Skip to content

fix(schemas): stop design.md from restating the proposal #1401

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
clay-good merged 3 commits into from
Jul 22, 2026
+12 −5
Merged

fix(schemas): stop design.md from restating the proposal #1401

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
15bd1b4
fix(schemas): keep design.md from restating the proposal
clay-good Jul 20, 2026
ddc8de8
fix(schemas): qualify the specs reference for design's parallel ordering
clay-good Jul 20, 2026
7d396d8
chore(changeset): add the patch changeset for the design/proposal bou…
clay-good Jul 22, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
8 changes: 5 additions & 3 deletions schemas/spec-driven/schema.yaml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -113,8 +113,8 @@ artifacts:
- Ambiguity that benefits from technical decisions before coding

Sections:
- **Context**: Background, current state, constraints, stakeholders
- **Goals / Non-Goals**: What this design achieves and explicitly excludes
- **Context**: Only the current state and constraints needed to explain the approach. Reference the proposal for motivation instead of restating it (e.g., "See proposal.md - Why").
- **Goals / Non-Goals**: What this design achieves and explicitly excludes. Don't restate the proposal's scope - add only design-level boundaries.
- **Decisions**: Key technical choices with rationale (why X over Y?). Include alternatives considered for each decision.
- **Risks / Trade-offs**: Known limitations, things that could go wrong. Format: [Risk] → Mitigation
- **Migration Plan**: Steps to deploy, rollback strategy (if applicable)
Expand All @@ -126,7 +126,9 @@ artifacts:
the task breakdown, resolve it now - ask the user instead of guessing.

Focus on architecture and approach, not line-by-line implementation.
Reference the proposal for motivation and specs for requirements.
The proposal covers why and what; design covers how. Reference the
proposal for motivation and specs for requirements - if a section
would only restate them, point to them instead.
Comment thread
coderabbitai[bot] marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated

Good design docs explain the "why" behind technical decisions.
requires:
Expand Down
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions schemas/spec-driven/templates/design.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
## Context

<!-- Background and current state -->
<!-- Current state and constraints that shape the approach. See proposal.md for motivation - don't restate it -->

## Goals / Non-Goals

Expand All @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@

## Decisions

<!-- Key design decisions and rationale -->
<!-- Key design decisions with rationale and alternatives considered -->

## Risks / Trade-offs

Expand Down
Loading