OGT Docs Define

General guide for creating definition documents. Use when you need to define WHAT something IS - concepts, entities, systems, or domains. Routes to specialized sub-skills for specific definition types (business, features, code, marketing, branding, tools).

Guide for creating definition documents that establish WHAT things ARE in your system.

Philosophy

Definitions are the foundation of shared understanding.

Before anyone can implement, market, or discuss something, there must be a clear, agreed-upon definition of what it IS.

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                    THE DEFINITION PRINCIPLE                     │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│  A definition answers:                                          │
│    • WHAT is this thing?                                        │
│    • WHY does it exist?                                         │
│    • WHAT are its boundaries? (what it is NOT)                  │
│    • HOW does it relate to other things?                        │
│                                                                 │
│  A definition does NOT specify:                                 │
│    • HOW to implement it (that's rules/)                        │
│    • WHAT to do with it (that's todo/)                          │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

When to Use This Skill

Use ogt-docs-define when you need to:

• Understand the definitions folder structure
• Choose the right definition sub-skill
• Create a definition that doesn't fit specialized categories

For specific definition types, use:

Type	Sub-Skill	Use When
Business concepts	ogt-docs-define-business	Pricing, users, revenue, market
Product features	ogt-docs-define-feature	New capabilities, user-facing features
Technical architecture	ogt-docs-define-code	Services, data models, APIs
Marketing concepts	ogt-docs-define-marketing	Messaging, positioning, audience
Brand identity	ogt-docs-define-branding	Visual identity, tone, guidelines
Developer tools	ogt-docs-define-tools	CLI, scripts, dev workflows

Folder Structure

docs/definitions/
├── business/                   # Business model and operations
│   ├── pricing_model/
│   │   ├── definition.md
│   │   ├── tiers.md
│   │   ├── limits.md
│   │   └── .approved_by_founder
│   ├── user_types/
│   ├── revenue_model/
│   └── market_position/
│
├── features/                   # Product features
│   ├── global_search/
│   │   ├── feature.md
│   │   ├── mvp.md
│   │   ├── phase_0.md
│   │   ├── phase_1.md
│   │   ├── nice_to_have.md
│   │   └── .version
│   ├── user_auth/
│   └── campaign_manager/
│
├── technical/                  # Architecture and systems
│   ├── service_layer/
│   │   ├── definition.md
│   │   ├── contracts.md
│   │   ├── patterns.md
│   │   └── .version
│   ├── data_model/
│   └── api_design/
│
├── domain/                     # Domain-specific concepts
│   ├── creatures/
│   ├── abilities/
│   └── campaigns/
│
├── marketing/                  # Marketing and communications
│   ├── value_proposition/
│   ├── target_audience/
│   └── messaging/
│
├── branding/                   # Brand identity
│   ├── visual_identity/
│   ├── tone_of_voice/
│   └── brand_guidelines/
│
└── tools/                      # Developer tooling
    ├── cli/
    ├── scripts/
    └── workflows/

The Folder-as-Entity Pattern

Every definition is a folder containing:

{definition_slug}/
├── {type}.md                   # Primary definition file
├── {aspect}.md                 # Additional aspects/details
├── {related}.md                # Related concepts
└── .{signals}                  # Status and metadata

Primary File Naming

Definition Type	Primary File
Business	definition.md
Feature	feature.md
Technical	definition.md
Domain	definition.md
Marketing	definition.md
Branding	definition.md
Tools	definition.md

Definition Lifecycle

flowchart LR
    subgraph lifecycle ["Definition Lifecycle"]
        D[draft] --> R[review]
        R --> A[approved]
        R --> REJ[rejected]
        REJ --> D
        A --> DEP[deprecated]
    end

    style D fill:#fef3c7
    style R fill:#e0e7ff
    style A fill:#d1fae5
    style REJ fill:#fecaca
    style DEP fill:#e5e7eb

Draft State

Definition is being written, not yet ready for review.

{definition_slug}/
├── definition.md
├── .version
└── .draft                      # Empty signal: still in draft

Review State

Definition is complete and awaiting approval.

{definition_slug}/
├── definition.md
├── .version
├── .ready_for_review           # Empty signal
└── .review_requested_at        # Timestamp

Approved State

Definition is approved and can be referenced/implemented.

{definition_slug}/
├── definition.md
├── .version
├── .approved                   # Empty signal
├── .approved_by_{name}         # Who approved
└── .approved_at                # When approved

Rejected State

Definition was rejected, needs rework.

{definition_slug}/
├── definition.md
├── .version
├── .rejected                   # Empty signal
├── .rejected_reason            # Why rejected
└── .rejected_at                # When rejected

Deprecated State

Definition is outdated, replaced by something else.

{definition_slug}/
├── definition.md
├── .version
├── .deprecated                 # Empty signal
├── .deprecated_reason          # Why deprecated
├── .deprecated_at              # When deprecated
└── .superseded_by              # What replaces it

---

Creating a Definition: The Process

flowchart TD
    A[Need to define something] --> B{What type?}
    B -->|Business| C[ogt-docs-define-business]
    B -->|Feature| D[ogt-docs-define-feature]
    B -->|Technical| E[ogt-docs-define-code]
    B -->|Marketing| F[ogt-docs-define-marketing]
    B -->|Brand| G[ogt-docs-define-branding]
    B -->|Tools| H[ogt-docs-define-tools]
    B -->|Other| I[Use this skill]

    I --> J[Ask clarifying questions]
    J --> K[Draft definition]
    K --> L[Request review]
    L --> M{Approved?}
    M -->|Yes| N[Mark approved]
    M -->|No| O[Address feedback]
    O --> K

Step 1: Ask Clarifying Questions

Before writing any definition, gather information:

Core Questions (always ask):

1. What is the name/identifier for this concept?
2. In one sentence, what IS it?
3. Why does it need to exist? What problem does it solve?
4. What is it NOT? (boundaries)
5. What other concepts does it relate to?

Context Questions (ask as relevant): 6. Who are the stakeholders? 7. Are there existing similar concepts? 8. What decisions led to this concept? 9. What are the success criteria?

Step 2: Draft the Definition

Use the appropriate template based on type (see sub-skills).

Generic Definition Template:

# Definition: {Name}

## Overview

One paragraph explaining what this is and why it exists.

## Core Concept

Detailed explanation of the concept.

### Key Characteristics

- Characteristic 1
- Characteristic 2
- Characteristic 3

### Boundaries

What this is NOT:

- Not X
- Not Y
- Not Z

## Relationships

How this relates to other concepts.

| Related Concept | Relationship               |
| --------------- | -------------------------- |
| Concept A       | Uses/Contains/Depends on   |
| Concept B       | Parallel to/Alternative to |

## Examples

Concrete examples that illustrate the concept.

### Example 1: {Name}

Description of example.

### Example 2: {Name}

Description of example.

## Open Questions

Unresolved questions that need future discussion.

- Question 1?
- Question 2?

Step 3: Add Signal Files

# Create version file
echo '{"schema": "1.0", "created": "'$(date -Iseconds)'"}' > .version

# Mark as draft
touch .draft

Step 4: Request Review

# Remove draft signal
rm .draft

# Add review signals
touch .ready_for_review
echo "$(date -Iseconds)" > .review_requested_at

Step 5: Handle Review Outcome

If Approved:

rm .ready_for_review .review_requested_at
touch .approved
touch .approved_by_{reviewer_name}
echo "$(date -Iseconds)" > .approved_at

If Rejected:

rm .ready_for_review .review_requested_at
touch .rejected
echo "Reason for rejection" > .rejected_reason
echo "$(date -Iseconds)" > .rejected_at
# Then address feedback and restart from Step 2

---

Signal Files Reference

Status Signals (empty files)

Signal	Meaning
.draft	Still being written
.ready_for_review	Ready for review
.approved	Approved for use
.rejected	Rejected, needs rework
.deprecated	No longer current

Attribution Signals (empty files)

Signal	Meaning
.approved_by_{name}	Who approved
.created_by_{name}	Who created
.reviewed_by_{name}	Who reviewed

Content Signals (contain text)

Signal	Content
.version	JSON: {"schema": "1.0", "created": "..."}
.rejected_reason	Why rejected
.deprecated_reason	Why deprecated
.superseded_by	Path to replacement definition
.review_requested_at	ISO timestamp
.approved_at	ISO timestamp
.rejected_at	ISO timestamp
.deprecated_at	ISO timestamp

---

Referencing Definitions

When other documents reference a definition:

See [Definition: User Types](docs/definitions/business/user_types/)
Per the [Service Layer Definition](docs/definitions/technical/service_layer/)

When code implements a definition, add a comment:

/**
 * Implements: docs/definitions/technical/service_layer/
 * @see definition.md for contracts
 */
export class UserService implements IService {
  // ...
}

---

Common Mistakes

Mistake	Why It's Wrong	Correct Approach
Mixing definition with rules	Conflates WHAT with HOW	Keep definition pure, put HOW in rules/
No boundaries section	Unclear scope leads to scope creep	Always define what it is NOT
Skipping review	Unvalidated definitions cause misalignment	Always get approval
Editing approved definitions	Breaks references	Create new version or deprecate
No relationships section	Isolated definitions miss connections	Map relationships explicitly
Too abstract	Can't be implemented	Include concrete examples
Too specific	Can't adapt to change	Keep at concept level

---

Quality Checklist

Before requesting review, verify:

• Overview explains WHAT and WHY in one paragraph
• Core concept is detailed enough to understand
• Boundaries clearly state what this is NOT
• Relationships map to other definitions
• At least 2 concrete examples provided
• Open questions listed (if any)
• .version file created
• .draft signal present (will be removed when requesting review)