Comparison

The landscape of spec, intent, and AI-native development.

Three currents are running in parallel: SDD, IDD, and a growing list of products that put either word in their name. This page maps the terrain.

SDD levels are stacked — each one fixes the previous level's failure mode.
IDD schools are parallel choices — each makes a different bet. Don't confuse the two.
01 · SDD

SDD — three levels of investment

Birgitta Böckeler observed three levels of how SDD tools treat the spec. The levels stack: each fixes the failure mode of the one below.

LEVEL 1Spec-firstLEVEL 2Spec-anchoredLEVEL 3Spec-as-sourceEach level fixes the failure mode of the one below.
"Spec-as-source, and even spec-anchoring, may carry both the rigidity of MDD and the non-determinism of LLMs — Inflexibility AND non-determinism."— Birgitta Böckeler · martinfowler.com
02 · IDD

IDD — three schools

Where SDD levels are stacked, IDD schools are parallel choices. We have observed three so far. The naming is ours; the schools are real.

A

Build-First IDD

visrow
Strength
Light, fits Agile/CI culture, avoids doc rot.
Limit
Intent is one document per project; reuse and hierarchy are out of scope.
B

Implementation-Last IDD

m8a-io · r/IntentDrivenDev
Strength
Extends DDD/TDD intuitions; verification-driven code quality is stable.
Limit
Intent is treated as one bundle (file/schema/policy), not structured.
COURS

Tree-Structured Operational IDD

Intent-System (ours)
Strength
Cross-domain intent reuse, product-experience and tech intent in one tree, runs on existing PR/issue culture.
Limit
Heavier upfront structure; not for one-off scripts.
03 · Relation

How IDD relates to SDD

GitHub Spec-Kit treats IDD as the upstream of SDD. The lingua franca of development moves to a higher level; code is the last-mile approach.

Customer / Stakeholderwhat to achieve
IDDintent layer — natural language
SDDspec layer — implementation-near
Codegenerated by AI, reviewed by humans
04 · Comparison

At-a-glance comparison

AxisSDDIDD (general)Intent-System
Source of truthspecone intent doc / filestructured intent tree
Primary languagetechnical, implementation-nearnatural, customer-facingstructured (Purpose / User / Means)
Code-spec relationshipspec → code (level-dependent)intent → spec → codeintent tree → issue → code
Freshnessdepends on leveldepends on authorenforced via closeout
Review compares againstspecintentintent diff + code quality
Frontend & tech intentnot addressednot addressedsame tree
Multi-domain reusetypically one codebasetypically one codebasemultiple submodules / domains
Operational looplimitedlimitedbuilt-in (review / closeout)
05 · Where Intent-System fits

Intent-as-source

Intent-System is an implementation of Tree-Structured Operational IDD. Where Tessl makes the spec the SSoT, we make intent the SSoT.

Intent isn't just product goals. The tree also carries the technical decisions that constrain implementation — chosen architecture and frameworks, interface contracts, UI patterns down to text-input best practices. Each issue inherits the relevant slice of that tree, so the agent (and the human reviewer) sees the same map of what "correct" looks like before a single line is written. Cross-linking intents into a tree is how we hand AI both a map and a compass for the right implementation, and how implementation mistakes become easy to spot.

intent treecurated by humansPROMOTEinferred → clarified → canonicalspec / issuederived from intentLLM NON-DETERMINISMconfined herecodethe last mile

Intent-System is orthogonal to SDD tools — you can run it for the IDD layer and Spec-Kit, Tessl, or Augment Intent for the SDD layer in the same project.

Try Intent-System