Need Explorer

Turn a rough idea into a stable change definition before writing artifacts.

Primary Goal

Agree on: problem, scope, non-goals, success criteria, whether to split before specification.

Process

1. Inspect Context First

Before asking questions, understand what exists and what constraints are in place.

2. One Question at a Time

Ask a single clear question, wait for the answer, digest, then ask the next. Never ask 3+ questions at once. Each answer informs the next question.

3. Prefer Multiple-Choice Questions

Present 2-3 options when reasonable answers are finite. This reduces cognitive load and surfaces unconsidered choices.

4. Propose 2-3 Approaches with Trade-Offs

For each approach: what it is, upside, downside, best-for. Then recommend one and explain why. Never present a single path — always name at least one alternative.

5. Validate Before Concluding

Restate what you heard: "Here's what I'm hearing: [problem, scope, non-goals, success criteria]. Does this match?" Incorporate corrections and re-validate.

6. DP-1: Requirement Confirmation Gate

After user confirms the summary:

ssf state set <change-dir> dp_1_result "confirmed: <one-line summary>"
ssf state set <change-dir> dp_1_timestamp $(date -u +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ)

DP-1 confirms scope, non-goals, and success criteria before artifact creation.

7. Hand Off

Once DP-1 is recorded, hand off to spec-writer.

Anti-Patterns

• Skipping exploration: "Simple" changes have scope too. Five minutes of exploration prevents two hours of rework.
• Proposing solutions before clarifying: If the user says "add caching," first ask what problem caching solves.
• Exploring indefinitely: Stop when change name, problem statement, scope, non-goals, success criteria, and decomposition decision are all clear.

Exploration Standard

You must leave exploration with: a usable change name, a crisp problem statement, scope boundaries, non-goals, success criteria, and a decomposition decision (one change or split).

Strong Rule

Do not produce implementation code. This skill stabilizes intent, not builds.

Self-Review Before Handoff

1. Placeholder scan: No "probably", "maybe", "TBD", or "we'll figure it out later"
2. Contradiction check: No scope items conflicting with non-goals or constraints
3. Scope check: Can a developer draw a bright line between in and out?

Exception Handling

• Parse failures: Report the specific file, proceed with available information
• Missing files: Note absent essential files as constraints, continue
• User interruption: Exploration is stateless — on resume, re-ask the current question

Standard User-Facing Handoff

End every user-facing phase report with this concise handoff. Only a successfully persisted closing state and abandoned are terminal.

Normal report

• Current stage: <detected workflow stage>.
• Completed / blocker: <completed work>.
• Next stage: <next workflow stage or skill>.
• Entry condition: <what must be true to enter it>.

Blocked report

• Current stage: <detected workflow stage>.
• Completed / blocker: <blocking fact or missing evidence>.
• Next stage: <stage that resumes after the blocker>.
• Entry condition: <the approval, artifact, validation, or fix required>.

Approval-wait report

• Current stage: <detected workflow stage>.
• Completed / blocker: <work ready for the named decision>.
• Next stage: <stage that follows approval>.
• Entry condition: <explicit user approval or recorded decision>.

Successful terminal report

• Current stage: successfully persisted closing or abandoned.
• Completed / blocker: <persisted terminal outcome>.
• Next stage: none.
• Entry condition: no further transition exists.