規格驅動開發實戰：AI 時代的軟體開發新典範

Spec Kit Constitution Generator

這是基於 Claude.ai 網站的 Projects 功能所設計的「專案憲章」產生器。

Name

Spec Kit Constitution Generator

Description

Create or update the project constitution from interactive or provided principle inputs, ensuring all dependent templates stay in sync.

Instructions

If I haven't provided one, first ask the user for the `[PROJECT_NAME]`. Aside from `[PROJECT_NAME]`, do not request further details. Assume `[RATIFICATION_DATE]` is TODAY.

# Slash command: `/speckit.constitution`
<speckit.constitution>
---
description: Create or update the project constitution from interactive or provided principle inputs, ensuring all dependent templates stay in sync.
---

## User Input

```text
$ARGUMENTS
```

You **MUST** consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).

## Outline

You are creating the project constitution file: `.specify/memory/constitution.md`. This file is a TEMPLATE containing placeholder tokens in square brackets (e.g. `[PROJECT_NAME]`, `[PRINCIPLE_1_NAME]`). Your job is to (a) collect/derive concrete values, (b) fill the template precisely, and (c) propagate any amendments across dependent artifacts.

Follow this execution flow:

1. Load the existing constitution file at `.specify/memory/constitution.md`.
   - Identify every placeholder token of the form `[ALL_CAPS_IDENTIFIER]`.
   **IMPORTANT**: The user might require less or more principles than the ones used in the template. If a number is specified, respect that - follow the general template. You will update the doc accordingly.

2. Collect/derive values for placeholders:
   - If user input (conversation) supplies a value, use it.
   - Otherwise infer from existing repo context (README, docs, prior constitution versions if embedded).
   - For governance dates: `RATIFICATION_DATE` is the original adoption date (if unknown ask or mark TODO), `LAST_AMENDED_DATE` is today if changes are made, otherwise keep previous.
   - `CONSTITUTION_VERSION` must increment according to semantic versioning rules:
     * MAJOR: Backward incompatible governance/principle removals or redefinitions.
     * MINOR: New principle/section added or materially expanded guidance.
     * PATCH: Clarifications, wording, typo fixes, non-semantic refinements.
   - If version bump type ambiguous, propose reasoning before finalizing.

3. Draft the updated constitution content:
   - Replace every placeholder with concrete text (no bracketed tokens left except intentionally retained template slots that the project has chosen not to define yet—explicitly justify any left).
   - Preserve heading hierarchy and comments can be removed once replaced unless they still add clarifying guidance.
   - Ensure each Principle section: succinct name line, paragraph (or bullet list) capturing non‑negotiable rules, explicit rationale if not obvious.
   - Ensure Governance section lists amendment procedure, versioning policy, and compliance review expectations.

1. Consistency propagation checklist (convert prior checklist into active validations):
   - Read `.specify/templates/plan-template.md` and ensure any "Constitution Check" or rules align with updated principles.
   - Read `.specify/templates/spec-template.md` for scope/requirements alignment—update if constitution adds/removes mandatory sections or constraints.
   - Read `.specify/templates/tasks-template.md` and ensure task categorization reflects new or removed principle-driven task types (e.g., observability, versioning, testing discipline).
   - Read any runtime guidance docs (e.g., `README.md`, `docs/quickstart.md`, or agent-specific guidance files if present). Update references to principles changed.

2. Produce a Sync Impact Report (prepend as an HTML comment at top of the constitution file after update):
   - Version change: old → new
   - List of modified principles (old title → new title if renamed)
   - Added sections
   - Removed sections
   - Templates requiring updates (✅ updated / ⚠ pending) with file paths
   - Follow-up TODOs if any placeholders intentionally deferred.

3. Validation before final output:
   - No remaining unexplained bracket tokens.
   - Version line matches report.
   - Dates ISO format YYYY-MM-DD.
   - Principles are declarative, testable, and free of vague language ("should" → replace with MUST/SHOULD rationale where appropriate).

4. Write the completed constitution back to `.specify/memory/constitution.md` (overwrite).

5. Output a final summary to the user with:
   - New version and bump rationale.
   - Any files flagged for manual follow-up.
   - Suggested commit message (e.g., `docs: amend constitution to vX.Y.Z (principle additions + governance update)`).

Formatting & Style Requirements:
- Use Markdown headings exactly as in the template (do not demote/promote levels).
- Wrap long rationale lines to keep readability (<100 chars ideally) but do not hard enforce with awkward breaks.
- Keep a single blank line between sections.
- Avoid trailing whitespace.

If the user supplies partial updates (e.g., only one principle revision), still perform validation and version decision steps.

If critical info missing (e.g., ratification date truly unknown), insert `TODO(<FIELD_NAME>): explanation` and include in the Sync Impact Report under deferred items.

Do not create a new template; always operate on the existing `.specify/memory/constitution.md` file.
</speckit.constitution>

# File path: `.specify/templates/plan-template.md`
<plan-template>
# Implementation Plan: [FEATURE]

**Branch**: `[###-feature-name]` | **Date**: [DATE] | **Spec**: [link]
**Input**: Feature specification from `/specs/[###-feature-name]/spec.md`

**Note**: This template is filled in by the `/speckit.plan` command. See `.specify/templates/commands/plan.md` for the execution workflow.

## Summary

[Extract from feature spec: primary requirement + technical approach from research]

## Technical Context

<!--
  ACTION REQUIRED: Replace the content in this section with the technical details
  for the project. The structure here is presented in advisory capacity to guide
  the iteration process.
-->

**Language/Version**: [e.g., Python 3.11, Swift 5.9, Rust 1.75 or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]
**Primary Dependencies**: [e.g., FastAPI, UIKit, LLVM or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]
**Storage**: [if applicable, e.g., PostgreSQL, CoreData, files or N/A]
**Testing**: [e.g., pytest, XCTest, cargo test or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]
**Target Platform**: [e.g., Linux server, iOS 15+, WASM or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]
**Project Type**: [single/web/mobile - determines source structure]
**Performance Goals**: [domain-specific, e.g., 1000 req/s, 10k lines/sec, 60 fps or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]
**Constraints**: [domain-specific, e.g., <200ms p95, <100MB memory, offline-capable or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]
**Scale/Scope**: [domain-specific, e.g., 10k users, 1M LOC, 50 screens or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]

## Constitution Check

*GATE: Must pass before Phase 0 research. Re-check after Phase 1 design.*

[Gates determined based on constitution file]

## Project Structure

### Documentation (this feature)

```
specs/[###-feature]/
├── plan.md              # This file (/speckit.plan command output)
├── research.md          # Phase 0 output (/speckit.plan command)
├── data-model.md        # Phase 1 output (/speckit.plan command)
├── quickstart.md        # Phase 1 output (/speckit.plan command)
├── contracts/           # Phase 1 output (/speckit.plan command)
└── tasks.md             # Phase 2 output (/speckit.tasks command - NOT created by /speckit.plan)
```

### Source Code (repository root)
<!--
  ACTION REQUIRED: Replace the placeholder tree below with the concrete layout
  for this feature. Delete unused options and expand the chosen structure with
  real paths (e.g., apps/admin, packages/something). The delivered plan must
  not include Option labels.
-->

```
# [REMOVE IF UNUSED] Option 1: Single project (DEFAULT)
src/
├── models/
├── services/
├── cli/
└── lib/

tests/
├── contract/
├── integration/
└── unit/

# [REMOVE IF UNUSED] Option 2: Web application (when "frontend" + "backend" detected)
backend/
├── src/
│   ├── models/
│   ├── services/
│   └── api/
└── tests/

frontend/
├── src/
│   ├── components/
│   ├── pages/
│   └── services/
└── tests/

# [REMOVE IF UNUSED] Option 3: Mobile + API (when "iOS/Android" detected)
api/
└── [same as backend above]

ios/ or android/
└── [platform-specific structure: feature modules, UI flows, platform tests]
```

**Structure Decision**: [Document the selected structure and reference the real
directories captured above]

## Complexity Tracking

*Fill ONLY if Constitution Check has violations that must be justified*

| Violation | Why Needed | Simpler Alternative Rejected Because |
|-----------|------------|-------------------------------------|
| [e.g., 4th project] | [current need] | [why 3 projects insufficient] |
| [e.g., Repository pattern] | [specific problem] | [why direct DB access insufficient] |
</plan-template>

# File path: `.specify/templates/spec-template.md`
<spec-template>
# Feature Specification: [FEATURE NAME]

**Feature Branch**: `[###-feature-name]`
**Created**: [DATE]
**Status**: Draft
**Input**: User description: "$ARGUMENTS"

## User Scenarios & Testing *(mandatory)*

<!--
  IMPORTANT: User stories should be PRIORITIZED as user journeys ordered by importance.
  Each user story/journey must be INDEPENDENTLY TESTABLE - meaning if you implement just ONE of them,
  you should still have a viable MVP (Minimum Viable Product) that delivers value.

  Assign priorities (P1, P2, P3, etc.) to each story, where P1 is the most critical.
  Think of each story as a standalone slice of functionality that can be:
  - Developed independently
  - Tested independently
  - Deployed independently
  - Demonstrated to users independently
-->

### User Story 1 - [Brief Title] (Priority: P1)

[Describe this user journey in plain language]

**Why this priority**: [Explain the value and why it has this priority level]

**Independent Test**: [Describe how this can be tested independently - e.g., "Can be fully tested by [specific action] and delivers [specific value]"]

**Acceptance Scenarios**:

1. **Given** [initial state], **When** [action], **Then** [expected outcome]
2. **Given** [initial state], **When** [action], **Then** [expected outcome]

---

### User Story 2 - [Brief Title] (Priority: P2)

[Describe this user journey in plain language]

**Why this priority**: [Explain the value and why it has this priority level]

**Independent Test**: [Describe how this can be tested independently]

**Acceptance Scenarios**:

1. **Given** [initial state], **When** [action], **Then** [expected outcome]

---

### User Story 3 - [Brief Title] (Priority: P3)

[Describe this user journey in plain language]

**Why this priority**: [Explain the value and why it has this priority level]

**Independent Test**: [Describe how this can be tested independently]

**Acceptance Scenarios**:

1. **Given** [initial state], **When** [action], **Then** [expected outcome]

---

[Add more user stories as needed, each with an assigned priority]

### Edge Cases

<!--
  ACTION REQUIRED: The content in this section represents placeholders.
  Fill them out with the right edge cases.
-->

- What happens when [boundary condition]?
- How does system handle [error scenario]?

## Requirements *(mandatory)*

<!--
  ACTION REQUIRED: The content in this section represents placeholders.
  Fill them out with the right functional requirements.
-->

### Functional Requirements

- **FR-001**: System MUST [specific capability, e.g., "allow users to create accounts"]
- **FR-002**: System MUST [specific capability, e.g., "validate email addresses"]
- **FR-003**: Users MUST be able to [key interaction, e.g., "reset their password"]
- **FR-004**: System MUST [data requirement, e.g., "persist user preferences"]
- **FR-005**: System MUST [behavior, e.g., "log all security events"]

*Example of marking unclear requirements:*

- **FR-006**: System MUST authenticate users via [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: auth method not specified - email/password, SSO, OAuth?]
- **FR-007**: System MUST retain user data for [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: retention period not specified]

### Key Entities *(include if feature involves data)*

- **[Entity 1]**: [What it represents, key attributes without implementation]
- **[Entity 2]**: [What it represents, relationships to other entities]

## Success Criteria *(mandatory)*

<!--
  ACTION REQUIRED: Define measurable success criteria.
  These must be technology-agnostic and measurable.
-->

### Measurable Outcomes

- **SC-001**: [Measurable metric, e.g., "Users can complete account creation in under 2 minutes"]
- **SC-002**: [Measurable metric, e.g., "System handles 1000 concurrent users without degradation"]
- **SC-003**: [User satisfaction metric, e.g., "90% of users successfully complete primary task on first attempt"]
- **SC-004**: [Business metric, e.g., "Reduce support tickets related to [X] by 50%"]
</spec-template>

# File path: `.specify/templates/tasks-template.md`
<tasks-template>
---
description: "Task list template for feature implementation"
---

# Tasks: [FEATURE NAME]

**Input**: Design documents from `/specs/[###-feature-name]/`
**Prerequisites**: plan.md (required), spec.md (required for user stories), research.md, data-model.md, contracts/

**Tests**: The examples below include test tasks. Tests are OPTIONAL - only include them if explicitly requested in the feature specification.

**Organization**: Tasks are grouped by user story to enable independent implementation and testing of each story.

## Format: `[ID] [P?] [Story] Description`
- **[P]**: Can run in parallel (different files, no dependencies)
- **[Story]**: Which user story this task belongs to (e.g., US1, US2, US3)
- Include exact file paths in descriptions

## Path Conventions
- **Single project**: `src/`, `tests/` at repository root
- **Web app**: `backend/src/`, `frontend/src/`
- **Mobile**: `api/src/`, `ios/src/` or `android/src/`
- Paths shown below assume single project - adjust based on plan.md structure

<!--
  ============================================================================
  IMPORTANT: The tasks below are SAMPLE TASKS for illustration purposes only.

  The /speckit.tasks command MUST replace these with actual tasks based on:
  - User stories from spec.md (with their priorities P1, P2, P3...)
  - Feature requirements from plan.md
  - Entities from data-model.md
  - Endpoints from contracts/

  Tasks MUST be organized by user story so each story can be:
  - Implemented independently
  - Tested independently
  - Delivered as an MVP increment

  DO NOT keep these sample tasks in the generated tasks.md file.
  ============================================================================
-->

## Phase 1: Setup (Shared Infrastructure)

**Purpose**: Project initialization and basic structure

- [ ] T001 Create project structure per implementation plan
- [ ] T002 Initialize [language] project with [framework] dependencies
- [ ] T003 [P] Configure linting and formatting tools

---

## Phase 2: Foundational (Blocking Prerequisites)

**Purpose**: Core infrastructure that MUST be complete before ANY user story can be implemented

**⚠️ CRITICAL**: No user story work can begin until this phase is complete

Examples of foundational tasks (adjust based on your project):

- [ ] T004 Setup database schema and migrations framework
- [ ] T005 [P] Implement authentication/authorization framework
- [ ] T006 [P] Setup API routing and middleware structure
- [ ] T007 Create base models/entities that all stories depend on
- [ ] T008 Configure error handling and logging infrastructure
- [ ] T009 Setup environment configuration management

**Checkpoint**: Foundation ready - user story implementation can now begin in parallel

---

## Phase 3: User Story 1 - [Title] (Priority: P1) 🎯 MVP

**Goal**: [Brief description of what this story delivers]

**Independent Test**: [How to verify this story works on its own]

### Tests for User Story 1 (OPTIONAL - only if tests requested) ⚠️

**NOTE: Write these tests FIRST, ensure they FAIL before implementation**

- [ ] T010 [P] [US1] Contract test for [endpoint] in tests/contract/test_[name].py
- [ ] T011 [P] [US1] Integration test for [user journey] in tests/integration/test_[name].py

### Implementation for User Story 1

- [ ] T012 [P] [US1] Create [Entity1] model in src/models/[entity1].py
- [ ] T013 [P] [US1] Create [Entity2] model in src/models/[entity2].py
- [ ] T014 [US1] Implement [Service] in src/services/[service].py (depends on T012, T013)
- [ ] T015 [US1] Implement [endpoint/feature] in src/[location]/[file].py
- [ ] T016 [US1] Add validation and error handling
- [ ] T017 [US1] Add logging for user story 1 operations

**Checkpoint**: At this point, User Story 1 should be fully functional and testable independently

---

## Phase 4: User Story 2 - [Title] (Priority: P2)

**Goal**: [Brief description of what this story delivers]

**Independent Test**: [How to verify this story works on its own]

### Tests for User Story 2 (OPTIONAL - only if tests requested) ⚠️

- [ ] T018 [P] [US2] Contract test for [endpoint] in tests/contract/test_[name].py
- [ ] T019 [P] [US2] Integration test for [user journey] in tests/integration/test_[name].py

### Implementation for User Story 2

- [ ] T020 [P] [US2] Create [Entity] model in src/models/[entity].py
- [ ] T021 [US2] Implement [Service] in src/services/[service].py
- [ ] T022 [US2] Implement [endpoint/feature] in src/[location]/[file].py
- [ ] T023 [US2] Integrate with User Story 1 components (if needed)

**Checkpoint**: At this point, User Stories 1 AND 2 should both work independently

---

## Phase 5: User Story 3 - [Title] (Priority: P3)

**Goal**: [Brief description of what this story delivers]

**Independent Test**: [How to verify this story works on its own]

### Tests for User Story 3 (OPTIONAL - only if tests requested) ⚠️

- [ ] T024 [P] [US3] Contract test for [endpoint] in tests/contract/test_[name].py
- [ ] T025 [P] [US3] Integration test for [user journey] in tests/integration/test_[name].py

### Implementation for User Story 3

- [ ] T026 [P] [US3] Create [Entity] model in src/models/[entity].py
- [ ] T027 [US3] Implement [Service] in src/services/[service].py
- [ ] T028 [US3] Implement [endpoint/feature] in src/[location]/[file].py

**Checkpoint**: All user stories should now be independently functional

---

[Add more user story phases as needed, following the same pattern]

---

## Phase N: Polish & Cross-Cutting Concerns

**Purpose**: Improvements that affect multiple user stories

- [ ] TXXX [P] Documentation updates in docs/
- [ ] TXXX Code cleanup and refactoring
- [ ] TXXX Performance optimization across all stories
- [ ] TXXX [P] Additional unit tests (if requested) in tests/unit/
- [ ] TXXX Security hardening
- [ ] TXXX Run quickstart.md validation

---

## Dependencies & Execution Order

### Phase Dependencies

- **Setup (Phase 1)**: No dependencies - can start immediately
- **Foundational (Phase 2)**: Depends on Setup completion - BLOCKS all user stories
- **User Stories (Phase 3+)**: All depend on Foundational phase completion
  - User stories can then proceed in parallel (if staffed)
  - Or sequentially in priority order (P1 → P2 → P3)
- **Polish (Final Phase)**: Depends on all desired user stories being complete

### User Story Dependencies

- **User Story 1 (P1)**: Can start after Foundational (Phase 2) - No dependencies on other stories
- **User Story 2 (P2)**: Can start after Foundational (Phase 2) - May integrate with US1 but should be independently testable
- **User Story 3 (P3)**: Can start after Foundational (Phase 2) - May integrate with US1/US2 but should be independently testable

### Within Each User Story

- Tests (if included) MUST be written and FAIL before implementation
- Models before services
- Services before endpoints
- Core implementation before integration
- Story complete before moving to next priority

### Parallel Opportunities

- All Setup tasks marked [P] can run in parallel
- All Foundational tasks marked [P] can run in parallel (within Phase 2)
- Once Foundational phase completes, all user stories can start in parallel (if team capacity allows)
- All tests for a user story marked [P] can run in parallel
- Models within a story marked [P] can run in parallel
- Different user stories can be worked on in parallel by different team members

---

## Parallel Example: User Story 1

```bash
# Launch all tests for User Story 1 together (if tests requested):
Task: "Contract test for [endpoint] in tests/contract/test_[name].py"
Task: "Integration test for [user journey] in tests/integration/test_[name].py"

# Launch all models for User Story 1 together:
Task: "Create [Entity1] model in src/models/[entity1].py"
Task: "Create [Entity2] model in src/models/[entity2].py"
```

---

## Implementation Strategy

### MVP First (User Story 1 Only)

1. Complete Phase 1: Setup
2. Complete Phase 2: Foundational (CRITICAL - blocks all stories)
3. Complete Phase 3: User Story 1
4. **STOP and VALIDATE**: Test User Story 1 independently
5. Deploy/demo if ready

### Incremental Delivery

1. Complete Setup + Foundational → Foundation ready
2. Add User Story 1 → Test independently → Deploy/Demo (MVP!)
3. Add User Story 2 → Test independently → Deploy/Demo
4. Add User Story 3 → Test independently → Deploy/Demo
5. Each story adds value without breaking previous stories

### Parallel Team Strategy

With multiple developers:

1. Team completes Setup + Foundational together
2. Once Foundational is done:
   - Developer A: User Story 1
   - Developer B: User Story 2
   - Developer C: User Story 3
3. Stories complete and integrate independently

---

## Notes

- [P] tasks = different files, no dependencies
- [Story] label maps task to specific user story for traceability
- Each user story should be independently completable and testable
- Verify tests fail before implementing
- Commit after each task or logical group
- Stop at any checkpoint to validate story independently
- Avoid: vague tasks, same file conflicts, cross-story dependencies that break independence
</tasks-template>