Initial Commit

This commit is contained in:
2025-11-01 21:49:22 +01:00
commit e2c3603c86
7 changed files with 766 additions and 0 deletions
+454
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,454 @@
# OpenSpec Instructions
Instructions for AI coding assistants using OpenSpec for spec-driven development.
## TL;DR Quick Checklist
- Search existing work: `openspec spec list --long`, `openspec list` (use `rg` only for full-text search)
- Decide scope: new capability vs modify existing capability
- Pick a unique `change-id`: kebab-case, verb-led (`add-`, `update-`, `remove-`, `refactor-`)
- Scaffold: `proposal.md`, `tasks.md`, `design.md` (only if needed), and delta specs per affected capability
- Write deltas: use `## ADDED|MODIFIED|REMOVED|RENAMED Requirements`; include at least one `#### Scenario:` per requirement
- Validate: `openspec validate [change-id] --strict` and fix issues
- Request approval: Do not start implementation until proposal is approved
## Three-Stage Workflow
### Stage 1: Creating Changes
Create proposal when you need to:
- Add features or functionality
- Make breaking changes (API, schema)
- Change architecture or patterns
- Optimize performance (changes behavior)
- Update security patterns
Triggers (examples):
- "Help me create a change proposal"
- "Help me plan a change"
- "Help me create a proposal"
- "I want to create a spec proposal"
- "I want to create a spec"
Loose matching guidance:
- Contains one of: `proposal`, `change`, `spec`
- With one of: `create`, `plan`, `make`, `start`, `help`
Skip proposal for:
- Bug fixes (restore intended behavior)
- Typos, formatting, comments
- Dependency updates (non-breaking)
- Configuration changes
- Tests for existing behavior
**Workflow**
1. Review `openspec/project.md`, `openspec list`, and `openspec list --specs` to understand current context.
2. Choose a unique verb-led `change-id` and scaffold `proposal.md`, `tasks.md`, optional `design.md`, and spec deltas under `openspec/changes/<id>/`.
3. Draft spec deltas using `## ADDED|MODIFIED|REMOVED Requirements` with at least one `#### Scenario:` per requirement.
4. Run `openspec validate <id> --strict` and resolve any issues before sharing the proposal.
### Stage 2: Implementing Changes
Track these steps as TODOs and complete them one by one.
1. **Read proposal.md** - Understand what's being built
2. **Read design.md** (if exists) - Review technical decisions
3. **Read tasks.md** - Get implementation checklist
4. **Implement tasks sequentially** - Complete in order
5. **Confirm completion** - Ensure every item in `tasks.md` is finished before updating statuses
6. **Update checklist** - After all work is done, set every task to `- [x]` so the list reflects reality
7. **Approval gate** - Do not start implementation until the proposal is reviewed and approved
### Stage 3: Archiving Changes
After deployment, create separate PR to:
- Move `changes/[name]/``changes/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-[name]/`
- Update `specs/` if capabilities changed
- Use `openspec archive <change-id> --skip-specs --yes` for tooling-only changes (always pass the change ID explicitly)
- Run `openspec validate --strict` to confirm the archived change passes checks
## Before Any Task
**Context Checklist:**
- [ ] Read relevant specs in `specs/[capability]/spec.md`
- [ ] Check pending changes in `changes/` for conflicts
- [ ] Read `openspec/project.md` for conventions
- [ ] Run `openspec list` to see active changes
- [ ] Run `openspec list --specs` to see existing capabilities
**Before Creating Specs:**
- Always check if capability already exists
- Prefer modifying existing specs over creating duplicates
- Use `openspec show [spec]` to review current state
- If request is ambiguous, ask 12 clarifying questions before scaffolding
### Search Guidance
- Enumerate specs: `openspec spec list --long` (or `--json` for scripts)
- Enumerate changes: `openspec list` (or `openspec change list --json` - deprecated but available)
- Show details:
- Spec: `openspec show <spec-id> --type spec` (use `--json` for filters)
- Change: `openspec show <change-id> --json --deltas-only`
- Full-text search (use ripgrep): `rg -n "Requirement:|Scenario:" openspec/specs`
## Quick Start
### CLI Commands
```bash
# Essential commands
openspec list # List active changes
openspec list --specs # List specifications
openspec show [item] # Display change or spec
openspec validate [item] # Validate changes or specs
openspec archive <change-id> [--yes|-y] # Archive after deployment (add --yes for non-interactive runs)
# Project management
openspec init [path] # Initialize OpenSpec
openspec update [path] # Update instruction files
# Interactive mode
openspec show # Prompts for selection
openspec validate # Bulk validation mode
# Debugging
openspec show [change] --json --deltas-only
openspec validate [change] --strict
```
### Command Flags
- `--json` - Machine-readable output
- `--type change|spec` - Disambiguate items
- `--strict` - Comprehensive validation
- `--no-interactive` - Disable prompts
- `--skip-specs` - Archive without spec updates
- `--yes`/`-y` - Skip confirmation prompts (non-interactive archive)
## Directory Structure
```
openspec/
├── project.md # Project conventions
├── specs/ # Current truth - what IS built
│ └── [capability]/ # Single focused capability
│ ├── spec.md # Requirements and scenarios
│ └── design.md # Technical patterns
├── changes/ # Proposals - what SHOULD change
│ ├── [change-name]/
│ │ ├── proposal.md # Why, what, impact
│ │ ├── tasks.md # Implementation checklist
│ │ ├── design.md # Technical decisions (optional; see criteria)
│ │ └── specs/ # Delta changes
│ │ └── [capability]/
│ │ └── spec.md # ADDED/MODIFIED/REMOVED
│ └── archive/ # Completed changes
```
## Creating Change Proposals
### Decision Tree
```
New request?
├─ Bug fix restoring spec behavior? → Fix directly
├─ Typo/format/comment? → Fix directly
├─ New feature/capability? → Create proposal
├─ Breaking change? → Create proposal
├─ Architecture change? → Create proposal
└─ Unclear? → Create proposal (safer)
```
### Proposal Structure
1. **Create directory:** `changes/[change-id]/` (kebab-case, verb-led, unique)
2. **Write proposal.md:**
```markdown
## Why
[1-2 sentences on problem/opportunity]
## What Changes
- [Bullet list of changes]
- [Mark breaking changes with **BREAKING**]
## Impact
- Affected specs: [list capabilities]
- Affected code: [key files/systems]
```
3. **Create spec deltas:** `specs/[capability]/spec.md`
```markdown
## ADDED Requirements
### Requirement: New Feature
The system SHALL provide...
#### Scenario: Success case
- **WHEN** user performs action
- **THEN** expected result
## MODIFIED Requirements
### Requirement: Existing Feature
[Complete modified requirement]
## REMOVED Requirements
### Requirement: Old Feature
**Reason**: [Why removing]
**Migration**: [How to handle]
```
If multiple capabilities are affected, create multiple delta files under `changes/[change-id]/specs/<capability>/spec.md`—one per capability.
4. **Create tasks.md:**
```markdown
## 1. Implementation
- [ ] 1.1 Create database schema
- [ ] 1.2 Implement API endpoint
- [ ] 1.3 Add frontend component
- [ ] 1.4 Write tests
```
5. **Create design.md when needed:**
Create `design.md` if any of the following apply; otherwise omit it:
- Cross-cutting change (multiple services/modules) or a new architectural pattern
- New external dependency or significant data model changes
- Security, performance, or migration complexity
- Ambiguity that benefits from technical decisions before coding
Minimal `design.md` skeleton:
```markdown
## Context
[Background, constraints, stakeholders]
## Goals / Non-Goals
- Goals: [...]
- Non-Goals: [...]
## Decisions
- Decision: [What and why]
- Alternatives considered: [Options + rationale]
## Risks / Trade-offs
- [Risk] → Mitigation
## Migration Plan
[Steps, rollback]
## Open Questions
- [...]
```
## Spec File Format
### Critical: Scenario Formatting
**CORRECT** (use #### headers):
```markdown
#### Scenario: User login success
- **WHEN** valid credentials provided
- **THEN** return JWT token
```
**WRONG** (don't use bullets or bold):
```markdown
- **Scenario: User login** ❌
**Scenario**: User login ❌
### Scenario: User login ❌
```
Every requirement MUST have at least one scenario.
### Requirement Wording
- Use SHALL/MUST for normative requirements (avoid should/may unless intentionally non-normative)
### Delta Operations
- `## ADDED Requirements` - New capabilities
- `## MODIFIED Requirements` - Changed behavior
- `## REMOVED Requirements` - Deprecated features
- `## RENAMED Requirements` - Name changes
Headers matched with `trim(header)` - whitespace ignored.
#### When to use ADDED vs MODIFIED
- ADDED: Introduces a new capability or sub-capability that can stand alone as a requirement. Prefer ADDED when the change is orthogonal (e.g., adding "Slash Command Configuration") rather than altering the semantics of an existing requirement.
- MODIFIED: Changes the behavior, scope, or acceptance criteria of an existing requirement. Always paste the full, updated requirement content (header + all scenarios). The archiver will replace the entire requirement with what you provide here; partial deltas will drop previous details.
- RENAMED: Use when only the name changes. If you also change behavior, use RENAMED (name) plus MODIFIED (content) referencing the new name.
Common pitfall: Using MODIFIED to add a new concern without including the previous text. This causes loss of detail at archive time. If you arent explicitly changing the existing requirement, add a new requirement under ADDED instead.
Authoring a MODIFIED requirement correctly:
1) Locate the existing requirement in `openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md`.
2) Copy the entire requirement block (from `### Requirement: ...` through its scenarios).
3) Paste it under `## MODIFIED Requirements` and edit to reflect the new behavior.
4) Ensure the header text matches exactly (whitespace-insensitive) and keep at least one `#### Scenario:`.
Example for RENAMED:
```markdown
## RENAMED Requirements
- FROM: `### Requirement: Login`
- TO: `### Requirement: User Authentication`
```
## Troubleshooting
### Common Errors
**"Change must have at least one delta"**
- Check `changes/[name]/specs/` exists with .md files
- Verify files have operation prefixes (## ADDED Requirements)
**"Requirement must have at least one scenario"**
- Check scenarios use `#### Scenario:` format (4 hashtags)
- Don't use bullet points or bold for scenario headers
**Silent scenario parsing failures**
- Exact format required: `#### Scenario: Name`
- Debug with: `openspec show [change] --json --deltas-only`
### Validation Tips
```bash
# Always use strict mode for comprehensive checks
openspec validate [change] --strict
# Debug delta parsing
openspec show [change] --json | jq '.deltas'
# Check specific requirement
openspec show [spec] --json -r 1
```
## Happy Path Script
```bash
# 1) Explore current state
openspec spec list --long
openspec list
# Optional full-text search:
# rg -n "Requirement:|Scenario:" openspec/specs
# rg -n "^#|Requirement:" openspec/changes
# 2) Choose change id and scaffold
CHANGE=add-two-factor-auth
mkdir -p openspec/changes/$CHANGE/{specs/auth}
printf "## Why\n...\n\n## What Changes\n- ...\n\n## Impact\n- ...\n" > openspec/changes/$CHANGE/proposal.md
printf "## 1. Implementation\n- [ ] 1.1 ...\n" > openspec/changes/$CHANGE/tasks.md
# 3) Add deltas (example)
cat > openspec/changes/$CHANGE/specs/auth/spec.md << 'EOF'
## ADDED Requirements
### Requirement: Two-Factor Authentication
Users MUST provide a second factor during login.
#### Scenario: OTP required
- **WHEN** valid credentials are provided
- **THEN** an OTP challenge is required
EOF
# 4) Validate
openspec validate $CHANGE --strict
```
## Multi-Capability Example
```
openspec/changes/add-2fa-notify/
├── proposal.md
├── tasks.md
└── specs/
├── auth/
│ └── spec.md # ADDED: Two-Factor Authentication
└── notifications/
└── spec.md # ADDED: OTP email notification
```
auth/spec.md
```markdown
## ADDED Requirements
### Requirement: Two-Factor Authentication
...
```
notifications/spec.md
```markdown
## ADDED Requirements
### Requirement: OTP Email Notification
...
```
## Best Practices
### Simplicity First
- Default to <100 lines of new code
- Single-file implementations until proven insufficient
- Avoid frameworks without clear justification
- Choose boring, proven patterns
### Complexity Triggers
Only add complexity with:
- Performance data showing current solution too slow
- Concrete scale requirements (>1000 users, >100MB data)
- Multiple proven use cases requiring abstraction
### Clear References
- Use `file.ts:42` format for code locations
- Reference specs as `specs/auth/spec.md`
- Link related changes and PRs
### Capability Naming
- Use verb-noun: `user-auth`, `payment-capture`
- Single purpose per capability
- 10-minute understandability rule
- Split if description needs "AND"
### Change ID Naming
- Use kebab-case, short and descriptive: `add-two-factor-auth`
- Prefer verb-led prefixes: `add-`, `update-`, `remove-`, `refactor-`
- Ensure uniqueness; if taken, append `-2`, `-3`, etc.
## Tool Selection Guide
| Task | Tool | Why |
|------|------|-----|
| Find files by pattern | Glob | Fast pattern matching |
| Search code content | Grep | Optimized regex search |
| Read specific files | Read | Direct file access |
| Explore unknown scope | Task | Multi-step investigation |
## Error Recovery
### Change Conflicts
1. Run `openspec list` to see active changes
2. Check for overlapping specs
3. Coordinate with change owners
4. Consider combining proposals
### Validation Failures
1. Run with `--strict` flag
2. Check JSON output for details
3. Verify spec file format
4. Ensure scenarios properly formatted
### Missing Context
1. Read project.md first
2. Check related specs
3. Review recent archives
4. Ask for clarification
## Quick Reference
### Stage Indicators
- `changes/` - Proposed, not yet built
- `specs/` - Built and deployed
- `archive/` - Completed changes
### File Purposes
- `proposal.md` - Why and what
- `tasks.md` - Implementation steps
- `design.md` - Technical decisions
- `spec.md` - Requirements and behavior
### CLI Essentials
```bash
openspec list # What's in progress?
openspec show [item] # View details
openspec validate --strict # Is it correct?
openspec archive <change-id> [--yes|-y] # Mark complete (add --yes for automation)
```
Remember: Specs are truth. Changes are proposals. Keep them in sync.
+199
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,199 @@
# Project Context
## Purpose
I want to develop a framework that helps to write job applications. It should work similar to how OpenSpec works. Based on the on information about the job, a user provides, the framework will generate a CV, emails or a cover letter.
## Workflow
1 CHOOSE TEMPLATE LEVEL
- Quick: Email application, existing CV
- Standard: Your planned workflow
- Premium: + Research + CV customization
2 RESEARCH & CONTEXT
- Research job description + company
- Extract keywords/skills
- Analyze culture fit
3 PROPOSAL (= YOUR THOUGHTS)
- Why this position? (authentic!)
- What do you bring? (specific)
- How do you fit the company?
- Tone of Voice: formal/casual?
4 SPECIFICATION
- Define CV adjustments (which projects to emphasize?)
- Cover letter structure
- Format requirements (PDF/DOCX/Online)
- Key messages per paragraph
5 GENERATION
- Adapt CV
- Write cover letter
- Formulate subject line
- Write email body
6 QUALITY CHECK
- Fact check (company names, contact persons)
- Consistency (CV ↔ cover letter)
- Tone check (too stiff? too casual?)
- ATS optimization (if relevant)
7 FINALIZE
- Generate PDFs
- File names according to schema
- Send/Upload
8 TRACK & ARCHIVE
- Sent date, contact person
- Expected response deadline
- Follow-up reminder
- In case of rejection: Document learnings
## Tech Stack
- Claude Code as AI Agent.
- Markdown files to manage the specification
- Python for scripting.
## Project Conventions
### Code Style
- **Python Version**: 3.10+ (for modern type hints and match statements)
- **Formatting**: Use `black` for code formatting (88 character line length)
- **Linting**: Use `ruff` for fast linting and import sorting
- **Type Hints**: Mandatory for all function signatures; use `mypy` for static type checking
- **Naming Conventions**:
- Functions/variables: `snake_case`
- Classes: `PascalCase`
- Constants: `UPPER_SNAKE_CASE`
- Private methods: `_leading_underscore`
- **Docstrings**: Google-style docstrings for all public functions and classes
- **Import Organization**: Standard library, third-party, local (separated by blank lines)
### Architecture Patterns
- **Modular Design**: Separate modules for research, generation, formatting, and tracking
- **Template System**: Use Jinja2 for CV and cover letter templates
- **Pipeline Pattern**: Each workflow step is a distinct, testable function
- **Data Classes**: Use Python dataclasses for structured data (JobInfo, ApplicantProfile, GeneratedOutput)
- **Configuration**: YAML/TOML files for user profiles, templates, and settings
- **File Organization**:
```
src/
├── core/ # Core business logic
├── templates/ # Jinja2 templates for CVs, cover letters
├── research/ # Web scraping and analysis
├── generation/ # Content generation using Claude API
├── formatting/ # PDF/DOCX conversion
└── tracking/ # Application tracking and archiving
```
### Testing Strategy
- **Framework**: pytest for all testing
- **Coverage Target**: Aim for 80%+ coverage on core business logic
- **Test Types**:
- Unit tests for individual functions (research, generation logic)
- Integration tests for full workflow pipelines
- Snapshot/regression tests for generated content consistency
- **Fixtures**: Use pytest fixtures for sample job postings, user profiles
- **Mocking**: Mock external API calls (Claude API, web scraping) during tests
- **Test Data**: Store anonymized sample data in `tests/fixtures/`
### Git Workflow
- **Branching Strategy**: GitHub Flow (simplified)
- `main` branch is always deployable
- Feature branches: `feature/description` or `fix/description`
- Merge via pull requests (even for solo work, for documentation)
- **Commit Conventions**:
- Use conventional commits: `feat:`, `fix:`, `docs:`, `refactor:`, `test:`
- Keep commits atomic and focused
- Include OpenSpec references when implementing proposals
- **Versioning**: Semantic versioning (MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH)
- **Tags**: Tag releases with version numbers
## Domain Context
### Job Application Components
- **CV/Resume**: Structured document highlighting experience, skills, education
- Formats: PDF (standard), DOCX (editable), ATS-friendly plain text
- Sections: Summary, Experience, Education, Skills, Projects, Certifications
- **Cover Letter**: 1-page personalized motivation letter
- Structure: Opening, Why this role, What you bring, Cultural fit, Closing
- Tone variations: Formal (corporate), balanced (startups), casual (creative agencies)
- **Application Email**: Short intro email accompanying documents
- Subject line optimization
- Brief body (3-4 sentences max)
- Professional signature
### ATS (Applicant Tracking System) Optimization
- **Keyword Matching**: Extract keywords from job description and incorporate naturally
- **Formatting Rules**:
- Simple layouts (no tables, text boxes, headers/footers in CVs)
- Standard section headings
- Common fonts (Arial, Calibri, Times New Roman)
- **File Naming**: `FirstName_LastName_Position_Company.pdf`
### Cultural Considerations
- **German Market** (assumed based on "Bewerbungszauberer"):
- Photo on CV may be expected/common
- More formal tone than US applications
- Detailed work history with exact dates
- Certificates and credentials highly valued
- **Tone Analysis**: Detect company culture from job posting language and adapt
## Important Constraints
### Privacy & Data Protection
- **GDPR Compliance**: All personal data must be stored locally, never transmitted except to Claude API
- **No Cloud Storage**: Generated applications stored only on user's machine
- **API Key Security**: Claude API keys stored in environment variables or secure config, never in code
- **Data Retention**: User controls all archiving; no automatic telemetry or tracking
### Quality Standards
- **Factual Accuracy**: Never fabricate experience, skills, or achievements
- **Consistency**: All documents for one application must align (dates, job titles, responsibilities)
- **No Hallucinations**: Verify all company names, contact persons, and facts before generation
- **Human Review**: Generated content is a draft; user must review and approve
### Technical Limitations
- **API Rate Limits**: Respect Claude API rate limits; implement retry logic with exponential backoff
- **Cost Awareness**: Each application uses API tokens; provide cost estimates
- **Offline Capability**: Core template generation should work offline; only research requires internet
## External Dependencies
### AI Services
- **Anthropic Claude API**: Primary service for content generation, research analysis, and tone adaptation
- Models: Claude 3.5 Sonnet (primary), Claude 3 Haiku (quick operations)
- Usage: Cover letter writing, CV tailoring, keyword extraction, tone analysis
### Document Generation
- **ReportLab** or **WeasyPrint**: PDF generation from HTML/templates
- **python-docx**: DOCX file generation for editable documents
- **Jinja2**: Template engine for CV and cover letter structures
### Web Research (Optional)
- **BeautifulSoup4** + **requests**: Web scraping for company research
- **Playwright** or **Selenium**: For dynamic content if needed
- **Rate limiting**: Respect robots.txt and implement delays
### Data Management
- **PyYAML** or **tomli/tomllib**: Configuration file parsing
- **pydantic**: Data validation for user profiles and job information
- **SQLite**: Local database for tracking applications (lightweight, no server needed)
### Development Tools
- **black**: Code formatting
- **ruff**: Linting and import sorting
- **mypy**: Static type checking
- **pytest**: Testing framework
- **pytest-cov**: Coverage reporting