Extract explicit and implicit constraints from project documentation and
synthesize them into a canonical CONSTRAINTS.md — a living record of the
externally-imposed boundaries (compliance, security, hosting, tooling,
stakeholder, scope, dependency) that shape what a project can build and how.
Relationship to Other Living Documents
This skill is deliberately narrow. If a piece of content isn't clearly a constraint, it stays out of this file. Apply the forcing-function test before writing anything down:
Forcing-function test: if this were ignored, would something break OUTSIDE
the codebase — a contract, a law, a security posture, an executive decision,
a vendor relationship? If yes, it's a constraint.
If the honest answer is "the team would just be inconsistent" or "it would look different," it's a pattern or a procedure, not a constraint — it belongs in config.yaml or AGENTS.md instead.
| Document | Produced by | Captures |
| --- | --- | --- |
| `openspec/config.yaml` | `onboard-openspec` skill | WHAT the team chose (stack, patterns) |
| `AGENTS.md` / `CLAUDE.md` | `onboard-agent` skill | HOW the agent should behave |
| `ARCHITECTURE.md` | `architecture-doc` skill | HOW the system is structured today |
| `CONSTRAINTS.md` | **this skill** | WHY certain choices are non-negotiable |
Full category definitions, the forcing-function test worked through in
detail, and an in-scope/out-of-scope example table per category live in
`references/category-guide.md` — read it before running per-document extraction.
## Output Location
Determine where `CONSTRAINTS.md` belongs before scanning anything, so
Source Discovery knows to treat an existing file as authoritative rather
than as scan fodder.
1. Search the repository for an existing `CONSTRAINTS.md` file before doing
anything else. Use a repo-wide search (`find`, `rg`, or equivalent), not a
narrow check of only the root or `docs/`. If exactly one exists, that is the
target — use it, don't ask.
2. If more than one `CONSTRAINTS.md` exists, stop and show the matches. Ask the
user which one is authoritative rather than guessing.
3. If nothing exists, default to `CONSTRAINTS.md` at the repo root, alongside
`ARCHITECTURE.md` and `AGENTS.md`.
4. Announce the chosen path before proceeding: *"No existing
CONSTRAINTS.md found — I'll write to ./CONSTRAINTS.md."*
## NEVER Do When Extracting Constraints
- **NEVER invent a constraint not supported by evidence in a source
document.** If a candidate statement doesn't have real evidence behind
it, it doesn't qualify as `CONFIRMED` — treat it as a near-miss instead
(see "Preview Before Writing" below), not a low-confidence entry. There
is no third tier to fall back on for weak evidence.
- **NEVER silently drop a constraint because sources conflict.** Record both
sides, mark the entry `CONFLICTING`, and cite each source.
- **NEVER write a constraint without at least one evidence citation** (file
plus section or line reference). An unsourced constraint reads the same
as a hallucinated one.
- **NEVER treat a confidently-worded team preference as a constraint.** Apply
the forcing-function test. If no external force is evident, surface it in
the pre-write preview as a near-miss and leave it out of the file — see
"Preview Before Writing" below.
- **NEVER write a "Reviewed, Not Included" section, or any section like
it, into `CONSTRAINTS.md`.** Near-misses are conversation output, not
file content — see "Preview Before Writing."
- **NEVER add a "Related Documentation" section to `CONSTRAINTS.md`.** The
linking is one-directional: `AGENTS.md` or `CLAUDE.md` point to this file via the cross-link step, not the other
way around. A reverse pointer back to files that already reference this
one is pure noise.
- **NEVER write a scratch or findings JSON file anywhere inside the
repository being scanned, and never with a relative filename.** Every
intermediate file — each subagent's scratch output and the single
correlated findings file — lives under an absolute
`/tmp/constraints-extractor.XXXXXX/` path. A relative filename resolves
against the agent's working directory, which is the repo being scanned,
not `/tmp`.
- **NEVER hand-write or hand-format an entry in `CONSTRAINTS.md`.** Every
new or corroborated entry — including a single new entry — goes
through `scripts/merge_constraints.py`. Hand-formatting is how
inconsistent structure (ad hoc symbols, extra fields, uneven spacing)
ends up in the file, and it breaks the script's ability to parse the
file back in on the next run.
- **NEVER expect `scripts/merge_constraints.py` to remove a stale entry
or replace a bad citation on its own.** The script is additive by
design — it inserts new findings and corroborates existing ones by
merging evidence, but it has no delete path, even when a fresh scan
directly contradicts an existing `CONFIRMED` entry (that case becomes a
`CONFLICTING` finding, which still *adds* claims rather than removing
the original). Removing a stale entry or fixing a bad citation is the
one case where a direct, confirmed edit to `CONSTRAINTS.md` is
correct — see "Removing Stale Entries and Bad Citations" below for the
exact procedure. That is not a loophole in the rule above: it's
correcting existing, already-correctly-formatted lines under explicit
user confirmation, never inventing new ad hoc structure.
- **NEVER crawl `openspec/changes/archive/` automatically** — it grows too
large for a full-corpus scan and drowns real signal in resolved-change
noise. Only read specific archive files if the user names them explicitly.
- **NEVER run subagent extraction serially when subagents are available** —
dispatch in parallel, capped at 5 concurrent subagents. More than 5
source documents means multiple waves, not unlimited concurrency.
- **NEVER overwrite an existing `CONSTRAINTS.md` without reading it first**
— a human may have hand-corrected a confidence rating or resolved an
ambiguity that a fresh scan can't recover.
---
## Source Discovery
Before spawning any subagents, assemble the set of source documents to scan.
Announce the final list to the user before dispatching subagents.
**Step 1 — Auto-discover conventional locations.** Check for, and if
present, include:
- `docs/`, `documents/`, `doc/` (recursively — markdown and plain text)
- `README.md`, `CONTRIBUTING.md`, `SECURITY.md`, `COMPLIANCE.md`, `LICENSE*`
- `ARCHITECTURE.md`, `AGENTS.md` / `CLAUDE.md`, `openspec/config.yaml` —
these are decision *outputs*, but their prose sometimes carries buried
rationale that never got promoted to a first-class constraint
- Decision-record style folders, if present: `adr/`, `decisions/`, `rfd/`,
`rfcs/`, `notes/`, `spikes/` — any folder holding NOTE/SPIKE/RFC-style
documents is high-signal, since rationale for a resolved decision is
exactly where a forcing function tends to get written down explicitly
- An existing `CONSTRAINTS.md` at the location determined in "Output
Location" above, if one exists (read it fully — see "Locate or Create
CONSTRAINTS.md" below, do not treat it as just another scan target)
Run every check above as **one consolidated bash command**, not a
separate tool call per path — these are all fast existence checks with no
reasoning involved, so batching them costs one round trip instead of a
dozen:
```bash
for p in docs documents doc README.md CONTRIBUTING.md SECURITY.md \
COMPLIANCE.md ARCHITECTURE.md AGENTS.md CLAUDE.md \
openspec/config.yaml adr decisions rfd rfcs notes spikes; do
[ -e "$p" ] && echo "FOUND: $p"
done
ls LICENSE* 2>/dev/null
Step 2 — Accept an explicit user-provided list. If the user names
specific files or paths — including files inside
openspec/changes/archive/ — add them to the set. This is additive to
Step 1, never a replacement for it.
Step 3 — Deduplicate and announce.
Merge (Step 1 ∪ Step 2) by resolved path, then tell the user:
"Scanning N documents across ceil(N/5) waves of up to 5 subagents each:
[list]. This excludes openspec/changes/archive/ by default since it's
typically too large for a full pass — name specific files there if you
want them included."
If the merged set is empty, stop and ask the user where their documentation lives rather than guessing at paths.
Per-Document Extraction (parallel subagents)
Spawn one subagent per source document — parallel, never serial, capped at 5 concurrent subagents. With more than 5 documents in the discovered set, dispatch in waves of up to 5: wait for a wave to finish before starting the next.
Waves are a dispatch-batching concern only. They do not change the Single Correlation Pass below — that still runs exactly once, after every wave has finished, never once per wave.
Each subagent:
- Reads its assigned file in full.
- Applies the forcing-function test to every rule, limit, or boundary statement it finds.
- For each candidate constraint, extracts:
statement— the constraint in plain English, self-contained (must read correctly without the source file open)impact— one to three sentences on practical impact: what this constrains, what decisions it should shape, what breaks if ignored. Required whenever a constraint is included. If a subagent can't articulate this, that's usually a sign the candidate is a near-miss, not a real constraint.category— the exact slug, verbatim:compliance-governance,security-privacy-ip-cui,hosting-infrastructure,tooling-approved-path,workflow-sequencing,stakeholder-executive,scope-prioritization-delivery, orexternal-dependencies. Full definitions inreferences/category-guide.md. Use the slug itself, not a shortened or display form of it —merge_constraints.pywill auto-correct a few common variants but hard-fails on anything it can't confidently resolve, and a mismatch here is how a category's findings silently go missing.confidence— alwaysCONFIRMEDat this stage. There is no "weak evidence" tier — if the statement isn't backed by a real citation, it's a near-miss, not a lower-confidence constraint.CONFLICTINGonly gets assigned during the Single Correlation Pass below, when two extracted findings disagree; a single-document subagent can't see that on its own.evidence— a list of citations, each withfile(relative path from the project root, not an absolute path),location(a line number or range where the source has real line numbers, a short section anchor otherwise), andnote(one required sentence on what that specific citation shows — this becomes the entry'sEvidence notesbullet for that citation, so it needs to earn its own line, not just restate the statement).affects— optional list of bare tokens (rule IDs, other constraint IDs, system names) this constraint's enforcement touches. Omit or leave empty rather than guessing at a token that isn't actually named in the source.enforced_by— optional list of bare tokens naming a specific downstream rule (inAGENTS.md,ARCHITECTURE.md,config.yaml, or elsewhere) that this constraint drives. Omit rather than guessing.
- Also flags near-miss candidates — statements that read like constraints
but fail the forcing-function test — with a one-line reason. These are
surfaced only in the pre-write preview (see "Preview Before Writing")
and are never written into
CONSTRAINTS.mditself. - Writes full findings as JSON to a scratch file at an absolute path
under
mktemp -d "/tmp/constraints-extractor.XXXXXX"(one file per subagent — never a relative filename, never anywhere inside the repository being scanned) and returns only a one-line confirmation to the orchestrator, e.g.Extracted 4 constraints, 2 near-misses from docs/SECURITY.md. Keep bulk findings out of the orchestrator's context — the orchestrator reads scratch files directly during the single correlation pass; it does not receive findings inline.
Never assign an entry's CONSTR-<CATEGORY>-<NNN> ID at this stage, or at
correlation — ID assignment happens once, inside merge_constraints.py,
scoped per category. Extraction and correlation only ever produce
findings; the script is the sole owner of identity.
Single Correlation Pass
After all subagents complete, run exactly one reduce pass — never one per wave.
- Read every scratch file in one call —
cat /tmp/constraints-extractor.XXXXXX/*.json— rather than opening each one with a separate tool call. - Group candidates by category.
- Correlate duplicates. If two or more sources support the same
underlying constraint, merge into a single finding, combining their
evidence citations (deduped by file+location, not summed) into one
evidencelist. Every citation keeps its ownnote— merging findings doesn't merge notes into one another. - Surface conflicts. If two sources make incompatible claims about the
same boundary, do not pick a winner. Build a
claimslist — one entry per side, each with its ownstatement,file, andlocation— setconfidencetoCONFLICTING, and drop theevidence/impactfields for that finding entirely (aCONFLICTINGfinding carriesclaimsinstead, never both). - Route near-misses. Anything flagged as a near-miss during
per-document extraction is carried into the correlated findings file
for the preview step to display — it does not get a section in
CONSTRAINTS.md.
Write the correlated result to <scratch-dir>/correlated-findings.json —
an absolute path in the same /tmp directory as the scratch files, never
a bare relative filename. The top-level shape is a flat list, not a
grouping by category:
{"constraints": [ {"category": "workflow-sequencing", "title": "...", ...}, ... ], "near_misses": [...]}
Not {"workflow-sequencing": [...], "compliance-governance": [...]}. The
merge script reads the constraints array and reads each item's own
category field — it does not know how to interpret category names used
as top-level JSON keys. It checks for the constraints key explicitly
and refuses to run if it's missing, naming the keys it actually found, so
this shows up as a clear error rather than a silent zero-result write.
See references/troubleshooting.md for the full shape the merge script
expects (only needed if you're troubleshooting the merge step; day-to-day
use doesn't require reading it).
Locate or Create CONSTRAINTS.md
Use the path determined in "Output Location" above.
- If it exists: read it fully first. Treat any hand-edited entry as authoritative over a fresh scan's version of the same constraint, unless new evidence directly contradicts it — in that case, flag the conflict in the preview step rather than overwriting silently. Merge new findings into the correct category sections in place.
- If it doesn't exist: create it fresh from
references/template.md.
All mechanical file operations for additions and corroboration — ID
assignment, category insertion, dedup merge, ordering — are handled by
scripts/merge_constraints.py. Never hand-edit the file's structure
with ad hoc string appends; naive end-of-file appending corrupts
category grouping. The script is the single source of truth for how new
or corroborated entries get inserted. It cannot remove an entry or a
citation — see "Removing Stale Entries and Bad Citations" below for the
one case where editing the file directly is correct instead:
python3 scripts/merge_constraints.py \
--target <absolute path to CONSTRAINTS.md> \
--findings <absolute path to correlated-findings.json under /tmp>
Both arguments must be absolute paths. The script refuses to run with a
relative --findings path, precisely because a relative path resolves
against the repo being scanned rather than /tmp.
The script is idempotent — re-running it with the same findings file produces no diff.
A finding that fails validation (bad category, missing evidence, an unrecognized shape it can't coerce) is skipped individually — it does not block the rest of the batch from being written. Check the script's stdout after every run: it reports both what was written and what was skipped, with the specific reason for each skip. Relay skipped findings back to the person rather than treating a successful exit as "everything from this run made it in" — a partial write is still a successful run.
Removing Stale Entries and Bad Citations
merge_constraints.py is additive only: it inserts new findings and
corroborates existing ones by merging evidence, but it has no delete
path. It will never remove an entry, drop a citation, or replace one
that's gone bad, even when a fresh scan directly contradicts an existing
CONFIRMED entry — that case becomes a CONFLICTING finding, which
still adds claims rather than removing the original. If removal or a
citation fix is what's actually needed, running the script again with
new findings will not produce it.
Two situations call for this instead of a normal merge run:
- A stale entry. The constraint no longer holds — the source document was rewritten, the policy changed, the vendor relationship ended — and nothing in a fresh findings file will ever supersede it, because the script only matches on category + title and has nothing to match against for "this no longer applies."
- A bad citation. The
file:locationon an existing entry no longer points to the text it once did (the file moved, the section was rewritten, the line numbers shifted), so the entry's evidence silently stops backing its own statement.
Handle either the same way as any other change to the file: surface it
in "Preview Before Writing" below with the reason, get the user's
confirmation, then make the edit by hand — run merge_constraints.py
first for whatever additions or corroboration the same pass produced,
and make the manual cleanup edit afterward, so the script's
parse-and-render pass isn't reparsing a file mid-edit.
"By hand" means correcting or deleting existing, already-correctly-
formatted lines per references/entry-format.md — never freeform
reformatting, and never an excuse to hand-write a new entry while you're
already in the file:
- Removing an entry entirely: delete the whole `### CONSTR- ·
- Fixing one bad citation on an entry that otherwise still holds:
edit only that citation's segment in the
Evidence:line (and its(N refs)count if the citation is being dropped rather than corrected) and the matching bullet underEvidence notes:— same position in both lists, per the field rules inreferences/entry-format.md. Leave every other field on the entry untouched.
This is the one place in this skill where editing CONSTRAINTS.md
directly is correct instead of a validation workaround: the "never
hand-write an entry" rule above exists to stop ad hoc structure from
creeping in, not to freeze the file against a human-confirmed correction
the script has no mechanism to make itself.
Preview Before Writing
Show the user a summary before touching the filesystem:
- New constraints found, grouped by category
- Constraints whose evidence ref count grew via corroboration from multiple sources
- Any
CONFLICTINGentries, with every claim shown side by side - Near-misses found, with their one-line reasons — shown here only; they
are never written into
CONSTRAINTS.md - Stale entries or bad citations found during this run, flagged for
removal or correction, with the reason for each — see "Removing Stale
Entries and Bad Citations" above. These need the same explicit
confirmation as everything else here, since
merge_constraints.pycannot act on them and the only path is a direct, hand-confirmed edit.
Ask: "Does this look right? Anything to reclassify, merge, or drop before I write it?"
A wrong compliance boundary is worse than a wrong reference doc entry elsewhere — do not skip this step even for small diffs. If a run produces zero new constraints, say so plainly rather than padding the file to look productive.
Cross-Link From the Agent Behavior File
If AGENTS.md or CLAUDE.md exist at the project root, check whether the
target already has a "Related Documentation" section referencing
CONSTRAINTS.md. If not, offer to append a reference.
The constraints are only useful to future agent runs if something points them at it. CONSTRAINTS.md itself should stay a pure list, it should not reference agent behavior files, but the reverse should hold: AGENTS.md or CLAUDE.md, if either exists, should reference the constraints file so a later agent working in this project picks it up as context.
Check, in order, whether ./AGENTS.md or ./CLAUDE.md exists at the project root. If ./CLAUDE.md exists but its content is just an import pointer to AGENTS.md (for example, the file's content is essentially just @AGENTS.md), and ./AGENTS.md exists too, treat AGENTS.md as the real target instead of editing the pointer file. If neither file exists, skip this step; do not create one from scratch, that is out of scope for this skill.
If a target file was found, read it fully first, then:
- If it already has a
## Related Documentationsection, check whether the constraints file is already listed there (search for its path, orCONSTRAINTS.md). If it is, leave the file alone. If not, add one entry to that section, preserving every existing entry exactly as it was. - If no such section exists, add one at the end of the file.
Either way, the entry looks like this, with the constraints's actual path in place of CONSTRAINTS.md:
- **CONSTRAINTS.md** — Externally-imposed boundaries (compliance,
security, hosting, stakeholder) that shape what this project can build
and how.
_(Check this before scoping any change with compliance,
security, hosting, or stakeholder-priority implications — it is not
optional background reading)_
Do this with plain prose edits, not a companion script. This is a single one-time presence check per file, not high-volume sorting or deduplication — there's no ongoing mechanical work here that justifies a script.
Reference Files
references/category-guide.md— the eight constraint categories, the forcing-function test worked through with examples, and an in-scope vs. out-of-scope table per category. Read before per-document extraction.references/template.md— the bareCONSTRAINTS.mdskeleton used for new-file creation. Nothing but the eight category headings — no example content, so it can never be mistaken for real entries on first parse.references/entry-format.md— theCONSTRAINTS.mdentry grammar thatmerge_constraints.pyrenders and parses. Read once per run.references/troubleshooting.md— the JSON shapes extraction and correlation produce, the shape-tolerance layer, and the merge script's exact behavior. Only needed if a run actually fails.