Shape

---
name: shape
description: Bridge WHAT (intent) to HOW (implementation). Use when spec is clear but approach is not. Triggers on "shape this", "how should I build", "implementation approach".
model: opus
allowed-tools: Read, Bash, Skill
---

# Shape

Bridge between intent clarification and implementation. Transforms WHAT into HOW.

## When to Use Shape

- After `/hope:intent` when spec_score >= 5
- Explicit request: "shape this", "how should I build this"
- Architecture decisions needed before coding

**If spec_score < 5:** Return to `/hope:intent` for clarification first.

**Output:** Returns shape choice, approach, risks, and criteria in conversation. Never writes files. Caller decides next action.

---

## Protocol

### 1. Extract Intent

From user request or prior `/hope:intent`, extract: goal, constraints, scope.

### 2. Identify Candidate Shapes

Three collaboration modes determine how user and agent interact during implementation:

| Shape | Interaction | Best When |
|-------|-------------|-----------|
| **Colleague** | Iterate every step together | High ambiguity, novel domain, irreversible decisions |
| **Tool-Review** | Autonomous with checkpoints at major decisions | Moderate complexity, known patterns with unknowns |
| **Tool** | Fully autonomous, milestone announcements only | Clear requirements, well-trodden patterns, low risk |

### 3. Score Aspects

For each aspect in the discovery table below, determine which shape column the task falls into.

### 4. Select Shape

Count which column each aspect lands in:

- **Majority Colleague** → Colleague shape
- **Majority Tool** → Tool shape
- **Mixed or majority Tool-Review** → Tool-Review shape
- **Override:** Any Colleague in Risk or Interdependency → at minimum Tool-Review
- **Default when uncertain:** Tool-Review

### 5. Output Shape

Present in conversation: selected shape, relevant aspects with evidence, criteria (boolean/verifiable), mustNot constraints.

---

## Aspect Discovery

Score each aspect for the task. The column where most aspects land determines the shape.

| Aspect | Colleague | Tool-Review | Tool |
|--------|-----------|-------------|------|
| Decomposition | Cannot break down without user | Breaks down, user validates | Self-decomposes fully |
| Interdependency | High coupling across unknowns | Moderate, checkpoints at boundaries | Low, independent pieces |
| Novelty | No precedent, unknown patterns | Known patterns with variations | Well-trodden, clear precedent |
| Risk | High blast radius, irreversible | Medium, partially reversible | Low, fully reversible |
| Ambiguity | Requirements unclear or conflicting | Mostly clear, few open questions | Crisp, complete requirements |
| Domain knowledge | Needs user context to proceed | Partial context, can infer rest | Full context available |
| Verification | User must define pass/fail | User approves test plan | Self-verifiable criteria |
| Reversibility | Hard to undo, high stakes | Moderate rollback effort | Trivial to revert |

**Rule:** Only score aspects that appear in the spec or have clear dependencies. Skip irrelevant rows.

---

## Expert Consultation

After scoring aspects, seek expert guidance on the implementation approach. For tradeoff-heavy decisions, request a panel debate on the key tensions.

Expert input informs aspect scoring and approach selection — shape decides, experts advise.

---

## Decision Logic

```dot
digraph shape_decision {
  rankdir=TB
  start [label="Spec ready\n(score >= 5)"]
  score [label="Score 8 aspects\nagainst 3 shapes"]
  decide [label="Majority column?"]
  override [label="Risk or Interdep\n= Colleague?"]
  colleague [label="Colleague shape"]
  tool_review [label="Tool-Review shape"]
  tool [label="Tool shape"]
  start -> score -> decide
  decide -> colleague [label="Colleague"]
  decide -> tool_review [label="Mixed/Tool-Review"]
  decide -> override [label="Tool"]
  override -> tool_review [label="Yes"]
  override -> tool [label="No"]
}
```

---

## Integration

1. Invoke `/hope:soul` to ground decisions in user values
2. Run this skill's protocol (steps 1-5)
3. Output shape choice + approach + risks in conversation
4. Invoke hope:consult for expert review of approach

Shape output feeds into `/hope:loop`:

| Shape Output | Loop Usage |
|-------------|------------|
| `criteria` | Verification tracking |
| `mustNot` | Circuit breaker triggers |
| `shape` | Interaction mode for waves |

---

## Boundary

Shape surfaces considerations; user owns architecture.

- Expert recommendations are patterns, not prescriptions
- User resolves conflicts
- Shape informs design decisions, never makes them