Sdd Derive

SDD Derive

Orchestrate spec generation from existing code: a change directory (new or modified behavior) or baseline specs (retroactive documentation).

The orchestrator holds context across phases; subagents are dispatched for scoped work that benefits from context isolation.

> SPECS_ROOT is resolved by the sdd router before this skill runs. > Replace .specs/ with the project's actual specs root.

Invocation Notice

• Inform the user when this skill is being invoked by name: sdd-derive.

When to Use

• Deriving specs from existing code ("derive SDD specs for the auth flow")
• Documenting implemented behavior retroactively into baseline specs
• Producing a change directory for behavior already implemented
• User phrases: "derive specs", "generate specs from code", "retrofit specs", "document this code in SDD"

When Not to Use

• Translating specs from another tool or format — use sdd-translate
• No codebase and no existing behavior to anchor against — use sdd-propose
• Exploring a problem before deciding what to spec — use sdd-explore

Determine Output Type

Baseline specs (.specs/specs/) document implemented behavior. Write baseline specs only when existing code anchors them; otherwise generate a change directory.

digraph output_type {
    ".specs/specs/ exists?" [shape=diamond];
    "Codebase has relevant\nimplementation?\n(answered by Phase 2 discovery)" [shape=diamond];
    "New or existing behavior?" [shape=diamond];
    "Generate change directory\n(.specs/changes//)\nADDED-only delta specs" [shape=box];
    "Generate change directory\n(.specs/changes//)" [shape=box];
    "Generate baseline specs\n(.specs/specs/)" [shape=box];

    ".specs/specs/ exists?" -> "Codebase has relevant\nimplementation?\n(answered by Phase 2 discovery)" [label="no"];
    "Codebase has relevant\nimplementation?\n(answered by Phase 2 discovery)" -> "Generate baseline specs\n(.specs/specs/)" [label="yes — retroactive doc"];
    "Codebase has relevant\nimplementation?\n(answered by Phase 2 discovery)" -> "Generate change directory\n(.specs/changes//)\nADDED-only delta specs" [label="no — greenfield"];
    ".specs/specs/ exists?" -> "New or existing behavior?" [label="yes"];
    "New or existing behavior?" -> "Generate change directory\n(.specs/changes//)" [label="new or modified"];
    "New or existing behavior?" -> "Generate baseline specs\n(.specs/specs/)" [label="retroactive doc"];
}

Greenfield check: when .specs/specs/ does not exist, run discovery (Phase 2) before deciding. If discovery finds no relevant implementation, generate a change directory with ADDED-only delta specs — never assert behavior in .specs/specs/ that has not been built.

Workflow

Checklist

• [ ] Phase 1: Understand User Intent
• [ ] Phase 2: Discovery (explore + synthesize)
• [ ] Phase 3: Pre-flight Consent
• [ ] Phase 4: Per-Capability Derive (Observe + Lift)
• [ ] Phase 5: Validate
• [ ] Phase 6: Generate Output

Subagent Protocol

Persist before returning. Every subagent MUST write its output to disk unconditionally.

Resolve paths before dispatch. The orchestrator MUST expand $TMPDIR and other shell variables in the prompt; subagents do not consistently expand them, and literal $TMPDIR produces silent write failures.

Verify writes inline. Every subagent prompt MUST require ls -la after writing and report byte count. The orchestrator confirms the file exists before treating dispatch as successful.

Dispatch by reference, not inline duplication. Role discipline lives in references/.md. Resolve the skill's install path (e.g., ~/.claude/skills/sdd-derive/, .claude/skills/sdd-derive/, or a plugin directory) and substitute it into the template. Subagents inherit Read permissions from the parent.

Read `/references/.md` and follow it as your job description.
Below is your specific scope.

Capability: `` \
Files in scope: `` \
External-surface candidates: `` \
Output path: `` \

After writing, run `ls -la ` and report byte count.

Return decision-relevant data, not artifact content. Full artifacts live on disk; the orchestrator reads the file when it needs detail. The synthesizer is the exception — its capability menu is structured, bounded, and required for Phase 3.

| Subagent | Return inline | | ----------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Explorer | path written, byte count, technique, finding count, anomalies | | Synthesizer | full capability menu (Phase 3 needs it), path written, byte count | | Observer | path written, byte count, observation count, surface item count, anomalies | | Lifter | path written, byte count, requirement count, scenario count, uncertainty count, anomalies |

Track a manifest, not content. Decide what runs, track completed paths + counts + status, detect failures, trigger the next phase. Never re-ingest all artifacts at once.

digraph subagent_dispatch {
    need [label="Phase needs subagent", shape=ellipse];
    resolve [label="Resolve absolute paths\n($TMPDIR, skill_root)", shape=box];
    compose [label="Compose prompt:\nread references/.md\n+ scope + literal output path", shape=box];
    dispatch [label="Dispatch subagent", shape=box];

    work [label="Subagent reads role doc,\ndoes scoped work,\nwrites artifact to disk", shape=box];
    verify_cmd [label="ls -la ", shape=plaintext];
    report [label="Subagent reports path + bytes\n+ counts inline", shape=box];

    check [label="File exists and non-empty?", shape=diamond];
    manifest [label="Update manifest:\npath + counts + status=ok", shape=box];
    fail [label="Mark dispatch failed;\nre-dispatch or escalate", shape=octagon, style=filled, fillcolor=pink];
    next [label="Trigger next phase", shape=doublecircle];

    need -> resolve;
    resolve -> compose;
    compose -> dispatch;
    dispatch -> work;
    work -> verify_cmd;
    verify_cmd -> report;
    report -> check;
    check -> manifest [label="yes"];
    check -> fail [label="no"];
    manifest -> next;
}

Phase 1: Understand User Intent

Extract from the request:

• Which capability(s) does this touch?

(auth, payments, UI, etc.)

• What behavior is being specified?

(new, modified, retroactive)

• In scope vs. out of scope?

Ask one targeted question if truly ambiguous.

Don't speculate on large surface areas — confirm scope before generating anything.

Phase 2: Discovery

Two sequential calls:

1. discovery-explore — fan out parallel explorers, one per technique (call graph, naive AST, data-flow / channel, port/interface, schema artifacts, test-suite).

Each emits structured findings.

1. discovery-synthesize — single synthesizer consumes all explorer outputs and produces a capability menu (candidates with file scope and cost, overlaps, external-surface candidates, axis disagreements, gotchas).

See references/discovery.md for the explorer schema, synthesizer expectations, and loop semantics.

One-time tooling suggestions. Check .specs/.sdd/suggested-tools and present each suggestion below at most once (append the marker after presenting; create the file/dir if needed). If declined or already listed, skip and proceed with reduced fidelity.

> code-review-graph (first run only): > CLI that builds a structural AST graph of the codebase, improving call-graph discovery with communities, bridge nodes, and impact-radius signals. Install: uv tool install code-review-graph. Without it, the call-graph explorer falls back to naive AST traversal. Say "skip" to dismiss. > > schema-config (first run only when schemas detected): > Detected schema artifacts: `. Create .specs/.sdd/schema-config.yaml to configure schema extraction commands — enables snapshot generation, drift detection, and authored-vs-generated diffs. See references/sdd-schema.md` § 3 for the format. Without it, the schema-artifact explorer runs detection-only. Say "skip" to dismiss.

Phase 3: Pre-flight Consent

Users typically lack architectural ground-truth for overlap-ownership and external-surface classification. The orchestrator commits sensible defaults silently and only escalates on flagged conditions.

Defaults (applied silently unless escalation fires):

• Pre-select all candidates with confidence >= medium.
• Overlap primary-owner: capability with most edges to the bridge wins; ties broken alphabetically.
• External-surface owned vs 3rd-party: take each candidate's classification when explorer confidence ≥ medium.

Escalation conditions (orchestrator MUST prompt):

• Single-cluster degeneracy flagged by the synthesizer.
• Axis disagreements between explorers on capability boundaries.
• Universally low confidence ( 6 OR file count > 100.
• External-surface classification has medium-vs-high split.

When no escalation fires, present a brief summary (capabilities + counts + cost) and proceed. When any fires, present only the flagged item and ask one targeted question.

Loop semantics: if the user requests refinement, clarify the request unless unambiguous. Refinement options:

• Re-run synthesizer alone — cheap; preferred for "treat A and B as one"
• Re-run a specific explorer with adjusted scope — medium; for "ignore vendor/"
• Re-run all explorers — expensive; only for substantive scope changes

Change-directory output — value layer. If the output type is a change directory, draft candidate user stories from the change intent (Phase 1) and the capability menu — cross-cutting product value — and seed .specs/NORTH-STAR.md if absent. Present both for user ratification here, before dispatching lifters: Phase 4 lifters add each requirement's Serves: backlink from this ratified story set. Deriving cross-cutting stories from code is approximate — present them for ratification rather than asserting them. Baseline output skips this entirely (baseline is value-free).

Phase 4: Per-Capability Derive

For each selected capability, dispatch sequentially:

1. Observer — reads the capability's file scope.

Emits observations list (behavior-grain, with code references, evidence-class tags, confidence) and surface inventory. See references/observer.md.

1. Lifter — reads observations + surface inventory + capability metadata.

Has bounded source access for verification only. Emits lifted contracts and spec content (delta or baseline format), plus optional ## Uncertainties section. For change-directory (delta) output, also receives the ratified user stories and adds a Serves: backlink to each requirement; baseline output gets none. See references/lifter.md.

Capabilities run in parallel across each other; observer/lifter is sequential within a capability.

digraph phase_4_per_capability {
    selected [label="Capability selected\nfrom menu", shape=ellipse];
    obs_dispatch [label="Dispatch observer\n(file scope, surface candidates,\noutput path)", shape=box];
    obs_out [label="Observer writes observations.yaml\n(behaviors + tags + surface inventory)", shape=box];

    lift_dispatch [label="Dispatch lifter\n(observations path, metadata,\noutput type, as-of anchor)", shape=box];
    lift_work [label="Lifter consumes observations\n+ verifies source as needed", shape=box];
    lift_out [label="Lifter writes spec.md", shape=box];

    validate [label="uv run validate.py --single\n ", shape=plaintext];
    pass [label="PASS?", shape=diamond];
    fix [label="Lifter fixes failures in spec", shape=box];

    done [label="Capability complete:\nreturn path + counts", shape=doublecircle];

    selected -> obs_dispatch;
    obs_dispatch -> obs_out;
    obs_out -> lift_dispatch;
    lift_dispatch -> lift_work;
    lift_work -> lift_out;
    lift_out -> validate;
    validate -> pass;
    pass -> done [label="yes"];
    pass -> fix [label="no"];
    fix -> validate;
}

Phase 5: Validate

Validation runs in two places.

Per-capability — each lifter runs the validator before returning:

uv run --quiet /references/validate.py --single  

If FAIL, the lifter fixes and re-runs until PASS — catching format drift at write time avoids round-tripping a corrective dispatch. See references/lifter.md § Self-check.

Aggregate — the orchestrator runs across the whole run:

uv run --quiet /references/validate.py  

The aggregate report covers format, YAML parse, kind-aware surface coverage diff, and uncertainty review. If lifters did their self-check, format/YAML failures should be zero — failures here indicate a skipped self-check. Surface gaps and uncertainty totals are the substantive output.

If a spec fails format at this stage, dispatch a corrective lifter pass with the failures cited. If an observation YAML fails parse, dispatch a corrective observer pass. See references/validate.md for severity rules and report format.

Phase 6: Generate Output

Write the spec artifacts. Add a generation note at the top:

> Generated from code analysis on {date}, as-of commit {sha}

Clear ephemeral observations once specs are written. The commit SHA is the canonical anchor for re-derivation.

See references/derive-spec-additions.md for the ## Uncertainties section format and as-of anchor placement.

Output

Change directory (new/modified behavior):

• .specs/changes//proposal.md — includes ## User Stories (see references/sdd-change-formats.md § 1.1)
• .specs/changes//specs//spec.md (delta format) — requirements carry Serves: backlinks to the proposal stories
• .specs/changes//tasks.md (when applicable)

For change-directory output, seed .specs/NORTH-STAR.md if absent (draft a candidate from discovery + intent for the user to ratify) and author user stories from the change intent and capability menu, each laddering to the north star.

Baseline specs (retroactive):

• .specs/specs//spec.md per capability — value-free (no user stories or Serves: backlinks; the value layer is change-scoped)

sdd-derive produces a partial change directory — no design.md. Use sdd-propose for a full artifact set.

Report after generation: capabilities covered, requirement count, uncertainties count, surface coverage gaps.

Common Mistakes

• Skipping the lift step — writing requirements directly from observations.

The lifter translates "what code does" to "what property the code maintains" per references/evidence-class-taxonomy.md.

• Promoting an algorithm to a contract — when algorithmic is set, apply the strategy check and emit an Uncertainty.
• One massive spec for a large surface — discovery's capability menu is the decomposition; respect it.
• Lifter exploring instead of verifying — source access is reactive, not proactive.

See references/lifter.md § Verification Discipline.

• Wrong format for the output type — delta in .specs/specs/, or baseline in a change dir.
• Baseline carrying a value layer — baseline output is value-free; user stories and Serves: backlinks belong only to change-directory output (the value layer is change-scoped).
• Baseline specs in greenfield — .specs/specs/ asserts implemented behavior; if nothing is built, use a change directory with ADDED-only delta specs.
• Mid-run truncation — if a capability is too large to observe in one pass, split before dispatch (Phase 3).

Never silently truncate.

References

• references/discovery.md — explorer schema, synthesizer expectations, loop semantics
• references/evidence-class-taxonomy.md — tag definitions and composition rules
• references/observer.md — observation entry shape, surface inventory, observer prompt
• references/lifter.md — lift rules per tag, verification discipline, lifter prompt
• `refe

…

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

• Author: ahgraber
• Source: ahgraber/skills
• License: CC0-1.0

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.