Clay Good
8ba4ac1b16
* fix(apply): warn when a change is ready to implement with no specs Apply gates on the schema's `apply.requires` (tasks) alone, so a change whose tasks file was written ahead of its specs read as ready even though it had no delta specs at all — the state `openspec validate` rejects. Apply was the one surface that green-lit a change every other surface flags, which is how agents end up implementing before the specs exist. Report it as a warning, in the text output and in `--json`, naming both ways out: write the specs, or declare `skip_specs: true`. Blocking would be a policy change; naming the gap is not. Changes that have specs, declare `skip_specs`, or are still blocked on their own required artifacts are unaffected. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * refactor(apply): name the metadata file from its shared constant Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * test(apply): cover custom schemas in the no-specs warning A schema with no spec-producing artifact must stay quiet, and one whose spec artifact is not called `specs` must still warn - the rule keys off the output path, not the artifact id. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * test(apply): stop asserting an absolute temp path on Windows os.tmpdir() hands back the short form (C:\Users\RUNNER~1) while the CLI resolves the long one, so the assertion pinned a path that never matched on windows-pwsh. Assert the change-relative tail instead. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(apply): name the whole chain a blocked change still needs Apply blocks on the schema's `apply.requires` alone, so its message stopped at the first hop: a change holding only a proposal was told "Missing artifacts: tasks" while the specs `tasks` depends on were missing too. Taken literally that is an instruction to write the tracking file straight from the proposal and skip everything between — the failure reported in #834 and #869. Walk `requires` and report the whole set, in build order, as `missingPrerequisites` (text and `--json`). What apply blocks on is unchanged, and the wording leaves conditional artifacts to the schema rather than demanding them. The remedies these messages give are now CLI commands rather than the `openspec-continue-change` skill: `continue` is not in CORE_WORKFLOWS, so on the default profile the old advice named a skill that is never installed. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(apply): name the schema's own spec artifact in the warning alfred-openspec on #1783: collectApplyWarnings() discovers spec-producing artifacts by output path, so it correctly fires for a schema whose artifact id is `contracts`, but the remediation text then hardcoded `openspec instructions specs`. That names an artifact such a schema does not declare, so the advertised custom-schema support dead-ended at the exact step meant to resolve the warning. The command now derives its target from specArtifacts: the artifact's own id when the schema declares one spec-producing artifact, and `<artifact-id>` as a placeholder when it declares several, since there is no single right answer there and a guess would read as an instruction. The renamed-artifact test now asserts the command names `contracts` and rejects the hardcoded `specs` spelling, and a new test pins the two-artifact placeholder. Verified both fail against the hardcoded string. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * chore(changeset): bump apply warnings to minor This adds `missingPrerequisites` and `warnings` to the documented `instructions apply --json` contract in docs/agent-contract.md. New fields are backward compatible, but they are new capability an agent can consume, which is a minor under semver rather than a patch. Taking the conservative direction deliberately: shipping new API surface as a patch is the violation, since a consumer pinned to a patch range would receive it without opting in. A minor costs nothing if the fields turn out to be uninteresting. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
OpenSpec Documentation
Welcome. This is the home for everything OpenSpec.
OpenSpec helps you and your AI coding assistant agree on what to build before any code is written. You describe the change, the AI drafts a short spec and a task list, you both look at the same plan, and then the work happens. No more discovering halfway through that the AI built the wrong thing.
If you read nothing else, read these two pages:
- Getting Started: install, initialize, and ship your first change.
- How Commands Work: where you actually type
/opsx:propose(hint: in your AI chat, not the terminal). This trips up almost everyone once.
That second one matters more than it looks. OpenSpec has two halves: a command line tool you run in your terminal, and slash commands you give to your AI assistant. Knowing which is which saves you the most common moment of confusion.
The best habit to build first: when you're not sure what to build, start with
/opsx:explore. It's a no-stakes thinking partner that reads your code, weighs options, and sharpens a fuzzy idea into a concrete plan before any artifact or code exists. The Explore First guide makes the case.
Pick your path
I'm brand new. Start with Getting Started, then skim the Core Concepts at a Glance. When something feels mysterious, the FAQ and Glossary are nearby.
I have a problem but not a plan. This is the common case, and it has a dedicated answer: Explore First. Use /opsx:explore to think it through with the AI before committing to anything.
I have a big existing codebase. You don't document all of it. Using OpenSpec in an Existing Project shows how to start on real, brownfield code without boiling the ocean.
I just want to get it working. Install, run openspec init, then read How Commands Work so your first slash command lands in the right place. Or hand the setup to your assistant with the AI-assisted install prompt.
I learn by example. The Examples & Recipes page walks through real changes start to finish: a small feature, a bug fix, a refactor, an exploration.
The AI just drafted a plan — now what? Read it. Reviewing a Change shows the two-minute pass that catches a wrong turn while it's still cheap, and Writing Good Specs covers what a plan worth approving is made of.
I work on a team. OpenSpec on a Team shows how a change maps onto a branch and a pull request, and how teammates review a plan before the code.
I'm coming from the old workflow. The Migration Guide explains what changed and why, and promises your existing work is safe.
I want to bend it to my team's process. Customization covers project config, custom schemas, and shared context.
Something's broken. Troubleshooting collects the failures people actually hit, with fixes.
The whole map
Start here
| Doc | What it gives you |
|---|---|
| Getting Started | Install, initialize, and run your first change end to end |
| Explore First | Use /opsx:explore to think through an idea before you commit |
| How Commands Work | Where slash commands run, what "interactive mode" means, terminal vs chat |
| Core Concepts at a Glance | The whole mental model on one page: specs, changes, deltas, archive |
| Installation | npm, pnpm, yarn, bun, Nix, a prompt that hands setup to your AI assistant, and how to verify it worked |
Use it day to day
| Doc | What it gives you |
|---|---|
| Workflows | Common patterns and when to reach for each command |
| Examples & Recipes | Full walkthroughs of real changes, copy-pasteable |
| Writing Good Specs | What a strong requirement and scenario look like, and how to right-size a change |
| Reviewing a Change | The two-minute pass on a drafted plan before any code is written |
| OpenSpec on a Team | How changes fit branches, pull requests, and review |
| Using OpenSpec in an Existing Project | Adopting OpenSpec on a large brownfield codebase |
| Editing & Iterating on a Change | Update artifacts, go back, reconcile manual edits |
| Commands | Reference for every /opsx:* slash command |
| CLI | Reference for every openspec terminal command |
Understand it deeply
| Doc | What it gives you |
|---|---|
| Concepts | The long-form explanation of specs, changes, artifacts, schemas, and archive |
| OPSX Workflow | Why the workflow is fluid instead of phase-locked, plus an architecture deep dive |
| Glossary | Every term defined in one place |
Make it yours
| Doc | What it gives you |
|---|---|
| Customization | Project config, custom schemas, shared context |
| Multi-Language | Generate artifacts in languages other than English |
| Supported Tools | The 30+ AI tools OpenSpec integrates with, and where files land |
| Community Showcase | Projects and resources built with and for OpenSpec |
When you need help
| Doc | What it gives you |
|---|---|
| FAQ | Quick answers to the questions people ask most |
| Troubleshooting | Concrete fixes for concrete failures |
| Migration Guide | Moving from the legacy workflow to OPSX |
Coordinate across repos (beta)
| Doc | What it gives you |
|---|---|
| Stores: User Guide | Plan in its own repo when your work spans repos or teams |
| Agent Contract | The machine-readable CLI surfaces agents drive |
The thirty-second version
1. Install npm install -g @fission-ai/openspec@latest
2. Initialize cd your-project && openspec init
3. Explore (in your AI chat) /opsx:explore ← optional, but a great habit
4. Propose (in your AI chat) /opsx:propose add-dark-mode
5. Build (in your AI chat) /opsx:apply
6. Archive (in your AI chat) /opsx:archive
Steps 1 and 2 happen in your terminal. The rest happen in your AI assistant's chat. That split is the one thing worth memorizing, and How Commands Work explains exactly why. Step 3 is optional, but starting with /opsx:explore when you're unsure is the habit most worth forming.
Where else to get help
- Discord: discord.gg/YctCnvvshC for questions, ideas, and help.
- GitHub Issues: github.com/Fission-AI/OpenSpec/issues for bugs and feature requests.
openspec feedback "your message"sends feedback straight from your terminal (it opens a GitHub issue).
Found something in these docs that's wrong, stale, or confusing? That's a bug. Open an issue or a PR. Documentation improvements are some of the most valuable contributions you can make.