Spec Batch

<background_information>

• Success Criteria:
  • All features have complete spec files (spec.json, requirements.md, design.md, tasks.md)
  • Dependency ordering respected (upstream specs complete before downstream)
  • Independent features processed in parallel via sub-agent dispatch
  • Cross-spec consistency verified (data models, interfaces, naming)
  • Mixed roadmap context understood without breaking ## Specs (dependency order) parsing
  • Controller context stays lightweight (sub-agents do the heavy work) </background_information>

<instructions>

Step 1: Read Roadmap and Validate

1. Read {{KIRO_DIR}}/steering/roadmap.md
2. Parse the ## Specs (dependency order) section to extract:
   • Feature names
   • One-line descriptions
   • Dependencies for each feature
   • Completion status ([x] = done, [ ] = pending)
3. If present, also read for context:
   • ## Existing Spec Updates
   • ## Direct Implementation Candidates Do not include these in dependency-wave execution; they are awareness-only inputs for sequencing and consistency review.
4. For each pending feature in ## Specs (dependency order), verify {{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/<feature>/brief.md exists
5. If any brief.md is missing, stop and report: "Missing brief.md for: [list]. Run /kiro-discovery to generate briefs first."

Step 2: Build Dependency Waves

Group pending features into waves based on dependencies:

• Wave 1: Features with no dependencies (or all dependencies already completed [x])
• Wave 2: Features whose dependencies are all in Wave 1 or already completed
• Wave N: Features whose dependencies are all in earlier waves or already completed

Display the execution plan:

Spec Batch Plan:
  Wave 1 (parallel): app-foundation
  Wave 2 (parallel): block-editor, page-management
  Wave 3 (parallel): sidebar-navigation, database-views
  Wave 4 (parallel): cli-integration
  Total: 6 specs across 4 waves

If roadmap contains ## Existing Spec Updates or ## Direct Implementation Candidates, mention them separately as non-batch items so the user can see the whole decomposition.

Step 3: Execute Waves

For each wave, dispatch all features in the wave as parallel sub-agents.

Before dispatch, resolve ../kiro-spec-init/SKILL.md, ../kiro-spec-requirements/SKILL.md, ../kiro-spec-design/SKILL.md, and ../kiro-spec-tasks/SKILL.md relative to this skill’s installed directory. Pass their absolute paths in the prompt below so the worker does not need the parent’s skill-location context.

For each feature in the wave, spawn a sub-agent with this task:

Create a complete specification for feature "{feature-name}".
Bind the feature argument in each phase to "{feature-name}" (including `$1` or `{feature}` references). This batch uses the existing fast-track mode: supply `-y` to design and tasks before entering their approval checks. Required phase review gates still apply.

1. Read the brief at {{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/{feature-name}/brief.md for feature context
2. Read the roadmap at {{KIRO_DIR}}/steering/roadmap.md for project context
3. Execute the full spec pipeline. For each phase, read the corresponding skill's SKILL.md for complete instructions (templates, rules, review gates):
   a. Initialize: If spec.json already exists, reuse that spec without reinitializing or renaming it. Otherwise read {spec-init-skill-path}; use the brief as the project description and initialize spec.json and requirements.md in the existing brief directory. Later phases may update their own artifacts.
   b. Generate requirements: Read {spec-requirements-skill-path} and execute for feature "{feature-name}"
   c. Generate design: Read {spec-design-skill-path} and execute with arguments "{feature-name} -y", including required design review
   d. Generate tasks: Read {spec-tasks-skill-path} and execute with arguments "{feature-name} -y", including required task review
4. Let each successful phase record its approvals through its documented fast-track flow. If a phase review fails or needs human input, stop this feature and report the blocker; do not force its approvals to true
5. Report completion with file list and task count

If native subagent tools are unavailable or disabled in the current Antigravity session, execute features in the wave sequentially in the main context and report that no parallel subagents were used.

After all sub-agents in the wave complete:

1. Verify each feature has: spec.json, requirements.md, design.md, tasks.md
2. If any feature failed, report the error and continue with features that succeeded
3. Display wave completion: "Wave N complete: [features]. Files verified."
4. Proceed to next wave

Step 4: Cross-Spec Review

After all waves complete, perform a cross-spec consistency review. This is the highest-value quality gate -- it catches issues that per-spec review gates cannot.

Read ALL generated specs and check for consistency across the entire project:

• {{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/*/design.md (primary: contains interfaces, data models, architecture)
• {{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/*/requirements.md (for scope and acceptance criteria)
• {{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/*/tasks.md (for boundary annotations only -- read Boundary: lines, skip task descriptions)
• {{KIRO_DIR}}/steering/roadmap.md

Reading priority: Focus on design.md files (they contain interfaces, data models, architecture). For requirements.md, focus on section headings and acceptance criteria. For tasks.md, focus on Boundary: annotations.

Check:

1. Data model consistency: Same entities defined consistently across specs (field names, types, relationships)
2. Interface alignment: Where spec A outputs what spec B consumes, do contracts match exactly?
3. No duplicate functionality: Any capability specified in more than one spec?
4. Dependency completeness: Every design.md references correct upstream specs? Implicit dependencies not in roadmap?
5. Naming conventions: Component names, file paths, API routes, table names consistent across specs?
6. Shared infrastructure: Shared concerns (auth, error handling, logging) handled in one spec and correctly referenced?
7. Task boundary alignment: Task Boundary: annotations partition codebase cleanly? No files claimed by multiple specs?
8. Roadmap boundary continuity: If roadmap includes Existing Spec Updates or Direct Implementation Candidates, do the generated new specs avoid absorbing that work by accident?
9. Architecture boundary integrity: Do the specs preserve clean responsibility seams, avoid shared ownership, keep dependency direction coherent, and include enough revalidation triggers to catch downstream impact?
10. Change-friendly decomposition: Has any spec absorbed multiple independent seams that should probably be split instead of kept together?

Output: CONSISTENT areas + ISSUES with (which specs, what's inconsistent, suggested fix).

After the review completes:

• Critical/important issues found: Fix each affected spec to apply the suggested fixes. If the issue is really a decomposition problem (for example boundary overlap or one spec carrying multiple independent seams), stop and return to roadmap/discovery instead of papering over it locally. Re-run cross-spec review after fixes (max 3 remediation rounds).
• Minor issues only: Report them for user awareness, proceed to Step 5.
• No issues: Proceed to Step 5.

Step 5: Finalize

1. Scan {{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/*/tasks.md to verify all specs exist
2. For each completed spec, read spec.json to confirm phase and approvals
3. Update roadmap.md: mark completed specs as [x]
4. If roadmap.md includes Existing Spec Updates or Direct Implementation Candidates, leave them untouched and mention them as remaining follow-up items unless already explicitly completed elsewhere

Display final summary:

Spec Batch Complete:
  ✓ app-foundation: X requirements, Y design components, Z tasks
  ✓ block-editor: ...
  ✓ page-management: ...
  ...
  Total: N specs created, M tasks generated
  Cross-spec review: PASSED / N issues found (M fixed)
  Existing spec updates pending: <count or none>
  Direct implementation candidates pending: <count or none>

Next: Review generated specs, then start implementation with /kiro-impl <feature>

</instructions>

Critical Constraints

• Controller context: When delegating, keep per-spec generation in workers. In inline fallback, read the phase instructions and spec inputs needed to perform their checks in the main context.
• Wave ordering is strict: Never start a wave until all features in previous waves are complete.
• Parallel within waves: All features in the same wave should be dispatched in parallel if multi-agent is available.
• No partial waves: If a feature in a wave fails, still complete the other features in that wave before reporting.
• Skip completed specs: Features with [x] in roadmap.md or existing tasks.md are skipped.
• ## Specs (dependency order) remains authoritative for batch execution: Other roadmap sections are context, not wave inputs.

Safety & Fallback

Sub-agent failure:

• Log the error, skip the failed feature
• Continue with remaining features in the wave
• Report failed features in the summary
• Suggest: "Run /kiro-spec-quick <feature> --auto manually for failed features."

Circular dependencies:

• If dependency graph has cycles, report the cycle and stop
• Suggest: "Fix dependency ordering in roadmap.md"

Roadmap not found:

• Stop and report: "No roadmap.md found. Run /kiro-discovery first."

All specs already complete:

• Report: "All specs in roadmap.md are already complete. Nothing to do."