AlarQ

> to commit the specs alongside the code.

Hmm, I'm still undecided when it comes to the best approach: commit or not commit. Now I'm leaning toward the second one, as the implementation can diverge from the spec files, even though I store some impl logs in specs. As a part of feature delivery, I update the main repo docs based on the spec and code written. IMO it makes context for the LLM a bit cleaner.

Totally agree. It's totally worth it to invest this way at the start.

I get your point @stephen. In such areas, finding balance to not overcomplicate, can be a challenge. The approach I described works for me, though, as I'm focused on closing LLM statistical behavior within deterministic barriers. That's why I highly rely on schema-based ideas.