Fix archive guidance for greenfield spec sync

[hutiefang76]

Summary

• Clarify archive workflow instructions so missing main specs are treated as unsynced greenfield capabilities
• Tell archive skill and /opsx:archive command to create a new main spec from ADDED requirements during sync
• Add template coverage to prevent regressions

Fixes #1222.

Tests

• pnpm vitest run test/core/templates/skill-templates-parity.test.ts test/core/archive.test.ts
• pnpm run build
• pnpm run lint
• pnpm test

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes

  • Archive workflows now correctly handle missing main specification files by treating them as greenfield capabilities and creating new specifications during sync operations, rather than skipping or marking as already synced.

• Tests

  • Added and updated test cases to verify proper handling of missing specification files in archive workflows.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 09cd8d36-24d7-46fb-bdb1-fed90b1f962a

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 1b06fdd and 4cc6fe6.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• src/core/templates/workflows/archive-change.ts
• test/core/templates/skill-templates-parity.test.ts

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Instruction text in getArchiveChangeSkillTemplate and getOpsxArchiveCommandTemplate is updated to handle the case where openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md is missing during delta-spec sync: the delta is now treated as an unsynced greenfield capability and a new main spec is created from ADDED requirements. Corresponding parity hashes and a new behavioral test are updated.

Changes

Greenfield main spec handling in archive workflow

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Archive template greenfield instructions src/core/templates/workflows/archive-change.ts	Adds four lines (two per template function) to the "Assess delta spec sync state" section of getArchiveChangeSkillTemplate and getOpsxArchiveCommandTemplate, directing that a missing openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md must be treated as an unsynced greenfield and trigger new main spec creation rather than being skipped or considered already synced.
Parity hash updates and greenfield assertion test test/core/templates/skill-templates-parity.test.ts	Updates expected SHA-256 hashes for getArchiveChangeSkillTemplate, getOpsxArchiveCommandTemplate, and the openspec-archive-change generated skill; adds a new it block that asserts both templates include missing-main-spec creation guidance and do not mark missing main specs as already synced.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~4 minutes

Possibly related issues

• #1222: Main spec is never created for the first change in a greenfield project — The template instruction changes directly address the reported behavior where archiving the first change in a new project never created the expected entry under /specs, by explicitly treating a missing main spec as an unsynced greenfield that should be created.

Possibly related PRs

• Fission-AI/OpenSpec#450: Shares the same archive-change template and greenfield main spec creation path via openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md.
• Fission-AI/OpenSpec#452: Directly overlaps — adds "smart sync check" logic for /opsx:archive that treats a missing main spec as unsynced greenfield, the same behavior this PR encodes in the instruction text.
• Fission-AI/OpenSpec#514: Both PRs modify the "Assess delta spec sync state" instructions in the opsx archive-related templates, addressing how missing main specs are described and handled.

Suggested reviewers

• TabishB

🐰 A brand-new spec, nowhere in sight,
No folder, no file — but that's alright!
I'll treat it as greenfield, fresh as dew,
And build a main spec, shiny and new.
No skipping allowed when there's work to be done! 🌱

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.	Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.

✅ Passed checks (4 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title 'Fix archive guidance for greenfield spec sync' directly describes the main change: updating archive guidance to properly handle greenfield projects with missing main specs.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	The PR modifications address issue #1222's requirement to automatically create main specs during archive operations in greenfield projects instead of archiving to /changes/archive.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	All changes are directly scoped to updating archive template guidance and adding corresponding test coverage for greenfield spec sync behavior; no unrelated modifications detected.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}