Files
pm-claude-skills/skills/technical-spec-template/SKILL.md
T
mohitagw15856 f3b9d008fe feat: 100 skills milestone — 7 new skills + quality improvements across all 93
New skills added:
- teaching-lesson-plan: structured lesson plans for any subject/audience/setting
- seo-content-brief: complete SEO briefs with intent, competitor gaps, and outline
- media-pitch: story-first journalist pitches with angle development framework
- change-management-plan: stakeholder analysis, comms strategy, adoption metrics
- workshop-facilitation-guide: activity instructions, decision protocols, facilitator moves
- sales-forecasting-model: pipeline model, scenario analysis, assumption log
- tax-planning-checklist: year-end tax planning across income, pension, CGT, reliefs

Quality improvements across all 93 existing skills:
- Standardised description format: "Verb the thing. Use when X. Produces Y."
- Added Required Inputs section to all skills missing it (prompts for missing info)
- Added Quality Checks section to all skills missing it (specific, not generic)
- Fixed broken multiline YAML descriptions
- Removed non-standard frontmatter keys (tool_integration, metadata blocks)

README updated to v6.0.0 with 100-skill count, new skill tables, and article series

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-20 20:52:31 +01:00

5.2 KiB
Raw Blame History

name, description
name description
technical-spec-template Create structured technical specification documents that bridge product requirements and engineering implementation. Use when writing a tech spec, engineering spec, system design doc, or API specification. Produces a complete spec with problem statement, proposed solution, data model, API design, alternatives considered, security considerations, testing plan, and rollout strategy.

Technical Spec Template Skill

Write technical specifications that engineers actually read — clear problem framing, unambiguous requirements, explicit decisions, and documented trade-offs.

Required Inputs

Ask the user for these if not provided:

  • Feature or system description (what needs to be specced)
  • Related PRD or product brief (if available)
  • Engineering reviewers (whose sign-off is needed)
  • Known constraints (technical limitations, security requirements, performance targets)

When to Write a Tech Spec

Write a tech spec when:

  • The feature requires changes to 2+ systems
  • There are significant architectural decisions to make
  • More than one engineer will work on the implementation
  • The feature has security, privacy, or compliance implications
  • Estimated effort is >5 story points

Skip the spec for trivial bug fixes or 1-2 hour changes.


Technical Spec Output Format

Technical Specification — [Feature Name]

Author: [Name] Status: Draft | In Review | Approved | Implemented Created: [Date] | Last Updated: [Date] Reviewers: [Eng Lead, Architect, PM, Security if needed] Related PRD: [Link] | Jira Epic: [Link]


1. Problem Statement

[23 sentences. What problem are we solving and why now? No solution language here.]

2. Goals & Non-Goals

Goals (in scope):

  • [Specific, measurable outcome]
  • [Specific, measurable outcome]

Non-Goals (explicitly out of scope):

  • [What this spec does NOT cover]
  • [Common assumption to shut down early]

3. Background & Context

[Any prior art, related systems, or context engineers need to understand the decision space. Link to previous specs, ADRs, or research.]

4. Proposed Solution

High-Level Approach: [24 sentences describing the chosen solution. Why this approach vs alternatives?]

System Architecture Diagram: [Describe or embed: which services are involved, how data flows, what APIs are called]

Data Model Changes:

-- New tables or schema changes
[Include DDL or schema definition]

API Design:

[Endpoint] [Method]
Request: { [fields and types] }
Response: { [fields and types] }
Error codes: [list]

Key Implementation Details:

  • [Important technical constraint or approach]
  • [Edge case handling]
  • [Third-party dependency and version]

5. Alternative Approaches Considered

Option Pros Cons Why Rejected
[Alt 1] [Benefits] [Drawbacks] [Reason not chosen]
[Alt 2] [Benefits] [Drawbacks] [Reason not chosen]

6. Security & Privacy Considerations

  • Data stored: [What PII or sensitive data is involved]
  • Authentication: [How is access controlled]
  • Authorisation: [What permissions are required]
  • Encryption: [At rest / in transit requirements]
  • Compliance implications: [GDPR, SOC2, etc. if relevant]

7. Performance & Scalability

  • Expected load: [Requests/second, data volume]
  • Latency requirements: [P50 / P95 targets]
  • Caching strategy: [If applicable]
  • Database indexing: [New indexes required]
  • Known bottlenecks: [Where to watch]

8. Testing Plan

  • Unit tests: [Key scenarios to cover]
  • Integration tests: [System boundaries to test]
  • Load tests: [If performance-critical]
  • Edge cases: [Known tricky scenarios]
  • Rollback plan: [How to revert if something goes wrong]

9. Rollout Plan

  • Feature flag: [Yes / No — name of flag]
  • Rollout stages: [% of users at each stage]
  • Monitoring: [Metrics and alerts to set up]
  • Success criteria to progress rollout: [What needs to be true]
  • Rollback trigger: [What would cause immediate rollback]

10. Open Questions

Question Owner Due Date Resolution
[Unresolved question] [Name] [Date] [Pending]

11. Implementation Timeline (Rough)

Phase Work Estimated Effort
[Phase 1] [What gets built] [X days/points]
[Phase 2] [What gets built] [X days/points]
Total [X story points]

Guidelines

  • The spec is a decision record, not a task list — document why decisions were made
  • All open questions must have an owner and due date
  • Security and privacy sections are never optional for features that touch user data
  • Recommend async review: engineers read first, then a 30-minute sync to resolve questions
  • Keep the spec updated as implementation progresses — stale specs are worse than no specs

Quality Checks

  • Problem statement contains no solution language
  • Non-goals explicitly list at least 2 things that might be assumed in scope
  • At least 2 alternative approaches are documented with reasons for rejection
  • Security and privacy section is completed for any feature touching user data
  • All open questions have a named owner and due date (not "TBD")