spec-kit-clarify

To resolve ambiguities in feature specifications, you can use a structured multi-agent debate system that surfaces gaps and finalizes spec amendments. It engages four specialized agents to evaluate conflicting constraints and automatically embeds final decisions back into the spec.

A multi-agent debate system for requirement clarification uses four specialized agents—Interrogator, Respondent, Skeptic, and Arbiter—to collaboratively validate constraints, surface gaps, and reach a final spec decision, producing a precise audit trail.

To clarify unclear acceptance criteria in a product spec, initiate a structured debate workflow that runs prerequisite checks automatically. The workflow interrogates constraints, finalizes spec decisions, and updates the document with embedded amendments.

No, the specification clarification workflow runs prerequisite checks automatically before engaging the four agents. This ensures the feature specification is fully validated and prepared before the clarification debate begins.

Yes, you can use multi-agent debate for conflicting constraints in requirements. The Skeptic agent evaluates available options while the Arbiter reaches a final decision, effectively resolving the conflict and embedding the outcome into the specification.

The best way to document decisions when refining requirements is using a structured workflow that produces an audit trail. It automatically embeds finalized spec amendments directly back into the original feature specification document.