Spec Kit pilot — writing the spec before the code

// The question

As a non-programmer directing AI, can a 'spec-driven' workflow — write the spec first, then a plan, then tasks, then code — make what I build more deliberate and less improvised?

// What I learned

Forcing the sequence Spec → Plan → Tasks → Code front-loads the thinking exactly where I'm strongest — defining what to build and why — and defers the code to the end, where the AI is strongest. It also gave me shared vocabulary with the tools, which lowers my biggest friction: translating intent into technical terms. The discipline matters more than the specific toolkit.

// Why it stopped here

Piloted on a sample project to learn the model. Parked as a method I now reach for by default, rather than a finished deliverable.

What it is

A pilot of Spec-Driven Development (SDD) — a workflow where you write a clear specification first, then break it into a plan, then into tasks, and only then generate code. I ran it on a sample project using a toolkit called Spec Kit.

Why it fits how I work

I'm a designer, not a programmer. My slowest step is translating what I want into technical language. SDD plays to that:

Spec — say what and why (my strength: scope and intent).
Plan — how it'll be structured.
Tasks — the concrete steps.
Code — generated last, against a target that's already clear.

By the time code happens, the thinking is done. It turns "vibe-build until it works" into something deliberate, and it builds the shared vocabulary I use to direct the rest of my multi-agent workspace.

Where it stands

Piloted and internalized. It's a habit now, not a project — the way I'd rather start anything non-trivial.