OpenSpec – A lightweight and configurable AI spec framework • Hacker News Board

Re: OpenSpec – A lightweight and configurable AI spec framework

#31

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Sep 17, 2026, 2:17 AM UTC

alexjplant wrote: post #23

sheepscreek wrote: post #15

Haven’t we moved on from these things? Most recent LLMs have been trained on enough long context tasks to have become pretty good at planning. Perhaps with contributions from the harness. In either case, I wouldn’t bother if I were using Codex or Claude Code.

I bother because Claude Code does wacky nonsense unless I use OpenSpec (or something similar) to explicitly research, scope, persist, then implement in a brand-new context. Even Opus will do ridiculous nonsense like throw its hands up when asked to start a Docker container, ignore explicit architectural instructions, write verbose make-work documentation riddled with inaccuracies, etc. Using OpenSpec keeps things as…

[deleted]

Re: OpenSpec – A lightweight and configurable AI spec framework

#32

Post by esafak » Thu, Sep 17, 2026, 2:26 AM UTC

Even OpenSpec is too heavy for me. I do similar things but in one file, which I generate with a skill after a planning session. The important thing is to have a file reviewers can audit the code against.

Re: OpenSpec – A lightweight and configurable AI spec framework

#33

Post by verdverm » Thu, Sep 17, 2026, 2:31 AM UTC

Wazzymandias wrote: post #24

sheepscreek wrote: post #15

Haven’t we moved on from these things? Most recent LLMs have been trained on enough long context tasks to have become pretty good at planning. Perhaps with contributions from the harness. In either case, I wouldn’t bother if I were using Codex or Claude Code.

> been trained on enough long context tasks to have become pretty good at planning This is absolutely not true

if anything in the latest batch, they have been trained to try everything and anything to get a task done, hence their hacking abilities, but also how they go way off the rails when they don't get sufficient context on our human intent for the task

feels less like planning and more like throwing spaghetti at the wall the moment ambiguity emerges, I really hope the next batch dials it back

Re: OpenSpec – A lightweight and configurable AI spec framework

#34

Post by jmathai » Thu, Sep 17, 2026, 2:39 AM UTC

sheepscreek wrote: post #15

Haven’t we moved on from these things? Most recent LLMs have been trained on enough long context tasks to have become pretty good at planning. Perhaps with contributions from the harness. In either case, I wouldn’t bother if I were using Codex or Claude Code.

Do you save the plans from plan mode alongside of the feature? I use specs to save the artifact but hadn't thought of using plan mode as the spec generator itself.

Re: OpenSpec – A lightweight and configurable AI spec framework

#35

Post by jmathai » Thu, Sep 17, 2026, 2:43 AM UTC

OutOfHere wrote: post #21

jmathai wrote: post #10

I have a super simple spec-based workflow. It works amazingly well. I’m amazed how well coding agents can work through what I consider large features. Last week, I gave a 471 line spec to implement a major feature and it didn’t flinch. I wrote about it here. https://jaisenmathai.com/articles/sojourn-for-ios-was-45-one...

I am sorry but 471 lines is nothing in 2026. Come back when it has executed a 5000-10,000 line spec flawlessly, although the threshold keeps getting higher as the models get better. You're right though about a simple spec based workflow going far.

Yeah - I'm sure folks have pushed it further than I have. But this is what I've seen with my own eyes as opposed to read from others. And even at 471, I'm impressed.

Re: OpenSpec – A lightweight and configurable AI spec framework

#36

Post by thesmtsolver2 » Thu, Sep 17, 2026, 2:48 AM UTC

Wazzymandias wrote: post #24

sheepscreek wrote: post #15

Haven’t we moved on from these things? Most recent LLMs have been trained on enough long context tasks to have become pretty good at planning. Perhaps with contributions from the harness. In either case, I wouldn’t bother if I were using Codex or Claude Code.

> been trained on enough long context tasks to have become pretty good at planning This is absolutely not true

Well, they are absolutely pretty good at faking being good at long-horizon planning which is enough to fool a lot of people till things start breaking lol.

Re: OpenSpec – A lightweight and configurable AI spec framework

#37

Post by crossroadsguy » Thu, Sep 17, 2026, 3:04 AM UTC

sheepscreek wrote: post #15

Haven’t we moved on from these things? Most recent LLMs have been trained on enough long context tasks to have become pretty good at planning. Perhaps with contributions from the harness. In either case, I wouldn’t bother if I were using Codex or Claude Code.

I mostly use speckit, not openspec. I think basically these are the same tools. There are other reasons for using such tools, but one reason is to enforce discipline for me and the LLM. Otherwise, often it starts going round in circles. Helps me save tokens as well. Again, the discipline is the important bit (along with clearly produced artefacts). Can I do all of this just with the LLM? Yes and that's what I did but it was very messy.

Re: OpenSpec – A lightweight and configurable AI spec framework

#38

Post by broodbucket » Thu, Sep 17, 2026, 3:12 AM UTC

nullbio wrote: post #28

I just have it write a checklist file in /tmp (or a todo folder if I want to keep it), and check off items as it finishes them. Seems to work fine. Is this really needed?

If you're writing design documentation to /tmp you're not the target audience for this kind of thing

Re: OpenSpec – A lightweight and configurable AI spec framework

#39

Post by open-paren » Thu, Sep 17, 2026, 3:19 AM UTC

my org at work adopted openspec, and i strongly dislike it. every change, medium or larger, turns into a large set of multiple markdown documents, each that need review. and they are never handwritten - always slop, filled with the all the tells of ai writing, which i personally find grating.

i find a small, human written spec to be much more effective than these large spec documents.

the idea is that you iterate with your agent to write the spec, you implement, then eventually that spec gets merged into a "spec corpus" that describes all the behavior of the repository. but i don't think that prose can ever enumerate all the behaviors required of code, nor should it. the spec almost immediately becomes out of date.

Re: OpenSpec – A lightweight and configurable AI spec framework

#40

Post by nonethewiser » Thu, Sep 17, 2026, 3:36 AM UTC

open-paren wrote: post #39

my org at work adopted openspec, and i strongly dislike it. every change, medium or larger, turns into a large set of multiple markdown documents, each that need review. and they are never handwritten - always slop, filled with the all the tells of ai writing, which i personally find grating. i find a small, human written spec to be much more effective than these large spec documents. the idea is that you iterate wit…

Trying to impose this kind of structure on the agent workflow creates more work and decreases quality. It's an illusion of control.