Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Propose a new change with all artifacts generated in one step. Use when the user wants to quickly describe what they want to build and get a complete proposal with design, specs, and tasks ready for implementation.
.claude/skills/bluelovers-openspec-propose/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-08 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 8% | 0% |
| case-13 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 87% | 0% |
| case-16 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 13% | 0% |
| case-17 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -4% | 0% |
| case-15 | ✓→✗ | ▼ Worse | 59% | 0% |
Propose a new change - create the change and generate all artifacts in one step.
I'll create a change with artifacts:
When ready to implement, run /opsx-apply
Input: The user's request should include a change name (kebab-case) OR a description of what they want to build.
Steps
Use the AskUserQuestion tool (open-ended, no preset options) to ask: > "What change do you want to work on? Describe what you want to build or fix."
From their description, derive a kebab-case name (e.g., "add user authentication" → add-user-auth).
IMPORTANT: Do NOT proceed without understanding what the user wants to build.
bash openspec new change "<name>" This creates a scaffolded change in the planning home resolved by the CLI with .openspec.yaml.
bash openspec status --change "<name>" --json Parse the JSON to get:
applyRequires: array of artifact IDs needed before implementation (e.g., ["tasks"])artifacts: list of all artifacts with their status and dependenciesplanningHome, changeRoot, artifactPaths, and actionContext: path and scope context. Use these instead of assuming repo-local paths.Use the TodoWrite tool to track progress through the artifacts.
Loop through artifacts in dependency order (artifacts with no pending dependencies first):
a. For each artifact that is ready (dependencies satisfied):
bash openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json
context: Project background (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)rules: Artifact-specific rules (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)template: The structure to use for your output fileinstruction: Schema-specific guidance for this artifact typeresolvedOutputPath: Resolved path or pattern to write the artifactdependencies: Completed artifacts to read for contexttemplate as the structure and write it to resolvedOutputPathcontext and rules as constraints - but do NOT copy them into the fileb. Continue until all applyRequires artifacts are complete
openspec status --change "<name>" --jsonapplyRequires has status: "done" in the artifacts arrayapplyRequires artifacts are donec. If an artifact requires user input (unclear context):
bash openspec status --change "<name>"
Output
After completing all artifacts, summarize:
/opsx-apply or ask me to implement to start working on the tasks."Artifact Creation Guidelines
instruction field from openspec instructions for each artifact typetemplate as the structure for your output file - fill in its sectionscontext and rules are constraints for YOU, not content for the file<context>, <rules>, <project_context> blocks into the artifactGuardrails
apply.requires)| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-20 | fail→fail | 11,138 | 7,566 | -32% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,972 | 2,383 | +21% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | 14,302 | 4,317 | -70% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,615 | 1,307 | -50% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→fail | 9,851 | 4,823 | -51% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,742 | 1,341 | -23% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | 14,027 | 4,230 | -70% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,485 | 1,260 | -49% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | 19,662 | 4,690 | -76% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,585 | 1,324 | -63% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→fail | 8,713 | 5,467 | -37% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,410 | 1,516 | +8% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→fail | 2,984 | 5,928 | +99% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 364 | 1,434 | +294% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | fail→fail | 10,064 | 4,667 | -54% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 966 | 1,257 | +30% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→pass | 11,674 | 5,979 | -49% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,001 | 2,155 | +8% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 8,083 | 2,971 | -63% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,194 | 1,606 | +35% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→fail | 4,466 | 5,368 | +20% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 783 | 1,390 | +78% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | pass→pass | 5,229 | 2,429 | -54% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 766 | 1,490 | +95% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | fail→fail | 10,234 | 5,324 | -48% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,664 | 1,401 | -16% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | 4,724 | 2,136 | -55% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 750 | 1,401 | +87% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | 7,931 | 5,793 | -27% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,331 | 2,049 | +54% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | pass→fail | 5,160 | 1,940 | -62% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 868 | 1,384 | +59% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | 7,471 | 2,539 | -66% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,280 | 1,448 | +13% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | 9,088 | 2,826 | -69% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,622 | 1,558 | -4% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→fail | 15,711 | 4,223 | -73% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,136 | 1,237 | -61% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→fail | 11,140 | 1,567 | -86% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,832 | 1,299 | -29% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 4,735 | 2,186 | -54% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 802 | 1,385 | +73% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | fail→fail | 7,005 | 1,823 | -74% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,390 | 1,327 | -5% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted, and 12 counted toward the lift figure. The other 10 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +14 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 12 comparable cases. 5 cases got worse with the skill loaded, and they are included in that figure.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.