specformula-fork

Validate SpecFormula fork-route payload questions and dispatch fork clarifications with readGraph anchors.

77|15|Updated May 12, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/Waterball-Software-Academy/aixbdd --skill specformula-fork
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: specformula-fork
Source: https://github.com/Waterball-Software-Academy/aixbdd/tree/main/.agents/skills/clarify-loop/sub-skill/SpecFormula-Fork
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/Waterball-Software-Academy/aixbdd --skill specformula-fork

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve?

This Skill prevents agents from guessing when a product-spec question is ambiguous by validating SpecFormula fork payloads and dispatching a structured fork-question for deterministic clarification.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Strict fork-route payload validation: Enforces option-count, forbids OTHER/free_text, and rejects legacy/fuzzy location anchors to keep the decision grounded in the graph.
  • Fork-question construction and dispatch: Builds a four-element fork.question string from each question and triggers the fork tool with the required identifiers.
  • Fail-fast correctness guarantees: Marks the route as incomplete when required fields are missing or invariants are violated, avoiding silent degradation to other routes.

Quick Start

Use the specformula-fork skill to validate fork-ready questions and dispatch a fork tool call per question with the correct graph anchor and option recommendation.

Frequently Asked Questions about specformula-fork

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I validate agent workflow clarifications for ambiguous product specification questions?

Payload validation for agent workflow clarifications enforces option-count invariants, forbids free-text options, and requires location fields to ground fork questions in the graph. This prevents silent degradation and rejects legacy anchors when fields are missing.

What is the best way to dispatch fork clarifications with discrete options in an agent workflow?

Dispatch fork clarifications by building a fork question string and triggering the fork tool with located_file_type, located_file_path, and location. This applies during clarify-loop planning when a question requires 2-4 discrete options and a recommendation affecting downstream decisions.

Why does my specification clarification payload fail validation when using free text options?

Specification clarification payload validation fails because the invariants explicitly forbid OTHER and free_text options to ensure deterministic decisions. The route is marked incomplete to avoid silent degradation when option-count or location field requirements are violated.

When do I need to trigger a fork question for acceptance criteria during clarify-loop planning?

Trigger a fork question during clarify-loop planning when an ambiguous specification requires 2-4 discrete options and a recommendation that affects downstream decisions. The fork tool uses verbatim readGraph anchors to dispatch the structured clarification deterministically.

Does this clarification approach support fuzzy location anchors in the specification graph?

This clarification approach does not support fuzzy location anchors. It rejects legacy and fuzzy anchors to keep the decision grounded in the graph, requiring exact graph anchors like located_file_path and location fields for valid payload validation.

Can I use other route types if my fork-route payload is missing required location fields?

Using other route types when the fork-route payload is missing required location fields causes fail-fast correctness guarantees to mark the route as incomplete. This avoids silent degradation to other routes and ensures the fork tool only triggers with valid graph anchors.