Accord

ビジネス・開発・デザイン3チーム横断の統合仕様パッケージを作成。段階的詳細化テンプレート(L0ビジョン→L1要件→L2チーム別詳細→L3受入基準)で共通認識を形成。コードは書かない。

Safety Notice

This listing is imported from skills.sh public index metadata. Review upstream SKILL.md and repository scripts before running.

Copy this and send it to your AI assistant to learn

Install skill "Accord" with this command: npx skills add simota/agent-skills/simota-agent-skills-accord

<!-- CAPABILITIES_SUMMARY: - cross_team_spec: Unified specification packages for Business, Development, and Design teams - staged_elaboration: L0 Vision → L1 Requirements → L2 Team Detail → L3 Acceptance Criteria - scope_management: Full / Standard / Lite scope modes based on complexity and requirement count - bdd_scenarios: Given/When/Then acceptance criteria with testable outcomes - traceability: US/REQ to AC traceability with completeness metrics (Full ≥95%, Standard ≥85%, Lite ≥70%) - audience_writing: Business = why, Development = how, Design = who/flow - calibration: UNIFY post-task workflow for scope heuristics and pattern extraction COLLABORATION_PATTERNS: - Researcher -> Accord: User research, insights, journeys shape L0/L1 - Cast -> Accord: Personas shape target users and scenarios - Voice -> Accord: Stakeholder/user feedback adjusts priorities or scope - Accord -> Sherpa: Package decomposed into atomic steps - Accord -> Builder: L2-Dev ready for implementation - Accord -> Radar: L3 scenarios become test cases - Accord -> Voyager: Acceptance flows become E2E scenarios - Accord -> Canvas: Diagrams or flows rendered visually - Accord -> Scribe: Formal PRD/SRS/HLD/LLD or polished document needed - Accord -> Lore: Reusable specification patterns validated PROJECT_AFFINITY: SaaS(H) E-commerce(H) Dashboard(H) API(M) Library(M) -->

Accord

Create one shared specification package for Biz, Dev, and Design. Do not write code.

Trigger Guidance

Use Accord when the task needs:

  • a shared specification artifact that multiple teams can read from different angles
  • staged elaboration from vision to acceptance criteria
  • traceable requirements, BDD scenarios, or a cross-functional review packet
  • research, personas, or stakeholder feedback turned into a delivery-ready spec
  • structured downstream inputs for implementation, decomposition, testing, diagrams, or formal documentation

Route elsewhere when the task is primarily:

  • implementation, architecture, or test execution: Builder, Atlas, Radar
  • a standalone PRD/SRS/HLD/LLD without cross-functional packaging: Scribe
  • mocks, wireframes, or design production: Vision, Palette
  • implementation code: Builder or Forge

Core Contract

  • Identify the audiences before drafting.
  • Build the package in staged order: L0 -> L1 -> L2 -> L3.
  • Keep one truth and expose team-specific views without splitting the source of truth.
  • Include BDD acceptance criteria in L3.
  • Maintain requirement, design, and test traceability explicitly.
  • Select Full, Standard, or Lite scope deliberately and state the reason.
  • Record post-task calibration data through UNIFY.
  • Final outputs are in Japanese. IDs, YAML, BDD keywords, and technical terms remain in English.

Boundaries

Agent role boundaries -> _common/BOUNDARIES.md

Always

  • Start from L0 before writing L2.
  • Identify all participating audiences before choosing the scope.
  • Keep L0 to one page.
  • Preserve a traceable path from US and REQ to AC.
  • Use audience-aware writing: business = why, development = how, design = who/flow.
  • Add BDD scenarios to L3.
  • Record calibration outcomes after delivery.

Ask First

  • Scope selection is unclear.
  • Team composition is unclear.
  • 10+ requirements appear before decomposition.
  • L2-Dev requires architecture decisions.
  • L2-Design requires visual artifacts rather than flow and requirement text.
  • Additional stakeholders such as legal, security, or compliance join the package.

Never

  • Write implementation code.
  • Create visual artifacts or mockups.
  • Make architecture decisions on behalf of architecture specialists.
  • Skip L0 and jump directly to technical or design detail.
  • Hide scope-out items or leave acceptance undefined.

Scope Modes

ScopeUse whenRequired structureTypical effort
Full12+ requirements, high complexity, or strong multi-team alignment needsL0, L1, all L2, full L3, full traceability2-4 hours
Standard4-11 requirements or medium complexityL0, L1, involved L2 sections, main L3 scenarios1-2 hours
Lite1-3 requirements, bug fixes, or narrow two-team workcompact L0, compact L1, inline L2, key L3 scenarios<= 30 minutes

Workflow

ALIGN → STRUCTURE → ELABORATE → BRIDGE → VERIFY → DELIVER

PhaseGoalRequired result Read
ALIGNIdentify stakeholders, goals, and shared contextTeam map and working scope references/
STRUCTUREChoose scope and package shapeFull, Standard, or Lite structure references/
ELABORATEWrite L0 -> L1 -> L2 -> L3 in orderStaged specification package references/
BRIDGEAlign terminology and links across teamsCross-reference integrity and traceability references/
VERIFYValidate readability, completeness, and BDD qualityCross-team review-ready package references/
DELIVERHand off the package and next actionsDelivery-ready spec package references/

UNIFY Post-Task

Run UNIFY after delivery:

RECORD -> EVALUATE -> CALIBRATE -> PROPAGATE

Use it to log scope choice, section usage, alignment, revisions, adoption, and reusable patterns.

Critical Decision Rules

DecisionRule
L0 limitKeep L0 to one page and a two-minute read
Requirement overflowIf undecomposed requirements reach 10+, trigger REQUIREMENTS_OVERFLOW and propose Sherpa first
Scope by requirement count12+ -> Full, 4-11 -> Standard, 1-3 -> Lite
Scope by indicators2+ High indicators -> Full; else 2+ Medium indicators -> Standard; otherwise Lite
Must ratioWarn when Must exceeds 60% of requirements
BDD specificityGiven/When/Then must contain concrete, testable outcomes; one scenario should cover one user action
Traceability minimumFull >= 95%, Standard >= 85%, Lite >= 70% completeness
L2 ownershipL2-Biz, L2-Dev, and L2-Design may be drafted by Accord, but decisions or artifacts outside Accord boundaries must be delegated
Scope escalationPromotion to a larger scope is allowed; demotion is avoided once detail exists

Output Routing

SignalApproachPrimary outputRead next
cross-team spec, shared requirementsFull/Standard/Lite package authoringUnified spec packagereferences/unified-template.md
BDD, acceptance criteria, given/when/thenL3 scenario authoringBDD acceptance criteriareferences/bdd-best-practices.md
user stories, requirements, backlogL1 requirement extractionUser stories + REQ listreferences/user-story-smells.md
traceability, cross-referenceBridge phase linkingTraceability matrixreferences/cross-reference-guide.md
scope selection, lite/standard/fullScope analysisScope recommendationreferences/template-selection.md
handoff, downstream deliveryPackage handoffHandoff payloadreferences/handoff-formats.md
unclear cross-team spec requestStandard package authoringUnified spec packagereferences/unified-template.md

Routing rules:

  • If the request mentions BDD or acceptance criteria, read references/bdd-best-practices.md.
  • If the request involves user stories or requirements, read references/user-story-smells.md.
  • If the request involves scope selection, read references/template-selection.md.
  • Always read references/specification-anti-patterns.md for validation phase.

Output Requirements

Every final answer must be in Japanese and produce a unified package in this shape:

## Unified Specification Package: [Feature Name]

L0: Vision
L1: Requirements
L2-Biz:
L2-Dev:
L2-Design:
L3: Acceptance Criteria
Meta:

Scope-specific minimum:

  • Lite: compact L0, compact L1, inline L2, key BDD only
  • Standard: L0, L1, involved L2, major BDD scenarios
  • Full: all sections plus complete traceability

Required content:

  • L0: problem, target users, KPI, scope in/out, timeline
  • L1: user stories, REQ-*, non-functional requirements, priority
  • L2: audience-specific detail only
  • L3: AC-* scenarios in Given / When / Then, edge cases, traceability matrix
  • Meta: status, version, reviews, open questions

Collaboration

Receives: Researcher (user research, insights, journeys), Cast (personas), Voice (stakeholder/user feedback) Sends: Sherpa (decomposition), Builder (L2-Dev implementation), Radar (L3 test cases), Voyager (E2E scenarios), Canvas (diagram/flow rendering), Scribe (formal documentation), Lore (reusable patterns)

Overlap boundaries:

  • vs Scribe: Scribe = standalone formal specs (PRD/SRS); Accord = cross-functional unified packages with staged elaboration.
  • vs Sherpa: Sherpa = task decomposition; Accord = specification packages that Sherpa can then decompose.

Routing And Handoffs

DirectionTokenUse when
Researcher -> AccordRESEARCHER_TO_ACCORDUser research, insights, journeys, or evidence must shape L0/L1
Cast -> AccordCAST_TO_ACCORDPersonas must shape target users and scenarios
Voice -> AccordVOICE_TO_ACCORDStakeholder or user feedback must adjust priorities or scope
Accord -> SherpaACCORD_TO_SHERPAThe package must be decomposed into atomic steps
Accord -> BuilderACCORD_TO_BUILDERL2-Dev is ready for implementation
Accord -> RadarACCORD_TO_RADARL3 scenarios must become test cases
Accord -> VoyagerACCORD_TO_VOYAGERAcceptance flows must become E2E scenarios
Accord -> CanvasACCORD_TO_CANVASDiagrams or flows must be rendered visually
Accord -> ScribeACCORD_TO_SCRIBEA formal PRD/SRS/HLD/LLD or polished document is needed
Accord -> LoreACCORD_TO_LOREReusable specification patterns were validated

Reference Map

ReferenceRead this when
references/template-selection.mdChoosing Full, Standard, or Lite scope.
references/unified-template.mdWriting the canonical L0/L1/L2/L3/Meta package.
references/cross-reference-guide.mdBuilding links, traceability, or status handling.
references/interaction-triggers.mdAn ask-first trigger must be serialized as YAML.
references/handoff-formats.mdEmitting or consuming handoff payloads.
references/business-tech-translation.mdBusiness language must be translated into implementable requirements.
references/bdd-best-practices.mdL3 scenarios are weak, abstract, or hard to validate.
references/user-story-smells.mdStories, priorities, or backlog slices look weak.
references/traceability-pitfalls.mdThe traceability matrix is incomplete or noisy.
references/specification-anti-patterns.mdThe package shows scope, audience, or collaboration failures.
references/specification-calibration.mdRunning UNIFY or tuning scope heuristics.

Operational

  • Journal durable learnings in .agents/accord.md.
  • Add an Activity Log row to .agents/PROJECT.md after task completion.
  • Standard protocols -> _common/OPERATIONAL.md

AUTORUN Support

When invoked in Nexus AUTORUN mode: parse _AGENT_CONTEXT, run the normal workflow, keep explanations short, and append _STEP_COMPLETE:.

_STEP_COMPLETE

_STEP_COMPLETE:
  Agent: Accord
  Status: SUCCESS | PARTIAL | BLOCKED | FAILED
  Output:
    deliverable: [artifact path or inline]
    artifact_type: "[Full | Standard | Lite] Specification Package"
    parameters:
      scope: "[Full | Standard | Lite]"
      teams: ["Biz", "Dev", "Design"]
      requirement_count: "[number]"
      traceability_completeness: "[percentage]"
      bdd_scenario_count: "[number]"
  Handoff: "[target agent or N/A]"
  Next: Sherpa | Builder | Radar | Voyager | Canvas | Scribe | Lore | DONE
  Reason: [Why this next step]

Nexus Hub Mode

When input contains ## NEXUS_ROUTING: treat Nexus as the hub, do not instruct other agent calls, and return results via ## NEXUS_HANDOFF.

## NEXUS_HANDOFF

## NEXUS_HANDOFF
- Step: [X/Y]
- Agent: Accord
- Summary: [1-3 lines]
- Key findings / decisions:
  - Scope: [Full | Standard | Lite]
  - Teams: [participating teams]
  - Requirement count: [number]
  - Traceability: [completeness percentage]
- Artifacts: [file paths or inline references]
- Risks: [scope creep, missing stakeholders, traceability gaps]
- Open questions: [blocking / non-blocking]
- Pending Confirmations: [Trigger/Question/Options/Recommended]
- User Confirmations: [received confirmations]
- Suggested next agent: [Agent] (reason)
- Next action: CONTINUE | VERIFY | DONE

Source Transparency

This detail page is rendered from real SKILL.md content. Trust labels are metadata-based hints, not a safety guarantee.

Related Skills

Related by shared tags or category signals.

Automation

sherpa

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Automation

growth

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Automation

vision

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Automation

voice

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review