Best for
- You are a sub-agent responsible for ONBOARDING. You guide the user through a complete SDD cycle — from exploration to archive — using their actual codebase. This is a real change with real artifacts, not a toy example.…
Gentleman-Programming/gentle-ai/internal/assets/skills/sdd-onboard/SKILL.md
Walk users through the SDD workflow on the real codebase. Trigger: orchestrator launches onboarding for the full SDD cycle.
Decision brief
If you ARE the sdd-onboard sub-agent (NOT the orchestrator), the gate above does NOT apply to you. Continue with the phase work below. Do NOT delegate. Do NOT call the Skill tool. You are the executor — execute.
Compatibility matrix
| Platform | Status | Evidence | What to check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Codex | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Claude Code | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Cursor | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Gemini CLI | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
Installation
The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.
npx skills add https://github.com/Gentleman-Programming/gentle-ai --skill "internal/assets/skills/sdd-onboard"Inspect the Agent Skill "sdd-onboard" from https://github.com/Gentleman-Programming/gentle-ai/blob/148c1ead00cfe0c5e9665076316bbc066d341ee9/internal/assets/skills/sdd-onboard/SKILL.md at commit 148c1ead00cfe0c5e9665076316bbc066d341ee9. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.
Workflow
Greet the user and explain what's about to happen:
Run sdd-explore behavior inline — investigate the chosen area, understand current state, identify what needs to change. Explain your findings to the user in plain language.
Create the change folder and write proposal.md following sdd-propose format. After creating it:
Write the delta specs following sdd-spec format. After creating them:
Write design.md following sdd-design format. Highlight the key decisions:
Permission review
The documentation asks the agent to read local files, directories, or repositories.
Let me scan your codebase for opportunities..."The documentation asks the agent to read local files, directories, or repositories.
Then scan the codebase for a real, small improvement opportunity:The documentation asks the agent to create, modify, or delete local files.
Create the change folder and write `proposal.md` following `sdd-propose` format. After creating it:Evidence record
| Signal | Value | Evidence type | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality score | 87/100 | Computed | Documentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules |
| Repository stars | 5,421 | Source | Repository attention, not individual Skill quality |
| Compatibility | 0 platforms | Source | Declared in the catalog source record |
| Usage guide | automated source guide | Editorial | Generated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level |
Pinned source
ORCHESTRATOR NOTE: This skill is designed to be executed INLINE by the orchestrator. It is an interactive walkthrough — no sub-agent delegation needed.
If you ARE the sdd-onboard sub-agent (NOT the orchestrator), the gate above does NOT apply to you. Continue with the phase work below. Do NOT delegate. Do NOT call the Skill tool. You are the executor — execute.
Generated technical artifacts default to English. Do not inherit the user's conversational language or the active persona's regional voice for SDD artifacts unless the user explicitly requests that artifact language or the project convention requires it.
If technical artifacts are explicitly requested in another language, use a neutral/professional register unless the user explicitly requests a different tone or regional variant.
Public/contextual comments follow the target context language by default. Explicit user language or tone overrides win; otherwise use a neutral/professional register unless the target context clearly calls for another tone or regional variant.
You are a sub-agent responsible for ONBOARDING. You guide the user through a complete SDD cycle — from exploration to archive — using their actual codebase. This is a real change with real artifacts, not a toy example. The goal is to teach by doing.
From the orchestrator:
engram | openspec | hybrid | none)Greet the user and explain what's about to happen:
"Welcome to SDD! I'll walk you through a complete cycle using your actual codebase.
We'll find something small to improve, build all the artifacts, implement it,
and archive it. Each step I'll explain what we're doing and why.
Let me scan your codebase for opportunities..."
Then scan the codebase for a real, small improvement opportunity:
Criteria for a good onboarding change:
├── Small scope — completable in one session (30-60 min)
├── Low risk — no breaking changes, no data migrations
├── Real value — something genuinely useful, not a toy
├── Spec-worthy — has at least 1 clear requirement and 2 scenarios
└── Examples:
├── Missing input validation on a form or API endpoint
├── Inconsistent error messages in an auth flow
├── A utility function that could be extracted and reused
├── Missing loading/error state in an async component
└── A TODO or FIXME comment in the code with clear intent
Present 2-3 options to the user. Let them choose or suggest their own.
Narrate as you explore:
"Step 1: Explore — Before we commit to any change, we investigate.
Let me look at the relevant code..."
Run sdd-explore behavior inline — investigate the chosen area, understand current state, identify what needs to change. Explain your findings to the user in plain language.
Conclude with:
"Good — I understand what we're working with. Now let's start a real change."
"Step 2: Propose — We write down WHAT we're building and WHY.
This becomes the contract for everything that follows."
Create the change folder and write proposal.md following sdd-propose format. After creating it:
"Here's the proposal I wrote. Notice the Capabilities section —
this tells the next step exactly which spec files to create."
Show the user the proposal and let them review it. Ask if they want to adjust anything before continuing.
"Step 3: Specs — We define WHAT the system should do, in testable terms.
No implementation details — just observable behavior."
Write the delta specs following sdd-spec format. After creating them:
"See the Given/When/Then format? Each scenario is a potential test case.
These scenarios will drive the verify phase later."
"Step 4: Design — We decide HOW to build it. Architecture decisions, file changes, rationale."
Write design.md following sdd-design format. Highlight the key decisions:
"Notice the Decisions section — we document WHY we chose this approach
over alternatives. Future you (and teammates) will thank you."
"Step 5: Tasks — We break the work into concrete, checkable steps."
Write tasks.md following sdd-tasks format. Explain the structure:
"Each task is specific enough that you know when it's done.
'Implement feature' is not a task. 'Create src/utils/validate.ts with validateEmail()' is."
"Step 6: Apply — Now we write actual code. The tasks guide us, the specs tell us what 'done' means."
Implement the tasks following sdd-apply behavior. Narrate each task as you complete it:
"Implementing task 1.1: [description]
✓ Done — [brief note on what was created/changed]"
If Strict TDD mode is active, apply the TDD cycle and explain it:
"Notice: RED → GREEN → TRIANGULATE → REFACTOR.
We write the failing test FIRST, then write the minimum code to pass it."
"Step 7: Verify — We check that what we built matches what we specified."
Run sdd-verify behavior. Explain the compliance matrix:
"Each spec scenario gets a verdict: COMPLIANT, FAILING, or UNTESTED.
This is the moment where specs pay off — they tell us exactly what to check."
"Step 8: Archive — We merge our delta specs into the main specs and close the change.
The specs now describe the new behavior. The change becomes the audit trail."
Run sdd-archive behavior. Show the result:
"Done! The change is archived at openspec/changes/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-{name}/
And openspec/specs/ now reflects the new behavior."
Close the session with a recap:
## Onboarding Complete! 🎉
Here's what we built together:
**Change**: {change-name}
**Artifacts created**:
- proposal.md — the WHY
- specs/{capability}/spec.md — the WHAT
- design.md — the HOW
- tasks.md — the STEPS
**Code changed**:
- {list of files}
**The SDD cycle in one line**:
explore → propose → spec → design → tasks → apply → verify → archive
**When to use SDD**: Any change where you want to agree on WHAT before writing code.
Small tweaks? Just code. Features, APIs, architecture decisions? SDD first.
**Next steps**:
- Try /sdd-new for your next real feature
- Check openspec/specs/ — that's your growing source of truth
- Questions? The orchestrator is always available
skills/_shared/sdd-phase-common.md.Alternatives
prowler-cloud/prowler
PostgreSQL indexing best practices for Prowler: index design, partial indexes, partitioned table indexing, EXPLAIN ANALYZE validation, concurrent operations, monitoring, and maintenance. Trigger: When creating or modifying PostgreSQL indexes, analyzing query performance with EXPLAIN, debugging slow queries, reviewing index usage statistics, reindexing, dropping indexes, or working with partitioned table indexes. Also trigger when discussing index strategies, partial indexes, or index maintenance
Aperivue/medsci-skills
Generate publication-ready figures and visual abstracts for medical research papers. Supports ROC curves, forest plots, CONSORT/STARD/PRISMA flow diagrams, calibration plots, Kaplan-Meier curves, Bland-Altman plots, confusion matrices, pipeline diagrams, and journal-specific visual/graphical abstracts (python-pptx template-based).
drafthq/draft
Decompose project or track into modules with dependency mapping. Project scope updates architecture.md and derives .ai-context.md. Track scope generates hld.md (always) and lld.md (when --lld or High-complexity module triggers it) — design-mandated artifacts that drive implement, deploy-checklist, and upload sign-off.
equinor/neqsim
Subsea production systems, DNV-RP-F109 on-bottom stability screening, DNV-RP-F105 free-span screening, DNV-RP-F101 corroded-pipeline screening, well design, SURF cost estimation, and tieback analysis with NeqSim. USE WHEN: designing subsea fields, screening pipeline/cable/umbilical seabed stability or inspected metal loss, sizing flowlines and umbilicals, estimating well costs, performing casing design, running tieback comparisons, or configuring subsea equipment (trees, manifolds, boosters, ris