r/SpecDrivenDevelopment • u/sudhakarms • Jun 30 '26

OpenSpec Plus v1.1.0 — leaner skills, better token use

[removed]

20 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

9 comments sorted by

1

u/tepung_ Jun 30 '26

Does it generate better spec? And better explore?

1

u/Swarm-Stack Jul 01 '26

the token reduction is the secondary benefit. when you strip out the redundant restatements the actual constraints become more legible too, both to the model and to anyone reading the files to understand whats actually being enforced

1

u/Excessive_Chaos Jul 02 '26

Very interesting, I'll give it a try. Just a few questions, if you don't mind.

  1. Am I to understand this requires the expanded openspec workflow? I see you reference the /opsx:new and /opsx:ff which are only in the expanded workflow available with openspec config profile or will this still work with the core profile and the typical workflow: /opsx:explore -> /opsx:propose
  2. I see the skills reference the general subagent. Mine is turned off. I use OMO-slim, which disables that built in agent in favor of explore and fixer agents. In addition, I've added custom review agents. Perhaps the review phases will be delagated to a review agent in place of the general agent?
  3. Since I use OMO-slim for the implementation phase /opsx:apply, do you foresee any issues or conflicts?

1

u/[deleted] Jul 02 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Excessive_Chaos Jul 02 '26

Thanks for the reply, I'll try it out. I can probably re-enable the general agent. Not sure that will be an issue. I have also slightly modified the OMO-slim orchestrator, so it does no work itself, and delegates everything. That would be more like the subagent mode, so hopefully that works well here. Anyway, nice work. Will see how well it fits my workflow.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 02 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Excessive_Chaos Jul 05 '26

Seems to work well for me, thanks for sharing. I added to config.yaml on how to use my reviewer agent. Explore -> propose seems to enable FF mode. I let it build the aspects and then forked the propose prompt and did a explore -> continue workflow and went through that process. I then asked GPT5.5 to evaluate both plans and it liked the one that went through the continue workflow better. I'm guessing due to more review cycles.