Chapter 2 · Spec-Driven Development in Depth · Lesson 2.5

Choosing & Adopting a Spec Framework

A simple decision aid for picking Spec Kit, OpenSpec, or agent-skills - and how a committed spec plugs into your harness.

The decision aid

You have now seen all three frameworks close up. The choice is not "which is best" - it is "which weight fits my situation". Match the ceremony to the context: heavy structure on a throwaway is waste, and none at all on a big team project is drift. Use this table to pick.

Your situationReach for
Greenfield project; want a thorough, repeatable, structured process; don't mind the ceremonySpec Kit
Existing (brownfield) codebase; want it lightweight and iterative; fast setupOpenSpec
Already in a skill-capable harness (e.g. Claude Code); want SDD with no extra toolingagent-skills
Just testing the water on any one taskThe 5-line spec habit (no tool)
Adopting without pain

A spec is part of your harness

This is the point that ties the whole chapter to the rest of the course. A committed, living spec is scaffolding - it steers the agent every turn, just like a rules file or a hook. So treat it with the ratchet: earn it, keep it lean, and prune it when the model no longer needs the hand-holding.

A spec is not paperwork - it's harness. It is durable structure that steers the agent, and it earns its keep the same way a rule does. The SDD-as-harness principle - see Osmani, Agent Harness Engineering

Honest close

The best framework is the lightest one your project can get away with. A heavyweight setup cargo-culted onto a small job costs you in tokens and ceremony; a no-structure free-for-all on a big team project costs you in drift and rework. Pick by context, commit what you choose, and ratchet it as you learn. And remember: if all you ever need is the five-line spec, that is not a failure of SDD - it is SDD working at the right weight.

You've completed Chapter 2

One breath: spec-driven development makes the spec the source of truth, and three frameworks deliver it at three weights - Spec Kit (heavy, phase-gated), OpenSpec (light, change-based), and agent-skills (a drop-in skill). Pick by context, commit what you choose, and treat the spec as part of your harness - lean, earned, and disposable. Next, Chapter 3 takes the harness you've built and runs it for real, safely.

Check yourself

For a big greenfield project you should -

Spec Kit's thorough, repeatable, phase-gated process is the fit when you want full ceremony on a large, long-lived, greenfield project - the other options are lighter and better suited to brownfield or no-extra-tooling situations.

On an existing brownfield codebase, choose -

OpenSpec is brownfield-first, lightweight, and iterative - it can even reverse-engineer baseline specs from code you already have. That fits an existing codebase where heavy phase gates would fight you.

A committed spec is best treated as -

A committed, living spec is durable scaffolding that steers the agent - harness. So earn it, keep it lean, and prune it when the model outgrows it, exactly like a rule or a hook.

Do this now (5 min)

Using the table above, pick one framework (or the plain 5-line habit) for your next real project, and write one sentence on why it fits your context - greenfield vs brownfield, solo vs team, ceremony-tolerant or not. If you can't name the reason, you don't have a context yet, so start with the 5-line habit.

I'm your teacher - ask freely. Not sure which weight fits your project? Describe it - greenfield or brownfield, solo or team, how big - and we'll pick the right framework together. Chapter 2 is complete, so we can also dive deeper into any Spec Kit command, OpenSpec's "change" model, or the agent-skills workflow.

Go deeper

Primary source (read this): GitHub Spec Kit and OpenSpec - skim both READMEs side by side to feel the heavy-vs-light contrast for yourself.

Secondary: Addy Osmani - Agent Harness Engineering - on treating all scaffolding (specs included) as earned and disposable harness.

Wisdom (test it on people): r/ChatGPTCoding - active, cross-tool debate on which spec framework fits which job.