Spec-First, Agent-Implemented Software Development Lifecycle...
A structured software development lifecycle where specifications drive implementation. Human writes intent; Claude produces design documents, implementation specs, code, and tests—with review gates at each phase.
Intent & Constraints (human)
↓
High-Level Design (Claude) ←→ Human Review
↓
ADR-Lite (Claude) ←→ Human Review
↓
Revised HLD (Claude)
↓
Executable Implementation Spec (Claude) ←→ Human Review
↓
Code Generation (Claude)
↓
Validation Tests (Claude)
Owner: Human
Output: docs/intent-and-constraints.md
Human provides:
Owner: Claude
Input: Intent and constraints document
Output: docs/high-level-design.md
Template: See references/hld-template.md
Generate HLD covering:
Wait for human review and agreement before proceeding.
Owner: Claude
Input: Approved HLD + human feedback
Output: docs/adr-lite.md
Template: See references/adr-template.md
For each significant decision, document:
Each ADR entry must explicitly reference:
Wait for human review and agreement before proceeding.
Owner: Claude
Input: Approved ADR-Lite
Output: Updated docs/high-level-design.md
Revise HLD to:
Owner: Claude
Input: Revised HLD + ADR-Lite
Output: docs/implementation-spec.md
Template: See references/eis-template.md
Specify implementation details:
Wait for human review and agreement before proceeding.
Owner: Claude
Input: Approved EIS
Output: Source code in src/
Implement code that:
Owner: Claude
Input: Implementation + Intent document
Output: Tests in tests/
Generate comprehensive tests:
Tests should trace back to original intents and constraints.
Never proceed to the next phase without explicit human approval. At each gate:
When user provides existing artifacts and wants to continue from a specific phase:
Determine which phase to start from based on what artifacts exist:
Before generating the next artifact, review provided documents for:
If gaps or inconsistencies found:
"I reviewed [artifact]. Before proceeding to [next phase], I noticed:
- [Gap or inconsistency]
Would you like me to address this first, or proceed with assumptions?"
When entering mid-workflow, explicitly map existing artifacts:
After assessment, continue with standard phase sequence and review gates.
project/
├── docs/
│ ├── intent-and-constraints.md
│ ├── high-level-design.md
│ ├── adr-lite.md
│ └── implementation-spec.md
├── src/
│ └── [implementation files]
└── tests/
└── [test files]