SpecKit - Workflow Diagram

[zolandor]

Hi, to help me understand the workflow and files generated I created the below diagram.
If you have any suggestions on how I can improve/correct it, let me know.
Also if you find it helpful I appreciate hearing that too.

[OptimusPi]

Thank you for creating this. It's really helpful!

[Andrew-MS]

This is great @zolandor ! Would love a way to get something similar to this as a release step for spec-kit. As contributions increase its really helpful to see the components involved, especially with recently merged /constituion and /implement

[zolandor]

Thanks for your feedback @OptimusPi and @Andrew-MS

I've added /constitution and /implement along with the new /clarify and /analyze.

[alexrodio]

Thank you.

[zolandor]

Made the following updates - v2.1:

1. Added in the Review & Verify > Refine loop for /constitution
2. Added meta data - Version and Last Updated
3. And a few UI tweaks

Again any feedback will be appreciated.

[amosgeva]

Fantastic job! :)
On 3A you can add like you did on 2A the usage of sources outside the SpecKit. Any technical documents that are related can feed SpecKit for better planning results.

The /analyze (with z) also can have loop so you take its feedback, give a prompt to fix something and re-run /analyze again to see that your fixes are correct.

[pawl1234]

Super useful. /analyze and /implement must move to the blue line for consitancy. Probably you moved it to red to to look better?

[Katekko]

@pawl1234 the /analyze I guess can be in the red, but the implements I think should be in the blue, like /tasks /plan etc.

edit: But idk, thinking more seems all the commands should be inside blue

[lnnujxxy]

good job

[fabian-von-tiedemann]

Fantastic job! Is this something you can do for BMAD Method as well? It would be very valuable!

[zolandor]

🔄 SpecKit Workflow – v3 Update

I’ve made a few adjustments based on earlier feedback and would love more input from the community.

What’s new in v3:
• ✅ Moved /clarify, /analyze, and /implement into the Human Actions (blue lane) for consistency.
• ✅ Added a re-analyze loop so issues can be addressed and re-checked until clean.
• ✅ Added an external content note for /plan to reflect how tech docs, APIs, and NFRs can enrich the plan stage.
• ✅ A few UI/visual tweaks for clarity.

Question for discussion:
I’m curious how others handle the final stage (6A Review & Verify and 6B Improvements) when a feature file is generated. Do you treat this like a Definition of Done check? Do you use automated validation (lint, CI, a11y, tests), peer review, or something else?

Feedback always appreciated, especially around how you’ve adapted these last steps in real-world use.

[ngaitanr87]

I have just started looking at spec kit and this is the bit I wanted to add.

Verifying code changes against the plan and implementation documentation is an essential step in my AI Augmented development, it is great to see this in Spec Kit.

I wonder if there is room for an additional view that overlays the Branching, Commits, PR, Merge phases?

Sam, maybe the latest video from Den can give some answers about the branching and the commits: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT4moDsMZ2g

[whinc]

In my opinion, if 6A is not passed the reason may be unexpected problem in spec.md or plan.md or tasks.md. You can update related stage file and then run command after the stage which not must re-begin from spec.md.

[danielmackay]

This image doesn't seem to be accessible. Can you upload again please?

[zolandor]

@danielmackay - here you go.

[danielmackay]

@danielmackay - here you go.

Thanks you so much! 🙏

[euroblaze]

I’m curious how others handle the final stage (6A Review & Verify and 6B Improvements) when a feature file is generated. Do you treat this like a Definition of Done check? Do you use automated validation (lint, CI, a11y, tests), peer review, or something else?

Actually in the last iterations of feature dev in our product (2 weeks or so), we have fallen out of habit of using speckit. Some of the issues we faced are mentioned in these threads:

#569
#390

Also, we had a concern that while the AI coders worked on specs/, they would meddle with the code directories. Remote possibility, but we couldn't risk.
So we did the spec-writing in one branch and the coding a different. This worked OK for a while, but we started to run into merge issues, which was slowing us down.

At some point we just started to prompt the AI directly on console for the next feature we wanted, fine tune it in the plan-mode, and when confident that the AI understood our requirement, we proceeded to code.
This helped us to stay in flow, instead of breaking out into the specs/ workflow, and coming back to code, and forth, and back, and forth..

Just sharing our journey at the moment, and happy to hear how everyone is going about.

Thanks!

[ranp]

Does this mean your specs stays behind and become obsolete? If that is the case, it's not a great indication for the ability to keep specs up-to-date source of truth, especially for projects with some millage or brownfield projects. Would love to get your view on this.

[euroblaze]

Yes @ranp, that is currently unfortunately the case.
So the whole idea of spec-driven SDD didn't stick beyond the initial phase of the project.

How has your experience been?

[pmm4654]

Is there a recommended flow for updating/removing tasks after you've started with the /implement step. My specific example is generally just a 1-time thing, but I created a new project with a frontend and backend and spent a lot of time with the constitution, specify, refining, etc, and though I had everything, but after the TDD step when the tests were written, I realized that the task for creating and running migrations wasn't generated.

My resolution was to just do it manually for unblock testing out spec-kit, but I'd love to know if there's a built-in, recommended flow for this (and maybe add it to the lovely workflow diagram 😁 )

[abevol]

Thank you for sharing; this is very helpful.
To benefit more people, I have created a Chinese translation version.
I have fully retained your contact information and added the translator's infos. I hope you don't mind.
Online Doc: https://www.yuque.com/zman/kb/hnfq5wqovosvhigs

[zolandor]

@abevol this is super cool, thank you.

[erapade]

Thanks, I will use it. Things in missing is vertical swim lanes for different phases and that /spec is optional. I also miss that the constitution is checked from the other phases