openspec-triage-change

Triaging verify outputs involves parsing CRITICAL, WARNING, and SUGGESTION lines to classify each item into CODE FIX, DOCUMENTATION, or SCOPE INCREASE buckets based on the original scope. This structured triage output can then be routed for code, doc, or future change planning.

Bug classification from change management artifacts reads proposal.md, tasks.md, design.md, and specs to determine scope boundaries. It evaluates verify results against documented tasks to classify whether an item requires a code fix or indicates a scope increase.

Parsing CRITICAL and WARNING lines determines remediation paths by comparing results against documented scope. CRITICAL items typically drive CODE FIX actions, while warnings often indicate DOCUMENTATION gaps or necessary SCOPE INCREASES for future planning.

Yes, you can generate an issues.md skeleton for future work directly from verify results. The triage process optionally produces this skeleton to track categorized scope increases and documentation gaps, ensuring consistency with the current implementation.

Verify output triage requires reading change artifacts like proposal.md and tasks.md to determine the original scope boundary and proposed outcomes. Without these artifacts, the triage process cannot accurately classify whether an item is a bug, a documentation gap, or a scope increase.

A limitation of automated triage for scope increases and documentation gaps is its strict dependency on reading existing change artifacts. If proposal.md, tasks.md, or spec files are missing or incomplete, the classification of CRITICAL and WARNING items into accurate action buckets may fail.