terse: rewrite v0.8.1 command templates — 1998 → 642 lines (68% cut)

Rewrote all 9 command templates from scratch based on v0.8.1 upstream
content, applying the fork's terse philosophy:

- Collapsed the ~60-line hook-checking boilerplate duplicated in every
  file down to one line ("Run hooks.before_X from .specify/extensions.yml
  if present"). This alone saved ~500 lines across the 9 files.
- Cut long example lists (implement.md's per-technology ignore-file
  enumerations, specify.md's "For AI Generation" prose, good/bad
  example tables) to 2-3 representative cases.
- Removed philosophy prose that restated what the step-by-step already
  said.
- Added explicit output line limits to constrain generated artifacts:
  spec.md ≤50 lines, plan.md ≤60 lines.
- Preserved all v0.8.1 new features: __SPECKIT_COMMAND_X__ template
  markers (for install-time substitution), .specify/feature.json
  persistence, branch_numbering sequential/timestamp mode, extension
  hook points, checklist gate in implement, scripts frontmatter with
  sh/ps variants.

Per-file:
  specify     327 →  74
  plan        152 →  59
  tasks       203 →  84
  implement   201 →  65
  analyze     252 →  95
  checklist   364 →  54
  clarify     250 →  94
  constitution 150 →  76
  taskstoissues 99 →  41

Data templates (templates/*.md) left untouched for now; the command-
level line-limit instructions constrain output at generation time even
if the templates retain their example sections. If still too verbose
in practice, data-template trimming can follow in a separate PR.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Author: fry-lobster

templates/commands/analyze.md

@@ -13,240 +13,83 @@ $ARGUMENTS
 
 You **MUST** consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
 
-## Pre-Execution Checks
+## Pre-Execution
 
-**Check for extension hooks (before analysis)**:
-- Check if `.specify/extensions.yml` exists in the project root.
-- If it exists, read it and look for entries under the `hooks.before_analyze` key
-- If the YAML cannot be parsed or is invalid, skip hook checking silently and continue normally
-- Filter out hooks where `enabled` is explicitly `false`. Treat hooks without an `enabled` field as enabled by default.
-- For each remaining hook, do **not** attempt to interpret or evaluate hook `condition` expressions:
-  - If the hook has no `condition` field, or it is null/empty, treat the hook as executable
-  - If the hook defines a non-empty `condition`, skip the hook and leave condition evaluation to the HookExecutor implementation
-- For each executable hook, output the following based on its `optional` flag:
-  - **Optional hook** (`optional: true`):
-    ```
-    ## Extension Hooks
+Run `hooks.before_analyze` from `.specify/extensions.yml` if present.
 
-    **Optional Pre-Hook**: {extension}
-    Command: `/{command}`
-    Description: {description}
+## Constraints
 
-    Prompt: {prompt}
-    To execute: `/{command}`
-    ```
-  - **Mandatory hook** (`optional: false`):
-    ```
-    ## Extension Hooks
+**READ-ONLY.** Do not modify any files. Output a single analysis report.
 
-    **Automatic Pre-Hook**: {extension}
-    Executing: `/{command}`
-    EXECUTE_COMMAND: {command}
+**Constitution is authoritative.** Conflicts with `/memory/constitution.md` → always CRITICAL. Principles change only via `__SPECKIT_COMMAND_CONSTITUTION__`.
 
-    Wait for the result of the hook command before proceeding to the Goal.
-    ```
-- If no hooks are registered or `.specify/extensions.yml` does not exist, skip silently
+## Steps
 
-## Goal
+1. **Setup**: run `{SCRIPT}`. Parse `FEATURE_DIR` + `AVAILABLE_DOCS`. Derive absolute paths:
+   - `SPEC = FEATURE_DIR/spec.md`
+   - `PLAN = FEATURE_DIR/plan.md`
+   - `TASKS = FEATURE_DIR/tasks.md`
 
-Identify inconsistencies, duplications, ambiguities, and underspecified items across the three core artifacts (`spec.md`, `plan.md`, `tasks.md`) before implementation. This command MUST run only after `__SPECKIT_COMMAND_TASKS__` has successfully produced a complete `tasks.md`.
+   Abort if any is missing.
 
-## Operating Constraints
+2. **Load minimally**:
+   - `spec.md` → Overview, Functional Requirements, Success Criteria, User Stories, Edge Cases
+   - `plan.md` → Architecture, data-model refs, phases, constraints
+   - `tasks.md` → IDs, descriptions, phases, `[P]`, file paths
+   - `constitution.md` → principles
 
-**STRICTLY READ-ONLY**: Do **not** modify any files. Output a structured analysis report. Offer an optional remediation plan (user must explicitly approve before any follow-up editing commands would be invoked manually).
+3. **Build internal models** (don't emit):
+   - Requirements inventory: FR-###, SC-### as keys (skip non-buildable outcomes like "reduce tickets by 50%")
+   - User-action inventory with acceptance criteria
+   - Task → requirement mapping
+   - Constitution MUST/SHOULD statements
 
-**Constitution Authority**: The project constitution (`/memory/constitution.md`) is **non-negotiable** within this analysis scope. Constitution conflicts are automatically CRITICAL and require adjustment of the spec, plan, or tasks—not dilution, reinterpretation, or silent ignoring of the principle. If a principle itself needs to change, that must occur in a separate, explicit constitution update outside `__SPECKIT_COMMAND_ANALYZE__`.
+4. **Detection passes** (max 50 findings; overflow summarized):
+   - **A. Duplication** — near-duplicate requirements; flag worse phrasing
+   - **B. Ambiguity** — vague adjectives ("fast", "robust") without metrics; TODO/TKTK/`<placeholder>`
+   - **C. Underspecification** — verbs with no object; stories missing acceptance; tasks referencing undefined components
+   - **D. Constitution alignment** — any conflict with MUST principle; missing mandated sections
+   - **E. Coverage gaps** — requirements with 0 tasks; tasks with no mapped requirement; buildable SCs not reflected in tasks
+   - **F. Inconsistency** — terminology drift; entity mentioned in plan but not spec (or vice versa); task ordering contradictions; conflicting choices (Next.js vs Vue)
 
-## Execution Steps
+5. **Severity**:
+   - CRITICAL — constitution MUST violation, missing core artifact, zero-coverage blocking baseline
+   - HIGH — duplicate/conflicting requirement, ambiguous security/perf attribute, untestable acceptance
+   - MEDIUM — terminology drift, missing NFR coverage, underspecified edge case
+   - LOW — wording, minor redundancy
 
-### 1. Initialize Analysis Context
+6. **Emit report**:
 
-Run `{SCRIPT}` once from repo root and parse JSON for FEATURE_DIR and AVAILABLE_DOCS. Derive absolute paths:
+   ```
+   ## Specification Analysis Report
 
-- SPEC = FEATURE_DIR/spec.md
-- PLAN = FEATURE_DIR/plan.md
-- TASKS = FEATURE_DIR/tasks.md
+   | ID | Category | Severity | Location | Summary | Recommendation |
 
-Abort with an error message if any required file is missing (instruct the user to run missing prerequisite command).
-For single quotes in args like "I'm Groot", use escape syntax: e.g 'I'\''m Groot' (or double-quote if possible: "I'm Groot").
+   ## Coverage Summary
 
-### 2. Load Artifacts (Progressive Disclosure)
+   | Requirement | Has Task? | Task IDs | Notes |
 
-Load only the minimal necessary context from each artifact:
+   ## Constitution Alignment Issues
+   ## Unmapped Tasks
+   ## Metrics
+   - Total requirements / tasks / coverage % / ambiguity / duplication / critical count
+   ```
 
-**From spec.md:**
+   Stable IDs prefixed by category initial (`D1`, `A2`, …).
 
-- Overview/Context
-- Functional Requirements
-- Success Criteria (measurable outcomes — e.g., performance, security, availability, user success, business impact)
-- User Stories
-- Edge Cases (if present)
+7. **Next actions**:
+   - CRITICAL present → recommend resolving before `__SPECKIT_COMMAND_IMPLEMENT__`
+   - Only LOW/MEDIUM → may proceed; list improvement suggestions
+   - Suggest specific follow-up commands
 
-**From plan.md:**
+8. **Offer remediation**: ask "Suggest concrete edits for top N?" — never apply automatically.
 
-- Architecture/stack choices
-- Data Model references
-- Phases
-- Technical constraints
+9. Run `hooks.after_analyze` if present.
 
-**From tasks.md:**
+## Principles
 
-- Task IDs
-- Descriptions
-- Phase grouping
-- Parallel markers [P]
-- Referenced file paths
-
-**From constitution:**
-
-- Load `/memory/constitution.md` for principle validation
-
-### 3. Build Semantic Models
-
-Create internal representations (do not include raw artifacts in output):
-
-- **Requirements inventory**: For each Functional Requirement (FR-###) and Success Criterion (SC-###), record a stable key. Use the explicit FR-/SC- identifier as the primary key when present, and optionally also derive an imperative-phrase slug for readability (e.g., "User can upload file" → `user-can-upload-file`). Include only Success Criteria items that require buildable work (e.g., load-testing infrastructure, security audit tooling), and exclude post-launch outcome metrics and business KPIs (e.g., "Reduce support tickets by 50%").
-- **User story/action inventory**: Discrete user actions with acceptance criteria
-- **Task coverage mapping**: Map each task to one or more requirements or stories (inference by keyword / explicit reference patterns like IDs or key phrases)
-- **Constitution rule set**: Extract principle names and MUST/SHOULD normative statements
-
-### 4. Detection Passes (Token-Efficient Analysis)
-
-Focus on high-signal findings. Limit to 50 findings total; aggregate remainder in overflow summary.
-
-#### A. Duplication Detection
-
-- Identify near-duplicate requirements
-- Mark lower-quality phrasing for consolidation
-
-#### B. Ambiguity Detection
-
-- Flag vague adjectives (fast, scalable, secure, intuitive, robust) lacking measurable criteria
-- Flag unresolved placeholders (TODO, TKTK, ???, `<placeholder>`, etc.)
-
-#### C. Underspecification
-
-- Requirements with verbs but missing object or measurable outcome
-- User stories missing acceptance criteria alignment
-- Tasks referencing files or components not defined in spec/plan
-
-#### D. Constitution Alignment
-
-- Any requirement or plan element conflicting with a MUST principle
-- Missing mandated sections or quality gates from constitution
-
-#### E. Coverage Gaps
-
-- Requirements with zero associated tasks
-- Tasks with no mapped requirement/story
-- Success Criteria requiring buildable work (performance, security, availability) not reflected in tasks
-
-#### F. Inconsistency
-
-- Terminology drift (same concept named differently across files)
-- Data entities referenced in plan but absent in spec (or vice versa)
-- Task ordering contradictions (e.g., integration tasks before foundational setup tasks without dependency note)
-- Conflicting requirements (e.g., one requires Next.js while other specifies Vue)
-
-### 5. Severity Assignment
-
-Use this heuristic to prioritize findings:
-
-- **CRITICAL**: Violates constitution MUST, missing core spec artifact, or requirement with zero coverage that blocks baseline functionality
-- **HIGH**: Duplicate or conflicting requirement, ambiguous security/performance attribute, untestable acceptance criterion
-- **MEDIUM**: Terminology drift, missing non-functional task coverage, underspecified edge case
-- **LOW**: Style/wording improvements, minor redundancy not affecting execution order
-
-### 6. Produce Compact Analysis Report
-
-Output a Markdown report (no file writes) with the following structure:
-
-## Specification Analysis Report
-
-| ID | Category | Severity | Location(s) | Summary | Recommendation |
-|----|----------|----------|-------------|---------|----------------|
-| A1 | Duplication | HIGH | spec.md:L120-134 | Two similar requirements ... | Merge phrasing; keep clearer version |
-
-(Add one row per finding; generate stable IDs prefixed by category initial.)
-
-**Coverage Summary Table:**
-
-| Requirement Key | Has Task? | Task IDs | Notes |
-|-----------------|-----------|----------|-------|
-
-**Constitution Alignment Issues:** (if any)
-
-**Unmapped Tasks:** (if any)
-
-**Metrics:**
-
-- Total Requirements
-- Total Tasks
-- Coverage % (requirements with >=1 task)
-- Ambiguity Count
-- Duplication Count
-- Critical Issues Count
-
-### 7. Provide Next Actions
-
-At end of report, output a concise Next Actions block:
-
-- If CRITICAL issues exist: Recommend resolving before `__SPECKIT_COMMAND_IMPLEMENT__`
-- If only LOW/MEDIUM: User may proceed, but provide improvement suggestions
-- Provide explicit command suggestions: e.g., "Run __SPECKIT_COMMAND_SPECIFY__ with refinement", "Run __SPECKIT_COMMAND_PLAN__ to adjust architecture", "Manually edit tasks.md to add coverage for 'performance-metrics'"
-
-### 8. Offer Remediation
-
-Ask the user: "Would you like me to suggest concrete remediation edits for the top N issues?" (Do NOT apply them automatically.)
-
-### 9. Check for extension hooks
-
-After reporting, check if `.specify/extensions.yml` exists in the project root.
-- If it exists, read it and look for entries under the `hooks.after_analyze` key
-- If the YAML cannot be parsed or is invalid, skip hook checking silently and continue normally
-- Filter out hooks where `enabled` is explicitly `false`. Treat hooks without an `enabled` field as enabled by default.
-- For each remaining hook, do **not** attempt to interpret or evaluate hook `condition` expressions:
-  - If the hook has no `condition` field, or it is null/empty, treat the hook as executable
-  - If the hook defines a non-empty `condition`, skip the hook and leave condition evaluation to the HookExecutor implementation
-- For each executable hook, output the following based on its `optional` flag:
-  - **Optional hook** (`optional: true`):
-    ```
-    ## Extension Hooks
-
-    **Optional Hook**: {extension}
-    Command: `/{command}`
-    Description: {description}
-
-    Prompt: {prompt}
-    To execute: `/{command}`
-    ```
-  - **Mandatory hook** (`optional: false`):
-    ```
-    ## Extension Hooks
-
-    **Automatic Hook**: {extension}
-    Executing: `/{command}`
-    EXECUTE_COMMAND: {command}
-    ```
-- If no hooks are registered or `.specify/extensions.yml` does not exist, skip silently
-
-## Operating Principles
-
-### Context Efficiency
-
-- **Minimal high-signal tokens**: Focus on actionable findings, not exhaustive documentation
-- **Progressive disclosure**: Load artifacts incrementally; don't dump all content into analysis
-- **Token-efficient output**: Limit findings table to 50 rows; summarize overflow
-- **Deterministic results**: Rerunning without changes should produce consistent IDs and counts
-
-### Analysis Guidelines
-
-- **NEVER modify files** (this is read-only analysis)
-- **NEVER hallucinate missing sections** (if absent, report them accurately)
-- **Prioritize constitution violations** (these are always CRITICAL)
-- **Use examples over exhaustive rules** (cite specific instances, not generic patterns)
-- **Report zero issues gracefully** (emit success report with coverage statistics)
-
-## Context
-
-{ARGS}
+- **Never modify files.**
+- **Never hallucinate missing sections** — report them as absent.
+- **Constitution violations are always CRITICAL.**
+- Cite specific instances, not generic patterns.
+- Deterministic: same input → same IDs and counts.