Repository navigation
SPIR spec template is dead code: no prompt, consult type, or porch check references it #1279
Description
Problem (reported from a production SPIR workspace, 2026-07-28; flagged by the owner)
codev-skeleton/protocols/spir/templates/spec.md exists but nothing in the pipeline delivers or enforces it:
prompts/specify.mdnever references the template — it describes required content in prose only.- Porch's
spec-approvalgate checks only that the spec file exists, not its structure. consult-types/spec-review.mdhas no template/structure check.
Net effect: builders never see the template unless they go looking. In the reporting workspace, the builder pattern-matched the previous spec's free-form structure, 3-way review passed it, and both of that repo's SPIR specs are off-template — discovered only when the human asked why.
Suggested fixes (any/all, from the report)
- Reference the template explicitly in
prompts/specify.md('structure per templates/spec.md' — or better, per the deliver-don't-fetch convention, inline the required heading skeleton into the prompt). - Add a structure line to the
spec-reviewconsult type so reviewers check it. - Optionally: a porch check for required headings at
spec-approval.
Audit scope
The same disease presumably applies to plan/review templates in SPIR and to ASPIR/PIR skeletons — audit all template references across protocols before fixing one.
Sequencing note
Land AFTER PR #1278 (Spec 1252) merges — that PR makes codev-skeleton/ the single owner of these files and adds the ownership map; this issue's fix should register the templates' wiring in that map rather than creating new unowned references. Conceptually this is the same class 1252 attacked: an authored artifact with no owning consumer is dead code that silently rots.
Activity
waleedkadous commentedon Jul 28, 2026
Architect verification (2026-07-28) — confirmed at the canonical source, with one correction
Verified against
codev-skeleton/in this repo (not the reporting workspace's local copies), so this is not project-specific:spir/prompts/specify.mdcontains no template reference and no{{> }}include. The spec template is dead in the pipeline.spir/consult-types/spec-review.mdhas no structure/template check.Correction to the audit assumption: the plan template is NOT dead — both
spir/prompts/plan.md:79andaspir/prompts/plan.md:79inline it via{{> protocols/spir/templates/plan.md}}, using exactly the include mechanism porch resolves (porch/prompts.ts:82). So the disease is an asymmetric oversight, and the fix precedent already exists in-tree:templates/plan.mdtemplates/spec.mdtemplates/review.mdRecommended fix shape: add the same
{{> …}}include to specify/review prompts (matching the plan precedent — this also satisfies the deliver-don't-fetch convention, since porch expands the partial into the delivered prompt), plus the structure line in the spec-review/review consult types. The porch heading-check remains optional hardening.This also explains why the reporting workspace's plans looked fine while its specs drifted off-template.
waleedkadous commentedon Jul 28, 2026
On it! Working on a fix now.
[Bugfix #1279] Fix: deliver every protocol template via a {{> }} include
[Bugfix #1279] Fix: give spec-approval something to gate on
[Bugfix #1279] Test: every-template-has-a-consumer regression guard
[Bugfix #1279] Docs: record the every-template-has-a-consumer invariant
[Bugfix #1279] Test: enforce delivery by reachability, not by any inc…
[Bugfix #1279] Fix: calibrate spec_has_required_sections against real…
[Bugfix #1279] Docs: thread update — PR, CMAP verdicts, and dispositions
Merge pull request #1283 from cluesmith/builder/bugfix-1279
[Bugfix #1279] Docs: thread closeout — merge, verification on main, f…
Merge pull request #1287 from cluesmith/builder/bugfix-1279
[Spec 1280][Phase: phase_3_protocol_md] refactor: protocol.md x10 via…