Fix Cline: use workflows instead of rules for slash commands #283
Conversation
- Update ClineSlashCommandConfigurator to use .clinerules/workflows/ paths - Update tests to expect correct workflow file locations - Update README.md to reflect workflows instead of rules - Fixes Cline integration to match Cline's architecture per their blog post
WalkthroughRelocates Cline OpenSpec workflow files from Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant CLI as openspec CLI
participant Config as ClineSlashCommandConfigurator
participant FS as Filesystem (.clinerules)
Note over CLI,Config: Init flow (updated)
User->>CLI: run `openspec init` (select Cline)
CLI->>Config: generate Cline workflow files
Config->>FS: create `.clinerules/workflows/openspec-proposal.md`
Config->>FS: create `.clinerules/workflows/openspec-apply.md`
Config->>FS: create `.clinerules/workflows/openspec-archive.md`
FS-->>CLI: files created
CLI-->>User: init complete (instructions to re-run if migrating)
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20 minutes
Possibly related PRs
Poem
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
🧰 Additional context used🧠 Learnings (1)📚 Learning: 2025-10-22T06:05:06.615ZApplied to files:
🔇 Additional comments (2)
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. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
openspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/specs/cli-init/spec.md (1)
4-11: Add normative wording (SHALL/MUST) to requirement body.Per guidelines, requirements should use SHALL/MUST for normative wording. Currently the requirement section jumps directly to the scenario without a requirement statement. Consider adding a normative preamble such as:
### Requirement: Slash Command Configuration The system SHALL create three OpenSpec workflow files at `.clinerules/workflows/` when the user selects Cline during initialization, populated from shared templates with Cline-specific Markdown heading frontmatter. #### Scenario: Generating slash commands for Cline - **WHEN** the user selects Cline during initialization ...
📜 Review details
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
openspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/proposal.md(1 hunks)openspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/specs/cli-init/spec.md(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (4)
openspec/changes/*/{proposal.md,tasks.md,design.md,specs/**/spec.md}
📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (openspec/AGENTS.md)
Scaffold each change with proposal.md, tasks.md, optional design.md, and delta spec files under openspec/changes//specs//spec.md
Files:
openspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/specs/cli-init/spec.mdopenspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/proposal.md
openspec/changes/*/**
📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (openspec/AGENTS.md)
Choose a unique kebab-case, verb-led change-id (add-, update-, remove-, refactor-) for openspec/changes//
Files:
openspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/specs/cli-init/spec.mdopenspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/proposal.md
openspec/{specs/**/spec.md,changes/*/specs/**/spec.md}
📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (openspec/AGENTS.md)
openspec/{specs/**/spec.md,changes/*/specs/**/spec.md}: Write requirements using SHALL/MUST for normative wording
Every requirement must include at least one scenario, formatted exactly with a '#### Scenario: ' header (no bullets or bold)
Under ADDED, introduce new capabilities as standalone requirements rather than altering existing ones
Files:
openspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/specs/cli-init/spec.md
openspec/changes/*/specs/**/spec.md
📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (openspec/AGENTS.md)
openspec/changes/*/specs/**/spec.md: Use ADDED, MODIFIED, REMOVED, or RENAMED sections when authoring deltas; place changed requirements under the correct operation header
For MODIFIED requirements, paste the full existing requirement block (header through scenarios) and ensure the header text matches exactly (whitespace-insensitive)
Use RENAMED when only the requirement name changes; if behavior changes too, use RENAMED plus MODIFIED referencing the new name
Files:
openspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/specs/cli-init/spec.md
🧠 Learnings (6)
📚 Learning: 2025-10-22T06:05:06.615Z
Learnt from: CR
Repo: Fission-AI/OpenSpec PR: 0
File: openspec/AGENTS.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-10-22T06:05:06.615Z
Learning: Applies to openspec/changes/*/{proposal.md,tasks.md,design.md,specs/**/spec.md} : Scaffold each change with proposal.md, tasks.md, optional design.md, and delta spec files under openspec/changes/<change-id>/specs/<capability>/spec.md
Applied to files:
openspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/specs/cli-init/spec.mdopenspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/proposal.md
📚 Learning: 2025-10-22T06:05:06.615Z
Learnt from: CR
Repo: Fission-AI/OpenSpec PR: 0
File: openspec/AGENTS.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-10-22T06:05:06.615Z
Learning: Applies to openspec/changes/*/specs/**/spec.md : Use ADDED, MODIFIED, REMOVED, or RENAMED sections when authoring deltas; place changed requirements under the correct operation header
Applied to files:
openspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/specs/cli-init/spec.mdopenspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/proposal.md
📚 Learning: 2025-10-22T06:05:06.615Z
Learnt from: CR
Repo: Fission-AI/OpenSpec PR: 0
File: openspec/AGENTS.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-10-22T06:05:06.615Z
Learning: Prefer modifying existing specs over creating duplicates; if multiple capabilities are affected, create one delta spec.md per capability
Applied to files:
openspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/specs/cli-init/spec.md
📚 Learning: 2025-10-22T06:05:06.615Z
Learnt from: CR
Repo: Fission-AI/OpenSpec PR: 0
File: openspec/AGENTS.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-10-22T06:05:06.615Z
Learning: Applies to openspec/{specs/**/spec.md,changes/*/specs/**/spec.md} : Under ADDED, introduce new capabilities as standalone requirements rather than altering existing ones
Applied to files:
openspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/specs/cli-init/spec.mdopenspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/proposal.md
📚 Learning: 2025-10-21T03:05:07.856Z
Learnt from: CR
Repo: Fission-AI/OpenSpec PR: 0
File: AGENTS.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-10-21T03:05:07.856Z
Learning: Use @/openspec/AGENTS.md to learn how to create and apply change proposals
Applied to files:
openspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/specs/cli-init/spec.md
📚 Learning: 2025-10-22T06:05:06.615Z
Learnt from: CR
Repo: Fission-AI/OpenSpec PR: 0
File: openspec/AGENTS.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-10-22T06:05:06.615Z
Learning: Applies to openspec/specs/**/spec.md : Keep current, deployed specs in openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md (one focused capability per directory)
Applied to files:
openspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/proposal.md
🔇 Additional comments (3)
openspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/specs/cli-init/spec.md (1)
3-11: Include the original requirement block in MODIFIED section per guidelines.Per coding guidelines, MODIFIED requirements must include the full existing requirement block (header through scenarios) with exact header text matching to enable comparison. Please include the original "Slash Command Configuration" requirement from the base spec so reviewers can see what changed.
Can you confirm the original requirement text from
openspec/specs/cli-init/spec.mdand include it above the new scenario?openspec/changes/fix-cline-workflows-implementation/proposal.md (2)
1-13: Excellent proposal structure and architectural rationale.The proposal clearly articulates the architectural issue (workflows vs. rules per Cline's guidance), lists concrete changes, and appropriately flags the BREAKING change. The rationale is sound and well-referenced.
1-2: Verify complete change scaffolding.Per guidelines, each change should be scaffolded with
proposal.md,tasks.md, optionaldesign.md, and delta specs. The provided files includeproposal.mdandspecs/cli-init/spec.md, buttasks.mdis not in the review context. Please confirmtasks.mdexists in the change directory.
…-AI#283) * fix(cline): use workflows instead of rules for slash commands - Update ClineSlashCommandConfigurator to use .clinerules/workflows/ paths - Update tests to expect correct workflow file locations - Update README.md to reflect workflows instead of rules - Fixes Cline integration to match Cline's architecture per their blog post * Adds spec for fix-cline-workflows-implementation --------- Co-authored-by: didier <didier.boff@axess.fr> Co-authored-by: Tabish Bidiwale <30385142+TabishB@users.noreply.github.com>
…-AI#283) * fix(cline): use workflows instead of rules for slash commands - Update ClineSlashCommandConfigurator to use .clinerules/workflows/ paths - Update tests to expect correct workflow file locations - Update README.md to reflect workflows instead of rules - Fixes Cline integration to match Cline's architecture per their blog post * Adds spec for fix-cline-workflows-implementation --------- Co-authored-by: didier <didier.boff@axess.fr> Co-authored-by: Tabish Bidiwale <30385142+TabishB@users.noreply.github.com>
2 participants
The Cline implementation is incorrect, it should be using workflows, just as Kilo Code (Cline is the master project !).
For the record: https://cline.bot/blog/stop-adding-rules-when-you-need-workflows
Changes:
Summary by CodeRabbit
Breaking Changes
Documentation
Tests