docs(spec-review): enumerate implementation tasks in Phase 6

From a pearl handoff: Phase 6 logged deferred and v1 work only in passing, so the implementer handoff was a re-read of the spec rather than a paste. I added a step that lifts the spec's Implementation phases section into a drop-in todo.org block: one [#B] TODO per phase plus a test-surface entry mirroring the Acceptance criteria. A spec with no phase decomposition fails the step, surfacing the shape problem as a finding before Ready rather than inventing phases. Added Exit Criterion 6 and a review-history entry.

3 files changed, 51 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/.ai/workflows/spec-review.org b/.ai/workflows/spec-review.org
index 159202e..c0df333 100644
--- a/.ai/workflows/spec-review.org
+++ b/.ai/workflows/spec-review.org
@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ A review is complete when:
 3. *If not ready:* a =<spec>-review.org= file is written next to the spec, in the standard structure, with every finding specific and actionable (current behavior named, risk explained, change recommended, blocking-or-not stated).
 4. *The spec's review history is updated* with who reviewed it, when, which iteration it was, what changed or was recommended, and why.
 5. *Deferred work is logged* to =todo.org= (v1 = =[#B]=, vNext/someday = =[#D]=), not left only in chat.
+6. *Implementation tasks are enumerated* — the spec's =Implementation phases= section is lifted into a drop-in =todo.org= block (one entry per phase plus a test-surface entry), or, if the spec has no phase decomposition, that gap is raised as a finding.
 
 *Measurable validation:* after reading the review, an implementer knows exactly what to decide or change before starting, and an author running spec-response can give every finding an accept/modify/reject without guessing what it means.
 
@@ -188,6 +189,24 @@ Body fields:
 
 If the spec has no such section, add it at the bottom. Keep the history short and cumulative; it is provenance for future readers, not a session transcript.
 
+*Emit implementation tasks (drop-in for =todo.org=).* Read the spec's =Implementation phases= section and turn it into a paste-ready block in the review file, under a heading =Implementation tasks (drop-in for todo.org)=. One =** TODO= entry per phase, plus a final entry for the test surface. The point: the handoff to whoever implements is one paste, not a re-read of the spec, and a spec that can't be decomposed into phases fails this step, surfacing a shape problem before =Ready=.
+
+Per-phase entry, following =todo-format.md= (terse heading names the phase; body holds the one-line deliverable plus a pointer back to the spec; tags on the heading):
+
+#+begin_example
+** TODO [#B] <phase name — smallest noun phrase> :feature:
+<what this phase delivers, one line>. Spec: [[file:<spec path>]] (Implementation phases, phase N).
+#+end_example
+
+Final test-surface entry, mirroring the spec's =Acceptance criteria= when present:
+
+#+begin_example
+** TODO [#B] <feature> — test surface :test:
+Unit: <...>. Integration: <...>. E2e / manual-verify: <acceptance criteria as checkable items>. Spec: [[file:<spec path>]] (Acceptance criteria).
+#+end_example
+
+Priority and tags follow the deferred-work rule below. Emit the block in the review file; the author pastes it into =todo.org= during spec-response, or you log it directly when you're also closing the loop. If the spec has no =Implementation phases= section, don't invent one — that absence is the finding, and the step becomes the prompt to ask the author to add a phase decomposition before the spec can be =Ready=.
+
 Then log deferred work to =todo.org=: v1 implementation = =[#B]= (unless urgent or speculative); vNext/someday = =[#D]=. Tag =:feature:= / =:bug:= / =:refactor:= / =:test:= / =:quick:= / =:solo:= only when accurate. Don't leave important deferred decisions only in chat.
 
 * Principles to Follow
@@ -264,3 +283,8 @@ Sources:
 - *What:* Backfilled this section with entries for the workflow file's prior iterations (Draft 1, Review-and-Fold, Requirement addition). Used commit author dates where exact; Draft 1's timestamp is an opaque-id placeholder since no exact time was recorded.
 - *Why:* The iteration-history requirement landed in =55adf6e= without retroactive entries for the workflow file's own prior history. This pass closes that gap so the section starts with full provenance rather than empty.
 - *Artifacts:* Working draft sources at =working/spec-workflows-iteration-history-backfill/draft-entries.org= (deleted on this commit). Spec-response cycle (two Codex reviews and three rulesets responses on the draft) validated the entries and the entry-shape before splicing.
+
+** 2026-05-31 Sun @ 10:39:49 -0500 — Claude Code (rulesets) — author
+- *What:* Added a Phase 6 step, "Emit implementation tasks (drop-in for todo.org)": lift the spec's =Implementation phases= section into a paste-ready =todo.org= block (one =[#B]= TODO per phase plus a test-surface entry mirroring =Acceptance criteria=), with the missing-phase-decomposition case raised as a finding rather than invented. Added Exit Criterion 6 to match.
+- *Why:* From a pearl handoff. Phase 6 only logged deferred/v1 work in passing; this makes the implementer handoff one paste instead of a re-read, and forces specs to be decomposable into phases (a spec that resists it surfaces a shape problem before =Ready=).
+- *Artifacts:* =todo.org= task ([#C] =:feature:solo:=, closed this commit). Phase 6 + Exit Criteria edits in this file.
diff --git a/claude-templates/.ai/workflows/spec-review.org b/claude-templates/.ai/workflows/spec-review.org
index 159202e..c0df333 100644
--- a/claude-templates/.ai/workflows/spec-review.org
+++ b/claude-templates/.ai/workflows/spec-review.org
@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ A review is complete when:
 3. *If not ready:* a =<spec>-review.org= file is written next to the spec, in the standard structure, with every finding specific and actionable (current behavior named, risk explained, change recommended, blocking-or-not stated).
 4. *The spec's review history is updated* with who reviewed it, when, which iteration it was, what changed or was recommended, and why.
 5. *Deferred work is logged* to =todo.org= (v1 = =[#B]=, vNext/someday = =[#D]=), not left only in chat.
+6. *Implementation tasks are enumerated* — the spec's =Implementation phases= section is lifted into a drop-in =todo.org= block (one entry per phase plus a test-surface entry), or, if the spec has no phase decomposition, that gap is raised as a finding.
 
 *Measurable validation:* after reading the review, an implementer knows exactly what to decide or change before starting, and an author running spec-response can give every finding an accept/modify/reject without guessing what it means.
 
@@ -188,6 +189,24 @@ Body fields:
 
 If the spec has no such section, add it at the bottom. Keep the history short and cumulative; it is provenance for future readers, not a session transcript.
 
+*Emit implementation tasks (drop-in for =todo.org=).* Read the spec's =Implementation phases= section and turn it into a paste-ready block in the review file, under a heading =Implementation tasks (drop-in for todo.org)=. One =** TODO= entry per phase, plus a final entry for the test surface. The point: the handoff to whoever implements is one paste, not a re-read of the spec, and a spec that can't be decomposed into phases fails this step, surfacing a shape problem before =Ready=.
+
+Per-phase entry, following =todo-format.md= (terse heading names the phase; body holds the one-line deliverable plus a pointer back to the spec; tags on the heading):
+
+#+begin_example
+** TODO [#B] <phase name — smallest noun phrase> :feature:
+<what this phase delivers, one line>. Spec: [[file:<spec path>]] (Implementation phases, phase N).
+#+end_example
+
+Final test-surface entry, mirroring the spec's =Acceptance criteria= when present:
+
+#+begin_example
+** TODO [#B] <feature> — test surface :test:
+Unit: <...>. Integration: <...>. E2e / manual-verify: <acceptance criteria as checkable items>. Spec: [[file:<spec path>]] (Acceptance criteria).
+#+end_example
+
+Priority and tags follow the deferred-work rule below. Emit the block in the review file; the author pastes it into =todo.org= during spec-response, or you log it directly when you're also closing the loop. If the spec has no =Implementation phases= section, don't invent one — that absence is the finding, and the step becomes the prompt to ask the author to add a phase decomposition before the spec can be =Ready=.
+
 Then log deferred work to =todo.org=: v1 implementation = =[#B]= (unless urgent or speculative); vNext/someday = =[#D]=. Tag =:feature:= / =:bug:= / =:refactor:= / =:test:= / =:quick:= / =:solo:= only when accurate. Don't leave important deferred decisions only in chat.
 
 * Principles to Follow
@@ -264,3 +283,8 @@ Sources:
 - *What:* Backfilled this section with entries for the workflow file's prior iterations (Draft 1, Review-and-Fold, Requirement addition). Used commit author dates where exact; Draft 1's timestamp is an opaque-id placeholder since no exact time was recorded.
 - *Why:* The iteration-history requirement landed in =55adf6e= without retroactive entries for the workflow file's own prior history. This pass closes that gap so the section starts with full provenance rather than empty.
 - *Artifacts:* Working draft sources at =working/spec-workflows-iteration-history-backfill/draft-entries.org= (deleted on this commit). Spec-response cycle (two Codex reviews and three rulesets responses on the draft) validated the entries and the entry-shape before splicing.
+
+** 2026-05-31 Sun @ 10:39:49 -0500 — Claude Code (rulesets) — author
+- *What:* Added a Phase 6 step, "Emit implementation tasks (drop-in for todo.org)": lift the spec's =Implementation phases= section into a paste-ready =todo.org= block (one =[#B]= TODO per phase plus a test-surface entry mirroring =Acceptance criteria=), with the missing-phase-decomposition case raised as a finding rather than invented. Added Exit Criterion 6 to match.
+- *Why:* From a pearl handoff. Phase 6 only logged deferred/v1 work in passing; this makes the implementer handoff one paste instead of a re-read, and forces specs to be decomposable into phases (a spec that resists it surfaces a shape problem before =Ready=).
+- *Artifacts:* =todo.org= task ([#C] =:feature:solo:=, closed this commit). Phase 6 + Exit Criteria edits in this file.
diff --git a/todo.org b/todo.org
index 380244b..b6cde8c 100644
--- a/todo.org
+++ b/todo.org
@@ -1256,11 +1256,13 @@ The voice skill earns its place when Craig sees the rewrite and recognizes it as
 
 Likely improves =/voice personal= output quality on PR bodies, commit messages, and email drafts. Compound interest over the long run.
 
-** TODO [#C] Enumerate implementation tasks in =spec-review.org= Phase 6 :feature:solo:
+** DONE [#C] Enumerate implementation tasks in =spec-review.org= Phase 6 :feature:solo:
+CLOSED: [2026-05-31 Sun]
 :PROPERTIES:
 :CREATED: [2026-05-28 Thu]
 :LAST_REVIEWED: 2026-05-28
 :END:
+Added a Phase 6 step that lifts the spec's =Implementation phases= into a drop-in =todo.org= block (one =[#B]= per phase + a test-surface entry mirroring =Acceptance criteria=); a spec lacking phase decomposition raises that as a finding instead. Added Exit Criterion 6 and a review-history entry. Pure workflow-doc change.
 
 From pearl handoff 2026-05-28. =spec-review.org= Phase 6 currently says "log deferred work to =todo.org=: v1 implementation = [#B] ... vNext/someday = [#D]." That covers deferred and v1 in passing but doesn't lift the spec's =Implementation phases= section into a drop-in =todo.org= block.