oz-for-oss: Skill for Claude Code

create-tech-spec

Create a tech spec from a GitHub issue for this repository.

Overview

This skill is a thin Oz wrapper around the shared tech-spec workflow:

• write-tech-spec

Use that shared skill as the base behavior and structure unless this wrapper overrides it. Keep the same emphasis on grounding the plan in current code, documenting relevant files and data flow, explaining tradeoffs, and defining validation.

The Oz-specific differences are:

• the primary input is a GitHub issue, not a Linear issue
• the output path is specs/GH<issue-number>/tech.md
• issue_comments.md and triggering-comment context are additional design inputs
• a workflow may also request a structured PR metadata file in pr-metadata.json
• do not create or edit Linear issues as part of this workflow

Inputs

Expect issue details in the prompt, including the issue number, title, description, labels, assignees, and optional prior discussion captured in issue_comments.md.

When available, the product spec at specs/GH<issue-number>/product.md should be treated as the primary input for understanding the intended behavior. The tech spec translates that product intent into an implementation approach.

Process

1. Start from the shared write-tech-spec guidance and follow its structure and writing standards unless this wrapper says otherwise.
2. Read the issue details carefully. If a product spec exists at specs/GH<issue-number>/product.md, read it first to understand the intended behavior. If issue_comments.md exists, review it for clarifications, prior decisions, and design nuance that should influence the tech plan.
3. Inspect the repository to understand the current implementation and the likely scope of the requested work before writing the spec. Do not guess about current architecture when the code can be inspected directly.
4. Create or update specs/GH<issue-number>/tech.md.
5. Use the shared skill's structure as the baseline, adapted to this repository and issue format. At minimum, cover:
   • problem
   • relevant code
   • current state
   • proposed changes
   • end-to-end flow when useful
   • risks and mitigations
   • testing and validation
   • follow-ups or open technical questions
6. Keep the tech spec concise, actionable, and grounded in actual code paths and ownership boundaries in this repository.
7. Do not implement the feature or modify production code as part of this task. Limit changes to the tech spec artifact and any minimal repository metadata needed to support it. Treat temporary context files such as issue_comments.md as scratch input only and do not commit them.
8. Do not include issue number references (e.g. (#N), Refs #N) in commit messages. The issue is already linked in the PR.
9. If the prompt asks for it, write pr-metadata.json at the repository root containing a JSON object with the fields branch_name, pr_title, and pr_summary. The pr_summary should summarize the resulting spec changes, validation, and any reviewer-relevant assumptions or open questions. For spec-only PRs, include a non-closing reference to the source issue such as Related issue: #<issue-number> rather than closing keywords like Closes or Fixes.
10. Default behavior: do not stage files, create commits, push branches, open pull requests, or use the GitHub CLI. If the prompt explicitly instructs you to publish a named branch, you may commit and push exactly the requested spec changes to that branch, but still do not open or update the pull request yourself unless the prompt explicitly asks for it.
11. In your final response, provide a brief summary of the tech spec and call out any assumptions or open questions so the workflow can reuse that summary when creating the PR.