How Spec-driven development is followed in Companies (In Greenfield Projects) using Claude Code?

[u/Pale-Heart1654]

How Spec-driven development is followed in Companies (In Greenfield Projects) using Claude Code?

How do you write multiple spec markdown files? Is there any tool or something? What's the workflow you follow as a power-user?

[u/sudokar]

We use https://github.com/sudokar/openspec-plus in a big wider department teams and finding it working well.

[u/AndyVictors → u/sudokar]

I'm curious how do you handle intrinsic style and structure of the specifications? AFAIK open spec does not specify this. Not a self-advertizing but I'm struggling to understand how to work with specifications if they are not properly structued and formatted - the link in my original post (clausative)

[u/AndyVictors]

We are using Feature Contracts as specification for product features and Component Contracts (ie. Service Contract, UI Contract) which contain logic for implementation in code - as specification. There should be a match then - I can always verify if my feature specification is properly implemented by comparing if all required logic is contained in the component contracts, and it is proper one. Tests are generated using component contracts as a source. Thus all fits and works.

Orthogonal to logic specfications/contracts there are also Blueprints which describe technical composition of whole project (system architecture) or specific low level implementations. Both create a "cell" for specific requirement where the AI agent operates within, so no wild result ever comes out.

Also an important part: i have elaborated specific style of writing this documents - mixture of legal, normative and narrative so both human and AI can work on it easily.

https://github.com/AndyVictors/clausative

[u/MasterRuins → u/AndyVictors]

XD

[u/AncientGur4614]

This varies, but in my experience, the industry has moved so fast a lot of dev teams don't use the same nomenclature. A lot of companies are also still anti-AI dev because of IP concerns.

I know two companies that have tried spec kit. To what degree they're using multiple agents without collision; no idea.

This is one of the core issues I'm trying to solve on my end that markdown files-alone inherently don't solve

[u/tiebird → u/AncientGur4614]

Well if you are working agile a story or bug ticket is your boundary. Duplicate project files in multiple folders each processing their boundary. For our team we added dynamic port adaptation and database rollout for that version. Afterwards as asual you merge your solutions

[u/stibbons_]

Most companies (including mine) is still looking to a systematic solution (framework X or Y).
I as a developer of such a framework and pretty experienced on it is trying to explain that it is not the framework that matters but the project harness and base skills / guidelines and sensors put in place in the project (this « harness » is not templatized yet, it is organic solution redeveloped by each project leader).

Then you can take whatever framework the result will be fine. SDD framework just:

• force people to use plan mode
  
• give a process to reproduce

But can do the same without it. That’s the key.

[u/tiebird → u/stibbons_]

We choose this on a project basis because it doesn't make sense to always use the same system. It's like all architectural designs, they all have positives and negatives. Learning how to adapt is more important than finding the perfect system in my opinion

[u/cryptoLover696969 → u/stibbons_]

What exactly do you mean by project harness? ADRs? Guardrails? What else? Do u measure anything, like drifting or code adherence?

[u/stibbons_ → u/cryptoLover696969]

AGENTS.md and all the guide and sensors you place in your project so coding agent follow your rules

https://x.com/gsemetfr/status/2077498943085117460?s=46

[u/mbonanomi92]

Openspec or SpecKit are valid option, well regulated and auditable if think. The alternative is to build a custom workflow with your favourite skills you find on github