openspec-continue-change

name: openspec-continue-change description: Continue working on an OpenSpec change by creating the next artifact. Use when the user wants to progress their change, create the next artifact, or continue their workflow. license: MIT compatibility: Requires openspec CLI. metadata: author: openspec version: "1.0" generatedBy: "1.1.1"

Continue working on a change by creating the next artifact.

Input: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.

Steps

1. If no change name provided, prompt for selection

   Run openspec list --json to get available changes sorted by most recently modified. Then use the AskUserQuestion tool to let the user select which change to work on.

   Present the top 3-4 most recently modified changes as options, showing:

   • Change name
   • Schema (from schema field if present, otherwise "spec-driven")
   • Status (e.g., "0/5 tasks", "complete", "no tasks")
   • How recently it was modified (from lastModified field)

   Mark the most recently modified change as "(Recommended)" since it's likely what the user wants to continue.

   IMPORTANT: Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose.

2. Check current status

   openspec status --change "<name>" --json
   

   Parse the JSON to understand current state. The response includes:

   • schemaName: The workflow schema being used (e.g., "spec-driven")
   • artifacts: Array of artifacts with their status ("done", "ready", "blocked")
   • isComplete: Boolean indicating if all artifacts are complete

3. Act based on status:

   ---

   If all artifacts are complete (isComplete: true):

   • Congratulate the user
   • Show final status including the schema used
   • Suggest: "All artifacts created! You can now implement this change or archive it."
   • STOP

   ---

   If artifacts are ready to create (status shows artifacts with status: "ready"):

   • Pick the FIRST artifact with status: "ready" from the status output
   • Get its instructions:

     openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json
     

   • Parse the JSON. The key fields are:
     • context: Project background (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
     • rules: Artifact-specific rules (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
     • template: The structure to use for your output file
     • instruction: Schema-specific guidance
     • outputPath: Where to write the artifact
     • dependencies: Completed artifacts to read for context
   • Create the artifact file:
     • Read any completed dependency files for context
     • Use template as the structure - fill in its sections
     • Apply context and rules as constraints when writing - but do NOT copy them into the file
     • Write to the output path specified in instructions
   • Show what was created and what's now unlocked
   • STOP after creating ONE artifact

   ---

   If no artifacts are ready (all blocked):

   • This shouldn't happen with a valid schema
   • Show status and suggest checking for issues

4. After creating an artifact, show progress

   openspec status --change "<name>"
   

Output

After each invocation, show:

• Which artifact was created
• Schema workflow being used
• Current progress (N/M complete)
• What artifacts are now unlocked
• Prompt: "Want to continue? Just ask me to continue or tell me what to do next."

Artifact Creation Guidelines

The artifact types and their purpose depend on the schema. Use the instruction field from the instructions output to understand what to create.

Common artifact patterns:

spec-driven schema (proposal → specs → design → tasks):

• proposal.md: Ask user about the change if not clear. Fill in Why, What Changes, Capabilities, Impact.
  • The Capabilities section is critical - each capability listed will need a spec file.
• specs//spec.md: Create one spec per capability listed in the proposal's Capabilities section (use the capability name, not the change name).
• design.md: Document technical decisions, architecture, and implementation approach.
• tasks.md: Break down implementation into checkboxed tasks.

For other schemas, follow the instruction field from the CLI output.

CRITICAL: EXTREME DETAIL REQUIREMENT FOR ALL ARTIFACTS

⚠️ THESE RULES ARE MANDATORY FOR ALL ARTIFACTS ⚠️

All artifacts MUST be created with EXTREME EXPLICITNESS to prevent any AI implementation from "inventing" or "interpreting" requirements.

General Principles for ALL Artifacts

1. NEVER assume the implementer has context from exploration

   • Document EVERY decision made during exploration
   • Include WHY choices were made, not just WHAT was chosen
   • Document alternatives considered and why they were rejected

2. NEVER leave room for interpretation

   • Be prescriptive, not suggestive
   • Use MUST/SHALL, not "should" or "could"
   • Specify EXACT locations, names, patterns, colors, layouts

3. NEVER omit seemingly "obvious" details

   • Where buttons go (EXACTLY which page, EXACTLY where on that page)
   • Which existing components to reuse vs creating new ones
   • Navigation flows with every intermediate step
   • Data flow between components

Artifact-Specific Requirements

PROPOSAL.MD - Add at the very beginning:

MUST include a "CRITICAL IMPLEMENTATION CONSTRAINTS" section at the top with:

• List of non-negotiable design decisions (numbered)
• Specific locations/components mentioned (e.g., "Button MUST be in SettingsPage")
• Interaction patterns that MUST be followed (e.g., "MUST reuse SearchPage for X")
• Visual patterns that MUST be maintained (e.g., "MUST show [A] badge for foods")
• Explicit list of things NOT to do (❌ DO NOT create...)

MUST be explicit about:

• EXACT navigation paths for new features (PageA → PageB → PageC with parameters)
• Which existing pages/components are modified vs created new
• Where new navigation entry points are added (which menu, which section, EXACTLY where)

DESIGN.MD - Add at the very beginning:

MUST include "IMPLEMENTATION RULES - DO NOT DEVIATE" section with:

• ❌ Forbidden actions list (what NOT to do)
• ✅ Required actions list (what MUST be done)
• Architecture patterns that MUST be followed
• Component reuse rules

MUST include detailed sections:

1. DETAILED UI FLOWS AND COMPONENT REUSE (MANDATORY):

   • Break down EVERY user flow into numbered steps
   • Example: "Flow 1: Accessing Recipe Management"
     • Starting Point: [exact page]
     • Navigation Path: [PageA → PageB → PageC with transition types]
     • Step 1: User taps [exact button name] on [exact page]
     • Step 2: System executes [exact command name]
     • Step 3: Navigation calls [exact code: await Shell.Current.GoToAsync("...")]
     • etc. for EVERY interaction in that flow
   • Include 5-10 critical flows depending on feature complexity

2. DETAILED PAGE WIREFRAMES (MANDATORY for any UI changes):

   • ASCII art or structured text layout of EVERY page
   • Show EXACT component placement
   • Include Component Breakdown listing all UI elements with bindings

3. COMPONENT REUSE MATRIX (MANDATORY):

   • Table showing Component | Reused As-Is | Modified | New
   • EXPLICIT about what gets reused vs created

4. CODE EXAMPLES FOR CRITICAL COMPONENTS (MANDATORY):

   • Provide 3-6 complete, functional code examples
   • Cover the most complex/ambiguous components
   • Include both XAML and C# where applicable
   • Examples should be COPY-PASTE ready

5. CRITICAL UX BEHAVIORS (MANDATORY):

   • Document EXACT behavior for inference logic (e.g., time-based defaults)
   • Specify EXACT format for visual indicators (e.g., "⭐ [R] Recipe Name")
   • Include code snippets for behavior logic

6. IMPLEMENTATION VERIFICATION CHECKLIST (MANDATORY):

   • 50-100 checkbox items organized by category
   • Cover: Navigation, Display, Data Model, Services, Testing
   • Include "CRITICAL DEVIATIONS CHECK" section with deal-breaker items
   • Format: "- [ ] ✅ [positive check]" and "- [ ] ❌ [negative check - if true, WRONG]"

Database changes MUST include:

• EXACT migration SQL/code
• EXACT schema with column names, types, constraints
• EXACT indexes to create
• Migration verification steps

Service changes MUST include:

• EXACT interface method signatures
• EXACT implementation logic for complex methods
• Code examples showing how services are called

SPECS/*.MD

MUST be testable and unambiguous:

• Each requirement has multiple scenarios
• Each scenario uses WHEN/THEN format
• Be specific about EXACT behavior, not vague descriptions
• Include edge cases and error conditions

TASKS.MD

EACH task MUST:

• Be COMPLETELY self-contained (implementer doesn't need to read other docs to understand)
• Specify EXACT file paths and class names
• Include EXACT code patterns or references to design.md examples
• Specify EXACT validation criteria (how to know it's done correctly)

Example of GOOD task detail level: "Create EditRecipePage.xaml in MasQueDieta.App/Pages with Entry for recipe name, 'Add Ingredient' button, CollectionView for ingredients with item template showing food name + quantity Entry + unit Picker + remove button, Label for total points, Save and Cancel buttons"

Example of BAD task (too vague): "Create EditRecipePage"

Example of GOOD task with code specifics: "Implement MealType Picker in XAML with ItemsSource={'Desayuno','Comida','Cena','Snack'}, SelectedItem bound to MealType property, infer MealType in OnNavigatedTo: if current time 6:00-11:00 set 'Desayuno', 11:00-16:00 set 'Comida', 16:00-21:00 set 'Cena', else 'Snack' (SAME logic as EditEntryPage for food items)"

During Exploration Phase

BEFORE creating any artifacts, ensure you've gathered:

• All navigation flows discussed with user
• All UX patterns and their consistency with existing app
• All UI wireframes or layouts discussed
• All data model decisions (tables, columns, relationships)
• All service architecture decisions
• All component reuse decisions
• All alternatives considered and rejected
• All edge cases and error scenarios
• All testing strategies

If any of the above is unclear, ASK the user in explore mode before proceeding to artifact creation.

Document Interconnection

Artifacts MUST reference each other:

• design.md MUST reference specific requirements from specs by name
• tasks.md MUST reference design.md sections for implementation details
• specs MUST reference capabilities from proposal.md

Cross-reference format: "See design.md 'Decision 3: Snapshot Strategy' for implementation approach" or "Implements requirement 'Track recipe with decimal servings' from specs/recipe-consumption/spec.md"

Quality Check Before Submitting Artifact

Ask yourself:

1. Could another AI implement this WITHOUT guessing or inventing? (If no → add more detail)
2. Are EXACT locations specified for all UI elements? (If no → add wireframes/layouts)
3. Are all reused components explicitly called out? (If no → add component reuse matrix)
4. Are code examples provided for ambiguous parts? (If no → add examples)
5. Is there a verification checklist? (If no → add one)

If any answer is NO, the artifact is incomplete.

Guardrails

• Create ONE artifact per invocation
• Always read dependency artifacts before creating a new one
• Never skip artifacts or create out of order
• If context is unclear, ask the user before creating
• Verify the artifact file exists after writing before marking progress
• Use the schema's artifact sequence, don't assume specific artifact names
• IMPORTANT: context and rules are constraints for YOU, not content for the file
  • Do NOT copy <context>, <rules>, <project_context> blocks into the artifact
  • These guide what you write, but should never appear in the output