Re-scope discovery PoC to interface-contract feasibility only

[bigsmartben]

Summary

Re-scope /speckit.discovery.poc so it only validates interface-contract feasibility through a minimal runnable code check. It should not validate business workflows, end-to-end product behavior, scenario acceptance, or business correctness.

This issue comes from the integration repo review in bigsmartben/spec-kit, where the bundled extensions/discovery snapshot is currently too broad for the intended downstream source behavior.

Intended positioning

/speckit.discovery.poc should answer questions like:

• Can this interface boundary be called or adapted with the proposed contract?
• Can a synthetic request/payload be serialized, sent, parsed, and validated?
• Can the minimal adapter/mock/probe code run successfully under local preconditions?
• Are response schema, error shape, status code, auth stub, SDK method signature, or message envelope assumptions technically viable?

It should not answer questions like:

• Does the business workflow succeed?
• Is the end-to-end scenario accepted?
• Are product requirements complete or correct?
• Does the implementation meet production readiness?
• Are real side effects, production APIs, or business state transitions correct?

Files likely needing updates

• commands/poc.md

  • Replace user-story/use-case/core-design framing with interface target, contract assumption, and minimal runnable check inputs.
  • Rename success framing to technical pass conditions.
  • Add a hard scope boundary: passed/failed/inconclusive applies only to interface-contract/code-runs evidence.

• templates/poc-plan.md

  • Add fields such as Interface Contract Target, Contract Assumption, Minimal Runnable Check, Technical Pass Conditions, and Out of Scope / Non-goals.

• templates/poc-result.md

  • Add a scope boundary and make the conclusion explicitly contract-check-only.
  • Ensure passed cannot be read as business acceptance.

• README.md and docs/usage.md

  • Update command signature and examples.
  • Replace user-flow examples with interface-boundary examples using synthetic payloads, mock endpoints, SDK calls, schemas, or error handling.

• extension.yml

  • Narrow metadata from generic proof-of-concept validation to interface-contract feasibility and minimal runnable-code checks.
  • Consider tags such as interface-contract, contract-check, and runnable-check; avoid implying workflow validation.

• Follow-on command references

  • Where feasibility, techselect, decision, codebase, or codebase-api-imp recommend /speckit.discovery.poc, phrase that recommendation as interface-contract feasibility or a minimal runnable probe, not general executable/business validation.

Acceptance criteria

• /speckit.discovery.poc no longer uses user stories/use cases/typical flows as the required PoC input contract.
• Generated plan/result templates require an explicit non-goal statement that business workflows and end-to-end behavior are out of scope.
• Result classification is limited to interface-contract feasibility and minimal code execution evidence.
• Documentation examples avoid business-process validation claims.
• The integration repo can later update its bundled discovery snapshot from this downstream change.

Agent disclosure

Filed on behalf of the maintainer by Codex after reviewing the integration snapshot in bigsmartben/spec-kit.