docs: clarify project-defined constitution articles#2994
Draft
YNan-varamor wants to merge 1 commit into
Draft
Conversation
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Note
Copilot was unable to run its full agentic suite in this review.
Adds clarification to the spec-driven documentation describing how Articles IV–VI are intended to be project-defined via a constitution template, and how /speckit.analyze enforces those customized principles.
Changes:
- Documented that Articles IV–VI are placeholders filled by each project’s constitution rather than fixed by Spec Kit
- Clarified examples of what governance topics these articles may cover (security, integration testing, observability, versioning)
- Stated that
/speckit.analyzeevaluates the project’s concrete constitution so these articles participate in compliance checks
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
|
|
||
| Articles IV, V, and VI are intentionally defined by each project's constitution rather than prescribed by Spec Kit. The constitution template provides placeholder slots and example concerns such as integration testing, observability, versioning, and breaking changes, but teams replace those placeholders with the principles that match their system and organization. | ||
|
|
||
| This keeps the nine-article structure stable while allowing each project to encode its own non-negotiable standards. For one project, Article IV might govern security and access boundaries; for another, it might define integration test requirements. The `/speckit.analyze` command evaluates the concrete constitution in the project, so these project-defined articles participate in compliance checks just like the built-in examples. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Clarifies that Articles IV, V, and VI in the SDD constitution are project-defined governance slots rather than fixed Spec Kit rules.
Why
Issue #2466 notes that
spec-driven.mddescribes Articles I, II, III, VII, VIII, and IX, but does not explain how Articles IV, V, and VI should be understood. The added section documents that these articles are intentionally customized by each project's constitution while preserving the nine-article structure.Validation
git diff --check/speckit.analyzeis an existing command in the repository docs/templatesAI assistance disclosure
This PR was prepared with assistance from OpenAI Codex. The change was reviewed locally and kept to a focused documentation update.