)Phase 2a
2a. Technical Designrequirements.mddesign.md—Phase 2b
2b. Design Previewdesign.mddesign-preview/Gate 2 (design)Phase 2c
2c. Task Breakdowndesign.md + requirements.mdtasks.md—Phase 2d
2d. Feature Specstasks.md + design.mdspec_xxx.mdGate 3 (plan)Phase 3
3. Generatetasks.md + spec_xxx.mdcode + testsGate 4 (code)Phase 4
4. Verifycode + tests + spec_xxx.mdtest results, Implementation Map—Phase 5 or done
5. Evolvetrunk specs + user requestchanges/scoped gate→ Phase 1–4

When to Use

Trigger conditions:

  • User mentions "spec coding", "spec-first", "spec-driven development"
  • User asks to write specs / requirements / design docs before implementation
  • User mentions phase keywords: "clarify requirements", "write a spec", "generate from spec"

When NOT to use: Pure bug fixes, one-line config changes, dependency updates, or tasks completable in < 15 minutes without design decisions.

Complexity triage — choose the right track:

TrackWhenPhasesArtifactsReview Depth
SmallSingle endpoint, field addition, < 1 hrSpec (lite) → Generate → Verifyspec_xxx.md onlyLite (1–2 roles, skip if trivial)
MediumSingle feature, 1–4 hrs, 1–3 modulesClarify (brief) → Spec → Generate → Verifyspec_xxx.md + tasks.mdStandard (2–3 roles)
LargeMulti-module, > 4 hrs, or new systemFull 5-phase workflowAll spec filesFull (all roles)

Ask the user which track fits, or infer from the scope of their request.

Small track shortcut: Skip Phase 1. Write a single spec_xxx.md (Interface + Business Rules + Test Points only), then go straight to Generate → Verify.

Medium track shortcut: Phase 1 is a brief bullet-point confirmation (no full requirements.md). Phase 2 produces tasks.md + spec_xxx.md only (skip design.md and design-preview/ unless architecture decisions are needed).

Mid-project entry: If the user already has spec files or an existing codebase, read them first. Validate existing artifacts against the expected format, then confirm which phase to start from.

File Organization

Two-layer structure: trunk (current system truth) + changes (incremental work).

specs/
├── index.md                    ← navigation hub: all features & recent changes
├── requirements.md             ← project-level requirements (grows incrementally)
├── design.md                   ← system-level architecture (grows incrementally)
├── design-preview/
├── tasks.md                    ← active tasks only
├── status.md
├── spec_<feature_name>.md      ← feature specs (current truth, one per feature)
└── changes/                    ← all incremental work
    ├── FEAT-NNN-name/          ← new feature (full spec lifecycle)
    │   ├── spec.md
    │   ├── design.md
    │   ├── tasks.md
    │   └── delta.md            ← merge instructions for trunk
    ├── CHG-NNN-name/           ← change/enhancement (delta only)
    │   ├── spec.md             ← ADDED / MODIFIED / REMOVED sections
    │   ├── tasks.md
    │   └── delta.md
    └── archive/                ← completed & merged changes

First-time projects: Start with trunk only (no changes/ needed). The changes layer is introduced when the first post-v1 feature or modification begins.

For full lifecycle management details, see Spec Lifecycle Management.

Phase 0 (Optional): Codebase Scan

For existing codebases, run before Phase 1: read dependency files to detect tech stack, list directory tree, identify existing interfaces/models/conventions, and summarize findings.

Output: Write results to specs/status.md under ## Codebase Context (tech stack, key conventions, existing interfaces, directory structure summary). This persists the scan across sessions. Phase 1 references this for requirements scoping; Phase 2a references it for architecture decisions.

Phase 1: Clarify & Scope

Goal: Turn informal requirements into a confirmed, structured requirements.md.

Constraints: Do NOT write any code. Only ask questions and produce documents.

  1. Interactive Clarification — Ask user for raw requirements. Summarize goals (3–5 bullets), list ambiguities with options, suggest unconsidered constraints. Iterate until confirmed.
  2. Structured Requirements — Produce specs/requirements.md (see template): Background & Objectives, User Roles & Use Cases, Functional Requirements (FR-001...), Non-Functional Requirements, Out of Scope. If Phase 0 ran, populate the "Existing Architecture" section with requirement-relevant context from status.md § Codebase Context.

→ Gate 1: Requirements Review

Per Expert Review Protocol — Gate 1. Exit: User approves (or auto-approved).

Phase 2: Spec

Goal: Produce spec documents that directly drive code generation.

2a: Technical Design → specs/design.md

Based on requirements.md, produce specs/design.md (see template):

  1. Architecture overview (tech stack, layers, services)
  2. Core module breakdown with responsibilities and dependency directions
  3. Key data models, interfaces & interaction flows
  4. Cross-cutting concerns (error handling, auth, observability, deployment) — skip on Small track
  5. NFR fulfillment matrix + key architecture decisions (ADR format) — skip on Small/Medium track

For existing codebases: populate "Existing Architecture" section with architecture-relevant context from status.md § Codebase Context (what's new vs. modified).

2b: Design Preview → specs/design-preview/

Self-contained HTML prototype visualizing architecture, module layout, UI screens or API flows, and data models.

Constraints:

  • Single HTML file per page/screen (inline CSS + JS, no external dependencies) — must open in any browser without a build step.
  • Target: validate information architecture and user flow, not pixel-perfect design. Lo-fi is acceptable.
  • Limit to ≤ 5 key screens/pages. Prioritize primary user workflow.
  • For non-UI projects: Architecture Diagram Preview only (module relationships + data flow as a single HTML page).

UI projects: All generated UI must follow the UI Design Guidelines to avoid AI-template aesthetics.

→ Gate 2: Design Review (2a + 2b combined)

Per Expert Review Protocol — Gate 2. Exit: User approves (or auto-approved).

2c: Task Breakdown → specs/tasks.md

Task table (see template). Target granularity: 30–90 min per task.

2d: Feature Spec → specs/spec_<feature>.md

Per feature (see template): Feature Description & Use Cases, Interface Definition, Data Model, Business Rules & Edge Cases, Test Points (≥ 5 per feature, complex: 10–20; categories: Normal / Error / Boundary / Combination).

→ Gate 3: Implementation Plan Review (2c + 2d combined)

Per Expert Review Protocol — Gate 3. Exit: User approves (or auto-approved).

Spec Quality Checklist

Before leaving Phase 2: every interface has explicit I/O types; every business rule has ≥ 1 test point; specs describe what not how; each spec is self-contained for code generation; edge cases are explicit, not implied.

Phase 3: Generate

Goal: Produce implementation code + tests strictly based on the spec.

Spec adherence — tiered rules:

TierScopeRule
StrictInterfaces, data models, business rulesFollow spec exactly. Do not change signatures, field names, or behavior.
FlexibleInternal implementation (function names, code organization, logging, error messages)AI decides, but must note deviations in Human-review points.
SPEC-GAPScenarios the spec doesn't cover (discovered during coding)Implement a reasonable solution, tag it [SPEC-GAP], and continue. Collect all gaps for batch review in Phase 4.

Never silently deviate from Strict-tier items. If a Strict item is wrong or incomplete, flag it and ask the user — but do not block on every minor gap.

Execution Strategy

  1. Order: Sort tasks by dependency graph (topological order). Infrastructure/setup tasks first.
  2. Parallelism: Tasks with no mutual dependencies may be executed in parallel (e.g., via subagents). Tasks sharing the same module should be sequential to avoid merge conflicts.
  3. Commit cadence: One commit per task, tagged with task ID: feat(TASK-001): ...
  4. Failure handling: If a task fails to generate or test correctly after 2 attempts, mark it Blocked in tasks.md, log the reason, and continue with non-dependent tasks. Return to blocked tasks after unblocked tasks complete.
  5. Progress tracking: Update tasks.md Status column (Pending → In Progress → Done / Blocked) as each task progresses.

Steps

  1. Scan project structure and tech stack (or use Phase 0 results).
  2. For each task in tasks.md (per execution strategy above), take its linked spec_xxx.md as input.
  3. Output per task:

- File list (create vs. modify, with paths) - Implementation code - Tests derived from spec Test Points (TP-001 → test function) - Human-review points — Flexible-tier deviations + all [SPEC-GAP] items

  1. Add spec traceability comments at module/class level: // SPEC: spec_auth.md | TASK-002 — enables reverse lookup from code to spec.

For existing codebases: clearly distinguish "new file" vs. "modify existing file" and show diffs for modifications.

→ Gate 4: Code Review

Per Expert Review Protocol — Gate 4. Exit: User approves (or auto-approved). Proceed to Phase 4.

Phase 4: Verify

Goal: Confirm generated code satisfies the spec through execution (static compliance is already covered by Gate 4).

4a: Dynamic Verification

Run the following checks in order. Stop and fix if any step fails.

  1. Build — Project compiles / bundles without errors.
  2. Lint & Type Check — Run linter and type checker (if available). Zero errors required; warnings acceptable.
  3. Unit Tests — Execute test suite (pytest, npm test, go test, etc.). Map each TP-ID to pass/fail.
  4. Integration Tests — Run integration / E2E tests if defined in tasks.md.
  5. Coverage Check — Report test coverage. Flag spec Test Points that have no corresponding test execution.
  6. NFR Verification — If requirements.md defines measurable NFRs (response time, throughput), run benchmarks and compare. Log results even if not blocking.
  7. Manual Test Checklist — For tasks marked AI-Auto: No in tasks.md, generate a manual test checklist with steps and expected results for the user to execute.

4b: SPEC-GAP Resolution

For each [SPEC-GAP] from Phase 3: Accept (update spec) / Reject (fix code) / Defer (add to backlog).

4c: Implementation Map Update

After all tests pass, update the ## Implementation Map section in each spec_xxx.md with the actual code file paths and function/class names. This enables reverse lookup from spec to code.

Output & Transitions

  • Passed — items satisfying the spec; Failed — items deviating (recommend: fix spec or fix code)
  • All passed → Phase 5 or next task. Failed → fix in Phase 2 or 3 → re-verify.

Exit condition: All items pass, or user acknowledges remaining gaps.

Workflow completion (initial build): If this is the initial build and no further changes are planned, update status.md: mark all phases complete, remove the Initial Build Progress table, and present a summary to the user (features built, test pass rate, deferred items count).

Phase 5: Evolve — New Features & Changes

Goal: Add new capabilities or modify existing ones while keeping all specs in sync.

Key rule: Always update the spec BEFORE updating the code. Every change goes through specs/changes/.

Step 1: Classify the Work

TypeCriteriaAction
New FeatureIndependent business value, new interfaces/modelsCreate specs/changes/FEAT-NNN-name/, run full Phase 1–4 within it
Change / EnhancementModifies existing feature behaviorCreate specs/changes/CHG-NNN-name/, write delta spec, run Phase 2d–4
Trivial FixSingle spec file, single section, no interface/model changeUpdate trunk spec directly with changelog entry, skip change dir

Step 2: Overlap Check

Before creating the change directory, run Overlap Check against all In-Progress changes listed in specs/index.md. If overlapping Target Specs are found, warn the user and agree on a resolution strategy before proceeding.

Step 3: Work Within the Change Directory

For Features: run the full workflow (Phase 1–4) inside specs/changes/FEAT-NNN/. For Changes: write a delta-format spec.md (ADDED / MODIFIED / REMOVED), then run Phase 2d–4. For Changes that add/remove screens, modify navigation structure, or alter primary interaction patterns (e.g., forms → tables): also run Phase 2b to update design-preview/.

Path rule: All Phase 1–4 outputs go into the change directory, not the trunk. For example, Phase 2a produces specs/changes/FEAT-NNN/design.md, not specs/design.md. The trunk is only updated during Step 4 (Merge to Trunk).

Nesting rule: Changes are always flat — never create a change inside another change directory. If FEAT-NNN's implementation reveals the need for an additional feature, create a sibling FEAT-NNN+1 at the top level (specs/changes/FEAT-NNN+1-name/) and add a dependency note in both tasks.md files.

Apply the same review gates as the main workflow, scoped to the change:

  • Interface/architecture change → Gate 2 | Business rule change → Gate 3 | Implementation-only → Gate 4

Step 4: Cross-Feature Impact Analysis

Before generating code, analyze impact across ALL trunk specs:

  • Direct: Specs explicitly modified by this change.
  • Indirect: Specs that depend on modified interfaces or data models.
  • Test: Test points in other specs that may need updating.

Present impact analysis to the user for confirmation.

Step 5: Merge to Trunk

After code is verified (Phase 4 passed):

  1. (Features only) Copy changes/FEAT-NNN/spec.md to specs/spec_<feature>.md.
  2. Generate delta.md — merge instructions listing every trunk file/section to update.
  3. Apply delta to trunk specs (specs/*.md): insert ADDED content, replace MODIFIED sections, remove REMOVED items.
  4. Add changelog entries to every modified trunk file.
  5. Update specs/index.md with the change reference.
  6. Commit all trunk updates atomically: spec: merge FEAT/CHG-NNN to trunk.
  7. Move change directory to specs/changes/archive/.

For full lifecycle details, merge rules, and scaling guidance, see Spec Lifecycle Management.

Cross-Phase Guidelines

  • No phase skipping: Do not generate code without a confirmed spec. Ask user for confirmation before advancing phases.
  • Spec-code traceability: Every code change traces to a spec item (TASK-ID + TP-ID); every spec item has corresponding code and tests.
  • Status tracking: Maintain specs/status.md (see template). Update at each phase end with current phase, gate results, and deferred item counts. On session start, read specs/status.md first to restore context.
  • Context management: Keep each spec file under ~300 lines. In Phase 3, feed only the relevant spec_xxx.md + related design.md sections — not all spec files at once.
  • Expert review: All review gates follow the Expert Review Protocol. Key points: auto-approve when no Critical/Major issues; max 3 rounds per gate; track prior issues across rounds; deferred items logged in spec files. Users can set review preferences in specs/status.md.
  • UI de-AI aesthetic: All user-facing UI must follow the UI Design Guidelines to avoid AI-template aesthetics. Gate 2 and Gate 4 reviewers check UI against the de-AI checklist.

Error Recovery

ScenarioRecovery Action
Phase 3: Task fails after 2 attemptsMark task Blocked in tasks.md, log root cause, continue with non-dependent tasks. After all other tasks complete, revisit blocked tasks — may require spec revision (back to Phase 2d).
Phase 4: Tests failCategorize: spec bug (fix spec then re-generate) vs. code bug (fix code, re-run tests). Do not loop more than 3 fix-verify cycles per task — escalate to user.
Phase 4: Test environment unavailableGenerate manual test checklist, document expected setup, and mark verification as Pending-Env in status.md. Proceed with remaining phases that don't require the environment.
SPEC-GAP: Cannot decide autonomouslyTag as [SPEC-GAP-BLOCKED], implement a safe no-op or error response as placeholder, and batch all blocked gaps for user decision before Phase 4 verification.
Phase 5: Delta merge conflictFollow conflict handling in spec-lifecycle.md. Never force-overwrite trunk — always present both versions to the user.
Cross-session context lossRead specs/status.md + last completed artifacts (see Session Start). If status.md is missing or stale, scan specs/ directory structure and tasks.md status to reconstruct state.
Phase 1: Requirements deadlockIf the user cannot decide after 3 clarification rounds, present a default recommendation with rationale. Ask for explicit approval or override. Do not loop indefinitely.
Phase 2: Design deadlockIf two design options are equally viable, document both in ADR format (pros/cons/consequences), provide a recommended option, and ask the user to decide. Limit to 2 discussion rounds, then adopt the recommendation if no response.

Templates

For spec file templates, see templates.md (core) and templates-lifecycle.md (lifecycle & review).

平台分布

OpenClaw

84.18%
按下载量换算2,283

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

可疑

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills