outcomeeng/bootstrapping

<objective>

Interview the user to understand their product, then scaffold the initial spx/ directory with a product spec, project guide, and top-level node stubs. This is the entry point for new spec-tree projects.

</objective>

<quick_start>

PREREQUISITE: Check for <SPEC_TREE_FOUNDATION> marker. If absent, invoke /understanding first.

This skill runs when:

• The user says "bootstrap", "set up spec tree", "start a new project"
• /authoring detects no spx/ directory or an empty one
• The user invokes /bootstrapping directly

</quick_start>

<workflow> <step name="detect">

Step 1: Check current state

Glob: "spx/*.product.md"
Glob: "spx/*-*.{enabler,outcome}/"

If a product spec already exists, this is not a bootstrap — redirect to /authoring.

If spx/ doesn't exist or contains no product spec, proceed.

</step> <step name="interview">

Step 2: Interview the user

Use AskUserQuestion to gather product understanding. Adapt based on what's already known from the conversation.

Round 1 — Product identity:

• "What does this product do?" (one sentence)
• "Who is it for?" (target user)

Round 2 — Product hypothesis:

• "What change in user behavior do you expect?" (outcome)
• "What business value does that produce?" (impact)

Round 3 — Scope:

• "What are the 3–7 major things this product does or provides?" (candidate top-level nodes)

For each candidate, ask whether it delivers user-facing value (outcome) or exists to serve other parts (enabler).

Decision gate: "Ready to scaffold, or want to refine?"

Skip questions where the conversation already provides the answer.

</step> <step name="plan">

Step 3: Present the scaffold plan

Before creating anything, show the user what will be created:

Proposed structure:

spx/
├── {product-name}.product.md
├── CLAUDE.md
├── {NN}-{slug}.enabler/
│   ├── {slug}.md
│   └── tests/
├── {NN}-{slug}.outcome/
│   ├── {slug}.md
│   └── tests/
└── ...

Include:

• Product name and hypothesis
• Each top-level node with type (enabler/outcome), index, and one-line description
• Index rationale (ordering formula applied)

Wait for user confirmation before creating files.

</step> <step name="scaffold">

Step 4: Create the scaffold

1. Create spx/ directory if it doesn't exist.

2. Write spx/{product-name}.product.md using the template from ${SKILL_DIR}/../understanding/templates/product/product-name.product.md. Fill in:

   • Product name
   • Why this product exists
   • Three-part hypothesis (output → outcome → impact)
   • Scope (included items = the top-level nodes)
   • Product-level compliance rules (if any emerged from interview)

3. Write spx/CLAUDE.md from the template at ${SKILL_DIR}/templates/spx-claude.md. Replace {product-name} with the actual product name.

4. For each top-level node:

   • Create directory: spx/{NN}-{slug}.{enabler|outcome}/
   • Write spec stub: {slug}.md with hypothesis or enables statement and a placeholder assertion
   • Create tests/ directory

</step> <step name="deliver">

Step 5: Report and recommend

Summarize what was created:

• Product spec path
• CLAUDE.md path
• Each node with type, index, and path

Recommend next steps:

• "Fill in assertions for each node with /authoring"
• "If any node has more than 7 concerns, decompose it with /decomposing"
• "When assertions are ready, write tests with /testing"

</step> </workflow>

<failure_modes>

Failure 1: Bootstrapped over an existing tree

Agent ran bootstrapping in a project that already had spx/ with specs. The product spec was overwritten.

How to avoid: Step 1 checks for an existing product spec. If one exists, redirect to /authoring — this is not a bootstrap.

Failure 2: Too many top-level nodes

Agent accepted the user's list of 12 candidate nodes without pushing back. The tree started with too many siblings, making context loading expensive and structure unclear.

How to avoid: During the interview, if the user lists more than 7, ask which ones could be grouped under a parent. The ~7 children heuristic from decomposition-semantics.md applies at every level including the top.

Failure 3: All outcomes, no enablers

Agent created 5 outcome nodes but missed that 3 of them shared a database schema dependency. The shared concern should have been an enabler at a lower index.

How to avoid: After collecting candidate nodes, explicitly ask: "Do any of these share infrastructure or dependencies?" Extract shared concerns as enablers before assigning indices.

</failure_modes>

<success_criteria>

Bootstrapping is complete when:

• [ ] Existing tree checked (no overwrite of existing product spec)
• [ ] User interviewed for product identity, hypothesis, and scope
• [ ] Scaffold plan presented and confirmed
• [ ] spx/{product-name}.product.md created with hypothesis and scope
• [ ] spx/CLAUDE.md created from template with product name
• [ ] Top-level nodes created with correct types, indices, and spec stubs
• [ ] Next steps recommended

</success_criteria>