/clarify — Adaptive Requirements Clarification
SkillProductivityAdaptive requirements clarification with auto-depth routing. Shallow (Q&A) for simple tasks, Deep (exploration + DRAFT + PLAN) for complex ones. Escalates automatically when ambiguity persists.
Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.
No other account needed.
Connect ahel once, and every AI you use reads what you have installed.
Then ask your AI: use the /clarify — Adaptive Requirements Clarification skill
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by mag123c/toktrack in .claude/skills/clarify/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
Chain (MUST)
| Previous | Current | Next |
|---|---|---|
| Session start | /clarify | Present PLAN inline → /implement |
Core Model
/clarify → Measure complexity → Clear enough?
├─ Yes → Present PLAN inline → /implement
└─ No → Deeper clarify (explore, analyze, DRAFT...)
→ Re-measure → Repeat
Exit condition: "Is this enough info to implement?" — Critical Unknown=0 + remaining items are made visible (Provenance).
Reference Files (load as needed — chaining)
| When | File |
|---|---|
| Tagging provenance on key decisions/assumptions / probe decisions | references/provenance.md |
| Pre-PLAN user confirmation | references/checkpoint.md |
| When document authority/reading order is unclear | references/doc-roles.md |
| Full Deep path procedure | deep/DEEP.md |
| PLAN/DRAFT structure (Lite/Full + Clarify Verdict) | templates/ |
Inline essentials only: probe-don't-tag (if cheaply verifiable, measure instead of tagging), PLAN=intent · WRAP/DECISIONS=fact, do not hide inferences. Details in the references above.
Step 0: Route — Complexity Assessment
Measure complexity internally upon receiving request (do not expose to user).
Complexity Signals
| Signal | LOW | HIGH |
|---|---|---|
| Request length | Short and specific | Long or ambiguous |
| Keywords | "add", "fix", "change" | "design", "migration", "from scratch" |
| Uncertainty | None | "not sure", "how should I" |
| Impact scope | Single file/module | Cross-cutting, multiple services |
| Risk | Low (UI, text) | High (DB, auth, breaking API) |
| Existing patterns | Clearly exist | None or unfamiliar stack |
- LOW → Shallow Path (completed within this file)
- HIGH → Deep Path (see
deep/DEEP.md) - Ambiguous → Start Shallow, monitor escalation conditions
Shallow Path (Low Complexity)
Remove ambiguity via quick Q&A, generate minimal specs, and present the PLAN inline.
Execution
- Record: Log original request + identify ambiguous parts
- Question:
AskUserQuestion(specific options, 2-3 rounds) - Escalation Check: Check escalation conditions (see below)
- Create DRAFT: Write
.dev/specs/{name}/DRAFT.md(minimal version — What, Why, Scope, Success Criteria) - Summary + Create PLAN: Before/After comparison → Write
.dev/specs/{name}/PLAN.md - Present PLAN: Present the PLAN inline in the conversation (do NOT enter plan mode), then immediately call
/implement. The plan file must be written to.dev/specs/{name}/PLAN.md
Rules
- No assumptions → Ask questions
- Clarify to TDD-ready level
- Target resolution within 3 rounds
Escalation → Deep Path
Switch to Deep Path if any of these are detected:
- Scope still undefined after 3 rounds of questions
- New uncertainties keep emerging from user answers
- Impact scope expanded beyond initial estimate (single → multi-module)
- Risk indicators found (DB schema, auth, breaking changes)
- User doesn't know the approach itself ("I don't know how to do this")
On switch: Inform "Scope is more complex than expected. Exploring the codebase first." then follow the process in deep/DEEP.md.
Deep Path
When complexity is HIGH or escalated from Shallow.
See deep/DEEP.md for the full process.
Summary:
- Classify intent (7 types) → Determine strategy
- 3 parallel exploration agents → Understand codebase
- Generate DRAFT → Interview → Continuously update
- On user explicit request → Analysis agents → Generate PLAN → Reviewer loop
- Present PLAN inline → immediately call
/implement(no plan mode entry)
DECISIONS.md Recording (MUST)
Record decisions in .dev/DECISIONS.md before finalizing plan:
| Situation | Required Record |
|---|---|
| New feature design | Decision background, alternatives, reasoning |
| Architecture choice | Considered options, selection rationale |
| Trade-offs | What was sacrificed and what was gained |
## YYYY-MM-DD: {feature-name}
- **Decision**: What was decided
- **Reason**: Why this choice was made
- **Alternatives**: Options considered but not chosen
- **Reference**: .dev/specs/{feature-name}/PLAN.md (if exists)
Plan File Requirements
Plan files must include:
- Specify implementation via
/implementskill - Verification method (test execution)
- Confirmation that
.dev/DECISIONS.mdrecording is complete
Plan File Location: The PLAN must be written to .dev/specs/{name}/PLAN.md.
Important: Plans that do not use /implement will not be approved.
NEXT STEP (Auto-execute)
After presenting the PLAN inline, call /implement immediately. Do NOT enter plan mode; do not ask "Should I implement?".
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 189
- Forks
- 20
- Last commit
- Sep 2026
- Hacker News mentions
- 5
Advanced
- Catalog kind
- skill
- Gateway key
clarify-mag123c- Source
- github.com/mag123c/toktrack