qa

To resolve ambiguous design requirements before planning, use interactive low-level design QA to surface and document implementation decisions. It bridges spec-generation and planning by guiding step-by-step discussions that finalize architecture, interfaces, and acceptance criteria, ensuring you start planning with zero open questions.

The best way to document architecture decisions for codebases with unclear requirements is through an interactive QA workflow. Deep codebase exploration identifies touched files and data flow, while the interactive discussion finalizes designs and automatically generates a qa.md file recording all resolved decisions.

To start an interactive Q&A session for low-level design, point the tool to your spec.md or spec directory. It enforces a hard gate requiring interactive resolution of implementation questions, exploring the codebase to identify design patterns before writing the final qa.md document.

Yes, you can use codebase analysis to identify touched files, data flow, and design patterns before finalizing a specification. Parallel agents explore the codebase during the interactive QA process to surface implementation questions and ensure the resulting architecture decisions are grounded in existing code.

Yes, interactive design QA integrates seamlessly with orchestrate pipelines to ensure a clean handoff from spec to plan. By documenting all resolved decisions in qa.md, it satisfies the pipeline requirement of starting the planning phase with zero ambiguity or open questions.

You should not use interactive questioning for low-level design documentation when your requirements are already unambiguous and fully specified. The tool enforces a hard interactive gate to resolve open questions, making it unnecessary overhead for codebases with clear, finalized architecture and interfaces.