feat: spec-dc writes the spec in the request's language - #14
Merged
Conversation
The /spec-dc output was always English. Make the spec artifact follow the language the user used to describe the feature (Portuguese request → Portuguese spec), so the human-reviewed artifact reads in the team's language — with zero config, correct for every install (no language is forced on template users). - Prose only: the seven section headings and the filename slug stay ASCII structural anchors that /plan-dc relies on to locate content. - Reviewer prompt notes the spec may not be in English, so language is never flagged as a defect. - /plan-dc and /execute-dc are unchanged (English) — the spec is what matters for human review. - Applied to both the repo's own command and the distributed template copy. - ADR-020 History updated (v1.2). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
WalkthroughThe ChangesSpecification localization
Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes Possibly related PRs
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In @.claude/commands/spec-dc.md:
- Around line 189-190: Update the reviewer guidance at
.claude/commands/spec-dc.md lines 189-190 to allow specs in the original
request’s language while still requiring verification against the requested or
documented fallback language; apply the identical synchronized correction at
templates/.claude/commands/spec-dc.md lines 189-190.
- Around line 78-88: Define a deterministic language-selection rule in the
“Output language” guidance, explicitly specifying how to resolve multilingual
feature descriptions, clarifying Q&A, and conflicting repository-language
sources before applying the fallback for ambiguous input. Apply the identical
rule at .claude/commands/spec-dc.md:78-88 and
templates/.claude/commands/spec-dc.md:78-88, while preserving the fixed headings
and ASCII slug requirements.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Organization UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 423353ce-7b3a-4cd8-9758-1ce8994983f0
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
.claude/commands/spec-dc.md.context/decisions/020-spec-plan-execute-workflow.mdtemplates/.claude/commands/spec-dc.md
The output-language rule lived only in the spec-dc command body, so it reached Claude/opencode/Copilot but not the harnesses that run workflows from the AGENTS.md `## Workflows` section (Gemini, Cursor, Codex). Add a note there so those harnesses also write the spec in the request's language. Seed file (create-only), so this reaches new installs via `init`; existing projects keep their user-owned AGENTS.md untouched, per ADR-020. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@templates/AGENTS.md`:
- Around line 117-121: Update the language guidance in the spec-dc instructions
to explicitly require the seven section headings to remain exactly as written in
the template, while keeping the filename slug as an ASCII structural anchor;
preserve the existing language behavior for spec prose and the English-only
requirements for plan-dc and execute-dc.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Organization UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 72a390da-98d2-4618-8abd-bcf827f10ddb
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
templates/AGENTS.md
- spec-dc: make output-language selection deterministic (explicit precedence: $ARGUMENTS description → clarifying Q&A → repo primary language → English) - spec-dc: reviewer now verifies the spec's language matches the request (or the documented fallback) instead of ignoring language entirely — a non-English spec is not a defect, but the wrong language is - AGENTS.md: require the seven section headings "exactly as written in the template" (only the slug is ASCII), matching the spec-dc contract plan-dc relies on Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
18 tasks
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
1 participant
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.
What
/spec-dcnow writes the spec artifact in the same language the user used to describe the feature — a Portuguese request produces a Portuguese spec, an English request an English spec. Ambiguous → repo's primary language, then English.Only the spec is localized (as discussed).
/plan-dcand/execute-dcstay English — the spec is the artifact that matters for human review.Why this approach
The spec command is a static markdown prompt with no notion of locale, and there are two copies (the repo's own
.claude/commands/and the distributedtemplates/). Hardcoding Portuguese would ship Portuguese to every install of the toolkit. "Follow the request's language" is instead zero-config, globally correct (no language forced on any template user), and naturally gives the team Portuguese specs.Changes
spec-dc.md→ new "Output language" subsection: write the spec in the request's language; prose only — the seven section headings and the filename slug stay ASCII structural anchors/plan-dcrelies on to locate content.templates/AGENTS.md→ Workflows note: carries the same rule to the harnesses that have no per-repo command file and run workflows from the## Workflowssection (Gemini, Cursor, Codex), for cross-harness parity.How it reaches users
mainat runtime, so this is live on merge.spec-dc.mdis already in theupdate.shmanaged set → existing projects get it viadotcontext update(diff + prompt); new installs viadotcontext init. Nosrc/change needed; thedotcontextbinary stays in sync (CI sync gate passes).update(re-init or manual edit); new installs get it.AGENTS.mdnote above (seed/create-only → new installs viainit; existing user-ownedAGENTS.mduntouched, per ADR-020).Out of scope
Localizing plan/execute; config/locale machinery. A separate analysis of
mattpocock/skillssurfaced a skill-authoring quality rubric worth considering later — intentionally not in this PR.🤖 Generated with Claude Code
Summary by CodeRabbit