A new open corpus maps how developer-written and AI-drafted specifications drive code: SPECMINE records 470,795 spec files (plus 98,574 Kiro artifacts), full commit histories, 5,992 spec-touching pull requests, and a 2.4 million–item traceability index across 73,030 public GitHub repositories. Released with reproducible snapshots and rich structural features, it lets researchers trace spec→code workflows and study human–AI collaboration at scale.

Main Finding

SPECMINE v1.0 is the first large-scale, public corpus of Spec-Driven Development (SDD) artifacts that treats the natural‑language specification as a first‑class unit and links it to code. The release (July 2026 snapshot) captures the “intent” layer produced by ~18 SDD tools and provides two independent channels from spec → implementation (co-change PRs and a traceability index), enabling empirical study of how AI-assisted specs drive software production at scale.

Key Points

• What SDD is: developers (often aided by AI) place structured specifications in repository files (spec.md, or tool-specific layouts like Kiro’s .kiro/specs/). AI agents then generate or modify code from those specs.
• Scale & scope (v1.0 snapshot):
  • 470,795 spec files (broad filename census) across 73,030 repositories and 44,521 owners.
  • 98,574 Kiro artifacts across 12,910 repositories (separately censused).
  • 468,307 spec files annotated with 39 structural features (headings, EARS/Gherkin markers, TODOs, etc.).
  • 780,335 total spec-file commits (full commit histories available).
  • 5,992 pull requests that touch spec files (11 tools swept; sample of repos with ≥10 stars) across 581 repositories; 81.2% of those PRs also modify code in the same PR.
  • Traceability index: 2,421,323 typed references (1.28M to code files, 863k to sibling docs, 152k to PRs, etc.); OpenSpec task→code resolvable references: 435,401 (resolved against repo tree at anchor commit).
  • Temporal concentration: 99.7% of specs first committed in 2025+, 92% in 2026 → captures the birth and rapid adoption window.
  • Dataset size: curated release ≈14.7 GB; licensed repos: 28,698; repos with ≥100 stars: 923.
• Data products & access:
  • Zenodo archive with DOI (10.5281/zenodo.22102779): MySQL dump + CSV/Parquet + JSONL of spec contents.
  • Hugging Face Parquet mirror: https://huggingface.co/datasets/ShyAgarwal/specmine
  • GitHub repo with schema, loader scripts, and 500-repo sample: https://github.com/shyamagarwal13/specmine-official
• Validation & provenance:
  • Tool attribution via path‑fingerprints; small manual check (30 specs across 10 tools) found correct attribution.
  • Construction is idempotent/deterministic; filtered out non-spec scaffolding (e.g., package caches).
• Limitations noted by authors:
  • PR layer is a subsample (repositories with ≥10 stars for 11 tools), not a full census.
  • GitHub code-search caps (1,000 results) — they use adaptive partitioning; reachable set may be a strict subset of all matching files.
  • Some artifacts are auto-generated (e.g., caffeine.ai repositories) and may need filtering depending on study goals.

Data & Methods

• Two complementary censuses:
• Broad filename census: search for spec.md/specs.md to recover most SDD tools (470,795 files). Each row includes repository metadata, file/commit provenance, raw content, and tool attribution (spec_tool/spec_role).
• Kiro census: targeted discovery of .kiro/specs/{requirements,design,tasks}.md layout (98,574 artifacts).
• PR layer (implementation channel): exhaustive capture of every PR touching a spec file for 11 tools across repositories with ≥10 stars. Each PR has per-file changesets flagged is_spec/is_code. Result: 5,992 spec-touching PRs, 348,141 per-file diff rows captured.
• Traceability index: assembled links from spec text, commit messages, tasks.md, and folder git trees; typed by relation and provenance. For OpenSpec tasks.md, task→code references were resolved against the git tree at the anchoring commit.
• Structural features: 39 parsed features per spec (heading structure, counts of code/tables/diagrams, requirement-template markers, placeholders/TODOs, etc.).
• Storage & formats: relational MySQL schema (57 tables, 815 columns) plus CSV/Parquet exports and JSONL for spec contents. Sample and loading scripts provided; recommended use with SQL, DuckDB, pandas/polars.
• Ethical & licensing handling: only public GitHub data collected under API terms. Release preserves repo license metadata; commit emails and some profile fields removed. SPECMINE compiled release under CC BY 4.0; users should respect original repo licenses when redistributing or using derived products.

Implications for AI Economics

SPECMINE creates a rich empirical substrate for economic questions about AI tools, labor, and innovation in software production. Key opportunities and suggested research angles:

• Adoption, diffusion, and market structure

  • Map adoption of SDD tools across ecosystems, languages, and organizations; estimate diffusion rates and network effects among repositories/orgs.
  • Study competition and coexistence among tool families (Kiro, Spec Kit, OpenSpec, etc.): determinants of market share and path dependence.
  • Use event‑study designs around tool releases/announcements to identify causal adoption effects.

• Labor substitution, task allocation, and complementarities

  • Measure how much specification work is human vs agent (authorship signals, template vs custom content) and how this changes labor composition.
  • Quantify task reallocation: are humans shifting from low‑level coding to spec writing/review/curation? Compare PR sizes, review effort, and follow-up fixes conditional on spec presence/quality.
  • Estimate complementarity vs substitutability between human engineers and AI agents using productivity outcomes (time-to-merge, PR iteration counts, bug-fix rates).

• Productivity, quality, and returns to AI tooling

  • Test whether higher-quality specs (operationalized via the 39 structural features, absence of placeholders, testability markers) predict faster or fewer-fix implementations, smaller PR churn, or higher merge success.
  • Regression or matched‑sample analyses: control for repo maturity, stars, language, team size to estimate effect of SDD adoption on engineering throughput.
  • Instrumental variables or difference-in-differences exploiting staggered adoption/availability of tools to estimate causal effects on productivity.

• Innovation, modularity, and re-use

  • Measure template reuse vs project-specific spec content to infer returns to scale in specification engineering and potential for SDD-based productization.
  • Analyze patterns where specs name files that never appear (unimplemented tasks) to study waste, speculative design, or idea filtering.

• Governance, incentives, and regulation

  • Study licensing and IP questions: frequency of specs in repos with permissive vs restrictive licenses; potential leak vectors when AI drafts specs from private prompts (policy relevance).
  • Investigate how review and accountability operate when the “artifact under discussion” is the spec (not code): who signs off, dispute resolution, and audit trails.

• Methods & identification suggestions

  • Suggested causal strategies: event studies (tool launches, major updates), repo fixed effects, staggered DiD, synthetic controls, and IVs based on exogenous exposure (e.g., GitHub feature rollouts, region/time-limited tool availability).
  • For micro-level causal claims about agent vs human authorship, combine automated authorship classification with manual validation and consider regression discontinuity (e.g., thresholds for tool adoption) or matched comparisons of otherwise similar repos.

• Policy and macro implications

  • SPECMINE enables measurement of aggregate trends: rate at which AI-generated intent displaces or complements developer labor, which feeds into labor-market forecasting for software engineers and policy on reskilling.
  • Platform competition: empirical evidence on lock-in, template homogenization, and standards convergence could inform regulation of dominant SDD tool providers.

Caveats for economic inference - Sampling and external validity: the PR layer is a targeted subsample (repos ≥10 stars for 11 tools). Many captured repositories are low-star / experimental — careful filters and robustness checks are necessary before generalizing. - Measurement error: tool attribution is path-fingerprint based and was spot-checked; task→code resolution is possible only where tasks name files or PRs are referenceable, and co-change heuristics are imperfect. - Timing & causality: specs and code can be written in various orders (spec-first, implementation-first, co-change). Use pre-trends and repo fixed effects to reduce reverse causality bias.

Overall, SPECMINE offers an unprecedented, directly usable dataset for rigorous empirical research on how AI agents change the economics of software production — from micro productivities and task allocation to market dynamics of tooling and implications for labor markets and regulation.