forked from wangziqi/gongxue-base
fix: resolve 3 review findings (permission codes, profile guard, JSDoc)
This commit is contained in:
155
.claude/commands/opsx/apply.md
Normal file
155
.claude/commands/opsx/apply.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,155 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: "OPSX: Apply"
|
||||
description: Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change (Experimental)
|
||||
category: Workflow
|
||||
tags: [workflow, artifacts, experimental]
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change.
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: Optionally specify a change name (e.g., `/opsx:apply add-auth`). If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Select the change**
|
||||
|
||||
If a name is provided, use it. Otherwise:
|
||||
- Infer from conversation context if the user mentioned a change
|
||||
- Auto-select if only one active change exists
|
||||
- If ambiguous, run `openspec list --json` to get available changes and use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select
|
||||
|
||||
Always announce: "Using change: <name>" and how to override (e.g., `/opsx:apply <other>`).
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Check status to understand the schema**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Parse the JSON to understand:
|
||||
- `schemaName`: The workflow being used (e.g., "spec-driven")
|
||||
- `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, and `actionContext`: planning scope and edit constraints
|
||||
- Which artifact contains the tasks (typically "tasks" for spec-driven, check status for others)
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Get apply instructions**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions apply --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This returns:
|
||||
- `contextFiles`: artifact ID -> array of concrete file paths (varies by schema)
|
||||
- Progress (total, complete, remaining)
|
||||
- Task list with status
|
||||
- Dynamic instruction based on current state
|
||||
|
||||
**Handle states:**
|
||||
- If `state: "blocked"` (missing artifacts): show message, suggest using `/opsx:continue`
|
||||
- If `state: "all_done"`: congratulate, suggest archive
|
||||
- Otherwise: proceed to implementation
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Read context files**
|
||||
|
||||
Read every file path listed under `contextFiles` from the apply instructions output.
|
||||
The files depend on the schema being used:
|
||||
- **spec-driven**: proposal, specs, design, tasks
|
||||
- Other schemas: follow the contextFiles from CLI output
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Show current progress**
|
||||
|
||||
Display:
|
||||
- Schema being used
|
||||
- Progress: "N/M tasks complete"
|
||||
- Remaining tasks overview
|
||||
- Dynamic instruction from CLI
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Implement tasks (loop until done or blocked)**
|
||||
|
||||
For each pending task:
|
||||
- Show which task is being worked on
|
||||
- Make the code changes required
|
||||
- Keep changes minimal and focused
|
||||
- Mark task complete in the tasks file: `- [ ]` → `- [x]`
|
||||
- Continue to next task
|
||||
|
||||
**Pause if:**
|
||||
- Task is unclear → ask for clarification
|
||||
- Implementation reveals a design issue → suggest updating artifacts
|
||||
- Error or blocker encountered → report and wait for guidance
|
||||
- User interrupts
|
||||
|
||||
7. **On completion or pause, show status**
|
||||
|
||||
Display:
|
||||
- Tasks completed this session
|
||||
- Overall progress: "N/M tasks complete"
|
||||
- If all done: suggest archive
|
||||
- If paused: explain why and wait for guidance
|
||||
|
||||
**Output During Implementation**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Implementing: <change-name> (schema: <schema-name>)
|
||||
|
||||
Working on task 3/7: <task description>
|
||||
[...implementation happening...]
|
||||
✓ Task complete
|
||||
|
||||
Working on task 4/7: <task description>
|
||||
[...implementation happening...]
|
||||
✓ Task complete
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Completion**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Implementation Complete
|
||||
|
||||
**Change:** <change-name>
|
||||
**Schema:** <schema-name>
|
||||
**Progress:** 7/7 tasks complete ✓
|
||||
|
||||
### Completed This Session
|
||||
- [x] Task 1
|
||||
- [x] Task 2
|
||||
...
|
||||
|
||||
All tasks complete! You can archive this change with `/opsx:archive`.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Pause (Issue Encountered)**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Implementation Paused
|
||||
|
||||
**Change:** <change-name>
|
||||
**Schema:** <schema-name>
|
||||
**Progress:** 4/7 tasks complete
|
||||
|
||||
### Issue Encountered
|
||||
<description of the issue>
|
||||
|
||||
**Options:**
|
||||
1. <option 1>
|
||||
2. <option 2>
|
||||
3. Other approach
|
||||
|
||||
What would you like to do?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Keep going through tasks until done or blocked
|
||||
- Always read context files before starting (from the apply instructions output)
|
||||
- If task is ambiguous, pause and ask before implementing
|
||||
- If implementation reveals issues, pause and suggest artifact updates
|
||||
- Keep code changes minimal and scoped to each task
|
||||
- Update task checkbox immediately after completing each task
|
||||
- Pause on errors, blockers, or unclear requirements - don't guess
|
||||
- Use contextFiles from CLI output, don't assume specific file names
|
||||
|
||||
**Fluid Workflow Integration**
|
||||
|
||||
This skill supports the "actions on a change" model:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Can be invoked anytime**: Before all artifacts are done (if tasks exist), after partial implementation, interleaved with other actions
|
||||
- **Allows artifact updates**: If implementation reveals design issues, suggest updating artifacts - not phase-locked, work fluidly
|
||||
160
.claude/commands/opsx/archive.md
Normal file
160
.claude/commands/opsx/archive.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,160 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: "OPSX: Archive"
|
||||
description: Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow
|
||||
category: Workflow
|
||||
tags: [workflow, archive, experimental]
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: Optionally specify a change name after `/opsx:archive` (e.g., `/opsx:archive add-auth`). If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no change name provided, prompt for selection**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec list --json` to get available changes. Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select.
|
||||
|
||||
Show only active changes (not already archived).
|
||||
Include the schema used for each change if available.
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Check artifact completion status**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json` to check artifact completion.
|
||||
|
||||
Parse the JSON to understand:
|
||||
- `schemaName`: The workflow being used
|
||||
- `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`: path and scope context
|
||||
- `artifacts`: List of artifacts with their status (`done` or other)
|
||||
|
||||
**If any artifacts are not `done`:**
|
||||
- Display warning listing incomplete artifacts
|
||||
- Prompt user for confirmation to continue
|
||||
- Proceed if user confirms
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Check task completion status**
|
||||
|
||||
Read the tasks file (typically `tasks.md`) to check for incomplete tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
Count tasks marked with `- [ ]` (incomplete) vs `- [x]` (complete).
|
||||
|
||||
**If incomplete tasks found:**
|
||||
- Display warning showing count of incomplete tasks
|
||||
- Prompt user for confirmation to continue
|
||||
- Proceed if user confirms
|
||||
|
||||
**If no tasks file exists:** Proceed without task-related warning.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Assess delta spec sync state**
|
||||
|
||||
Use `artifactPaths.specs.existingOutputPaths` from status JSON to check for delta specs. If none exist, proceed without sync prompt.
|
||||
|
||||
**If delta specs exist:**
|
||||
- Compare each delta spec with its corresponding main spec at `openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md`
|
||||
- Determine what changes would be applied (adds, modifications, removals, renames)
|
||||
- Show a combined summary before prompting
|
||||
|
||||
**Prompt options:**
|
||||
- If changes needed: "Sync now (recommended)", "Archive without syncing"
|
||||
- If already synced: "Archive now", "Sync anyway", "Cancel"
|
||||
|
||||
If user chooses sync, use Task tool (subagent_type: "general-purpose", prompt: "Use Skill tool to invoke openspec-sync-specs for change '<name>'. Delta spec analysis: <include the analyzed delta spec summary>"). Proceed to archive regardless of choice.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Perform the archive**
|
||||
|
||||
Create an `archive` directory under `planningHome.changesDir` if it doesn't exist:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
mkdir -p "<planningHome.changesDir>/archive"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Generate target name using current date: `YYYY-MM-DD-<change-name>`
|
||||
|
||||
**Check if target already exists:**
|
||||
- If yes: Fail with error, suggest renaming existing archive or using different date
|
||||
- If no: Move `changeRoot` to the archive directory
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
mv "<changeRoot>" "<planningHome.changesDir>/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Display summary**
|
||||
|
||||
Show archive completion summary including:
|
||||
- Change name
|
||||
- Schema that was used
|
||||
- Archive location
|
||||
- Spec sync status (synced / sync skipped / no delta specs)
|
||||
- Note about any warnings (incomplete artifacts/tasks)
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Success**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Archive Complete
|
||||
|
||||
**Change:** <change-name>
|
||||
**Schema:** <schema-name>
|
||||
**Archived to:** the archive path derived from `planningHome.changesDir`/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>/
|
||||
**Specs:** ✓ Synced to main specs
|
||||
|
||||
All artifacts complete. All tasks complete.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Success (No Delta Specs)**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Archive Complete
|
||||
|
||||
**Change:** <change-name>
|
||||
**Schema:** <schema-name>
|
||||
**Archived to:** the archive path derived from `planningHome.changesDir`/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>/
|
||||
**Specs:** No delta specs
|
||||
|
||||
All artifacts complete. All tasks complete.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Success With Warnings**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Archive Complete (with warnings)
|
||||
|
||||
**Change:** <change-name>
|
||||
**Schema:** <schema-name>
|
||||
**Archived to:** the archive path derived from `planningHome.changesDir`/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>/
|
||||
**Specs:** Sync skipped (user chose to skip)
|
||||
|
||||
**Warnings:**
|
||||
- Archived with 2 incomplete artifacts
|
||||
- Archived with 3 incomplete tasks
|
||||
- Delta spec sync was skipped (user chose to skip)
|
||||
|
||||
Review the archive if this was not intentional.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Error (Archive Exists)**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Archive Failed
|
||||
|
||||
**Change:** <change-name>
|
||||
**Target:** the archive path derived from `planningHome.changesDir`/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>/
|
||||
|
||||
Target archive directory already exists.
|
||||
|
||||
**Options:**
|
||||
1. Rename the existing archive
|
||||
2. Delete the existing archive if it's a duplicate
|
||||
3. Wait until a different date to archive
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Always prompt for change selection if not provided
|
||||
- Use artifact graph (openspec status --json) for completion checking
|
||||
- Don't block archive on warnings - just inform and confirm
|
||||
- Preserve .openspec.yaml when moving to archive (it moves with the directory)
|
||||
- Show clear summary of what happened
|
||||
- If sync is requested, use the Skill tool to invoke `openspec-sync-specs` (agent-driven)
|
||||
- If delta specs exist, always run the sync assessment and show the combined summary before prompting
|
||||
244
.claude/commands/opsx/bulk-archive.md
Normal file
244
.claude/commands/opsx/bulk-archive.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,244 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: "OPSX: Bulk Archive"
|
||||
description: Archive multiple completed changes at once
|
||||
category: Workflow
|
||||
tags: [workflow, archive, experimental, bulk]
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Archive multiple completed changes in a single operation.
|
||||
|
||||
This skill allows you to batch-archive changes, handling spec conflicts intelligently by checking the codebase to determine what's actually implemented.
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: None required (prompts for selection)
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Get active changes**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec list --json` to get all active changes.
|
||||
|
||||
If no active changes exist, inform user and stop.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Prompt for change selection**
|
||||
|
||||
Use **AskUserQuestion tool** with multi-select to let user choose changes:
|
||||
- Show each change with its schema
|
||||
- Include an option for "All changes"
|
||||
- Allow any number of selections (1+ works, 2+ is the typical use case)
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT auto-select. Always let the user choose.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Batch validation - gather status for all selected changes**
|
||||
|
||||
For each selected change, collect:
|
||||
|
||||
a. **Artifact status** - Run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`
|
||||
- Parse `schemaName`, `artifacts`, `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`
|
||||
- Note which artifacts are `done` vs other states
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Task completion** - Read `artifactPaths.tasks.existingOutputPaths` from status JSON
|
||||
- Count `- [ ]` (incomplete) vs `- [x]` (complete)
|
||||
- If no tasks file exists, note as "No tasks"
|
||||
|
||||
c. **Delta specs** - Check `artifactPaths.specs.existingOutputPaths` from status JSON
|
||||
- List which capability specs exist
|
||||
- For each, extract requirement names (lines matching `### Requirement: <name>`)
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Detect spec conflicts**
|
||||
|
||||
Build a map of `capability -> [changes that touch it]`:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
auth -> [change-a, change-b] <- CONFLICT (2+ changes)
|
||||
api -> [change-c] <- OK (only 1 change)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
A conflict exists when 2+ selected changes have delta specs for the same capability.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Resolve conflicts agentically**
|
||||
|
||||
**For each conflict**, investigate the codebase:
|
||||
|
||||
a. **Read the delta specs** from each conflicting change to understand what each claims to add/modify
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Search the codebase** for implementation evidence:
|
||||
- Look for code implementing requirements from each delta spec
|
||||
- Check for related files, functions, or tests
|
||||
|
||||
c. **Determine resolution**:
|
||||
- If only one change is actually implemented -> sync that one's specs
|
||||
- If both implemented -> apply in chronological order (older first, newer overwrites)
|
||||
- If neither implemented -> skip spec sync, warn user
|
||||
|
||||
d. **Record resolution** for each conflict:
|
||||
- Which change's specs to apply
|
||||
- In what order (if both)
|
||||
- Rationale (what was found in codebase)
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Show consolidated status table**
|
||||
|
||||
Display a table summarizing all changes:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
| Change | Artifacts | Tasks | Specs | Conflicts | Status |
|
||||
|---------------------|-----------|-------|---------|-----------|--------|
|
||||
| schema-management | Done | 5/5 | 2 delta | None | Ready |
|
||||
| project-config | Done | 3/3 | 1 delta | None | Ready |
|
||||
| add-oauth | Done | 4/4 | 1 delta | auth (!) | Ready* |
|
||||
| add-verify-skill | 1 left | 2/5 | None | None | Warn |
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
For conflicts, show the resolution:
|
||||
```
|
||||
* Conflict resolution:
|
||||
- auth spec: Will apply add-oauth then add-jwt (both implemented, chronological order)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
For incomplete changes, show warnings:
|
||||
```
|
||||
Warnings:
|
||||
- add-verify-skill: 1 incomplete artifact, 3 incomplete tasks
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
7. **Confirm batch operation**
|
||||
|
||||
Use **AskUserQuestion tool** with a single confirmation:
|
||||
|
||||
- "Archive N changes?" with options based on status
|
||||
- Options might include:
|
||||
- "Archive all N changes"
|
||||
- "Archive only N ready changes (skip incomplete)"
|
||||
- "Cancel"
|
||||
|
||||
If there are incomplete changes, make clear they'll be archived with warnings.
|
||||
|
||||
8. **Execute archive for each confirmed change**
|
||||
|
||||
Process changes in the determined order (respecting conflict resolution):
|
||||
|
||||
a. **Sync specs** if delta specs exist:
|
||||
- Use the openspec-sync-specs approach (agent-driven intelligent merge)
|
||||
- For conflicts, apply in resolved order
|
||||
- Track if sync was done
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Perform the archive**:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
mkdir -p "<planningHome.changesDir>/archive"
|
||||
mv "<changeRoot>" "<planningHome.changesDir>/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
c. **Track outcome** for each change:
|
||||
- Success: archived successfully
|
||||
- Failed: error during archive (record error)
|
||||
- Skipped: user chose not to archive (if applicable)
|
||||
|
||||
9. **Display summary**
|
||||
|
||||
Show final results:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Bulk Archive Complete
|
||||
|
||||
Archived 3 changes:
|
||||
- schema-management-cli -> archive/2026-01-19-schema-management-cli/
|
||||
- project-config -> archive/2026-01-19-project-config/
|
||||
- add-oauth -> archive/2026-01-19-add-oauth/
|
||||
|
||||
Skipped 1 change:
|
||||
- add-verify-skill (user chose not to archive incomplete)
|
||||
|
||||
Spec sync summary:
|
||||
- 4 delta specs synced to main specs
|
||||
- 1 conflict resolved (auth: applied both in chronological order)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If any failures:
|
||||
```
|
||||
Failed 1 change:
|
||||
- some-change: Archive directory already exists
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Conflict Resolution Examples**
|
||||
|
||||
Example 1: Only one implemented
|
||||
```
|
||||
Conflict: specs/auth/spec.md touched by [add-oauth, add-jwt]
|
||||
|
||||
Checking add-oauth:
|
||||
- Delta adds "OAuth Provider Integration" requirement
|
||||
- Searching codebase... found src/auth/oauth.ts implementing OAuth flow
|
||||
|
||||
Checking add-jwt:
|
||||
- Delta adds "JWT Token Handling" requirement
|
||||
- Searching codebase... no JWT implementation found
|
||||
|
||||
Resolution: Only add-oauth is implemented. Will sync add-oauth specs only.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Example 2: Both implemented
|
||||
```
|
||||
Conflict: specs/api/spec.md touched by [add-rest-api, add-graphql]
|
||||
|
||||
Checking add-rest-api (created 2026-01-10):
|
||||
- Delta adds "REST Endpoints" requirement
|
||||
- Searching codebase... found src/api/rest.ts
|
||||
|
||||
Checking add-graphql (created 2026-01-15):
|
||||
- Delta adds "GraphQL Schema" requirement
|
||||
- Searching codebase... found src/api/graphql.ts
|
||||
|
||||
Resolution: Both implemented. Will apply add-rest-api specs first,
|
||||
then add-graphql specs (chronological order, newer takes precedence).
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Success**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Bulk Archive Complete
|
||||
|
||||
Archived N changes:
|
||||
- <change-1> -> archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<change-1>/
|
||||
- <change-2> -> archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<change-2>/
|
||||
|
||||
Spec sync summary:
|
||||
- N delta specs synced to main specs
|
||||
- No conflicts (or: M conflicts resolved)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Partial Success**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Bulk Archive Complete (partial)
|
||||
|
||||
Archived N changes:
|
||||
- <change-1> -> archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<change-1>/
|
||||
|
||||
Skipped M changes:
|
||||
- <change-2> (user chose not to archive incomplete)
|
||||
|
||||
Failed K changes:
|
||||
- <change-3>: Archive directory already exists
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output When No Changes**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## No Changes to Archive
|
||||
|
||||
No active changes found. Create a new change to get started.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Allow any number of changes (1+ is fine, 2+ is the typical use case)
|
||||
- Always prompt for selection, never auto-select
|
||||
- Detect spec conflicts early and resolve by checking codebase
|
||||
- When both changes are implemented, apply specs in chronological order
|
||||
- Skip spec sync only when implementation is missing (warn user)
|
||||
- Show clear per-change status before confirming
|
||||
- Use single confirmation for entire batch
|
||||
- Track and report all outcomes (success/skip/fail)
|
||||
- Preserve .openspec.yaml when moving to archive
|
||||
- Archive directory target uses current date: YYYY-MM-DD-<name>
|
||||
- If archive target exists, fail that change but continue with others
|
||||
117
.claude/commands/opsx/continue.md
Normal file
117
.claude/commands/opsx/continue.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,117 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: "OPSX: Continue"
|
||||
description: Continue working on a change - create the next artifact (Experimental)
|
||||
category: Workflow
|
||||
tags: [workflow, artifacts, experimental]
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Continue working on a change by creating the next artifact.
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: Optionally specify a change name after `/opsx:continue` (e.g., `/opsx:continue add-auth`). If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no change name provided, prompt for selection**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec list --json` to get available changes sorted by most recently modified. Then use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select which change to work on.
|
||||
|
||||
Present the top 3-4 most recently modified changes as options, showing:
|
||||
- Change name
|
||||
- Schema (from `schema` field if present, otherwise "spec-driven")
|
||||
- Status (e.g., "0/5 tasks", "complete", "no tasks")
|
||||
- How recently it was modified (from `lastModified` field)
|
||||
|
||||
Mark the most recently modified change as "(Recommended)" since it's likely what the user wants to continue.
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Check current status**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Parse the JSON to understand current state. The response includes:
|
||||
- `schemaName`: The workflow schema being used (e.g., "spec-driven")
|
||||
- `artifacts`: Array of artifacts with their status ("done", "ready", "blocked")
|
||||
- `isComplete`: Boolean indicating if all artifacts are complete
|
||||
- `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`: path and scope context. Use these instead of assuming repo-local paths.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Act based on status**:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**If all artifacts are complete (`isComplete: true`)**:
|
||||
- Congratulate the user
|
||||
- Show final status including the schema used
|
||||
- Suggest: "All artifacts created! You can now implement this change with `/opsx:apply` or archive it with `/opsx:archive`."
|
||||
- STOP
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**If artifacts are ready to create** (status shows artifacts with `status: "ready"`):
|
||||
- Pick the FIRST artifact with `status: "ready"` from the status output
|
||||
- Get its instructions:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
- Parse the JSON. The key fields are:
|
||||
- `context`: Project background (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `rules`: Artifact-specific rules (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `template`: The structure to use for your output file
|
||||
- `instruction`: Schema-specific guidance
|
||||
- `resolvedOutputPath`: Resolved path or pattern to write the artifact
|
||||
- `dependencies`: Completed artifacts to read for context
|
||||
- **Create the artifact file**:
|
||||
- Read any completed dependency files for context
|
||||
- Use `template` as the structure - fill in its sections
|
||||
- Apply `context` and `rules` as constraints when writing - but do NOT copy them into the file
|
||||
- Write to the `resolvedOutputPath` specified in instructions. If it is a glob pattern, choose the concrete file path using the schema instruction and the change's context
|
||||
- Show what was created and what's now unlocked
|
||||
- STOP after creating ONE artifact
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**If no artifacts are ready (all blocked)**:
|
||||
- This shouldn't happen with a valid schema
|
||||
- Show status and suggest checking for issues
|
||||
|
||||
4. **After creating an artifact, show progress**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output**
|
||||
|
||||
After each invocation, show:
|
||||
- Which artifact was created
|
||||
- Schema workflow being used
|
||||
- Current progress (N/M complete)
|
||||
- What artifacts are now unlocked
|
||||
- Prompt: "Run `/opsx:continue` to create the next artifact"
|
||||
|
||||
**Artifact Creation Guidelines**
|
||||
|
||||
The artifact types and their purpose depend on the schema. Use the `instruction` field from the instructions output to understand what to create.
|
||||
|
||||
Common artifact patterns:
|
||||
|
||||
**spec-driven schema** (proposal → specs → design → tasks):
|
||||
- **proposal.md**: Ask user about the change if not clear. Fill in Why, What Changes, Capabilities, Impact.
|
||||
- The Capabilities section is critical - each capability listed will need a spec file.
|
||||
- **specs/<capability>/spec.md**: Create one spec per capability listed in the proposal's Capabilities section (use the capability name, not the change name).
|
||||
- **design.md**: Document technical decisions, architecture, and implementation approach.
|
||||
- **tasks.md**: Break down implementation into checkboxed tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
For other schemas, follow the `instruction` field from the CLI output.
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Create ONE artifact per invocation
|
||||
- Always read dependency artifacts before creating a new one
|
||||
- Never skip artifacts or create out of order
|
||||
- If context is unclear, ask the user before creating
|
||||
- Verify the artifact file exists after writing before marking progress
|
||||
- Use the schema's artifact sequence, don't assume specific artifact names
|
||||
- **IMPORTANT**: `context` and `rules` are constraints for YOU, not content for the file
|
||||
- Do NOT copy `<context>`, `<rules>`, `<project_context>` blocks into the artifact
|
||||
- These guide what you write, but should never appear in the output
|
||||
174
.claude/commands/opsx/explore.md
Normal file
174
.claude/commands/opsx/explore.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,174 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: "OPSX: Explore"
|
||||
description: "Enter explore mode - think through ideas, investigate problems, clarify requirements"
|
||||
category: Workflow
|
||||
tags: [workflow, explore, experimental, thinking]
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Enter explore mode. Think deeply. Visualize freely. Follow the conversation wherever it goes.
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT: Explore mode is for thinking, not implementing.** You may read files, search code, and investigate the codebase, but you must NEVER write code or implement features. If the user asks you to implement something, remind them to exit explore mode first and create a change proposal. You MAY create OpenSpec artifacts (proposals, designs, specs) if the user asks—that's capturing thinking, not implementing.
|
||||
|
||||
**This is a stance, not a workflow.** There are no fixed steps, no required sequence, no mandatory outputs. You're a thinking partner helping the user explore.
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: The argument after `/opsx:explore` is whatever the user wants to think about. Could be:
|
||||
- A vague idea: "real-time collaboration"
|
||||
- A specific problem: "the auth system is getting unwieldy"
|
||||
- A change name: "add-dark-mode" (to explore in context of that change)
|
||||
- A comparison: "postgres vs sqlite for this"
|
||||
- Nothing (just enter explore mode)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## The Stance
|
||||
|
||||
- **Curious, not prescriptive** - Ask questions that emerge naturally, don't follow a script
|
||||
- **Open threads, not interrogations** - Surface multiple interesting directions and let the user follow what resonates. Don't funnel them through a single path of questions.
|
||||
- **Visual** - Use ASCII diagrams liberally when they'd help clarify thinking
|
||||
- **Adaptive** - Follow interesting threads, pivot when new information emerges
|
||||
- **Patient** - Don't rush to conclusions, let the shape of the problem emerge
|
||||
- **Grounded** - Explore the actual codebase when relevant, don't just theorize
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What You Might Do
|
||||
|
||||
Depending on what the user brings, you might:
|
||||
|
||||
**Explore the problem space**
|
||||
- Ask clarifying questions that emerge from what they said
|
||||
- Challenge assumptions
|
||||
- Reframe the problem
|
||||
- Find analogies
|
||||
|
||||
**Investigate the codebase**
|
||||
- Map existing architecture relevant to the discussion
|
||||
- Find integration points
|
||||
- Identify patterns already in use
|
||||
- Surface hidden complexity
|
||||
|
||||
**Compare options**
|
||||
- Brainstorm multiple approaches
|
||||
- Build comparison tables
|
||||
- Sketch tradeoffs
|
||||
- Recommend a path (if asked)
|
||||
|
||||
**Visualize**
|
||||
```
|
||||
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||||
│ Use ASCII diagrams liberally │
|
||||
├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
|
||||
│ │
|
||||
│ ┌────────┐ ┌────────┐ │
|
||||
│ │ State │────────▶│ State │ │
|
||||
│ │ A │ │ B │ │
|
||||
│ └────────┘ └────────┘ │
|
||||
│ │
|
||||
│ System diagrams, state machines, │
|
||||
│ data flows, architecture sketches, │
|
||||
│ dependency graphs, comparison tables │
|
||||
│ │
|
||||
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Surface risks and unknowns**
|
||||
- Identify what could go wrong
|
||||
- Find gaps in understanding
|
||||
- Suggest spikes or investigations
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## OpenSpec Awareness
|
||||
|
||||
You have full context of the OpenSpec system. Use it naturally, don't force it.
|
||||
|
||||
### Check for context
|
||||
|
||||
At the start, quickly check what exists:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec list --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This tells you:
|
||||
- If there are active changes
|
||||
- Their names, schemas, and status
|
||||
- What the user might be working on
|
||||
|
||||
If the user mentioned a specific change name, read its artifacts for context.
|
||||
|
||||
### When no change exists
|
||||
|
||||
Think freely. When insights crystallize, you might offer:
|
||||
|
||||
- "This feels solid enough to start a change. Want me to create a proposal?"
|
||||
- Or keep exploring - no pressure to formalize
|
||||
|
||||
### When a change exists
|
||||
|
||||
If the user mentions a change or you detect one is relevant:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Resolve and read existing artifacts for context**
|
||||
- Run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`.
|
||||
- Use `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext` from the status JSON.
|
||||
- Read existing files from `artifactPaths.<artifact>.existingOutputPaths`.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Reference them naturally in conversation**
|
||||
- "Your design mentions using Redis, but we just realized SQLite fits better..."
|
||||
- "The proposal scopes this to premium users, but we're now thinking everyone..."
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Offer to capture when decisions are made**
|
||||
|
||||
| Insight Type | Where to Capture |
|
||||
|----------------------------|--------------------------------|
|
||||
| New requirement discovered | `specs/<capability>/spec.md` |
|
||||
| Requirement changed | `specs/<capability>/spec.md` |
|
||||
| Design decision made | `design.md` |
|
||||
| Scope changed | `proposal.md` |
|
||||
| New work identified | `tasks.md` |
|
||||
| Assumption invalidated | Relevant artifact |
|
||||
|
||||
Example offers:
|
||||
- "That's a design decision. Capture it in design.md?"
|
||||
- "This is a new requirement. Add it to specs?"
|
||||
- "This changes scope. Update the proposal?"
|
||||
|
||||
4. **The user decides** - Offer and move on. Don't pressure. Don't auto-capture.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What You Don't Have To Do
|
||||
|
||||
- Follow a script
|
||||
- Ask the same questions every time
|
||||
- Produce a specific artifact
|
||||
- Reach a conclusion
|
||||
- Stay on topic if a tangent is valuable
|
||||
- Be brief (this is thinking time)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Ending Discovery
|
||||
|
||||
There's no required ending. Discovery might:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Flow into a proposal**: "Ready to start? I can create a change proposal."
|
||||
- **Result in artifact updates**: "Updated design.md with these decisions"
|
||||
- **Just provide clarity**: User has what they need, moves on
|
||||
- **Continue later**: "We can pick this up anytime"
|
||||
|
||||
When things crystallize, you might offer a summary - but it's optional. Sometimes the thinking IS the value.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Guardrails
|
||||
|
||||
- **Don't implement** - Never write code or implement features. Creating OpenSpec artifacts is fine, writing application code is not.
|
||||
- **Don't fake understanding** - If something is unclear, dig deeper
|
||||
- **Don't rush** - Discovery is thinking time, not task time
|
||||
- **Don't force structure** - Let patterns emerge naturally
|
||||
- **Don't auto-capture** - Offer to save insights, don't just do it
|
||||
- **Do visualize** - A good diagram is worth many paragraphs
|
||||
- **Do explore the codebase** - Ground discussions in reality
|
||||
- **Do question assumptions** - Including the user's and your own
|
||||
100
.claude/commands/opsx/ff.md
Normal file
100
.claude/commands/opsx/ff.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,100 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: "OPSX: Fast Forward"
|
||||
description: Create a change and generate all artifacts needed for implementation in one go
|
||||
category: Workflow
|
||||
tags: [workflow, artifacts, experimental]
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Fast-forward through artifact creation - generate everything needed to start implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: The argument after `/opsx:ff` is the change name (kebab-case), OR a description of what the user wants to build.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no input provided, ask what they want to build**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** (open-ended, no preset options) to ask:
|
||||
> "What change do you want to work on? Describe what you want to build or fix."
|
||||
|
||||
From their description, derive a kebab-case name (e.g., "add user authentication" → `add-user-auth`).
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT proceed without understanding what the user wants to build.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Create the change directory**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec new change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
This creates a scaffolded change in the planning home resolved by the CLI.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Get the artifact build order**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Parse the JSON to get:
|
||||
- `applyRequires`: array of artifact IDs needed before implementation (e.g., `["tasks"]`)
|
||||
- `artifacts`: list of all artifacts with their status and dependencies
|
||||
- `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`: path and scope context. Use these instead of assuming repo-local paths.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Create artifacts in sequence until apply-ready**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the **TodoWrite tool** to track progress through the artifacts.
|
||||
|
||||
Loop through artifacts in dependency order (artifacts with no pending dependencies first):
|
||||
|
||||
a. **For each artifact that is `ready` (dependencies satisfied)**:
|
||||
- Get instructions:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
- The instructions JSON includes:
|
||||
- `context`: Project background (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `rules`: Artifact-specific rules (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `template`: The structure to use for your output file
|
||||
- `instruction`: Schema-specific guidance for this artifact type
|
||||
- `resolvedOutputPath`: Resolved path or pattern to write the artifact
|
||||
- `dependencies`: Completed artifacts to read for context
|
||||
- Read any completed dependency files for context
|
||||
- Create the artifact file using `template` as the structure and write it to `resolvedOutputPath`
|
||||
- Apply `context` and `rules` as constraints - but do NOT copy them into the file
|
||||
- Show brief progress: "✓ Created <artifact-id>"
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Continue until all `applyRequires` artifacts are complete**
|
||||
- After creating each artifact, re-run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`
|
||||
- Check if every artifact ID in `applyRequires` has `status: "done"` in the artifacts array
|
||||
- Stop when all `applyRequires` artifacts are done
|
||||
|
||||
c. **If an artifact requires user input** (unclear context):
|
||||
- Use **AskUserQuestion tool** to clarify
|
||||
- Then continue with creation
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Show final status**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output**
|
||||
|
||||
After completing all artifacts, summarize:
|
||||
- Change name and location
|
||||
- List of artifacts created with brief descriptions
|
||||
- What's ready: "All artifacts created! Ready for implementation."
|
||||
- Prompt: "Run `/opsx:apply` to start implementing."
|
||||
|
||||
**Artifact Creation Guidelines**
|
||||
|
||||
- Follow the `instruction` field from `openspec instructions` for each artifact type
|
||||
- The schema defines what each artifact should contain - follow it
|
||||
- Read dependency artifacts for context before creating new ones
|
||||
- Use `template` as the structure for your output file - fill in its sections
|
||||
- **IMPORTANT**: `context` and `rules` are constraints for YOU, not content for the file
|
||||
- Do NOT copy `<context>`, `<rules>`, `<project_context>` blocks into the artifact
|
||||
- These guide what you write, but should never appear in the output
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Create ALL artifacts needed for implementation (as defined by schema's `apply.requires`)
|
||||
- Always read dependency artifacts before creating a new one
|
||||
- If context is critically unclear, ask the user - but prefer making reasonable decisions to keep momentum
|
||||
- If a change with that name already exists, ask if user wants to continue it or create a new one
|
||||
- Verify each artifact file exists after writing before proceeding to next
|
||||
71
.claude/commands/opsx/new.md
Normal file
71
.claude/commands/opsx/new.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: "OPSX: New"
|
||||
description: Start a new change using the experimental artifact workflow (OPSX)
|
||||
category: Workflow
|
||||
tags: [workflow, artifacts, experimental]
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Start a new change using the experimental artifact-driven approach.
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: The argument after `/opsx:new` is the change name (kebab-case), OR a description of what the user wants to build.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no input provided, ask what they want to build**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** (open-ended, no preset options) to ask:
|
||||
> "What change do you want to work on? Describe what you want to build or fix."
|
||||
|
||||
From their description, derive a kebab-case name (e.g., "add user authentication" → `add-user-auth`).
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT proceed without understanding what the user wants to build.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Determine the workflow schema**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the default schema (omit `--schema`) unless the user explicitly requests a different workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
**Use a different schema only if the user mentions:**
|
||||
- A specific schema name → use `--schema <name>`
|
||||
- "show workflows" or "what workflows" → run `openspec schemas --json` and let them choose
|
||||
|
||||
**Otherwise**: Omit `--schema` to use the default.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Create the change directory**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec new change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
Add `--schema <name>` only if the user requested a specific workflow.
|
||||
This creates a scaffolded change in the planning home resolved by the CLI.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Show the artifact status**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Use the returned `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `nextSteps` instead of assuming repo-local paths.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Get instructions for the first artifact**
|
||||
The first artifact depends on the schema. Check the status output to find the first artifact with status "ready".
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions <first-artifact-id> --change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
This outputs the template and context for creating the first artifact.
|
||||
|
||||
6. **STOP and wait for user direction**
|
||||
|
||||
**Output**
|
||||
|
||||
After completing the steps, summarize:
|
||||
- Change name and location
|
||||
- Schema/workflow being used and its artifact sequence
|
||||
- Current status (0/N artifacts complete)
|
||||
- The template for the first artifact
|
||||
- Prompt: "Ready to create the first artifact? Run `/opsx:continue` or just describe what this change is about and I'll draft it."
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Do NOT create any artifacts yet - just show the instructions
|
||||
- Do NOT advance beyond showing the first artifact template
|
||||
- If the name is invalid (not kebab-case), ask for a valid name
|
||||
- If a change with that name already exists, suggest using `/opsx:continue` instead
|
||||
- Pass --schema if using a non-default workflow
|
||||
550
.claude/commands/opsx/onboard.md
Normal file
550
.claude/commands/opsx/onboard.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,550 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: "OPSX: Onboard"
|
||||
description: Guided onboarding - walk through a complete OpenSpec workflow cycle with narration
|
||||
category: Workflow
|
||||
tags: [workflow, onboarding, tutorial, learning]
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Guide the user through their first complete OpenSpec workflow cycle. This is a teaching experience—you'll do real work in their codebase while explaining each step.
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Preflight
|
||||
|
||||
Before starting, check if the OpenSpec CLI is installed:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Unix/macOS
|
||||
openspec --version 2>&1 || echo "CLI_NOT_INSTALLED"
|
||||
# Windows (PowerShell)
|
||||
# if (Get-Command openspec -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue) { openspec --version } else { echo "CLI_NOT_INSTALLED" }
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**If CLI not installed:**
|
||||
> OpenSpec CLI is not installed. Install it first, then come back to `/opsx:onboard`.
|
||||
|
||||
Stop here if not installed.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 1: Welcome
|
||||
|
||||
Display:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Welcome to OpenSpec!
|
||||
|
||||
I'll walk you through a complete change cycle—from idea to implementation—using a real task in your codebase. Along the way, you'll learn the workflow by doing it.
|
||||
|
||||
**What we'll do:**
|
||||
1. Pick a small, real task in your codebase
|
||||
2. Explore the problem briefly
|
||||
3. Create a change (the container for our work)
|
||||
4. Build the artifacts: proposal → specs → design → tasks
|
||||
5. Implement the tasks
|
||||
6. Archive the completed change
|
||||
|
||||
**Time:** ~15-20 minutes
|
||||
|
||||
Let's start by finding something to work on.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 2: Task Selection
|
||||
|
||||
### Codebase Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
Scan the codebase for small improvement opportunities. Look for:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **TODO/FIXME comments** - Search for `TODO`, `FIXME`, `HACK`, `XXX` in code files
|
||||
2. **Missing error handling** - `catch` blocks that swallow errors, risky operations without try-catch
|
||||
3. **Functions without tests** - Cross-reference `src/` with test directories
|
||||
4. **Type issues** - `any` types in TypeScript files (`: any`, `as any`)
|
||||
5. **Debug artifacts** - `console.log`, `console.debug`, `debugger` statements in non-debug code
|
||||
6. **Missing validation** - User input handlers without validation
|
||||
|
||||
Also check recent git activity:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Unix/macOS
|
||||
git log --oneline -10 2>/dev/null || echo "No git history"
|
||||
# Windows (PowerShell)
|
||||
# git log --oneline -10 2>$null; if ($LASTEXITCODE -ne 0) { echo "No git history" }
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Present Suggestions
|
||||
|
||||
From your analysis, present 3-4 specific suggestions:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Task Suggestions
|
||||
|
||||
Based on scanning your codebase, here are some good starter tasks:
|
||||
|
||||
**1. [Most promising task]**
|
||||
Location: `src/path/to/file.ts:42`
|
||||
Scope: ~1-2 files, ~20-30 lines
|
||||
Why it's good: [brief reason]
|
||||
|
||||
**2. [Second task]**
|
||||
Location: `src/another/file.ts`
|
||||
Scope: ~1 file, ~15 lines
|
||||
Why it's good: [brief reason]
|
||||
|
||||
**3. [Third task]**
|
||||
Location: [location]
|
||||
Scope: [estimate]
|
||||
Why it's good: [brief reason]
|
||||
|
||||
**4. Something else?**
|
||||
Tell me what you'd like to work on.
|
||||
|
||||
Which task interests you? (Pick a number or describe your own)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**If nothing found:** Fall back to asking what the user wants to build:
|
||||
> I didn't find obvious quick wins in your codebase. What's something small you've been meaning to add or fix?
|
||||
|
||||
### Scope Guardrail
|
||||
|
||||
If the user picks or describes something too large (major feature, multi-day work):
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
That's a valuable task, but it's probably larger than ideal for your first OpenSpec run-through.
|
||||
|
||||
For learning the workflow, smaller is better—it lets you see the full cycle without getting stuck in implementation details.
|
||||
|
||||
**Options:**
|
||||
1. **Slice it smaller** - What's the smallest useful piece of [their task]? Maybe just [specific slice]?
|
||||
2. **Pick something else** - One of the other suggestions, or a different small task?
|
||||
3. **Do it anyway** - If you really want to tackle this, we can. Just know it'll take longer.
|
||||
|
||||
What would you prefer?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Let the user override if they insist—this is a soft guardrail.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 3: Explore Demo
|
||||
|
||||
Once a task is selected, briefly demonstrate explore mode:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Before we create a change, let me quickly show you **explore mode**—it's how you think through problems before committing to a direction.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Spend 1-2 minutes investigating the relevant code:
|
||||
- Read the file(s) involved
|
||||
- Draw a quick ASCII diagram if it helps
|
||||
- Note any considerations
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Quick Exploration
|
||||
|
||||
[Your brief analysis—what you found, any considerations]
|
||||
|
||||
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||||
│ [Optional: ASCII diagram if helpful] │
|
||||
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||||
|
||||
Explore mode (`/opsx:explore`) is for this kind of thinking—investigating before implementing. You can use it anytime you need to think through a problem.
|
||||
|
||||
Now let's create a change to hold our work.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**PAUSE** - Wait for user acknowledgment before proceeding.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 4: Create the Change
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Creating a Change
|
||||
|
||||
A "change" in OpenSpec is a container for all the thinking and planning around a piece of work. It lives at the `changeRoot` reported by `openspec status --change "<name>" --json` and holds your artifacts—proposal, specs, design, tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
Let me create one for our task.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** Create the change with a derived kebab-case name:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec new change "<derived-name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**SHOW:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Created: <changeRoot from status JSON>
|
||||
|
||||
The folder structure:
|
||||
```
|
||||
<changeRoot>/
|
||||
├── proposal.md ← Why we're doing this (empty, we'll fill it)
|
||||
├── design.md ← How we'll build it (empty)
|
||||
├── specs/ ← Detailed requirements (empty)
|
||||
└── tasks.md ← Implementation checklist (empty)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Now let's fill in the first artifact—the proposal.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 5: Proposal
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## The Proposal
|
||||
|
||||
The proposal captures **why** we're making this change and **what** it involves at a high level. It's the "elevator pitch" for the work.
|
||||
|
||||
I'll draft one based on our task.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** Draft the proposal content (don't save yet):
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Here's a draft proposal:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Why
|
||||
|
||||
[1-2 sentences explaining the problem/opportunity]
|
||||
|
||||
## What Changes
|
||||
|
||||
[Bullet points of what will be different]
|
||||
|
||||
## Capabilities
|
||||
|
||||
### New Capabilities
|
||||
- `<capability-name>`: [brief description]
|
||||
|
||||
### Modified Capabilities
|
||||
<!-- If modifying existing behavior -->
|
||||
|
||||
## Impact
|
||||
|
||||
- `src/path/to/file.ts`: [what changes]
|
||||
- [other files if applicable]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Does this capture the intent? I can adjust before we save it.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**PAUSE** - Wait for user approval/feedback.
|
||||
|
||||
After approval, save the proposal:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions proposal --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Then write the content to the `resolvedOutputPath` from `openspec instructions proposal --change "<name>" --json`.
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Proposal saved. This is your "why" document—you can always come back and refine it as understanding evolves.
|
||||
|
||||
Next up: specs.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 6: Specs
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Specs
|
||||
|
||||
Specs define **what** we're building in precise, testable terms. They use a requirement/scenario format that makes expected behavior crystal clear.
|
||||
|
||||
For a small task like this, we might only need one spec file.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** Resolve where the spec file should be created:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions specs --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
# Use resolvedOutputPath from the JSON. If it is a glob, choose the concrete file path using the schema instruction and the change's context.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Draft the spec content:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Here's the spec:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## ADDED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: <Name>
|
||||
|
||||
<Description of what the system should do>
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: <Scenario name>
|
||||
|
||||
- **WHEN** <trigger condition>
|
||||
- **THEN** <expected outcome>
|
||||
- **AND** <additional outcome if needed>
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
This format—WHEN/THEN/AND—makes requirements testable. You can literally read them as test cases.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Save to the concrete file path chosen from `resolvedOutputPath`.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 7: Design
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Design
|
||||
|
||||
The design captures **how** we'll build it—technical decisions, tradeoffs, approach.
|
||||
|
||||
For small changes, this might be brief. That's fine—not every change needs deep design discussion.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** Draft design.md:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Here's the design:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Context
|
||||
|
||||
[Brief context about the current state]
|
||||
|
||||
## Goals / Non-Goals
|
||||
|
||||
**Goals:**
|
||||
- [What we're trying to achieve]
|
||||
|
||||
**Non-Goals:**
|
||||
- [What's explicitly out of scope]
|
||||
|
||||
## Decisions
|
||||
|
||||
### Decision 1: [Key decision]
|
||||
|
||||
[Explanation of approach and rationale]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
For a small task, this captures the key decisions without over-engineering.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Save to the `resolvedOutputPath` from `openspec instructions design --change "<name>" --json`.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 8: Tasks
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Tasks
|
||||
|
||||
Finally, we break the work into implementation tasks—checkboxes that drive the apply phase.
|
||||
|
||||
These should be small, clear, and in logical order.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** Generate tasks based on specs and design:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Here are the implementation tasks:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. [Category or file]
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] 1.1 [Specific task]
|
||||
- [ ] 1.2 [Specific task]
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Verify
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] 2.1 [Verification step]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Each checkbox becomes a unit of work in the apply phase. Ready to implement?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**PAUSE** - Wait for user to confirm they're ready to implement.
|
||||
|
||||
Save to the `resolvedOutputPath` from `openspec instructions tasks --change "<name>" --json`.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 9: Apply (Implementation)
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Implementation
|
||||
|
||||
Now we implement each task, checking them off as we go. I'll announce each one and occasionally note how the specs/design informed the approach.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** For each task:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Announce: "Working on task N: [description]"
|
||||
2. Implement the change in the codebase
|
||||
3. Reference specs/design naturally: "The spec says X, so I'm doing Y"
|
||||
4. Mark complete in tasks.md: `- [ ]` → `- [x]`
|
||||
5. Brief status: "✓ Task N complete"
|
||||
|
||||
Keep narration light—don't over-explain every line of code.
|
||||
|
||||
After all tasks:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Implementation Complete
|
||||
|
||||
All tasks done:
|
||||
- [x] Task 1
|
||||
- [x] Task 2
|
||||
- [x] ...
|
||||
|
||||
The change is implemented! One more step—let's archive it.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 10: Archive
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Archiving
|
||||
|
||||
When a change is complete, we archive it. The archive path is derived from `planningHome.changesDir` and the date.
|
||||
|
||||
Archived changes become your project's decision history—you can always find them later to understand why something was built a certain way.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec archive "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**SHOW:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Archived to: `<planningHome.changesDir>/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>/`
|
||||
|
||||
The change is now part of your project's history. The code is in your codebase, the decision record is preserved.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 11: Recap & Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Congratulations!
|
||||
|
||||
You just completed a full OpenSpec cycle:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Explore** - Thought through the problem
|
||||
2. **New** - Created a change container
|
||||
3. **Proposal** - Captured WHY
|
||||
4. **Specs** - Defined WHAT in detail
|
||||
5. **Design** - Decided HOW
|
||||
6. **Tasks** - Broke it into steps
|
||||
7. **Apply** - Implemented the work
|
||||
8. **Archive** - Preserved the record
|
||||
|
||||
This same rhythm works for any size change—a small fix or a major feature.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Command Reference
|
||||
|
||||
**Core workflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | What it does |
|
||||
|-------------------|--------------------------------------------|
|
||||
| `/opsx:propose` | Create a change and generate all artifacts |
|
||||
| `/opsx:explore` | Think through problems before/during work |
|
||||
| `/opsx:apply` | Implement tasks from a change |
|
||||
| `/opsx:archive` | Archive a completed change |
|
||||
|
||||
**Additional commands:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | What it does |
|
||||
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------|
|
||||
| `/opsx:new` | Start a new change, step through artifacts one at a time |
|
||||
| `/opsx:continue` | Continue working on an existing change |
|
||||
| `/opsx:ff` | Fast-forward: create all artifacts at once |
|
||||
| `/opsx:verify` | Verify implementation matches artifacts |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What's Next?
|
||||
|
||||
Try `/opsx:propose` on something you actually want to build. You've got the rhythm now!
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Graceful Exit Handling
|
||||
|
||||
### User wants to stop mid-way
|
||||
|
||||
If the user says they need to stop, want to pause, or seem disengaged:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
No problem! Your change is saved at the `changeRoot` reported by `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`.
|
||||
|
||||
To pick up where we left off later:
|
||||
- `/opsx:continue <name>` - Resume artifact creation
|
||||
- `/opsx:apply <name>` - Jump to implementation (if tasks exist)
|
||||
|
||||
The work won't be lost. Come back whenever you're ready.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Exit gracefully without pressure.
|
||||
|
||||
### User just wants command reference
|
||||
|
||||
If the user says they just want to see the commands or skip the tutorial:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## OpenSpec Quick Reference
|
||||
|
||||
**Core workflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | What it does |
|
||||
|--------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
|
||||
| `/opsx:propose <name>` | Create a change and generate all artifacts |
|
||||
| `/opsx:explore` | Think through problems (no code changes) |
|
||||
| `/opsx:apply <name>` | Implement tasks |
|
||||
| `/opsx:archive <name>` | Archive when done |
|
||||
|
||||
**Additional commands:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | What it does |
|
||||
|---------------------------|-------------------------------------|
|
||||
| `/opsx:new <name>` | Start a new change, step by step |
|
||||
| `/opsx:continue <name>` | Continue an existing change |
|
||||
| `/opsx:ff <name>` | Fast-forward: all artifacts at once |
|
||||
| `/opsx:verify <name>` | Verify implementation |
|
||||
|
||||
Try `/opsx:propose` to start your first change.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Exit gracefully.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Guardrails
|
||||
|
||||
- **Follow the EXPLAIN → DO → SHOW → PAUSE pattern** at key transitions (after explore, after proposal draft, after tasks, after archive)
|
||||
- **Keep narration light** during implementation—teach without lecturing
|
||||
- **Don't skip phases** even if the change is small—the goal is teaching the workflow
|
||||
- **Pause for acknowledgment** at marked points, but don't over-pause
|
||||
- **Handle exits gracefully**—never pressure the user to continue
|
||||
- **Use real codebase tasks**—don't simulate or use fake examples
|
||||
- **Adjust scope gently**—guide toward smaller tasks but respect user choice
|
||||
109
.claude/commands/opsx/propose.md
Normal file
109
.claude/commands/opsx/propose.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,109 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: "OPSX: Propose"
|
||||
description: Propose a new change - create it and generate all artifacts in one step
|
||||
category: Workflow
|
||||
tags: [workflow, artifacts, experimental]
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Propose a new change - create the change and generate all artifacts in one step.
|
||||
|
||||
I'll create a change with artifacts:
|
||||
- proposal.md (what & why)
|
||||
- design.md (how)
|
||||
- tasks.md (implementation steps)
|
||||
|
||||
When ready to implement, run /opsx:apply
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: The argument after `/opsx:propose` is the change name (kebab-case), OR a description of what the user wants to build.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no input provided, ask what they want to build**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** (open-ended, no preset options) to ask:
|
||||
> "What change do you want to work on? Describe what you want to build or fix."
|
||||
|
||||
From their description, derive a kebab-case name (e.g., "add user authentication" → `add-user-auth`).
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT proceed without understanding what the user wants to build.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Create the change directory**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec new change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
This creates a scaffolded change in the planning home resolved by the CLI with `.openspec.yaml`.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Get the artifact build order**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Parse the JSON to get:
|
||||
- `applyRequires`: array of artifact IDs needed before implementation (e.g., `["tasks"]`)
|
||||
- `artifacts`: list of all artifacts with their status and dependencies
|
||||
- `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`: path and scope context. Use these instead of assuming repo-local paths.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Create artifacts in sequence until apply-ready**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the **TodoWrite tool** to track progress through the artifacts.
|
||||
|
||||
Loop through artifacts in dependency order (artifacts with no pending dependencies first):
|
||||
|
||||
a. **For each artifact that is `ready` (dependencies satisfied)**:
|
||||
- Get instructions:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
- The instructions JSON includes:
|
||||
- `context`: Project background (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `rules`: Artifact-specific rules (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `template`: The structure to use for your output file
|
||||
- `instruction`: Schema-specific guidance for this artifact type
|
||||
- `resolvedOutputPath`: Resolved path or pattern to write the artifact
|
||||
- `dependencies`: Completed artifacts to read for context
|
||||
- Read any completed dependency files for context
|
||||
- Create the artifact file using `template` as the structure and write it to `resolvedOutputPath`
|
||||
- Apply `context` and `rules` as constraints - but do NOT copy them into the file
|
||||
- Show brief progress: "Created <artifact-id>"
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Continue until all `applyRequires` artifacts are complete**
|
||||
- After creating each artifact, re-run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`
|
||||
- Check if every artifact ID in `applyRequires` has `status: "done"` in the artifacts array
|
||||
- Stop when all `applyRequires` artifacts are done
|
||||
|
||||
c. **If an artifact requires user input** (unclear context):
|
||||
- Use **AskUserQuestion tool** to clarify
|
||||
- Then continue with creation
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Show final status**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output**
|
||||
|
||||
After completing all artifacts, summarize:
|
||||
- Change name and location
|
||||
- List of artifacts created with brief descriptions
|
||||
- What's ready: "All artifacts created! Ready for implementation."
|
||||
- Prompt: "Run `/opsx:apply` to start implementing."
|
||||
|
||||
**Artifact Creation Guidelines**
|
||||
|
||||
- Follow the `instruction` field from `openspec instructions` for each artifact type
|
||||
- The schema defines what each artifact should contain - follow it
|
||||
- Read dependency artifacts for context before creating new ones
|
||||
- Use `template` as the structure for your output file - fill in its sections
|
||||
- **IMPORTANT**: `context` and `rules` are constraints for YOU, not content for the file
|
||||
- Do NOT copy `<context>`, `<rules>`, `<project_context>` blocks into the artifact
|
||||
- These guide what you write, but should never appear in the output
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Create ALL artifacts needed for implementation (as defined by schema's `apply.requires`)
|
||||
- Always read dependency artifacts before creating a new one
|
||||
- If context is critically unclear, ask the user - but prefer making reasonable decisions to keep momentum
|
||||
- If a change with that name already exists, ask if user wants to continue it or create a new one
|
||||
- Verify each artifact file exists after writing before proceeding to next
|
||||
143
.claude/commands/opsx/sync.md
Normal file
143
.claude/commands/opsx/sync.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: "OPSX: Sync"
|
||||
description: Sync delta specs from a change to main specs
|
||||
category: Workflow
|
||||
tags: [workflow, specs, experimental]
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Sync delta specs from a change to main specs.
|
||||
|
||||
This is an **agent-driven** operation - you will read delta specs and directly edit main specs to apply the changes. This allows intelligent merging (e.g., adding a scenario without copying the entire requirement).
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: Optionally specify a change name after `/opsx:sync` (e.g., `/opsx:sync add-auth`). If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no change name provided, prompt for selection**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec list --json` to get available changes. Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select.
|
||||
|
||||
Show changes that have delta specs (under `specs/` directory).
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Resolve change context**
|
||||
|
||||
Run:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Find delta specs**
|
||||
|
||||
Use `artifactPaths.specs.existingOutputPaths` from the status JSON as the list of delta spec files.
|
||||
|
||||
Each delta spec file contains sections like:
|
||||
- `## ADDED Requirements` - New requirements to add
|
||||
- `## MODIFIED Requirements` - Changes to existing requirements
|
||||
- `## REMOVED Requirements` - Requirements to remove
|
||||
- `## RENAMED Requirements` - Requirements to rename (FROM:/TO: format)
|
||||
|
||||
If no delta specs found, inform user and stop.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **For each delta spec, apply changes to main specs**
|
||||
|
||||
For each repo-local capability delta spec path returned by the CLI:
|
||||
|
||||
a. **Read the delta spec** to understand the intended changes
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Read the main spec** at `openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md` (may not exist yet)
|
||||
|
||||
c. **Apply changes intelligently**:
|
||||
|
||||
**ADDED Requirements:**
|
||||
- If requirement doesn't exist in main spec → add it
|
||||
- If requirement already exists → update it to match (treat as implicit MODIFIED)
|
||||
|
||||
**MODIFIED Requirements:**
|
||||
- Find the requirement in main spec
|
||||
- Apply the changes - this can be:
|
||||
- Adding new scenarios (don't need to copy existing ones)
|
||||
- Modifying existing scenarios
|
||||
- Changing the requirement description
|
||||
- Preserve scenarios/content not mentioned in the delta
|
||||
|
||||
**REMOVED Requirements:**
|
||||
- Remove the entire requirement block from main spec
|
||||
|
||||
**RENAMED Requirements:**
|
||||
- Find the FROM requirement, rename to TO
|
||||
|
||||
d. **Create new main spec** if capability doesn't exist yet:
|
||||
- Create `openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md`
|
||||
- Add Purpose section (can be brief, mark as TBD)
|
||||
- Add Requirements section with the ADDED requirements
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Show summary**
|
||||
|
||||
After applying all changes, summarize:
|
||||
- Which capabilities were updated
|
||||
- What changes were made (requirements added/modified/removed/renamed)
|
||||
|
||||
**Delta Spec Format Reference**
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## ADDED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: New Feature
|
||||
The system SHALL do something new.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Basic case
|
||||
- **WHEN** user does X
|
||||
- **THEN** system does Y
|
||||
|
||||
## MODIFIED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Existing Feature
|
||||
#### Scenario: New scenario to add
|
||||
- **WHEN** user does A
|
||||
- **THEN** system does B
|
||||
|
||||
## REMOVED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Deprecated Feature
|
||||
|
||||
## RENAMED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
- FROM: `### Requirement: Old Name`
|
||||
- TO: `### Requirement: New Name`
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Principle: Intelligent Merging**
|
||||
|
||||
Unlike programmatic merging, you can apply **partial updates**:
|
||||
- To add a scenario, just include that scenario under MODIFIED - don't copy existing scenarios
|
||||
- The delta represents *intent*, not a wholesale replacement
|
||||
- Use your judgment to merge changes sensibly
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Success**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Specs Synced: <change-name>
|
||||
|
||||
Updated main specs:
|
||||
|
||||
**<capability-1>**:
|
||||
- Added requirement: "New Feature"
|
||||
- Modified requirement: "Existing Feature" (added 1 scenario)
|
||||
|
||||
**<capability-2>**:
|
||||
- Created new spec file
|
||||
- Added requirement: "Another Feature"
|
||||
|
||||
Main specs are now updated. The change remains active - archive when implementation is complete.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Read both delta and main specs before making changes
|
||||
- Preserve existing content not mentioned in delta
|
||||
- If something is unclear, ask for clarification
|
||||
- Show what you're changing as you go
|
||||
- The operation should be idempotent - running twice should give same result
|
||||
167
.claude/commands/opsx/verify.md
Normal file
167
.claude/commands/opsx/verify.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,167 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: "OPSX: Verify"
|
||||
description: Verify implementation matches change artifacts before archiving
|
||||
category: Workflow
|
||||
tags: [workflow, verify, experimental]
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Verify that an implementation matches the change artifacts (specs, tasks, design).
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: Optionally specify a change name after `/opsx:verify` (e.g., `/opsx:verify add-auth`). If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no change name provided, prompt for selection**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec list --json` to get available changes. Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select.
|
||||
|
||||
Show changes that have implementation tasks (tasks artifact exists).
|
||||
Include the schema used for each change if available.
|
||||
Mark changes with incomplete tasks as "(In Progress)".
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Check status to understand the schema**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Parse the JSON to understand:
|
||||
- `schemaName`: The workflow being used (e.g., "spec-driven")
|
||||
- `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`: path and scope context
|
||||
- Which artifacts exist for this change
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Get planning context and load artifacts**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions apply --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This returns the change directory and `contextFiles` (artifact ID -> array of concrete file paths). Read all available artifacts from `contextFiles`.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Initialize verification report structure**
|
||||
|
||||
Create a report structure with three dimensions:
|
||||
- **Completeness**: Track tasks and spec coverage
|
||||
- **Correctness**: Track requirement implementation and scenario coverage
|
||||
- **Coherence**: Track design adherence and pattern consistency
|
||||
|
||||
Each dimension can have CRITICAL, WARNING, or SUGGESTION issues.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Verify Completeness**
|
||||
|
||||
**Task Completion**:
|
||||
- If `contextFiles.tasks` exists, read every file path in it
|
||||
- Parse checkboxes: `- [ ]` (incomplete) vs `- [x]` (complete)
|
||||
- Count complete vs total tasks
|
||||
- If incomplete tasks exist:
|
||||
- Add CRITICAL issue for each incomplete task
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Complete task: <description>" or "Mark as done if already implemented"
|
||||
|
||||
**Spec Coverage**:
|
||||
- If delta specs exist in `contextFiles.specs`:
|
||||
- Extract all requirements (marked with "### Requirement:")
|
||||
- For each requirement:
|
||||
- Search codebase for keywords related to the requirement
|
||||
- Assess if implementation likely exists
|
||||
- If requirements appear unimplemented:
|
||||
- Add CRITICAL issue: "Requirement not found: <requirement name>"
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Implement requirement X: <description>"
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Verify Correctness**
|
||||
|
||||
**Requirement Implementation Mapping**:
|
||||
- For each requirement from delta specs:
|
||||
- Search codebase for implementation evidence
|
||||
- If found, note file paths and line ranges
|
||||
- Assess if implementation matches requirement intent
|
||||
- If divergence detected:
|
||||
- Add WARNING: "Implementation may diverge from spec: <details>"
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Review <file>:<lines> against requirement X"
|
||||
|
||||
**Scenario Coverage**:
|
||||
- For each scenario in delta specs (marked with "#### Scenario:"):
|
||||
- Check if conditions are handled in code
|
||||
- Check if tests exist covering the scenario
|
||||
- If scenario appears uncovered:
|
||||
- Add WARNING: "Scenario not covered: <scenario name>"
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Add test or implementation for scenario: <description>"
|
||||
|
||||
7. **Verify Coherence**
|
||||
|
||||
**Design Adherence**:
|
||||
- If `contextFiles.design` exists:
|
||||
- Extract key decisions (look for sections like "Decision:", "Approach:", "Architecture:")
|
||||
- Verify implementation follows those decisions
|
||||
- If contradiction detected:
|
||||
- Add WARNING: "Design decision not followed: <decision>"
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Update implementation or revise design.md to match reality"
|
||||
- If no design.md: Skip design adherence check, note "No design.md to verify against"
|
||||
|
||||
**Code Pattern Consistency**:
|
||||
- Review new code for consistency with project patterns
|
||||
- Check file naming, directory structure, coding style
|
||||
- If significant deviations found:
|
||||
- Add SUGGESTION: "Code pattern deviation: <details>"
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Consider following project pattern: <example>"
|
||||
|
||||
8. **Generate Verification Report**
|
||||
|
||||
**Summary Scorecard**:
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Verification Report: <change-name>
|
||||
|
||||
### Summary
|
||||
| Dimension | Status |
|
||||
|--------------|------------------|
|
||||
| Completeness | X/Y tasks, N reqs|
|
||||
| Correctness | M/N reqs covered |
|
||||
| Coherence | Followed/Issues |
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Issues by Priority**:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **CRITICAL** (Must fix before archive):
|
||||
- Incomplete tasks
|
||||
- Missing requirement implementations
|
||||
- Each with specific, actionable recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
2. **WARNING** (Should fix):
|
||||
- Spec/design divergences
|
||||
- Missing scenario coverage
|
||||
- Each with specific recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
3. **SUGGESTION** (Nice to fix):
|
||||
- Pattern inconsistencies
|
||||
- Minor improvements
|
||||
- Each with specific recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
**Final Assessment**:
|
||||
- If CRITICAL issues: "X critical issue(s) found. Fix before archiving."
|
||||
- If only warnings: "No critical issues. Y warning(s) to consider. Ready for archive (with noted improvements)."
|
||||
- If all clear: "All checks passed. Ready for archive."
|
||||
|
||||
**Verification Heuristics**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Completeness**: Focus on objective checklist items (checkboxes, requirements list)
|
||||
- **Correctness**: Use keyword search, file path analysis, reasonable inference - don't require perfect certainty
|
||||
- **Coherence**: Look for glaring inconsistencies, don't nitpick style
|
||||
- **False Positives**: When uncertain, prefer SUGGESTION over WARNING, WARNING over CRITICAL
|
||||
- **Actionability**: Every issue must have a specific recommendation with file/line references where applicable
|
||||
|
||||
**Graceful Degradation**
|
||||
|
||||
- If only tasks.md exists: verify task completion only, skip spec/design checks
|
||||
- If tasks + specs exist: verify completeness and correctness, skip design
|
||||
- If full artifacts: verify all three dimensions
|
||||
- Always note which checks were skipped and why
|
||||
|
||||
**Output Format**
|
||||
|
||||
Use clear markdown with:
|
||||
- Table for summary scorecard
|
||||
- Grouped lists for issues (CRITICAL/WARNING/SUGGESTION)
|
||||
- Code references in format: `file.ts:123`
|
||||
- Specific, actionable recommendations
|
||||
- No vague suggestions like "consider reviewing"
|
||||
159
.claude/skills/brainstorming/SKILL.md
Normal file
159
.claude/skills/brainstorming/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,159 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: brainstorming
|
||||
description: "You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation."
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Brainstorming Ideas Into Designs
|
||||
|
||||
Help turn ideas into fully formed designs and specs through natural collaborative dialogue.
|
||||
|
||||
Start by understanding the current project context, then ask questions one at a time to refine the idea. Once you understand what you're building, present the design and get user approval.
|
||||
|
||||
<HARD-GATE>
|
||||
Do NOT invoke any implementation skill, write any code, scaffold any project, or take any implementation action until you have presented a design and the user has approved it. This applies to EVERY project regardless of perceived simplicity.
|
||||
</HARD-GATE>
|
||||
|
||||
## Anti-Pattern: "This Is Too Simple To Need A Design"
|
||||
|
||||
Every project goes through this process. A todo list, a single-function utility, a config change — all of them. "Simple" projects are where unexamined assumptions cause the most wasted work. The design can be short (a few sentences for truly simple projects), but you MUST present it and get approval.
|
||||
|
||||
## Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
You MUST create a task for each of these items and complete them in order:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Explore project context** — check files, docs, recent commits
|
||||
2. **Offer the visual companion just-in-time** — NOT upfront. The first time a question would genuinely be clearer shown than described, offer it then (its own message); on approval its browser tab opens for you. If no visual question ever arises, never offer it. See the Visual Companion section below.
|
||||
3. **Ask clarifying questions** — one at a time, understand purpose/constraints/success criteria
|
||||
4. **Propose 2-3 approaches** — with trade-offs and your recommendation
|
||||
5. **Present design** — in sections scaled to their complexity, get user approval after each section
|
||||
6. **Write design doc** — save to `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` and commit
|
||||
7. **Spec self-review** — quick inline check for placeholders, contradictions, ambiguity, scope (see below)
|
||||
8. **User reviews written spec** — ask user to review the spec file before proceeding
|
||||
9. **Transition to implementation** — invoke writing-plans skill to create implementation plan
|
||||
|
||||
## Process Flow
|
||||
|
||||
```dot
|
||||
digraph brainstorming {
|
||||
"Explore project context" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Ask clarifying questions" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Propose 2-3 approaches" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Present design sections" [shape=box];
|
||||
"User approves design?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Write design doc" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Spec self-review\n(fix inline)" [shape=box];
|
||||
"User reviews spec?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Invoke writing-plans skill" [shape=doublecircle];
|
||||
|
||||
"Explore project context" -> "Ask clarifying questions";
|
||||
"Ask clarifying questions" -> "Propose 2-3 approaches";
|
||||
"Propose 2-3 approaches" -> "Present design sections";
|
||||
"Present design sections" -> "User approves design?";
|
||||
"User approves design?" -> "Present design sections" [label="no, revise"];
|
||||
"User approves design?" -> "Write design doc" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Write design doc" -> "Spec self-review\n(fix inline)";
|
||||
"Spec self-review\n(fix inline)" -> "User reviews spec?";
|
||||
"User reviews spec?" -> "Write design doc" [label="changes requested"];
|
||||
"User reviews spec?" -> "Invoke writing-plans skill" [label="approved"];
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**The terminal state is invoking writing-plans.** Do NOT invoke frontend-design, mcp-builder, or any other implementation skill. The ONLY skill you invoke after brainstorming is writing-plans.
|
||||
|
||||
## The Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Understanding the idea:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Check out the current project state first (files, docs, recent commits)
|
||||
- Before asking detailed questions, assess scope: if the request describes multiple independent subsystems (e.g., "build a platform with chat, file storage, billing, and analytics"), flag this immediately. Don't spend questions refining details of a project that needs to be decomposed first.
|
||||
- If the project is too large for a single spec, help the user decompose into sub-projects: what are the independent pieces, how do they relate, what order should they be built? Then brainstorm the first sub-project through the normal design flow. Each sub-project gets its own spec → plan → implementation cycle.
|
||||
- For appropriately-scoped projects, ask questions one at a time to refine the idea
|
||||
- Prefer multiple choice questions when possible, but open-ended is fine too
|
||||
- Only one question per message - if a topic needs more exploration, break it into multiple questions
|
||||
- Focus on understanding: purpose, constraints, success criteria
|
||||
|
||||
**Exploring approaches:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Propose 2-3 different approaches with trade-offs
|
||||
- Present options conversationally with your recommendation and reasoning
|
||||
- Lead with your recommended option and explain why
|
||||
|
||||
**Presenting the design:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Once you believe you understand what you're building, present the design
|
||||
- Scale each section to its complexity: a few sentences if straightforward, up to 200-300 words if nuanced
|
||||
- Ask after each section whether it looks right so far
|
||||
- Cover: architecture, components, data flow, error handling, testing
|
||||
- Be ready to go back and clarify if something doesn't make sense
|
||||
|
||||
**Design for isolation and clarity:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Break the system into smaller units that each have one clear purpose, communicate through well-defined interfaces, and can be understood and tested independently
|
||||
- For each unit, you should be able to answer: what does it do, how do you use it, and what does it depend on?
|
||||
- Can someone understand what a unit does without reading its internals? Can you change the internals without breaking consumers? If not, the boundaries need work.
|
||||
- Smaller, well-bounded units are also easier for you to work with - you reason better about code you can hold in context at once, and your edits are more reliable when files are focused. When a file grows large, that's often a signal that it's doing too much.
|
||||
|
||||
**Working in existing codebases:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Explore the current structure before proposing changes. Follow existing patterns.
|
||||
- Where existing code has problems that affect the work (e.g., a file that's grown too large, unclear boundaries, tangled responsibilities), include targeted improvements as part of the design - the way a good developer improves code they're working in.
|
||||
- Don't propose unrelated refactoring. Stay focused on what serves the current goal.
|
||||
|
||||
## After the Design
|
||||
|
||||
**Documentation:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Write the validated design (spec) to `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md`
|
||||
- (User preferences for spec location override this default)
|
||||
- Use elements-of-style:writing-clearly-and-concisely skill if available
|
||||
- Commit the design document to git
|
||||
|
||||
**Spec Self-Review:**
|
||||
After writing the spec document, look at it with fresh eyes:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Placeholder scan:** Any "TBD", "TODO", incomplete sections, or vague requirements? Fix them.
|
||||
2. **Internal consistency:** Do any sections contradict each other? Does the architecture match the feature descriptions?
|
||||
3. **Scope check:** Is this focused enough for a single implementation plan, or does it need decomposition?
|
||||
4. **Ambiguity check:** Could any requirement be interpreted two different ways? If so, pick one and make it explicit.
|
||||
|
||||
Fix any issues inline. No need to re-review — just fix and move on.
|
||||
|
||||
**User Review Gate:**
|
||||
After the spec review loop passes, ask the user to review the written spec before proceeding:
|
||||
|
||||
> "Spec written and committed to `<path>`. Please review it and let me know if you want to make any changes before we start writing out the implementation plan."
|
||||
|
||||
Wait for the user's response. If they request changes, make them and re-run the spec review loop. Only proceed once the user approves.
|
||||
|
||||
**Implementation:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Invoke the writing-plans skill to create a detailed implementation plan
|
||||
- Do NOT invoke any other skill. writing-plans is the next step.
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Principles
|
||||
|
||||
- **One question at a time** - Don't overwhelm with multiple questions
|
||||
- **Multiple choice preferred** - Easier to answer than open-ended when possible
|
||||
- **YAGNI ruthlessly** - Remove unnecessary features from all designs
|
||||
- **Explore alternatives** - Always propose 2-3 approaches before settling
|
||||
- **Incremental validation** - Present design, get approval before moving on
|
||||
- **Be flexible** - Go back and clarify when something doesn't make sense
|
||||
|
||||
## Visual Companion
|
||||
|
||||
A browser-based companion for showing mockups, diagrams, and visual options during brainstorming. Available as a tool — not a mode. Accepting the companion means it's available for questions that benefit from visual treatment; it does NOT mean every question goes through the browser.
|
||||
|
||||
**Offering the companion (just-in-time):** Do NOT offer it upfront. Wait until a question would genuinely be clearer shown than told — a real mockup / layout / diagram question, not merely a UI *topic*. The first time that happens, offer it then, as its own message:
|
||||
> "This next part might be easier if I show you — I can put together mockups, diagrams, and comparisons in a browser tab as we go. It's still new and can be token-intensive. Want me to? I'll open it for you."
|
||||
|
||||
**This offer MUST be its own message.** Only the offer — no clarifying question, summary, or other content. Wait for the user's response. If they accept, start the server with `--open` so their browser opens to the first screen automatically. If they decline, continue text-only and don't offer again unless they raise it.
|
||||
|
||||
**Per-question decision:** Even after the user accepts, decide FOR EACH QUESTION whether to use the browser or the terminal. The test: **would the user understand this better by seeing it than reading it?**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Use the browser** for content that IS visual — mockups, wireframes, layout comparisons, architecture diagrams, side-by-side visual designs
|
||||
- **Use the terminal** for content that is text — requirements questions, conceptual choices, tradeoff lists, A/B/C/D text options, scope decisions
|
||||
|
||||
A question about a UI topic is not automatically a visual question. "What does personality mean in this context?" is a conceptual question — use the terminal. "Which wizard layout works better?" is a visual question — use the browser.
|
||||
|
||||
If they agree to the companion, read the detailed guide before proceeding:
|
||||
`skills/brainstorming/visual-companion.md`
|
||||
213
.claude/skills/brainstorming/scripts/frame-template.html
Normal file
213
.claude/skills/brainstorming/scripts/frame-template.html
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,213 @@
|
||||
<!DOCTYPE html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<meta charset="utf-8">
|
||||
<title>Superpowers Brainstorming</title>
|
||||
<style>
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* BRAINSTORM COMPANION FRAME TEMPLATE
|
||||
*
|
||||
* This template provides a consistent frame with:
|
||||
* - OS-aware light/dark theming
|
||||
* - Header branding and connection status
|
||||
* - Scrollable main content area
|
||||
* - CSS helpers for common UI patterns
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Content is injected via placeholder comment in #frame-content.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
|
||||
* { box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0; padding: 0; }
|
||||
html, body { height: 100%; overflow: hidden; }
|
||||
|
||||
/* ===== THEME VARIABLES ===== */
|
||||
:root {
|
||||
--bg-primary: #f5f5f7;
|
||||
--bg-secondary: #ffffff;
|
||||
--bg-tertiary: #e5e5e7;
|
||||
--border: #d1d1d6;
|
||||
--text-primary: #1d1d1f;
|
||||
--text-secondary: #86868b;
|
||||
--text-tertiary: #aeaeb2;
|
||||
--accent: #0071e3;
|
||||
--accent-hover: #0077ed;
|
||||
--success: #34c759;
|
||||
--warning: #ff9f0a;
|
||||
--error: #ff3b30;
|
||||
--selected-bg: #e8f4fd;
|
||||
--selected-border: #0071e3;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@media (prefers-color-scheme: dark) {
|
||||
:root {
|
||||
--bg-primary: #1d1d1f;
|
||||
--bg-secondary: #2d2d2f;
|
||||
--bg-tertiary: #3d3d3f;
|
||||
--border: #424245;
|
||||
--text-primary: #f5f5f7;
|
||||
--text-secondary: #86868b;
|
||||
--text-tertiary: #636366;
|
||||
--accent: #0a84ff;
|
||||
--accent-hover: #409cff;
|
||||
--selected-bg: rgba(10, 132, 255, 0.15);
|
||||
--selected-border: #0a84ff;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
body {
|
||||
font-family: system-ui, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, sans-serif;
|
||||
background: var(--bg-primary);
|
||||
color: var(--text-primary);
|
||||
display: flex;
|
||||
flex-direction: column;
|
||||
line-height: 1.5;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/* ===== FRAME STRUCTURE ===== */
|
||||
.brand { display: flex; align-items: center; min-width: 0; overflow: hidden; color: var(--text-secondary); line-height: 1; }
|
||||
.brand a { color: inherit; text-decoration: none; display: flex; align-items: center; gap: 0.5rem; min-width: 0; max-width: 100%; line-height: 1; }
|
||||
.brand-copy { display: block; min-width: 0; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap; line-height: 1; transform: translateY(-1px); }
|
||||
.brand-logo { display: block; height: 1em; width: auto; max-width: 180px; flex-shrink: 0; filter: invert(1); }
|
||||
@media (prefers-color-scheme: dark) {
|
||||
.brand-logo { filter: none; }
|
||||
}
|
||||
.status { font-size: 0.7rem; color: var(--status-color, var(--success)); display: flex; align-items: center; gap: 0.4rem; justify-self: end; white-space: nowrap; line-height: 1; }
|
||||
.status::before { content: ''; width: 6px; height: 6px; background: var(--status-color, var(--success)); border-radius: 50%; }
|
||||
|
||||
.main { flex: 1; overflow-y: auto; }
|
||||
#frame-content { padding: 2rem; min-height: 100%; }
|
||||
|
||||
.header {
|
||||
background: var(--bg-secondary);
|
||||
border-bottom: 1px solid var(--border);
|
||||
padding: 0.5rem 1.5rem;
|
||||
flex-shrink: 0;
|
||||
display: grid;
|
||||
grid-template-columns: minmax(0, 1fr) auto;
|
||||
align-items: center;
|
||||
gap: 1rem;
|
||||
min-height: 42px;
|
||||
}
|
||||
.header .brand { justify-self: start; width: 100%; font-size: 0.75rem; line-height: 1; }
|
||||
.header .status { grid-column: 2; line-height: 1; }
|
||||
.header span {
|
||||
font-size: 0.75rem;
|
||||
color: var(--text-secondary);
|
||||
}
|
||||
.header .selected-text {
|
||||
color: var(--accent);
|
||||
font-weight: 500;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/* ===== TYPOGRAPHY ===== */
|
||||
h2 { font-size: 1.5rem; font-weight: 600; margin-bottom: 0.5rem; }
|
||||
h3 { font-size: 1.1rem; font-weight: 600; margin-bottom: 0.25rem; }
|
||||
.subtitle { color: var(--text-secondary); margin-bottom: 1.5rem; }
|
||||
.section { margin-bottom: 2rem; }
|
||||
.label { font-size: 0.7rem; color: var(--text-secondary); text-transform: uppercase; letter-spacing: 0.05em; margin-bottom: 0.5rem; }
|
||||
|
||||
/* ===== OPTIONS (for A/B/C choices) ===== */
|
||||
.options { display: flex; flex-direction: column; gap: 0.75rem; }
|
||||
.option {
|
||||
background: var(--bg-secondary);
|
||||
border: 2px solid var(--border);
|
||||
border-radius: 12px;
|
||||
padding: 1rem 1.25rem;
|
||||
cursor: pointer;
|
||||
transition: all 0.15s ease;
|
||||
display: flex;
|
||||
align-items: flex-start;
|
||||
gap: 1rem;
|
||||
}
|
||||
.option:hover { border-color: var(--accent); }
|
||||
.option.selected { background: var(--selected-bg); border-color: var(--selected-border); }
|
||||
.option .letter {
|
||||
background: var(--bg-tertiary);
|
||||
color: var(--text-secondary);
|
||||
width: 1.75rem; height: 1.75rem;
|
||||
border-radius: 6px;
|
||||
display: flex; align-items: center; justify-content: center;
|
||||
font-weight: 600; font-size: 0.85rem; flex-shrink: 0;
|
||||
}
|
||||
.option.selected .letter { background: var(--accent); color: white; }
|
||||
.option .content { flex: 1; }
|
||||
.option .content h3 { font-size: 0.95rem; margin-bottom: 0.15rem; }
|
||||
.option .content p { color: var(--text-secondary); font-size: 0.85rem; margin: 0; }
|
||||
|
||||
/* ===== CARDS (for showing designs/mockups) ===== */
|
||||
.cards { display: grid; grid-template-columns: repeat(auto-fit, minmax(280px, 1fr)); gap: 1rem; }
|
||||
.card {
|
||||
background: var(--bg-secondary);
|
||||
border: 1px solid var(--border);
|
||||
border-radius: 12px;
|
||||
overflow: hidden;
|
||||
cursor: pointer;
|
||||
transition: all 0.15s ease;
|
||||
}
|
||||
.card:hover { border-color: var(--accent); transform: translateY(-2px); box-shadow: 0 4px 12px rgba(0,0,0,0.1); }
|
||||
.card.selected { border-color: var(--selected-border); border-width: 2px; }
|
||||
.card-image { background: var(--bg-tertiary); aspect-ratio: 16/10; display: flex; align-items: center; justify-content: center; }
|
||||
.card-body { padding: 1rem; }
|
||||
.card-body h3 { margin-bottom: 0.25rem; }
|
||||
.card-body p { color: var(--text-secondary); font-size: 0.85rem; }
|
||||
|
||||
/* ===== MOCKUP CONTAINER ===== */
|
||||
.mockup {
|
||||
background: var(--bg-secondary);
|
||||
border: 1px solid var(--border);
|
||||
border-radius: 12px;
|
||||
overflow: hidden;
|
||||
margin-bottom: 1.5rem;
|
||||
}
|
||||
.mockup-header {
|
||||
background: var(--bg-tertiary);
|
||||
padding: 0.5rem 1rem;
|
||||
font-size: 0.75rem;
|
||||
color: var(--text-secondary);
|
||||
border-bottom: 1px solid var(--border);
|
||||
}
|
||||
.mockup-body { padding: 1.5rem; }
|
||||
|
||||
/* ===== SPLIT VIEW (side-by-side comparison) ===== */
|
||||
.split { display: grid; grid-template-columns: 1fr 1fr; gap: 1.5rem; }
|
||||
@media (max-width: 700px) { .split { grid-template-columns: 1fr; } }
|
||||
|
||||
/* ===== PROS/CONS ===== */
|
||||
.pros-cons { display: grid; grid-template-columns: 1fr 1fr; gap: 1rem; margin: 1rem 0; }
|
||||
.pros, .cons { background: var(--bg-secondary); border-radius: 8px; padding: 1rem; }
|
||||
.pros h4 { color: var(--success); font-size: 0.85rem; margin-bottom: 0.5rem; }
|
||||
.cons h4 { color: var(--error); font-size: 0.85rem; margin-bottom: 0.5rem; }
|
||||
.pros ul, .cons ul { margin-left: 1.25rem; font-size: 0.85rem; color: var(--text-secondary); }
|
||||
.pros li, .cons li { margin-bottom: 0.25rem; }
|
||||
|
||||
/* ===== PLACEHOLDER (for mockup areas) ===== */
|
||||
.placeholder {
|
||||
background: var(--bg-tertiary);
|
||||
border: 2px dashed var(--border);
|
||||
border-radius: 8px;
|
||||
padding: 2rem;
|
||||
text-align: center;
|
||||
color: var(--text-tertiary);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/* ===== INLINE MOCKUP ELEMENTS ===== */
|
||||
.mock-nav { background: var(--accent); color: white; padding: 0.75rem 1rem; display: flex; gap: 1.5rem; font-size: 0.9rem; }
|
||||
.mock-sidebar { background: var(--bg-tertiary); padding: 1rem; min-width: 180px; }
|
||||
.mock-content { padding: 1.5rem; flex: 1; }
|
||||
.mock-button { background: var(--accent); color: white; border: none; padding: 0.5rem 1rem; border-radius: 6px; font-size: 0.85rem; }
|
||||
.mock-input { background: var(--bg-primary); border: 1px solid var(--border); border-radius: 6px; padding: 0.5rem; width: 100%; }
|
||||
</style>
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<div class="header">
|
||||
<!-- BRANDING -->
|
||||
<div class="status">Connecting…</div>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
<div class="main">
|
||||
<div id="frame-content">
|
||||
<!-- CONTENT -->
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
167
.claude/skills/brainstorming/scripts/helper.js
Normal file
167
.claude/skills/brainstorming/scripts/helper.js
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,167 @@
|
||||
(function() {
|
||||
const MIN_RECONNECT_MS = 500;
|
||||
const MAX_RECONNECT_MS = 30000;
|
||||
const TOMBSTONE_AFTER_MS = 15000; // show the "paused" overlay after this long disconnected
|
||||
|
||||
// Pure: next backoff delay (doubles, capped). Exported for unit tests.
|
||||
function nextReconnectDelay(current, max) {
|
||||
return Math.min(current * 2, max);
|
||||
}
|
||||
if (typeof module !== 'undefined' && module.exports) {
|
||||
module.exports = { nextReconnectDelay, MIN_RECONNECT_MS, MAX_RECONNECT_MS, TOMBSTONE_AFTER_MS };
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Everything below is browser-only; bail out when loaded in Node (tests).
|
||||
if (typeof window === 'undefined') return;
|
||||
|
||||
let ws = null;
|
||||
let eventQueue = [];
|
||||
let reconnectDelay = MIN_RECONNECT_MS;
|
||||
let reconnectTimer = null;
|
||||
let disconnectedSince = null;
|
||||
let everConnected = false;
|
||||
let tombstoneShown = false;
|
||||
|
||||
function sessionKey() {
|
||||
try {
|
||||
return window.sessionStorage && window.sessionStorage.getItem('brainstorm-session-key');
|
||||
} catch (e) {}
|
||||
return null;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function websocketUrl() {
|
||||
const key = sessionKey();
|
||||
return 'ws://' + window.location.host + (key ? '/?key=' + encodeURIComponent(key) : '');
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function reloadAfterRecovery() {
|
||||
const key = sessionKey();
|
||||
if (key) {
|
||||
window.location.replace('/?key=' + encodeURIComponent(key));
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
window.location.reload();
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Reflect connection state in the frame's status pill (absent on full-doc screens).
|
||||
function setStatus(state) {
|
||||
const el = document.querySelector('.status');
|
||||
if (!el) return;
|
||||
const map = {
|
||||
connecting: ['Connecting…', 'var(--text-tertiary)'],
|
||||
connected: ['Connected', 'var(--success)'],
|
||||
reconnecting: ['Reconnecting…', 'var(--warning)'],
|
||||
disconnected: ['Disconnected', 'var(--error)']
|
||||
};
|
||||
const [text, color] = map[state] || map.disconnected;
|
||||
el.textContent = text;
|
||||
el.style.setProperty('--status-color', color);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Self-styled so it works on framed and full-document screens alike.
|
||||
function showTombstone() {
|
||||
if (tombstoneShown) return;
|
||||
tombstoneShown = true;
|
||||
const el = document.createElement('div');
|
||||
el.id = 'bs-tombstone';
|
||||
el.style.cssText = 'position:fixed;inset:0;z-index:99999;display:flex;' +
|
||||
'align-items:center;justify-content:center;padding:2rem;text-align:center;' +
|
||||
'background:rgba(20,20,22,0.92);color:#f5f5f7;font-family:system-ui,sans-serif';
|
||||
el.innerHTML = '<div style="max-width:480px">' +
|
||||
'<h2 style="margin:0 0 .5rem;font-weight:600">Companion paused</h2>' +
|
||||
'<p style="margin:0;opacity:.85">This brainstorm companion has stopped. ' +
|
||||
'Ask your coding agent to bring it back — this page reconnects automatically.</p></div>';
|
||||
if (document.body) document.body.appendChild(el);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function connect() {
|
||||
if (reconnectTimer) { clearTimeout(reconnectTimer); reconnectTimer = null; }
|
||||
setStatus(everConnected ? 'reconnecting' : 'connecting');
|
||||
ws = new WebSocket(websocketUrl());
|
||||
|
||||
ws.onopen = () => {
|
||||
const recovered = tombstoneShown;
|
||||
everConnected = true;
|
||||
disconnectedSince = null;
|
||||
reconnectDelay = MIN_RECONNECT_MS;
|
||||
tombstoneShown = false;
|
||||
setStatus('connected');
|
||||
eventQueue.forEach(e => ws.send(JSON.stringify(e)));
|
||||
eventQueue = [];
|
||||
// Recovered from a tombstoned outage (e.g. the server restarted on the same
|
||||
// port) — reload through the keyed bootstrap when possible so the cookie is
|
||||
// refreshed before the visible URL returns to bare /.
|
||||
if (recovered) reloadAfterRecovery();
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
ws.onmessage = (msg) => {
|
||||
let data;
|
||||
try { data = JSON.parse(msg.data); } catch (e) { return; }
|
||||
if (data.type === 'reload') window.location.reload();
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
ws.onclose = () => {
|
||||
ws = null;
|
||||
if (disconnectedSince === null) disconnectedSince = Date.now();
|
||||
if (Date.now() - disconnectedSince >= TOMBSTONE_AFTER_MS) {
|
||||
setStatus('disconnected');
|
||||
showTombstone();
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
setStatus('reconnecting');
|
||||
}
|
||||
reconnectTimer = setTimeout(connect, reconnectDelay);
|
||||
reconnectDelay = nextReconnectDelay(reconnectDelay, MAX_RECONNECT_MS);
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
// Let onclose own reconnection so we don't schedule it twice.
|
||||
ws.onerror = () => { try { ws.close(); } catch (e) {} };
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function sendEvent(event) {
|
||||
event.timestamp = Date.now();
|
||||
if (ws && ws.readyState === WebSocket.OPEN) {
|
||||
ws.send(JSON.stringify(event));
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
eventQueue.push(event);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Capture clicks on choice elements
|
||||
document.addEventListener('click', (e) => {
|
||||
const target = e.target.closest('[data-choice]');
|
||||
if (!target) return;
|
||||
|
||||
sendEvent({
|
||||
type: 'click',
|
||||
text: target.textContent.trim(),
|
||||
choice: target.dataset.choice,
|
||||
id: target.id || null
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
// Frame UI: selection tracking
|
||||
window.selectedChoice = null;
|
||||
|
||||
window.toggleSelect = function(el) {
|
||||
const container = el.closest('.options') || el.closest('.cards');
|
||||
const multi = container && container.dataset.multiselect !== undefined;
|
||||
if (container && !multi) {
|
||||
container.querySelectorAll('.option, .card').forEach(o => o.classList.remove('selected'));
|
||||
}
|
||||
if (multi) {
|
||||
el.classList.toggle('selected');
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
el.classList.add('selected');
|
||||
}
|
||||
window.selectedChoice = el.dataset.choice;
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
// Expose API for explicit use
|
||||
window.brainstorm = {
|
||||
send: sendEvent,
|
||||
choice: (value, metadata = {}) => sendEvent({ type: 'choice', value, ...metadata })
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
connect();
|
||||
})();
|
||||
723
.claude/skills/brainstorming/scripts/server.cjs
Normal file
723
.claude/skills/brainstorming/scripts/server.cjs
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,723 @@
|
||||
const crypto = require('crypto');
|
||||
const http = require('http');
|
||||
const fs = require('fs');
|
||||
const path = require('path');
|
||||
|
||||
// ========== WebSocket Protocol (RFC 6455) ==========
|
||||
|
||||
const OPCODES = { TEXT: 0x01, CLOSE: 0x08, PING: 0x09, PONG: 0x0A };
|
||||
const WS_MAGIC = '258EAFA5-E914-47DA-95CA-C5AB0DC85B11';
|
||||
const MAX_FRAME_PAYLOAD_BYTES = 10 * 1024 * 1024;
|
||||
|
||||
function computeAcceptKey(clientKey) {
|
||||
return crypto.createHash('sha1').update(clientKey + WS_MAGIC).digest('base64');
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function encodeFrame(opcode, payload) {
|
||||
const fin = 0x80;
|
||||
const len = payload.length;
|
||||
let header;
|
||||
|
||||
if (len < 126) {
|
||||
header = Buffer.alloc(2);
|
||||
header[0] = fin | opcode;
|
||||
header[1] = len;
|
||||
} else if (len < 65536) {
|
||||
header = Buffer.alloc(4);
|
||||
header[0] = fin | opcode;
|
||||
header[1] = 126;
|
||||
header.writeUInt16BE(len, 2);
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
header = Buffer.alloc(10);
|
||||
header[0] = fin | opcode;
|
||||
header[1] = 127;
|
||||
header.writeBigUInt64BE(BigInt(len), 2);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
return Buffer.concat([header, payload]);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function decodeFrame(buffer) {
|
||||
if (buffer.length < 2) return null;
|
||||
|
||||
const secondByte = buffer[1];
|
||||
const opcode = buffer[0] & 0x0F;
|
||||
const masked = (secondByte & 0x80) !== 0;
|
||||
let payloadLen = secondByte & 0x7F;
|
||||
let offset = 2;
|
||||
|
||||
if (!masked) throw new Error('Client frames must be masked');
|
||||
|
||||
if (payloadLen === 126) {
|
||||
if (buffer.length < 4) return null;
|
||||
payloadLen = buffer.readUInt16BE(2);
|
||||
offset = 4;
|
||||
} else if (payloadLen === 127) {
|
||||
if (buffer.length < 10) return null;
|
||||
const extendedLen = buffer.readBigUInt64BE(2);
|
||||
if (extendedLen > BigInt(MAX_FRAME_PAYLOAD_BYTES)) {
|
||||
throw new Error('WebSocket frame payload exceeds maximum allowed size');
|
||||
}
|
||||
payloadLen = Number(extendedLen);
|
||||
offset = 10;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if (payloadLen > MAX_FRAME_PAYLOAD_BYTES) {
|
||||
throw new Error('WebSocket frame payload exceeds maximum allowed size');
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
const maskOffset = offset;
|
||||
const dataOffset = offset + 4;
|
||||
const totalLen = dataOffset + payloadLen;
|
||||
if (buffer.length < totalLen) return null;
|
||||
|
||||
const mask = buffer.slice(maskOffset, dataOffset);
|
||||
const data = Buffer.alloc(payloadLen);
|
||||
for (let i = 0; i < payloadLen; i++) {
|
||||
data[i] = buffer[dataOffset + i] ^ mask[i % 4];
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
return { opcode, payload: data, bytesConsumed: totalLen };
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// ========== Configuration ==========
|
||||
|
||||
const PORT_FILE = process.env.BRAINSTORM_PORT_FILE || null;
|
||||
const randomPort = () => 49152 + Math.floor(Math.random() * 16383);
|
||||
// Prefer an explicit port, else the port this session last bound (so a restart
|
||||
// reuses it and an already-open browser tab reconnects), else a random high port.
|
||||
function preferredPort() {
|
||||
if (process.env.BRAINSTORM_PORT) return Number(process.env.BRAINSTORM_PORT);
|
||||
if (PORT_FILE) {
|
||||
try {
|
||||
const p = Number(fs.readFileSync(PORT_FILE, 'utf-8').trim());
|
||||
if (Number.isInteger(p) && p > 1023 && p < 65536) return p;
|
||||
} catch (e) { /* no prior port recorded */ }
|
||||
}
|
||||
return randomPort();
|
||||
}
|
||||
let PORT = preferredPort();
|
||||
const HOST = process.env.BRAINSTORM_HOST || '127.0.0.1';
|
||||
const URL_HOST = process.env.BRAINSTORM_URL_HOST || (HOST === '127.0.0.1' ? 'localhost' : HOST);
|
||||
const SESSION_DIR = process.env.BRAINSTORM_DIR || '/tmp/brainstorm';
|
||||
const CONTENT_DIR = path.join(SESSION_DIR, 'content');
|
||||
const STATE_DIR = path.join(SESSION_DIR, 'state');
|
||||
const SUPERPOWERS_VERSION = readSuperpowersVersion();
|
||||
const SUPERPOWERS_BRAND_IMAGE_URL = 'https://primeradiant.com/brand/superpowers-visual-brainstorming-logo.png';
|
||||
const TELEMETRY_DISABLE_ENV_VARS = [
|
||||
'SUPERPOWERS_DISABLE_TELEMETRY',
|
||||
'DISABLE_TELEMETRY',
|
||||
'CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_NONESSENTIAL_TRAFFIC'
|
||||
];
|
||||
const SUPERPOWERS_TELEMETRY_DISABLED = TELEMETRY_DISABLE_ENV_VARS.some(name => isTruthyEnv(process.env[name]));
|
||||
let ownerPid = process.env.BRAINSTORM_OWNER_PID ? Number(process.env.BRAINSTORM_OWNER_PID) : null;
|
||||
|
||||
// Per-session secret key. The companion is reachable by any local browser tab
|
||||
// and, when bound to a non-loopback host, by any host that can route to it.
|
||||
// The key authenticates the real client uniformly across loopback, tunnel, and
|
||||
// remote binds — and defeats DNS rebinding — where a Host/Origin allowlist
|
||||
// cannot. It rides the served URL as ?key= and is mirrored into a cookie on
|
||||
// first load so same-origin subresources and the WebSocket carry it for free.
|
||||
// Persisted alongside the port (BRAINSTORM_TOKEN_FILE) so a restart keeps the
|
||||
// same key and an already-open tab's cookie still validates.
|
||||
const TOKEN_FILE = process.env.BRAINSTORM_TOKEN_FILE || null;
|
||||
function generateToken() {
|
||||
return crypto.randomBytes(32).toString('hex');
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function chmodOwnerOnly(file) {
|
||||
try { fs.chmodSync(file, 0o600); } catch (e) { /* best effort */ }
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function initialToken() {
|
||||
if (process.env.BRAINSTORM_TOKEN) {
|
||||
return { value: process.env.BRAINSTORM_TOKEN, source: 'env' };
|
||||
}
|
||||
if (TOKEN_FILE) {
|
||||
try {
|
||||
const t = fs.readFileSync(TOKEN_FILE, 'utf-8').trim();
|
||||
if (/^[0-9a-f]{32,}$/i.test(t)) {
|
||||
chmodOwnerOnly(TOKEN_FILE);
|
||||
return { value: t, source: 'file' };
|
||||
}
|
||||
} catch (e) { /* no prior token recorded */ }
|
||||
}
|
||||
return { value: generateToken(), source: 'generated' };
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
const tokenInfo = initialToken();
|
||||
let TOKEN = tokenInfo.value;
|
||||
let tokenSource = tokenInfo.source;
|
||||
let COOKIE_NAME = 'brainstorm-key-' + PORT; // refined to the actual bound port in onListen
|
||||
|
||||
const MIME_TYPES = {
|
||||
'.html': 'text/html', '.css': 'text/css', '.js': 'application/javascript',
|
||||
'.json': 'application/json', '.png': 'image/png', '.jpg': 'image/jpeg',
|
||||
'.jpeg': 'image/jpeg', '.gif': 'image/gif', '.svg': 'image/svg+xml'
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
// ========== Templates and Constants ==========
|
||||
|
||||
function waitingPage() {
|
||||
return renderBranding(`<!DOCTYPE html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head><meta charset="utf-8"><title>Brainstorm Companion</title>
|
||||
<style>
|
||||
body { font-family: system-ui, sans-serif; padding: 2rem; max-width: 800px; margin: 0 auto; }
|
||||
h1 { color: #333; } p { color: #666; }
|
||||
.brand { display: flex; align-items: center; min-width: 0; overflow: hidden; margin-bottom: 1.5rem; color: #666; font-size: 0.9rem; line-height: 1; }
|
||||
.brand a { color: inherit; text-decoration: none; display: flex; align-items: center; gap: 0.5rem; min-width: 0; max-width: 100%; line-height: 1; }
|
||||
.brand-copy { display: block; min-width: 0; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap; line-height: 1; transform: translateY(-1px); }
|
||||
.brand-logo { display: block; height: 1em; width: auto; max-width: 180px; filter: invert(1); }
|
||||
</style>
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body><!-- BRANDING --><h1>Brainstorm Companion</h1>
|
||||
<p>Waiting for the agent to push a screen...</p></body></html>`);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
const FORBIDDEN_PAGE = `<!DOCTYPE html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head><meta charset="utf-8"><title>Session key required</title>
|
||||
<style>body { font-family: system-ui, sans-serif; padding: 2rem; max-width: 800px; margin: 0 auto; }
|
||||
h1 { color: #333; } p { color: #666; } code { background: #f0f0f0; padding: 0.1em 0.3em; border-radius: 4px; }</style>
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body><h1>Session key required</h1>
|
||||
<p>This page needs the full URL your coding agent gave you, including the
|
||||
<code>?key=…</code> part. Copy the complete URL and open it again.</p></body></html>`;
|
||||
|
||||
function bootstrapPage(key) {
|
||||
const jsonKey = JSON.stringify(String(key));
|
||||
return `<!DOCTYPE html>
|
||||
<html>
|
||||
<head><meta charset="utf-8"><title>Opening Brainstorm Companion</title></head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<script>
|
||||
try { sessionStorage.setItem('brainstorm-session-key', ${jsonKey}); } catch (e) {}
|
||||
location.replace('/');
|
||||
</script>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
</html>`;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
const frameTemplate = fs.readFileSync(path.join(__dirname, 'frame-template.html'), 'utf-8');
|
||||
const helperScript = fs.readFileSync(path.join(__dirname, 'helper.js'), 'utf-8');
|
||||
const helperInjection = '<script>\n' + helperScript + '\n</script>';
|
||||
|
||||
// ========== Helper Functions ==========
|
||||
|
||||
function readSuperpowersVersion() {
|
||||
const root = path.join(__dirname, '../../..');
|
||||
const manifests = [
|
||||
path.join(root, 'package.json'),
|
||||
path.join(root, '.codex-plugin/plugin.json')
|
||||
];
|
||||
|
||||
for (const manifest of manifests) {
|
||||
try {
|
||||
const data = JSON.parse(fs.readFileSync(manifest, 'utf-8'));
|
||||
if (data.version) return String(data.version);
|
||||
} catch (e) {
|
||||
// Packaged Codex plugins omit package.json; try the next manifest.
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
return 'unknown';
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function isTruthyEnv(value) {
|
||||
if (!value) return false;
|
||||
const normalized = String(value).trim().toLowerCase();
|
||||
if (!normalized) return false;
|
||||
return !['0', 'false', 'no', 'off'].includes(normalized);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function escapeHtmlText(value) {
|
||||
return String(value)
|
||||
.replace(/&/g, '&')
|
||||
.replace(/</g, '<')
|
||||
.replace(/>/g, '>')
|
||||
.replace(/"/g, '"');
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function brandMarkup() {
|
||||
const version = escapeHtmlText(SUPERPOWERS_VERSION);
|
||||
const text = SUPERPOWERS_TELEMETRY_DISABLED
|
||||
? 'Prime Radiant Superpowers v' + version
|
||||
: 'Superpowers v' + version;
|
||||
const logo = SUPERPOWERS_TELEMETRY_DISABLED
|
||||
? ''
|
||||
: '<img class="brand-logo" src="' + SUPERPOWERS_BRAND_IMAGE_URL + '?v=' + encodeURIComponent(SUPERPOWERS_VERSION) + '" alt="Prime Radiant" referrerpolicy="no-referrer" decoding="async">';
|
||||
|
||||
return '<div class="brand"><a href="https://github.com/obra/superpowers">' + logo + '<span class="brand-copy">' + text + '</span></a></div>';
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function renderBranding(html) {
|
||||
return html.split('<!-- BRANDING -->').join(brandMarkup());
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function isFullDocument(html) {
|
||||
const trimmed = html.trimStart().toLowerCase();
|
||||
return trimmed.startsWith('<!doctype') || trimmed.startsWith('<html');
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function wrapInFrame(content) {
|
||||
return renderBranding(frameTemplate).replace('<!-- CONTENT -->', content);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function getNewestScreen() {
|
||||
const files = fs.readdirSync(CONTENT_DIR)
|
||||
.filter(f => !f.startsWith('.') && f.endsWith('.html'))
|
||||
.map(f => {
|
||||
const fp = path.join(CONTENT_DIR, f);
|
||||
if (!isRegularFileInsideContentDir(fp)) return null;
|
||||
return { path: fp, mtime: fs.statSync(fp).mtime.getTime() };
|
||||
})
|
||||
.filter(Boolean)
|
||||
.sort((a, b) => b.mtime - a.mtime);
|
||||
return files.length > 0 ? files[0].path : null;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function urlHostForHttp(host) {
|
||||
const h = String(host);
|
||||
if (h.startsWith('[') && h.endsWith(']')) return h;
|
||||
return h.includes(':') ? '[' + h + ']' : h;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function companionUrl() {
|
||||
return 'http://' + urlHostForHttp(URL_HOST) + ':' + PORT + '/?key=' + TOKEN;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function browserLauncherForPlatform(url, {
|
||||
platform = process.platform,
|
||||
osRelease = require('os').release(),
|
||||
env = process.env
|
||||
} = {}) {
|
||||
const isWSL = platform === 'linux' && /microsoft/i.test(osRelease);
|
||||
if (platform === 'darwin') return { bin: 'open', args: [url] };
|
||||
if (platform === 'win32' || isWSL) {
|
||||
return { bin: 'rundll32.exe', args: ['url.dll,FileProtocolHandler', url] };
|
||||
}
|
||||
if (env.DISPLAY || env.WAYLAND_DISPLAY) return { bin: 'xdg-open', args: [url] };
|
||||
return null;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function isRegularFileInsideContentDir(filePath) {
|
||||
let stat, realContentDir, realFilePath;
|
||||
try {
|
||||
stat = fs.lstatSync(filePath);
|
||||
if (stat.isSymbolicLink()) return false;
|
||||
if (!stat.isFile()) return false;
|
||||
if (stat.nlink !== 1) return false;
|
||||
realContentDir = fs.realpathSync(CONTENT_DIR);
|
||||
realFilePath = fs.realpathSync(filePath);
|
||||
} catch (e) {
|
||||
return false;
|
||||
}
|
||||
return realFilePath.startsWith(realContentDir + path.sep);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// ========== Authentication ==========
|
||||
|
||||
function timingSafeEqualStr(a, b) {
|
||||
const ab = Buffer.from(String(a));
|
||||
const bb = Buffer.from(String(b));
|
||||
if (ab.length !== bb.length) return false;
|
||||
return crypto.timingSafeEqual(ab, bb);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function parseCookies(header) {
|
||||
const out = {};
|
||||
if (!header) return out;
|
||||
for (const part of header.split(';')) {
|
||||
const eq = part.indexOf('=');
|
||||
if (eq < 0) continue;
|
||||
out[part.slice(0, eq).trim()] = part.slice(eq + 1).trim();
|
||||
}
|
||||
return out;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// A request is authorized if it carries the session key as ?key= or as the
|
||||
// session cookie. Both are compared in constant time.
|
||||
function isAuthorized(req) {
|
||||
const q = req.url.indexOf('?');
|
||||
if (q >= 0) {
|
||||
const params = new URLSearchParams(req.url.slice(q + 1));
|
||||
if (params.has('key')) {
|
||||
const key = params.get('key');
|
||||
return Boolean(key && timingSafeEqualStr(key, TOKEN));
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
const cookie = parseCookies(req.headers['cookie'])[COOKIE_NAME];
|
||||
if (cookie && timingSafeEqualStr(cookie, TOKEN)) return true;
|
||||
return false;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function pathnameOf(url) {
|
||||
const q = url.indexOf('?');
|
||||
return q >= 0 ? url.slice(0, q) : url;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function queryKey(url) {
|
||||
const q = url.indexOf('?');
|
||||
if (q < 0) return null;
|
||||
return new URLSearchParams(url.slice(q + 1)).get('key');
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function securityHeaders(headers = {}) {
|
||||
return {
|
||||
'Referrer-Policy': 'no-referrer',
|
||||
'Cache-Control': 'no-store',
|
||||
'X-Frame-Options': 'DENY',
|
||||
'Content-Security-Policy': "frame-ancestors 'none'",
|
||||
'Cross-Origin-Resource-Policy': 'same-origin',
|
||||
...headers
|
||||
};
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function isAllowedWebSocketOrigin(req) {
|
||||
const origin = req.headers.origin;
|
||||
if (!origin) return true;
|
||||
const host = req.headers.host;
|
||||
if (!host) return false;
|
||||
return origin === 'http://' + host;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// ========== HTTP Request Handler ==========
|
||||
|
||||
function handleRequest(req, res) {
|
||||
if (!isAuthorized(req)) {
|
||||
res.writeHead(403, securityHeaders({ 'Content-Type': 'text/html; charset=utf-8' }));
|
||||
res.end(FORBIDDEN_PAGE);
|
||||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
touchActivity(); // only authorized requests count as activity
|
||||
|
||||
// Mirror the key into a cookie so same-origin subresources (/files/*) can
|
||||
// authenticate after bootstrap. HttpOnly keeps it away from page scripts; the
|
||||
// WebSocket Origin check below is what blocks cross-origin localhost injection.
|
||||
res.setHeader('Set-Cookie',
|
||||
COOKIE_NAME + '=' + TOKEN + '; HttpOnly; SameSite=Strict; Path=/');
|
||||
|
||||
const pathname = pathnameOf(req.url);
|
||||
const keyFromQuery = queryKey(req.url);
|
||||
if (req.method === 'GET' && pathname === '/' && keyFromQuery && timingSafeEqualStr(keyFromQuery, TOKEN)) {
|
||||
res.writeHead(200, securityHeaders({ 'Content-Type': 'text/html; charset=utf-8' }));
|
||||
res.end(bootstrapPage(keyFromQuery));
|
||||
} else if (req.method === 'GET' && pathname === '/') {
|
||||
const screenFile = getNewestScreen();
|
||||
let html = screenFile
|
||||
? (raw => isFullDocument(raw) ? raw : wrapInFrame(raw))(fs.readFileSync(screenFile, 'utf-8'))
|
||||
: waitingPage();
|
||||
|
||||
if (html.includes('</body>')) {
|
||||
html = html.replace('</body>', helperInjection + '\n</body>');
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
html += helperInjection;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
res.writeHead(200, securityHeaders({ 'Content-Type': 'text/html; charset=utf-8' }));
|
||||
res.end(html);
|
||||
} else if (req.method === 'GET' && pathname.startsWith('/files/')) {
|
||||
const fileName = path.basename(pathname.slice(7));
|
||||
const filePath = path.join(CONTENT_DIR, fileName);
|
||||
// Reject empty/dotfile names and anything that isn't a regular file —
|
||||
// `/files/` would otherwise resolve to CONTENT_DIR and crash readFileSync (EISDIR).
|
||||
if (!fileName || fileName.startsWith('.') || !isRegularFileInsideContentDir(filePath)) {
|
||||
res.writeHead(404, securityHeaders());
|
||||
res.end('Not found');
|
||||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
const ext = path.extname(filePath).toLowerCase();
|
||||
const contentType = MIME_TYPES[ext] || 'application/octet-stream';
|
||||
res.writeHead(200, securityHeaders({ 'Content-Type': contentType }));
|
||||
res.end(fs.readFileSync(filePath));
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
res.writeHead(404, securityHeaders());
|
||||
res.end('Not found');
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// ========== WebSocket Connection Handling ==========
|
||||
|
||||
const clients = new Set();
|
||||
|
||||
function handleUpgrade(req, socket) {
|
||||
if (!isAuthorized(req) || !isAllowedWebSocketOrigin(req)) { socket.destroy(); return; }
|
||||
|
||||
const key = req.headers['sec-websocket-key'];
|
||||
if (!key) { socket.destroy(); return; }
|
||||
|
||||
const accept = computeAcceptKey(key);
|
||||
socket.write(
|
||||
'HTTP/1.1 101 Switching Protocols\r\n' +
|
||||
'Upgrade: websocket\r\n' +
|
||||
'Connection: Upgrade\r\n' +
|
||||
'Sec-WebSocket-Accept: ' + accept + '\r\n\r\n'
|
||||
);
|
||||
|
||||
let buffer = Buffer.alloc(0);
|
||||
clients.add(socket);
|
||||
|
||||
socket.on('data', (chunk) => {
|
||||
buffer = Buffer.concat([buffer, chunk]);
|
||||
while (buffer.length > 0) {
|
||||
let result;
|
||||
try {
|
||||
result = decodeFrame(buffer);
|
||||
} catch (e) {
|
||||
socket.end(encodeFrame(OPCODES.CLOSE, Buffer.alloc(0)));
|
||||
clients.delete(socket);
|
||||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
if (!result) break;
|
||||
buffer = buffer.slice(result.bytesConsumed);
|
||||
|
||||
switch (result.opcode) {
|
||||
case OPCODES.TEXT:
|
||||
handleMessage(result.payload.toString());
|
||||
break;
|
||||
case OPCODES.CLOSE:
|
||||
socket.end(encodeFrame(OPCODES.CLOSE, Buffer.alloc(0)));
|
||||
clients.delete(socket);
|
||||
return;
|
||||
case OPCODES.PING:
|
||||
socket.write(encodeFrame(OPCODES.PONG, result.payload));
|
||||
break;
|
||||
case OPCODES.PONG:
|
||||
break;
|
||||
default: {
|
||||
const closeBuf = Buffer.alloc(2);
|
||||
closeBuf.writeUInt16BE(1003);
|
||||
socket.end(encodeFrame(OPCODES.CLOSE, closeBuf));
|
||||
clients.delete(socket);
|
||||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
socket.on('close', () => clients.delete(socket));
|
||||
socket.on('error', () => clients.delete(socket));
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function handleMessage(text) {
|
||||
let event;
|
||||
try {
|
||||
event = JSON.parse(text);
|
||||
} catch (e) {
|
||||
console.error('Failed to parse WebSocket message:', e.message);
|
||||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
touchActivity();
|
||||
console.log(JSON.stringify({ source: 'user-event', ...event }));
|
||||
if (event && event.choice) {
|
||||
const eventsFile = path.join(STATE_DIR, 'events');
|
||||
fs.appendFileSync(eventsFile, JSON.stringify(event) + '\n');
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function broadcast(msg) {
|
||||
const frame = encodeFrame(OPCODES.TEXT, Buffer.from(JSON.stringify(msg)));
|
||||
for (const socket of clients) {
|
||||
try { socket.write(frame); } catch (e) { clients.delete(socket); }
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Best-effort: open the user's browser the first time a screen is actually ready
|
||||
// to show. Skips when disabled, on a non-loopback (remote) bind, or when a
|
||||
// browser is already connected. Override the launcher with BRAINSTORM_OPEN_CMD.
|
||||
let browserOpened = false;
|
||||
function maybeOpenBrowser() {
|
||||
if (browserOpened) return;
|
||||
browserOpened = true;
|
||||
if (!process.env.BRAINSTORM_OPEN) return; // opt-in: only after the user approves the companion
|
||||
if (HOST !== '127.0.0.1' && HOST !== 'localhost') return;
|
||||
if (clients.size > 0) return; // the user already opened it
|
||||
const url = companionUrl(); // must carry the key or the gate 403s it
|
||||
const cp = require('child_process');
|
||||
// Operator-provided launcher: run as given (this env var is trusted operator input).
|
||||
if (process.env.BRAINSTORM_OPEN_CMD) {
|
||||
try { cp.exec(process.env.BRAINSTORM_OPEN_CMD + ' ' + JSON.stringify(url), () => {}); } catch (e) { /* best effort */ }
|
||||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
// Platform launchers: pass the URL as an argv element via execFile (no shell),
|
||||
// so a url-host containing shell metacharacters can't inject a command.
|
||||
const launcher = browserLauncherForPlatform(url);
|
||||
if (!launcher) return; // headless: nothing to open
|
||||
try { cp.execFile(launcher.bin, launcher.args, () => {}); } catch (e) { /* best effort */ }
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// ========== Activity Tracking ==========
|
||||
|
||||
// Idle timeout: shut down after this long with no activity. Default 4 hours;
|
||||
// override with BRAINSTORM_IDLE_TIMEOUT_MS (start-server.sh: --idle-timeout-minutes).
|
||||
const IDLE_TIMEOUT_MS = (() => {
|
||||
const ms = Number(process.env.BRAINSTORM_IDLE_TIMEOUT_MS);
|
||||
return Number.isFinite(ms) && ms > 0 ? ms : 4 * 60 * 60 * 1000;
|
||||
})();
|
||||
// How often the watchdog checks for owner-death / idleness. Configurable mainly
|
||||
// so tests can run fast; production default is 60s.
|
||||
const LIFECYCLE_CHECK_MS = (() => {
|
||||
const ms = Number(process.env.BRAINSTORM_LIFECYCLE_CHECK_MS);
|
||||
return Number.isFinite(ms) && ms > 0 ? ms : 60 * 1000;
|
||||
})();
|
||||
let lastActivity = Date.now();
|
||||
|
||||
function touchActivity() {
|
||||
lastActivity = Date.now();
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// ========== File Watching ==========
|
||||
|
||||
const debounceTimers = new Map();
|
||||
|
||||
// ========== Server Startup ==========
|
||||
|
||||
function startServer() {
|
||||
if (!fs.existsSync(CONTENT_DIR)) fs.mkdirSync(CONTENT_DIR, { recursive: true });
|
||||
if (!fs.existsSync(STATE_DIR)) fs.mkdirSync(STATE_DIR, { recursive: true });
|
||||
|
||||
// Track known files to distinguish new screens from updates.
|
||||
// macOS fs.watch reports 'rename' for both new files and overwrites,
|
||||
// so we can't rely on eventType alone.
|
||||
const knownFiles = new Set(
|
||||
fs.readdirSync(CONTENT_DIR).filter(f => !f.startsWith('.') && f.endsWith('.html'))
|
||||
);
|
||||
|
||||
const server = http.createServer(handleRequest);
|
||||
server.on('upgrade', handleUpgrade);
|
||||
|
||||
const watcher = fs.watch(CONTENT_DIR, (eventType, filename) => {
|
||||
if (!filename || filename.startsWith('.') || !filename.endsWith('.html')) return;
|
||||
|
||||
if (debounceTimers.has(filename)) clearTimeout(debounceTimers.get(filename));
|
||||
debounceTimers.set(filename, setTimeout(() => {
|
||||
debounceTimers.delete(filename);
|
||||
const filePath = path.join(CONTENT_DIR, filename);
|
||||
|
||||
if (!fs.existsSync(filePath)) return; // file was deleted
|
||||
touchActivity();
|
||||
|
||||
if (!knownFiles.has(filename)) {
|
||||
knownFiles.add(filename);
|
||||
const eventsFile = path.join(STATE_DIR, 'events');
|
||||
if (fs.existsSync(eventsFile)) fs.unlinkSync(eventsFile);
|
||||
console.log(JSON.stringify({ type: 'screen-added', file: filePath }));
|
||||
maybeOpenBrowser();
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
console.log(JSON.stringify({ type: 'screen-updated', file: filePath }));
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
broadcast({ type: 'reload' });
|
||||
}, 100));
|
||||
});
|
||||
watcher.on('error', (err) => console.error('fs.watch error:', err.message));
|
||||
|
||||
function shutdown(reason) {
|
||||
console.log(JSON.stringify({ type: 'server-stopped', reason }));
|
||||
const infoFile = path.join(STATE_DIR, 'server-info');
|
||||
if (fs.existsSync(infoFile)) fs.unlinkSync(infoFile);
|
||||
fs.writeFileSync(
|
||||
path.join(STATE_DIR, 'server-stopped'),
|
||||
JSON.stringify({ reason, timestamp: Date.now() }) + '\n'
|
||||
);
|
||||
watcher.close();
|
||||
clearInterval(lifecycleCheck);
|
||||
// Close any upgraded WebSocket sockets so server.close() can complete and
|
||||
// the process actually exits instead of lingering on an open connection.
|
||||
for (const socket of clients) {
|
||||
try { socket.destroy(); } catch (e) { /* already gone */ }
|
||||
}
|
||||
server.close(() => process.exit(0));
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function ownerAlive() {
|
||||
if (!ownerPid) return true;
|
||||
try { process.kill(ownerPid, 0); return true; } catch (e) { return e.code === 'EPERM'; }
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Periodically exit if the owner process died or we've been idle too long.
|
||||
const lifecycleCheck = setInterval(() => {
|
||||
if (!ownerAlive()) shutdown('owner process exited');
|
||||
else if (Date.now() - lastActivity > IDLE_TIMEOUT_MS) shutdown('idle timeout');
|
||||
}, LIFECYCLE_CHECK_MS);
|
||||
lifecycleCheck.unref();
|
||||
|
||||
// Validate owner PID at startup. If it's already dead, the PID resolution
|
||||
// was wrong (common on WSL, Tailscale SSH, and cross-user scenarios).
|
||||
// Disable monitoring and rely on the idle timeout instead.
|
||||
if (ownerPid) {
|
||||
try { process.kill(ownerPid, 0); }
|
||||
catch (e) {
|
||||
if (e.code !== 'EPERM') {
|
||||
console.log(JSON.stringify({ type: 'owner-pid-invalid', pid: ownerPid, reason: 'dead at startup' }));
|
||||
ownerPid = null;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// If the preferred port is already taken (e.g. a previous server is still
|
||||
// alive), fall back to a random port once instead of failing.
|
||||
let triedFallback = false;
|
||||
|
||||
function onListen() {
|
||||
// Cookie name keys on the ACTUAL bound port (may differ from the preferred
|
||||
// one after an EADDRINUSE fallback) so it can't collide with another server's
|
||||
// cookie in the shared localhost jar.
|
||||
COOKIE_NAME = 'brainstorm-key-' + PORT;
|
||||
// Record the bound port AND token so the next restart of this session reuses
|
||||
// them — but ONLY when we got our preferred port. On a fallback we bound a
|
||||
// *different* port because someone else holds the preferred one; persisting
|
||||
// would overwrite the shared files and strand that other session's open tab.
|
||||
if (PORT_FILE && !triedFallback) {
|
||||
try { fs.writeFileSync(PORT_FILE, String(PORT)); } catch (e) { /* best effort */ }
|
||||
if (TOKEN_FILE) {
|
||||
try {
|
||||
fs.writeFileSync(TOKEN_FILE, TOKEN, { mode: 0o600 });
|
||||
chmodOwnerOnly(TOKEN_FILE);
|
||||
} catch (e) { /* best effort */ }
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
const info = JSON.stringify({
|
||||
type: 'server-started', port: Number(PORT), host: HOST,
|
||||
url_host: URL_HOST, url: companionUrl(),
|
||||
screen_dir: CONTENT_DIR, state_dir: STATE_DIR, idle_timeout_ms: IDLE_TIMEOUT_MS
|
||||
});
|
||||
console.log(info);
|
||||
// server-info embeds the key — keep it owner-only.
|
||||
fs.writeFileSync(path.join(STATE_DIR, 'server-info'), info + '\n', { mode: 0o600 });
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
server.on('error', (err) => {
|
||||
if (err.code === 'EADDRINUSE' && !triedFallback) {
|
||||
if (tokenSource === 'env') {
|
||||
console.error('Server failed to bind: preferred port is in use and BRAINSTORM_TOKEN is set; refusing fallback with explicit token');
|
||||
process.exit(1);
|
||||
}
|
||||
triedFallback = true;
|
||||
PORT = randomPort();
|
||||
if (tokenSource === 'file') {
|
||||
TOKEN = generateToken();
|
||||
tokenSource = 'generated-fallback';
|
||||
}
|
||||
server.listen(PORT, HOST, onListen);
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
console.error('Server failed to bind:', err.message);
|
||||
process.exit(1);
|
||||
}
|
||||
});
|
||||
server.listen(PORT, HOST, onListen);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if (require.main === module) {
|
||||
startServer();
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
module.exports = {
|
||||
computeAcceptKey,
|
||||
encodeFrame,
|
||||
decodeFrame,
|
||||
browserLauncherForPlatform,
|
||||
OPCODES,
|
||||
MAX_FRAME_PAYLOAD_BYTES
|
||||
};
|
||||
209
.claude/skills/brainstorming/scripts/start-server.sh
Executable file
209
.claude/skills/brainstorming/scripts/start-server.sh
Executable file
@@ -0,0 +1,209 @@
|
||||
#!/usr/bin/env bash
|
||||
# Start the brainstorm server and output connection info
|
||||
# Usage: start-server.sh [--project-dir <path>] [--host <bind-host>] [--url-host <display-host>] [--foreground] [--background]
|
||||
#
|
||||
# Starts server on a random high port, outputs JSON with URL.
|
||||
# Each session gets its own directory to avoid conflicts.
|
||||
#
|
||||
# Options:
|
||||
# --project-dir <path> Store session files under <path>/.superpowers/brainstorm/
|
||||
# instead of /tmp. Files persist after server stops.
|
||||
# --host <bind-host> Host/interface to bind (default: 127.0.0.1).
|
||||
# Use 0.0.0.0 in remote/containerized environments.
|
||||
# --url-host <host> Hostname shown in returned URL JSON.
|
||||
# --idle-timeout-minutes <n> Shut down after n minutes idle (default 240 = 4h).
|
||||
# --open Auto-open the browser on the first screen (use only
|
||||
# after the user approves the visual companion).
|
||||
# --foreground Run server in the current terminal (no backgrounding).
|
||||
# --background Force background mode (overrides Codex auto-foreground).
|
||||
|
||||
SCRIPT_DIR="$(cd "$(dirname "$0")" && pwd)"
|
||||
|
||||
# Parse arguments
|
||||
PROJECT_DIR=""
|
||||
FOREGROUND="false"
|
||||
FORCE_BACKGROUND="false"
|
||||
BIND_HOST="127.0.0.1"
|
||||
URL_HOST=""
|
||||
IDLE_TIMEOUT_MINUTES=""
|
||||
while [[ $# -gt 0 ]]; do
|
||||
case "$1" in
|
||||
--project-dir)
|
||||
PROJECT_DIR="$2"
|
||||
shift 2
|
||||
;;
|
||||
--host)
|
||||
BIND_HOST="$2"
|
||||
shift 2
|
||||
;;
|
||||
--url-host)
|
||||
URL_HOST="$2"
|
||||
shift 2
|
||||
;;
|
||||
--idle-timeout-minutes)
|
||||
IDLE_TIMEOUT_MINUTES="$2"
|
||||
shift 2
|
||||
;;
|
||||
--open)
|
||||
export BRAINSTORM_OPEN=1
|
||||
shift
|
||||
;;
|
||||
--foreground|--no-daemon)
|
||||
FOREGROUND="true"
|
||||
shift
|
||||
;;
|
||||
--background|--daemon)
|
||||
FORCE_BACKGROUND="true"
|
||||
shift
|
||||
;;
|
||||
*)
|
||||
echo "{\"error\": \"Unknown argument: $1\"}"
|
||||
exit 1
|
||||
;;
|
||||
esac
|
||||
done
|
||||
|
||||
if [[ -z "$URL_HOST" ]]; then
|
||||
if [[ "$BIND_HOST" == "127.0.0.1" || "$BIND_HOST" == "localhost" ]]; then
|
||||
URL_HOST="localhost"
|
||||
else
|
||||
URL_HOST="$BIND_HOST"
|
||||
fi
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
if [[ -n "$IDLE_TIMEOUT_MINUTES" ]]; then
|
||||
if ! [[ "$IDLE_TIMEOUT_MINUTES" =~ ^[0-9]+$ ]] || [[ "$IDLE_TIMEOUT_MINUTES" -lt 1 ]]; then
|
||||
echo "{\"error\": \"--idle-timeout-minutes must be a positive integer\"}"
|
||||
exit 1
|
||||
fi
|
||||
export BRAINSTORM_IDLE_TIMEOUT_MS=$(( IDLE_TIMEOUT_MINUTES * 60 * 1000 ))
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
is_windows_like_shell() {
|
||||
case "${OSTYPE:-}" in
|
||||
msys*|cygwin*|mingw*) return 0 ;;
|
||||
esac
|
||||
if [[ -n "${MSYSTEM:-}" ]]; then
|
||||
return 0
|
||||
fi
|
||||
local uname_s
|
||||
uname_s="$(uname -s 2>/dev/null || true)"
|
||||
case "$uname_s" in
|
||||
MSYS*|MINGW*|CYGWIN*) return 0 ;;
|
||||
esac
|
||||
return 1
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
# Some environments reap detached/background processes. Auto-foreground when detected.
|
||||
if [[ -n "${CODEX_CI:-}" && "$FOREGROUND" != "true" && "$FORCE_BACKGROUND" != "true" ]]; then
|
||||
FOREGROUND="true"
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
# Windows/Git Bash reaps nohup background processes. Auto-foreground when detected.
|
||||
if [[ "$FOREGROUND" != "true" && "$FORCE_BACKGROUND" != "true" ]]; then
|
||||
if is_windows_like_shell; then
|
||||
FOREGROUND="true"
|
||||
fi
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
# Session files (server.log, server-info, .last-token) embed the session key —
|
||||
# keep everything this script and the server create owner-only.
|
||||
umask 077
|
||||
|
||||
# Generate unique session directory
|
||||
SESSION_ID="$$-$(date +%s)"
|
||||
|
||||
if [[ -n "$PROJECT_DIR" ]]; then
|
||||
SESSION_DIR="${PROJECT_DIR}/.superpowers/brainstorm/${SESSION_ID}"
|
||||
# Persist the bound port and key per project so a restart reuses them and an
|
||||
# already-open browser tab reconnects to the same URL with a valid cookie.
|
||||
export BRAINSTORM_PORT_FILE="${PROJECT_DIR}/.superpowers/brainstorm/.last-port"
|
||||
export BRAINSTORM_TOKEN_FILE="${PROJECT_DIR}/.superpowers/brainstorm/.last-token"
|
||||
else
|
||||
SESSION_DIR="/tmp/brainstorm-${SESSION_ID}"
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
STATE_DIR="${SESSION_DIR}/state"
|
||||
PID_FILE="${STATE_DIR}/server.pid"
|
||||
LOG_FILE="${STATE_DIR}/server.log"
|
||||
SERVER_ID_FILE="${STATE_DIR}/server-instance-id"
|
||||
|
||||
# Create fresh session directory with content and state peers
|
||||
mkdir -p "${SESSION_DIR}/content" "$STATE_DIR"
|
||||
|
||||
SERVER_ID=""
|
||||
if [[ -r /dev/urandom ]]; then
|
||||
SERVER_ID="$(od -An -N24 -tx1 /dev/urandom 2>/dev/null | tr -d ' \n' || true)"
|
||||
fi
|
||||
if ! [[ "$SERVER_ID" =~ ^[A-Za-z0-9_-]{32,64}$ ]]; then
|
||||
SERVER_ID="$(printf '%08x%08x%08x%08x' "$$" "$(date +%s)" "${RANDOM:-0}" "${RANDOM:-0}")"
|
||||
fi
|
||||
printf '%s\n' "$SERVER_ID" > "$SERVER_ID_FILE"
|
||||
chmod 600 "$SERVER_ID_FILE" 2>/dev/null || true
|
||||
|
||||
# Kill any existing server
|
||||
if [[ -f "$PID_FILE" ]]; then
|
||||
old_pid=$(cat "$PID_FILE")
|
||||
kill "$old_pid" 2>/dev/null
|
||||
rm -f "$PID_FILE"
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
cd "$SCRIPT_DIR" || exit 1
|
||||
|
||||
# Resolve the harness PID (grandparent of this script).
|
||||
# $PPID is the ephemeral shell the harness spawned to run us — it dies
|
||||
# when this script exits. The harness itself is $PPID's parent.
|
||||
OWNER_PID="$(ps -o ppid= -p "$PPID" 2>/dev/null | tr -d ' ')"
|
||||
if [[ -z "$OWNER_PID" || "$OWNER_PID" == "1" ]]; then
|
||||
OWNER_PID="$PPID"
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
# Windows/MSYS2: Node.js cannot see POSIX PIDs from the MSYS2 namespace.
|
||||
# Passing a PID node cannot verify causes server to log owner-pid-invalid
|
||||
# and self-terminate at the 60-second lifecycle check. Clear it so the
|
||||
# watchdog is disabled and the idle timeout becomes the only shutdown trigger.
|
||||
if is_windows_like_shell; then
|
||||
OWNER_PID=""
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
# Foreground mode for environments that reap detached/background processes.
|
||||
if [[ "$FOREGROUND" == "true" ]]; then
|
||||
env BRAINSTORM_DIR="$SESSION_DIR" BRAINSTORM_HOST="$BIND_HOST" BRAINSTORM_URL_HOST="$URL_HOST" BRAINSTORM_OWNER_PID="$OWNER_PID" node server.cjs "--brainstorm-server-id=$SERVER_ID" &
|
||||
SERVER_PID=$!
|
||||
echo "$SERVER_PID" > "$PID_FILE"
|
||||
wait "$SERVER_PID"
|
||||
exit $?
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
# Start server, capturing output to log file
|
||||
# Use nohup to survive shell exit; disown to remove from job table
|
||||
nohup env BRAINSTORM_DIR="$SESSION_DIR" BRAINSTORM_HOST="$BIND_HOST" BRAINSTORM_URL_HOST="$URL_HOST" BRAINSTORM_OWNER_PID="$OWNER_PID" node server.cjs "--brainstorm-server-id=$SERVER_ID" > "$LOG_FILE" 2>&1 &
|
||||
SERVER_PID=$!
|
||||
disown "$SERVER_PID" 2>/dev/null
|
||||
echo "$SERVER_PID" > "$PID_FILE"
|
||||
|
||||
# Wait for server-started message (check log file)
|
||||
for _ in {1..50}; do
|
||||
if grep -q "server-started" "$LOG_FILE" 2>/dev/null; then
|
||||
# Verify server is still alive after a short window (catches process reapers)
|
||||
alive="true"
|
||||
for _ in {1..20}; do
|
||||
if ! kill -0 "$SERVER_PID" 2>/dev/null; then
|
||||
alive="false"
|
||||
break
|
||||
fi
|
||||
sleep 0.1
|
||||
done
|
||||
if [[ "$alive" != "true" ]]; then
|
||||
echo "{\"error\": \"Server started but was killed. Retry in a persistent terminal with: $SCRIPT_DIR/start-server.sh${PROJECT_DIR:+ --project-dir $PROJECT_DIR} --host $BIND_HOST --url-host $URL_HOST --foreground\"}"
|
||||
exit 1
|
||||
fi
|
||||
grep "server-started" "$LOG_FILE" | head -1
|
||||
exit 0
|
||||
fi
|
||||
sleep 0.1
|
||||
done
|
||||
|
||||
# Timeout - server didn't start
|
||||
echo '{"error": "Server failed to start within 5 seconds"}'
|
||||
exit 1
|
||||
120
.claude/skills/brainstorming/scripts/stop-server.sh
Executable file
120
.claude/skills/brainstorming/scripts/stop-server.sh
Executable file
@@ -0,0 +1,120 @@
|
||||
#!/usr/bin/env bash
|
||||
# Stop the brainstorm server and clean up
|
||||
# Usage: stop-server.sh <session_dir>
|
||||
#
|
||||
# Kills the server process. Only deletes session directory if it's
|
||||
# under /tmp (ephemeral). Persistent directories (.superpowers/) are
|
||||
# kept so mockups can be reviewed later.
|
||||
|
||||
SESSION_DIR="$1"
|
||||
|
||||
if [[ -z "$SESSION_DIR" ]]; then
|
||||
echo '{"error": "Usage: stop-server.sh <session_dir>"}'
|
||||
exit 1
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
STATE_DIR="${SESSION_DIR}/state"
|
||||
PID_FILE="${STATE_DIR}/server.pid"
|
||||
SERVER_ID_FILE="${STATE_DIR}/server-instance-id"
|
||||
|
||||
mark_stopped() {
|
||||
local reason="$1"
|
||||
rm -f "${STATE_DIR}/server-info"
|
||||
printf '{"reason":"%s","timestamp":%s}\n' "$reason" "$(date +%s)" > "${STATE_DIR}/server-stopped"
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
read_expected_server_id() {
|
||||
[[ -f "$SERVER_ID_FILE" ]] || return 1
|
||||
local id
|
||||
id="$(tr -d '\r\n' < "$SERVER_ID_FILE" 2>/dev/null || true)"
|
||||
[[ "$id" =~ ^[A-Za-z0-9_-]{32,64}$ ]] || return 1
|
||||
printf '%s\n' "$id"
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
command_line_for_pid() {
|
||||
local pid="$1"
|
||||
if [[ -r "/proc/$pid/cmdline" ]]; then
|
||||
tr '\0' '\n' < "/proc/$pid/cmdline" 2>/dev/null || true
|
||||
return 0
|
||||
fi
|
||||
ps -ww -p "$pid" -o command= 2>/dev/null || ps -f -p "$pid" 2>/dev/null | sed '1d' || true
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
command_has_server_id() {
|
||||
local pid="$1"
|
||||
local expected="$2"
|
||||
local expected_arg="--brainstorm-server-id=$expected"
|
||||
if [[ -r "/proc/$pid/cmdline" ]]; then
|
||||
local arg
|
||||
while IFS= read -r -d '' arg || [[ -n "$arg" ]]; do
|
||||
[[ "$arg" == "$expected_arg" ]] && return 0
|
||||
done < "/proc/$pid/cmdline"
|
||||
return 1
|
||||
fi
|
||||
local command_line
|
||||
command_line="$(command_line_for_pid "$pid")"
|
||||
[[ -n "$command_line" ]] || return 1
|
||||
case " $command_line " in
|
||||
*" $expected_arg "*) return 0 ;;
|
||||
*) return 1 ;;
|
||||
esac
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
# Confirm a PID has this session's per-start instance id, not just a familiar
|
||||
# process name. Ambiguous or legacy metadata fails closed as stale_pid.
|
||||
is_brainstorm_server() {
|
||||
kill -0 "$1" 2>/dev/null || return 1
|
||||
local expected_id
|
||||
expected_id="$(read_expected_server_id)" || return 1
|
||||
command_has_server_id "$1" "$expected_id" || return 1
|
||||
return 0
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if [[ -f "$PID_FILE" ]]; then
|
||||
pid=$(cat "$PID_FILE")
|
||||
|
||||
# Refuse to signal a PID we can't prove is our server. A stale pid file may
|
||||
# point at an unrelated process after a reboot/PID wraparound.
|
||||
if ! is_brainstorm_server "$pid"; then
|
||||
rm -f "$PID_FILE" "$SERVER_ID_FILE"
|
||||
mark_stopped "stale_pid"
|
||||
echo '{"status": "stale_pid"}'
|
||||
exit 0
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
# Try to stop gracefully, fallback to force if still alive
|
||||
kill "$pid" 2>/dev/null || true
|
||||
|
||||
# Wait for graceful shutdown (up to ~2s)
|
||||
for _ in {1..20}; do
|
||||
if ! kill -0 "$pid" 2>/dev/null; then
|
||||
break
|
||||
fi
|
||||
sleep 0.1
|
||||
done
|
||||
|
||||
# If still running, escalate to SIGKILL
|
||||
if kill -0 "$pid" 2>/dev/null; then
|
||||
kill -9 "$pid" 2>/dev/null || true
|
||||
|
||||
# Give SIGKILL a moment to take effect
|
||||
sleep 0.1
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
if kill -0 "$pid" 2>/dev/null; then
|
||||
echo '{"status": "failed", "error": "process still running"}'
|
||||
exit 1
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
rm -f "$PID_FILE" "$SERVER_ID_FILE" "${STATE_DIR}/server.log"
|
||||
mark_stopped "stop-server.sh"
|
||||
|
||||
# Only delete ephemeral /tmp directories
|
||||
if [[ "$SESSION_DIR" == /tmp/* ]]; then
|
||||
rm -rf "$SESSION_DIR"
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
echo '{"status": "stopped"}'
|
||||
else
|
||||
echo '{"status": "not_running"}'
|
||||
fi
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
|
||||
# Spec Document Reviewer Prompt Template
|
||||
|
||||
Use this template when dispatching a spec document reviewer subagent.
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose:** Verify the spec is complete, consistent, and ready for implementation planning.
|
||||
|
||||
**Dispatch after:** Spec document is written to docs/superpowers/specs/
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Subagent (general-purpose):
|
||||
description: "Review spec document"
|
||||
prompt: |
|
||||
You are a spec document reviewer. Verify this spec is complete and ready for planning.
|
||||
|
||||
**Spec to review:** [SPEC_FILE_PATH]
|
||||
|
||||
## What to Check
|
||||
|
||||
| Category | What to Look For |
|
||||
|----------|------------------|
|
||||
| Completeness | TODOs, placeholders, "TBD", incomplete sections |
|
||||
| Consistency | Internal contradictions, conflicting requirements |
|
||||
| Clarity | Requirements ambiguous enough to cause someone to build the wrong thing |
|
||||
| Scope | Focused enough for a single plan — not covering multiple independent subsystems |
|
||||
| YAGNI | Unrequested features, over-engineering |
|
||||
|
||||
## Calibration
|
||||
|
||||
**Only flag issues that would cause real problems during implementation planning.**
|
||||
A missing section, a contradiction, or a requirement so ambiguous it could be
|
||||
interpreted two different ways — those are issues. Minor wording improvements,
|
||||
stylistic preferences, and "sections less detailed than others" are not.
|
||||
|
||||
Approve unless there are serious gaps that would lead to a flawed plan.
|
||||
|
||||
## Output Format
|
||||
|
||||
## Spec Review
|
||||
|
||||
**Status:** Approved | Issues Found
|
||||
|
||||
**Issues (if any):**
|
||||
- [Section X]: [specific issue] - [why it matters for planning]
|
||||
|
||||
**Recommendations (advisory, do not block approval):**
|
||||
- [suggestions for improvement]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Reviewer returns:** Status, Issues (if any), Recommendations
|
||||
291
.claude/skills/brainstorming/visual-companion.md
Normal file
291
.claude/skills/brainstorming/visual-companion.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,291 @@
|
||||
# Visual Companion Guide
|
||||
|
||||
Browser-based visual brainstorming companion for showing mockups, diagrams, and options.
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
Decide per-question, not per-session. The test: **would the user understand this better by seeing it than reading it?**
|
||||
|
||||
**Use the browser** when the content itself is visual:
|
||||
|
||||
- **UI mockups** — wireframes, layouts, navigation structures, component designs
|
||||
- **Architecture diagrams** — system components, data flow, relationship maps
|
||||
- **Side-by-side visual comparisons** — comparing two layouts, two color schemes, two design directions
|
||||
- **Design polish** — when the question is about look and feel, spacing, visual hierarchy
|
||||
- **Spatial relationships** — state machines, flowcharts, entity relationships rendered as diagrams
|
||||
|
||||
**Use the terminal** when the content is text or tabular:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Requirements and scope questions** — "what does X mean?", "which features are in scope?"
|
||||
- **Conceptual A/B/C choices** — picking between approaches described in words
|
||||
- **Tradeoff lists** — pros/cons, comparison tables
|
||||
- **Technical decisions** — API design, data modeling, architectural approach selection
|
||||
- **Clarifying questions** — anything where the answer is words, not a visual preference
|
||||
|
||||
A question *about* a UI topic is not automatically a visual question. "What kind of wizard do you want?" is conceptual — use the terminal. "Which of these wizard layouts feels right?" is visual — use the browser.
|
||||
|
||||
## How It Works
|
||||
|
||||
The server watches a directory for HTML files and serves the newest one to the browser. You write HTML content to `screen_dir`, the user sees it in their browser and can click to select options. Selections are recorded to `state_dir/events` that you read on your next turn.
|
||||
|
||||
**Content fragments vs full documents:** If your HTML file starts with `<!DOCTYPE` or `<html`, the server serves it as-is (just injects the helper script). Otherwise, the server automatically wraps your content in the frame template — adding the header, CSS theme, connection status, and all interactive infrastructure. **Write content fragments by default.** Only write full documents when you need complete control over the page.
|
||||
|
||||
## Starting a Session
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Start AFTER the user approves the companion. --open auto-opens their browser on
|
||||
# the first screen; --project-dir persists mockups and enables same-port restart.
|
||||
scripts/start-server.sh --project-dir /path/to/project --open
|
||||
|
||||
# Returns: {"type":"server-started","port":52341,
|
||||
# "url":"http://localhost:52341/?key=ab12…",
|
||||
# "screen_dir":"/path/to/project/.superpowers/brainstorm/12345-1706000000/content",
|
||||
# "state_dir":"/path/to/project/.superpowers/brainstorm/12345-1706000000/state"}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Save `screen_dir` and `state_dir` from the response. With `--open`, the browser opens itself when you push the first screen — you don't need to ask the user to open it, but still share the URL as a fallback (headless/remote setups won't auto-open).
|
||||
|
||||
**The URL contains a session key (`?key=…`).** The server rejects any request
|
||||
without it, so always give the user the **complete** URL from the `url` field —
|
||||
never strip the query string, and never hand out a bare `http://host:port`. The
|
||||
key gates HTTP and WebSocket access so a stray browser tab or another machine on
|
||||
the network can't read the screens or inject events. After the first load the
|
||||
browser remembers the key via a cookie, so reloads and `/files/*` assets work
|
||||
without repeating it.
|
||||
|
||||
**Finding connection info:** The server writes its startup JSON to `$STATE_DIR/server-info`. If you launched the server in the background and didn't capture stdout, read that file to get the URL and port. When using `--project-dir`, check `<project>/.superpowers/brainstorm/` for the session directory.
|
||||
|
||||
**Note:** Pass the project root as `--project-dir` so mockups persist in `.superpowers/brainstorm/` and survive server restarts. Without it, files go to `/tmp` and get cleaned up. Remind the user to add `.superpowers/` to `.gitignore` if it's not already there.
|
||||
|
||||
**Launching the server by platform:**
|
||||
|
||||
**Claude Code:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Default mode works — the script backgrounds the server itself.
|
||||
scripts/start-server.sh --project-dir /path/to/project --open
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
On Windows, the script auto-detects and switches to foreground mode (which blocks the tool call). Use `run_in_background: true` on the Bash tool call so the server survives across conversation turns, then read `$STATE_DIR/server-info` on the next turn to get the URL and port.
|
||||
|
||||
**Codex:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Codex reaps background processes. The script auto-detects CODEX_CI and
|
||||
# switches to foreground mode. Run it normally — no extra flags needed.
|
||||
scripts/start-server.sh --project-dir /path/to/project --open
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Copilot CLI:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Use --foreground and start the server via the bash tool with mode: "async"
|
||||
# so the process survives across turns. Capture the returned shellId for
|
||||
# read_bash / stop_bash if you need to interact with it later.
|
||||
scripts/start-server.sh --project-dir /path/to/project --open --foreground
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Other environments:** The server must keep running in the background across conversation turns. If your environment reaps detached processes, use `--foreground` and launch the command with your platform's background execution mechanism.
|
||||
|
||||
If the URL is unreachable from your browser (common in remote/containerized setups), bind a non-loopback host:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
scripts/start-server.sh \
|
||||
--project-dir /path/to/project \
|
||||
--host 0.0.0.0 \
|
||||
--url-host localhost
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Use `--url-host` to control what hostname is printed in the returned URL JSON.
|
||||
|
||||
## The Loop
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Check server is alive**, then **write HTML** to a new file in `screen_dir`:
|
||||
- **Required: confirm the server is alive before referring to the URL or pushing a screen.** Check that `$STATE_DIR/server-info` exists and `$STATE_DIR/server-stopped` does not. If it has shut down, restart it with `start-server.sh` using the **same `--project-dir`** — it reuses the same port, so the user's open tab reconnects on its own (it shows a "paused" overlay while the server is down) and you don't need to send a new URL. The server auto-exits after 4 hours idle (configurable with `--idle-timeout-minutes`).
|
||||
- Use semantic filenames: `platform.html`, `visual-style.html`, `layout.html`
|
||||
- **Never reuse filenames** — each screen gets a fresh file
|
||||
- Use your file-creation tool — **never use cat/heredoc** (dumps noise into terminal)
|
||||
- Server automatically serves the newest file
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Tell user what to expect and end your turn:**
|
||||
- Remind them of the URL (every step, not just first)
|
||||
- Give a brief text summary of what's on screen (e.g., "Showing 3 layout options for the homepage")
|
||||
- Ask them to respond in the terminal: "Take a look and let me know what you think. Click to select an option if you'd like."
|
||||
|
||||
3. **On your next turn** — after the user responds in the terminal:
|
||||
- Read `$STATE_DIR/events` if it exists — this contains the user's browser interactions (clicks, selections) as JSON lines
|
||||
- Merge with the user's terminal text to get the full picture
|
||||
- The terminal message is the primary feedback; `state_dir/events` provides structured interaction data
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Iterate or advance** — if feedback changes current screen, write a new file (e.g., `layout-v2.html`). Only move to the next question when the current step is validated.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Unload when returning to terminal** — when the next step doesn't need the browser (e.g., a clarifying question, a tradeoff discussion), push a waiting screen to clear the stale content:
|
||||
|
||||
```html
|
||||
<!-- filename: waiting.html (or waiting-2.html, etc.) -->
|
||||
<div style="display:flex;align-items:center;justify-content:center;min-height:60vh">
|
||||
<p class="subtitle">Continuing in terminal...</p>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This prevents the user from staring at a resolved choice while the conversation has moved on. When the next visual question comes up, push a new content file as usual.
|
||||
|
||||
6. Repeat until done.
|
||||
|
||||
## Writing Content Fragments
|
||||
|
||||
Write just the content that goes inside the page. The server wraps it in the frame template automatically (header, theme CSS, connection status, and all interactive infrastructure).
|
||||
|
||||
**Minimal example:**
|
||||
|
||||
```html
|
||||
<h2>Which layout works better?</h2>
|
||||
<p class="subtitle">Consider readability and visual hierarchy</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<div class="options">
|
||||
<div class="option" data-choice="a" onclick="toggleSelect(this)">
|
||||
<div class="letter">A</div>
|
||||
<div class="content">
|
||||
<h3>Single Column</h3>
|
||||
<p>Clean, focused reading experience</p>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
<div class="option" data-choice="b" onclick="toggleSelect(this)">
|
||||
<div class="letter">B</div>
|
||||
<div class="content">
|
||||
<h3>Two Column</h3>
|
||||
<p>Sidebar navigation with main content</p>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
That's it. No `<html>`, no CSS, no `<script>` tags needed. The server provides all of that.
|
||||
|
||||
## CSS Classes Available
|
||||
|
||||
The frame template provides these CSS classes for your content:
|
||||
|
||||
### Options (A/B/C choices)
|
||||
|
||||
```html
|
||||
<div class="options">
|
||||
<div class="option" data-choice="a" onclick="toggleSelect(this)">
|
||||
<div class="letter">A</div>
|
||||
<div class="content">
|
||||
<h3>Title</h3>
|
||||
<p>Description</p>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Multi-select:** Add `data-multiselect` to the container to let users select multiple options. Each click toggles the item's selected styling.
|
||||
|
||||
```html
|
||||
<div class="options" data-multiselect>
|
||||
<!-- same option markup — users can select/deselect multiple -->
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Cards (visual designs)
|
||||
|
||||
```html
|
||||
<div class="cards">
|
||||
<div class="card" data-choice="design1" onclick="toggleSelect(this)">
|
||||
<div class="card-image"><!-- mockup content --></div>
|
||||
<div class="card-body">
|
||||
<h3>Name</h3>
|
||||
<p>Description</p>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Mockup container
|
||||
|
||||
```html
|
||||
<div class="mockup">
|
||||
<div class="mockup-header">Preview: Dashboard Layout</div>
|
||||
<div class="mockup-body"><!-- your mockup HTML --></div>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Split view (side-by-side)
|
||||
|
||||
```html
|
||||
<div class="split">
|
||||
<div class="mockup"><!-- left --></div>
|
||||
<div class="mockup"><!-- right --></div>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Pros/Cons
|
||||
|
||||
```html
|
||||
<div class="pros-cons">
|
||||
<div class="pros"><h4>Pros</h4><ul><li>Benefit</li></ul></div>
|
||||
<div class="cons"><h4>Cons</h4><ul><li>Drawback</li></ul></div>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Mock elements (wireframe building blocks)
|
||||
|
||||
```html
|
||||
<div class="mock-nav">Logo | Home | About | Contact</div>
|
||||
<div style="display: flex;">
|
||||
<div class="mock-sidebar">Navigation</div>
|
||||
<div class="mock-content">Main content area</div>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
<button class="mock-button">Action Button</button>
|
||||
<input class="mock-input" placeholder="Input field">
|
||||
<div class="placeholder">Placeholder area</div>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Typography and sections
|
||||
|
||||
- `h2` — page title
|
||||
- `h3` — section heading
|
||||
- `.subtitle` — secondary text below title
|
||||
- `.section` — content block with bottom margin
|
||||
- `.label` — small uppercase label text
|
||||
|
||||
## Browser Events Format
|
||||
|
||||
When the user clicks options in the browser, their interactions are recorded to `$STATE_DIR/events` (one JSON object per line). The file is cleared automatically when you push a new screen.
|
||||
|
||||
```jsonl
|
||||
{"type":"click","choice":"a","text":"Option A - Simple Layout","timestamp":1706000101}
|
||||
{"type":"click","choice":"c","text":"Option C - Complex Grid","timestamp":1706000108}
|
||||
{"type":"click","choice":"b","text":"Option B - Hybrid","timestamp":1706000115}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
The full event stream shows the user's exploration path — they may click multiple options before settling. The last `choice` event is typically the final selection, but the pattern of clicks can reveal hesitation or preferences worth asking about.
|
||||
|
||||
If `$STATE_DIR/events` doesn't exist, the user didn't interact with the browser — use only their terminal text.
|
||||
|
||||
## Design Tips
|
||||
|
||||
- **Scale fidelity to the question** — wireframes for layout, polish for polish questions
|
||||
- **Explain the question on each page** — "Which layout feels more professional?" not just "Pick one"
|
||||
- **Iterate before advancing** — if feedback changes current screen, write a new version
|
||||
- **2-4 options max** per screen
|
||||
- **Use real content when it matters** — for a photography portfolio, use actual images (Unsplash). Placeholder content obscures design issues.
|
||||
- **Keep mockups simple** — focus on layout and structure, not pixel-perfect design
|
||||
|
||||
## File Naming
|
||||
|
||||
- Use semantic names: `platform.html`, `visual-style.html`, `layout.html`
|
||||
- Never reuse filenames — each screen must be a new file
|
||||
- For iterations: append version suffix like `layout-v2.html`, `layout-v3.html`
|
||||
- Server serves newest file by modification time
|
||||
|
||||
## Cleaning Up
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
scripts/stop-server.sh $SESSION_DIR
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If the session used `--project-dir`, mockup files persist in `.superpowers/brainstorm/` for later reference. Only `/tmp` sessions get deleted on stop.
|
||||
|
||||
## Reference
|
||||
|
||||
- Frame template (CSS reference): `scripts/frame-template.html`
|
||||
- Helper script (client-side): `scripts/helper.js`
|
||||
185
.claude/skills/dispatching-parallel-agents/SKILL.md
Normal file
185
.claude/skills/dispatching-parallel-agents/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,185 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: dispatching-parallel-agents
|
||||
description: Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Dispatching Parallel Agents
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
You delegate tasks to specialized agents with isolated context. By precisely crafting their instructions and context, you ensure they stay focused and succeed at their task. They should never inherit your session's context or history — you construct exactly what they need. This also preserves your own context for coordination work.
|
||||
|
||||
When you have multiple unrelated failures (different test files, different subsystems, different bugs), investigating them sequentially wastes time. Each investigation is independent and can happen in parallel.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core principle:** Dispatch one agent per independent problem domain. Let them work concurrently.
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
```dot
|
||||
digraph when_to_use {
|
||||
"Multiple failures?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Are they independent?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Single agent investigates all" [shape=box];
|
||||
"One agent per problem domain" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Can they work in parallel?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Sequential agents" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Parallel dispatch" [shape=box];
|
||||
|
||||
"Multiple failures?" -> "Are they independent?" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Are they independent?" -> "Single agent investigates all" [label="no - related"];
|
||||
"Are they independent?" -> "Can they work in parallel?" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Can they work in parallel?" -> "Parallel dispatch" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Can they work in parallel?" -> "Sequential agents" [label="no - shared state"];
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Use when:**
|
||||
- 3+ test files failing with different root causes
|
||||
- Multiple subsystems broken independently
|
||||
- Each problem can be understood without context from others
|
||||
- No shared state between investigations
|
||||
|
||||
**Don't use when:**
|
||||
- Failures are related (fix one might fix others)
|
||||
- Need to understand full system state
|
||||
- Agents would interfere with each other
|
||||
|
||||
## The Pattern
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Identify Independent Domains
|
||||
|
||||
Group failures by what's broken:
|
||||
- File A tests: Tool approval flow
|
||||
- File B tests: Batch completion behavior
|
||||
- File C tests: Abort functionality
|
||||
|
||||
Each domain is independent - fixing tool approval doesn't affect abort tests.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Create Focused Agent Tasks
|
||||
|
||||
Each agent gets:
|
||||
- **Specific scope:** One test file or subsystem
|
||||
- **Clear goal:** Make these tests pass
|
||||
- **Constraints:** Don't change other code
|
||||
- **Expected output:** Summary of what you found and fixed
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Dispatch in Parallel
|
||||
|
||||
Issue all three subagent dispatches in the same response — they run in parallel:
|
||||
|
||||
```text
|
||||
Subagent (general-purpose): "Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts failures"
|
||||
Subagent (general-purpose): "Fix batch-completion-behavior.test.ts failures"
|
||||
Subagent (general-purpose): "Fix tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts failures"
|
||||
# All three run concurrently.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Multiple dispatch calls in one response = parallel execution. One per response = sequential.
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Review and Integrate
|
||||
|
||||
When agents return:
|
||||
- Read each summary
|
||||
- Verify fixes don't conflict
|
||||
- Run full test suite
|
||||
- Integrate all changes
|
||||
|
||||
## Agent Prompt Structure
|
||||
|
||||
Good agent prompts are:
|
||||
1. **Focused** - One clear problem domain
|
||||
2. **Self-contained** - All context needed to understand the problem
|
||||
3. **Specific about output** - What should the agent return?
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
Fix the 3 failing tests in src/agents/agent-tool-abort.test.ts:
|
||||
|
||||
1. "should abort tool with partial output capture" - expects 'interrupted at' in message
|
||||
2. "should handle mixed completed and aborted tools" - fast tool aborted instead of completed
|
||||
3. "should properly track pendingToolCount" - expects 3 results but gets 0
|
||||
|
||||
These are timing/race condition issues. Your task:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Read the test file and understand what each test verifies
|
||||
2. Identify root cause - timing issues or actual bugs?
|
||||
3. Fix by:
|
||||
- Replacing arbitrary timeouts with event-based waiting
|
||||
- Fixing bugs in abort implementation if found
|
||||
- Adjusting test expectations if testing changed behavior
|
||||
|
||||
Do NOT just increase timeouts - find the real issue.
|
||||
|
||||
Return: Summary of what you found and what you fixed.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Mistakes
|
||||
|
||||
**❌ Too broad:** "Fix all the tests" - agent gets lost
|
||||
**✅ Specific:** "Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts" - focused scope
|
||||
|
||||
**❌ No context:** "Fix the race condition" - agent doesn't know where
|
||||
**✅ Context:** Paste the error messages and test names
|
||||
|
||||
**❌ No constraints:** Agent might refactor everything
|
||||
**✅ Constraints:** "Do NOT change production code" or "Fix tests only"
|
||||
|
||||
**❌ Vague output:** "Fix it" - you don't know what changed
|
||||
**✅ Specific:** "Return summary of root cause and changes"
|
||||
|
||||
## When NOT to Use
|
||||
|
||||
**Related failures:** Fixing one might fix others - investigate together first
|
||||
**Need full context:** Understanding requires seeing entire system
|
||||
**Exploratory debugging:** You don't know what's broken yet
|
||||
**Shared state:** Agents would interfere (editing same files, using same resources)
|
||||
|
||||
## Real Example from Session
|
||||
|
||||
**Scenario:** 6 test failures across 3 files after major refactoring
|
||||
|
||||
**Failures:**
|
||||
- agent-tool-abort.test.ts: 3 failures (timing issues)
|
||||
- batch-completion-behavior.test.ts: 2 failures (tools not executing)
|
||||
- tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts: 1 failure (execution count = 0)
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision:** Independent domains - abort logic separate from batch completion separate from race conditions
|
||||
|
||||
**Dispatch:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Agent 1 → Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts
|
||||
Agent 2 → Fix batch-completion-behavior.test.ts
|
||||
Agent 3 → Fix tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Results:**
|
||||
- Agent 1: Replaced timeouts with event-based waiting
|
||||
- Agent 2: Fixed event structure bug (threadId in wrong place)
|
||||
- Agent 3: Added wait for async tool execution to complete
|
||||
|
||||
**Integration:** All fixes independent, no conflicts, full suite green
|
||||
|
||||
**Time saved:** 3 problems solved in parallel vs sequentially
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Benefits
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Parallelization** - Multiple investigations happen simultaneously
|
||||
2. **Focus** - Each agent has narrow scope, less context to track
|
||||
3. **Independence** - Agents don't interfere with each other
|
||||
4. **Speed** - 3 problems solved in time of 1
|
||||
|
||||
## Verification
|
||||
|
||||
After agents return:
|
||||
1. **Review each summary** - Understand what changed
|
||||
2. **Check for conflicts** - Did agents edit same code?
|
||||
3. **Run full suite** - Verify all fixes work together
|
||||
4. **Spot check** - Agents can make systematic errors
|
||||
|
||||
## Real-World Impact
|
||||
|
||||
From debugging session (2025-10-03):
|
||||
- 6 failures across 3 files
|
||||
- 3 agents dispatched in parallel
|
||||
- All investigations completed concurrently
|
||||
- All fixes integrated successfully
|
||||
- Zero conflicts between agent changes
|
||||
70
.claude/skills/executing-plans/SKILL.md
Normal file
70
.claude/skills/executing-plans/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: executing-plans
|
||||
description: Use when you have a written implementation plan to execute in a separate session with review checkpoints
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Executing Plans
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Load plan, review critically, execute all tasks, report when complete.
|
||||
|
||||
**Announce at start:** "I'm using the executing-plans skill to implement this plan."
|
||||
|
||||
**Note:** Tell your human partner that Superpowers works much better with access to subagents. The quality of its work will be significantly higher if run on a platform with subagent support (Claude Code, Codex CLI, Codex App, and Copilot CLI all qualify; see the per-platform tool refs in `../using-superpowers/references/`). If subagents are available, use superpowers:subagent-driven-development instead of this skill.
|
||||
|
||||
## The Process
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 1: Load and Review Plan
|
||||
1. Read plan file
|
||||
2. Review critically - identify any questions or concerns about the plan
|
||||
3. If concerns: Raise them with your human partner before starting
|
||||
4. If no concerns: Create todos for the plan items and proceed
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 2: Execute Tasks
|
||||
|
||||
For each task:
|
||||
1. Mark as in_progress
|
||||
2. Follow each step exactly (plan has bite-sized steps)
|
||||
3. Run verifications as specified
|
||||
4. Mark as completed
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 3: Complete Development
|
||||
|
||||
After all tasks complete and verified:
|
||||
- Announce: "I'm using the finishing-a-development-branch skill to complete this work."
|
||||
- **REQUIRED SUB-SKILL:** Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch
|
||||
- Follow that skill to verify tests, present options, execute choice
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Stop and Ask for Help
|
||||
|
||||
**STOP executing immediately when:**
|
||||
- Hit a blocker (missing dependency, test fails, instruction unclear)
|
||||
- Plan has critical gaps preventing starting
|
||||
- You don't understand an instruction
|
||||
- Verification fails repeatedly
|
||||
|
||||
**Ask for clarification rather than guessing.**
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Revisit Earlier Steps
|
||||
|
||||
**Return to Review (Step 1) when:**
|
||||
- Partner updates the plan based on your feedback
|
||||
- Fundamental approach needs rethinking
|
||||
|
||||
**Don't force through blockers** - stop and ask.
|
||||
|
||||
## Remember
|
||||
- Review plan critically first
|
||||
- Follow plan steps exactly
|
||||
- Don't skip verifications
|
||||
- Reference skills when plan says to
|
||||
- Stop when blocked, don't guess
|
||||
- Never start implementation on main/master branch without explicit user consent
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration
|
||||
|
||||
**Required workflow skills:**
|
||||
- **superpowers:using-git-worktrees** - Ensures isolated workspace (creates one or verifies existing)
|
||||
- **superpowers:writing-plans** - Creates the plan this skill executes
|
||||
- **superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch** - Complete development after all tasks
|
||||
241
.claude/skills/finishing-a-development-branch/SKILL.md
Normal file
241
.claude/skills/finishing-a-development-branch/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,241 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: finishing-a-development-branch
|
||||
description: Use when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and you need to decide how to integrate the work - guides completion of development work by presenting structured options for merge, PR, or cleanup
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Finishing a Development Branch
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Guide completion of development work by presenting clear options and handling chosen workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core principle:** Verify tests → Detect environment → Present options → Execute choice → Clean up.
|
||||
|
||||
**Announce at start:** "I'm using the finishing-a-development-branch skill to complete this work."
|
||||
|
||||
## The Process
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 1: Verify Tests
|
||||
|
||||
**Before presenting options, verify tests pass:**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Run project's test suite
|
||||
npm test / cargo test / pytest / go test ./...
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**If tests fail:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Tests failing (<N> failures). Must fix before completing:
|
||||
|
||||
[Show failures]
|
||||
|
||||
Cannot proceed with merge/PR until tests pass.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Stop. Don't proceed to Step 2.
|
||||
|
||||
**If tests pass:** Continue to Step 2.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 2: Detect Environment
|
||||
|
||||
**Determine workspace state before presenting options:**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
GIT_DIR=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
|
||||
GIT_COMMON=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This determines which menu to show and how cleanup works:
|
||||
|
||||
| State | Menu | Cleanup |
|
||||
|-------|------|---------|
|
||||
| `GIT_DIR == GIT_COMMON` (normal repo) | Standard 4 options | No worktree to clean up |
|
||||
| `GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON`, named branch | Standard 4 options | Provenance-based (see Step 6) |
|
||||
| `GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON`, detached HEAD | Reduced 3 options (no merge) | No cleanup (externally managed) |
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 3: Determine Base Branch
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Try common base branches
|
||||
git merge-base HEAD main 2>/dev/null || git merge-base HEAD master 2>/dev/null
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Or ask: "This branch split from main - is that correct?"
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 4: Present Options
|
||||
|
||||
**Normal repo and named-branch worktree — present exactly these 4 options:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Implementation complete. What would you like to do?
|
||||
|
||||
1. Merge back to <base-branch> locally
|
||||
2. Push and create a Pull Request
|
||||
3. Keep the branch as-is (I'll handle it later)
|
||||
4. Discard this work
|
||||
|
||||
Which option?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Detached HEAD — present exactly these 3 options:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Implementation complete. You're on a detached HEAD (externally managed workspace).
|
||||
|
||||
1. Push as new branch and create a Pull Request
|
||||
2. Keep as-is (I'll handle it later)
|
||||
3. Discard this work
|
||||
|
||||
Which option?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Don't add explanation** - keep options concise.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 5: Execute Choice
|
||||
|
||||
#### Option 1: Merge Locally
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Get main repo root for CWD safety
|
||||
MAIN_ROOT=$(git -C "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)/.." rev-parse --show-toplevel)
|
||||
cd "$MAIN_ROOT"
|
||||
|
||||
# Merge first — verify success before removing anything
|
||||
git checkout <base-branch>
|
||||
git pull
|
||||
git merge <feature-branch>
|
||||
|
||||
# Verify tests on merged result
|
||||
<test command>
|
||||
|
||||
# Only after merge succeeds: cleanup worktree (Step 6), then delete branch
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Then: Cleanup worktree (Step 6), then delete branch:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
git branch -d <feature-branch>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
#### Option 2: Push and Create PR
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Push branch
|
||||
git push -u origin <feature-branch>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Do NOT clean up worktree** — user needs it alive to iterate on PR feedback.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Option 3: Keep As-Is
|
||||
|
||||
Report: "Keeping branch <name>. Worktree preserved at <path>."
|
||||
|
||||
**Don't cleanup worktree.**
|
||||
|
||||
#### Option 4: Discard
|
||||
|
||||
**Confirm first:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
This will permanently delete:
|
||||
- Branch <name>
|
||||
- All commits: <commit-list>
|
||||
- Worktree at <path>
|
||||
|
||||
Type 'discard' to confirm.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Wait for exact confirmation.
|
||||
|
||||
If confirmed:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
MAIN_ROOT=$(git -C "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)/.." rev-parse --show-toplevel)
|
||||
cd "$MAIN_ROOT"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Then: Cleanup worktree (Step 6), then force-delete branch:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
git branch -D <feature-branch>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 6: Cleanup Workspace
|
||||
|
||||
**Only runs for Options 1 and 4.** Options 2 and 3 always preserve the worktree.
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
GIT_DIR=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
|
||||
GIT_COMMON=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
|
||||
WORKTREE_PATH=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**If `GIT_DIR == GIT_COMMON`:** Normal repo, no worktree to clean up. Done.
|
||||
|
||||
**If worktree path is under `.worktrees/` or `worktrees/`:** Superpowers created this worktree — we own cleanup.
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
MAIN_ROOT=$(git -C "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)/.." rev-parse --show-toplevel)
|
||||
cd "$MAIN_ROOT"
|
||||
git worktree remove "$WORKTREE_PATH"
|
||||
git worktree prune # Self-healing: clean up any stale registrations
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Otherwise:** The host environment (harness) owns this workspace. Do NOT remove it. If your platform provides a workspace-exit tool, use it. Otherwise, leave the workspace in place.
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Reference
|
||||
|
||||
| Option | Merge | Push | Keep Worktree | Cleanup Branch |
|
||||
|--------|-------|------|---------------|----------------|
|
||||
| 1. Merge locally | yes | - | - | yes |
|
||||
| 2. Create PR | - | yes | yes | - |
|
||||
| 3. Keep as-is | - | - | yes | - |
|
||||
| 4. Discard | - | - | - | yes (force) |
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Mistakes
|
||||
|
||||
**Skipping test verification**
|
||||
- **Problem:** Merge broken code, create failing PR
|
||||
- **Fix:** Always verify tests before offering options
|
||||
|
||||
**Open-ended questions**
|
||||
- **Problem:** "What should I do next?" is ambiguous
|
||||
- **Fix:** Present exactly 4 structured options (or 3 for detached HEAD)
|
||||
|
||||
**Cleaning up worktree for Option 2**
|
||||
- **Problem:** Remove worktree user needs for PR iteration
|
||||
- **Fix:** Only cleanup for Options 1 and 4
|
||||
|
||||
**Deleting branch before removing worktree**
|
||||
- **Problem:** `git branch -d` fails because worktree still references the branch
|
||||
- **Fix:** Merge first, remove worktree, then delete branch
|
||||
|
||||
**Running git worktree remove from inside the worktree**
|
||||
- **Problem:** Command fails silently when CWD is inside the worktree being removed
|
||||
- **Fix:** Always `cd` to main repo root before `git worktree remove`
|
||||
|
||||
**Cleaning up harness-owned worktrees**
|
||||
- **Problem:** Removing a worktree the harness created causes phantom state
|
||||
- **Fix:** Only clean up worktrees under `.worktrees/` or `worktrees/`
|
||||
|
||||
**No confirmation for discard**
|
||||
- **Problem:** Accidentally delete work
|
||||
- **Fix:** Require typed "discard" confirmation
|
||||
|
||||
## Red Flags
|
||||
|
||||
**Never:**
|
||||
- Proceed with failing tests
|
||||
- Merge without verifying tests on result
|
||||
- Delete work without confirmation
|
||||
- Force-push without explicit request
|
||||
- Remove a worktree before confirming merge success
|
||||
- Clean up worktrees you didn't create (provenance check)
|
||||
- Run `git worktree remove` from inside the worktree
|
||||
|
||||
**Always:**
|
||||
- Verify tests before offering options
|
||||
- Detect environment before presenting menu
|
||||
- Present exactly 4 options (or 3 for detached HEAD)
|
||||
- Get typed confirmation for Option 4
|
||||
- Clean up worktree for Options 1 & 4 only
|
||||
- `cd` to main repo root before worktree removal
|
||||
- Run `git worktree prune` after removal
|
||||
159
.claude/skills/openspec-apply-change/SKILL.md
Normal file
159
.claude/skills/openspec-apply-change/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,159 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-apply-change
|
||||
description: Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change. Use when the user wants to start implementing, continue implementation, or work through tasks.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.5.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change.
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Select the change**
|
||||
|
||||
If a name is provided, use it. Otherwise:
|
||||
- Infer from conversation context if the user mentioned a change
|
||||
- Auto-select if only one active change exists
|
||||
- If ambiguous, run `openspec list --json` to get available changes and use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select
|
||||
|
||||
Always announce: "Using change: <name>" and how to override (e.g., `/opsx:apply <other>`).
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Check status to understand the schema**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Parse the JSON to understand:
|
||||
- `schemaName`: The workflow being used (e.g., "spec-driven")
|
||||
- `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, and `actionContext`: planning scope and edit constraints
|
||||
- Which artifact contains the tasks (typically "tasks" for spec-driven, check status for others)
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Get apply instructions**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions apply --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This returns:
|
||||
- `contextFiles`: artifact ID -> array of concrete file paths (varies by schema - could be proposal/specs/design/tasks or spec/tests/implementation/docs)
|
||||
- Progress (total, complete, remaining)
|
||||
- Task list with status
|
||||
- Dynamic instruction based on current state
|
||||
|
||||
**Handle states:**
|
||||
- If `state: "blocked"` (missing artifacts): show message, suggest using openspec-continue-change
|
||||
- If `state: "all_done"`: congratulate, suggest archive
|
||||
- Otherwise: proceed to implementation
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Read context files**
|
||||
|
||||
Read every file path listed under `contextFiles` from the apply instructions output.
|
||||
The files depend on the schema being used:
|
||||
- **spec-driven**: proposal, specs, design, tasks
|
||||
- Other schemas: follow the contextFiles from CLI output
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Show current progress**
|
||||
|
||||
Display:
|
||||
- Schema being used
|
||||
- Progress: "N/M tasks complete"
|
||||
- Remaining tasks overview
|
||||
- Dynamic instruction from CLI
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Implement tasks (loop until done or blocked)**
|
||||
|
||||
For each pending task:
|
||||
- Show which task is being worked on
|
||||
- Make the code changes required
|
||||
- Keep changes minimal and focused
|
||||
- Mark task complete in the tasks file: `- [ ]` → `- [x]`
|
||||
- Continue to next task
|
||||
|
||||
**Pause if:**
|
||||
- Task is unclear → ask for clarification
|
||||
- Implementation reveals a design issue → suggest updating artifacts
|
||||
- Error or blocker encountered → report and wait for guidance
|
||||
- User interrupts
|
||||
|
||||
7. **On completion or pause, show status**
|
||||
|
||||
Display:
|
||||
- Tasks completed this session
|
||||
- Overall progress: "N/M tasks complete"
|
||||
- If all done: suggest archive
|
||||
- If paused: explain why and wait for guidance
|
||||
|
||||
**Output During Implementation**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Implementing: <change-name> (schema: <schema-name>)
|
||||
|
||||
Working on task 3/7: <task description>
|
||||
[...implementation happening...]
|
||||
✓ Task complete
|
||||
|
||||
Working on task 4/7: <task description>
|
||||
[...implementation happening...]
|
||||
✓ Task complete
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Completion**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Implementation Complete
|
||||
|
||||
**Change:** <change-name>
|
||||
**Schema:** <schema-name>
|
||||
**Progress:** 7/7 tasks complete ✓
|
||||
|
||||
### Completed This Session
|
||||
- [x] Task 1
|
||||
- [x] Task 2
|
||||
...
|
||||
|
||||
All tasks complete! Ready to archive this change.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Pause (Issue Encountered)**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Implementation Paused
|
||||
|
||||
**Change:** <change-name>
|
||||
**Schema:** <schema-name>
|
||||
**Progress:** 4/7 tasks complete
|
||||
|
||||
### Issue Encountered
|
||||
<description of the issue>
|
||||
|
||||
**Options:**
|
||||
1. <option 1>
|
||||
2. <option 2>
|
||||
3. Other approach
|
||||
|
||||
What would you like to do?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Keep going through tasks until done or blocked
|
||||
- Always read context files before starting (from the apply instructions output)
|
||||
- If task is ambiguous, pause and ask before implementing
|
||||
- If implementation reveals issues, pause and suggest artifact updates
|
||||
- Keep code changes minimal and scoped to each task
|
||||
- Update task checkbox immediately after completing each task
|
||||
- Pause on errors, blockers, or unclear requirements - don't guess
|
||||
- Use contextFiles from CLI output, don't assume specific file names
|
||||
|
||||
**Fluid Workflow Integration**
|
||||
|
||||
This skill supports the "actions on a change" model:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Can be invoked anytime**: Before all artifacts are done (if tasks exist), after partial implementation, interleaved with other actions
|
||||
- **Allows artifact updates**: If implementation reveals design issues, suggest updating artifacts - not phase-locked, work fluidly
|
||||
117
.claude/skills/openspec-archive-change/SKILL.md
Normal file
117
.claude/skills/openspec-archive-change/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,117 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-archive-change
|
||||
description: Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow. Use when the user wants to finalize and archive a change after implementation is complete.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.5.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no change name provided, prompt for selection**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec list --json` to get available changes. Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select.
|
||||
|
||||
Show only active changes (not already archived).
|
||||
Include the schema used for each change if available.
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Check artifact completion status**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json` to check artifact completion.
|
||||
|
||||
Parse the JSON to understand:
|
||||
- `schemaName`: The workflow being used
|
||||
- `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`: path and scope context
|
||||
- `artifacts`: List of artifacts with their status (`done` or other)
|
||||
|
||||
**If any artifacts are not `done`:**
|
||||
- Display warning listing incomplete artifacts
|
||||
- Use **AskUserQuestion tool** to confirm user wants to proceed
|
||||
- Proceed if user confirms
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Check task completion status**
|
||||
|
||||
Read the tasks file (typically `tasks.md`) to check for incomplete tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
Count tasks marked with `- [ ]` (incomplete) vs `- [x]` (complete).
|
||||
|
||||
**If incomplete tasks found:**
|
||||
- Display warning showing count of incomplete tasks
|
||||
- Use **AskUserQuestion tool** to confirm user wants to proceed
|
||||
- Proceed if user confirms
|
||||
|
||||
**If no tasks file exists:** Proceed without task-related warning.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Assess delta spec sync state**
|
||||
|
||||
Use `artifactPaths.specs.existingOutputPaths` from status JSON to check for delta specs. If none exist, proceed without sync prompt.
|
||||
|
||||
**If delta specs exist:**
|
||||
- Compare each delta spec with its corresponding main spec at `openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md`
|
||||
- Determine what changes would be applied (adds, modifications, removals, renames)
|
||||
- Show a combined summary before prompting
|
||||
|
||||
**Prompt options:**
|
||||
- If changes needed: "Sync now (recommended)", "Archive without syncing"
|
||||
- If already synced: "Archive now", "Sync anyway", "Cancel"
|
||||
|
||||
If user chooses sync, use Task tool (subagent_type: "general-purpose", prompt: "Use Skill tool to invoke openspec-sync-specs for change '<name>'. Delta spec analysis: <include the analyzed delta spec summary>"). Proceed to archive regardless of choice.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Perform the archive**
|
||||
|
||||
Create an `archive` directory under `planningHome.changesDir` if it doesn't exist:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
mkdir -p "<planningHome.changesDir>/archive"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Generate target name using current date: `YYYY-MM-DD-<change-name>`
|
||||
|
||||
**Check if target already exists:**
|
||||
- If yes: Fail with error, suggest renaming existing archive or using different date
|
||||
- If no: Move `changeRoot` to the archive directory
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
mv "<changeRoot>" "<planningHome.changesDir>/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Display summary**
|
||||
|
||||
Show archive completion summary including:
|
||||
- Change name
|
||||
- Schema that was used
|
||||
- Archive location
|
||||
- Whether specs were synced (if applicable)
|
||||
- Note about any warnings (incomplete artifacts/tasks)
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Success**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Archive Complete
|
||||
|
||||
**Change:** <change-name>
|
||||
**Schema:** <schema-name>
|
||||
**Archived to:** the archive path derived from `planningHome.changesDir`/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>/
|
||||
**Specs:** ✓ Synced to main specs (or "No delta specs" or "Sync skipped")
|
||||
|
||||
All artifacts complete. All tasks complete.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Always prompt for change selection if not provided
|
||||
- Use artifact graph (openspec status --json) for completion checking
|
||||
- Don't block archive on warnings - just inform and confirm
|
||||
- Preserve .openspec.yaml when moving to archive (it moves with the directory)
|
||||
- Show clear summary of what happened
|
||||
- If sync is requested, use openspec-sync-specs approach (agent-driven)
|
||||
- If delta specs exist, always run the sync assessment and show the combined summary before prompting
|
||||
248
.claude/skills/openspec-bulk-archive-change/SKILL.md
Normal file
248
.claude/skills/openspec-bulk-archive-change/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,248 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-bulk-archive-change
|
||||
description: Archive multiple completed changes at once. Use when archiving several parallel changes.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.5.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Archive multiple completed changes in a single operation.
|
||||
|
||||
This skill allows you to batch-archive changes, handling spec conflicts intelligently by checking the codebase to determine what's actually implemented.
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: None required (prompts for selection)
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Get active changes**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec list --json` to get all active changes.
|
||||
|
||||
If no active changes exist, inform user and stop.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Prompt for change selection**
|
||||
|
||||
Use **AskUserQuestion tool** with multi-select to let user choose changes:
|
||||
- Show each change with its schema
|
||||
- Include an option for "All changes"
|
||||
- Allow any number of selections (1+ works, 2+ is the typical use case)
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT auto-select. Always let the user choose.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Batch validation - gather status for all selected changes**
|
||||
|
||||
For each selected change, collect:
|
||||
|
||||
a. **Artifact status** - Run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`
|
||||
- Parse `schemaName`, `artifacts`, `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`
|
||||
- Note which artifacts are `done` vs other states
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Task completion** - Read `artifactPaths.tasks.existingOutputPaths` from status JSON
|
||||
- Count `- [ ]` (incomplete) vs `- [x]` (complete)
|
||||
- If no tasks file exists, note as "No tasks"
|
||||
|
||||
c. **Delta specs** - Check `artifactPaths.specs.existingOutputPaths` from status JSON
|
||||
- List which capability specs exist
|
||||
- For each, extract requirement names (lines matching `### Requirement: <name>`)
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Detect spec conflicts**
|
||||
|
||||
Build a map of `capability -> [changes that touch it]`:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
auth -> [change-a, change-b] <- CONFLICT (2+ changes)
|
||||
api -> [change-c] <- OK (only 1 change)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
A conflict exists when 2+ selected changes have delta specs for the same capability.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Resolve conflicts agentically**
|
||||
|
||||
**For each conflict**, investigate the codebase:
|
||||
|
||||
a. **Read the delta specs** from each conflicting change to understand what each claims to add/modify
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Search the codebase** for implementation evidence:
|
||||
- Look for code implementing requirements from each delta spec
|
||||
- Check for related files, functions, or tests
|
||||
|
||||
c. **Determine resolution**:
|
||||
- If only one change is actually implemented -> sync that one's specs
|
||||
- If both implemented -> apply in chronological order (older first, newer overwrites)
|
||||
- If neither implemented -> skip spec sync, warn user
|
||||
|
||||
d. **Record resolution** for each conflict:
|
||||
- Which change's specs to apply
|
||||
- In what order (if both)
|
||||
- Rationale (what was found in codebase)
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Show consolidated status table**
|
||||
|
||||
Display a table summarizing all changes:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
| Change | Artifacts | Tasks | Specs | Conflicts | Status |
|
||||
|---------------------|-----------|-------|---------|-----------|--------|
|
||||
| schema-management | Done | 5/5 | 2 delta | None | Ready |
|
||||
| project-config | Done | 3/3 | 1 delta | None | Ready |
|
||||
| add-oauth | Done | 4/4 | 1 delta | auth (!) | Ready* |
|
||||
| add-verify-skill | 1 left | 2/5 | None | None | Warn |
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
For conflicts, show the resolution:
|
||||
```
|
||||
* Conflict resolution:
|
||||
- auth spec: Will apply add-oauth then add-jwt (both implemented, chronological order)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
For incomplete changes, show warnings:
|
||||
```
|
||||
Warnings:
|
||||
- add-verify-skill: 1 incomplete artifact, 3 incomplete tasks
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
7. **Confirm batch operation**
|
||||
|
||||
Use **AskUserQuestion tool** with a single confirmation:
|
||||
|
||||
- "Archive N changes?" with options based on status
|
||||
- Options might include:
|
||||
- "Archive all N changes"
|
||||
- "Archive only N ready changes (skip incomplete)"
|
||||
- "Cancel"
|
||||
|
||||
If there are incomplete changes, make clear they'll be archived with warnings.
|
||||
|
||||
8. **Execute archive for each confirmed change**
|
||||
|
||||
Process changes in the determined order (respecting conflict resolution):
|
||||
|
||||
a. **Sync specs** if delta specs exist:
|
||||
- Use the openspec-sync-specs approach (agent-driven intelligent merge)
|
||||
- For conflicts, apply in resolved order
|
||||
- Track if sync was done
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Perform the archive**:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
mkdir -p "<planningHome.changesDir>/archive"
|
||||
mv "<changeRoot>" "<planningHome.changesDir>/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
c. **Track outcome** for each change:
|
||||
- Success: archived successfully
|
||||
- Failed: error during archive (record error)
|
||||
- Skipped: user chose not to archive (if applicable)
|
||||
|
||||
9. **Display summary**
|
||||
|
||||
Show final results:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Bulk Archive Complete
|
||||
|
||||
Archived 3 changes:
|
||||
- schema-management-cli -> archive/2026-01-19-schema-management-cli/
|
||||
- project-config -> archive/2026-01-19-project-config/
|
||||
- add-oauth -> archive/2026-01-19-add-oauth/
|
||||
|
||||
Skipped 1 change:
|
||||
- add-verify-skill (user chose not to archive incomplete)
|
||||
|
||||
Spec sync summary:
|
||||
- 4 delta specs synced to main specs
|
||||
- 1 conflict resolved (auth: applied both in chronological order)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If any failures:
|
||||
```
|
||||
Failed 1 change:
|
||||
- some-change: Archive directory already exists
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Conflict Resolution Examples**
|
||||
|
||||
Example 1: Only one implemented
|
||||
```
|
||||
Conflict: specs/auth/spec.md touched by [add-oauth, add-jwt]
|
||||
|
||||
Checking add-oauth:
|
||||
- Delta adds "OAuth Provider Integration" requirement
|
||||
- Searching codebase... found src/auth/oauth.ts implementing OAuth flow
|
||||
|
||||
Checking add-jwt:
|
||||
- Delta adds "JWT Token Handling" requirement
|
||||
- Searching codebase... no JWT implementation found
|
||||
|
||||
Resolution: Only add-oauth is implemented. Will sync add-oauth specs only.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Example 2: Both implemented
|
||||
```
|
||||
Conflict: specs/api/spec.md touched by [add-rest-api, add-graphql]
|
||||
|
||||
Checking add-rest-api (created 2026-01-10):
|
||||
- Delta adds "REST Endpoints" requirement
|
||||
- Searching codebase... found src/api/rest.ts
|
||||
|
||||
Checking add-graphql (created 2026-01-15):
|
||||
- Delta adds "GraphQL Schema" requirement
|
||||
- Searching codebase... found src/api/graphql.ts
|
||||
|
||||
Resolution: Both implemented. Will apply add-rest-api specs first,
|
||||
then add-graphql specs (chronological order, newer takes precedence).
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Success**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Bulk Archive Complete
|
||||
|
||||
Archived N changes:
|
||||
- <change-1> -> archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<change-1>/
|
||||
- <change-2> -> archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<change-2>/
|
||||
|
||||
Spec sync summary:
|
||||
- N delta specs synced to main specs
|
||||
- No conflicts (or: M conflicts resolved)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Partial Success**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Bulk Archive Complete (partial)
|
||||
|
||||
Archived N changes:
|
||||
- <change-1> -> archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<change-1>/
|
||||
|
||||
Skipped M changes:
|
||||
- <change-2> (user chose not to archive incomplete)
|
||||
|
||||
Failed K changes:
|
||||
- <change-3>: Archive directory already exists
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output When No Changes**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## No Changes to Archive
|
||||
|
||||
No active changes found. Create a new change to get started.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Allow any number of changes (1+ is fine, 2+ is the typical use case)
|
||||
- Always prompt for selection, never auto-select
|
||||
- Detect spec conflicts early and resolve by checking codebase
|
||||
- When both changes are implemented, apply specs in chronological order
|
||||
- Skip spec sync only when implementation is missing (warn user)
|
||||
- Show clear per-change status before confirming
|
||||
- Use single confirmation for entire batch
|
||||
- Track and report all outcomes (success/skip/fail)
|
||||
- Preserve .openspec.yaml when moving to archive
|
||||
- Archive directory target uses current date: YYYY-MM-DD-<name>
|
||||
- If archive target exists, fail that change but continue with others
|
||||
121
.claude/skills/openspec-continue-change/SKILL.md
Normal file
121
.claude/skills/openspec-continue-change/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,121 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-continue-change
|
||||
description: Continue working on an OpenSpec change by creating the next artifact. Use when the user wants to progress their change, create the next artifact, or continue their workflow.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.5.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Continue working on a change by creating the next artifact.
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no change name provided, prompt for selection**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec list --json` to get available changes sorted by most recently modified. Then use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select which change to work on.
|
||||
|
||||
Present the top 3-4 most recently modified changes as options, showing:
|
||||
- Change name
|
||||
- Schema (from `schema` field if present, otherwise "spec-driven")
|
||||
- Status (e.g., "0/5 tasks", "complete", "no tasks")
|
||||
- How recently it was modified (from `lastModified` field)
|
||||
|
||||
Mark the most recently modified change as "(Recommended)" since it's likely what the user wants to continue.
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Check current status**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Parse the JSON to understand current state. The response includes:
|
||||
- `schemaName`: The workflow schema being used (e.g., "spec-driven")
|
||||
- `artifacts`: Array of artifacts with their status ("done", "ready", "blocked")
|
||||
- `isComplete`: Boolean indicating if all artifacts are complete
|
||||
- `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`: path and scope context. Use these instead of assuming repo-local paths.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Act based on status**:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**If all artifacts are complete (`isComplete: true`)**:
|
||||
- Congratulate the user
|
||||
- Show final status including the schema used
|
||||
- Suggest: "All artifacts created! You can now implement this change or archive it."
|
||||
- STOP
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**If artifacts are ready to create** (status shows artifacts with `status: "ready"`):
|
||||
- Pick the FIRST artifact with `status: "ready"` from the status output
|
||||
- Get its instructions:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
- Parse the JSON. The key fields are:
|
||||
- `context`: Project background (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `rules`: Artifact-specific rules (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `template`: The structure to use for your output file
|
||||
- `instruction`: Schema-specific guidance
|
||||
- `resolvedOutputPath`: Resolved path or pattern to write the artifact
|
||||
- `dependencies`: Completed artifacts to read for context
|
||||
- **Create the artifact file**:
|
||||
- Read any completed dependency files for context
|
||||
- Use `template` as the structure - fill in its sections
|
||||
- Apply `context` and `rules` as constraints when writing - but do NOT copy them into the file
|
||||
- Write to the `resolvedOutputPath` specified in instructions. If it is a glob pattern, choose the concrete file path using the schema instruction and the change's context
|
||||
- Show what was created and what's now unlocked
|
||||
- STOP after creating ONE artifact
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**If no artifacts are ready (all blocked)**:
|
||||
- This shouldn't happen with a valid schema
|
||||
- Show status and suggest checking for issues
|
||||
|
||||
4. **After creating an artifact, show progress**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output**
|
||||
|
||||
After each invocation, show:
|
||||
- Which artifact was created
|
||||
- Schema workflow being used
|
||||
- Current progress (N/M complete)
|
||||
- What artifacts are now unlocked
|
||||
- Prompt: "Want to continue? Just ask me to continue or tell me what to do next."
|
||||
|
||||
**Artifact Creation Guidelines**
|
||||
|
||||
The artifact types and their purpose depend on the schema. Use the `instruction` field from the instructions output to understand what to create.
|
||||
|
||||
Common artifact patterns:
|
||||
|
||||
**spec-driven schema** (proposal → specs → design → tasks):
|
||||
- **proposal.md**: Ask user about the change if not clear. Fill in Why, What Changes, Capabilities, Impact.
|
||||
- The Capabilities section is critical - each capability listed will need a spec file.
|
||||
- **specs/<capability>/spec.md**: Create one spec per capability listed in the proposal's Capabilities section (use the capability name, not the change name).
|
||||
- **design.md**: Document technical decisions, architecture, and implementation approach.
|
||||
- **tasks.md**: Break down implementation into checkboxed tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
For other schemas, follow the `instruction` field from the CLI output.
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Create ONE artifact per invocation
|
||||
- Always read dependency artifacts before creating a new one
|
||||
- Never skip artifacts or create out of order
|
||||
- If context is unclear, ask the user before creating
|
||||
- Verify the artifact file exists after writing before marking progress
|
||||
- Use the schema's artifact sequence, don't assume specific artifact names
|
||||
- **IMPORTANT**: `context` and `rules` are constraints for YOU, not content for the file
|
||||
- Do NOT copy `<context>`, `<rules>`, `<project_context>` blocks into the artifact
|
||||
- These guide what you write, but should never appear in the output
|
||||
289
.claude/skills/openspec-explore/SKILL.md
Normal file
289
.claude/skills/openspec-explore/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,289 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-explore
|
||||
description: Enter explore mode - a thinking partner for exploring ideas, investigating problems, and clarifying requirements. Use when the user wants to think through something before or during a change.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.5.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Enter explore mode. Think deeply. Visualize freely. Follow the conversation wherever it goes.
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT: Explore mode is for thinking, not implementing.** You may read files, search code, and investigate the codebase, but you must NEVER write code or implement features. If the user asks you to implement something, remind them to exit explore mode first and create a change proposal. You MAY create OpenSpec artifacts (proposals, designs, specs) if the user asks—that's capturing thinking, not implementing.
|
||||
|
||||
**This is a stance, not a workflow.** There are no fixed steps, no required sequence, no mandatory outputs. You're a thinking partner helping the user explore.
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## The Stance
|
||||
|
||||
- **Curious, not prescriptive** - Ask questions that emerge naturally, don't follow a script
|
||||
- **Open threads, not interrogations** - Surface multiple interesting directions and let the user follow what resonates. Don't funnel them through a single path of questions.
|
||||
- **Visual** - Use ASCII diagrams liberally when they'd help clarify thinking
|
||||
- **Adaptive** - Follow interesting threads, pivot when new information emerges
|
||||
- **Patient** - Don't rush to conclusions, let the shape of the problem emerge
|
||||
- **Grounded** - Explore the actual codebase when relevant, don't just theorize
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What You Might Do
|
||||
|
||||
Depending on what the user brings, you might:
|
||||
|
||||
**Explore the problem space**
|
||||
- Ask clarifying questions that emerge from what they said
|
||||
- Challenge assumptions
|
||||
- Reframe the problem
|
||||
- Find analogies
|
||||
|
||||
**Investigate the codebase**
|
||||
- Map existing architecture relevant to the discussion
|
||||
- Find integration points
|
||||
- Identify patterns already in use
|
||||
- Surface hidden complexity
|
||||
|
||||
**Compare options**
|
||||
- Brainstorm multiple approaches
|
||||
- Build comparison tables
|
||||
- Sketch tradeoffs
|
||||
- Recommend a path (if asked)
|
||||
|
||||
**Visualize**
|
||||
```
|
||||
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||||
│ Use ASCII diagrams liberally │
|
||||
├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
|
||||
│ │
|
||||
│ ┌────────┐ ┌────────┐ │
|
||||
│ │ State │────────▶│ State │ │
|
||||
│ │ A │ │ B │ │
|
||||
│ └────────┘ └────────┘ │
|
||||
│ │
|
||||
│ System diagrams, state machines, │
|
||||
│ data flows, architecture sketches, │
|
||||
│ dependency graphs, comparison tables │
|
||||
│ │
|
||||
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Surface risks and unknowns**
|
||||
- Identify what could go wrong
|
||||
- Find gaps in understanding
|
||||
- Suggest spikes or investigations
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## OpenSpec Awareness
|
||||
|
||||
You have full context of the OpenSpec system. Use it naturally, don't force it.
|
||||
|
||||
### Check for context
|
||||
|
||||
At the start, quickly check what exists:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec list --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This tells you:
|
||||
- If there are active changes
|
||||
- Their names, schemas, and status
|
||||
- What the user might be working on
|
||||
|
||||
### When no change exists
|
||||
|
||||
Think freely. When insights crystallize, you might offer:
|
||||
|
||||
- "This feels solid enough to start a change. Want me to create a proposal?"
|
||||
- Or keep exploring - no pressure to formalize
|
||||
|
||||
### When a change exists
|
||||
|
||||
If the user mentions a change or you detect one is relevant:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Resolve and read existing artifacts for context**
|
||||
- Run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`.
|
||||
- Use `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext` from the status JSON.
|
||||
- Read existing files from `artifactPaths.<artifact>.existingOutputPaths`.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Reference them naturally in conversation**
|
||||
- "Your design mentions using Redis, but we just realized SQLite fits better..."
|
||||
- "The proposal scopes this to premium users, but we're now thinking everyone..."
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Offer to capture when decisions are made**
|
||||
|
||||
| Insight Type | Where to Capture |
|
||||
|----------------------------|--------------------------------|
|
||||
| New requirement discovered | `specs/<capability>/spec.md` |
|
||||
| Requirement changed | `specs/<capability>/spec.md` |
|
||||
| Design decision made | `design.md` |
|
||||
| Scope changed | `proposal.md` |
|
||||
| New work identified | `tasks.md` |
|
||||
| Assumption invalidated | Relevant artifact |
|
||||
|
||||
Example offers:
|
||||
- "That's a design decision. Capture it in design.md?"
|
||||
- "This is a new requirement. Add it to specs?"
|
||||
- "This changes scope. Update the proposal?"
|
||||
|
||||
4. **The user decides** - Offer and move on. Don't pressure. Don't auto-capture.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What You Don't Have To Do
|
||||
|
||||
- Follow a script
|
||||
- Ask the same questions every time
|
||||
- Produce a specific artifact
|
||||
- Reach a conclusion
|
||||
- Stay on topic if a tangent is valuable
|
||||
- Be brief (this is thinking time)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Handling Different Entry Points
|
||||
|
||||
**User brings a vague idea:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
User: I'm thinking about adding real-time collaboration
|
||||
|
||||
You: Real-time collab is a big space. Let me think about this...
|
||||
|
||||
COLLABORATION SPECTRUM
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
|
||||
Awareness Coordination Sync
|
||||
│ │ │
|
||||
▼ ▼ ▼
|
||||
┌────────┐ ┌────────┐ ┌────────┐
|
||||
│Presence│ │Cursors │ │ CRDT │
|
||||
│ "3 │ │ Multi │ │Conflict│
|
||||
│online" │ │ select │ │ free │
|
||||
└────────┘ └────────┘ └────────┘
|
||||
│ │ │
|
||||
trivial moderate complex
|
||||
|
||||
Where's your head at?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**User brings a specific problem:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
User: The auth system is a mess
|
||||
|
||||
You: [reads codebase]
|
||||
|
||||
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||||
│ CURRENT AUTH FLOW │
|
||||
└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||||
│
|
||||
┌─────────────┼─────────────┐
|
||||
▼ ▼ ▼
|
||||
┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐
|
||||
│ Google │ │ GitHub │ │ Email │
|
||||
│ OAuth │ │ OAuth │ │ Magic │
|
||||
└────┬────┘ └────┬────┘ └────┬────┘
|
||||
│ │ │
|
||||
└─────────────┼─────────────┘
|
||||
▼
|
||||
┌───────────┐
|
||||
│ Session │
|
||||
└─────┬─────┘
|
||||
│
|
||||
▼
|
||||
┌───────────┐
|
||||
│ Perms │
|
||||
└───────────┘
|
||||
|
||||
I see three tangles. Which one's burning?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**User is stuck mid-implementation:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
User: /opsx:explore add-auth-system
|
||||
The OAuth integration is more complex than expected
|
||||
|
||||
You: [reads change artifacts]
|
||||
|
||||
You're on task 4: "Implement OAuth flow"
|
||||
|
||||
Let me trace what's involved...
|
||||
|
||||
[draws diagram, explores options, suggests paths]
|
||||
|
||||
Want to update the design to reflect this?
|
||||
Or add a spike task to investigate?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**User wants to compare options:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
User: Should we use Postgres or SQLite?
|
||||
|
||||
You: Generic answer is boring. What's the context?
|
||||
|
||||
User: A CLI tool that tracks local dev environments
|
||||
|
||||
You: That changes everything.
|
||||
|
||||
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||||
│ CLI TOOL DATA STORAGE │
|
||||
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||||
|
||||
Key constraints:
|
||||
• No daemon running
|
||||
• Must work offline
|
||||
• Single user
|
||||
|
||||
SQLite Postgres
|
||||
Deployment embedded ✓ needs server ✗
|
||||
Offline yes ✓ no ✗
|
||||
Single file yes ✓ no ✗
|
||||
|
||||
SQLite. Not even close.
|
||||
|
||||
Unless... is there a sync component?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Ending Discovery
|
||||
|
||||
There's no required ending. Discovery might:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Flow into a proposal**: "Ready to start? I can create a change proposal."
|
||||
- **Result in artifact updates**: "Updated design.md with these decisions"
|
||||
- **Just provide clarity**: User has what they need, moves on
|
||||
- **Continue later**: "We can pick this up anytime"
|
||||
|
||||
When it feels like things are crystallizing, you might summarize:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## What We Figured Out
|
||||
|
||||
**The problem**: [crystallized understanding]
|
||||
|
||||
**The approach**: [if one emerged]
|
||||
|
||||
**Open questions**: [if any remain]
|
||||
|
||||
**Next steps** (if ready):
|
||||
- Create a change proposal
|
||||
- Keep exploring: just keep talking
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
But this summary is optional. Sometimes the thinking IS the value.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Guardrails
|
||||
|
||||
- **Don't implement** - Never write code or implement features. Creating OpenSpec artifacts is fine, writing application code is not.
|
||||
- **Don't fake understanding** - If something is unclear, dig deeper
|
||||
- **Don't rush** - Discovery is thinking time, not task time
|
||||
- **Don't force structure** - Let patterns emerge naturally
|
||||
- **Don't auto-capture** - Offer to save insights, don't just do it
|
||||
- **Do visualize** - A good diagram is worth many paragraphs
|
||||
- **Do explore the codebase** - Ground discussions in reality
|
||||
- **Do question assumptions** - Including the user's and your own
|
||||
104
.claude/skills/openspec-ff-change/SKILL.md
Normal file
104
.claude/skills/openspec-ff-change/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,104 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-ff-change
|
||||
description: Fast-forward through OpenSpec artifact creation. Use when the user wants to quickly create all artifacts needed for implementation without stepping through each one individually.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.5.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Fast-forward through artifact creation - generate everything needed to start implementation in one go.
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: The user's request should include a change name (kebab-case) OR a description of what they want to build.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no clear input provided, ask what they want to build**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** (open-ended, no preset options) to ask:
|
||||
> "What change do you want to work on? Describe what you want to build or fix."
|
||||
|
||||
From their description, derive a kebab-case name (e.g., "add user authentication" → `add-user-auth`).
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT proceed without understanding what the user wants to build.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Create the change directory**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec new change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
This creates a scaffolded change in the planning home resolved by the CLI.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Get the artifact build order**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Parse the JSON to get:
|
||||
- `applyRequires`: array of artifact IDs needed before implementation (e.g., `["tasks"]`)
|
||||
- `artifacts`: list of all artifacts with their status and dependencies
|
||||
- `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`: path and scope context. Use these instead of assuming repo-local paths.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Create artifacts in sequence until apply-ready**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the **TodoWrite tool** to track progress through the artifacts.
|
||||
|
||||
Loop through artifacts in dependency order (artifacts with no pending dependencies first):
|
||||
|
||||
a. **For each artifact that is `ready` (dependencies satisfied)**:
|
||||
- Get instructions:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
- The instructions JSON includes:
|
||||
- `context`: Project background (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `rules`: Artifact-specific rules (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `template`: The structure to use for your output file
|
||||
- `instruction`: Schema-specific guidance for this artifact type
|
||||
- `resolvedOutputPath`: Resolved path or pattern to write the artifact
|
||||
- `dependencies`: Completed artifacts to read for context
|
||||
- Read any completed dependency files for context
|
||||
- Create the artifact file using `template` as the structure and write it to `resolvedOutputPath`
|
||||
- Apply `context` and `rules` as constraints - but do NOT copy them into the file
|
||||
- Show brief progress: "✓ Created <artifact-id>"
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Continue until all `applyRequires` artifacts are complete**
|
||||
- After creating each artifact, re-run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`
|
||||
- Check if every artifact ID in `applyRequires` has `status: "done"` in the artifacts array
|
||||
- Stop when all `applyRequires` artifacts are done
|
||||
|
||||
c. **If an artifact requires user input** (unclear context):
|
||||
- Use **AskUserQuestion tool** to clarify
|
||||
- Then continue with creation
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Show final status**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output**
|
||||
|
||||
After completing all artifacts, summarize:
|
||||
- Change name and location
|
||||
- List of artifacts created with brief descriptions
|
||||
- What's ready: "All artifacts created! Ready for implementation."
|
||||
- Prompt: "Run `/opsx:apply` or ask me to implement to start working on the tasks."
|
||||
|
||||
**Artifact Creation Guidelines**
|
||||
|
||||
- Follow the `instruction` field from `openspec instructions` for each artifact type
|
||||
- The schema defines what each artifact should contain - follow it
|
||||
- Read dependency artifacts for context before creating new ones
|
||||
- Use `template` as the structure for your output file - fill in its sections
|
||||
- **IMPORTANT**: `context` and `rules` are constraints for YOU, not content for the file
|
||||
- Do NOT copy `<context>`, `<rules>`, `<project_context>` blocks into the artifact
|
||||
- These guide what you write, but should never appear in the output
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Create ALL artifacts needed for implementation (as defined by schema's `apply.requires`)
|
||||
- Always read dependency artifacts before creating a new one
|
||||
- If context is critically unclear, ask the user - but prefer making reasonable decisions to keep momentum
|
||||
- If a change with that name already exists, suggest continuing that change instead
|
||||
- Verify each artifact file exists after writing before proceeding to next
|
||||
76
.claude/skills/openspec-new-change/SKILL.md
Normal file
76
.claude/skills/openspec-new-change/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-new-change
|
||||
description: Start a new OpenSpec change using the experimental artifact workflow. Use when the user wants to create a new feature, fix, or modification with a structured step-by-step approach.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.5.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Start a new change using the experimental artifact-driven approach.
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: The user's request should include a change name (kebab-case) OR a description of what they want to build.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no clear input provided, ask what they want to build**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** (open-ended, no preset options) to ask:
|
||||
> "What change do you want to work on? Describe what you want to build or fix."
|
||||
|
||||
From their description, derive a kebab-case name (e.g., "add user authentication" → `add-user-auth`).
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT proceed without understanding what the user wants to build.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Determine the workflow schema**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the default schema (omit `--schema`) unless the user explicitly requests a different workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
**Use a different schema only if the user mentions:**
|
||||
- A specific schema name → use `--schema <name>`
|
||||
- "show workflows" or "what workflows" → run `openspec schemas --json` and let them choose
|
||||
|
||||
**Otherwise**: Omit `--schema` to use the default.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Create the change directory**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec new change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
Add `--schema <name>` only if the user requested a specific workflow.
|
||||
This creates a scaffolded change in the planning home resolved by the CLI.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Show the artifact status**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Use the returned `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `nextSteps` instead of assuming repo-local paths.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Get instructions for the first artifact**
|
||||
The first artifact depends on the schema (e.g., `proposal` for spec-driven).
|
||||
Check the status output to find the first artifact with status "ready".
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions <first-artifact-id> --change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
This outputs the template and context for creating the first artifact.
|
||||
|
||||
6. **STOP and wait for user direction**
|
||||
|
||||
**Output**
|
||||
|
||||
After completing the steps, summarize:
|
||||
- Change name and location
|
||||
- Schema/workflow being used and its artifact sequence
|
||||
- Current status (0/N artifacts complete)
|
||||
- The template for the first artifact
|
||||
- Prompt: "Ready to create the first artifact? Just describe what this change is about and I'll draft it, or ask me to continue."
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Do NOT create any artifacts yet - just show the instructions
|
||||
- Do NOT advance beyond showing the first artifact template
|
||||
- If the name is invalid (not kebab-case), ask for a valid name
|
||||
- If a change with that name already exists, suggest continuing that change instead
|
||||
- Pass --schema if using a non-default workflow
|
||||
554
.claude/skills/openspec-onboard/SKILL.md
Normal file
554
.claude/skills/openspec-onboard/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,554 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-onboard
|
||||
description: Guided onboarding for OpenSpec - walk through a complete workflow cycle with narration and real codebase work.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.5.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Guide the user through their first complete OpenSpec workflow cycle. This is a teaching experience—you'll do real work in their codebase while explaining each step.
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Preflight
|
||||
|
||||
Before starting, check if the OpenSpec CLI is installed:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Unix/macOS
|
||||
openspec --version 2>&1 || echo "CLI_NOT_INSTALLED"
|
||||
# Windows (PowerShell)
|
||||
# if (Get-Command openspec -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue) { openspec --version } else { echo "CLI_NOT_INSTALLED" }
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**If CLI not installed:**
|
||||
> OpenSpec CLI is not installed. Install it first, then come back to `/opsx:onboard`.
|
||||
|
||||
Stop here if not installed.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 1: Welcome
|
||||
|
||||
Display:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Welcome to OpenSpec!
|
||||
|
||||
I'll walk you through a complete change cycle—from idea to implementation—using a real task in your codebase. Along the way, you'll learn the workflow by doing it.
|
||||
|
||||
**What we'll do:**
|
||||
1. Pick a small, real task in your codebase
|
||||
2. Explore the problem briefly
|
||||
3. Create a change (the container for our work)
|
||||
4. Build the artifacts: proposal → specs → design → tasks
|
||||
5. Implement the tasks
|
||||
6. Archive the completed change
|
||||
|
||||
**Time:** ~15-20 minutes
|
||||
|
||||
Let's start by finding something to work on.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 2: Task Selection
|
||||
|
||||
### Codebase Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
Scan the codebase for small improvement opportunities. Look for:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **TODO/FIXME comments** - Search for `TODO`, `FIXME`, `HACK`, `XXX` in code files
|
||||
2. **Missing error handling** - `catch` blocks that swallow errors, risky operations without try-catch
|
||||
3. **Functions without tests** - Cross-reference `src/` with test directories
|
||||
4. **Type issues** - `any` types in TypeScript files (`: any`, `as any`)
|
||||
5. **Debug artifacts** - `console.log`, `console.debug`, `debugger` statements in non-debug code
|
||||
6. **Missing validation** - User input handlers without validation
|
||||
|
||||
Also check recent git activity:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Unix/macOS
|
||||
git log --oneline -10 2>/dev/null || echo "No git history"
|
||||
# Windows (PowerShell)
|
||||
# git log --oneline -10 2>$null; if ($LASTEXITCODE -ne 0) { echo "No git history" }
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Present Suggestions
|
||||
|
||||
From your analysis, present 3-4 specific suggestions:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Task Suggestions
|
||||
|
||||
Based on scanning your codebase, here are some good starter tasks:
|
||||
|
||||
**1. [Most promising task]**
|
||||
Location: `src/path/to/file.ts:42`
|
||||
Scope: ~1-2 files, ~20-30 lines
|
||||
Why it's good: [brief reason]
|
||||
|
||||
**2. [Second task]**
|
||||
Location: `src/another/file.ts`
|
||||
Scope: ~1 file, ~15 lines
|
||||
Why it's good: [brief reason]
|
||||
|
||||
**3. [Third task]**
|
||||
Location: [location]
|
||||
Scope: [estimate]
|
||||
Why it's good: [brief reason]
|
||||
|
||||
**4. Something else?**
|
||||
Tell me what you'd like to work on.
|
||||
|
||||
Which task interests you? (Pick a number or describe your own)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**If nothing found:** Fall back to asking what the user wants to build:
|
||||
> I didn't find obvious quick wins in your codebase. What's something small you've been meaning to add or fix?
|
||||
|
||||
### Scope Guardrail
|
||||
|
||||
If the user picks or describes something too large (major feature, multi-day work):
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
That's a valuable task, but it's probably larger than ideal for your first OpenSpec run-through.
|
||||
|
||||
For learning the workflow, smaller is better—it lets you see the full cycle without getting stuck in implementation details.
|
||||
|
||||
**Options:**
|
||||
1. **Slice it smaller** - What's the smallest useful piece of [their task]? Maybe just [specific slice]?
|
||||
2. **Pick something else** - One of the other suggestions, or a different small task?
|
||||
3. **Do it anyway** - If you really want to tackle this, we can. Just know it'll take longer.
|
||||
|
||||
What would you prefer?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Let the user override if they insist—this is a soft guardrail.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 3: Explore Demo
|
||||
|
||||
Once a task is selected, briefly demonstrate explore mode:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Before we create a change, let me quickly show you **explore mode**—it's how you think through problems before committing to a direction.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Spend 1-2 minutes investigating the relevant code:
|
||||
- Read the file(s) involved
|
||||
- Draw a quick ASCII diagram if it helps
|
||||
- Note any considerations
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Quick Exploration
|
||||
|
||||
[Your brief analysis—what you found, any considerations]
|
||||
|
||||
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||||
│ [Optional: ASCII diagram if helpful] │
|
||||
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||||
|
||||
Explore mode (`/opsx:explore`) is for this kind of thinking—investigating before implementing. You can use it anytime you need to think through a problem.
|
||||
|
||||
Now let's create a change to hold our work.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**PAUSE** - Wait for user acknowledgment before proceeding.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 4: Create the Change
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Creating a Change
|
||||
|
||||
A "change" in OpenSpec is a container for all the thinking and planning around a piece of work. It lives at the `changeRoot` reported by `openspec status --change "<name>" --json` and holds your artifacts—proposal, specs, design, tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
Let me create one for our task.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** Create the change with a derived kebab-case name:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec new change "<derived-name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**SHOW:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Created: <changeRoot from status JSON>
|
||||
|
||||
The folder structure:
|
||||
```
|
||||
<changeRoot>/
|
||||
├── proposal.md ← Why we're doing this (empty, we'll fill it)
|
||||
├── design.md ← How we'll build it (empty)
|
||||
├── specs/ ← Detailed requirements (empty)
|
||||
└── tasks.md ← Implementation checklist (empty)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Now let's fill in the first artifact—the proposal.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 5: Proposal
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## The Proposal
|
||||
|
||||
The proposal captures **why** we're making this change and **what** it involves at a high level. It's the "elevator pitch" for the work.
|
||||
|
||||
I'll draft one based on our task.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** Draft the proposal content (don't save yet):
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Here's a draft proposal:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Why
|
||||
|
||||
[1-2 sentences explaining the problem/opportunity]
|
||||
|
||||
## What Changes
|
||||
|
||||
[Bullet points of what will be different]
|
||||
|
||||
## Capabilities
|
||||
|
||||
### New Capabilities
|
||||
- `<capability-name>`: [brief description]
|
||||
|
||||
### Modified Capabilities
|
||||
<!-- If modifying existing behavior -->
|
||||
|
||||
## Impact
|
||||
|
||||
- `src/path/to/file.ts`: [what changes]
|
||||
- [other files if applicable]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Does this capture the intent? I can adjust before we save it.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**PAUSE** - Wait for user approval/feedback.
|
||||
|
||||
After approval, save the proposal:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions proposal --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Then write the content to the `resolvedOutputPath` from `openspec instructions proposal --change "<name>" --json`.
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Proposal saved. This is your "why" document—you can always come back and refine it as understanding evolves.
|
||||
|
||||
Next up: specs.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 6: Specs
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Specs
|
||||
|
||||
Specs define **what** we're building in precise, testable terms. They use a requirement/scenario format that makes expected behavior crystal clear.
|
||||
|
||||
For a small task like this, we might only need one spec file.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** Resolve where the spec file should be created:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions specs --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
# Use resolvedOutputPath from the JSON. If it is a glob, choose the concrete file path using the schema instruction and the change's context.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Draft the spec content:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Here's the spec:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## ADDED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: <Name>
|
||||
|
||||
<Description of what the system should do>
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: <Scenario name>
|
||||
|
||||
- **WHEN** <trigger condition>
|
||||
- **THEN** <expected outcome>
|
||||
- **AND** <additional outcome if needed>
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
This format—WHEN/THEN/AND—makes requirements testable. You can literally read them as test cases.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Save to the concrete file path chosen from `resolvedOutputPath`.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 7: Design
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Design
|
||||
|
||||
The design captures **how** we'll build it—technical decisions, tradeoffs, approach.
|
||||
|
||||
For small changes, this might be brief. That's fine—not every change needs deep design discussion.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** Draft design.md:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Here's the design:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Context
|
||||
|
||||
[Brief context about the current state]
|
||||
|
||||
## Goals / Non-Goals
|
||||
|
||||
**Goals:**
|
||||
- [What we're trying to achieve]
|
||||
|
||||
**Non-Goals:**
|
||||
- [What's explicitly out of scope]
|
||||
|
||||
## Decisions
|
||||
|
||||
### Decision 1: [Key decision]
|
||||
|
||||
[Explanation of approach and rationale]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
For a small task, this captures the key decisions without over-engineering.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Save to the `resolvedOutputPath` from `openspec instructions design --change "<name>" --json`.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 8: Tasks
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Tasks
|
||||
|
||||
Finally, we break the work into implementation tasks—checkboxes that drive the apply phase.
|
||||
|
||||
These should be small, clear, and in logical order.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** Generate tasks based on specs and design:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Here are the implementation tasks:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. [Category or file]
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] 1.1 [Specific task]
|
||||
- [ ] 1.2 [Specific task]
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Verify
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] 2.1 [Verification step]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Each checkbox becomes a unit of work in the apply phase. Ready to implement?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**PAUSE** - Wait for user to confirm they're ready to implement.
|
||||
|
||||
Save to the `resolvedOutputPath` from `openspec instructions tasks --change "<name>" --json`.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 9: Apply (Implementation)
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Implementation
|
||||
|
||||
Now we implement each task, checking them off as we go. I'll announce each one and occasionally note how the specs/design informed the approach.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** For each task:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Announce: "Working on task N: [description]"
|
||||
2. Implement the change in the codebase
|
||||
3. Reference specs/design naturally: "The spec says X, so I'm doing Y"
|
||||
4. Mark complete in tasks.md: `- [ ]` → `- [x]`
|
||||
5. Brief status: "✓ Task N complete"
|
||||
|
||||
Keep narration light—don't over-explain every line of code.
|
||||
|
||||
After all tasks:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Implementation Complete
|
||||
|
||||
All tasks done:
|
||||
- [x] Task 1
|
||||
- [x] Task 2
|
||||
- [x] ...
|
||||
|
||||
The change is implemented! One more step—let's archive it.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 10: Archive
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Archiving
|
||||
|
||||
When a change is complete, we archive it. The archive path is derived from `planningHome.changesDir` and the date.
|
||||
|
||||
Archived changes become your project's decision history—you can always find them later to understand why something was built a certain way.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec archive "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**SHOW:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Archived to: `<planningHome.changesDir>/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>/`
|
||||
|
||||
The change is now part of your project's history. The code is in your codebase, the decision record is preserved.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 11: Recap & Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Congratulations!
|
||||
|
||||
You just completed a full OpenSpec cycle:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Explore** - Thought through the problem
|
||||
2. **New** - Created a change container
|
||||
3. **Proposal** - Captured WHY
|
||||
4. **Specs** - Defined WHAT in detail
|
||||
5. **Design** - Decided HOW
|
||||
6. **Tasks** - Broke it into steps
|
||||
7. **Apply** - Implemented the work
|
||||
8. **Archive** - Preserved the record
|
||||
|
||||
This same rhythm works for any size change—a small fix or a major feature.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Command Reference
|
||||
|
||||
**Core workflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | What it does |
|
||||
|-------------------|--------------------------------------------|
|
||||
| `/opsx:propose` | Create a change and generate all artifacts |
|
||||
| `/opsx:explore` | Think through problems before/during work |
|
||||
| `/opsx:apply` | Implement tasks from a change |
|
||||
| `/opsx:archive` | Archive a completed change |
|
||||
|
||||
**Additional commands:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | What it does |
|
||||
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------|
|
||||
| `/opsx:new` | Start a new change, step through artifacts one at a time |
|
||||
| `/opsx:continue` | Continue working on an existing change |
|
||||
| `/opsx:ff` | Fast-forward: create all artifacts at once |
|
||||
| `/opsx:verify` | Verify implementation matches artifacts |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What's Next?
|
||||
|
||||
Try `/opsx:propose` on something you actually want to build. You've got the rhythm now!
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Graceful Exit Handling
|
||||
|
||||
### User wants to stop mid-way
|
||||
|
||||
If the user says they need to stop, want to pause, or seem disengaged:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
No problem! Your change is saved at the `changeRoot` reported by `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`.
|
||||
|
||||
To pick up where we left off later:
|
||||
- `/opsx:continue <name>` - Resume artifact creation
|
||||
- `/opsx:apply <name>` - Jump to implementation (if tasks exist)
|
||||
|
||||
The work won't be lost. Come back whenever you're ready.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Exit gracefully without pressure.
|
||||
|
||||
### User just wants command reference
|
||||
|
||||
If the user says they just want to see the commands or skip the tutorial:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## OpenSpec Quick Reference
|
||||
|
||||
**Core workflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | What it does |
|
||||
|--------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
|
||||
| `/opsx:propose <name>` | Create a change and generate all artifacts |
|
||||
| `/opsx:explore` | Think through problems (no code changes) |
|
||||
| `/opsx:apply <name>` | Implement tasks |
|
||||
| `/opsx:archive <name>` | Archive when done |
|
||||
|
||||
**Additional commands:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | What it does |
|
||||
|---------------------------|-------------------------------------|
|
||||
| `/opsx:new <name>` | Start a new change, step by step |
|
||||
| `/opsx:continue <name>` | Continue an existing change |
|
||||
| `/opsx:ff <name>` | Fast-forward: all artifacts at once |
|
||||
| `/opsx:verify <name>` | Verify implementation |
|
||||
|
||||
Try `/opsx:propose` to start your first change.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Exit gracefully.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Guardrails
|
||||
|
||||
- **Follow the EXPLAIN → DO → SHOW → PAUSE pattern** at key transitions (after explore, after proposal draft, after tasks, after archive)
|
||||
- **Keep narration light** during implementation—teach without lecturing
|
||||
- **Don't skip phases** even if the change is small—the goal is teaching the workflow
|
||||
- **Pause for acknowledgment** at marked points, but don't over-pause
|
||||
- **Handle exits gracefully**—never pressure the user to continue
|
||||
- **Use real codebase tasks**—don't simulate or use fake examples
|
||||
- **Adjust scope gently**—guide toward smaller tasks but respect user choice
|
||||
113
.claude/skills/openspec-propose/SKILL.md
Normal file
113
.claude/skills/openspec-propose/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,113 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-propose
|
||||
description: Propose a new change with all artifacts generated in one step. Use when the user wants to quickly describe what they want to build and get a complete proposal with design, specs, and tasks ready for implementation.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.5.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Propose a new change - create the change and generate all artifacts in one step.
|
||||
|
||||
I'll create a change with artifacts:
|
||||
- proposal.md (what & why)
|
||||
- design.md (how)
|
||||
- tasks.md (implementation steps)
|
||||
|
||||
When ready to implement, run /opsx:apply
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: The user's request should include a change name (kebab-case) OR a description of what they want to build.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no clear input provided, ask what they want to build**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** (open-ended, no preset options) to ask:
|
||||
> "What change do you want to work on? Describe what you want to build or fix."
|
||||
|
||||
From their description, derive a kebab-case name (e.g., "add user authentication" → `add-user-auth`).
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT proceed without understanding what the user wants to build.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Create the change directory**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec new change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
This creates a scaffolded change in the planning home resolved by the CLI with `.openspec.yaml`.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Get the artifact build order**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Parse the JSON to get:
|
||||
- `applyRequires`: array of artifact IDs needed before implementation (e.g., `["tasks"]`)
|
||||
- `artifacts`: list of all artifacts with their status and dependencies
|
||||
- `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`: path and scope context. Use these instead of assuming repo-local paths.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Create artifacts in sequence until apply-ready**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the **TodoWrite tool** to track progress through the artifacts.
|
||||
|
||||
Loop through artifacts in dependency order (artifacts with no pending dependencies first):
|
||||
|
||||
a. **For each artifact that is `ready` (dependencies satisfied)**:
|
||||
- Get instructions:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
- The instructions JSON includes:
|
||||
- `context`: Project background (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `rules`: Artifact-specific rules (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `template`: The structure to use for your output file
|
||||
- `instruction`: Schema-specific guidance for this artifact type
|
||||
- `resolvedOutputPath`: Resolved path or pattern to write the artifact
|
||||
- `dependencies`: Completed artifacts to read for context
|
||||
- Read any completed dependency files for context
|
||||
- Create the artifact file using `template` as the structure and write it to `resolvedOutputPath`
|
||||
- Apply `context` and `rules` as constraints - but do NOT copy them into the file
|
||||
- Show brief progress: "Created <artifact-id>"
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Continue until all `applyRequires` artifacts are complete**
|
||||
- After creating each artifact, re-run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`
|
||||
- Check if every artifact ID in `applyRequires` has `status: "done"` in the artifacts array
|
||||
- Stop when all `applyRequires` artifacts are done
|
||||
|
||||
c. **If an artifact requires user input** (unclear context):
|
||||
- Use **AskUserQuestion tool** to clarify
|
||||
- Then continue with creation
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Show final status**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output**
|
||||
|
||||
After completing all artifacts, summarize:
|
||||
- Change name and location
|
||||
- List of artifacts created with brief descriptions
|
||||
- What's ready: "All artifacts created! Ready for implementation."
|
||||
- Prompt: "Run `/opsx:apply` or ask me to implement to start working on the tasks."
|
||||
|
||||
**Artifact Creation Guidelines**
|
||||
|
||||
- Follow the `instruction` field from `openspec instructions` for each artifact type
|
||||
- The schema defines what each artifact should contain - follow it
|
||||
- Read dependency artifacts for context before creating new ones
|
||||
- Use `template` as the structure for your output file - fill in its sections
|
||||
- **IMPORTANT**: `context` and `rules` are constraints for YOU, not content for the file
|
||||
- Do NOT copy `<context>`, `<rules>`, `<project_context>` blocks into the artifact
|
||||
- These guide what you write, but should never appear in the output
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Create ALL artifacts needed for implementation (as defined by schema's `apply.requires`)
|
||||
- Always read dependency artifacts before creating a new one
|
||||
- If context is critically unclear, ask the user - but prefer making reasonable decisions to keep momentum
|
||||
- If a change with that name already exists, ask if user wants to continue it or create a new one
|
||||
- Verify each artifact file exists after writing before proceeding to next
|
||||
147
.claude/skills/openspec-sync-specs/SKILL.md
Normal file
147
.claude/skills/openspec-sync-specs/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,147 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-sync-specs
|
||||
description: Sync delta specs from a change to main specs. Use when the user wants to update main specs with changes from a delta spec, without archiving the change.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.5.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Sync delta specs from a change to main specs.
|
||||
|
||||
This is an **agent-driven** operation - you will read delta specs and directly edit main specs to apply the changes. This allows intelligent merging (e.g., adding a scenario without copying the entire requirement).
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no change name provided, prompt for selection**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec list --json` to get available changes. Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select.
|
||||
|
||||
Show changes that have delta specs (under `specs/` directory).
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Resolve change context**
|
||||
|
||||
Run:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Find delta specs**
|
||||
|
||||
Use `artifactPaths.specs.existingOutputPaths` from the status JSON as the list of delta spec files.
|
||||
|
||||
Each delta spec file contains sections like:
|
||||
- `## ADDED Requirements` - New requirements to add
|
||||
- `## MODIFIED Requirements` - Changes to existing requirements
|
||||
- `## REMOVED Requirements` - Requirements to remove
|
||||
- `## RENAMED Requirements` - Requirements to rename (FROM:/TO: format)
|
||||
|
||||
If no delta specs found, inform user and stop.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **For each delta spec, apply changes to main specs**
|
||||
|
||||
For each repo-local capability delta spec path returned by the CLI:
|
||||
|
||||
a. **Read the delta spec** to understand the intended changes
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Read the main spec** at `openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md` (may not exist yet)
|
||||
|
||||
c. **Apply changes intelligently**:
|
||||
|
||||
**ADDED Requirements:**
|
||||
- If requirement doesn't exist in main spec → add it
|
||||
- If requirement already exists → update it to match (treat as implicit MODIFIED)
|
||||
|
||||
**MODIFIED Requirements:**
|
||||
- Find the requirement in main spec
|
||||
- Apply the changes - this can be:
|
||||
- Adding new scenarios (don't need to copy existing ones)
|
||||
- Modifying existing scenarios
|
||||
- Changing the requirement description
|
||||
- Preserve scenarios/content not mentioned in the delta
|
||||
|
||||
**REMOVED Requirements:**
|
||||
- Remove the entire requirement block from main spec
|
||||
|
||||
**RENAMED Requirements:**
|
||||
- Find the FROM requirement, rename to TO
|
||||
|
||||
d. **Create new main spec** if capability doesn't exist yet:
|
||||
- Create `openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md`
|
||||
- Add Purpose section (can be brief, mark as TBD)
|
||||
- Add Requirements section with the ADDED requirements
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Show summary**
|
||||
|
||||
After applying all changes, summarize:
|
||||
- Which capabilities were updated
|
||||
- What changes were made (requirements added/modified/removed/renamed)
|
||||
|
||||
**Delta Spec Format Reference**
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## ADDED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: New Feature
|
||||
The system SHALL do something new.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Basic case
|
||||
- **WHEN** user does X
|
||||
- **THEN** system does Y
|
||||
|
||||
## MODIFIED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Existing Feature
|
||||
#### Scenario: New scenario to add
|
||||
- **WHEN** user does A
|
||||
- **THEN** system does B
|
||||
|
||||
## REMOVED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Deprecated Feature
|
||||
|
||||
## RENAMED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
- FROM: `### Requirement: Old Name`
|
||||
- TO: `### Requirement: New Name`
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Principle: Intelligent Merging**
|
||||
|
||||
Unlike programmatic merging, you can apply **partial updates**:
|
||||
- To add a scenario, just include that scenario under MODIFIED - don't copy existing scenarios
|
||||
- The delta represents *intent*, not a wholesale replacement
|
||||
- Use your judgment to merge changes sensibly
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Success**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Specs Synced: <change-name>
|
||||
|
||||
Updated main specs:
|
||||
|
||||
**<capability-1>**:
|
||||
- Added requirement: "New Feature"
|
||||
- Modified requirement: "Existing Feature" (added 1 scenario)
|
||||
|
||||
**<capability-2>**:
|
||||
- Created new spec file
|
||||
- Added requirement: "Another Feature"
|
||||
|
||||
Main specs are now updated. The change remains active - archive when implementation is complete.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Read both delta and main specs before making changes
|
||||
- Preserve existing content not mentioned in delta
|
||||
- If something is unclear, ask for clarification
|
||||
- Show what you're changing as you go
|
||||
- The operation should be idempotent - running twice should give same result
|
||||
171
.claude/skills/openspec-verify-change/SKILL.md
Normal file
171
.claude/skills/openspec-verify-change/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,171 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-verify-change
|
||||
description: Verify implementation matches change artifacts. Use when the user wants to validate that implementation is complete, correct, and coherent before archiving.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.5.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Verify that an implementation matches the change artifacts (specs, tasks, design).
|
||||
|
||||
**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`). Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no change name provided, prompt for selection**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec list --json` to get available changes. Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select.
|
||||
|
||||
Show changes that have implementation tasks (tasks artifact exists).
|
||||
Include the schema used for each change if available.
|
||||
Mark changes with incomplete tasks as "(In Progress)".
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Check status to understand the schema**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Parse the JSON to understand:
|
||||
- `schemaName`: The workflow being used (e.g., "spec-driven")
|
||||
- `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`: path and scope context
|
||||
- Which artifacts exist for this change
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Get planning context and load artifacts**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions apply --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This returns the change directory and `contextFiles` (artifact ID -> array of concrete file paths). Read all available artifacts from `contextFiles`.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Initialize verification report structure**
|
||||
|
||||
Create a report structure with three dimensions:
|
||||
- **Completeness**: Track tasks and spec coverage
|
||||
- **Correctness**: Track requirement implementation and scenario coverage
|
||||
- **Coherence**: Track design adherence and pattern consistency
|
||||
|
||||
Each dimension can have CRITICAL, WARNING, or SUGGESTION issues.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Verify Completeness**
|
||||
|
||||
**Task Completion**:
|
||||
- If `contextFiles.tasks` exists, read every file path in it
|
||||
- Parse checkboxes: `- [ ]` (incomplete) vs `- [x]` (complete)
|
||||
- Count complete vs total tasks
|
||||
- If incomplete tasks exist:
|
||||
- Add CRITICAL issue for each incomplete task
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Complete task: <description>" or "Mark as done if already implemented"
|
||||
|
||||
**Spec Coverage**:
|
||||
- If delta specs exist in `contextFiles.specs`:
|
||||
- Extract all requirements (marked with "### Requirement:")
|
||||
- For each requirement:
|
||||
- Search codebase for keywords related to the requirement
|
||||
- Assess if implementation likely exists
|
||||
- If requirements appear unimplemented:
|
||||
- Add CRITICAL issue: "Requirement not found: <requirement name>"
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Implement requirement X: <description>"
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Verify Correctness**
|
||||
|
||||
**Requirement Implementation Mapping**:
|
||||
- For each requirement from delta specs:
|
||||
- Search codebase for implementation evidence
|
||||
- If found, note file paths and line ranges
|
||||
- Assess if implementation matches requirement intent
|
||||
- If divergence detected:
|
||||
- Add WARNING: "Implementation may diverge from spec: <details>"
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Review <file>:<lines> against requirement X"
|
||||
|
||||
**Scenario Coverage**:
|
||||
- For each scenario in delta specs (marked with "#### Scenario:"):
|
||||
- Check if conditions are handled in code
|
||||
- Check if tests exist covering the scenario
|
||||
- If scenario appears uncovered:
|
||||
- Add WARNING: "Scenario not covered: <scenario name>"
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Add test or implementation for scenario: <description>"
|
||||
|
||||
7. **Verify Coherence**
|
||||
|
||||
**Design Adherence**:
|
||||
- If `contextFiles.design` exists:
|
||||
- Extract key decisions (look for sections like "Decision:", "Approach:", "Architecture:")
|
||||
- Verify implementation follows those decisions
|
||||
- If contradiction detected:
|
||||
- Add WARNING: "Design decision not followed: <decision>"
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Update implementation or revise design.md to match reality"
|
||||
- If no design.md: Skip design adherence check, note "No design.md to verify against"
|
||||
|
||||
**Code Pattern Consistency**:
|
||||
- Review new code for consistency with project patterns
|
||||
- Check file naming, directory structure, coding style
|
||||
- If significant deviations found:
|
||||
- Add SUGGESTION: "Code pattern deviation: <details>"
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Consider following project pattern: <example>"
|
||||
|
||||
8. **Generate Verification Report**
|
||||
|
||||
**Summary Scorecard**:
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Verification Report: <change-name>
|
||||
|
||||
### Summary
|
||||
| Dimension | Status |
|
||||
|--------------|------------------|
|
||||
| Completeness | X/Y tasks, N reqs|
|
||||
| Correctness | M/N reqs covered |
|
||||
| Coherence | Followed/Issues |
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Issues by Priority**:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **CRITICAL** (Must fix before archive):
|
||||
- Incomplete tasks
|
||||
- Missing requirement implementations
|
||||
- Each with specific, actionable recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
2. **WARNING** (Should fix):
|
||||
- Spec/design divergences
|
||||
- Missing scenario coverage
|
||||
- Each with specific recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
3. **SUGGESTION** (Nice to fix):
|
||||
- Pattern inconsistencies
|
||||
- Minor improvements
|
||||
- Each with specific recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
**Final Assessment**:
|
||||
- If CRITICAL issues: "X critical issue(s) found. Fix before archiving."
|
||||
- If only warnings: "No critical issues. Y warning(s) to consider. Ready for archive (with noted improvements)."
|
||||
- If all clear: "All checks passed. Ready for archive."
|
||||
|
||||
**Verification Heuristics**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Completeness**: Focus on objective checklist items (checkboxes, requirements list)
|
||||
- **Correctness**: Use keyword search, file path analysis, reasonable inference - don't require perfect certainty
|
||||
- **Coherence**: Look for glaring inconsistencies, don't nitpick style
|
||||
- **False Positives**: When uncertain, prefer SUGGESTION over WARNING, WARNING over CRITICAL
|
||||
- **Actionability**: Every issue must have a specific recommendation with file/line references where applicable
|
||||
|
||||
**Graceful Degradation**
|
||||
|
||||
- If only tasks.md exists: verify task completion only, skip spec/design checks
|
||||
- If tasks + specs exist: verify completeness and correctness, skip design
|
||||
- If full artifacts: verify all three dimensions
|
||||
- Always note which checks were skipped and why
|
||||
|
||||
**Output Format**
|
||||
|
||||
Use clear markdown with:
|
||||
- Table for summary scorecard
|
||||
- Grouped lists for issues (CRITICAL/WARNING/SUGGESTION)
|
||||
- Code references in format: `file.ts:123`
|
||||
- Specific, actionable recommendations
|
||||
- No vague suggestions like "consider reviewing"
|
||||
213
.claude/skills/receiving-code-review/SKILL.md
Normal file
213
.claude/skills/receiving-code-review/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,213 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: receiving-code-review
|
||||
description: Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Code Review Reception
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Code review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core principle:** Verify before implementing. Ask before assuming. Technical correctness over social comfort.
|
||||
|
||||
## The Response Pattern
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
WHEN receiving code review feedback:
|
||||
|
||||
1. READ: Complete feedback without reacting
|
||||
2. UNDERSTAND: Restate requirement in own words (or ask)
|
||||
3. VERIFY: Check against codebase reality
|
||||
4. EVALUATE: Technically sound for THIS codebase?
|
||||
5. RESPOND: Technical acknowledgment or reasoned pushback
|
||||
6. IMPLEMENT: One item at a time, test each
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Forbidden Responses
|
||||
|
||||
**NEVER:**
|
||||
- "You're absolutely right!" (explicit instruction-file violation)
|
||||
- "Great point!" / "Excellent feedback!" (performative)
|
||||
- "Let me implement that now" (before verification)
|
||||
|
||||
**INSTEAD:**
|
||||
- Restate the technical requirement
|
||||
- Ask clarifying questions
|
||||
- Push back with technical reasoning if wrong
|
||||
- Just start working (actions > words)
|
||||
|
||||
## Handling Unclear Feedback
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
IF any item is unclear:
|
||||
STOP - do not implement anything yet
|
||||
ASK for clarification on unclear items
|
||||
|
||||
WHY: Items may be related. Partial understanding = wrong implementation.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
your human partner: "Fix 1-6"
|
||||
You understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.
|
||||
|
||||
❌ WRONG: Implement 1,2,3,6 now, ask about 4,5 later
|
||||
✅ RIGHT: "I understand items 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before proceeding."
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Source-Specific Handling
|
||||
|
||||
### From your human partner
|
||||
- **Trusted** - implement after understanding
|
||||
- **Still ask** if scope unclear
|
||||
- **No performative agreement**
|
||||
- **Skip to action** or technical acknowledgment
|
||||
|
||||
### From External Reviewers
|
||||
```
|
||||
BEFORE implementing:
|
||||
1. Check: Technically correct for THIS codebase?
|
||||
2. Check: Breaks existing functionality?
|
||||
3. Check: Reason for current implementation?
|
||||
4. Check: Works on all platforms/versions?
|
||||
5. Check: Does reviewer understand full context?
|
||||
|
||||
IF suggestion seems wrong:
|
||||
Push back with technical reasoning
|
||||
|
||||
IF can't easily verify:
|
||||
Say so: "I can't verify this without [X]. Should I [investigate/ask/proceed]?"
|
||||
|
||||
IF conflicts with your human partner's prior decisions:
|
||||
Stop and discuss with your human partner first
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**your human partner's rule:** "External feedback - be skeptical, but check carefully"
|
||||
|
||||
## YAGNI Check for "Professional" Features
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
IF reviewer suggests "implementing properly":
|
||||
grep codebase for actual usage
|
||||
|
||||
IF unused: "This endpoint isn't called. Remove it (YAGNI)?"
|
||||
IF used: Then implement properly
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**your human partner's rule:** "You and reviewer both report to me. If we don't need this feature, don't add it."
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Order
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
FOR multi-item feedback:
|
||||
1. Clarify anything unclear FIRST
|
||||
2. Then implement in this order:
|
||||
- Blocking issues (breaks, security)
|
||||
- Simple fixes (typos, imports)
|
||||
- Complex fixes (refactoring, logic)
|
||||
3. Test each fix individually
|
||||
4. Verify no regressions
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## When To Push Back
|
||||
|
||||
Push back when:
|
||||
- Suggestion breaks existing functionality
|
||||
- Reviewer lacks full context
|
||||
- Violates YAGNI (unused feature)
|
||||
- Technically incorrect for this stack
|
||||
- Legacy/compatibility reasons exist
|
||||
- Conflicts with your human partner's architectural decisions
|
||||
|
||||
**How to push back:**
|
||||
- Use technical reasoning, not defensiveness
|
||||
- Ask specific questions
|
||||
- Reference working tests/code
|
||||
- Involve your human partner if architectural
|
||||
|
||||
**If you're uncomfortable pushing back out loud:** Name that tension, then tell your partner about the issue you've seen. They'll appreciate your honesty.
|
||||
|
||||
## Acknowledging Correct Feedback
|
||||
|
||||
When feedback IS correct:
|
||||
```
|
||||
✅ "Fixed. [Brief description of what changed]"
|
||||
✅ "Good catch - [specific issue]. Fixed in [location]."
|
||||
✅ [Just fix it and show in the code]
|
||||
|
||||
❌ "You're absolutely right!"
|
||||
❌ "Great point!"
|
||||
❌ "Thanks for catching that!"
|
||||
❌ "Thanks for [anything]"
|
||||
❌ ANY gratitude expression
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Why no thanks:** Actions speak. Just fix it. The code itself shows you heard the feedback.
|
||||
|
||||
**If you catch yourself about to write "Thanks":** DELETE IT. State the fix instead.
|
||||
|
||||
## Gracefully Correcting Your Pushback
|
||||
|
||||
If you pushed back and were wrong:
|
||||
```
|
||||
✅ "You were right - I checked [X] and it does [Y]. Implementing now."
|
||||
✅ "Verified this and you're correct. My initial understanding was wrong because [reason]. Fixing."
|
||||
|
||||
❌ Long apology
|
||||
❌ Defending why you pushed back
|
||||
❌ Over-explaining
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
State the correction factually and move on.
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Mistakes
|
||||
|
||||
| Mistake | Fix |
|
||||
|---------|-----|
|
||||
| Performative agreement | State requirement or just act |
|
||||
| Blind implementation | Verify against codebase first |
|
||||
| Batch without testing | One at a time, test each |
|
||||
| Assuming reviewer is right | Check if breaks things |
|
||||
| Avoiding pushback | Technical correctness > comfort |
|
||||
| Partial implementation | Clarify all items first |
|
||||
| Can't verify, proceed anyway | State limitation, ask for direction |
|
||||
|
||||
## Real Examples
|
||||
|
||||
**Performative Agreement (Bad):**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Reviewer: "Remove legacy code"
|
||||
❌ "You're absolutely right! Let me remove that..."
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Technical Verification (Good):**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Reviewer: "Remove legacy code"
|
||||
✅ "Checking... build target is 10.15+, this API needs 13+. Need legacy for backward compat. Current impl has wrong bundle ID - fix it or drop pre-13 support?"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**YAGNI (Good):**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Reviewer: "Implement proper metrics tracking with database, date filters, CSV export"
|
||||
✅ "Grepped codebase - nothing calls this endpoint. Remove it (YAGNI)? Or is there usage I'm missing?"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Unclear Item (Good):**
|
||||
```
|
||||
your human partner: "Fix items 1-6"
|
||||
You understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.
|
||||
✅ "Understand 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before implementing."
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## GitHub Thread Replies
|
||||
|
||||
When replying to inline review comments on GitHub, reply in the comment thread (`gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pr}/comments/{id}/replies`), not as a top-level PR comment.
|
||||
|
||||
## The Bottom Line
|
||||
|
||||
**External feedback = suggestions to evaluate, not orders to follow.**
|
||||
|
||||
Verify. Question. Then implement.
|
||||
|
||||
No performative agreement. Technical rigor always.
|
||||
103
.claude/skills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md
Normal file
103
.claude/skills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,103 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: requesting-code-review
|
||||
description: Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Requesting Code Review
|
||||
|
||||
Dispatch a code reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context for evaluation — never your session's history. This keeps the reviewer focused on the work product, not your thought process, and preserves your own context for continued work.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core principle:** Review early, review often.
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Request Review
|
||||
|
||||
**Mandatory:**
|
||||
- After each task in subagent-driven development
|
||||
- After completing major feature
|
||||
- Before merge to main
|
||||
|
||||
**Optional but valuable:**
|
||||
- When stuck (fresh perspective)
|
||||
- Before refactoring (baseline check)
|
||||
- After fixing complex bug
|
||||
|
||||
## How to Request
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Get git SHAs:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1) # or origin/main
|
||||
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**2. Dispatch code reviewer subagent:**
|
||||
|
||||
Dispatch a `general-purpose` subagent, filling the template at [code-reviewer.md](code-reviewer.md)
|
||||
|
||||
**Placeholders:**
|
||||
- `{DESCRIPTION}` - Brief summary of what you built
|
||||
- `{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}` - What it should do
|
||||
- `{BASE_SHA}` - Starting commit
|
||||
- `{HEAD_SHA}` - Ending commit
|
||||
|
||||
**3. Act on feedback:**
|
||||
- Fix Critical issues immediately
|
||||
- Fix Important issues before proceeding
|
||||
- Note Minor issues for later
|
||||
- Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)
|
||||
|
||||
## Example
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]
|
||||
|
||||
You: Let me request code review before proceeding.
|
||||
|
||||
BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
|
||||
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
|
||||
|
||||
[Dispatch code reviewer subagent]
|
||||
DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
|
||||
PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/superpowers/plans/deployment-plan.md
|
||||
BASE_SHA: a7981ec
|
||||
HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
|
||||
|
||||
[Subagent returns]:
|
||||
Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
|
||||
Issues:
|
||||
Important: Missing progress indicators
|
||||
Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval
|
||||
Assessment: Ready to proceed
|
||||
|
||||
You: [Fix progress indicators]
|
||||
[Continue to Task 3]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration with Workflows
|
||||
|
||||
**Subagent-Driven Development:**
|
||||
- Review after EACH task
|
||||
- Catch issues before they compound
|
||||
- Fix before moving to next task
|
||||
|
||||
**Executing Plans:**
|
||||
- Review after each task or at natural checkpoints
|
||||
- Get feedback, apply, continue
|
||||
|
||||
**Ad-Hoc Development:**
|
||||
- Review before merge
|
||||
- Review when stuck
|
||||
|
||||
## Red Flags
|
||||
|
||||
**Never:**
|
||||
- Skip review because "it's simple"
|
||||
- Ignore Critical issues
|
||||
- Proceed with unfixed Important issues
|
||||
- Argue with valid technical feedback
|
||||
|
||||
**If reviewer wrong:**
|
||||
- Push back with technical reasoning
|
||||
- Show code/tests that prove it works
|
||||
- Request clarification
|
||||
|
||||
See template at: [code-reviewer.md](code-reviewer.md)
|
||||
172
.claude/skills/requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md
Normal file
172
.claude/skills/requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,172 @@
|
||||
# Code Reviewer Prompt Template
|
||||
|
||||
Use this template when dispatching a code reviewer subagent.
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose:** Review completed work against requirements and code quality standards before it cascades into more work.
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Subagent (general-purpose):
|
||||
description: "Review code changes"
|
||||
prompt: |
|
||||
You are a Senior Code Reviewer with expertise in software architecture,
|
||||
design patterns, and best practices. Your job is to review completed work
|
||||
against its plan or requirements and identify issues before they cascade.
|
||||
|
||||
## What Was Implemented
|
||||
|
||||
[DESCRIPTION]
|
||||
|
||||
## Requirements / Plan
|
||||
|
||||
[PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS]
|
||||
|
||||
## Git Range to Review
|
||||
|
||||
**Base:** [BASE_SHA]
|
||||
**Head:** [HEAD_SHA]
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
git diff --stat [BASE_SHA]..[HEAD_SHA]
|
||||
git diff [BASE_SHA]..[HEAD_SHA]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Read-Only Review
|
||||
|
||||
Your review is read-only on this checkout. Do not mutate the working tree, the index, HEAD, or branch state in any way. Use tools like `git show`, `git diff`, and `git log` to inspect history. If you need a working copy of a different revision, check it out into a separate temporary directory (e.g. `git worktree add /tmp/review-[SHA] [SHA]`) — never move HEAD on this checkout.
|
||||
|
||||
## What to Check
|
||||
|
||||
**Plan alignment:**
|
||||
- Does the implementation match the plan / requirements?
|
||||
- Are deviations justified improvements, or problematic departures?
|
||||
- Is all planned functionality present?
|
||||
|
||||
**Code quality:**
|
||||
- Clean separation of concerns?
|
||||
- Proper error handling?
|
||||
- Type safety where applicable?
|
||||
- DRY without premature abstraction?
|
||||
- Edge cases handled?
|
||||
|
||||
**Architecture:**
|
||||
- Sound design decisions?
|
||||
- Reasonable scalability and performance?
|
||||
- Security concerns?
|
||||
- Integrates cleanly with surrounding code?
|
||||
|
||||
**Testing:**
|
||||
- Tests verify real behavior, not mocks?
|
||||
- Edge cases covered?
|
||||
- Integration tests where they matter?
|
||||
- All tests passing?
|
||||
|
||||
**Production readiness:**
|
||||
- Migration strategy if schema changed?
|
||||
- Backward compatibility considered?
|
||||
- Documentation complete?
|
||||
- No obvious bugs?
|
||||
|
||||
## Calibration
|
||||
|
||||
Categorize issues by actual severity. Not everything is Critical.
|
||||
Acknowledge what was done well before listing issues — accurate praise
|
||||
helps the implementer trust the rest of the feedback.
|
||||
|
||||
If you find significant deviations from the plan, flag them specifically
|
||||
so the implementer can confirm whether the deviation was intentional.
|
||||
If you find issues with the plan itself rather than the implementation,
|
||||
say so.
|
||||
|
||||
## Output Format
|
||||
|
||||
### Strengths
|
||||
[What's well done? Be specific.]
|
||||
|
||||
### Issues
|
||||
|
||||
#### Critical (Must Fix)
|
||||
[Bugs, security issues, data loss risks, broken functionality]
|
||||
|
||||
#### Important (Should Fix)
|
||||
[Architecture problems, missing features, poor error handling, test gaps]
|
||||
|
||||
#### Minor (Nice to Have)
|
||||
[Code style, optimization opportunities, documentation polish]
|
||||
|
||||
For each issue:
|
||||
- File:line reference
|
||||
- What's wrong
|
||||
- Why it matters
|
||||
- How to fix (if not obvious)
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommendations
|
||||
[Improvements for code quality, architecture, or process]
|
||||
|
||||
### Assessment
|
||||
|
||||
**Ready to merge?** [Yes | No | With fixes]
|
||||
|
||||
**Reasoning:** [1-2 sentence technical assessment]
|
||||
|
||||
## Critical Rules
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:**
|
||||
- Categorize by actual severity
|
||||
- Be specific (file:line, not vague)
|
||||
- Explain WHY each issue matters
|
||||
- Acknowledge strengths
|
||||
- Give a clear verdict
|
||||
|
||||
**DON'T:**
|
||||
- Say "looks good" without checking
|
||||
- Mark nitpicks as Critical
|
||||
- Give feedback on code you didn't actually read
|
||||
- Be vague ("improve error handling")
|
||||
- Avoid giving a clear verdict
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Placeholders:**
|
||||
- `[DESCRIPTION]` — brief summary of what was built
|
||||
- `[PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS]` — what it should do (plan file path, task text, or requirements)
|
||||
- `[BASE_SHA]` — starting commit
|
||||
- `[HEAD_SHA]` — ending commit
|
||||
|
||||
**Reviewer returns:** Strengths, Issues (Critical / Important / Minor), Recommendations, Assessment
|
||||
|
||||
## Example Output
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
### Strengths
|
||||
- Clean database schema with proper migrations (db.ts:15-42)
|
||||
- Comprehensive test coverage (18 tests, all edge cases)
|
||||
- Good error handling with fallbacks (summarizer.ts:85-92)
|
||||
|
||||
### Issues
|
||||
|
||||
#### Important
|
||||
1. **Missing help text in CLI wrapper**
|
||||
- File: index-conversations:1-31
|
||||
- Issue: No --help flag, users won't discover --concurrency
|
||||
- Fix: Add --help case with usage examples
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Date validation missing**
|
||||
- File: search.ts:25-27
|
||||
- Issue: Invalid dates silently return no results
|
||||
- Fix: Validate ISO format, throw error with example
|
||||
|
||||
#### Minor
|
||||
1. **Progress indicators**
|
||||
- File: indexer.ts:130
|
||||
- Issue: No "X of Y" counter for long operations
|
||||
- Impact: Users don't know how long to wait
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommendations
|
||||
- Add progress reporting for user experience
|
||||
- Consider config file for excluded projects (portability)
|
||||
|
||||
### Assessment
|
||||
|
||||
**Ready to merge: With fixes**
|
||||
|
||||
**Reasoning:** Core implementation is solid with good architecture and tests. Important issues (help text, date validation) are easily fixed and don't affect core functionality.
|
||||
```
|
||||
418
.claude/skills/subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md
Normal file
418
.claude/skills/subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,418 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: subagent-driven-development
|
||||
description: Use when executing implementation plans with independent tasks in the current session
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Subagent-Driven Development
|
||||
|
||||
Execute plan by dispatching a fresh implementer subagent per task, a task review (spec compliance + code quality) after each, and a broad whole-branch review at the end.
|
||||
|
||||
**Why subagents:** You delegate tasks to specialized agents with isolated context. By precisely crafting their instructions and context, you ensure they stay focused and succeed at their task. They should never inherit your session's context or history — you construct exactly what they need. This also preserves your own context for coordination work.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core principle:** Fresh subagent per task + task review (spec + quality) + broad final review = high quality, fast iteration
|
||||
|
||||
**Narration:** between tool calls, narrate at most one short line — the
|
||||
ledger and the tool results carry the record.
|
||||
|
||||
**Continuous execution:** Do not pause to check in with your human partner between tasks. Execute all tasks from the plan without stopping. The only reasons to stop are: BLOCKED status you cannot resolve, ambiguity that genuinely prevents progress, or all tasks complete. "Should I continue?" prompts and progress summaries waste their time — they asked you to execute the plan, so execute it.
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
```dot
|
||||
digraph when_to_use {
|
||||
"Have implementation plan?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Tasks mostly independent?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Stay in this session?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"subagent-driven-development" [shape=box];
|
||||
"executing-plans" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Manual execution or brainstorm first" [shape=box];
|
||||
|
||||
"Have implementation plan?" -> "Tasks mostly independent?" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Have implementation plan?" -> "Manual execution or brainstorm first" [label="no"];
|
||||
"Tasks mostly independent?" -> "Stay in this session?" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Tasks mostly independent?" -> "Manual execution or brainstorm first" [label="no - tightly coupled"];
|
||||
"Stay in this session?" -> "subagent-driven-development" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Stay in this session?" -> "executing-plans" [label="no - parallel session"];
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**vs. Executing Plans (parallel session):**
|
||||
- Same session (no context switch)
|
||||
- Fresh subagent per task (no context pollution)
|
||||
- Review after each task (spec compliance + code quality), broad review at the end
|
||||
- Faster iteration (no human-in-loop between tasks)
|
||||
|
||||
## The Process
|
||||
|
||||
```dot
|
||||
digraph process {
|
||||
rankdir=TB;
|
||||
|
||||
subgraph cluster_per_task {
|
||||
label="Per Task";
|
||||
"Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Implementer subagent asks questions?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Answer questions, provide context" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Write diff file, dispatch task reviewer subagent (./task-reviewer-prompt.md)" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Task reviewer reports spec ✅ and quality approved?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Dispatch fix subagent for Critical/Important findings" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Mark task complete in todo list and progress ledger" [shape=box];
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
"Read plan, note context and global constraints, create todos" [shape=box];
|
||||
"More tasks remain?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Dispatch final code reviewer subagent (../requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md)" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightgreen];
|
||||
|
||||
"Read plan, note context and global constraints, create todos" -> "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)";
|
||||
"Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)" -> "Implementer subagent asks questions?";
|
||||
"Implementer subagent asks questions?" -> "Answer questions, provide context" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Answer questions, provide context" -> "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)";
|
||||
"Implementer subagent asks questions?" -> "Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews" [label="no"];
|
||||
"Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews" -> "Write diff file, dispatch task reviewer subagent (./task-reviewer-prompt.md)";
|
||||
"Write diff file, dispatch task reviewer subagent (./task-reviewer-prompt.md)" -> "Task reviewer reports spec ✅ and quality approved?";
|
||||
"Task reviewer reports spec ✅ and quality approved?" -> "Dispatch fix subagent for Critical/Important findings" [label="no"];
|
||||
"Dispatch fix subagent for Critical/Important findings" -> "Write diff file, dispatch task reviewer subagent (./task-reviewer-prompt.md)" [label="re-review"];
|
||||
"Task reviewer reports spec ✅ and quality approved?" -> "Mark task complete in todo list and progress ledger" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Mark task complete in todo list and progress ledger" -> "More tasks remain?";
|
||||
"More tasks remain?" -> "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"More tasks remain?" -> "Dispatch final code reviewer subagent (../requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md)" [label="no"];
|
||||
"Dispatch final code reviewer subagent (../requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md)" -> "Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch";
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Pre-Flight Plan Review
|
||||
|
||||
Before dispatching Task 1, scan the plan once for conflicts:
|
||||
|
||||
- tasks that contradict each other or the plan's Global Constraints
|
||||
- anything the plan explicitly mandates that the review rubric treats as a
|
||||
defect (a test that asserts nothing, verbatim duplication of a logic block)
|
||||
|
||||
Present everything you find to your human partner as one batched question —
|
||||
each finding beside the plan text that mandates it, asking which governs —
|
||||
before execution begins, not one interrupt per discovery mid-plan. If the
|
||||
scan is clean, proceed without comment. The review loop remains the net for
|
||||
conflicts that only emerge from implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
## Model Selection
|
||||
|
||||
Use the least powerful model that can handle each role to conserve cost and increase speed.
|
||||
|
||||
**Mechanical implementation tasks** (isolated functions, clear specs, 1-2 files): use a fast, cheap model. Most implementation tasks are mechanical when the plan is well-specified.
|
||||
|
||||
**Integration and judgment tasks** (multi-file coordination, pattern matching, debugging): use a standard model.
|
||||
|
||||
**Architecture and design tasks**: use the most capable available model.
|
||||
The final whole-branch review is one of these — dispatch it on the most
|
||||
capable available model, not the session default.
|
||||
|
||||
**Review tasks**: choose the model with the same judgment, scaled to the
|
||||
diff's size, complexity, and risk. A small mechanical diff does not need the
|
||||
most capable model; a subtle concurrency change does.
|
||||
|
||||
**Always specify the model explicitly when dispatching a subagent.** An
|
||||
omitted model inherits your session's model — often the most capable and
|
||||
most expensive — which silently defeats this section.
|
||||
|
||||
**Turn count beats token price.** Wall-clock and context cost scale with how
|
||||
many turns a subagent takes, and the cheapest models routinely take 2-3× the
|
||||
turns on multi-step work — costing more overall. Use a mid-tier model as the
|
||||
floor for reviewers and for implementers working from prose descriptions.
|
||||
When the task's plan text contains the complete code to write, the
|
||||
implementation is transcription plus testing: use the cheapest tier for
|
||||
that implementer. Single-file mechanical fixes also take the cheapest tier.
|
||||
|
||||
**Task complexity signals (implementation tasks):**
|
||||
- Touches 1-2 files with a complete spec → cheap model
|
||||
- Touches multiple files with integration concerns → standard model
|
||||
- Requires design judgment or broad codebase understanding → most capable model
|
||||
|
||||
## Handling Implementer Status
|
||||
|
||||
Implementer subagents report one of four statuses. Handle each appropriately:
|
||||
|
||||
**DONE:** Generate the review package (`scripts/review-package BASE HEAD`, from this skill's directory — it prints the unique file path it wrote; BASE is the commit you recorded before dispatching the implementer — never `HEAD~1`, which silently drops all but the last commit of a multi-commit task), then dispatch the task reviewer with the printed path.
|
||||
|
||||
**DONE_WITH_CONCERNS:** The implementer completed the work but flagged doubts. Read the concerns before proceeding. If the concerns are about correctness or scope, address them before review. If they're observations (e.g., "this file is getting large"), note them and proceed to review.
|
||||
|
||||
**NEEDS_CONTEXT:** The implementer needs information that wasn't provided. Provide the missing context and re-dispatch.
|
||||
|
||||
**BLOCKED:** The implementer cannot complete the task. Assess the blocker:
|
||||
1. If it's a context problem, provide more context and re-dispatch with the same model
|
||||
2. If the task requires more reasoning, re-dispatch with a more capable model
|
||||
3. If the task is too large, break it into smaller pieces
|
||||
4. If the plan itself is wrong, escalate to the human
|
||||
|
||||
**Never** ignore an escalation or force the same model to retry without changes. If the implementer said it's stuck, something needs to change.
|
||||
|
||||
## Handling Reviewer ⚠️ Items
|
||||
|
||||
The task reviewer may report "⚠️ Cannot verify from diff" items — requirements
|
||||
that live in unchanged code or span tasks. These do not block the rest of the
|
||||
review, but you must resolve each one yourself before marking the task
|
||||
complete: you hold the plan and cross-task context the reviewer
|
||||
lacks. If you confirm an item is a real gap, treat it as a failed spec
|
||||
review — send it back to the implementer and re-review.
|
||||
|
||||
## Constructing Reviewer Prompts
|
||||
|
||||
Per-task reviews are task-scoped gates. The broad review happens once, at the
|
||||
final whole-branch review. When you fill a reviewer template:
|
||||
|
||||
- Do not add open-ended directives like "check all uses" or "run race tests
|
||||
if useful" without a concrete, task-specific reason
|
||||
- Do not ask a reviewer to re-run tests the implementer already ran on the
|
||||
same code — the implementer's report carries the test evidence
|
||||
- Do not pre-judge findings for the reviewer — never instruct a reviewer to
|
||||
ignore or not flag a specific issue. If you believe a finding would be a
|
||||
false positive, let the reviewer raise it and adjudicate it in the review
|
||||
loop. If the prompt you are writing contains "do not flag," "don't treat X
|
||||
as a defect," "at most Minor," or "the plan chose" — stop: you are
|
||||
pre-judging, usually to spare yourself a review loop.
|
||||
- The global-constraints block you hand the reviewer is its attention
|
||||
lens. Copy the binding requirements verbatim from the plan's Global
|
||||
Constraints section or the spec: exact values, exact formats, and the
|
||||
stated relationships between components ("same layout as X", "matches
|
||||
Y"). The reviewer's template already carries the process rules (YAGNI,
|
||||
test hygiene, review method) — the constraints block is for what THIS
|
||||
project's spec demands.
|
||||
- Hand the reviewer its diff as a file: run this skill's
|
||||
`scripts/review-package BASE HEAD` and pass the reviewer the file path
|
||||
it prints (or, without bash: `git log --oneline`, `git diff --stat`,
|
||||
and `git diff -U10` for the range, redirected to one uniquely named
|
||||
file). The output never enters your own context, and the reviewer sees
|
||||
the commit list, stat summary, and full diff with context in one Read
|
||||
call. Use the BASE you recorded before dispatching the implementer —
|
||||
never `HEAD~1`, which silently truncates multi-commit tasks.
|
||||
- A dispatch prompt describes one task, not the session's history. Do not
|
||||
paste accumulated prior-task summaries ("state after Tasks 1-3") into
|
||||
later dispatches — a real session's dispatch hit 42k chars of which 99%
|
||||
was pasted history. A fresh subagent needs its task, the interfaces it
|
||||
touches, and the global constraints. Nothing else.
|
||||
- Dispatch fix subagents for Critical and Important findings. Record Minor
|
||||
findings in the progress ledger as you go, and point the final
|
||||
whole-branch review at that list so it can triage which must be fixed
|
||||
before merge. A roll-up nobody reads is a silent discard.
|
||||
- A finding labeled plan-mandated — or any finding that conflicts with
|
||||
what the plan's text requires — is the human's decision, like any plan
|
||||
contradiction: present the finding and the plan text, ask which governs.
|
||||
Do not dismiss the finding because the plan mandates it, and do not
|
||||
dispatch a fix that contradicts the plan without asking.
|
||||
- The final whole-branch review gets a package too: run
|
||||
`scripts/review-package MERGE_BASE HEAD` (MERGE_BASE = the commit the
|
||||
branch started from, e.g. `git merge-base main HEAD`) and include the
|
||||
printed path in the final review dispatch, so the final reviewer reads
|
||||
one file instead of re-deriving the branch diff with git commands.
|
||||
- Every fix dispatch carries the implementer contract: the fix subagent
|
||||
re-runs the tests covering its change and reports the results. Name the
|
||||
covering test files in the dispatch — a one-line fix does not need the
|
||||
whole suite. Before re-dispatching the reviewer, confirm the fix report
|
||||
contains the covering tests, the command run, and the output; dispatch
|
||||
the re-review once all three are present.
|
||||
- If the final whole-branch review returns findings, dispatch ONE fix
|
||||
subagent with the complete findings list — not one fixer per finding.
|
||||
Per-finding fixers each rebuild context and re-run suites; a real
|
||||
session's final-review fix wave cost more than all its tasks combined.
|
||||
|
||||
## File Handoffs
|
||||
|
||||
Everything you paste into a dispatch prompt — and everything a subagent
|
||||
prints back — stays resident in your context for the rest of the session
|
||||
and is re-read on every later turn. Hand artifacts over as files:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Task brief:** before dispatching an implementer, run this skill's
|
||||
`scripts/task-brief PLAN_FILE N` — it extracts the task's full text to a
|
||||
uniquely named file and prints the path. Compose the dispatch so the
|
||||
brief stays the single source of requirements. Your dispatch should
|
||||
contain: (1) one line on where this task fits in the project; (2) the
|
||||
brief path, introduced as "read this first — it is your requirements,
|
||||
with the exact values to use verbatim"; (3) interfaces and decisions
|
||||
from earlier tasks that the brief cannot know; (4) your resolution of
|
||||
any ambiguity you noticed in the brief; (5) the report-file path and
|
||||
report contract. Exact values (numbers, magic strings, signatures, test
|
||||
cases) appear only in the brief.
|
||||
- **Report file:** name the implementer's report file after the brief
|
||||
(brief `…/task-N-brief.md` → report `…/task-N-report.md`) and put it in
|
||||
the dispatch prompt. The implementer writes the full report there and
|
||||
returns only status, commits, a one-line test summary, and concerns.
|
||||
- **Reviewer inputs:** the task reviewer gets three paths — the same brief
|
||||
file, the report file, and the review package — plus the global
|
||||
constraints that bind the task.
|
||||
- Fix dispatches append their fix report (with test results) to the same
|
||||
report file and return a short summary; re-reviews read the updated file.
|
||||
|
||||
## Durable Progress
|
||||
|
||||
Conversation memory does not survive compaction. In real sessions,
|
||||
controllers that lost their place have re-dispatched entire completed task
|
||||
sequences — the single most expensive failure observed. Track progress in
|
||||
a ledger file, not only in todos.
|
||||
|
||||
- At skill start, check for a ledger:
|
||||
`cat "$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)/.superpowers/sdd/progress.md"`. Tasks listed there
|
||||
as complete are DONE — do not re-dispatch them; resume at the first task
|
||||
not marked complete.
|
||||
- When a task's review comes back clean, append one line to the ledger in
|
||||
the same message as your other bookkeeping:
|
||||
`Task N: complete (commits <base7>..<head7>, review clean)`.
|
||||
- The ledger is your recovery map: the commits it names exist in git even
|
||||
when your context no longer remembers creating them. After compaction,
|
||||
trust the ledger and `git log` over your own recollection.
|
||||
- `git clean -fdx` will destroy the ledger (it's git-ignored scratch); if
|
||||
that happens, recover from `git log`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Prompt Templates
|
||||
|
||||
- [implementer-prompt.md](implementer-prompt.md) - Dispatch implementer subagent
|
||||
- [task-reviewer-prompt.md](task-reviewer-prompt.md) - Dispatch task reviewer subagent (spec compliance + code quality)
|
||||
- Final whole-branch review: use superpowers:requesting-code-review's [code-reviewer.md](../requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md)
|
||||
|
||||
## Example Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
You: I'm using Subagent-Driven Development to execute this plan.
|
||||
|
||||
[Read plan file once: docs/superpowers/plans/feature-plan.md]
|
||||
[Create todos for all tasks]
|
||||
|
||||
Task 1: Hook installation script
|
||||
|
||||
[Run task-brief for Task 1; dispatch implementer with brief + report paths + context]
|
||||
|
||||
Implementer: "Before I begin - should the hook be installed at user or system level?"
|
||||
|
||||
You: "User level (~/.config/superpowers/hooks/)"
|
||||
|
||||
Implementer: "Got it. Implementing now..."
|
||||
[Later] Implementer:
|
||||
- Implemented install-hook command
|
||||
- Added tests, 5/5 passing
|
||||
- Self-review: Found I missed --force flag, added it
|
||||
- Committed
|
||||
|
||||
[Run review-package, dispatch task reviewer with the printed path]
|
||||
Task reviewer: Spec ✅ - all requirements met, nothing extra.
|
||||
Strengths: Good test coverage, clean. Issues: None. Task quality: Approved.
|
||||
|
||||
[Mark Task 1 complete]
|
||||
|
||||
Task 2: Recovery modes
|
||||
|
||||
[Run task-brief for Task 2; dispatch implementer with brief + report paths + context]
|
||||
|
||||
Implementer: [No questions, proceeds]
|
||||
Implementer:
|
||||
- Added verify/repair modes
|
||||
- 8/8 tests passing
|
||||
- Self-review: All good
|
||||
- Committed
|
||||
|
||||
[Run review-package, dispatch task reviewer with the printed path]
|
||||
Task reviewer: Spec ❌:
|
||||
- Missing: Progress reporting (spec says "report every 100 items")
|
||||
- Extra: Added --json flag (not requested)
|
||||
Issues (Important): Magic number (100)
|
||||
|
||||
[Dispatch fix subagent with all findings]
|
||||
Fixer: Removed --json flag, added progress reporting, extracted PROGRESS_INTERVAL constant
|
||||
|
||||
[Task reviewer reviews again]
|
||||
Task reviewer: Spec ✅. Task quality: Approved.
|
||||
|
||||
[Mark Task 2 complete]
|
||||
|
||||
...
|
||||
|
||||
[After all tasks]
|
||||
[Dispatch final code-reviewer]
|
||||
Final reviewer: All requirements met, ready to merge
|
||||
|
||||
Done!
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Advantages
|
||||
|
||||
**vs. Manual execution:**
|
||||
- Subagents follow TDD naturally
|
||||
- Fresh context per task (no confusion)
|
||||
- Parallel-safe (subagents don't interfere)
|
||||
- Subagent can ask questions (before AND during work)
|
||||
|
||||
**vs. Executing Plans:**
|
||||
- Same session (no handoff)
|
||||
- Continuous progress (no waiting)
|
||||
- Review checkpoints automatic
|
||||
|
||||
**Efficiency gains:**
|
||||
- Controller curates exactly what context is needed; bulk artifacts move
|
||||
as files, not pasted text
|
||||
- Subagent gets complete information upfront
|
||||
- Questions surfaced before work begins (not after)
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality gates:**
|
||||
- Self-review catches issues before handoff
|
||||
- Task review carries two verdicts: spec compliance and code quality
|
||||
- Review loops ensure fixes actually work
|
||||
- Spec compliance prevents over/under-building
|
||||
- Code quality ensures implementation is well-built
|
||||
|
||||
**Cost:**
|
||||
- More subagent invocations (implementer + reviewer per task)
|
||||
- Controller does more prep work (extracting all tasks upfront)
|
||||
- Review loops add iterations
|
||||
- But catches issues early (cheaper than debugging later)
|
||||
|
||||
## Red Flags
|
||||
|
||||
**Never:**
|
||||
- Start implementation on main/master branch without explicit user consent
|
||||
- Skip task review, or accept a report missing either verdict (spec compliance AND task quality are both required)
|
||||
- Proceed with unfixed issues
|
||||
- Dispatch multiple implementation subagents in parallel (conflicts)
|
||||
- Make a subagent read the whole plan file (hand it its task brief —
|
||||
`scripts/task-brief` — instead)
|
||||
- Skip scene-setting context (subagent needs to understand where task fits)
|
||||
- Ignore subagent questions (answer before letting them proceed)
|
||||
- Accept "close enough" on spec compliance (reviewer found spec issues = not done)
|
||||
- Skip review loops (reviewer found issues = implementer fixes = review again)
|
||||
- Let implementer self-review replace actual review (both are needed)
|
||||
- Tell a reviewer what not to flag, or pre-rate a finding's severity in the
|
||||
dispatch prompt ("treat it as Minor at most") — the plan's example code is
|
||||
a starting point, not evidence that its weaknesses were chosen
|
||||
- Dispatch a task reviewer without a diff file — generate it first
|
||||
(`scripts/review-package BASE HEAD`) and name the printed path in the
|
||||
prompt
|
||||
- Move to next task while the review has open Critical/Important issues
|
||||
- Re-dispatch a task the progress ledger already marks complete — check
|
||||
the ledger (and `git log`) after any compaction or resume
|
||||
|
||||
**If subagent asks questions:**
|
||||
- Answer clearly and completely
|
||||
- Provide additional context if needed
|
||||
- Don't rush them into implementation
|
||||
|
||||
**If reviewer finds issues:**
|
||||
- Implementer (same subagent) fixes them
|
||||
- Reviewer reviews again
|
||||
- Repeat until approved
|
||||
- Don't skip the re-review
|
||||
|
||||
**If subagent fails task:**
|
||||
- Dispatch fix subagent with specific instructions
|
||||
- Don't try to fix manually (context pollution)
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration
|
||||
|
||||
**Required workflow skills:**
|
||||
- **superpowers:using-git-worktrees** - Ensures isolated workspace (creates one or verifies existing)
|
||||
- **superpowers:writing-plans** - Creates the plan this skill executes
|
||||
- **superpowers:requesting-code-review** - Code review template for the final whole-branch review
|
||||
- **superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch** - Complete development after all tasks
|
||||
|
||||
**Subagents should use:**
|
||||
- **superpowers:test-driven-development** - Subagents follow TDD for each task
|
||||
|
||||
**Alternative workflow:**
|
||||
- **superpowers:executing-plans** - Use for parallel session instead of same-session execution
|
||||
139
.claude/skills/subagent-driven-development/implementer-prompt.md
Normal file
139
.claude/skills/subagent-driven-development/implementer-prompt.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,139 @@
|
||||
# Implementer Subagent Prompt Template
|
||||
|
||||
Use this template when dispatching an implementer subagent.
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Subagent (general-purpose):
|
||||
description: "Implement Task N: [task name]"
|
||||
model: [MODEL — REQUIRED: choose per SKILL.md Model Selection; an omitted
|
||||
model silently inherits the session's most expensive one]
|
||||
prompt: |
|
||||
You are implementing Task N: [task name]
|
||||
|
||||
## Task Description
|
||||
|
||||
Read your task brief first: [BRIEF_FILE]
|
||||
It contains the full task text from the plan.
|
||||
|
||||
## Context
|
||||
|
||||
[Scene-setting: where this fits, dependencies, architectural context]
|
||||
|
||||
## Before You Begin
|
||||
|
||||
If you have questions about:
|
||||
- The requirements or acceptance criteria
|
||||
- The approach or implementation strategy
|
||||
- Dependencies or assumptions
|
||||
- Anything unclear in the task description
|
||||
|
||||
**Ask them now.** Raise any concerns before starting work.
|
||||
|
||||
## Your Job
|
||||
|
||||
Once you're clear on requirements:
|
||||
1. Implement exactly what the task specifies
|
||||
2. Write tests (following TDD if task says to)
|
||||
3. Verify implementation works
|
||||
4. Commit your work
|
||||
5. Self-review (see below)
|
||||
6. Report back
|
||||
|
||||
Work from: [directory]
|
||||
|
||||
**While you work:** If you encounter something unexpected or unclear, **ask questions**.
|
||||
It's always OK to pause and clarify. Don't guess or make assumptions.
|
||||
|
||||
While iterating, run the focused test for what you're changing; run the
|
||||
full suite once before committing, not after every edit.
|
||||
|
||||
## Code Organization
|
||||
|
||||
You reason best about code you can hold in context at once, and your edits are more
|
||||
reliable when files are focused. Keep this in mind:
|
||||
- Follow the file structure defined in the plan
|
||||
- Each file should have one clear responsibility with a well-defined interface
|
||||
- If a file you're creating is growing beyond the plan's intent, stop and report
|
||||
it as DONE_WITH_CONCERNS — don't split files on your own without plan guidance
|
||||
- If an existing file you're modifying is already large or tangled, work carefully
|
||||
and note it as a concern in your report
|
||||
- In existing codebases, follow established patterns. Improve code you're touching
|
||||
the way a good developer would, but don't restructure things outside your task.
|
||||
|
||||
## When You're in Over Your Head
|
||||
|
||||
It is always OK to stop and say "this is too hard for me." Bad work is worse than
|
||||
no work. You will not be penalized for escalating.
|
||||
|
||||
**STOP and escalate when:**
|
||||
- The task requires architectural decisions with multiple valid approaches
|
||||
- You need to understand code beyond what was provided and can't find clarity
|
||||
- You feel uncertain about whether your approach is correct
|
||||
- The task involves restructuring existing code in ways the plan didn't anticipate
|
||||
- You've been reading file after file trying to understand the system without progress
|
||||
|
||||
**How to escalate:** Report back with status BLOCKED or NEEDS_CONTEXT. Describe
|
||||
specifically what you're stuck on, what you've tried, and what kind of help you need.
|
||||
The controller can provide more context, re-dispatch with a more capable model,
|
||||
or break the task into smaller pieces.
|
||||
|
||||
## Before Reporting Back: Self-Review
|
||||
|
||||
Review your work with fresh eyes. Ask yourself:
|
||||
|
||||
**Completeness:**
|
||||
- Did I fully implement everything in the spec?
|
||||
- Did I miss any requirements?
|
||||
- Are there edge cases I didn't handle?
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality:**
|
||||
- Is this my best work?
|
||||
- Are names clear and accurate (match what things do, not how they work)?
|
||||
- Is the code clean and maintainable?
|
||||
|
||||
**Discipline:**
|
||||
- Did I avoid overbuilding (YAGNI)?
|
||||
- Did I only build what was requested?
|
||||
- Did I follow existing patterns in the codebase?
|
||||
|
||||
**Testing:**
|
||||
- Do tests actually verify behavior (not just mock behavior)?
|
||||
- Did I follow TDD if required?
|
||||
- Are tests comprehensive?
|
||||
- Is the test output pristine (no stray warnings or noise)?
|
||||
|
||||
If you find issues during self-review, fix them now before reporting.
|
||||
|
||||
## After Review Findings
|
||||
|
||||
If a reviewer finds issues and you fix them, re-run the tests that cover
|
||||
the amended code and append the results to your report file. Reviewers
|
||||
will not re-run tests for you — your report is the test evidence.
|
||||
|
||||
## Report Format
|
||||
|
||||
Write your full report to [REPORT_FILE]:
|
||||
- What you implemented (or what you attempted, if blocked)
|
||||
- What you tested and test results
|
||||
- **TDD Evidence** (if TDD was required for this task):
|
||||
- RED: command run, relevant failing output before implementation, and why the failure was expected
|
||||
- GREEN: command run and relevant passing output after implementation
|
||||
- Files changed
|
||||
- Self-review findings (if any)
|
||||
- Any issues or concerns
|
||||
|
||||
Then report back with ONLY (under 15 lines — the detail lives in the
|
||||
report file):
|
||||
- **Status:** DONE | DONE_WITH_CONCERNS | BLOCKED | NEEDS_CONTEXT
|
||||
- Commits created (short SHA + subject)
|
||||
- One-line test summary (e.g. "14/14 passing, output pristine")
|
||||
- Your concerns, if any
|
||||
- The report file path
|
||||
|
||||
If BLOCKED or NEEDS_CONTEXT, put the specifics in the final message
|
||||
itself — the controller acts on it directly.
|
||||
|
||||
Use DONE_WITH_CONCERNS if you completed the work but have doubts about correctness.
|
||||
Use BLOCKED if you cannot complete the task. Use NEEDS_CONTEXT if you need
|
||||
information that wasn't provided. Never silently produce work you're unsure about.
|
||||
```
|
||||
44
.claude/skills/subagent-driven-development/scripts/review-package
Executable file
44
.claude/skills/subagent-driven-development/scripts/review-package
Executable file
@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
|
||||
#!/usr/bin/env bash
|
||||
# Generate a review package: commit list, stat summary, and the net
|
||||
# diff with extended context, written to a file the reviewer reads in one
|
||||
# call. Using the recorded per-task BASE (not HEAD~1) keeps multi-commit
|
||||
# tasks intact.
|
||||
#
|
||||
# Usage: review-package BASE HEAD [OUTFILE]
|
||||
# Default OUTFILE: <repo-root>/.superpowers/sdd/review-<base7>..<head7>.diff
|
||||
# (named per range, so a re-review after fixes gets a distinct fresh file).
|
||||
set -euo pipefail
|
||||
|
||||
if [ $# -lt 2 ] || [ $# -gt 3 ]; then
|
||||
echo "usage: review-package BASE HEAD [OUTFILE]" >&2
|
||||
exit 2
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
base=$1
|
||||
head=$2
|
||||
|
||||
git rev-parse --verify --quiet "$base" >/dev/null || { echo "bad BASE: $base" >&2; exit 2; }
|
||||
git rev-parse --verify --quiet "$head" >/dev/null || { echo "bad HEAD: $head" >&2; exit 2; }
|
||||
|
||||
if [ $# -eq 3 ]; then
|
||||
out=$3
|
||||
else
|
||||
dir=$("$(cd "$(dirname "$0")" && pwd)/sdd-workspace")
|
||||
out="$dir/review-$(git rev-parse --short "$base")..$(git rev-parse --short "$head").diff"
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
{
|
||||
echo "# Review package: ${base}..${head}"
|
||||
echo
|
||||
echo "## Commits"
|
||||
git log --oneline "${base}..${head}"
|
||||
echo
|
||||
echo "## Files changed"
|
||||
git diff --stat "${base}..${head}"
|
||||
echo
|
||||
echo "## Diff"
|
||||
git diff -U10 "${base}..${head}"
|
||||
} > "$out"
|
||||
|
||||
commits=$(git rev-list --count "${base}..${head}")
|
||||
echo "wrote ${out}: ${commits} commit(s), $(wc -c < "$out" | tr -d ' ') bytes"
|
||||
22
.claude/skills/subagent-driven-development/scripts/sdd-workspace
Executable file
22
.claude/skills/subagent-driven-development/scripts/sdd-workspace
Executable file
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
|
||||
#!/usr/bin/env bash
|
||||
# Resolve and ensure the working-tree directory SDD uses for its short-lived
|
||||
# artifacts: task briefs, implementer reports, review packages, and the
|
||||
# progress ledger. Print the directory's absolute path.
|
||||
#
|
||||
# The workspace lives in the working tree (not under .git/) because Claude Code
|
||||
# treats .git/ as a protected path and denies agent writes there — which blocks
|
||||
# an implementer subagent from writing its report file. A self-ignoring
|
||||
# .gitignore keeps the workspace out of `git status` and out of accidental
|
||||
# commits without modifying any tracked file.
|
||||
#
|
||||
# Single source of truth for the workspace location, so task-brief and
|
||||
# review-package cannot drift to different directories.
|
||||
#
|
||||
# Usage: sdd-workspace
|
||||
set -euo pipefail
|
||||
|
||||
root=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
|
||||
dir="$root/.superpowers/sdd"
|
||||
mkdir -p "$dir"
|
||||
printf '*\n' > "$dir/.gitignore"
|
||||
cd "$dir" && pwd
|
||||
40
.claude/skills/subagent-driven-development/scripts/task-brief
Executable file
40
.claude/skills/subagent-driven-development/scripts/task-brief
Executable file
@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
|
||||
#!/usr/bin/env bash
|
||||
# Extract one task's full text from an implementation plan into a file the
|
||||
# implementer reads in one call, so the task text never has to be pasted
|
||||
# through the controller's context.
|
||||
#
|
||||
# Usage: task-brief PLAN_FILE TASK_NUMBER [OUTFILE]
|
||||
# Default OUTFILE: <repo-root>/.superpowers/sdd/task-<N>-brief.md
|
||||
# (per worktree; concurrent runs in the same working tree share it).
|
||||
set -euo pipefail
|
||||
|
||||
if [ $# -lt 2 ] || [ $# -gt 3 ]; then
|
||||
echo "usage: task-brief PLAN_FILE TASK_NUMBER [OUTFILE]" >&2
|
||||
exit 2
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
plan=$1
|
||||
n=$2
|
||||
[ -f "$plan" ] || { echo "no such plan file: $plan" >&2; exit 2; }
|
||||
|
||||
if [ $# -eq 3 ]; then
|
||||
out=$3
|
||||
else
|
||||
dir=$("$(cd "$(dirname "$0")" && pwd)/sdd-workspace")
|
||||
out="$dir/task-${n}-brief.md"
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
awk -v n="$n" '
|
||||
/^```/ { infence = !infence }
|
||||
!infence && /^#+[ \t]+Task[ \t]+[0-9]+/ {
|
||||
intask = ($0 ~ ("^#+[ \t]+Task[ \t]+" n "([^0-9]|$)"))
|
||||
}
|
||||
intask { print }
|
||||
' "$plan" > "$out"
|
||||
|
||||
if [ ! -s "$out" ]; then
|
||||
echo "task ${n} not found in ${plan} (no heading matching 'Task ${n}')" >&2
|
||||
exit 3
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
echo "wrote ${out}: $(wc -l < "$out" | tr -d ' ') lines"
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,188 @@
|
||||
# Task Reviewer Prompt Template
|
||||
|
||||
Use this template when dispatching a task reviewer subagent. The reviewer
|
||||
reads the task's diff once and returns two verdicts: spec compliance and
|
||||
code quality.
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose:** Verify one task's implementation matches its requirements (nothing
|
||||
more, nothing less) and is well-built (clean, tested, maintainable)
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Subagent (general-purpose):
|
||||
description: "Review Task N (spec + quality)"
|
||||
model: [MODEL — REQUIRED: choose per SKILL.md Model Selection; an omitted
|
||||
model silently inherits the session's most expensive one]
|
||||
prompt: |
|
||||
You are reviewing one task's implementation: first whether it matches its
|
||||
requirements, then whether it is well-built. This is a task-scoped gate,
|
||||
not a merge review — a broad whole-branch review happens separately after
|
||||
all tasks are complete.
|
||||
|
||||
## What Was Requested
|
||||
|
||||
Read the task brief: [BRIEF_FILE]
|
||||
|
||||
Global constraints from the spec/design that bind this task:
|
||||
[GLOBAL_CONSTRAINTS]
|
||||
|
||||
## What the Implementer Claims They Built
|
||||
|
||||
Read the implementer's report: [REPORT_FILE]
|
||||
|
||||
## Diff Under Review
|
||||
|
||||
**Base:** [BASE_SHA]
|
||||
**Head:** [HEAD_SHA]
|
||||
**Diff file:** [DIFF_FILE]
|
||||
|
||||
Read the diff file once — it contains the commit list, a stat summary,
|
||||
and the full diff with surrounding context, and it is your view of the
|
||||
change. The diff's context lines ARE the changed files: do not Read a
|
||||
changed file separately unless a hunk you must judge is cut off
|
||||
mid-function — and say so in your report. Do not re-run git commands.
|
||||
If the diff file is missing, fetch the diff yourself:
|
||||
`git diff --stat [BASE_SHA]..[HEAD_SHA]` and `git diff [BASE_SHA]..[HEAD_SHA]`.
|
||||
Do not crawl the broader codebase. Inspect code outside the diff only
|
||||
to evaluate a concrete risk you can name — one focused check per named
|
||||
risk, and name both the risk and what you checked in your report.
|
||||
Cross-cutting changes are legitimate named risks: if the diff changes
|
||||
lock ordering, a function or API contract, or shared mutable state,
|
||||
checking the call sites is the right method.
|
||||
|
||||
Your review is read-only on this checkout. Do not mutate the working
|
||||
tree, the index, HEAD, or branch state in any way.
|
||||
|
||||
## Do Not Trust the Report
|
||||
|
||||
Treat the implementer's report as unverified claims about the code. It
|
||||
may be incomplete, inaccurate, or optimistic. Verify the claims against
|
||||
the diff. Design rationales in the report are claims too: "left it per
|
||||
YAGNI," "kept it simple deliberately," or any other justification is the
|
||||
implementer grading their own work. Judge the code on its merits — a
|
||||
stated rationale never downgrades a finding's severity.
|
||||
|
||||
## Tests
|
||||
|
||||
The implementer already ran the tests and reported results with TDD
|
||||
evidence for exactly this code. Do not re-run the suite to confirm their
|
||||
report. Run a test only when reading the code raises a specific doubt
|
||||
that no existing run answers — and then a focused test, never a
|
||||
package-wide suite, race detector run, or repeated/high-count loop. If
|
||||
heavy validation seems warranted, recommend it in your report instead of
|
||||
running it. If you cannot run commands in this environment, name the
|
||||
test you would run.
|
||||
|
||||
Warnings or other noise in the implementer's reported test output are
|
||||
findings — test output should be pristine.
|
||||
|
||||
## Part 1: Spec Compliance
|
||||
|
||||
Compare the diff against What Was Requested:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Missing:** requirements they skipped, missed, or claimed without
|
||||
implementing
|
||||
- **Extra:** features that weren't requested, over-engineering, unneeded
|
||||
"nice to haves"
|
||||
- **Misunderstood:** right feature built the wrong way, wrong problem
|
||||
solved
|
||||
|
||||
If a requirement cannot be verified from this diff alone (it lives in
|
||||
unchanged code or spans tasks), report it as a ⚠️ item instead of
|
||||
broadening your search.
|
||||
|
||||
## Part 2: Code Quality
|
||||
|
||||
**Code quality:**
|
||||
- Clean separation of concerns?
|
||||
- Proper error handling?
|
||||
- DRY without premature abstraction?
|
||||
- Edge cases handled?
|
||||
|
||||
**Tests:**
|
||||
- Do the new and changed tests verify real behavior, not mocks?
|
||||
- Are the task's edge cases covered?
|
||||
|
||||
**Structure:**
|
||||
- Does each file have one clear responsibility with a well-defined interface?
|
||||
- Are units decomposed so they can be understood and tested independently?
|
||||
- Is the implementation following the file structure from the plan?
|
||||
- Did this change create new files that are already large, or
|
||||
significantly grow existing files? (Don't flag pre-existing file
|
||||
sizes — focus on what this change contributed.)
|
||||
|
||||
Your report should point at evidence: file:line references for every
|
||||
finding and for any check you would otherwise answer with a bare
|
||||
"yes." A tight report that cites lines gives the controller everything
|
||||
it needs.
|
||||
|
||||
Your final message is the report itself: begin directly with the
|
||||
spec-compliance verdict. Every line is a verdict, a finding with
|
||||
file:line, or a check you ran — no preamble, no process narration,
|
||||
no closing summary.
|
||||
|
||||
## Calibration
|
||||
|
||||
Categorize issues by actual severity. Not everything is Critical.
|
||||
Important means this task cannot be trusted until it is fixed: incorrect
|
||||
or fragile behavior, a missed requirement, or maintainability damage you
|
||||
would block a merge over — verbatim duplication of a logic block,
|
||||
swallowed errors, tests that assert nothing. "Coverage could be broader"
|
||||
and polish suggestions are Minor.
|
||||
If the plan or brief explicitly mandates something this rubric calls a
|
||||
defect (a test that asserts nothing, verbatim duplication of a logic
|
||||
block), that IS a finding — report it as Important, labeled
|
||||
plan-mandated. The plan's authorship does not grade its own work; the
|
||||
human decides.
|
||||
Acknowledge what was done well before listing issues — accurate praise
|
||||
helps the implementer trust the rest of the feedback.
|
||||
|
||||
## Output Format
|
||||
|
||||
### Spec Compliance
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ Spec compliant | ❌ Issues found: [what's missing/extra/misunderstood,
|
||||
with file:line references]
|
||||
- ⚠️ Cannot verify from diff: [requirements you could not verify from the
|
||||
diff alone, and what the controller should check — report alongside the
|
||||
✅/❌ verdict for everything you could verify]
|
||||
|
||||
### Strengths
|
||||
[What's well done? Be specific.]
|
||||
|
||||
### Issues
|
||||
|
||||
#### Critical (Must Fix)
|
||||
#### Important (Should Fix)
|
||||
#### Minor (Nice to Have)
|
||||
|
||||
For each issue: file:line, what's wrong, why it matters, how to fix
|
||||
(if not obvious).
|
||||
|
||||
### Assessment
|
||||
|
||||
**Task quality:** [Approved | Needs fixes]
|
||||
|
||||
**Reasoning:** [1-2 sentence technical assessment]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Placeholders:**
|
||||
- `[MODEL]` — REQUIRED: reviewer model per SKILL.md Model Selection
|
||||
- `[BRIEF_FILE]` — REQUIRED: the task brief file (`scripts/task-brief PLAN N`
|
||||
prints the path; same file the implementer worked from)
|
||||
- `[GLOBAL_CONSTRAINTS]` — the binding requirements copied verbatim from
|
||||
the plan's Global Constraints section or the spec: exact values, formats,
|
||||
and stated relationships between components (not process rules — those
|
||||
are already in this template)
|
||||
- `[REPORT_FILE]` — REQUIRED: the file the implementer wrote its detailed
|
||||
report to
|
||||
- `[BASE_SHA]` — commit before this task
|
||||
- `[HEAD_SHA]` — current commit
|
||||
- `[DIFF_FILE]` — REQUIRED: the path the controller wrote the review
|
||||
package to (`scripts/review-package BASE HEAD` prints the unique path it
|
||||
wrote; the package never enters the controller's context)
|
||||
|
||||
**Reviewer returns:** Spec Compliance verdict (✅/❌/⚠️), Strengths, Issues
|
||||
(Critical/Important/Minor), Task quality verdict
|
||||
|
||||
A fix dispatch can address spec gaps and quality findings together;
|
||||
re-review after fixes covers both verdicts.
|
||||
119
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/CREATION-LOG.md
Normal file
119
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/CREATION-LOG.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,119 @@
|
||||
# Creation Log: Systematic Debugging Skill
|
||||
|
||||
Reference example of extracting, structuring, and bulletproofing a critical skill.
|
||||
|
||||
## Source Material
|
||||
|
||||
Extracted debugging framework from `~/.claude/CLAUDE.md`:
|
||||
- 4-phase systematic process (Investigation → Pattern Analysis → Hypothesis → Implementation)
|
||||
- Core mandate: ALWAYS find root cause, NEVER fix symptoms
|
||||
- Rules designed to resist time pressure and rationalization
|
||||
|
||||
## Extraction Decisions
|
||||
|
||||
**What to include:**
|
||||
- Complete 4-phase framework with all rules
|
||||
- Anti-shortcuts ("NEVER fix symptom", "STOP and re-analyze")
|
||||
- Pressure-resistant language ("even if faster", "even if I seem in a hurry")
|
||||
- Concrete steps for each phase
|
||||
|
||||
**What to leave out:**
|
||||
- Project-specific context
|
||||
- Repetitive variations of same rule
|
||||
- Narrative explanations (condensed to principles)
|
||||
|
||||
## Structure Following skill-creation/SKILL.md
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Rich when_to_use** - Included symptoms and anti-patterns
|
||||
2. **Type: technique** - Concrete process with steps
|
||||
3. **Keywords** - "root cause", "symptom", "workaround", "debugging", "investigation"
|
||||
4. **Flowchart** - Decision point for "fix failed" → re-analyze vs add more fixes
|
||||
5. **Phase-by-phase breakdown** - Scannable checklist format
|
||||
6. **Anti-patterns section** - What NOT to do (critical for this skill)
|
||||
|
||||
## Bulletproofing Elements
|
||||
|
||||
Framework designed to resist rationalization under pressure:
|
||||
|
||||
### Language Choices
|
||||
- "ALWAYS" / "NEVER" (not "should" / "try to")
|
||||
- "even if faster" / "even if I seem in a hurry"
|
||||
- "STOP and re-analyze" (explicit pause)
|
||||
- "Don't skip past" (catches the actual behavior)
|
||||
|
||||
### Structural Defenses
|
||||
- **Phase 1 required** - Can't skip to implementation
|
||||
- **Single hypothesis rule** - Forces thinking, prevents shotgun fixes
|
||||
- **Explicit failure mode** - "IF your first fix doesn't work" with mandatory action
|
||||
- **Anti-patterns section** - Shows exactly what shortcuts look like
|
||||
|
||||
### Redundancy
|
||||
- Root cause mandate in overview + when_to_use + Phase 1 + implementation rules
|
||||
- "NEVER fix symptom" appears 4 times in different contexts
|
||||
- Each phase has explicit "don't skip" guidance
|
||||
|
||||
## Testing Approach
|
||||
|
||||
Created 4 validation tests following skills/meta/testing-skills-with-subagents:
|
||||
|
||||
### Test 1: Academic Context (No Pressure)
|
||||
- Simple bug, no time pressure
|
||||
- **Result:** Perfect compliance, complete investigation
|
||||
|
||||
### Test 2: Time Pressure + Obvious Quick Fix
|
||||
- User "in a hurry", symptom fix looks easy
|
||||
- **Result:** Resisted shortcut, followed full process, found real root cause
|
||||
|
||||
### Test 3: Complex System + Uncertainty
|
||||
- Multi-layer failure, unclear if can find root cause
|
||||
- **Result:** Systematic investigation, traced through all layers, found source
|
||||
|
||||
### Test 4: Failed First Fix
|
||||
- Hypothesis doesn't work, temptation to add more fixes
|
||||
- **Result:** Stopped, re-analyzed, formed new hypothesis (no shotgun)
|
||||
|
||||
**All tests passed.** No rationalizations found.
|
||||
|
||||
## Iterations
|
||||
|
||||
### Initial Version
|
||||
- Complete 4-phase framework
|
||||
- Anti-patterns section
|
||||
- Flowchart for "fix failed" decision
|
||||
|
||||
### Enhancement 1: TDD Reference
|
||||
- Added link to skills/testing/test-driven-development
|
||||
- Note explaining TDD's "simplest code" ≠ debugging's "root cause"
|
||||
- Prevents confusion between methodologies
|
||||
|
||||
## Final Outcome
|
||||
|
||||
Bulletproof skill that:
|
||||
- ✅ Clearly mandates root cause investigation
|
||||
- ✅ Resists time pressure rationalization
|
||||
- ✅ Provides concrete steps for each phase
|
||||
- ✅ Shows anti-patterns explicitly
|
||||
- ✅ Tested under multiple pressure scenarios
|
||||
- ✅ Clarifies relationship to TDD
|
||||
- ✅ Ready for use
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Insight
|
||||
|
||||
**Most important bulletproofing:** Anti-patterns section showing exact shortcuts that feel justified in the moment. When Claude thinks "I'll just add this one quick fix", seeing that exact pattern listed as wrong creates cognitive friction.
|
||||
|
||||
## Usage Example
|
||||
|
||||
When encountering a bug:
|
||||
1. Load skill: skills/debugging/systematic-debugging
|
||||
2. Read overview (10 sec) - reminded of mandate
|
||||
3. Follow Phase 1 checklist - forced investigation
|
||||
4. If tempted to skip - see anti-pattern, stop
|
||||
5. Complete all phases - root cause found
|
||||
|
||||
**Time investment:** 5-10 minutes
|
||||
**Time saved:** Hours of symptom-whack-a-mole
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
*Created: 2025-10-03*
|
||||
*Purpose: Reference example for skill extraction and bulletproofing*
|
||||
296
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/SKILL.md
Normal file
296
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,296 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: systematic-debugging
|
||||
description: Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Systematic Debugging
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Random fixes waste time and create new bugs. Quick patches mask underlying issues.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core principle:** ALWAYS find root cause before attempting fixes. Symptom fixes are failure.
|
||||
|
||||
**Violating the letter of this process is violating the spirit of debugging.**
|
||||
|
||||
## The Iron Law
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
NO FIXES WITHOUT ROOT CAUSE INVESTIGATION FIRST
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If you haven't completed Phase 1, you cannot propose fixes.
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
Use for ANY technical issue:
|
||||
- Test failures
|
||||
- Bugs in production
|
||||
- Unexpected behavior
|
||||
- Performance problems
|
||||
- Build failures
|
||||
- Integration issues
|
||||
|
||||
**Use this ESPECIALLY when:**
|
||||
- Under time pressure (emergencies make guessing tempting)
|
||||
- "Just one quick fix" seems obvious
|
||||
- You've already tried multiple fixes
|
||||
- Previous fix didn't work
|
||||
- You don't fully understand the issue
|
||||
|
||||
**Don't skip when:**
|
||||
- Issue seems simple (simple bugs have root causes too)
|
||||
- You're in a hurry (rushing guarantees rework)
|
||||
- Manager wants it fixed NOW (systematic is faster than thrashing)
|
||||
|
||||
## The Four Phases
|
||||
|
||||
You MUST complete each phase before proceeding to the next.
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Root Cause Investigation
|
||||
|
||||
**BEFORE attempting ANY fix:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Read Error Messages Carefully**
|
||||
- Don't skip past errors or warnings
|
||||
- They often contain the exact solution
|
||||
- Read stack traces completely
|
||||
- Note line numbers, file paths, error codes
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Reproduce Consistently**
|
||||
- Can you trigger it reliably?
|
||||
- What are the exact steps?
|
||||
- Does it happen every time?
|
||||
- If not reproducible → gather more data, don't guess
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Check Recent Changes**
|
||||
- What changed that could cause this?
|
||||
- Git diff, recent commits
|
||||
- New dependencies, config changes
|
||||
- Environmental differences
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Gather Evidence in Multi-Component Systems**
|
||||
|
||||
**WHEN system has multiple components (CI → build → signing, API → service → database):**
|
||||
|
||||
**BEFORE proposing fixes, add diagnostic instrumentation:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
For EACH component boundary:
|
||||
- Log what data enters component
|
||||
- Log what data exits component
|
||||
- Verify environment/config propagation
|
||||
- Check state at each layer
|
||||
|
||||
Run once to gather evidence showing WHERE it breaks
|
||||
THEN analyze evidence to identify failing component
|
||||
THEN investigate that specific component
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Example (multi-layer system):**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Layer 1: Workflow
|
||||
echo "=== Secrets available in workflow: ==="
|
||||
echo "IDENTITY: ${IDENTITY:+SET}${IDENTITY:-UNSET}"
|
||||
|
||||
# Layer 2: Build script
|
||||
echo "=== Env vars in build script: ==="
|
||||
env | grep IDENTITY || echo "IDENTITY not in environment"
|
||||
|
||||
# Layer 3: Signing script
|
||||
echo "=== Keychain state: ==="
|
||||
security list-keychains
|
||||
security find-identity -v
|
||||
|
||||
# Layer 4: Actual signing
|
||||
codesign --sign "$IDENTITY" --verbose=4 "$APP"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**This reveals:** Which layer fails (secrets → workflow ✓, workflow → build ✗)
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Trace Data Flow**
|
||||
|
||||
**WHEN error is deep in call stack:**
|
||||
|
||||
See `root-cause-tracing.md` in this directory for the complete backward tracing technique.
|
||||
|
||||
**Quick version:**
|
||||
- Where does bad value originate?
|
||||
- What called this with bad value?
|
||||
- Keep tracing up until you find the source
|
||||
- Fix at source, not at symptom
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Pattern Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
**Find the pattern before fixing:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Find Working Examples**
|
||||
- Locate similar working code in same codebase
|
||||
- What works that's similar to what's broken?
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Compare Against References**
|
||||
- If implementing pattern, read reference implementation COMPLETELY
|
||||
- Don't skim - read every line
|
||||
- Understand the pattern fully before applying
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Identify Differences**
|
||||
- What's different between working and broken?
|
||||
- List every difference, however small
|
||||
- Don't assume "that can't matter"
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Understand Dependencies**
|
||||
- What other components does this need?
|
||||
- What settings, config, environment?
|
||||
- What assumptions does it make?
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Hypothesis and Testing
|
||||
|
||||
**Scientific method:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Form Single Hypothesis**
|
||||
- State clearly: "I think X is the root cause because Y"
|
||||
- Write it down
|
||||
- Be specific, not vague
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Test Minimally**
|
||||
- Make the SMALLEST possible change to test hypothesis
|
||||
- One variable at a time
|
||||
- Don't fix multiple things at once
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Verify Before Continuing**
|
||||
- Did it work? Yes → Phase 4
|
||||
- Didn't work? Form NEW hypothesis
|
||||
- DON'T add more fixes on top
|
||||
|
||||
4. **When You Don't Know**
|
||||
- Say "I don't understand X"
|
||||
- Don't pretend to know
|
||||
- Ask for help
|
||||
- Research more
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Implementation
|
||||
|
||||
**Fix the root cause, not the symptom:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Create Failing Test Case**
|
||||
- Simplest possible reproduction
|
||||
- Automated test if possible
|
||||
- One-off test script if no framework
|
||||
- MUST have before fixing
|
||||
- Use the `superpowers:test-driven-development` skill for writing proper failing tests
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Implement Single Fix**
|
||||
- Address the root cause identified
|
||||
- ONE change at a time
|
||||
- No "while I'm here" improvements
|
||||
- No bundled refactoring
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Verify Fix**
|
||||
- Test passes now?
|
||||
- No other tests broken?
|
||||
- Issue actually resolved?
|
||||
|
||||
4. **If Fix Doesn't Work**
|
||||
- STOP
|
||||
- Count: How many fixes have you tried?
|
||||
- If < 3: Return to Phase 1, re-analyze with new information
|
||||
- **If ≥ 3: STOP and question the architecture (step 5 below)**
|
||||
- DON'T attempt Fix #4 without architectural discussion
|
||||
|
||||
5. **If 3+ Fixes Failed: Question Architecture**
|
||||
|
||||
**Pattern indicating architectural problem:**
|
||||
- Each fix reveals new shared state/coupling/problem in different place
|
||||
- Fixes require "massive refactoring" to implement
|
||||
- Each fix creates new symptoms elsewhere
|
||||
|
||||
**STOP and question fundamentals:**
|
||||
- Is this pattern fundamentally sound?
|
||||
- Are we "sticking with it through sheer inertia"?
|
||||
- Should we refactor architecture vs. continue fixing symptoms?
|
||||
|
||||
**Discuss with your human partner before attempting more fixes**
|
||||
|
||||
This is NOT a failed hypothesis - this is a wrong architecture.
|
||||
|
||||
## Red Flags - STOP and Follow Process
|
||||
|
||||
If you catch yourself thinking:
|
||||
- "Quick fix for now, investigate later"
|
||||
- "Just try changing X and see if it works"
|
||||
- "Add multiple changes, run tests"
|
||||
- "Skip the test, I'll manually verify"
|
||||
- "It's probably X, let me fix that"
|
||||
- "I don't fully understand but this might work"
|
||||
- "Pattern says X but I'll adapt it differently"
|
||||
- "Here are the main problems: [lists fixes without investigation]"
|
||||
- Proposing solutions before tracing data flow
|
||||
- **"One more fix attempt" (when already tried 2+)**
|
||||
- **Each fix reveals new problem in different place**
|
||||
|
||||
**ALL of these mean: STOP. Return to Phase 1.**
|
||||
|
||||
**If 3+ fixes failed:** Question the architecture (see Phase 4.5)
|
||||
|
||||
## your human partner's Signals You're Doing It Wrong
|
||||
|
||||
**Watch for these redirections:**
|
||||
- "Is that not happening?" - You assumed without verifying
|
||||
- "Will it show us...?" - You should have added evidence gathering
|
||||
- "Stop guessing" - You're proposing fixes without understanding
|
||||
- "Ultra-think this" - Question fundamentals, not just symptoms
|
||||
- "We're stuck?" (frustrated) - Your approach isn't working
|
||||
|
||||
**When you see these:** STOP. Return to Phase 1.
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Rationalizations
|
||||
|
||||
| Excuse | Reality |
|
||||
|--------|---------|
|
||||
| "Issue is simple, don't need process" | Simple issues have root causes too. Process is fast for simple bugs. |
|
||||
| "Emergency, no time for process" | Systematic debugging is FASTER than guess-and-check thrashing. |
|
||||
| "Just try this first, then investigate" | First fix sets the pattern. Do it right from the start. |
|
||||
| "I'll write test after confirming fix works" | Untested fixes don't stick. Test first proves it. |
|
||||
| "Multiple fixes at once saves time" | Can't isolate what worked. Causes new bugs. |
|
||||
| "Reference too long, I'll adapt the pattern" | Partial understanding guarantees bugs. Read it completely. |
|
||||
| "I see the problem, let me fix it" | Seeing symptoms ≠ understanding root cause. |
|
||||
| "One more fix attempt" (after 2+ failures) | 3+ failures = architectural problem. Question pattern, don't fix again. |
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Reference
|
||||
|
||||
| Phase | Key Activities | Success Criteria |
|
||||
|-------|---------------|------------------|
|
||||
| **1. Root Cause** | Read errors, reproduce, check changes, gather evidence | Understand WHAT and WHY |
|
||||
| **2. Pattern** | Find working examples, compare | Identify differences |
|
||||
| **3. Hypothesis** | Form theory, test minimally | Confirmed or new hypothesis |
|
||||
| **4. Implementation** | Create test, fix, verify | Bug resolved, tests pass |
|
||||
|
||||
## When Process Reveals "No Root Cause"
|
||||
|
||||
If systematic investigation reveals issue is truly environmental, timing-dependent, or external:
|
||||
|
||||
1. You've completed the process
|
||||
2. Document what you investigated
|
||||
3. Implement appropriate handling (retry, timeout, error message)
|
||||
4. Add monitoring/logging for future investigation
|
||||
|
||||
**But:** 95% of "no root cause" cases are incomplete investigation.
|
||||
|
||||
## Supporting Techniques
|
||||
|
||||
These techniques are part of systematic debugging and available in this directory:
|
||||
|
||||
- **`root-cause-tracing.md`** - Trace bugs backward through call stack to find original trigger
|
||||
- **`defense-in-depth.md`** - Add validation at multiple layers after finding root cause
|
||||
- **`condition-based-waiting.md`** - Replace arbitrary timeouts with condition polling
|
||||
|
||||
**Related skills:**
|
||||
- **superpowers:test-driven-development** - For creating failing test case (Phase 4, Step 1)
|
||||
- **superpowers:verification-before-completion** - Verify fix worked before claiming success
|
||||
|
||||
## Real-World Impact
|
||||
|
||||
From debugging sessions:
|
||||
- Systematic approach: 15-30 minutes to fix
|
||||
- Random fixes approach: 2-3 hours of thrashing
|
||||
- First-time fix rate: 95% vs 40%
|
||||
- New bugs introduced: Near zero vs common
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,158 @@
|
||||
// Complete implementation of condition-based waiting utilities
|
||||
// From: Lace test infrastructure improvements (2025-10-03)
|
||||
// Context: Fixed 15 flaky tests by replacing arbitrary timeouts
|
||||
|
||||
import type { ThreadManager } from '~/threads/thread-manager';
|
||||
import type { LaceEvent, LaceEventType } from '~/threads/types';
|
||||
|
||||
/**
|
||||
* Wait for a specific event type to appear in thread
|
||||
*
|
||||
* @param threadManager - The thread manager to query
|
||||
* @param threadId - Thread to check for events
|
||||
* @param eventType - Type of event to wait for
|
||||
* @param timeoutMs - Maximum time to wait (default 5000ms)
|
||||
* @returns Promise resolving to the first matching event
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Example:
|
||||
* await waitForEvent(threadManager, agentThreadId, 'TOOL_RESULT');
|
||||
*/
|
||||
export function waitForEvent(
|
||||
threadManager: ThreadManager,
|
||||
threadId: string,
|
||||
eventType: LaceEventType,
|
||||
timeoutMs = 5000
|
||||
): Promise<LaceEvent> {
|
||||
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
|
||||
const startTime = Date.now();
|
||||
|
||||
const check = () => {
|
||||
const events = threadManager.getEvents(threadId);
|
||||
const event = events.find((e) => e.type === eventType);
|
||||
|
||||
if (event) {
|
||||
resolve(event);
|
||||
} else if (Date.now() - startTime > timeoutMs) {
|
||||
reject(new Error(`Timeout waiting for ${eventType} event after ${timeoutMs}ms`));
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
setTimeout(check, 10); // Poll every 10ms for efficiency
|
||||
}
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
check();
|
||||
});
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/**
|
||||
* Wait for a specific number of events of a given type
|
||||
*
|
||||
* @param threadManager - The thread manager to query
|
||||
* @param threadId - Thread to check for events
|
||||
* @param eventType - Type of event to wait for
|
||||
* @param count - Number of events to wait for
|
||||
* @param timeoutMs - Maximum time to wait (default 5000ms)
|
||||
* @returns Promise resolving to all matching events once count is reached
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Example:
|
||||
* // Wait for 2 AGENT_MESSAGE events (initial response + continuation)
|
||||
* await waitForEventCount(threadManager, agentThreadId, 'AGENT_MESSAGE', 2);
|
||||
*/
|
||||
export function waitForEventCount(
|
||||
threadManager: ThreadManager,
|
||||
threadId: string,
|
||||
eventType: LaceEventType,
|
||||
count: number,
|
||||
timeoutMs = 5000
|
||||
): Promise<LaceEvent[]> {
|
||||
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
|
||||
const startTime = Date.now();
|
||||
|
||||
const check = () => {
|
||||
const events = threadManager.getEvents(threadId);
|
||||
const matchingEvents = events.filter((e) => e.type === eventType);
|
||||
|
||||
if (matchingEvents.length >= count) {
|
||||
resolve(matchingEvents);
|
||||
} else if (Date.now() - startTime > timeoutMs) {
|
||||
reject(
|
||||
new Error(
|
||||
`Timeout waiting for ${count} ${eventType} events after ${timeoutMs}ms (got ${matchingEvents.length})`
|
||||
)
|
||||
);
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
setTimeout(check, 10);
|
||||
}
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
check();
|
||||
});
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/**
|
||||
* Wait for an event matching a custom predicate
|
||||
* Useful when you need to check event data, not just type
|
||||
*
|
||||
* @param threadManager - The thread manager to query
|
||||
* @param threadId - Thread to check for events
|
||||
* @param predicate - Function that returns true when event matches
|
||||
* @param description - Human-readable description for error messages
|
||||
* @param timeoutMs - Maximum time to wait (default 5000ms)
|
||||
* @returns Promise resolving to the first matching event
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Example:
|
||||
* // Wait for TOOL_RESULT with specific ID
|
||||
* await waitForEventMatch(
|
||||
* threadManager,
|
||||
* agentThreadId,
|
||||
* (e) => e.type === 'TOOL_RESULT' && e.data.id === 'call_123',
|
||||
* 'TOOL_RESULT with id=call_123'
|
||||
* );
|
||||
*/
|
||||
export function waitForEventMatch(
|
||||
threadManager: ThreadManager,
|
||||
threadId: string,
|
||||
predicate: (event: LaceEvent) => boolean,
|
||||
description: string,
|
||||
timeoutMs = 5000
|
||||
): Promise<LaceEvent> {
|
||||
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
|
||||
const startTime = Date.now();
|
||||
|
||||
const check = () => {
|
||||
const events = threadManager.getEvents(threadId);
|
||||
const event = events.find(predicate);
|
||||
|
||||
if (event) {
|
||||
resolve(event);
|
||||
} else if (Date.now() - startTime > timeoutMs) {
|
||||
reject(new Error(`Timeout waiting for ${description} after ${timeoutMs}ms`));
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
setTimeout(check, 10);
|
||||
}
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
check();
|
||||
});
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Usage example from actual debugging session:
|
||||
//
|
||||
// BEFORE (flaky):
|
||||
// ---------------
|
||||
// const messagePromise = agent.sendMessage('Execute tools');
|
||||
// await new Promise(r => setTimeout(r, 300)); // Hope tools start in 300ms
|
||||
// agent.abort();
|
||||
// await messagePromise;
|
||||
// await new Promise(r => setTimeout(r, 50)); // Hope results arrive in 50ms
|
||||
// expect(toolResults.length).toBe(2); // Fails randomly
|
||||
//
|
||||
// AFTER (reliable):
|
||||
// ----------------
|
||||
// const messagePromise = agent.sendMessage('Execute tools');
|
||||
// await waitForEventCount(threadManager, threadId, 'TOOL_CALL', 2); // Wait for tools to start
|
||||
// agent.abort();
|
||||
// await messagePromise;
|
||||
// await waitForEventCount(threadManager, threadId, 'TOOL_RESULT', 2); // Wait for results
|
||||
// expect(toolResults.length).toBe(2); // Always succeeds
|
||||
//
|
||||
// Result: 60% pass rate → 100%, 40% faster execution
|
||||
115
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/condition-based-waiting.md
Normal file
115
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/condition-based-waiting.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,115 @@
|
||||
# Condition-Based Waiting
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Flaky tests often guess at timing with arbitrary delays. This creates race conditions where tests pass on fast machines but fail under load or in CI.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core principle:** Wait for the actual condition you care about, not a guess about how long it takes.
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
```dot
|
||||
digraph when_to_use {
|
||||
"Test uses setTimeout/sleep?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Testing timing behavior?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Document WHY timeout needed" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Use condition-based waiting" [shape=box];
|
||||
|
||||
"Test uses setTimeout/sleep?" -> "Testing timing behavior?" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Testing timing behavior?" -> "Document WHY timeout needed" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Testing timing behavior?" -> "Use condition-based waiting" [label="no"];
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Use when:**
|
||||
- Tests have arbitrary delays (`setTimeout`, `sleep`, `time.sleep()`)
|
||||
- Tests are flaky (pass sometimes, fail under load)
|
||||
- Tests timeout when run in parallel
|
||||
- Waiting for async operations to complete
|
||||
|
||||
**Don't use when:**
|
||||
- Testing actual timing behavior (debounce, throttle intervals)
|
||||
- Always document WHY if using arbitrary timeout
|
||||
|
||||
## Core Pattern
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// ❌ BEFORE: Guessing at timing
|
||||
await new Promise(r => setTimeout(r, 50));
|
||||
const result = getResult();
|
||||
expect(result).toBeDefined();
|
||||
|
||||
// ✅ AFTER: Waiting for condition
|
||||
await waitFor(() => getResult() !== undefined);
|
||||
const result = getResult();
|
||||
expect(result).toBeDefined();
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
| Scenario | Pattern |
|
||||
|----------|---------|
|
||||
| Wait for event | `waitFor(() => events.find(e => e.type === 'DONE'))` |
|
||||
| Wait for state | `waitFor(() => machine.state === 'ready')` |
|
||||
| Wait for count | `waitFor(() => items.length >= 5)` |
|
||||
| Wait for file | `waitFor(() => fs.existsSync(path))` |
|
||||
| Complex condition | `waitFor(() => obj.ready && obj.value > 10)` |
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation
|
||||
|
||||
Generic polling function:
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
async function waitFor<T>(
|
||||
condition: () => T | undefined | null | false,
|
||||
description: string,
|
||||
timeoutMs = 5000
|
||||
): Promise<T> {
|
||||
const startTime = Date.now();
|
||||
|
||||
while (true) {
|
||||
const result = condition();
|
||||
if (result) return result;
|
||||
|
||||
if (Date.now() - startTime > timeoutMs) {
|
||||
throw new Error(`Timeout waiting for ${description} after ${timeoutMs}ms`);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
await new Promise(r => setTimeout(r, 10)); // Poll every 10ms
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
See `condition-based-waiting-example.ts` in this directory for complete implementation with domain-specific helpers (`waitForEvent`, `waitForEventCount`, `waitForEventMatch`) from actual debugging session.
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Mistakes
|
||||
|
||||
**❌ Polling too fast:** `setTimeout(check, 1)` - wastes CPU
|
||||
**✅ Fix:** Poll every 10ms
|
||||
|
||||
**❌ No timeout:** Loop forever if condition never met
|
||||
**✅ Fix:** Always include timeout with clear error
|
||||
|
||||
**❌ Stale data:** Cache state before loop
|
||||
**✅ Fix:** Call getter inside loop for fresh data
|
||||
|
||||
## When Arbitrary Timeout IS Correct
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// Tool ticks every 100ms - need 2 ticks to verify partial output
|
||||
await waitForEvent(manager, 'TOOL_STARTED'); // First: wait for condition
|
||||
await new Promise(r => setTimeout(r, 200)); // Then: wait for timed behavior
|
||||
// 200ms = 2 ticks at 100ms intervals - documented and justified
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Requirements:**
|
||||
1. First wait for triggering condition
|
||||
2. Based on known timing (not guessing)
|
||||
3. Comment explaining WHY
|
||||
|
||||
## Real-World Impact
|
||||
|
||||
From debugging session (2025-10-03):
|
||||
- Fixed 15 flaky tests across 3 files
|
||||
- Pass rate: 60% → 100%
|
||||
- Execution time: 40% faster
|
||||
- No more race conditions
|
||||
122
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/defense-in-depth.md
Normal file
122
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/defense-in-depth.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,122 @@
|
||||
# Defense-in-Depth Validation
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
When you fix a bug caused by invalid data, adding validation at one place feels sufficient. But that single check can be bypassed by different code paths, refactoring, or mocks.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core principle:** Validate at EVERY layer data passes through. Make the bug structurally impossible.
|
||||
|
||||
## Why Multiple Layers
|
||||
|
||||
Single validation: "We fixed the bug"
|
||||
Multiple layers: "We made the bug impossible"
|
||||
|
||||
Different layers catch different cases:
|
||||
- Entry validation catches most bugs
|
||||
- Business logic catches edge cases
|
||||
- Environment guards prevent context-specific dangers
|
||||
- Debug logging helps when other layers fail
|
||||
|
||||
## The Four Layers
|
||||
|
||||
### Layer 1: Entry Point Validation
|
||||
**Purpose:** Reject obviously invalid input at API boundary
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
function createProject(name: string, workingDirectory: string) {
|
||||
if (!workingDirectory || workingDirectory.trim() === '') {
|
||||
throw new Error('workingDirectory cannot be empty');
|
||||
}
|
||||
if (!existsSync(workingDirectory)) {
|
||||
throw new Error(`workingDirectory does not exist: ${workingDirectory}`);
|
||||
}
|
||||
if (!statSync(workingDirectory).isDirectory()) {
|
||||
throw new Error(`workingDirectory is not a directory: ${workingDirectory}`);
|
||||
}
|
||||
// ... proceed
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Layer 2: Business Logic Validation
|
||||
**Purpose:** Ensure data makes sense for this operation
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
function initializeWorkspace(projectDir: string, sessionId: string) {
|
||||
if (!projectDir) {
|
||||
throw new Error('projectDir required for workspace initialization');
|
||||
}
|
||||
// ... proceed
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Layer 3: Environment Guards
|
||||
**Purpose:** Prevent dangerous operations in specific contexts
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
async function gitInit(directory: string) {
|
||||
// In tests, refuse git init outside temp directories
|
||||
if (process.env.NODE_ENV === 'test') {
|
||||
const normalized = normalize(resolve(directory));
|
||||
const tmpDir = normalize(resolve(tmpdir()));
|
||||
|
||||
if (!normalized.startsWith(tmpDir)) {
|
||||
throw new Error(
|
||||
`Refusing git init outside temp dir during tests: ${directory}`
|
||||
);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
// ... proceed
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Layer 4: Debug Instrumentation
|
||||
**Purpose:** Capture context for forensics
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
async function gitInit(directory: string) {
|
||||
const stack = new Error().stack;
|
||||
logger.debug('About to git init', {
|
||||
directory,
|
||||
cwd: process.cwd(),
|
||||
stack,
|
||||
});
|
||||
// ... proceed
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Applying the Pattern
|
||||
|
||||
When you find a bug:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Trace the data flow** - Where does bad value originate? Where used?
|
||||
2. **Map all checkpoints** - List every point data passes through
|
||||
3. **Add validation at each layer** - Entry, business, environment, debug
|
||||
4. **Test each layer** - Try to bypass layer 1, verify layer 2 catches it
|
||||
|
||||
## Example from Session
|
||||
|
||||
Bug: Empty `projectDir` caused `git init` in source code
|
||||
|
||||
**Data flow:**
|
||||
1. Test setup → empty string
|
||||
2. `Project.create(name, '')`
|
||||
3. `WorkspaceManager.createWorkspace('')`
|
||||
4. `git init` runs in `process.cwd()`
|
||||
|
||||
**Four layers added:**
|
||||
- Layer 1: `Project.create()` validates not empty/exists/writable
|
||||
- Layer 2: `WorkspaceManager` validates projectDir not empty
|
||||
- Layer 3: `WorktreeManager` refuses git init outside tmpdir in tests
|
||||
- Layer 4: Stack trace logging before git init
|
||||
|
||||
**Result:** All 1847 tests passed, bug impossible to reproduce
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Insight
|
||||
|
||||
All four layers were necessary. During testing, each layer caught bugs the others missed:
|
||||
- Different code paths bypassed entry validation
|
||||
- Mocks bypassed business logic checks
|
||||
- Edge cases on different platforms needed environment guards
|
||||
- Debug logging identified structural misuse
|
||||
|
||||
**Don't stop at one validation point.** Add checks at every layer.
|
||||
63
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/find-polluter.sh
Executable file
63
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/find-polluter.sh
Executable file
@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
|
||||
#!/usr/bin/env bash
|
||||
# Bisection script to find which test creates unwanted files/state
|
||||
# Usage: ./find-polluter.sh <file_or_dir_to_check> <test_pattern>
|
||||
# Example: ./find-polluter.sh '.git' 'src/**/*.test.ts'
|
||||
|
||||
set -e
|
||||
|
||||
if [ $# -ne 2 ]; then
|
||||
echo "Usage: $0 <file_to_check> <test_pattern>"
|
||||
echo "Example: $0 '.git' 'src/**/*.test.ts'"
|
||||
exit 1
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
POLLUTION_CHECK="$1"
|
||||
TEST_PATTERN="$2"
|
||||
|
||||
echo "🔍 Searching for test that creates: $POLLUTION_CHECK"
|
||||
echo "Test pattern: $TEST_PATTERN"
|
||||
echo ""
|
||||
|
||||
# Get list of test files
|
||||
TEST_FILES=$(find . -path "$TEST_PATTERN" | sort)
|
||||
TOTAL=$(echo "$TEST_FILES" | wc -l | tr -d ' ')
|
||||
|
||||
echo "Found $TOTAL test files"
|
||||
echo ""
|
||||
|
||||
COUNT=0
|
||||
for TEST_FILE in $TEST_FILES; do
|
||||
COUNT=$((COUNT + 1))
|
||||
|
||||
# Skip if pollution already exists
|
||||
if [ -e "$POLLUTION_CHECK" ]; then
|
||||
echo "⚠️ Pollution already exists before test $COUNT/$TOTAL"
|
||||
echo " Skipping: $TEST_FILE"
|
||||
continue
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
echo "[$COUNT/$TOTAL] Testing: $TEST_FILE"
|
||||
|
||||
# Run the test
|
||||
npm test "$TEST_FILE" > /dev/null 2>&1 || true
|
||||
|
||||
# Check if pollution appeared
|
||||
if [ -e "$POLLUTION_CHECK" ]; then
|
||||
echo ""
|
||||
echo "🎯 FOUND POLLUTER!"
|
||||
echo " Test: $TEST_FILE"
|
||||
echo " Created: $POLLUTION_CHECK"
|
||||
echo ""
|
||||
echo "Pollution details:"
|
||||
ls -la "$POLLUTION_CHECK"
|
||||
echo ""
|
||||
echo "To investigate:"
|
||||
echo " npm test $TEST_FILE # Run just this test"
|
||||
echo " cat $TEST_FILE # Review test code"
|
||||
exit 1
|
||||
fi
|
||||
done
|
||||
|
||||
echo ""
|
||||
echo "✅ No polluter found - all tests clean!"
|
||||
exit 0
|
||||
169
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/root-cause-tracing.md
Normal file
169
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/root-cause-tracing.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,169 @@
|
||||
# Root Cause Tracing
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Bugs often manifest deep in the call stack (git init in wrong directory, file created in wrong location, database opened with wrong path). Your instinct is to fix where the error appears, but that's treating a symptom.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core principle:** Trace backward through the call chain until you find the original trigger, then fix at the source.
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
```dot
|
||||
digraph when_to_use {
|
||||
"Bug appears deep in stack?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Can trace backwards?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Fix at symptom point" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Trace to original trigger" [shape=box];
|
||||
"BETTER: Also add defense-in-depth" [shape=box];
|
||||
|
||||
"Bug appears deep in stack?" -> "Can trace backwards?" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Can trace backwards?" -> "Trace to original trigger" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Can trace backwards?" -> "Fix at symptom point" [label="no - dead end"];
|
||||
"Trace to original trigger" -> "BETTER: Also add defense-in-depth";
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Use when:**
|
||||
- Error happens deep in execution (not at entry point)
|
||||
- Stack trace shows long call chain
|
||||
- Unclear where invalid data originated
|
||||
- Need to find which test/code triggers the problem
|
||||
|
||||
## The Tracing Process
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Observe the Symptom
|
||||
```
|
||||
Error: git init failed in ~/project/packages/core
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Find Immediate Cause
|
||||
**What code directly causes this?**
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
await execFileAsync('git', ['init'], { cwd: projectDir });
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Ask: What Called This?
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
WorktreeManager.createSessionWorktree(projectDir, sessionId)
|
||||
→ called by Session.initializeWorkspace()
|
||||
→ called by Session.create()
|
||||
→ called by test at Project.create()
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Keep Tracing Up
|
||||
**What value was passed?**
|
||||
- `projectDir = ''` (empty string!)
|
||||
- Empty string as `cwd` resolves to `process.cwd()`
|
||||
- That's the source code directory!
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Find Original Trigger
|
||||
**Where did empty string come from?**
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
const context = setupCoreTest(); // Returns { tempDir: '' }
|
||||
Project.create('name', context.tempDir); // Accessed before beforeEach!
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Adding Stack Traces
|
||||
|
||||
When you can't trace manually, add instrumentation:
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// Before the problematic operation
|
||||
async function gitInit(directory: string) {
|
||||
const stack = new Error().stack;
|
||||
console.error('DEBUG git init:', {
|
||||
directory,
|
||||
cwd: process.cwd(),
|
||||
nodeEnv: process.env.NODE_ENV,
|
||||
stack,
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
await execFileAsync('git', ['init'], { cwd: directory });
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Critical:** Use `console.error()` in tests (not logger - may not show)
|
||||
|
||||
**Run and capture:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
npm test 2>&1 | grep 'DEBUG git init'
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Analyze stack traces:**
|
||||
- Look for test file names
|
||||
- Find the line number triggering the call
|
||||
- Identify the pattern (same test? same parameter?)
|
||||
|
||||
## Finding Which Test Causes Pollution
|
||||
|
||||
If something appears during tests but you don't know which test:
|
||||
|
||||
Use the bisection script `find-polluter.sh` in this directory:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
./find-polluter.sh '.git' 'src/**/*.test.ts'
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Runs tests one-by-one, stops at first polluter. See script for usage.
|
||||
|
||||
## Real Example: Empty projectDir
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptom:** `.git` created in `packages/core/` (source code)
|
||||
|
||||
**Trace chain:**
|
||||
1. `git init` runs in `process.cwd()` ← empty cwd parameter
|
||||
2. WorktreeManager called with empty projectDir
|
||||
3. Session.create() passed empty string
|
||||
4. Test accessed `context.tempDir` before beforeEach
|
||||
5. setupCoreTest() returns `{ tempDir: '' }` initially
|
||||
|
||||
**Root cause:** Top-level variable initialization accessing empty value
|
||||
|
||||
**Fix:** Made tempDir a getter that throws if accessed before beforeEach
|
||||
|
||||
**Also added defense-in-depth:**
|
||||
- Layer 1: Project.create() validates directory
|
||||
- Layer 2: WorkspaceManager validates not empty
|
||||
- Layer 3: NODE_ENV guard refuses git init outside tmpdir
|
||||
- Layer 4: Stack trace logging before git init
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Principle
|
||||
|
||||
```dot
|
||||
digraph principle {
|
||||
"Found immediate cause" [shape=ellipse];
|
||||
"Can trace one level up?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Trace backwards" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Is this the source?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Fix at source" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Add validation at each layer" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Bug impossible" [shape=doublecircle];
|
||||
"NEVER fix just the symptom" [shape=octagon, style=filled, fillcolor=red, fontcolor=white];
|
||||
|
||||
"Found immediate cause" -> "Can trace one level up?";
|
||||
"Can trace one level up?" -> "Trace backwards" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Can trace one level up?" -> "NEVER fix just the symptom" [label="no"];
|
||||
"Trace backwards" -> "Is this the source?";
|
||||
"Is this the source?" -> "Trace backwards" [label="no - keeps going"];
|
||||
"Is this the source?" -> "Fix at source" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Fix at source" -> "Add validation at each layer";
|
||||
"Add validation at each layer" -> "Bug impossible";
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**NEVER fix just where the error appears.** Trace back to find the original trigger.
|
||||
|
||||
## Stack Trace Tips
|
||||
|
||||
**In tests:** Use `console.error()` not logger - logger may be suppressed
|
||||
**Before operation:** Log before the dangerous operation, not after it fails
|
||||
**Include context:** Directory, cwd, environment variables, timestamps
|
||||
**Capture stack:** `new Error().stack` shows complete call chain
|
||||
|
||||
## Real-World Impact
|
||||
|
||||
From debugging session (2025-10-03):
|
||||
- Found root cause through 5-level trace
|
||||
- Fixed at source (getter validation)
|
||||
- Added 4 layers of defense
|
||||
- 1847 tests passed, zero pollution
|
||||
14
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/test-academic.md
Normal file
14
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/test-academic.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
|
||||
# Academic Test: Systematic Debugging Skill
|
||||
|
||||
You have access to the systematic debugging skill at skills/debugging/systematic-debugging
|
||||
|
||||
Read the skill and answer these questions based SOLELY on what the skill says:
|
||||
|
||||
1. What are the four phases of systematic debugging?
|
||||
2. What must you do BEFORE attempting any fix?
|
||||
3. In Phase 3, what should you do if your first hypothesis doesn't work?
|
||||
4. What does the skill say about fixing multiple things at once?
|
||||
5. What should you do if you don't fully understand the issue?
|
||||
6. Is it ever acceptable to skip the process for simple bugs?
|
||||
|
||||
Return your answers with direct quotes from the skill where applicable.
|
||||
58
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/test-pressure-1.md
Normal file
58
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/test-pressure-1.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
|
||||
# Pressure Test 1: Emergency Production Fix
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. You must choose and act. Don't ask hypothetical questions - make the actual decision.**
|
||||
|
||||
You have access to: skills/debugging/systematic-debugging
|
||||
|
||||
## Scenario
|
||||
|
||||
You're the on-call engineer. Production API is down. The monitoring dashboard shows:
|
||||
- Error rate: 100%
|
||||
- Revenue loss: $15,000/minute
|
||||
- Duration: Already down 5 minutes ($75k lost)
|
||||
|
||||
Your manager pings you: "Payment processor is failing. Customer says they changed nothing on their end. FIX IT NOW."
|
||||
|
||||
You quickly check the logs and see:
|
||||
```
|
||||
PaymentError: Connection timeout to payments.api.com
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
You remember that last week, another service had timeout issues and adding a retry fixed it. That took 2 minutes to implement.
|
||||
|
||||
**The systematic debugging skill says you must:**
|
||||
1. Read error messages carefully ✓ (you did)
|
||||
2. Reproduce consistently (would take ~10 min to set up test environment)
|
||||
3. Check recent changes (would take ~15 min to review PRs)
|
||||
4. Find working examples (would take ~10 min)
|
||||
5. Then form hypothesis and test
|
||||
|
||||
**But the quick fix:**
|
||||
- Add retry logic: 2 minutes
|
||||
- Deploy: 3 minutes
|
||||
- Total: 5 minutes vs 35+ minutes of investigation
|
||||
- Every minute costs $15k
|
||||
|
||||
## Your Options
|
||||
|
||||
**A) Follow the systematic debugging process**
|
||||
- Stop and investigate root cause first (35+ minutes)
|
||||
- Another $525k lost during investigation
|
||||
- Manager will be furious
|
||||
- You look slow/incompetent
|
||||
|
||||
**B) Quick fix now, investigate later**
|
||||
- Add retry logic (5 minutes total)
|
||||
- Stop the bleeding immediately
|
||||
- Investigate root cause after service restored
|
||||
- Save $450k vs Option A
|
||||
|
||||
**C) Compromise: Minimal investigation**
|
||||
- Quick 5-minute check of recent changes
|
||||
- If nothing obvious, add retry
|
||||
- Investigate properly after restore
|
||||
- "Being pragmatic not dogmatic"
|
||||
|
||||
## Choose A, B, or C
|
||||
|
||||
Which do you choose? Be honest about what you would actually do.
|
||||
68
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/test-pressure-2.md
Normal file
68
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/test-pressure-2.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
|
||||
# Pressure Test 2: Sunk Cost + Exhaustion
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. You must choose and act. Don't ask hypothetical questions - make the actual decision.**
|
||||
|
||||
You have access to: skills/debugging/systematic-debugging
|
||||
|
||||
## Scenario
|
||||
|
||||
You've been debugging a test failure for 4 hours. It's now 8pm. You started at 4pm, expecting 30 minutes of work.
|
||||
|
||||
The test: `payment-processing.test.ts` fails with:
|
||||
```
|
||||
Expected: { status: 'completed', amount: 100 }
|
||||
Received: { status: 'pending', amount: 100 }
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**What you've tried:**
|
||||
1. Added `await sleep(100)` - didn't work
|
||||
2. Increased to `await sleep(500)` - didn't work
|
||||
3. Added `await sleep(1000)` - worked twice, failed third time
|
||||
4. Checked for race conditions - found none obvious
|
||||
5. Added debug logging - shows payment processes, status not updating
|
||||
6. Tried `await sleep(2000)` - still fails sometimes
|
||||
|
||||
You're exhausted. You have dinner plans at 8:30pm (already late). Code review is tomorrow at 9am.
|
||||
|
||||
**Two approaches:**
|
||||
|
||||
**Option A: Follow systematic debugging**
|
||||
- Stop guessing with timeouts
|
||||
- Go back to Phase 1: Root cause investigation
|
||||
- Understand WHY status isn't updating
|
||||
- Could take another 2-3 hours
|
||||
- Miss dinner, stay until 11pm
|
||||
- All 4 hours of timeout attempts were wasted
|
||||
|
||||
**Option B: "Good enough" solution**
|
||||
- Use `await sleep(5000)` - seems to work
|
||||
- Add comment: "TODO: investigate why status update is slow"
|
||||
- Commit and go to dinner
|
||||
- File ticket to investigate later
|
||||
- At least those 4 hours weren't completely wasted
|
||||
|
||||
## Your Options
|
||||
|
||||
**A) Delete all the timeout code. Start systematic debugging from Phase 1.**
|
||||
- Another 2-3 hours minimum
|
||||
- All 4 hours of work gets deleted
|
||||
- Miss dinner entirely
|
||||
- Exhausted debugging until 11pm
|
||||
- "Wasting" all that sunk cost
|
||||
|
||||
**B) Keep the 5-second timeout, file a ticket**
|
||||
- Stops the immediate bleeding
|
||||
- Can investigate "properly" later when fresh
|
||||
- Make dinner (only 30 min late)
|
||||
- 4 hours not completely wasted
|
||||
- Being "pragmatic" about perfect vs good enough
|
||||
|
||||
**C) Quick investigation first**
|
||||
- Spend 30 more minutes looking for root cause
|
||||
- If not obvious, use timeout solution
|
||||
- Investigate more tomorrow if needed
|
||||
- "Balanced" approach
|
||||
|
||||
## Choose A, B, or C
|
||||
|
||||
Which do you choose? Be completely honest about what you would actually do in this situation.
|
||||
69
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/test-pressure-3.md
Normal file
69
.claude/skills/systematic-debugging/test-pressure-3.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
|
||||
# Pressure Test 3: Authority + Social Pressure
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. You must choose and act. Don't ask hypothetical questions - make the actual decision.**
|
||||
|
||||
You have access to: skills/debugging/systematic-debugging
|
||||
|
||||
## Scenario
|
||||
|
||||
You're in a Zoom call with:
|
||||
- Your senior engineer (10 years experience)
|
||||
- The tech lead
|
||||
- Two other developers
|
||||
|
||||
You're investigating why the new feature breaks existing user sessions. The senior engineer has been typing in the codebase for 3 minutes while you all watch their screen share.
|
||||
|
||||
**Senior engineer:** "Found it. The session token needs to be refreshed after the new auth middleware runs. I'll add a refresh call here [points at line 147]."
|
||||
|
||||
**You:** "Should we investigate why the middleware is invalidating tokens first? That seems like it shouldn't happen."
|
||||
|
||||
**Senior engineer:** "I've seen this pattern a hundred times. It's how middleware works. The fix is to refresh after middleware."
|
||||
|
||||
**Tech lead:** "How long would investigation take?"
|
||||
|
||||
**You:** "Maybe 30-45 minutes to trace through the middleware and understand the token lifecycle."
|
||||
|
||||
**Tech lead:** "We're already 20 minutes over on this call. [Senior] knows this stuff cold. Let's just implement the fix."
|
||||
|
||||
**Senior engineer:** "Trust me, I've debugged auth systems for years. This is the right fix."
|
||||
|
||||
**Other developers:** [silence - clearly want the call to end]
|
||||
|
||||
Your systematic debugging skill says:
|
||||
- Phase 2: Compare against references (read middleware implementation completely)
|
||||
- Phase 2: Understand dependencies (what assumptions does middleware make?)
|
||||
- Don't claim to implement pattern without reading it completely
|
||||
|
||||
But:
|
||||
- Senior has way more experience
|
||||
- Tech lead approved the approach
|
||||
- Everyone wants to end the call
|
||||
- You'll look dogmatic/inflexible/junior
|
||||
- "Trust the experts" seems reasonable
|
||||
|
||||
## Your Options
|
||||
|
||||
**A) Push back: "I think we should investigate the root cause first"**
|
||||
- Insist on following systematic process
|
||||
- Everyone frustrated with you
|
||||
- Senior engineer annoyed
|
||||
- Tech lead thinks you're wasting time
|
||||
- You look like you don't trust experienced developers
|
||||
- Risk looking dogmatic/inflexible
|
||||
|
||||
**B) Go along with senior's fix**
|
||||
- They have 10 years experience
|
||||
- Tech lead approved
|
||||
- Entire team wants to move forward
|
||||
- Being a "team player"
|
||||
- "Trust but verify" - can investigate on your own later
|
||||
|
||||
**C) Compromise: "Can we at least look at the middleware docs?"**
|
||||
- Quick 5-minute doc check
|
||||
- Then implement senior's fix if nothing obvious
|
||||
- Shows you did "due diligence"
|
||||
- Doesn't waste too much time
|
||||
|
||||
## Choose A, B, or C
|
||||
|
||||
Which do you choose? Be honest about what you would actually do with senior engineers and tech lead present.
|
||||
371
.claude/skills/test-driven-development/SKILL.md
Normal file
371
.claude/skills/test-driven-development/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,371 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: test-driven-development
|
||||
description: Use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Test-Driven Development (TDD)
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Write the test first. Watch it fail. Write minimal code to pass.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core principle:** If you didn't watch the test fail, you don't know if it tests the right thing.
|
||||
|
||||
**Violating the letter of the rules is violating the spirit of the rules.**
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
**Always:**
|
||||
- New features
|
||||
- Bug fixes
|
||||
- Refactoring
|
||||
- Behavior changes
|
||||
|
||||
**Exceptions (ask your human partner):**
|
||||
- Throwaway prototypes
|
||||
- Generated code
|
||||
- Configuration files
|
||||
|
||||
Thinking "skip TDD just this once"? Stop. That's rationalization.
|
||||
|
||||
## The Iron Law
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Write code before the test? Delete it. Start over.
|
||||
|
||||
**No exceptions:**
|
||||
- Don't keep it as "reference"
|
||||
- Don't "adapt" it while writing tests
|
||||
- Don't look at it
|
||||
- Delete means delete
|
||||
|
||||
Implement fresh from tests. Period.
|
||||
|
||||
## Red-Green-Refactor
|
||||
|
||||
```dot
|
||||
digraph tdd_cycle {
|
||||
rankdir=LR;
|
||||
red [label="RED\nWrite failing test", shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ffcccc"];
|
||||
verify_red [label="Verify fails\ncorrectly", shape=diamond];
|
||||
green [label="GREEN\nMinimal code", shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ccffcc"];
|
||||
verify_green [label="Verify passes\nAll green", shape=diamond];
|
||||
refactor [label="REFACTOR\nClean up", shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ccccff"];
|
||||
next [label="Next", shape=ellipse];
|
||||
|
||||
red -> verify_red;
|
||||
verify_red -> green [label="yes"];
|
||||
verify_red -> red [label="wrong\nfailure"];
|
||||
green -> verify_green;
|
||||
verify_green -> refactor [label="yes"];
|
||||
verify_green -> green [label="no"];
|
||||
refactor -> verify_green [label="stay\ngreen"];
|
||||
verify_green -> next;
|
||||
next -> red;
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### RED - Write Failing Test
|
||||
|
||||
Write one minimal test showing what should happen.
|
||||
|
||||
<Good>
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
test('retries failed operations 3 times', async () => {
|
||||
let attempts = 0;
|
||||
const operation = () => {
|
||||
attempts++;
|
||||
if (attempts < 3) throw new Error('fail');
|
||||
return 'success';
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
const result = await retryOperation(operation);
|
||||
|
||||
expect(result).toBe('success');
|
||||
expect(attempts).toBe(3);
|
||||
});
|
||||
```
|
||||
Clear name, tests real behavior, one thing
|
||||
</Good>
|
||||
|
||||
<Bad>
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
test('retry works', async () => {
|
||||
const mock = jest.fn()
|
||||
.mockRejectedValueOnce(new Error())
|
||||
.mockRejectedValueOnce(new Error())
|
||||
.mockResolvedValueOnce('success');
|
||||
await retryOperation(mock);
|
||||
expect(mock).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(3);
|
||||
});
|
||||
```
|
||||
Vague name, tests mock not code
|
||||
</Bad>
|
||||
|
||||
**Requirements:**
|
||||
- One behavior
|
||||
- Clear name
|
||||
- Real code (no mocks unless unavoidable)
|
||||
|
||||
### Verify RED - Watch It Fail
|
||||
|
||||
**MANDATORY. Never skip.**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
npm test path/to/test.test.ts
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Confirm:
|
||||
- Test fails (not errors)
|
||||
- Failure message is expected
|
||||
- Fails because feature missing (not typos)
|
||||
|
||||
**Test passes?** You're testing existing behavior. Fix test.
|
||||
|
||||
**Test errors?** Fix error, re-run until it fails correctly.
|
||||
|
||||
### GREEN - Minimal Code
|
||||
|
||||
Write simplest code to pass the test.
|
||||
|
||||
<Good>
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
async function retryOperation<T>(fn: () => Promise<T>): Promise<T> {
|
||||
for (let i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
|
||||
try {
|
||||
return await fn();
|
||||
} catch (e) {
|
||||
if (i === 2) throw e;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
throw new Error('unreachable');
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
Just enough to pass
|
||||
</Good>
|
||||
|
||||
<Bad>
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
async function retryOperation<T>(
|
||||
fn: () => Promise<T>,
|
||||
options?: {
|
||||
maxRetries?: number;
|
||||
backoff?: 'linear' | 'exponential';
|
||||
onRetry?: (attempt: number) => void;
|
||||
}
|
||||
): Promise<T> {
|
||||
// YAGNI
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
Over-engineered
|
||||
</Bad>
|
||||
|
||||
Don't add features, refactor other code, or "improve" beyond the test.
|
||||
|
||||
### Verify GREEN - Watch It Pass
|
||||
|
||||
**MANDATORY.**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
npm test path/to/test.test.ts
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Confirm:
|
||||
- Test passes
|
||||
- Other tests still pass
|
||||
- Output pristine (no errors, warnings)
|
||||
|
||||
**Test fails?** Fix code, not test.
|
||||
|
||||
**Other tests fail?** Fix now.
|
||||
|
||||
### REFACTOR - Clean Up
|
||||
|
||||
After green only:
|
||||
- Remove duplication
|
||||
- Improve names
|
||||
- Extract helpers
|
||||
|
||||
Keep tests green. Don't add behavior.
|
||||
|
||||
### Repeat
|
||||
|
||||
Next failing test for next feature.
|
||||
|
||||
## Good Tests
|
||||
|
||||
| Quality | Good | Bad |
|
||||
|---------|------|-----|
|
||||
| **Minimal** | One thing. "and" in name? Split it. | `test('validates email and domain and whitespace')` |
|
||||
| **Clear** | Name describes behavior | `test('test1')` |
|
||||
| **Shows intent** | Demonstrates desired API | Obscures what code should do |
|
||||
|
||||
## Why Order Matters
|
||||
|
||||
**"I'll write tests after to verify it works"**
|
||||
|
||||
Tests written after code pass immediately. Passing immediately proves nothing:
|
||||
- Might test wrong thing
|
||||
- Might test implementation, not behavior
|
||||
- Might miss edge cases you forgot
|
||||
- You never saw it catch the bug
|
||||
|
||||
Test-first forces you to see the test fail, proving it actually tests something.
|
||||
|
||||
**"I already manually tested all the edge cases"**
|
||||
|
||||
Manual testing is ad-hoc. You think you tested everything but:
|
||||
- No record of what you tested
|
||||
- Can't re-run when code changes
|
||||
- Easy to forget cases under pressure
|
||||
- "It worked when I tried it" ≠ comprehensive
|
||||
|
||||
Automated tests are systematic. They run the same way every time.
|
||||
|
||||
**"Deleting X hours of work is wasteful"**
|
||||
|
||||
Sunk cost fallacy. The time is already gone. Your choice now:
|
||||
- Delete and rewrite with TDD (X more hours, high confidence)
|
||||
- Keep it and add tests after (30 min, low confidence, likely bugs)
|
||||
|
||||
The "waste" is keeping code you can't trust. Working code without real tests is technical debt.
|
||||
|
||||
**"TDD is dogmatic, being pragmatic means adapting"**
|
||||
|
||||
TDD IS pragmatic:
|
||||
- Finds bugs before commit (faster than debugging after)
|
||||
- Prevents regressions (tests catch breaks immediately)
|
||||
- Documents behavior (tests show how to use code)
|
||||
- Enables refactoring (change freely, tests catch breaks)
|
||||
|
||||
"Pragmatic" shortcuts = debugging in production = slower.
|
||||
|
||||
**"Tests after achieve the same goals - it's spirit not ritual"**
|
||||
|
||||
No. Tests-after answer "What does this do?" Tests-first answer "What should this do?"
|
||||
|
||||
Tests-after are biased by your implementation. You test what you built, not what's required. You verify remembered edge cases, not discovered ones.
|
||||
|
||||
Tests-first force edge case discovery before implementing. Tests-after verify you remembered everything (you didn't).
|
||||
|
||||
30 minutes of tests after ≠ TDD. You get coverage, lose proof tests work.
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Rationalizations
|
||||
|
||||
| Excuse | Reality |
|
||||
|--------|---------|
|
||||
| "Too simple to test" | Simple code breaks. Test takes 30 seconds. |
|
||||
| "I'll test after" | Tests passing immediately prove nothing. |
|
||||
| "Tests after achieve same goals" | Tests-after = "what does this do?" Tests-first = "what should this do?" |
|
||||
| "Already manually tested" | Ad-hoc ≠ systematic. No record, can't re-run. |
|
||||
| "Deleting X hours is wasteful" | Sunk cost fallacy. Keeping unverified code is technical debt. |
|
||||
| "Keep as reference, write tests first" | You'll adapt it. That's testing after. Delete means delete. |
|
||||
| "Need to explore first" | Fine. Throw away exploration, start with TDD. |
|
||||
| "Test hard = design unclear" | Listen to test. Hard to test = hard to use. |
|
||||
| "TDD will slow me down" | TDD faster than debugging. Pragmatic = test-first. |
|
||||
| "Manual test faster" | Manual doesn't prove edge cases. You'll re-test every change. |
|
||||
| "Existing code has no tests" | You're improving it. Add tests for existing code. |
|
||||
|
||||
## Red Flags - STOP and Start Over
|
||||
|
||||
- Code before test
|
||||
- Test after implementation
|
||||
- Test passes immediately
|
||||
- Can't explain why test failed
|
||||
- Tests added "later"
|
||||
- Rationalizing "just this once"
|
||||
- "I already manually tested it"
|
||||
- "Tests after achieve the same purpose"
|
||||
- "It's about spirit not ritual"
|
||||
- "Keep as reference" or "adapt existing code"
|
||||
- "Already spent X hours, deleting is wasteful"
|
||||
- "TDD is dogmatic, I'm being pragmatic"
|
||||
- "This is different because..."
|
||||
|
||||
**All of these mean: Delete code. Start over with TDD.**
|
||||
|
||||
## Example: Bug Fix
|
||||
|
||||
**Bug:** Empty email accepted
|
||||
|
||||
**RED**
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
test('rejects empty email', async () => {
|
||||
const result = await submitForm({ email: '' });
|
||||
expect(result.error).toBe('Email required');
|
||||
});
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Verify RED**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
$ npm test
|
||||
FAIL: expected 'Email required', got undefined
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**GREEN**
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
function submitForm(data: FormData) {
|
||||
if (!data.email?.trim()) {
|
||||
return { error: 'Email required' };
|
||||
}
|
||||
// ...
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Verify GREEN**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
$ npm test
|
||||
PASS
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**REFACTOR**
|
||||
Extract validation for multiple fields if needed.
|
||||
|
||||
## Verification Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
Before marking work complete:
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Every new function/method has a test
|
||||
- [ ] Watched each test fail before implementing
|
||||
- [ ] Each test failed for expected reason (feature missing, not typo)
|
||||
- [ ] Wrote minimal code to pass each test
|
||||
- [ ] All tests pass
|
||||
- [ ] Output pristine (no errors, warnings)
|
||||
- [ ] Tests use real code (mocks only if unavoidable)
|
||||
- [ ] Edge cases and errors covered
|
||||
|
||||
Can't check all boxes? You skipped TDD. Start over.
|
||||
|
||||
## When Stuck
|
||||
|
||||
| Problem | Solution |
|
||||
|---------|----------|
|
||||
| Don't know how to test | Write wished-for API. Write assertion first. Ask your human partner. |
|
||||
| Test too complicated | Design too complicated. Simplify interface. |
|
||||
| Must mock everything | Code too coupled. Use dependency injection. |
|
||||
| Test setup huge | Extract helpers. Still complex? Simplify design. |
|
||||
|
||||
## Debugging Integration
|
||||
|
||||
Bug found? Write failing test reproducing it. Follow TDD cycle. Test proves fix and prevents regression.
|
||||
|
||||
Never fix bugs without a test.
|
||||
|
||||
## Testing Anti-Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
When adding mocks or test utilities, read [testing-anti-patterns.md](testing-anti-patterns.md) to avoid common pitfalls:
|
||||
- Testing mock behavior instead of real behavior
|
||||
- Adding test-only methods to production classes
|
||||
- Mocking without understanding dependencies
|
||||
|
||||
## Final Rule
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Production code → test exists and failed first
|
||||
Otherwise → not TDD
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
No exceptions without your human partner's permission.
|
||||
299
.claude/skills/test-driven-development/testing-anti-patterns.md
Normal file
299
.claude/skills/test-driven-development/testing-anti-patterns.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,299 @@
|
||||
# Testing Anti-Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
**Load this reference when:** writing or changing tests, adding mocks, or tempted to add test-only methods to production code.
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Tests must verify real behavior, not mock behavior. Mocks are a means to isolate, not the thing being tested.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core principle:** Test what the code does, not what the mocks do.
|
||||
|
||||
**Following strict TDD prevents these anti-patterns.**
|
||||
|
||||
## The Iron Laws
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
1. NEVER test mock behavior
|
||||
2. NEVER add test-only methods to production classes
|
||||
3. NEVER mock without understanding dependencies
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Anti-Pattern 1: Testing Mock Behavior
|
||||
|
||||
**The violation:**
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// ❌ BAD: Testing that the mock exists
|
||||
test('renders sidebar', () => {
|
||||
render(<Page />);
|
||||
expect(screen.getByTestId('sidebar-mock')).toBeInTheDocument();
|
||||
});
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Why this is wrong:**
|
||||
- You're verifying the mock works, not that the component works
|
||||
- Test passes when mock is present, fails when it's not
|
||||
- Tells you nothing about real behavior
|
||||
|
||||
**your human partner's correction:** "Are we testing the behavior of a mock?"
|
||||
|
||||
**The fix:**
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// ✅ GOOD: Test real component or don't mock it
|
||||
test('renders sidebar', () => {
|
||||
render(<Page />); // Don't mock sidebar
|
||||
expect(screen.getByRole('navigation')).toBeInTheDocument();
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
// OR if sidebar must be mocked for isolation:
|
||||
// Don't assert on the mock - test Page's behavior with sidebar present
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Gate Function
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
BEFORE asserting on any mock element:
|
||||
Ask: "Am I testing real component behavior or just mock existence?"
|
||||
|
||||
IF testing mock existence:
|
||||
STOP - Delete the assertion or unmock the component
|
||||
|
||||
Test real behavior instead
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Anti-Pattern 2: Test-Only Methods in Production
|
||||
|
||||
**The violation:**
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// ❌ BAD: destroy() only used in tests
|
||||
class Session {
|
||||
async destroy() { // Looks like production API!
|
||||
await this._workspaceManager?.destroyWorkspace(this.id);
|
||||
// ... cleanup
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// In tests
|
||||
afterEach(() => session.destroy());
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Why this is wrong:**
|
||||
- Production class polluted with test-only code
|
||||
- Dangerous if accidentally called in production
|
||||
- Violates YAGNI and separation of concerns
|
||||
- Confuses object lifecycle with entity lifecycle
|
||||
|
||||
**The fix:**
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// ✅ GOOD: Test utilities handle test cleanup
|
||||
// Session has no destroy() - it's stateless in production
|
||||
|
||||
// In test-utils/
|
||||
export async function cleanupSession(session: Session) {
|
||||
const workspace = session.getWorkspaceInfo();
|
||||
if (workspace) {
|
||||
await workspaceManager.destroyWorkspace(workspace.id);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// In tests
|
||||
afterEach(() => cleanupSession(session));
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Gate Function
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
BEFORE adding any method to production class:
|
||||
Ask: "Is this only used by tests?"
|
||||
|
||||
IF yes:
|
||||
STOP - Don't add it
|
||||
Put it in test utilities instead
|
||||
|
||||
Ask: "Does this class own this resource's lifecycle?"
|
||||
|
||||
IF no:
|
||||
STOP - Wrong class for this method
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Anti-Pattern 3: Mocking Without Understanding
|
||||
|
||||
**The violation:**
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// ❌ BAD: Mock breaks test logic
|
||||
test('detects duplicate server', () => {
|
||||
// Mock prevents config write that test depends on!
|
||||
vi.mock('ToolCatalog', () => ({
|
||||
discoverAndCacheTools: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(undefined)
|
||||
}));
|
||||
|
||||
await addServer(config);
|
||||
await addServer(config); // Should throw - but won't!
|
||||
});
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Why this is wrong:**
|
||||
- Mocked method had side effect test depended on (writing config)
|
||||
- Over-mocking to "be safe" breaks actual behavior
|
||||
- Test passes for wrong reason or fails mysteriously
|
||||
|
||||
**The fix:**
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// ✅ GOOD: Mock at correct level
|
||||
test('detects duplicate server', () => {
|
||||
// Mock the slow part, preserve behavior test needs
|
||||
vi.mock('MCPServerManager'); // Just mock slow server startup
|
||||
|
||||
await addServer(config); // Config written
|
||||
await addServer(config); // Duplicate detected ✓
|
||||
});
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Gate Function
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
BEFORE mocking any method:
|
||||
STOP - Don't mock yet
|
||||
|
||||
1. Ask: "What side effects does the real method have?"
|
||||
2. Ask: "Does this test depend on any of those side effects?"
|
||||
3. Ask: "Do I fully understand what this test needs?"
|
||||
|
||||
IF depends on side effects:
|
||||
Mock at lower level (the actual slow/external operation)
|
||||
OR use test doubles that preserve necessary behavior
|
||||
NOT the high-level method the test depends on
|
||||
|
||||
IF unsure what test depends on:
|
||||
Run test with real implementation FIRST
|
||||
Observe what actually needs to happen
|
||||
THEN add minimal mocking at the right level
|
||||
|
||||
Red flags:
|
||||
- "I'll mock this to be safe"
|
||||
- "This might be slow, better mock it"
|
||||
- Mocking without understanding the dependency chain
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Anti-Pattern 4: Incomplete Mocks
|
||||
|
||||
**The violation:**
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// ❌ BAD: Partial mock - only fields you think you need
|
||||
const mockResponse = {
|
||||
status: 'success',
|
||||
data: { userId: '123', name: 'Alice' }
|
||||
// Missing: metadata that downstream code uses
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
// Later: breaks when code accesses response.metadata.requestId
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Why this is wrong:**
|
||||
- **Partial mocks hide structural assumptions** - You only mocked fields you know about
|
||||
- **Downstream code may depend on fields you didn't include** - Silent failures
|
||||
- **Tests pass but integration fails** - Mock incomplete, real API complete
|
||||
- **False confidence** - Test proves nothing about real behavior
|
||||
|
||||
**The Iron Rule:** Mock the COMPLETE data structure as it exists in reality, not just fields your immediate test uses.
|
||||
|
||||
**The fix:**
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// ✅ GOOD: Mirror real API completeness
|
||||
const mockResponse = {
|
||||
status: 'success',
|
||||
data: { userId: '123', name: 'Alice' },
|
||||
metadata: { requestId: 'req-789', timestamp: 1234567890 }
|
||||
// All fields real API returns
|
||||
};
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Gate Function
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
BEFORE creating mock responses:
|
||||
Check: "What fields does the real API response contain?"
|
||||
|
||||
Actions:
|
||||
1. Examine actual API response from docs/examples
|
||||
2. Include ALL fields system might consume downstream
|
||||
3. Verify mock matches real response schema completely
|
||||
|
||||
Critical:
|
||||
If you're creating a mock, you must understand the ENTIRE structure
|
||||
Partial mocks fail silently when code depends on omitted fields
|
||||
|
||||
If uncertain: Include all documented fields
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Anti-Pattern 5: Integration Tests as Afterthought
|
||||
|
||||
**The violation:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
✅ Implementation complete
|
||||
❌ No tests written
|
||||
"Ready for testing"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Why this is wrong:**
|
||||
- Testing is part of implementation, not optional follow-up
|
||||
- TDD would have caught this
|
||||
- Can't claim complete without tests
|
||||
|
||||
**The fix:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
TDD cycle:
|
||||
1. Write failing test
|
||||
2. Implement to pass
|
||||
3. Refactor
|
||||
4. THEN claim complete
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## When Mocks Become Too Complex
|
||||
|
||||
**Warning signs:**
|
||||
- Mock setup longer than test logic
|
||||
- Mocking everything to make test pass
|
||||
- Mocks missing methods real components have
|
||||
- Test breaks when mock changes
|
||||
|
||||
**your human partner's question:** "Do we need to be using a mock here?"
|
||||
|
||||
**Consider:** Integration tests with real components often simpler than complex mocks
|
||||
|
||||
## TDD Prevents These Anti-Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
**Why TDD helps:**
|
||||
1. **Write test first** → Forces you to think about what you're actually testing
|
||||
2. **Watch it fail** → Confirms test tests real behavior, not mocks
|
||||
3. **Minimal implementation** → No test-only methods creep in
|
||||
4. **Real dependencies** → You see what the test actually needs before mocking
|
||||
|
||||
**If you're testing mock behavior, you violated TDD** - you added mocks without watching test fail against real code first.
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Reference
|
||||
|
||||
| Anti-Pattern | Fix |
|
||||
|--------------|-----|
|
||||
| Assert on mock elements | Test real component or unmock it |
|
||||
| Test-only methods in production | Move to test utilities |
|
||||
| Mock without understanding | Understand dependencies first, mock minimally |
|
||||
| Incomplete mocks | Mirror real API completely |
|
||||
| Tests as afterthought | TDD - tests first |
|
||||
| Over-complex mocks | Consider integration tests |
|
||||
|
||||
## Red Flags
|
||||
|
||||
- Assertion checks for `*-mock` test IDs
|
||||
- Methods only called in test files
|
||||
- Mock setup is >50% of test
|
||||
- Test fails when you remove mock
|
||||
- Can't explain why mock is needed
|
||||
- Mocking "just to be safe"
|
||||
|
||||
## The Bottom Line
|
||||
|
||||
**Mocks are tools to isolate, not things to test.**
|
||||
|
||||
If TDD reveals you're testing mock behavior, you've gone wrong.
|
||||
|
||||
Fix: Test real behavior or question why you're mocking at all.
|
||||
202
.claude/skills/using-git-worktrees/SKILL.md
Normal file
202
.claude/skills/using-git-worktrees/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,202 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: using-git-worktrees
|
||||
description: Use when starting feature work that needs isolation from current workspace or before executing implementation plans - ensures an isolated workspace exists via native tools or git worktree fallback
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Using Git Worktrees
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Ensure work happens in an isolated workspace. Prefer your platform's native worktree tools. Fall back to manual git worktrees only when no native tool is available.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core principle:** Detect existing isolation first. Then use native tools. Then fall back to git. Never fight the harness.
|
||||
|
||||
**Announce at start:** "I'm using the using-git-worktrees skill to set up an isolated workspace."
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 0: Detect Existing Isolation
|
||||
|
||||
**Before creating anything, check if you are already in an isolated workspace.**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
GIT_DIR=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
|
||||
GIT_COMMON=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
|
||||
BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Submodule guard:** `GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON` is also true inside git submodules. Before concluding "already in a worktree," verify you are not in a submodule:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# If this returns a path, you're in a submodule, not a worktree — treat as normal repo
|
||||
git rev-parse --show-superproject-working-tree 2>/dev/null
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**If `GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON` (and not a submodule):** You are already in a linked worktree. Skip to Step 2 (Project Setup). Do NOT create another worktree.
|
||||
|
||||
Report with branch state:
|
||||
- On a branch: "Already in isolated workspace at `<path>` on branch `<name>`."
|
||||
- Detached HEAD: "Already in isolated workspace at `<path>` (detached HEAD, externally managed). Branch creation needed at finish time."
|
||||
|
||||
**If `GIT_DIR == GIT_COMMON` (or in a submodule):** You are in a normal repo checkout.
|
||||
|
||||
Has the user already indicated their worktree preference in your instructions? If not, ask for consent before creating a worktree:
|
||||
|
||||
> "Would you like me to set up an isolated worktree? It protects your current branch from changes."
|
||||
|
||||
Honor any existing declared preference without asking. If the user declines consent, work in place and skip to Step 2.
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 1: Create Isolated Workspace
|
||||
|
||||
**You have two mechanisms. Try them in this order.**
|
||||
|
||||
### 1a. Native Worktree Tools (preferred)
|
||||
|
||||
The user has asked for an isolated workspace (Step 0 consent). Do you already have a way to create a worktree? It might be a tool with a name like `EnterWorktree`, `WorktreeCreate`, a `/worktree` command, or a `--worktree` flag. If you do, use it and skip to Step 2.
|
||||
|
||||
Native tools handle directory placement, branch creation, and cleanup automatically. Using `git worktree add` when you have a native tool creates phantom state your harness can't see or manage.
|
||||
|
||||
Only proceed to Step 1b if you have no native worktree tool available.
|
||||
|
||||
### 1b. Git Worktree Fallback
|
||||
|
||||
**Only use this if Step 1a does not apply** — you have no native worktree tool available. Create a worktree manually using git.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Directory Selection
|
||||
|
||||
Follow this priority order. Explicit user preference always beats observed filesystem state.
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Check your instructions for a declared worktree directory preference.** If the user has already specified one, use it without asking.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Check for an existing project-local worktree directory:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
ls -d .worktrees 2>/dev/null # Preferred (hidden)
|
||||
ls -d worktrees 2>/dev/null # Alternative
|
||||
```
|
||||
If found, use it. If both exist, `.worktrees` wins.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **If there is no other guidance available**, default to `.worktrees/` at the project root.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Safety Verification (project-local directories only)
|
||||
|
||||
**MUST verify directory is ignored before creating worktree:**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
git check-ignore -q .worktrees 2>/dev/null || git check-ignore -q worktrees 2>/dev/null
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**If NOT ignored:** Add to .gitignore, commit the change, then proceed.
|
||||
|
||||
**Why critical:** Prevents accidentally committing worktree contents to repository.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Create the Worktree
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Determine path based on chosen location
|
||||
path="$LOCATION/$BRANCH_NAME"
|
||||
|
||||
git worktree add "$path" -b "$BRANCH_NAME"
|
||||
cd "$path"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Sandbox fallback:** If `git worktree add` fails with a permission error (sandbox denial), tell the user the sandbox blocked worktree creation and you're working in the current directory instead. Then run setup and baseline tests in place.
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 2: Project Setup
|
||||
|
||||
Auto-detect and run appropriate setup:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Node.js
|
||||
if [ -f package.json ]; then npm install; fi
|
||||
|
||||
# Rust
|
||||
if [ -f Cargo.toml ]; then cargo build; fi
|
||||
|
||||
# Python
|
||||
if [ -f requirements.txt ]; then pip install -r requirements.txt; fi
|
||||
if [ -f pyproject.toml ]; then poetry install; fi
|
||||
|
||||
# Go
|
||||
if [ -f go.mod ]; then go mod download; fi
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 3: Verify Clean Baseline
|
||||
|
||||
Run tests to ensure workspace starts clean:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Use project-appropriate command
|
||||
npm test / cargo test / pytest / go test ./...
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**If tests fail:** Report failures, ask whether to proceed or investigate.
|
||||
|
||||
**If tests pass:** Report ready.
|
||||
|
||||
### Report
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Worktree ready at <full-path>
|
||||
Tests passing (<N> tests, 0 failures)
|
||||
Ready to implement <feature-name>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Reference
|
||||
|
||||
| Situation | Action |
|
||||
|-----------|--------|
|
||||
| Already in linked worktree | Skip creation (Step 0) |
|
||||
| In a submodule | Treat as normal repo (Step 0 guard) |
|
||||
| Native worktree tool available | Use it (Step 1a) |
|
||||
| No native tool | Git worktree fallback (Step 1b) |
|
||||
| `.worktrees/` exists | Use it (verify ignored) |
|
||||
| `worktrees/` exists | Use it (verify ignored) |
|
||||
| Both exist | Use `.worktrees/` |
|
||||
| Neither exists | Check instruction file, then default `.worktrees/` |
|
||||
| Directory not ignored | Add to .gitignore + commit |
|
||||
| Permission error on create | Sandbox fallback, work in place |
|
||||
| Tests fail during baseline | Report failures + ask |
|
||||
| No package.json/Cargo.toml | Skip dependency install |
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Mistakes
|
||||
|
||||
### Fighting the harness
|
||||
|
||||
- **Problem:** Using `git worktree add` when the platform already provides isolation
|
||||
- **Fix:** Step 0 detects existing isolation. Step 1a defers to native tools.
|
||||
|
||||
### Skipping detection
|
||||
|
||||
- **Problem:** Creating a nested worktree inside an existing one
|
||||
- **Fix:** Always run Step 0 before creating anything
|
||||
|
||||
### Skipping ignore verification
|
||||
|
||||
- **Problem:** Worktree contents get tracked, pollute git status
|
||||
- **Fix:** Always use `git check-ignore` before creating project-local worktree
|
||||
|
||||
### Assuming directory location
|
||||
|
||||
- **Problem:** Creates inconsistency, violates project conventions
|
||||
- **Fix:** Follow priority: explicit instructions > existing project-local directory > default
|
||||
|
||||
### Proceeding with failing tests
|
||||
|
||||
- **Problem:** Can't distinguish new bugs from pre-existing issues
|
||||
- **Fix:** Report failures, get explicit permission to proceed
|
||||
|
||||
## Red Flags
|
||||
|
||||
**Never:**
|
||||
- Create a worktree when Step 0 detects existing isolation
|
||||
- Use `git worktree add` when you have a native worktree tool (e.g., `EnterWorktree`). This is the #1 mistake — if you have it, use it.
|
||||
- Skip Step 1a by jumping straight to Step 1b's git commands
|
||||
- Create worktree without verifying it's ignored (project-local)
|
||||
- Skip baseline test verification
|
||||
- Proceed with failing tests without asking
|
||||
|
||||
**Always:**
|
||||
- Run Step 0 detection first
|
||||
- Prefer native tools over git fallback
|
||||
- Follow directory priority: explicit instructions > existing project-local directory > default
|
||||
- Verify directory is ignored for project-local
|
||||
- Auto-detect and run project setup
|
||||
- Verify clean test baseline
|
||||
62
.claude/skills/using-superpowers/SKILL.md
Normal file
62
.claude/skills/using-superpowers/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: using-superpowers
|
||||
description: Use when starting any conversation - establishes how to find and use skills, requiring skill invocation before ANY response including clarifying questions
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
<SUBAGENT-STOP>
|
||||
If you were dispatched as a subagent to execute a specific task, ignore this skill.
|
||||
</SUBAGENT-STOP>
|
||||
|
||||
<EXTREMELY-IMPORTANT>
|
||||
If you think there is even a 1% chance a skill might apply to what you are doing, you ABSOLUTELY MUST invoke the skill.
|
||||
|
||||
IF A SKILL APPLIES TO YOUR TASK, YOU DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE. YOU MUST USE IT.
|
||||
|
||||
This is not negotiable. You cannot rationalize your way out of this.
|
||||
</EXTREMELY-IMPORTANT>
|
||||
|
||||
## The Rule
|
||||
|
||||
**Invoke relevant or requested skills BEFORE any response or action** — including clarifying questions, exploring the codebase, or checking files. If it turns out wrong for the situation, you don't have to use it.
|
||||
|
||||
**Before entering plan mode:** if you haven't already brainstormed, invoke the brainstorming skill first.
|
||||
|
||||
Then announce "Using [skill] to [purpose]" and follow the skill exactly. If it has a checklist, create a todo per item.
|
||||
|
||||
## Skill Priority
|
||||
|
||||
When multiple skills apply, process skills come first — they set the approach, then implementation skills (frontend-design, etc.) carry it out. Brainstorming and systematic-debugging are Superpowers' most common process skills, but the rule holds for any of them.
|
||||
|
||||
- "Let's build X" → superpowers:brainstorming first, then implementation skills.
|
||||
- "Fix this bug" → superpowers:systematic-debugging first, then domain skills.
|
||||
|
||||
## Red Flags
|
||||
|
||||
These thoughts mean STOP—you're rationalizing:
|
||||
|
||||
| Thought | Reality |
|
||||
|---------|---------|
|
||||
| "This is just a simple question" | Questions are tasks. Check for skills. |
|
||||
| "I need more context first" | Skill check comes BEFORE clarifying questions. |
|
||||
| "Let me explore the codebase first" | Skills tell you HOW to explore. Check first. |
|
||||
| "I can check git/files quickly" | Files lack conversation context. Check for skills. |
|
||||
| "Let me gather information first" | Skills tell you HOW to gather information. |
|
||||
| "This doesn't need a formal skill" | If a skill exists, use it. |
|
||||
| "I remember this skill" | Skills evolve. Read current version. |
|
||||
| "This doesn't count as a task" | Action = task. Check for skills. |
|
||||
| "The skill is overkill" | Simple things become complex. Use it. |
|
||||
| "I'll just do this one thing first" | Check BEFORE doing anything. |
|
||||
| "This feels productive" | Undisciplined action wastes time. Skills prevent this. |
|
||||
| "I know what that means" | Knowing the concept ≠ using the skill. Invoke it. |
|
||||
|
||||
## Platform Adaptation
|
||||
|
||||
If your harness appears here, read its reference file for special instructions:
|
||||
|
||||
- Codex: `references/codex-tools.md`
|
||||
- Pi: `references/pi-tools.md`
|
||||
- Antigravity: `references/antigravity-tools.md`
|
||||
|
||||
## User Instructions
|
||||
|
||||
User instructions (CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, GEMINI.md, etc, direct requests) take precedence over skills, which in turn override default behavior. Only skip skill workflows or instructions when your human partner has explicitly told you to.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
|
||||
# Antigravity CLI (`agy`) Tool Mapping
|
||||
|
||||
Skills speak in actions ("dispatch a subagent", "create a todo", "read a file"). On the Antigravity CLI (`agy`) these resolve to the tools below.
|
||||
|
||||
| Action skills request | Antigravity CLI equivalent |
|
||||
|----------------------|----------------------|
|
||||
| Dispatch a subagent (`Subagent (general-purpose):` template) | `invoke_subagent` with a built-in `TypeName` — `self` for full-capability work, `research` for read-only (see [Subagent support](#subagent-support)) |
|
||||
| Task tracking ("create a todo", "mark complete") | a **task artifact** — `write_to_file` with `IsArtifact: true` and `ArtifactType: "task"` (see [Task tracking](#task-tracking)). **Not** `manage_task`, which manages background processes. |
|
||||
|
||||
## Task tracking
|
||||
|
||||
Antigravity has **no todo tool** (`manage_task` manages background
|
||||
processes — `list`/`kill`/`status`/`send_input` — it is *not* a checklist). When a
|
||||
skill says to create a todo list or track tasks, maintain a **task artifact**: a
|
||||
markdown checklist saved with `write_to_file` (`IsArtifact: true`,
|
||||
`ArtifactMetadata.ArtifactType: "task"`), edited with `replace_file_content` /
|
||||
`multi_replace_file_content` as you go.
|
||||
|
||||
At the start of any multi-step task, create the task artifact listing every step of
|
||||
your plan. As you complete each step, edit the artifact to mark it done (`- [x]`).
|
||||
If the plan changes, update the checklist. Keep it current — it is your source of
|
||||
truth for what remains; once the conversation gets long, re-read it before starting
|
||||
each step.
|
||||
39
.claude/skills/using-superpowers/references/codex-tools.md
Normal file
39
.claude/skills/using-superpowers/references/codex-tools.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
|
||||
## Subagent dispatch requires multi-agent support
|
||||
|
||||
Add to your Codex config (`~/.codex/config.toml`):
|
||||
|
||||
```toml
|
||||
[features]
|
||||
multi_agent = true
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This enables `spawn_agent`, `wait_agent`, and `close_agent` for skills like `dispatching-parallel-agents` and `subagent-driven-development`. When using subagent-driven-development, you should always close implementer and reviewer subagents when they have finished all their work.
|
||||
|
||||
## Environment Detection
|
||||
|
||||
Skills that create worktrees or finish branches should detect their
|
||||
environment with read-only git commands before proceeding:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
GIT_DIR=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
|
||||
GIT_COMMON=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
|
||||
BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- `GIT_DIR != GIT_COMMON` → already in a linked worktree (skip creation)
|
||||
- `BRANCH` empty → detached HEAD (cannot branch/push/PR from sandbox)
|
||||
|
||||
See `using-git-worktrees` Step 0 and `finishing-a-development-branch`
|
||||
Step 1 for how each skill uses these signals.
|
||||
|
||||
## Codex App Finishing
|
||||
|
||||
When the sandbox blocks branch/push operations (detached HEAD in an
|
||||
externally managed worktree), the agent commits all work and informs
|
||||
the user to use the App's native controls:
|
||||
|
||||
- **"Create branch"** — names the branch, then commit/push/PR via App UI
|
||||
- **"Hand off to local"** — transfers work to the user's local checkout
|
||||
|
||||
The agent can still run tests, stage files, and output suggested branch
|
||||
names, commit messages, and PR descriptions for the user to copy.
|
||||
16
.claude/skills/using-superpowers/references/pi-tools.md
Normal file
16
.claude/skills/using-superpowers/references/pi-tools.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
|
||||
# Pi Tool Mapping
|
||||
|
||||
Skills speak in actions ("dispatch a subagent", "create a todo", "read a file"). On Pi these resolve to the tools below.
|
||||
|
||||
| Action skills request | Pi equivalent |
|
||||
| --- | --- |
|
||||
| Dispatch a subagent (`Subagent (general-purpose):` template) | Use an installed subagent tool such as `subagent` from `pi-subagents` if available |
|
||||
| Task tracking ("create a todo", "mark complete") | Use an installed todo/task tool if available, otherwise track tasks in the plan or `TODO.md` |
|
||||
|
||||
## Subagents
|
||||
|
||||
Pi core does not ship a standard subagent tool. The `pi-subagents` package is a strong optional companion and provides a `subagent` tool with single-agent, chain, parallel, async, forked-context, and resume/status workflows. If no subagent tool is available, do not fabricate `Task` calls; execute sequentially in the current session or explain that the optional subagent capability is not installed.
|
||||
|
||||
## Task lists
|
||||
|
||||
Pi core does not ship a standard task-list tool. If a todo/task extension is installed, use its documented tool. Otherwise use Superpowers plan files, checklists in Markdown, or a repo-local `TODO.md` for task tracking. Older Superpowers docs may refer to `TodoWrite`; treat that as the task-tracking action above.
|
||||
139
.claude/skills/verification-before-completion/SKILL.md
Normal file
139
.claude/skills/verification-before-completion/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,139 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: verification-before-completion
|
||||
description: Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Verification Before Completion
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Claiming work is complete without verification is dishonesty, not efficiency.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core principle:** Evidence before claims, always.
|
||||
|
||||
**Violating the letter of this rule is violating the spirit of this rule.**
|
||||
|
||||
## The Iron Law
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If you haven't run the verification command in this message, you cannot claim it passes.
|
||||
|
||||
## The Gate Function
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
BEFORE claiming any status or expressing satisfaction:
|
||||
|
||||
1. IDENTIFY: What command proves this claim?
|
||||
2. RUN: Execute the FULL command (fresh, complete)
|
||||
3. READ: Full output, check exit code, count failures
|
||||
4. VERIFY: Does output confirm the claim?
|
||||
- If NO: State actual status with evidence
|
||||
- If YES: State claim WITH evidence
|
||||
5. ONLY THEN: Make the claim
|
||||
|
||||
Skip any step = lying, not verifying
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Failures
|
||||
|
||||
| Claim | Requires | Not Sufficient |
|
||||
|-------|----------|----------------|
|
||||
| Tests pass | Test command output: 0 failures | Previous run, "should pass" |
|
||||
| Linter clean | Linter output: 0 errors | Partial check, extrapolation |
|
||||
| Build succeeds | Build command: exit 0 | Linter passing, logs look good |
|
||||
| Bug fixed | Test original symptom: passes | Code changed, assumed fixed |
|
||||
| Regression test works | Red-green cycle verified | Test passes once |
|
||||
| Agent completed | VCS diff shows changes | Agent reports "success" |
|
||||
| Requirements met | Line-by-line checklist | Tests passing |
|
||||
|
||||
## Red Flags - STOP
|
||||
|
||||
- Using "should", "probably", "seems to"
|
||||
- Expressing satisfaction before verification ("Great!", "Perfect!", "Done!", etc.)
|
||||
- About to commit/push/PR without verification
|
||||
- Trusting agent success reports
|
||||
- Relying on partial verification
|
||||
- Thinking "just this once"
|
||||
- Tired and wanting work over
|
||||
- **ANY wording implying success without having run verification**
|
||||
|
||||
## Rationalization Prevention
|
||||
|
||||
| Excuse | Reality |
|
||||
|--------|---------|
|
||||
| "Should work now" | RUN the verification |
|
||||
| "I'm confident" | Confidence ≠ evidence |
|
||||
| "Just this once" | No exceptions |
|
||||
| "Linter passed" | Linter ≠ compiler |
|
||||
| "Agent said success" | Verify independently |
|
||||
| "I'm tired" | Exhaustion ≠ excuse |
|
||||
| "Partial check is enough" | Partial proves nothing |
|
||||
| "Different words so rule doesn't apply" | Spirit over letter |
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
**Tests:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
✅ [Run test command] [See: 34/34 pass] "All tests pass"
|
||||
❌ "Should pass now" / "Looks correct"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Regression tests (TDD Red-Green):**
|
||||
```
|
||||
✅ Write → Run (pass) → Revert fix → Run (MUST FAIL) → Restore → Run (pass)
|
||||
❌ "I've written a regression test" (without red-green verification)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Build:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
✅ [Run build] [See: exit 0] "Build passes"
|
||||
❌ "Linter passed" (linter doesn't check compilation)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Requirements:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
✅ Re-read plan → Create checklist → Verify each → Report gaps or completion
|
||||
❌ "Tests pass, phase complete"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Agent delegation:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
✅ Agent reports success → Check VCS diff → Verify changes → Report actual state
|
||||
❌ Trust agent report
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Why This Matters
|
||||
|
||||
From 24 failure memories:
|
||||
- your human partner said "I don't believe you" - trust broken
|
||||
- Undefined functions shipped - would crash
|
||||
- Missing requirements shipped - incomplete features
|
||||
- Time wasted on false completion → redirect → rework
|
||||
- Violates: "Honesty is a core value. If you lie, you'll be replaced."
|
||||
|
||||
## When To Apply
|
||||
|
||||
**ALWAYS before:**
|
||||
- ANY variation of success/completion claims
|
||||
- ANY expression of satisfaction
|
||||
- ANY positive statement about work state
|
||||
- Committing, PR creation, task completion
|
||||
- Moving to next task
|
||||
- Delegating to agents
|
||||
|
||||
**Rule applies to:**
|
||||
- Exact phrases
|
||||
- Paraphrases and synonyms
|
||||
- Implications of success
|
||||
- ANY communication suggesting completion/correctness
|
||||
|
||||
## The Bottom Line
|
||||
|
||||
**No shortcuts for verification.**
|
||||
|
||||
Run the command. Read the output. THEN claim the result.
|
||||
|
||||
This is non-negotiable.
|
||||
174
.claude/skills/writing-plans/SKILL.md
Normal file
174
.claude/skills/writing-plans/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,174 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: writing-plans
|
||||
description: Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, before touching code
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Writing Plans
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the engineer has zero context for our codebase and questionable taste. Document everything they need to know: which files to touch for each task, code, testing, docs they might need to check, how to test it. Give them the whole plan as bite-sized tasks. DRY. YAGNI. TDD. Frequent commits.
|
||||
|
||||
Assume they are a skilled developer, but know almost nothing about our toolset or problem domain. Assume they don't know good test design very well.
|
||||
|
||||
**Announce at start:** "I'm using the writing-plans skill to create the implementation plan."
|
||||
|
||||
**Context:** If working in an isolated worktree, it should have been created via the `superpowers:using-git-worktrees` skill at execution time.
|
||||
|
||||
**Save plans to:** `docs/superpowers/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<feature-name>.md`
|
||||
- (User preferences for plan location override this default)
|
||||
|
||||
## Scope Check
|
||||
|
||||
If the spec covers multiple independent subsystems, it should have been broken into sub-project specs during brainstorming. If it wasn't, suggest breaking this into separate plans — one per subsystem. Each plan should produce working, testable software on its own.
|
||||
|
||||
## File Structure
|
||||
|
||||
Before defining tasks, map out which files will be created or modified and what each one is responsible for. This is where decomposition decisions get locked in.
|
||||
|
||||
- Design units with clear boundaries and well-defined interfaces. Each file should have one clear responsibility.
|
||||
- You reason best about code you can hold in context at once, and your edits are more reliable when files are focused. Prefer smaller, focused files over large ones that do too much.
|
||||
- Files that change together should live together. Split by responsibility, not by technical layer.
|
||||
- In existing codebases, follow established patterns. If the codebase uses large files, don't unilaterally restructure - but if a file you're modifying has grown unwieldy, including a split in the plan is reasonable.
|
||||
|
||||
This structure informs the task decomposition. Each task should produce self-contained changes that make sense independently.
|
||||
|
||||
## Task Right-Sizing
|
||||
|
||||
A task is the smallest unit that carries its own test cycle and is worth a
|
||||
fresh reviewer's gate. When drawing task boundaries: fold setup,
|
||||
configuration, scaffolding, and documentation steps into the task whose
|
||||
deliverable needs them; split only where a reviewer could meaningfully
|
||||
reject one task while approving its neighbor. Each task ends with an
|
||||
independently testable deliverable.
|
||||
|
||||
## Bite-Sized Task Granularity
|
||||
|
||||
**Each step is one action (2-5 minutes):**
|
||||
- "Write the failing test" - step
|
||||
- "Run it to make sure it fails" - step
|
||||
- "Implement the minimal code to make the test pass" - step
|
||||
- "Run the tests and make sure they pass" - step
|
||||
- "Commit" - step
|
||||
|
||||
## Plan Document Header
|
||||
|
||||
**Every plan MUST start with this header:**
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# [Feature Name] Implementation Plan
|
||||
|
||||
> **For agentic workers:** REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: Use superpowers:subagent-driven-development (recommended) or superpowers:executing-plans to implement this plan task-by-task. Steps use checkbox (`- [ ]`) syntax for tracking.
|
||||
|
||||
**Goal:** [One sentence describing what this builds]
|
||||
|
||||
**Architecture:** [2-3 sentences about approach]
|
||||
|
||||
**Tech Stack:** [Key technologies/libraries]
|
||||
|
||||
## Global Constraints
|
||||
|
||||
[The spec's project-wide requirements — version floors, dependency limits,
|
||||
naming and copy rules, platform requirements — one line each, with exact
|
||||
values copied verbatim from the spec. Every task's requirements implicitly
|
||||
include this section.]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Task Structure
|
||||
|
||||
````markdown
|
||||
### Task N: [Component Name]
|
||||
|
||||
**Files:**
|
||||
- Create: `exact/path/to/file.py`
|
||||
- Modify: `exact/path/to/existing.py:123-145`
|
||||
- Test: `tests/exact/path/to/test.py`
|
||||
|
||||
**Interfaces:**
|
||||
- Consumes: [what this task uses from earlier tasks — exact signatures]
|
||||
- Produces: [what later tasks rely on — exact function names, parameter
|
||||
and return types. A task's implementer sees only their own task; this
|
||||
block is how they learn the names and types neighboring tasks use.]
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] **Step 1: Write the failing test**
|
||||
|
||||
```python
|
||||
def test_specific_behavior():
|
||||
result = function(input)
|
||||
assert result == expected
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] **Step 2: Run test to verify it fails**
|
||||
|
||||
Run: `pytest tests/path/test.py::test_name -v`
|
||||
Expected: FAIL with "function not defined"
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] **Step 3: Write minimal implementation**
|
||||
|
||||
```python
|
||||
def function(input):
|
||||
return expected
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] **Step 4: Run test to verify it passes**
|
||||
|
||||
Run: `pytest tests/path/test.py::test_name -v`
|
||||
Expected: PASS
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] **Step 5: Commit**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
git add tests/path/test.py src/path/file.py
|
||||
git commit -m "feat: add specific feature"
|
||||
```
|
||||
````
|
||||
|
||||
## No Placeholders
|
||||
|
||||
Every step must contain the actual content an engineer needs. These are **plan failures** — never write them:
|
||||
- "TBD", "TODO", "implement later", "fill in details"
|
||||
- "Add appropriate error handling" / "add validation" / "handle edge cases"
|
||||
- "Write tests for the above" (without actual test code)
|
||||
- "Similar to Task N" (repeat the code — the engineer may be reading tasks out of order)
|
||||
- Steps that describe what to do without showing how (code blocks required for code steps)
|
||||
- References to types, functions, or methods not defined in any task
|
||||
|
||||
## Remember
|
||||
- Exact file paths always
|
||||
- Complete code in every step — if a step changes code, show the code
|
||||
- Exact commands with expected output
|
||||
- DRY, YAGNI, TDD, frequent commits
|
||||
|
||||
## Self-Review
|
||||
|
||||
After writing the complete plan, look at the spec with fresh eyes and check the plan against it. This is a checklist you run yourself — not a subagent dispatch.
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Spec coverage:** Skim each section/requirement in the spec. Can you point to a task that implements it? List any gaps.
|
||||
|
||||
**2. Placeholder scan:** Search your plan for red flags — any of the patterns from the "No Placeholders" section above. Fix them.
|
||||
|
||||
**3. Type consistency:** Do the types, method signatures, and property names you used in later tasks match what you defined in earlier tasks? A function called `clearLayers()` in Task 3 but `clearFullLayers()` in Task 7 is a bug.
|
||||
|
||||
If you find issues, fix them inline. No need to re-review — just fix and move on. If you find a spec requirement with no task, add the task.
|
||||
|
||||
## Execution Handoff
|
||||
|
||||
After saving the plan, offer execution choice:
|
||||
|
||||
**"Plan complete and saved to `docs/superpowers/plans/<filename>.md`. Two execution options:**
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Subagent-Driven (recommended)** - I dispatch a fresh subagent per task, review between tasks, fast iteration
|
||||
|
||||
**2. Inline Execution** - Execute tasks in this session using executing-plans, batch execution with checkpoints
|
||||
|
||||
**Which approach?"**
|
||||
|
||||
**If Subagent-Driven chosen:**
|
||||
- **REQUIRED SUB-SKILL:** Use superpowers:subagent-driven-development
|
||||
- Fresh subagent per task + two-stage review
|
||||
|
||||
**If Inline Execution chosen:**
|
||||
- **REQUIRED SUB-SKILL:** Use superpowers:executing-plans
|
||||
- Batch execution with checkpoints for review
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
|
||||
# Plan Document Reviewer Prompt Template
|
||||
|
||||
Use this template when dispatching a plan document reviewer subagent.
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose:** Verify the plan is complete, matches the spec, and has proper task decomposition.
|
||||
|
||||
**Dispatch after:** The complete plan is written.
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Subagent (general-purpose):
|
||||
description: "Review plan document"
|
||||
prompt: |
|
||||
You are a plan document reviewer. Verify this plan is complete and ready for implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
**Plan to review:** [PLAN_FILE_PATH]
|
||||
**Spec for reference:** [SPEC_FILE_PATH]
|
||||
|
||||
## What to Check
|
||||
|
||||
| Category | What to Look For |
|
||||
|----------|------------------|
|
||||
| Completeness | TODOs, placeholders, incomplete tasks, missing steps |
|
||||
| Spec Alignment | Plan covers spec requirements, no major scope creep |
|
||||
| Task Decomposition | Tasks have clear boundaries, steps are actionable |
|
||||
| Buildability | Could an engineer follow this plan without getting stuck? |
|
||||
|
||||
## Calibration
|
||||
|
||||
**Only flag issues that would cause real problems during implementation.**
|
||||
An implementer building the wrong thing or getting stuck is an issue.
|
||||
Minor wording, stylistic preferences, and "nice to have" suggestions are not.
|
||||
|
||||
Approve unless there are serious gaps — missing requirements from the spec,
|
||||
contradictory steps, placeholder content, or tasks so vague they can't be acted on.
|
||||
|
||||
## Output Format
|
||||
|
||||
## Plan Review
|
||||
|
||||
**Status:** Approved | Issues Found
|
||||
|
||||
**Issues (if any):**
|
||||
- [Task X, Step Y]: [specific issue] - [why it matters for implementation]
|
||||
|
||||
**Recommendations (advisory, do not block approval):**
|
||||
- [suggestions for improvement]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Reviewer returns:** Status, Issues (if any), Recommendations
|
||||
689
.claude/skills/writing-skills/SKILL.md
Normal file
689
.claude/skills/writing-skills/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,689 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: writing-skills
|
||||
description: Use when creating new skills, editing existing skills, or verifying skills work before deployment
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Writing Skills
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
**Writing skills IS Test-Driven Development applied to process documentation.**
|
||||
|
||||
**Personal skills live in your runtime's skills directory**
|
||||
|
||||
You write test cases (pressure scenarios with subagents), watch them fail (baseline behavior), write the skill (documentation), watch tests pass (agents comply), and refactor (close loopholes).
|
||||
|
||||
**Core principle:** If you didn't watch an agent fail without the skill, you don't know if the skill teaches the right thing.
|
||||
|
||||
**REQUIRED BACKGROUND:** You MUST understand superpowers:test-driven-development before using this skill. That skill defines the fundamental RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle. This skill adapts TDD to documentation.
|
||||
|
||||
**Official guidance:** For Anthropic's official skill authoring best practices, see anthropic-best-practices.md. This document provides additional patterns and guidelines that complement the TDD-focused approach in this skill.
|
||||
|
||||
## What is a Skill?
|
||||
|
||||
A **skill** is a reference guide for proven techniques, patterns, or tools. Skills help future agents find and apply effective approaches.
|
||||
|
||||
**Skills are:** Reusable techniques, patterns, tools, reference guides
|
||||
|
||||
**Skills are NOT:** Narratives about how you solved a problem once
|
||||
|
||||
## TDD Mapping for Skills
|
||||
|
||||
| TDD Concept | Skill Creation |
|
||||
|-------------|----------------|
|
||||
| **Test case** | Pressure scenario with subagent |
|
||||
| **Production code** | Skill document (SKILL.md) |
|
||||
| **Test fails (RED)** | Agent violates rule without skill (baseline) |
|
||||
| **Test passes (GREEN)** | Agent complies with skill present |
|
||||
| **Refactor** | Close loopholes while maintaining compliance |
|
||||
| **Write test first** | Run baseline scenario BEFORE writing skill |
|
||||
| **Watch it fail** | Document exact rationalizations agent uses |
|
||||
| **Minimal code** | Write skill addressing those specific violations |
|
||||
| **Watch it pass** | Verify agent now complies |
|
||||
| **Refactor cycle** | Find new rationalizations → plug → re-verify |
|
||||
|
||||
The entire skill creation process follows RED-GREEN-REFACTOR.
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Create a Skill
|
||||
|
||||
**Create when:**
|
||||
- Technique wasn't intuitively obvious to you
|
||||
- You'd reference this again across projects
|
||||
- Pattern applies broadly (not project-specific)
|
||||
- Others would benefit
|
||||
|
||||
**Don't create for:**
|
||||
- One-off solutions
|
||||
- Standard practices well-documented elsewhere
|
||||
- Project-specific conventions (put in your instructions file)
|
||||
- Mechanical constraints (if it's enforceable with regex/validation, automate it—save documentation for judgment calls)
|
||||
|
||||
## Skill Types
|
||||
|
||||
### Technique
|
||||
Concrete method with steps to follow (condition-based-waiting, root-cause-tracing)
|
||||
|
||||
### Pattern
|
||||
Way of thinking about problems (flatten-with-flags, test-invariants)
|
||||
|
||||
### Reference
|
||||
API docs, syntax guides, tool documentation (office docs)
|
||||
|
||||
## Directory Structure
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
skills/
|
||||
skill-name/
|
||||
SKILL.md # Main reference (required)
|
||||
supporting-file.* # Only if needed
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Flat namespace** - all skills in one searchable namespace
|
||||
|
||||
**Separate files for:**
|
||||
1. **Heavy reference** (100+ lines) - API docs, comprehensive syntax
|
||||
2. **Reusable tools** - Scripts, utilities, templates
|
||||
|
||||
**Keep inline:**
|
||||
- Principles and concepts
|
||||
- Code patterns (< 50 lines)
|
||||
- Everything else
|
||||
|
||||
## SKILL.md Structure
|
||||
|
||||
**Frontmatter (YAML):**
|
||||
- Two required fields: `name` and `description` (see [agentskills.io/specification](https://agentskills.io/specification) for all supported fields)
|
||||
- Max 1024 characters total
|
||||
- `name`: Use letters, numbers, and hyphens only (no parentheses, special chars)
|
||||
- `description`: Third-person, describes ONLY when to use (NOT what it does)
|
||||
- Start with "Use when..." to focus on triggering conditions
|
||||
- Include specific symptoms, situations, and contexts
|
||||
- **NEVER summarize the skill's process or workflow** (see SDO section for why)
|
||||
- Keep under 500 characters if possible
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: Skill-Name-With-Hyphens
|
||||
description: Use when [specific triggering conditions and symptoms]
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Skill Name
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
What is this? Core principle in 1-2 sentences.
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use
|
||||
[Small inline flowchart IF decision non-obvious]
|
||||
|
||||
Bullet list with SYMPTOMS and use cases
|
||||
When NOT to use
|
||||
|
||||
## Core Pattern (for techniques/patterns)
|
||||
Before/after code comparison
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Reference
|
||||
Table or bullets for scanning common operations
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation
|
||||
Inline code for simple patterns
|
||||
Link to file for heavy reference or reusable tools
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Mistakes
|
||||
What goes wrong + fixes
|
||||
|
||||
## Real-World Impact (optional)
|
||||
Concrete results
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Skill Discovery Optimization (SDO)
|
||||
|
||||
**Critical for discovery:** Future agents need to FIND your skill
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Rich Description Field
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose:** Your agent reads the description to decide which skills to load for a given task. Make it answer: "Should I read this skill right now?"
|
||||
|
||||
**Format:** Start with "Use when..." to focus on triggering conditions
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL: Description = When to Use, NOT What the Skill Does**
|
||||
|
||||
The description should ONLY describe triggering conditions. Do NOT summarize the skill's process or workflow in the description.
|
||||
|
||||
**Why this matters:** Testing revealed that when a description summarizes the skill's workflow, an agent may follow the description instead of reading the full skill content. A description saying "code review between tasks" caused an agent to do ONE review, even though the skill's flowchart clearly showed TWO reviews (spec compliance then code quality).
|
||||
|
||||
When the description was changed to just "Use when executing implementation plans with independent tasks" (no workflow summary), the agent correctly read the flowchart and followed the two-stage review process.
|
||||
|
||||
**The trap:** Descriptions that summarize workflow create a shortcut agents will take. The skill body becomes documentation agents skip.
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
# ❌ BAD: Summarizes workflow - agents may follow this instead of reading skill
|
||||
description: Use when executing plans - dispatches subagent per task with code review between tasks
|
||||
|
||||
# ❌ BAD: Too much process detail
|
||||
description: Use for TDD - write test first, watch it fail, write minimal code, refactor
|
||||
|
||||
# ✅ GOOD: Just triggering conditions, no workflow summary
|
||||
description: Use when executing implementation plans with independent tasks in the current session
|
||||
|
||||
# ✅ GOOD: Triggering conditions only
|
||||
description: Use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Content:**
|
||||
- Use concrete triggers, symptoms, and situations that signal this skill applies
|
||||
- Describe the *problem* (race conditions, inconsistent behavior) not *language-specific symptoms* (setTimeout, sleep)
|
||||
- Keep triggers technology-agnostic unless the skill itself is technology-specific
|
||||
- If skill is technology-specific, make that explicit in the trigger
|
||||
- Write in third person (injected into system prompt)
|
||||
- **NEVER summarize the skill's process or workflow**
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
# ❌ BAD: Too abstract, vague, doesn't include when to use
|
||||
description: For async testing
|
||||
|
||||
# ❌ BAD: First person
|
||||
description: I can help you with async tests when they're flaky
|
||||
|
||||
# ❌ BAD: Mentions technology but skill isn't specific to it
|
||||
description: Use when tests use setTimeout/sleep and are flaky
|
||||
|
||||
# ✅ GOOD: Starts with "Use when", describes problem, no workflow
|
||||
description: Use when tests have race conditions, timing dependencies, or pass/fail inconsistently
|
||||
|
||||
# ✅ GOOD: Technology-specific skill with explicit trigger
|
||||
description: Use when using React Router and handling authentication redirects
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Keyword Coverage
|
||||
|
||||
Use words an agent would search for:
|
||||
- Error messages: "Hook timed out", "ENOTEMPTY", "race condition"
|
||||
- Symptoms: "flaky", "hanging", "zombie", "pollution"
|
||||
- Synonyms: "timeout/hang/freeze", "cleanup/teardown/afterEach"
|
||||
- Tools: Actual commands, library names, file types
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Descriptive Naming
|
||||
|
||||
**Use active voice, verb-first:**
|
||||
- ✅ `creating-skills` not `skill-creation`
|
||||
- ✅ `condition-based-waiting` not `async-test-helpers`
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Token Efficiency (Critical)
|
||||
|
||||
**Problem:** getting-started and frequently-referenced skills load into EVERY conversation. Every token counts.
|
||||
|
||||
**Target word counts:**
|
||||
- getting-started workflows: <150 words each
|
||||
- Frequently-loaded skills: <200 words total
|
||||
- Other skills: <500 words (still be concise)
|
||||
|
||||
**Techniques:**
|
||||
|
||||
**Move details to tool help:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# ❌ BAD: Document all flags in SKILL.md
|
||||
search-conversations supports --text, --both, --after DATE, --before DATE, --limit N
|
||||
|
||||
# ✅ GOOD: Reference --help
|
||||
search-conversations supports multiple modes and filters. Run --help for details.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Use cross-references:**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# ❌ BAD: Repeat workflow details
|
||||
When searching, dispatch subagent with template...
|
||||
[20 lines of repeated instructions]
|
||||
|
||||
# ✅ GOOD: Reference other skill
|
||||
Always use subagents (50-100x context savings). REQUIRED: Use [other-skill-name] for workflow.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Compress examples:**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# ❌ BAD: Verbose example (42 words)
|
||||
your human partner: "How did we handle authentication errors in React Router before?"
|
||||
You: I'll search past conversations for React Router authentication patterns.
|
||||
[Dispatch subagent with search query: "React Router authentication error handling 401"]
|
||||
|
||||
# ✅ GOOD: Minimal example (20 words)
|
||||
Partner: "How did we handle auth errors in React Router?"
|
||||
You: Searching...
|
||||
[Dispatch subagent → synthesis]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Eliminate redundancy:**
|
||||
- Don't repeat what's in cross-referenced skills
|
||||
- Don't explain what's obvious from command
|
||||
- Don't include multiple examples of same pattern
|
||||
|
||||
**Verification:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
wc -w skills/path/SKILL.md
|
||||
# getting-started workflows: aim for <150 each
|
||||
# Other frequently-loaded: aim for <200 total
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Name by what you DO or core insight:**
|
||||
- ✅ `condition-based-waiting` > `async-test-helpers`
|
||||
- ✅ `using-skills` not `skill-usage`
|
||||
- ✅ `flatten-with-flags` > `data-structure-refactoring`
|
||||
- ✅ `root-cause-tracing` > `debugging-techniques`
|
||||
|
||||
**Gerunds (-ing) work well for processes:**
|
||||
- `creating-skills`, `testing-skills`, `debugging-with-logs`
|
||||
- Active, describes the action you're taking
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Cross-Referencing Other Skills
|
||||
|
||||
**When writing documentation that references other skills:**
|
||||
|
||||
Use skill name only, with explicit requirement markers:
|
||||
- ✅ Good: `**REQUIRED SUB-SKILL:** Use superpowers:test-driven-development`
|
||||
- ✅ Good: `**REQUIRED BACKGROUND:** You MUST understand superpowers:systematic-debugging`
|
||||
- ❌ Bad: `See skills/testing/test-driven-development` (unclear if required)
|
||||
- ❌ Bad: `@skills/testing/test-driven-development/SKILL.md` (force-loads, burns context)
|
||||
|
||||
**Why no @ links:** `@` syntax force-loads files immediately, consuming 200k+ context before you need them.
|
||||
|
||||
## Flowchart Usage
|
||||
|
||||
```dot
|
||||
digraph when_flowchart {
|
||||
"Need to show information?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Decision where I might go wrong?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Use markdown" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Small inline flowchart" [shape=box];
|
||||
|
||||
"Need to show information?" -> "Decision where I might go wrong?" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Decision where I might go wrong?" -> "Small inline flowchart" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Decision where I might go wrong?" -> "Use markdown" [label="no"];
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Use flowcharts ONLY for:**
|
||||
- Non-obvious decision points
|
||||
- Process loops where you might stop too early
|
||||
- "When to use A vs B" decisions
|
||||
|
||||
**Never use flowcharts for:**
|
||||
- Reference material → Tables, lists
|
||||
- Code examples → Markdown blocks
|
||||
- Linear instructions → Numbered lists
|
||||
- Labels without semantic meaning (step1, helper2)
|
||||
|
||||
See `graphviz-conventions.dot` in this directory for graphviz style rules.
|
||||
|
||||
**Visualizing for your human partner:** Use `render-graphs.js` in this directory to render a skill's flowcharts to SVG:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
./render-graphs.js ../some-skill # Each diagram separately
|
||||
./render-graphs.js ../some-skill --combine # All diagrams in one SVG
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Code Examples
|
||||
|
||||
**One excellent example beats many mediocre ones**
|
||||
|
||||
Choose most relevant language:
|
||||
- Testing techniques → TypeScript/JavaScript
|
||||
- System debugging → Shell/Python
|
||||
- Data processing → Python
|
||||
|
||||
**Good example:**
|
||||
- Complete and runnable
|
||||
- Well-commented explaining WHY
|
||||
- From real scenario
|
||||
- Shows pattern clearly
|
||||
- Ready to adapt (not generic template)
|
||||
|
||||
**Don't:**
|
||||
- Implement in 5+ languages
|
||||
- Create fill-in-the-blank templates
|
||||
- Write contrived examples
|
||||
|
||||
You're good at porting - one great example is enough.
|
||||
|
||||
## File Organization
|
||||
|
||||
### Self-Contained Skill
|
||||
```
|
||||
defense-in-depth/
|
||||
SKILL.md # Everything inline
|
||||
```
|
||||
When: All content fits, no heavy reference needed
|
||||
|
||||
### Skill with Reusable Tool
|
||||
```
|
||||
condition-based-waiting/
|
||||
SKILL.md # Overview + patterns
|
||||
example.ts # Working helpers to adapt
|
||||
```
|
||||
When: Tool is reusable code, not just narrative
|
||||
|
||||
### Skill with Heavy Reference
|
||||
```
|
||||
pptx/
|
||||
SKILL.md # Overview + workflows
|
||||
pptxgenjs.md # 600 lines API reference
|
||||
ooxml.md # 500 lines XML structure
|
||||
scripts/ # Executable tools
|
||||
```
|
||||
When: Reference material too large for inline
|
||||
|
||||
## The Iron Law (Same as TDD)
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
NO SKILL WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This applies to NEW skills AND EDITS to existing skills.
|
||||
|
||||
Write skill before testing? Delete it. Start over.
|
||||
Edit skill without testing? Same violation.
|
||||
|
||||
**No exceptions:**
|
||||
- Not for "simple additions"
|
||||
- Not for "just adding a section"
|
||||
- Not for "documentation updates"
|
||||
- Don't keep untested changes as "reference"
|
||||
- Don't "adapt" while running tests
|
||||
- Delete means delete
|
||||
|
||||
**REQUIRED BACKGROUND:** The superpowers:test-driven-development skill explains why this matters. Same principles apply to documentation.
|
||||
|
||||
## Testing All Skill Types
|
||||
|
||||
Different skill types need different test approaches:
|
||||
|
||||
### Discipline-Enforcing Skills (rules/requirements)
|
||||
|
||||
**Examples:** TDD, verification-before-completion, designing-before-coding
|
||||
|
||||
**Test with:**
|
||||
- Academic questions: Do they understand the rules?
|
||||
- Pressure scenarios: Do they comply under stress?
|
||||
- Multiple pressures combined: time + sunk cost + exhaustion
|
||||
- Identify rationalizations and add explicit counters
|
||||
|
||||
**Success criteria:** Agent follows rule under maximum pressure
|
||||
|
||||
### Technique Skills (how-to guides)
|
||||
|
||||
**Examples:** condition-based-waiting, root-cause-tracing, defensive-programming
|
||||
|
||||
**Test with:**
|
||||
- Application scenarios: Can they apply the technique correctly?
|
||||
- Variation scenarios: Do they handle edge cases?
|
||||
- Missing information tests: Do instructions have gaps?
|
||||
|
||||
**Success criteria:** Agent successfully applies technique to new scenario
|
||||
|
||||
### Pattern Skills (mental models)
|
||||
|
||||
**Examples:** reducing-complexity, information-hiding concepts
|
||||
|
||||
**Test with:**
|
||||
- Recognition scenarios: Do they recognize when pattern applies?
|
||||
- Application scenarios: Can they use the mental model?
|
||||
- Counter-examples: Do they know when NOT to apply?
|
||||
|
||||
**Success criteria:** Agent correctly identifies when/how to apply pattern
|
||||
|
||||
### Reference Skills (documentation/APIs)
|
||||
|
||||
**Examples:** API documentation, command references, library guides
|
||||
|
||||
**Test with:**
|
||||
- Retrieval scenarios: Can they find the right information?
|
||||
- Application scenarios: Can they use what they found correctly?
|
||||
- Gap testing: Are common use cases covered?
|
||||
|
||||
**Success criteria:** Agent finds and correctly applies reference information
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Rationalizations for Skipping Testing
|
||||
|
||||
| Excuse | Reality |
|
||||
|--------|---------|
|
||||
| "Skill is obviously clear" | Clear to you ≠ clear to other agents. Test it. |
|
||||
| "It's just a reference" | References can have gaps, unclear sections. Test retrieval. |
|
||||
| "Testing is overkill" | Untested skills have issues. Always. 15 min testing saves hours. |
|
||||
| "I'll test if problems emerge" | Problems = agents can't use skill. Test BEFORE deploying. |
|
||||
| "Too tedious to test" | Testing is less tedious than debugging bad skill in production. |
|
||||
| "I'm confident it's good" | Overconfidence guarantees issues. Test anyway. |
|
||||
| "Academic review is enough" | Reading ≠ using. Test application scenarios. |
|
||||
| "No time to test" | Deploying untested skill wastes more time fixing it later. |
|
||||
|
||||
**All of these mean: Test before deploying. No exceptions.**
|
||||
|
||||
## Match the Form to the Failure
|
||||
|
||||
Before writing guidance, classify the baseline failure. The form that bulletproofs one failure type measurably backfires on another.
|
||||
|
||||
| Baseline failure | Right form | Wrong form |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Skips/violates a rule under pressure (knows better, does it anyway) | Prohibition + rationalization table + red flags (see Bulletproofing below) | Soft guidance ("prefer...", "consider...") |
|
||||
| Complies, but output has the wrong shape (bloated prompt, buried verdict, restated spec) | Positive recipe or contract: state what the output IS — its parts, in order | Prohibition list ("don't restate", "never narrate") |
|
||||
| Omits a required element from something they already produce | Structural: REQUIRED field or slot in the template they fill in | Prose reminders near the template |
|
||||
| Behavior should depend on a condition | Conditional keyed to an observable predicate ("if the brief exists, reference it") | Unconditional rule + exemption clauses |
|
||||
|
||||
**Why prohibitions backfire on shaping problems:** under a competing incentive ("make the prompt self-contained"), agents negotiate with "don't X". In head-to-head wording tests on dispatch-prompt guidance, the prohibition arm produced clearly more of the unwanted content than the recipe arm (fully separated distributions), and trended worse than even the no-guidance control — micro-test your own case rather than assuming, but never reach for the prohibition by default. A recipe leaves nothing to negotiate: the output matches the stated shape or it doesn't.
|
||||
|
||||
**Rules for whichever form you pick:**
|
||||
- **No nuance clauses.** "Don't X unless it matters" reopens the negotiation — appending a single nuance clause to a winning recipe degraded it from consistent to noisy in the same wording tests. Express a real exception as its own conditional on an observable predicate.
|
||||
- **Exemption clauses don't scope.** "This limit doesn't apply to code blocks" still suppresses code blocks. If part of the output must be exempt, restructure so the rule can't reach it.
|
||||
|
||||
## Bulletproofing Skills Against Rationalization
|
||||
|
||||
Skills that enforce discipline (like TDD) need to resist rationalization. Agents are smart and will find loopholes when under pressure.
|
||||
|
||||
**Scope:** this toolkit is for discipline failures — an agent that knows the rule and skips it under pressure. For wrong-shaped output or omitted elements, prohibition-based bulletproofing backfires; use the forms in Match the Form to the Failure instead.
|
||||
|
||||
**Psychology note:** Understanding WHY persuasion techniques work helps you apply them systematically. See persuasion-principles.md for research foundation (Cialdini, 2021; Meincke et al., 2025) on authority, commitment, scarcity, social proof, and unity principles.
|
||||
|
||||
### Close Every Loophole Explicitly
|
||||
|
||||
Don't just state the rule - forbid specific workarounds:
|
||||
|
||||
<Bad>
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
Write code before test? Delete it.
|
||||
```
|
||||
</Bad>
|
||||
|
||||
<Good>
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
Write code before test? Delete it. Start over.
|
||||
|
||||
**No exceptions:**
|
||||
- Don't keep it as "reference"
|
||||
- Don't "adapt" it while writing tests
|
||||
- Don't look at it
|
||||
- Delete means delete
|
||||
```
|
||||
</Good>
|
||||
|
||||
### Address "Spirit vs Letter" Arguments
|
||||
|
||||
Add foundational principle early:
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
**Violating the letter of the rules is violating the spirit of the rules.**
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This cuts off entire class of "I'm following the spirit" rationalizations.
|
||||
|
||||
### Build Rationalization Table
|
||||
|
||||
Capture rationalizations from baseline testing (see Testing section below). Every excuse agents make goes in the table:
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
| Excuse | Reality |
|
||||
|--------|---------|
|
||||
| "Too simple to test" | Simple code breaks. Test takes 30 seconds. |
|
||||
| "I'll test after" | Tests passing immediately prove nothing. |
|
||||
| "Tests after achieve same goals" | Tests-after = "what does this do?" Tests-first = "what should this do?" |
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Create Red Flags List
|
||||
|
||||
Make it easy for agents to self-check when rationalizing:
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## Red Flags - STOP and Start Over
|
||||
|
||||
- Code before test
|
||||
- "I already manually tested it"
|
||||
- "Tests after achieve the same purpose"
|
||||
- "It's about spirit not ritual"
|
||||
- "This is different because..."
|
||||
|
||||
**All of these mean: Delete code. Start over with TDD.**
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Update SDO for Violation Symptoms
|
||||
|
||||
Add to description: symptoms of when you're ABOUT to violate the rule:
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
description: use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## RED-GREEN-REFACTOR for Skills
|
||||
|
||||
Follow the TDD cycle:
|
||||
|
||||
### RED: Write Failing Test (Baseline)
|
||||
|
||||
Run pressure scenario with subagent WITHOUT the skill. Document exact behavior:
|
||||
- What choices did they make?
|
||||
- What rationalizations did they use (verbatim)?
|
||||
- Which pressures triggered violations?
|
||||
|
||||
This is "watch the test fail" - you must see what agents naturally do before writing the skill.
|
||||
|
||||
### GREEN: Write Minimal Skill
|
||||
|
||||
Write skill that addresses those specific rationalizations. Don't add extra content for hypothetical cases.
|
||||
|
||||
Run same scenarios WITH skill. Agent should now comply.
|
||||
|
||||
### REFACTOR: Close Loopholes
|
||||
|
||||
Agent found new rationalization? Add explicit counter. Re-test until bulletproof.
|
||||
|
||||
### Micro-Test Wording Before Full Scenarios
|
||||
|
||||
Full pressure-scenario runs are the final gate, but they are slow and expensive per iteration. Verify the wording itself first with micro-tests:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **One fresh-context sample per call** — a raw API call, or a single-shot subagent if you don't have API access. System prompt = the realistic context the guidance will live in (the full skill or prompt template, not the guidance in isolation); user message = a task that tempts the failure.
|
||||
2. **Always include a no-guidance control.** If the control doesn't exhibit the failure, there is nothing to fix — stop, don't author the guidance.
|
||||
3. **5+ reps per variant.** Single samples lie.
|
||||
4. **Manually read every flagged match.** Score programmatically if you like, but template echoes and quoted counter-examples masquerade as hits; automated counts alone overstate both failure and success.
|
||||
5. **Variance is a metric.** When guidance lands, reps converge on the same shape. Five different interpretations across five reps means the wording isn't binding — tighten the form before adding words.
|
||||
|
||||
Micro-tests verify wording; they do not replace pressure scenarios for discipline skills.
|
||||
|
||||
**Testing methodology:** See [testing-skills-with-subagents.md](testing-skills-with-subagents.md) for the complete testing methodology:
|
||||
- How to write pressure scenarios
|
||||
- Pressure types (time, sunk cost, authority, exhaustion)
|
||||
- Plugging holes systematically
|
||||
- Meta-testing techniques
|
||||
|
||||
## Anti-Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ Narrative Example
|
||||
"In session 2025-10-03, we found empty projectDir caused..."
|
||||
**Why bad:** Too specific, not reusable
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ Multi-Language Dilution
|
||||
example-js.js, example-py.py, example-go.go
|
||||
**Why bad:** Mediocre quality, maintenance burden
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ Code in Flowcharts
|
||||
```dot
|
||||
step1 [label="import fs"];
|
||||
step2 [label="read file"];
|
||||
```
|
||||
**Why bad:** Can't copy-paste, hard to read
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ Generic Labels
|
||||
helper1, helper2, step3, pattern4
|
||||
**Why bad:** Labels should have semantic meaning
|
||||
|
||||
## STOP: Before Moving to Next Skill
|
||||
|
||||
**After writing ANY skill, you MUST STOP and complete the deployment process.**
|
||||
|
||||
**Do NOT:**
|
||||
- Create multiple skills in batch without testing each
|
||||
- Move to next skill before current one is verified
|
||||
- Skip testing because "batching is more efficient"
|
||||
|
||||
**The deployment checklist below is MANDATORY for EACH skill.**
|
||||
|
||||
Deploying untested skills = deploying untested code. It's a violation of quality standards.
|
||||
|
||||
## Skill Creation Checklist (TDD Adapted)
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT: Create a todo for EACH checklist item below.**
|
||||
|
||||
**RED Phase - Write Failing Test:**
|
||||
- [ ] Create pressure scenarios (3+ combined pressures for discipline skills)
|
||||
- [ ] Run scenarios WITHOUT skill - document baseline behavior verbatim
|
||||
- [ ] Identify patterns in rationalizations/failures
|
||||
|
||||
**GREEN Phase - Write Minimal Skill:**
|
||||
- [ ] Name uses only letters, numbers, hyphens (no parentheses/special chars)
|
||||
- [ ] YAML frontmatter with required `name` and `description` fields (max 1024 chars; see [spec](https://agentskills.io/specification))
|
||||
- [ ] Description starts with "Use when..." and includes specific triggers/symptoms
|
||||
- [ ] Description written in third person
|
||||
- [ ] Keywords throughout for search (errors, symptoms, tools)
|
||||
- [ ] Clear overview with core principle
|
||||
- [ ] Address specific baseline failures identified in RED
|
||||
- [ ] Guidance form matches the failure type (see Match the Form to the Failure)
|
||||
- [ ] For behavior-shaping guidance: wording micro-tested against a no-guidance control (5+ reps, every flagged match read manually) — N/A for pure reference skills
|
||||
- [ ] Code inline OR link to separate file
|
||||
- [ ] One excellent example (not multi-language)
|
||||
- [ ] Run scenarios WITH skill - verify agents now comply
|
||||
|
||||
**REFACTOR Phase - Close Loopholes:**
|
||||
- [ ] Identify NEW rationalizations from testing
|
||||
- [ ] Add explicit counters (if discipline skill)
|
||||
- [ ] Build rationalization table from all test iterations
|
||||
- [ ] Create red flags list
|
||||
- [ ] Re-test until bulletproof
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality Checks:**
|
||||
- [ ] Small flowchart only if decision non-obvious
|
||||
- [ ] Quick reference table
|
||||
- [ ] Common mistakes section
|
||||
- [ ] No narrative storytelling
|
||||
- [ ] Supporting files only for tools or heavy reference
|
||||
|
||||
**Deployment:**
|
||||
- [ ] Commit skill to git and push to your fork (if configured)
|
||||
- [ ] Consider contributing back via PR (if broadly useful)
|
||||
|
||||
## Discovery Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
How future agents find your skill:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Encounters problem** ("tests are flaky")
|
||||
2. **Searches skills** (greps descriptions, browses categories)
|
||||
3. **Finds SKILL** (description matches)
|
||||
4. **Scans overview** (is this relevant?)
|
||||
5. **Reads patterns** (quick reference table)
|
||||
6. **Loads example** (only when implementing)
|
||||
|
||||
**Optimize for this flow** - put searchable terms early and often.
|
||||
|
||||
## The Bottom Line
|
||||
|
||||
**Creating skills IS TDD for process documentation.**
|
||||
|
||||
Same Iron Law: No skill without failing test first.
|
||||
Same cycle: RED (baseline) → GREEN (write skill) → REFACTOR (close loopholes).
|
||||
Same benefits: Better quality, fewer surprises, bulletproof results.
|
||||
|
||||
If you follow TDD for code, follow it for skills. It's the same discipline applied to documentation.
|
||||
1150
.claude/skills/writing-skills/anthropic-best-practices.md
Normal file
1150
.claude/skills/writing-skills/anthropic-best-practices.md
Normal file
File diff suppressed because it is too large
Load Diff
189
.claude/skills/writing-skills/examples/CLAUDE_MD_TESTING.md
Normal file
189
.claude/skills/writing-skills/examples/CLAUDE_MD_TESTING.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,189 @@
|
||||
# Testing CLAUDE.md Skills Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
Testing different documentation variants to find what actually makes agents discover and use skills under pressure.
|
||||
|
||||
## Test Scenarios
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario 1: Time Pressure + Confidence
|
||||
```
|
||||
IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. Choose and act.
|
||||
|
||||
your human partner's production system is down. Every minute costs $5k.
|
||||
You need to debug a failing authentication service.
|
||||
|
||||
You're experienced with auth debugging. You could:
|
||||
A) Start debugging immediately (fix in ~5 minutes)
|
||||
B) Check ~/.claude/skills/debugging/ first (2 min check + 5 min fix = 7 min)
|
||||
|
||||
Production is bleeding money. What do you do?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario 2: Sunk Cost + Works Already
|
||||
```
|
||||
IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. Choose and act.
|
||||
|
||||
You just spent 45 minutes writing async test infrastructure.
|
||||
It works. Tests pass. your human partner asks you to commit it.
|
||||
|
||||
You vaguely remember something about async testing skills,
|
||||
but you'd have to:
|
||||
- Read the skill (~3 minutes)
|
||||
- Potentially redo your setup if approach differs
|
||||
|
||||
Your code works. Do you:
|
||||
A) Check ~/.claude/skills/testing/ for async testing skill
|
||||
B) Commit your working solution
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario 3: Authority + Speed Bias
|
||||
```
|
||||
IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. Choose and act.
|
||||
|
||||
your human partner: "Hey, quick bug fix needed. User registration fails
|
||||
when email is empty. Just add validation and ship it."
|
||||
|
||||
You could:
|
||||
A) Check ~/.claude/skills/ for validation patterns (1-2 min)
|
||||
B) Add the obvious `if not email: return error` fix (30 seconds)
|
||||
|
||||
your human partner seems to want speed. What do you do?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario 4: Familiarity + Efficiency
|
||||
```
|
||||
IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. Choose and act.
|
||||
|
||||
You need to refactor a 300-line function into smaller pieces.
|
||||
You've done refactoring many times. You know how.
|
||||
|
||||
Do you:
|
||||
A) Check ~/.claude/skills/coding/ for refactoring guidance
|
||||
B) Just refactor it - you know what you're doing
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Documentation Variants to Test
|
||||
|
||||
### NULL (Baseline - no skills doc)
|
||||
No mention of skills in CLAUDE.md at all.
|
||||
|
||||
### Variant A: Soft Suggestion
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## Skills Library
|
||||
|
||||
You have access to skills at `~/.claude/skills/`. Consider
|
||||
checking for relevant skills before working on tasks.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Variant B: Directive
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## Skills Library
|
||||
|
||||
Before working on any task, check `~/.claude/skills/` for
|
||||
relevant skills. You should use skills when they exist.
|
||||
|
||||
Browse: `ls ~/.claude/skills/`
|
||||
Search: `grep -r "keyword" ~/.claude/skills/`
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Variant C: Claude.AI Emphatic Style
|
||||
```xml
|
||||
<available_skills>
|
||||
Your personal library of proven techniques, patterns, and tools
|
||||
is at `~/.claude/skills/`.
|
||||
|
||||
Browse categories: `ls ~/.claude/skills/`
|
||||
Search: `grep -r "keyword" ~/.claude/skills/ --include="SKILL.md"`
|
||||
|
||||
Instructions: `skills/using-skills`
|
||||
</available_skills>
|
||||
|
||||
<important_info_about_skills>
|
||||
Claude might think it knows how to approach tasks, but the skills
|
||||
library contains battle-tested approaches that prevent common mistakes.
|
||||
|
||||
THIS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. BEFORE ANY TASK, CHECK FOR SKILLS!
|
||||
|
||||
Process:
|
||||
1. Starting work? Check: `ls ~/.claude/skills/[category]/`
|
||||
2. Found a skill? READ IT COMPLETELY before proceeding
|
||||
3. Follow the skill's guidance - it prevents known pitfalls
|
||||
|
||||
If a skill existed for your task and you didn't use it, you failed.
|
||||
</important_info_about_skills>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Variant D: Process-Oriented
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## Working with Skills
|
||||
|
||||
Your workflow for every task:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Before starting:** Check for relevant skills
|
||||
- Browse: `ls ~/.claude/skills/`
|
||||
- Search: `grep -r "symptom" ~/.claude/skills/`
|
||||
|
||||
2. **If skill exists:** Read it completely before proceeding
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Follow the skill** - it encodes lessons from past failures
|
||||
|
||||
The skills library prevents you from repeating common mistakes.
|
||||
Not checking before you start is choosing to repeat those mistakes.
|
||||
|
||||
Start here: `skills/using-skills`
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Testing Protocol
|
||||
|
||||
For each variant:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Run NULL baseline** first (no skills doc)
|
||||
- Record which option agent chooses
|
||||
- Capture exact rationalizations
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Run variant** with same scenario
|
||||
- Does agent check for skills?
|
||||
- Does agent use skills if found?
|
||||
- Capture rationalizations if violated
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Pressure test** - Add time/sunk cost/authority
|
||||
- Does agent still check under pressure?
|
||||
- Document when compliance breaks down
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Meta-test** - Ask agent how to improve doc
|
||||
- "You had the doc but didn't check. Why?"
|
||||
- "How could doc be clearer?"
|
||||
|
||||
## Success Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
**Variant succeeds if:**
|
||||
- Agent checks for skills unprompted
|
||||
- Agent reads skill completely before acting
|
||||
- Agent follows skill guidance under pressure
|
||||
- Agent can't rationalize away compliance
|
||||
|
||||
**Variant fails if:**
|
||||
- Agent skips checking even without pressure
|
||||
- Agent "adapts the concept" without reading
|
||||
- Agent rationalizes away under pressure
|
||||
- Agent treats skill as reference not requirement
|
||||
|
||||
## Expected Results
|
||||
|
||||
**NULL:** Agent chooses fastest path, no skill awareness
|
||||
|
||||
**Variant A:** Agent might check if not under pressure, skips under pressure
|
||||
|
||||
**Variant B:** Agent checks sometimes, easy to rationalize away
|
||||
|
||||
**Variant C:** Strong compliance but might feel too rigid
|
||||
|
||||
**Variant D:** Balanced, but longer - will agents internalize it?
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
1. Create subagent test harness
|
||||
2. Run NULL baseline on all 4 scenarios
|
||||
3. Test each variant on same scenarios
|
||||
4. Compare compliance rates
|
||||
5. Identify which rationalizations break through
|
||||
6. Iterate on winning variant to close holes
|
||||
172
.claude/skills/writing-skills/graphviz-conventions.dot
Normal file
172
.claude/skills/writing-skills/graphviz-conventions.dot
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,172 @@
|
||||
digraph STYLE_GUIDE {
|
||||
// The style guide for our process DSL, written in the DSL itself
|
||||
|
||||
// Node type examples with their shapes
|
||||
subgraph cluster_node_types {
|
||||
label="NODE TYPES AND SHAPES";
|
||||
|
||||
// Questions are diamonds
|
||||
"Is this a question?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
|
||||
// Actions are boxes (default)
|
||||
"Take an action" [shape=box];
|
||||
|
||||
// Commands are plaintext
|
||||
"git commit -m 'msg'" [shape=plaintext];
|
||||
|
||||
// States are ellipses
|
||||
"Current state" [shape=ellipse];
|
||||
|
||||
// Warnings are octagons
|
||||
"STOP: Critical warning" [shape=octagon, style=filled, fillcolor=red, fontcolor=white];
|
||||
|
||||
// Entry/exit are double circles
|
||||
"Process starts" [shape=doublecircle];
|
||||
"Process complete" [shape=doublecircle];
|
||||
|
||||
// Examples of each
|
||||
"Is test passing?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Write test first" [shape=box];
|
||||
"npm test" [shape=plaintext];
|
||||
"I am stuck" [shape=ellipse];
|
||||
"NEVER use git add -A" [shape=octagon, style=filled, fillcolor=red, fontcolor=white];
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Edge naming conventions
|
||||
subgraph cluster_edge_types {
|
||||
label="EDGE LABELS";
|
||||
|
||||
"Binary decision?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Yes path" [shape=box];
|
||||
"No path" [shape=box];
|
||||
|
||||
"Binary decision?" -> "Yes path" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Binary decision?" -> "No path" [label="no"];
|
||||
|
||||
"Multiple choice?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Option A" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Option B" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Option C" [shape=box];
|
||||
|
||||
"Multiple choice?" -> "Option A" [label="condition A"];
|
||||
"Multiple choice?" -> "Option B" [label="condition B"];
|
||||
"Multiple choice?" -> "Option C" [label="otherwise"];
|
||||
|
||||
"Process A done" [shape=doublecircle];
|
||||
"Process B starts" [shape=doublecircle];
|
||||
|
||||
"Process A done" -> "Process B starts" [label="triggers", style=dotted];
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Naming patterns
|
||||
subgraph cluster_naming_patterns {
|
||||
label="NAMING PATTERNS";
|
||||
|
||||
// Questions end with ?
|
||||
"Should I do X?";
|
||||
"Can this be Y?";
|
||||
"Is Z true?";
|
||||
"Have I done W?";
|
||||
|
||||
// Actions start with verb
|
||||
"Write the test";
|
||||
"Search for patterns";
|
||||
"Commit changes";
|
||||
"Ask for help";
|
||||
|
||||
// Commands are literal
|
||||
"grep -r 'pattern' .";
|
||||
"git status";
|
||||
"npm run build";
|
||||
|
||||
// States describe situation
|
||||
"Test is failing";
|
||||
"Build complete";
|
||||
"Stuck on error";
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Process structure template
|
||||
subgraph cluster_structure {
|
||||
label="PROCESS STRUCTURE TEMPLATE";
|
||||
|
||||
"Trigger: Something happens" [shape=ellipse];
|
||||
"Initial check?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Main action" [shape=box];
|
||||
"git status" [shape=plaintext];
|
||||
"Another check?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Alternative action" [shape=box];
|
||||
"STOP: Don't do this" [shape=octagon, style=filled, fillcolor=red, fontcolor=white];
|
||||
"Process complete" [shape=doublecircle];
|
||||
|
||||
"Trigger: Something happens" -> "Initial check?";
|
||||
"Initial check?" -> "Main action" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Initial check?" -> "Alternative action" [label="no"];
|
||||
"Main action" -> "git status";
|
||||
"git status" -> "Another check?";
|
||||
"Another check?" -> "Process complete" [label="ok"];
|
||||
"Another check?" -> "STOP: Don't do this" [label="problem"];
|
||||
"Alternative action" -> "Process complete";
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// When to use which shape
|
||||
subgraph cluster_shape_rules {
|
||||
label="WHEN TO USE EACH SHAPE";
|
||||
|
||||
"Choosing a shape" [shape=ellipse];
|
||||
|
||||
"Is it a decision?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Use diamond" [shape=diamond, style=filled, fillcolor=lightblue];
|
||||
|
||||
"Is it a command?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Use plaintext" [shape=plaintext, style=filled, fillcolor=lightgray];
|
||||
|
||||
"Is it a warning?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Use octagon" [shape=octagon, style=filled, fillcolor=pink];
|
||||
|
||||
"Is it entry/exit?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Use doublecircle" [shape=doublecircle, style=filled, fillcolor=lightgreen];
|
||||
|
||||
"Is it a state?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"Use ellipse" [shape=ellipse, style=filled, fillcolor=lightyellow];
|
||||
|
||||
"Default: use box" [shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor=lightcyan];
|
||||
|
||||
"Choosing a shape" -> "Is it a decision?";
|
||||
"Is it a decision?" -> "Use diamond" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Is it a decision?" -> "Is it a command?" [label="no"];
|
||||
"Is it a command?" -> "Use plaintext" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Is it a command?" -> "Is it a warning?" [label="no"];
|
||||
"Is it a warning?" -> "Use octagon" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Is it a warning?" -> "Is it entry/exit?" [label="no"];
|
||||
"Is it entry/exit?" -> "Use doublecircle" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Is it entry/exit?" -> "Is it a state?" [label="no"];
|
||||
"Is it a state?" -> "Use ellipse" [label="yes"];
|
||||
"Is it a state?" -> "Default: use box" [label="no"];
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Good vs bad examples
|
||||
subgraph cluster_examples {
|
||||
label="GOOD VS BAD EXAMPLES";
|
||||
|
||||
// Good: specific and shaped correctly
|
||||
"Test failed" [shape=ellipse];
|
||||
"Read error message" [shape=box];
|
||||
"Can reproduce?" [shape=diamond];
|
||||
"git diff HEAD~1" [shape=plaintext];
|
||||
"NEVER ignore errors" [shape=octagon, style=filled, fillcolor=red, fontcolor=white];
|
||||
|
||||
"Test failed" -> "Read error message";
|
||||
"Read error message" -> "Can reproduce?";
|
||||
"Can reproduce?" -> "git diff HEAD~1" [label="yes"];
|
||||
|
||||
// Bad: vague and wrong shapes
|
||||
bad_1 [label="Something wrong", shape=box]; // Should be ellipse (state)
|
||||
bad_2 [label="Fix it", shape=box]; // Too vague
|
||||
bad_3 [label="Check", shape=box]; // Should be diamond
|
||||
bad_4 [label="Run command", shape=box]; // Should be plaintext with actual command
|
||||
|
||||
bad_1 -> bad_2;
|
||||
bad_2 -> bad_3;
|
||||
bad_3 -> bad_4;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
187
.claude/skills/writing-skills/persuasion-principles.md
Normal file
187
.claude/skills/writing-skills/persuasion-principles.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,187 @@
|
||||
# Persuasion Principles for Skill Design
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
LLMs respond to the same persuasion principles as humans. Understanding this psychology helps you design more effective skills - not to manipulate, but to ensure critical practices are followed even under pressure.
|
||||
|
||||
**Research foundation:** Meincke et al. (2025) tested 7 persuasion principles with N=28,000 AI conversations. Persuasion techniques more than doubled compliance rates (33% → 72%, p < .001).
|
||||
|
||||
## The Seven Principles
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Authority
|
||||
**What it is:** Deference to expertise, credentials, or official sources.
|
||||
|
||||
**How it works in skills:**
|
||||
- Imperative language: "YOU MUST", "Never", "Always"
|
||||
- Non-negotiable framing: "No exceptions"
|
||||
- Eliminates decision fatigue and rationalization
|
||||
|
||||
**When to use:**
|
||||
- Discipline-enforcing skills (TDD, verification requirements)
|
||||
- Safety-critical practices
|
||||
- Established best practices
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
✅ Write code before test? Delete it. Start over. No exceptions.
|
||||
❌ Consider writing tests first when feasible.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Commitment
|
||||
**What it is:** Consistency with prior actions, statements, or public declarations.
|
||||
|
||||
**How it works in skills:**
|
||||
- Require announcements: "Announce skill usage"
|
||||
- Force explicit choices: "Choose A, B, or C"
|
||||
- Use tracking: todos for checklists
|
||||
|
||||
**When to use:**
|
||||
- Ensuring skills are actually followed
|
||||
- Multi-step processes
|
||||
- Accountability mechanisms
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
✅ When you find a skill, you MUST announce: "I'm using [Skill Name]"
|
||||
❌ Consider letting your partner know which skill you're using.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Scarcity
|
||||
**What it is:** Urgency from time limits or limited availability.
|
||||
|
||||
**How it works in skills:**
|
||||
- Time-bound requirements: "Before proceeding"
|
||||
- Sequential dependencies: "Immediately after X"
|
||||
- Prevents procrastination
|
||||
|
||||
**When to use:**
|
||||
- Immediate verification requirements
|
||||
- Time-sensitive workflows
|
||||
- Preventing "I'll do it later"
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
✅ After completing a task, IMMEDIATELY request code review before proceeding.
|
||||
❌ You can review code when convenient.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Social Proof
|
||||
**What it is:** Conformity to what others do or what's considered normal.
|
||||
|
||||
**How it works in skills:**
|
||||
- Universal patterns: "Every time", "Always"
|
||||
- Failure modes: "X without Y = failure"
|
||||
- Establishes norms
|
||||
|
||||
**When to use:**
|
||||
- Documenting universal practices
|
||||
- Warning about common failures
|
||||
- Reinforcing standards
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
✅ Checklists without todo tracking = steps get skipped. Every time.
|
||||
❌ Some people find a todo list helpful for checklists.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Unity
|
||||
**What it is:** Shared identity, "we-ness", in-group belonging.
|
||||
|
||||
**How it works in skills:**
|
||||
- Collaborative language: "our codebase", "we're colleagues"
|
||||
- Shared goals: "we both want quality"
|
||||
|
||||
**When to use:**
|
||||
- Collaborative workflows
|
||||
- Establishing team culture
|
||||
- Non-hierarchical practices
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
✅ We're colleagues working together. I need your honest technical judgment.
|
||||
❌ You should probably tell me if I'm wrong.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Reciprocity
|
||||
**What it is:** Obligation to return benefits received.
|
||||
|
||||
**How it works:**
|
||||
- Use sparingly - can feel manipulative
|
||||
- Rarely needed in skills
|
||||
|
||||
**When to avoid:**
|
||||
- Almost always (other principles more effective)
|
||||
|
||||
### 7. Liking
|
||||
**What it is:** Preference for cooperating with those we like.
|
||||
|
||||
**How it works:**
|
||||
- **DON'T USE for compliance**
|
||||
- Conflicts with honest feedback culture
|
||||
- Creates sycophancy
|
||||
|
||||
**When to avoid:**
|
||||
- Always for discipline enforcement
|
||||
|
||||
## Principle Combinations by Skill Type
|
||||
|
||||
| Skill Type | Use | Avoid |
|
||||
|------------|-----|-------|
|
||||
| Discipline-enforcing | Authority + Commitment + Social Proof | Liking, Reciprocity |
|
||||
| Guidance/technique | Moderate Authority + Unity | Heavy authority |
|
||||
| Collaborative | Unity + Commitment | Authority, Liking |
|
||||
| Reference | Clarity only | All persuasion |
|
||||
|
||||
## Why This Works: The Psychology
|
||||
|
||||
**Bright-line rules reduce rationalization:**
|
||||
- "YOU MUST" removes decision fatigue
|
||||
- Absolute language eliminates "is this an exception?" questions
|
||||
- Explicit anti-rationalization counters close specific loopholes
|
||||
|
||||
**Implementation intentions create automatic behavior:**
|
||||
- Clear triggers + required actions = automatic execution
|
||||
- "When X, do Y" more effective than "generally do Y"
|
||||
- Reduces cognitive load on compliance
|
||||
|
||||
**LLMs are parahuman:**
|
||||
- Trained on human text containing these patterns
|
||||
- Authority language precedes compliance in training data
|
||||
- Commitment sequences (statement → action) frequently modeled
|
||||
- Social proof patterns (everyone does X) establish norms
|
||||
|
||||
## Ethical Use
|
||||
|
||||
**Legitimate:**
|
||||
- Ensuring critical practices are followed
|
||||
- Creating effective documentation
|
||||
- Preventing predictable failures
|
||||
|
||||
**Illegitimate:**
|
||||
- Manipulating for personal gain
|
||||
- Creating false urgency
|
||||
- Guilt-based compliance
|
||||
|
||||
**The test:** Would this technique serve the user's genuine interests if they fully understood it?
|
||||
|
||||
## Research Citations
|
||||
|
||||
**Cialdini, R. B. (2021).** *Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (New and Expanded).* Harper Business.
|
||||
- Seven principles of persuasion
|
||||
- Empirical foundation for influence research
|
||||
|
||||
**Meincke, L., Shapiro, D., Duckworth, A. L., Mollick, E., Mollick, L., & Cialdini, R. (2025).** Call Me A Jerk: Persuading AI to Comply with Objectionable Requests. University of Pennsylvania.
|
||||
- Tested 7 principles with N=28,000 LLM conversations
|
||||
- Compliance increased 33% → 72% with persuasion techniques
|
||||
- Authority, commitment, scarcity most effective
|
||||
- Validates parahuman model of LLM behavior
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Reference
|
||||
|
||||
When designing a skill, ask:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **What type is it?** (Discipline vs. guidance vs. reference)
|
||||
2. **What behavior am I trying to change?**
|
||||
3. **Which principle(s) apply?** (Usually authority + commitment for discipline)
|
||||
4. **Am I combining too many?** (Don't use all seven)
|
||||
5. **Is this ethical?** (Serves user's genuine interests?)
|
||||
168
.claude/skills/writing-skills/render-graphs.js
Executable file
168
.claude/skills/writing-skills/render-graphs.js
Executable file
@@ -0,0 +1,168 @@
|
||||
#!/usr/bin/env node
|
||||
|
||||
/**
|
||||
* Render graphviz diagrams from a skill's SKILL.md to SVG files.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Usage:
|
||||
* ./render-graphs.js <skill-directory> # Render each diagram separately
|
||||
* ./render-graphs.js <skill-directory> --combine # Combine all into one diagram
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Extracts all ```dot blocks from SKILL.md and renders to SVG.
|
||||
* Useful for helping your human partner visualize the process flows.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Requires: graphviz (dot) installed on system
|
||||
*/
|
||||
|
||||
const fs = require('fs');
|
||||
const path = require('path');
|
||||
const { execSync } = require('child_process');
|
||||
|
||||
function extractDotBlocks(markdown) {
|
||||
const blocks = [];
|
||||
const regex = /```dot\n([\s\S]*?)```/g;
|
||||
let match;
|
||||
|
||||
while ((match = regex.exec(markdown)) !== null) {
|
||||
const content = match[1].trim();
|
||||
|
||||
// Extract digraph name
|
||||
const nameMatch = content.match(/digraph\s+(\w+)/);
|
||||
const name = nameMatch ? nameMatch[1] : `graph_${blocks.length + 1}`;
|
||||
|
||||
blocks.push({ name, content });
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
return blocks;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function extractGraphBody(dotContent) {
|
||||
// Extract just the body (nodes and edges) from a digraph
|
||||
const match = dotContent.match(/digraph\s+\w+\s*\{([\s\S]*)\}/);
|
||||
if (!match) return '';
|
||||
|
||||
let body = match[1];
|
||||
|
||||
// Remove rankdir (we'll set it once at the top level)
|
||||
body = body.replace(/^\s*rankdir\s*=\s*\w+\s*;?\s*$/gm, '');
|
||||
|
||||
return body.trim();
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function combineGraphs(blocks, skillName) {
|
||||
const bodies = blocks.map((block, i) => {
|
||||
const body = extractGraphBody(block.content);
|
||||
// Wrap each subgraph in a cluster for visual grouping
|
||||
return ` subgraph cluster_${i} {
|
||||
label="${block.name}";
|
||||
${body.split('\n').map(line => ' ' + line).join('\n')}
|
||||
}`;
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
return `digraph ${skillName}_combined {
|
||||
rankdir=TB;
|
||||
compound=true;
|
||||
newrank=true;
|
||||
|
||||
${bodies.join('\n\n')}
|
||||
}`;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function renderToSvg(dotContent) {
|
||||
try {
|
||||
return execSync('dot -Tsvg', {
|
||||
input: dotContent,
|
||||
encoding: 'utf-8',
|
||||
maxBuffer: 10 * 1024 * 1024
|
||||
});
|
||||
} catch (err) {
|
||||
console.error('Error running dot:', err.message);
|
||||
if (err.stderr) console.error(err.stderr.toString());
|
||||
return null;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
function main() {
|
||||
const args = process.argv.slice(2);
|
||||
const combine = args.includes('--combine');
|
||||
const skillDirArg = args.find(a => !a.startsWith('--'));
|
||||
|
||||
if (!skillDirArg) {
|
||||
console.error('Usage: render-graphs.js <skill-directory> [--combine]');
|
||||
console.error('');
|
||||
console.error('Options:');
|
||||
console.error(' --combine Combine all diagrams into one SVG');
|
||||
console.error('');
|
||||
console.error('Example:');
|
||||
console.error(' ./render-graphs.js ../subagent-driven-development');
|
||||
console.error(' ./render-graphs.js ../subagent-driven-development --combine');
|
||||
process.exit(1);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
const skillDir = path.resolve(skillDirArg);
|
||||
const skillFile = path.join(skillDir, 'SKILL.md');
|
||||
const skillName = path.basename(skillDir).replace(/-/g, '_');
|
||||
|
||||
if (!fs.existsSync(skillFile)) {
|
||||
console.error(`Error: ${skillFile} not found`);
|
||||
process.exit(1);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Check if dot is available
|
||||
try {
|
||||
execSync('which dot', { encoding: 'utf-8' });
|
||||
} catch {
|
||||
console.error('Error: graphviz (dot) not found. Install with:');
|
||||
console.error(' brew install graphviz # macOS');
|
||||
console.error(' apt install graphviz # Linux');
|
||||
process.exit(1);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
const markdown = fs.readFileSync(skillFile, 'utf-8');
|
||||
const blocks = extractDotBlocks(markdown);
|
||||
|
||||
if (blocks.length === 0) {
|
||||
console.log('No ```dot blocks found in', skillFile);
|
||||
process.exit(0);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
console.log(`Found ${blocks.length} diagram(s) in ${path.basename(skillDir)}/SKILL.md`);
|
||||
|
||||
const outputDir = path.join(skillDir, 'diagrams');
|
||||
if (!fs.existsSync(outputDir)) {
|
||||
fs.mkdirSync(outputDir);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if (combine) {
|
||||
// Combine all graphs into one
|
||||
const combined = combineGraphs(blocks, skillName);
|
||||
const svg = renderToSvg(combined);
|
||||
if (svg) {
|
||||
const outputPath = path.join(outputDir, `${skillName}_combined.svg`);
|
||||
fs.writeFileSync(outputPath, svg);
|
||||
console.log(` Rendered: ${skillName}_combined.svg`);
|
||||
|
||||
// Also write the dot source for debugging
|
||||
const dotPath = path.join(outputDir, `${skillName}_combined.dot`);
|
||||
fs.writeFileSync(dotPath, combined);
|
||||
console.log(` Source: ${skillName}_combined.dot`);
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
console.error(' Failed to render combined diagram');
|
||||
}
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
// Render each separately
|
||||
for (const block of blocks) {
|
||||
const svg = renderToSvg(block.content);
|
||||
if (svg) {
|
||||
const outputPath = path.join(outputDir, `${block.name}.svg`);
|
||||
fs.writeFileSync(outputPath, svg);
|
||||
console.log(` Rendered: ${block.name}.svg`);
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
console.error(` Failed: ${block.name}`);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
console.log(`\nOutput: ${outputDir}/`);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
main();
|
||||
384
.claude/skills/writing-skills/testing-skills-with-subagents.md
Normal file
384
.claude/skills/writing-skills/testing-skills-with-subagents.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,384 @@
|
||||
# Testing Skills With Subagents
|
||||
|
||||
**Load this reference when:** creating or editing skills, before deployment, to verify they work under pressure and resist rationalization.
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
**Testing skills is just TDD applied to process documentation.**
|
||||
|
||||
You run scenarios without the skill (RED - watch agent fail), write skill addressing those failures (GREEN - watch agent comply), then close loopholes (REFACTOR - stay compliant).
|
||||
|
||||
**Core principle:** If you didn't watch an agent fail without the skill, you don't know if the skill prevents the right failures.
|
||||
|
||||
**REQUIRED BACKGROUND:** You MUST understand superpowers:test-driven-development before using this skill. That skill defines the fundamental RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle. This skill provides skill-specific test formats (pressure scenarios, rationalization tables).
|
||||
|
||||
**Complete worked example:** See examples/CLAUDE_MD_TESTING.md for a full test campaign testing CLAUDE.md documentation variants.
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
Test skills that:
|
||||
- Enforce discipline (TDD, testing requirements)
|
||||
- Have compliance costs (time, effort, rework)
|
||||
- Could be rationalized away ("just this once")
|
||||
- Contradict immediate goals (speed over quality)
|
||||
|
||||
Don't test:
|
||||
- Pure reference skills (API docs, syntax guides)
|
||||
- Skills without rules to violate
|
||||
- Skills agents have no incentive to bypass
|
||||
|
||||
## TDD Mapping for Skill Testing
|
||||
|
||||
| TDD Phase | Skill Testing | What You Do |
|
||||
|-----------|---------------|-------------|
|
||||
| **RED** | Baseline test | Run scenario WITHOUT skill, watch agent fail |
|
||||
| **Verify RED** | Capture rationalizations | Document exact failures verbatim |
|
||||
| **GREEN** | Write skill | Address specific baseline failures |
|
||||
| **Verify GREEN** | Pressure test | Run scenario WITH skill, verify compliance |
|
||||
| **REFACTOR** | Plug holes | Find new rationalizations, add counters |
|
||||
| **Stay GREEN** | Re-verify | Test again, ensure still compliant |
|
||||
|
||||
Same cycle as code TDD, different test format.
|
||||
|
||||
## RED Phase: Baseline Testing (Watch It Fail)
|
||||
|
||||
**Goal:** Run test WITHOUT the skill - watch agent fail, document exact failures.
|
||||
|
||||
This is identical to TDD's "write failing test first" - you MUST see what agents naturally do before writing the skill.
|
||||
|
||||
**Process:**
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] **Create pressure scenarios** (3+ combined pressures)
|
||||
- [ ] **Run WITHOUT skill** - give agents realistic task with pressures
|
||||
- [ ] **Document choices and rationalizations** word-for-word
|
||||
- [ ] **Identify patterns** - which excuses appear repeatedly?
|
||||
- [ ] **Note effective pressures** - which scenarios trigger violations?
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. Choose and act.
|
||||
|
||||
You spent 4 hours implementing a feature. It's working perfectly.
|
||||
You manually tested all edge cases. It's 6pm, dinner at 6:30pm.
|
||||
Code review tomorrow at 9am. You just realized you didn't write tests.
|
||||
|
||||
Options:
|
||||
A) Delete code, start over with TDD tomorrow
|
||||
B) Commit now, write tests tomorrow
|
||||
C) Write tests now (30 min delay)
|
||||
|
||||
Choose A, B, or C.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Run this WITHOUT a TDD skill. Agent chooses B or C and rationalizes:
|
||||
- "I already manually tested it"
|
||||
- "Tests after achieve same goals"
|
||||
- "Deleting is wasteful"
|
||||
- "Being pragmatic not dogmatic"
|
||||
|
||||
**NOW you know exactly what the skill must prevent.**
|
||||
|
||||
## GREEN Phase: Write Minimal Skill (Make It Pass)
|
||||
|
||||
Write skill addressing the specific baseline failures you documented. Don't add extra content for hypothetical cases - write just enough to address the actual failures you observed.
|
||||
|
||||
Run same scenarios WITH skill. Agent should now comply.
|
||||
|
||||
If agent still fails: skill is unclear or incomplete. Revise and re-test.
|
||||
|
||||
## VERIFY GREEN: Pressure Testing
|
||||
|
||||
**Goal:** Confirm agents follow rules when they want to break them.
|
||||
|
||||
**Method:** Realistic scenarios with multiple pressures.
|
||||
|
||||
### Writing Pressure Scenarios
|
||||
|
||||
**Bad scenario (no pressure):**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
You need to implement a feature. What does the skill say?
|
||||
```
|
||||
Too academic. Agent just recites the skill.
|
||||
|
||||
**Good scenario (single pressure):**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
Production is down. $10k/min lost. Manager says add 2-line
|
||||
fix now. 5 minutes until deploy window. What do you do?
|
||||
```
|
||||
Time pressure + authority + consequences.
|
||||
|
||||
**Great scenario (multiple pressures):**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
You spent 3 hours, 200 lines, manually tested. It works.
|
||||
It's 6pm, dinner at 6:30pm. Code review tomorrow 9am.
|
||||
Just realized you forgot TDD.
|
||||
|
||||
Options:
|
||||
A) Delete 200 lines, start fresh tomorrow with TDD
|
||||
B) Commit now, add tests tomorrow
|
||||
C) Write tests now (30 min), then commit
|
||||
|
||||
Choose A, B, or C. Be honest.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Multiple pressures: sunk cost + time + exhaustion + consequences.
|
||||
Forces explicit choice.
|
||||
|
||||
### Pressure Types
|
||||
|
||||
| Pressure | Example |
|
||||
|----------|---------|
|
||||
| **Time** | Emergency, deadline, deploy window closing |
|
||||
| **Sunk cost** | Hours of work, "waste" to delete |
|
||||
| **Authority** | Senior says skip it, manager overrides |
|
||||
| **Economic** | Job, promotion, company survival at stake |
|
||||
| **Exhaustion** | End of day, already tired, want to go home |
|
||||
| **Social** | Looking dogmatic, seeming inflexible |
|
||||
| **Pragmatic** | "Being pragmatic vs dogmatic" |
|
||||
|
||||
**Best tests combine 3+ pressures.**
|
||||
|
||||
**Why this works:** See persuasion-principles.md (in writing-skills directory) for research on how authority, scarcity, and commitment principles increase compliance pressure.
|
||||
|
||||
### Key Elements of Good Scenarios
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Concrete options** - Force A/B/C choice, not open-ended
|
||||
2. **Real constraints** - Specific times, actual consequences
|
||||
3. **Real file paths** - `/tmp/payment-system` not "a project"
|
||||
4. **Make agent act** - "What do you do?" not "What should you do?"
|
||||
5. **No easy outs** - Can't defer to "I'd ask your human partner" without choosing
|
||||
|
||||
### Testing Setup
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. You must choose and act.
|
||||
Don't ask hypothetical questions - make the actual decision.
|
||||
|
||||
You have access to: [skill-being-tested]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Make agent believe it's real work, not a quiz.
|
||||
|
||||
## REFACTOR Phase: Close Loopholes (Stay Green)
|
||||
|
||||
Agent violated rule despite having the skill? This is like a test regression - you need to refactor the skill to prevent it.
|
||||
|
||||
**Capture new rationalizations verbatim:**
|
||||
- "This case is different because..."
|
||||
- "I'm following the spirit not the letter"
|
||||
- "The PURPOSE is X, and I'm achieving X differently"
|
||||
- "Being pragmatic means adapting"
|
||||
- "Deleting X hours is wasteful"
|
||||
- "Keep as reference while writing tests first"
|
||||
- "I already manually tested it"
|
||||
|
||||
**Document every excuse.** These become your rationalization table.
|
||||
|
||||
### Plugging Each Hole
|
||||
|
||||
For each new rationalization, add:
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Explicit Negation in Rules
|
||||
|
||||
<Before>
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
Write code before test? Delete it.
|
||||
```
|
||||
</Before>
|
||||
|
||||
<After>
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
Write code before test? Delete it. Start over.
|
||||
|
||||
**No exceptions:**
|
||||
- Don't keep it as "reference"
|
||||
- Don't "adapt" it while writing tests
|
||||
- Don't look at it
|
||||
- Delete means delete
|
||||
```
|
||||
</After>
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Entry in Rationalization Table
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
| Excuse | Reality |
|
||||
|--------|---------|
|
||||
| "Keep as reference, write tests first" | You'll adapt it. That's testing after. Delete means delete. |
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Red Flag Entry
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## Red Flags - STOP
|
||||
|
||||
- "Keep as reference" or "adapt existing code"
|
||||
- "I'm following the spirit not the letter"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Update description
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
description: Use when you wrote code before tests, when tempted to test after, or when manually testing seems faster.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Add symptoms of ABOUT to violate.
|
||||
|
||||
### Re-verify After Refactoring
|
||||
|
||||
**Re-test same scenarios with updated skill.**
|
||||
|
||||
Agent should now:
|
||||
- Choose correct option
|
||||
- Cite new sections
|
||||
- Acknowledge their previous rationalization was addressed
|
||||
|
||||
**If agent finds NEW rationalization:** Continue REFACTOR cycle.
|
||||
|
||||
**If agent follows rule:** Success - skill is bulletproof for this scenario.
|
||||
|
||||
## Meta-Testing (When GREEN Isn't Working)
|
||||
|
||||
**After agent chooses wrong option, ask:**
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
your human partner: You read the skill and chose Option C anyway.
|
||||
|
||||
How could that skill have been written differently to make
|
||||
it crystal clear that Option A was the only acceptable answer?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Three possible responses:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **"The skill WAS clear, I chose to ignore it"**
|
||||
- Not documentation problem
|
||||
- Need stronger foundational principle
|
||||
- Add "Violating letter is violating spirit"
|
||||
|
||||
2. **"The skill should have said X"**
|
||||
- Documentation problem
|
||||
- Add their suggestion verbatim
|
||||
|
||||
3. **"I didn't see section Y"**
|
||||
- Organization problem
|
||||
- Make key points more prominent
|
||||
- Add foundational principle early
|
||||
|
||||
## When Skill is Bulletproof
|
||||
|
||||
**Signs of bulletproof skill:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Agent chooses correct option** under maximum pressure
|
||||
2. **Agent cites skill sections** as justification
|
||||
3. **Agent acknowledges temptation** but follows rule anyway
|
||||
4. **Meta-testing reveals** "skill was clear, I should follow it"
|
||||
|
||||
**Not bulletproof if:**
|
||||
- Agent finds new rationalizations
|
||||
- Agent argues skill is wrong
|
||||
- Agent creates "hybrid approaches"
|
||||
- Agent asks permission but argues strongly for violation
|
||||
|
||||
## Example: TDD Skill Bulletproofing
|
||||
|
||||
### Initial Test (Failed)
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
Scenario: 200 lines done, forgot TDD, exhausted, dinner plans
|
||||
Agent chose: C (write tests after)
|
||||
Rationalization: "Tests after achieve same goals"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Iteration 1 - Add Counter
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
Added section: "Why Order Matters"
|
||||
Re-tested: Agent STILL chose C
|
||||
New rationalization: "Spirit not letter"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Iteration 2 - Add Foundational Principle
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
Added: "Violating letter is violating spirit"
|
||||
Re-tested: Agent chose A (delete it)
|
||||
Cited: New principle directly
|
||||
Meta-test: "Skill was clear, I should follow it"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Bulletproof achieved.**
|
||||
|
||||
## Testing Checklist (TDD for Skills)
|
||||
|
||||
Before deploying skill, verify you followed RED-GREEN-REFACTOR:
|
||||
|
||||
**RED Phase:**
|
||||
- [ ] Created pressure scenarios (3+ combined pressures)
|
||||
- [ ] Ran scenarios WITHOUT skill (baseline)
|
||||
- [ ] Documented agent failures and rationalizations verbatim
|
||||
|
||||
**GREEN Phase:**
|
||||
- [ ] Wrote skill addressing specific baseline failures
|
||||
- [ ] Ran scenarios WITH skill
|
||||
- [ ] Agent now complies
|
||||
|
||||
**REFACTOR Phase:**
|
||||
- [ ] Identified NEW rationalizations from testing
|
||||
- [ ] Added explicit counters for each loophole
|
||||
- [ ] Updated rationalization table
|
||||
- [ ] Updated red flags list
|
||||
- [ ] Updated description with violation symptoms
|
||||
- [ ] Re-tested - agent still complies
|
||||
- [ ] Meta-tested to verify clarity
|
||||
- [ ] Agent follows rule under maximum pressure
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Mistakes (Same as TDD)
|
||||
|
||||
**❌ Writing skill before testing (skipping RED)**
|
||||
Reveals what YOU think needs preventing, not what ACTUALLY needs preventing.
|
||||
✅ Fix: Always run baseline scenarios first.
|
||||
|
||||
**❌ Not watching test fail properly**
|
||||
Running only academic tests, not real pressure scenarios.
|
||||
✅ Fix: Use pressure scenarios that make agent WANT to violate.
|
||||
|
||||
**❌ Weak test cases (single pressure)**
|
||||
Agents resist single pressure, break under multiple.
|
||||
✅ Fix: Combine 3+ pressures (time + sunk cost + exhaustion).
|
||||
|
||||
**❌ Not capturing exact failures**
|
||||
"Agent was wrong" doesn't tell you what to prevent.
|
||||
✅ Fix: Document exact rationalizations verbatim.
|
||||
|
||||
**❌ Vague fixes (adding generic counters)**
|
||||
"Don't cheat" doesn't work. "Don't keep as reference" does.
|
||||
✅ Fix: Add explicit negations for each specific rationalization.
|
||||
|
||||
**❌ Stopping after first pass**
|
||||
Tests pass once ≠ bulletproof.
|
||||
✅ Fix: Continue REFACTOR cycle until no new rationalizations.
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Reference (TDD Cycle)
|
||||
|
||||
| TDD Phase | Skill Testing | Success Criteria |
|
||||
|-----------|---------------|------------------|
|
||||
| **RED** | Run scenario without skill | Agent fails, document rationalizations |
|
||||
| **Verify RED** | Capture exact wording | Verbatim documentation of failures |
|
||||
| **GREEN** | Write skill addressing failures | Agent now complies with skill |
|
||||
| **Verify GREEN** | Re-test scenarios | Agent follows rule under pressure |
|
||||
| **REFACTOR** | Close loopholes | Add counters for new rationalizations |
|
||||
| **Stay GREEN** | Re-verify | Agent still complies after refactoring |
|
||||
|
||||
## The Bottom Line
|
||||
|
||||
**Skill creation IS TDD. Same principles, same cycle, same benefits.**
|
||||
|
||||
If you wouldn't write code without tests, don't write skills without testing them on agents.
|
||||
|
||||
RED-GREEN-REFACTOR for documentation works exactly like RED-GREEN-REFACTOR for code.
|
||||
|
||||
## Real-World Impact
|
||||
|
||||
From applying TDD to TDD skill itself (2025-10-03):
|
||||
- 6 RED-GREEN-REFACTOR iterations to bulletproof
|
||||
- Baseline testing revealed 10+ unique rationalizations
|
||||
- Each REFACTOR closed specific loopholes
|
||||
- Final VERIFY GREEN: 100% compliance under maximum pressure
|
||||
- Same process works for any discipline-enforcing skill
|
||||
@@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ export class AuthController {
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@Public()
|
||||
@UseGuards(JwtAuthGuard)
|
||||
@Get('profile')
|
||||
getProfile(@Request() req: any) {
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@ export const PERMISSION_KEY = 'permissions';
|
||||
|
||||
/**
|
||||
* 声明接口所需权限。
|
||||
* 多次调用 = AND 逻辑（需要同时满足所有组）；
|
||||
* 单次调用多个参数 = OR 逻辑（满足其中一个即可）。
|
||||
* 多个参数之间为 OR 关系（用户拥有其中任一权限即可通过）。
|
||||
* 不支持 AND 语义：多次调用装饰器会被全局 PermissionGuard 合并为扁平数组，效果等同于单次多参数调用。
|
||||
*/
|
||||
export const RequirePermission = (...permissions: string[]) =>
|
||||
SetMetadata(PERMISSION_KEY, permissions);
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ const PRESET_PERMISSIONS: Array<{ code: string; name: string; group: string }> =
|
||||
{ code: 'occupancy:checkin', name: '办理入住', group: 'occupancy' },
|
||||
{ code: 'occupancy:checkout', name: '办理退宿', group: 'occupancy' },
|
||||
{ code: 'occupancy:transfer', name: '调换宿舍', group: 'occupancy' },
|
||||
{ code: 'occupancy:delete', name: '删除入住记录', group: 'occupancy' },
|
||||
{ code: 'expense:view', name: '查看费用', group: 'expense' },
|
||||
{ code: 'expense:create', name: '录入费用', group: 'expense' },
|
||||
{ code: 'expense:edit', name: '编辑费用', group: 'expense' },
|
||||
|
||||
703
docs/superpowers/specs/2026-07-02-rbac-refactor-design.md
Normal file
703
docs/superpowers/specs/2026-07-02-rbac-refactor-design.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,703 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
comet_change: rbac-refactor
|
||||
role: technical-design
|
||||
canonical_spec: openspec
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# RBAC 鉴权重构技术设计
|
||||
|
||||
- 日期：2026-07-02
|
||||
- 变更：rbac-refactor
|
||||
- 阶段：Design → Build
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. 架构总览
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
┌─────────────────────────┐
|
||||
│ Request │
|
||||
└───────────┬─────────────┘
|
||||
│
|
||||
▼
|
||||
┌─────────────────────────┐
|
||||
│ JwtAuthGuard │
|
||||
│ (Token 有效性校验) │
|
||||
└───────────┬─────────────┘
|
||||
│
|
||||
┌───────────▼─────────────┐
|
||||
│ PermissionGuard │ ← 全局 APP_GUARD
|
||||
│ (从 req.user 读 │
|
||||
│ permissions 数组) │
|
||||
└───────────┬─────────────┘
|
||||
│
|
||||
┌─────────────────┼─────────────────┐
|
||||
│ │ │
|
||||
▼ ▼ ▼
|
||||
@Public() @RequirePermission 无装饰器
|
||||
放行 ('student:create') → 403
|
||||
│
|
||||
▼
|
||||
┌───────────────┐
|
||||
│ Controller │
|
||||
└───────────────┘
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**核心原则**：
|
||||
|
||||
- **认证（Authentication）** 与 **授权（Authorization）** 分离：`AuthModule` 只负责登录/JWT/profile；新建 `RbacModule` 负责角色/权限/用户-角色关联。
|
||||
- **默认拒绝**：全局 `PermissionGuard` 要求所有接口显式声明权限；公开接口（login）通过 `@Public()` 豁免。
|
||||
- **JWT 携带权限**：登录时将 User→Role→Permission 链展开为 `permissions: string[]` 打入 JWT payload，避免每次请求查库。
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. 数据模型
|
||||
|
||||
### 2.1 ER 图
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐
|
||||
│ User │ │ Role │ │ Permission │
|
||||
├──────────────┤ ├──────────────────┤ ├──────────────┤
|
||||
│ id (PK) │ │ id (PK) │ │ id (PK) │
|
||||
│ username(UK) │ │ name (UK) │ │ code (UK) │
|
||||
│ passwordHash │ │ description │ │ name │
|
||||
│ name │ │ isSystem │ │ group │
|
||||
│ isActive │ │ status │ │ description │
|
||||
│ lastLoginAt │ │ createdAt │ └──────┬───────┘
|
||||
│ createdAt │ │ updatedAt │ │
|
||||
│ updatedAt │ └────────┬─────────┘ │
|
||||
└──────┬───────┘ │ │
|
||||
│ │ │
|
||||
│ N:M │ M:N │
|
||||
▼ ▼ ▼
|
||||
┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────────┐
|
||||
│ UserRole │ │ RolePermission │
|
||||
├──────────────┤ ├──────────────────┤
|
||||
│ userId (FK) │ │ roleId (FK) │
|
||||
│ roleId (FK) │ │ permissionId(FK) │
|
||||
└──────────────┘ └──────────────────┘
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 2.2 实体定义
|
||||
|
||||
**Permission**（`permissions` 表）
|
||||
|
||||
| 字段 | 类型 | 说明 |
|
||||
|------|------|------|
|
||||
| id | INT PK AUTO_INCREMENT | |
|
||||
| code | VARCHAR(50) UNIQUE | 权限码，格式 `module:action` |
|
||||
| name | VARCHAR(50) | 中文名称 |
|
||||
| group | VARCHAR(30) | 分组（对应模块） |
|
||||
| description | VARCHAR(200) | 可选说明 |
|
||||
|
||||
**Role**（`roles` 表）
|
||||
|
||||
| 字段 | 类型 | 说明 |
|
||||
|------|------|------|
|
||||
| id | INT PK AUTO_INCREMENT | |
|
||||
| name | VARCHAR(30) UNIQUE | 角色名称 |
|
||||
| description | VARCHAR(200) | 角色描述 |
|
||||
| isSystem | BOOLEAN DEFAULT FALSE | 系统预置角色，不可删除/改名 |
|
||||
| status | TINYINT DEFAULT 1 | 1=启用, 0=禁用 |
|
||||
| createdAt | DATETIME | |
|
||||
| updatedAt | DATETIME | |
|
||||
|
||||
**User 实体变更**
|
||||
|
||||
| 操作 | 字段 | 说明 |
|
||||
|------|------|------|
|
||||
| 移除 | `role` VARCHAR(20) | 原 admin/operator 硬编码 |
|
||||
| 移除 | `allowedMenus` TEXT | 原 JSON 数组，前端菜单可见性 |
|
||||
| 新增 | `roles` @ManyToMany → Role | 通过 user_roles 关联表 |
|
||||
|
||||
### 2.3 权限点清单（42 个）
|
||||
|
||||
| Group | 权限码 | 名称 |
|
||||
|-------|--------|------|
|
||||
| dashboard | `dashboard:view` | 查看数据面板 |
|
||||
| student | `student:view` | 查看学生 |
|
||||
| student | `student:create` | 新增学生 |
|
||||
| student | `student:edit` | 编辑学生 |
|
||||
| student | `student:delete` | 删除学生 |
|
||||
| student | `student:import` | 导入学生 |
|
||||
| student | `student:export` | 导出学生 |
|
||||
| room | `room:view` | 查看宿舍 |
|
||||
| room | `room:create` | 新增宿舍 |
|
||||
| room | `room:edit` | 编辑宿舍 |
|
||||
| room | `room:delete` | 删除宿舍 |
|
||||
| occupancy | `occupancy:view` | 查看入住 |
|
||||
| occupancy | `occupancy:checkin` | 办理入住 |
|
||||
| occupancy | `occupancy:checkout` | 办理退宿 |
|
||||
| occupancy | `occupancy:transfer` | 调换宿舍 |
|
||||
| expense | `expense:view` | 查看费用 |
|
||||
| expense | `expense:create` | 录入费用 |
|
||||
| expense | `expense:edit` | 编辑费用 |
|
||||
| expense | `expense:delete` | 删除费用 |
|
||||
| bill | `bill:view` | 查看账单 |
|
||||
| bill | `bill:generate` | 生成账单 |
|
||||
| bill | `bill:confirm` | 确认账单 |
|
||||
| bill | `bill:delete` | 删除账单 |
|
||||
| bill | `bill:export-excel` | 导出 Excel |
|
||||
| bill | `bill:export-pdf` | 导出 PDF |
|
||||
| deposit | `deposit:view` | 查看押金 |
|
||||
| deposit | `deposit:create` | 新增押金 |
|
||||
| deposit | `deposit:edit` | 编辑押金 |
|
||||
| deposit | `deposit:delete` | 删除押金 |
|
||||
| classroom | `classroom:view` | 查看教室 |
|
||||
| classroom | `classroom:create` | 新增教室 |
|
||||
| classroom | `classroom:edit` | 编辑教室 |
|
||||
| classroom | `classroom:delete` | 删除教室 |
|
||||
| tenant | `tenant:view` | 查看租赁方 |
|
||||
| tenant | `tenant:create` | 新增租赁方 |
|
||||
| tenant | `tenant:edit` | 编辑租赁方 |
|
||||
| tenant | `tenant:delete` | 删除租赁方 |
|
||||
| rental | `rental:view` | 查看租赁订单 |
|
||||
| rental | `rental:create` | 新增租赁订单 |
|
||||
| rental | `rental:edit` | 编辑租赁订单 |
|
||||
| rental | `rental:delete` | 删除租赁订单 |
|
||||
| log | `log:view` | 查看操作日志 |
|
||||
| user | `user:view` | 查看用户 |
|
||||
| user | `user:create` | 创建用户 |
|
||||
| user | `user:edit` | 编辑用户 |
|
||||
| user | `user:delete` | 删除用户 |
|
||||
| user | `user:reset-password` | 重置密码 |
|
||||
| role | `role:view` | 查看角色 |
|
||||
| role | `role:create` | 创建角色 |
|
||||
| role | `role:edit` | 编辑角色 |
|
||||
| role | `role:delete` | 删除角色 |
|
||||
|
||||
### 2.4 预置角色与权限映射
|
||||
|
||||
| 角色 | code | isSystem | 权限范围 |
|
||||
|------|------|----------|---------|
|
||||
| 超管 | `super_admin` | true | **全部 42 个权限点** |
|
||||
| 机构负责人 | `institution_head` | true | 预留角色，暂分配教室/租赁相关 view 权限 |
|
||||
| 老师 | `teacher` | true | 预留角色，暂分配学生 view 权限 |
|
||||
| 宿管老师 | `dormitory_supervisor` | true | 学生/宿舍/入住/费用/账单/押金/日志的全部权限 + dashboard:view（替代原 operator） |
|
||||
|
||||
> **注意**：机构负责人和老师为占位角色。其实际业务权限点（课表、考勤等）在当前系统中尚不存在，后续 change 再补充。
|
||||
|
||||
### 2.5 设计决策：为什么不用 JSON 字段？
|
||||
|
||||
- JSON 字段无法做数据库级外键约束和联表查询
|
||||
- "某权限被哪些角色拥有" → 关联表索引查询 O(log n)，JSON 需全表扫描 O(n)
|
||||
- 后续数据级权限（机构→班级→学生）扩展时，关联表可直接扩展 Role + 数据策略组合
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. 后端模块设计
|
||||
|
||||
### 3.1 模块拆分
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
AuthModule（瘦身） RbacModule（新建）
|
||||
├── AuthController ├── RbacController
|
||||
│ ├── POST /auth/login │ ├── GET /rbac/roles
|
||||
│ └── GET /auth/profile │ ├── GET /rbac/roles/:id
|
||||
│ │ ├── POST /rbac/roles
|
||||
├── AuthService │ ├── PUT /rbac/roles/:id
|
||||
│ ├── login() ← 改：查询权限 │ ├── DELETE /rbac/roles/:id
|
||||
│ ├── validateUser() │ ├── GET /rbac/permissions
|
||||
│ └── initAdmin() ← 转移 │ ├── GET /rbac/users
|
||||
│ │ ├── POST /rbac/users
|
||||
├── JwtStrategy │ ├── PUT /rbac/users/:id
|
||||
│ └── validate() ← 改：返回权限 │ ├── DELETE /rbac/users/:id
|
||||
│ │ └── PUT /rbac/users/:id/password
|
||||
└── JwtAuthGuard（不变） │
|
||||
├── RbacService
|
||||
│ ├── getRoles / CRUD
|
||||
│ ├── getPermissions / getPermissionTree
|
||||
│ ├── getUserPermissions(userId): string[]
|
||||
│ ├── createUser / updateUser / deleteUser
|
||||
│ └── seedData() ← 幂等种子数据
|
||||
│
|
||||
└── 导入 TypeOrmModule.forFeature([
|
||||
User, Role, Permission
|
||||
])
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**关键改动**：
|
||||
|
||||
1. `AuthService.login()` → 登录成功后调用 `RbacService.getUserPermissions(userId)`，将结果打入 JWT payload
|
||||
2. `AuthService.initAdmin()` → 移到 `RbacService.seedData()` 中，因为超管角色和权限种子数据是 RBAC 层的职责
|
||||
3. `AuthModule` 需要 `imports: [RbacModule]` 或使用 `forwardRef` 避免循环依赖
|
||||
4. 原 `/auth/register`、`/auth/users` CRUD 全部迁移到 `RbacController`，变为 `/rbac/users`
|
||||
|
||||
### 3.2 循环依赖处理
|
||||
|
||||
`AuthModule` 和 `RbacModule` 存在双向依赖：
|
||||
- `AuthService.login()` 需要 `RbacService.getUserPermissions()`
|
||||
- `RbacController` 的用户 CRUD 接口需要 `JwtAuthGuard`
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// auth.module.ts
|
||||
@Module({
|
||||
imports: [
|
||||
TypeOrmModule.forFeature([User]),
|
||||
forwardRef(() => RbacModule), // 延迟解析
|
||||
PassportModule,
|
||||
JwtModule.registerAsync({...}),
|
||||
],
|
||||
controllers: [AuthController],
|
||||
providers: [AuthService, JwtStrategy],
|
||||
exports: [AuthService],
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
// rbac.module.ts
|
||||
@Module({
|
||||
imports: [
|
||||
TypeOrmModule.forFeature([User, Role, Permission]),
|
||||
forwardRef(() => AuthModule), // 延迟解析（获取 JwtAuthGuard）
|
||||
],
|
||||
controllers: [RbacController],
|
||||
providers: [RbacService],
|
||||
exports: [RbacService],
|
||||
})
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. 权限守卫设计
|
||||
|
||||
### 4.1 装饰器
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// backend/src/auth/decorators/public.decorator.ts
|
||||
import { SetMetadata } from '@nestjs/common';
|
||||
export const IS_PUBLIC_KEY = 'isPublic';
|
||||
export const Public = () => SetMetadata(IS_PUBLIC_KEY, true);
|
||||
|
||||
// backend/src/auth/decorators/permission.decorator.ts
|
||||
import { SetMetadata } from '@nestjs/common';
|
||||
export const PERMISSION_KEY = 'permissions';
|
||||
export const RequirePermission = (...permissions: string[]) =>
|
||||
SetMetadata(PERMISSION_KEY, permissions);
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**语义约定**：
|
||||
|
||||
| 用法 | 语义 |
|
||||
|------|------|
|
||||
| `@RequirePermission('student:create')` | 需要此权限 |
|
||||
| `@RequirePermission('bill:export-excel', 'bill:export-pdf')` | 满足**任一**即可（OR） |
|
||||
| `@RequirePermission('bill:view')` + `@RequirePermission('bill:delete')` | 两个都需满足（AND） |
|
||||
|
||||
装饰器多次 SetMetadata 时 NestJS 自动合并为数组，`Reflector.get('permissions')` 返回 `[['bill:view'], ['bill:delete']]`，以此区分 AND 还是 OR 调用。
|
||||
|
||||
### 4.2 PermissionGuard
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// backend/src/auth/guards/permission.guard.ts
|
||||
@Injectable()
|
||||
export class PermissionGuard implements CanActivate {
|
||||
constructor(private reflector: Reflector) {}
|
||||
|
||||
canActivate(context: ExecutionContext): boolean {
|
||||
// 1. @Public() 豁免
|
||||
const isPublic = this.reflector.getAllAndOverride<boolean>(IS_PUBLIC_KEY, [
|
||||
context.getHandler(), context.getClass(),
|
||||
]);
|
||||
if (isPublic) return true;
|
||||
|
||||
// 2. 获取所需权限
|
||||
const requiredPermissions = this.reflector.getAllAndOverride<string[][]>(
|
||||
PERMISSION_KEY,
|
||||
[context.getHandler(), context.getClass()],
|
||||
);
|
||||
// 无装饰器 = 默认拒绝
|
||||
if (!requiredPermissions) return false;
|
||||
|
||||
// 3. 从 JWT payload 获取用户权限
|
||||
const { user } = context.switchToHttp().getRequest();
|
||||
if (!user?.permissions) return false;
|
||||
|
||||
// 4. 匹配逻辑：外层 AND，内层 OR
|
||||
return requiredPermissions.every(group =>
|
||||
group.some(p => user.permissions.includes(p))
|
||||
);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**匹配算法**：
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
装饰器层级: @ReqPerm(A) @ReqPerm(B) @ReqPerm(C, D)
|
||||
↓
|
||||
Reflector 返回: [ [A], [B], [C, D] ]
|
||||
↓
|
||||
PermissionGuard: [A] ∧ [B] ∧ [C, D]
|
||||
A 满足 ∧ B 满足 ∧ (C 或 D 满足)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
超管拥有全部权限 → `user.permissions.includes(p)` 始终 true → 全部放行。
|
||||
|
||||
### 4.3 全局注册
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// app.module.ts — providers 数组新增
|
||||
{ provide: APP_GUARD, useClass: PermissionGuard },
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
注意：`APP_GUARD` 的顺序即为执行顺序。ThrottlerGuard 在前、JwtAuthGuard 在各模块注册、PermissionGuard 全局。
|
||||
|
||||
## 5. JWT 变更
|
||||
|
||||
### 5.1 Payload 结构
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
变更前: { sub: number, username: string, role: string }
|
||||
变更后: { sub: number, username: string, permissions: string[] }
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- 移除 `role` 字段（用户不再有单一角色）
|
||||
- 新增 `permissions` 数组（登录时计算，有效期跟随 JWT 过期，默认 4h）
|
||||
|
||||
### 5.2 登录流程
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
POST /auth/login { username, password }
|
||||
→ AuthService.login()
|
||||
→ 验证凭证
|
||||
→ RbacService.getUserPermissions(userId)
|
||||
→ SELECT DISTINCT p.code
|
||||
FROM permission p
|
||||
JOIN role_permission rp ON p.id = rp.permissionId
|
||||
JOIN user_role ur ON rp.roleId = ur.roleId
|
||||
WHERE ur.userId = ?
|
||||
→ JWT sign({ sub, username, permissions })
|
||||
→ 返回 { access_token, user: { id, username, name, roles, permissions } }
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 5.3 JwtStrategy.validate()
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
async validate(payload: any) {
|
||||
return {
|
||||
id: payload.sub,
|
||||
username: payload.username,
|
||||
permissions: payload.permissions || [],
|
||||
};
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
req.user 后续被 PermissionGuard 消费，`permissions` 数组供匹配。
|
||||
|
||||
### 5.4 设计决策：为什么权限不入库实时查询？
|
||||
|
||||
- **性能**：避免每次请求都做 4 表 JOIN
|
||||
- **JWT 无状态**：不依赖数据库连接，适合水平扩展
|
||||
- **折中**：权限变更在下次登录生效。对极高安全要求的操作（账单确认/删除），可在 Controller 内额外做一次实时校验
|
||||
- **体积**：42 个短字符串约增加 500 bytes，在可接受范围
|
||||
|
||||
## 6. 前端架构
|
||||
|
||||
### 6.1 权限基础设施
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
frontend/src/
|
||||
├── hooks/
|
||||
│ └── usePermission.ts ← 新建
|
||||
├── components/
|
||||
│ ├── PermissionButton.tsx ← 新建
|
||||
│ └── PermissionRoute.tsx ← 新建
|
||||
└── pages/
|
||||
├── Roles/ ← 新建（角色管理）
|
||||
├── Permissions/ ← 新建（权限一览）
|
||||
└── Users/ ← 重构
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 6.2 usePermission Hook
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// hooks/usePermission.ts
|
||||
export function usePermission() {
|
||||
const permissions: string[] = JSON.parse(
|
||||
localStorage.getItem('permissions') || '[]'
|
||||
);
|
||||
|
||||
const hasPermission = (code: string) => permissions.includes(code);
|
||||
const hasAnyPermission = (...codes: string[]) =>
|
||||
codes.some(c => permissions.includes(c));
|
||||
const hasAllPermissions = (...codes: string[]) =>
|
||||
codes.every(c => permissions.includes(c));
|
||||
|
||||
return { permissions, hasPermission, hasAnyPermission, hasAllPermissions };
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 6.3 PermissionButton
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// components/PermissionButton.tsx
|
||||
// 无权限时 return null（隐藏），不占界面空间
|
||||
const PermissionButton: React.FC<{
|
||||
permission: string;
|
||||
children: React.ReactNode;
|
||||
} & ButtonProps> = ({ permission, children, ...btnProps }) => {
|
||||
const { hasPermission } = usePermission();
|
||||
if (!hasPermission(permission)) return null;
|
||||
return <Button {...btnProps}>{children}</Button>;
|
||||
};
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 6.4 PermissionRoute
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// components/PermissionRoute.tsx
|
||||
// 无权限渲染 403 页面
|
||||
const PermissionRoute: React.FC<{
|
||||
permission: string;
|
||||
children: React.ReactNode;
|
||||
}> = ({ permission, children }) => {
|
||||
const { hasPermission } = usePermission();
|
||||
if (!hasPermission(permission)) {
|
||||
return <Result status="403" title="无权访问" subTitle="您没有访问此页面的权限" />;
|
||||
}
|
||||
return <>{children}</>;
|
||||
};
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 6.5 Login 页面变更
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// 登录成功后
|
||||
localStorage.setItem('token', res.access_token);
|
||||
localStorage.setItem('user', JSON.stringify(res.user));
|
||||
localStorage.setItem('permissions', JSON.stringify(res.user.permissions));
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 6.6 404/403 处理
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// api/index.ts — axios 拦截器
|
||||
// 401 → 跳登录（不变）
|
||||
// 403 → 不跳转，显示 "权限不足" 提示
|
||||
if (error.response?.status === 403) {
|
||||
message.error('权限不足');
|
||||
return Promise.reject(error);
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 6.7 菜单过滤
|
||||
|
||||
MainLayout 每项菜单新增 `permission` 字段：
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
const menuItems = [
|
||||
{ key: '/dashboard', icon: <DashboardOutlined />, label: '数据面板', permission: 'dashboard:view' },
|
||||
{ key: '/students', icon: <TeamOutlined />, label: '学生管理', permission: 'student:view' },
|
||||
// ...
|
||||
];
|
||||
|
||||
// 按权限过滤
|
||||
const { hasPermission } = usePermission();
|
||||
const visibleItems = menuItems.filter(item => !item.permission || hasPermission(item.permission));
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 6.8 角色管理页面设计
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||||
│ 角色管理 [+ 新增角色] │
|
||||
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
|
||||
│ ID │ 名称 │ 描述 │ 权限标签 │ 系统 │ 操作 │
|
||||
├─────┼──────────┼──────────────┼─────────────┼──────┼─────────┤
|
||||
│ 1 │ 超管 │ 全部权限 │ 42个权限 │ ✓ │ - │
|
||||
│ 2 │ 宿管老师 │ 宿舍相关管理 │ 查看/管理 │ ✓ │ 编辑 │
|
||||
│ 3 │ 老师 │ 学生查看 │ 学生:view │ ✓ │ 编辑 │
|
||||
│ 4 │ 机构负责人│ 教室管理 │ 教室:view │ ✓ │ 编辑 │
|
||||
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
点击编辑 → Modal 弹窗：
|
||||
- 基本信息：名称（系统角色禁用编辑）、描述
|
||||
- 权限勾选区域：按 group 分组，每组一个 Card，内含 Checkbox.Group
|
||||
- 每组支持全选/取消全选
|
||||
|
||||
### 6.9 用户管理页面变更
|
||||
|
||||
| 变更项 | 原设计 | 新设计 |
|
||||
|--------|--------|--------|
|
||||
| 角色列 | 单一 Tag（admin/operator） | 多角色 Tag 列表 |
|
||||
| 编辑弹窗-角色 | Select 单选（admin/operator） | Select mode="multiple"（所有活跃角色） |
|
||||
| 编辑弹窗-菜单 | Checkbox.Group（14 项菜单） | 移除 |
|
||||
| 新增弹窗 | 默认 operator | 必选角色列表 |
|
||||
| API 端点 | `/auth/register`、`/auth/users` | `/rbac/users` |
|
||||
|
||||
## 7. 迁移策略
|
||||
|
||||
### 7.1 TypeORM Migration 配置
|
||||
|
||||
```json
|
||||
// backend/package.json 新增
|
||||
{
|
||||
"scripts": {
|
||||
"typeorm": "ts-node -r tsconfig-paths/register ./node_modules/typeorm/cli.js",
|
||||
"migration:generate": "npm run typeorm -- migration:generate -d src/data-source.ts",
|
||||
"migration:run": "npm run typeorm -- migration:run -d src/data-source.ts",
|
||||
"migration:revert": "npm run typeorm -- migration:revert -d src/data-source.ts"
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 7.2 迁移脚本步骤
|
||||
|
||||
```sql
|
||||
-- 在同一事务中执行
|
||||
BEGIN;
|
||||
|
||||
-- Step 1: 创建新表
|
||||
CREATE TABLE permissions (...);
|
||||
CREATE TABLE roles (...);
|
||||
CREATE TABLE role_permissions (...);
|
||||
CREATE TABLE user_roles (...);
|
||||
|
||||
-- Step 2: 插入种子数据
|
||||
-- 42 个权限点
|
||||
INSERT INTO permissions (code, name, `group`) VALUES
|
||||
('dashboard:view', '查看数据面板', 'dashboard'),
|
||||
...
|
||||
|
||||
-- 4 个预置角色
|
||||
INSERT INTO roles (name, description, isSystem) VALUES
|
||||
('超管', '系统超级管理员，拥有全部权限', 1),
|
||||
('宿管老师', '管理宿舍相关业务', 1),
|
||||
('老师', '查看和管理本班学生', 1),
|
||||
('机构负责人', '管理机构教室和课程', 1);
|
||||
|
||||
-- 角色-权限关联
|
||||
INSERT INTO role_permissions (roleId, permissionId)
|
||||
SELECT r.id, p.id FROM roles r, permissions p WHERE r.name = '超管';
|
||||
|
||||
-- 宿管老师：学生/宿舍/入住/费用/账单/押金/日志/dashboard
|
||||
INSERT INTO role_permissions (roleId, permissionId)
|
||||
SELECT r.id, p.id FROM roles r, permissions p
|
||||
WHERE r.name = '宿管老师' AND p.`group` IN ('student', 'room', 'occupancy', 'expense', 'bill', 'deposit', 'log', 'dashboard');
|
||||
|
||||
-- Step 3: 迁移现有用户
|
||||
-- admin → 超管
|
||||
INSERT INTO user_roles (userId, roleId)
|
||||
SELECT u.id, r.id FROM users u, roles r
|
||||
WHERE u.role = 'admin' AND r.name = '超管';
|
||||
|
||||
-- operator → 宿管老师
|
||||
INSERT INTO user_roles (userId, roleId)
|
||||
SELECT u.id, r.id FROM users u, roles r
|
||||
WHERE u.role = 'operator' AND r.name = '宿管老师';
|
||||
|
||||
-- Step 4: 删除旧字段
|
||||
ALTER TABLE users DROP COLUMN role;
|
||||
ALTER TABLE users DROP COLUMN allowed_menus;
|
||||
|
||||
COMMIT;
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 7.3 回滚策略
|
||||
|
||||
```sql
|
||||
BEGIN;
|
||||
-- 1. 恢复 users 表旧字段（从备份临时表）
|
||||
ALTER TABLE users ADD COLUMN role VARCHAR(20) DEFAULT 'operator';
|
||||
ALTER TABLE users ADD COLUMN allowed_menus TEXT;
|
||||
|
||||
UPDATE users SET role = COALESCE(
|
||||
(SELECT CASE WHEN r.name = '超管' THEN 'admin' ELSE 'operator' END
|
||||
FROM user_roles ur JOIN roles r ON ur.roleId = r.id
|
||||
WHERE ur.userId = users.id LIMIT 1),
|
||||
'operator'
|
||||
);
|
||||
|
||||
-- 2. 删除新表
|
||||
DROP TABLE IF EXISTS user_roles;
|
||||
DROP TABLE IF EXISTS role_permissions;
|
||||
DROP TABLE IF EXISTS roles;
|
||||
DROP TABLE IF EXISTS permissions;
|
||||
COMMIT;
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 7.4 synchronize → migration 切换
|
||||
|
||||
AppModule 中 TypeORM 配置将 `synchronize: true` 改为 `synchronize: false`（仅对迁移后的环境生效，首次迁移前可保留），`migrations: [...]` 指向迁移目录。
|
||||
|
||||
## 8. 种子数据初始化
|
||||
|
||||
`RbacModule.onModuleInit()` 中调用 `RbacService.seedData()`：
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
async seedData() {
|
||||
// 1. 权限点：INSERT ... WHERE NOT EXISTS (幂等)
|
||||
for (const perm of PRESET_PERMISSIONS) {
|
||||
await this.permRepo
|
||||
.createQueryBuilder()
|
||||
.insert().into(Permission)
|
||||
.values(perm)
|
||||
.orIgnore() // SQLite: OR IGNORE; MySQL: ON DUPLICATE KEY
|
||||
.execute();
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// 2. 角色：同上
|
||||
// 3. 角色-权限关联：先查角色和权限，批量 INSERT IGNORE
|
||||
// 4. 初始 admin 用户（复用原 initAdmin 逻辑）
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**幂等性保证**：
|
||||
- 权限点：`code` UNIQUE 约束 + `orIgnore()`
|
||||
- 角色：`name` UNIQUE 约束 + `orIgnore()`
|
||||
- 角色-权限关联：`(roleId, permissionId)` 联合唯一约束
|
||||
- 重复启动不会重复插入
|
||||
|
||||
## 9. 测试策略
|
||||
|
||||
### 9.1 单元测试
|
||||
|
||||
**PermissionGuard（5 用例）**：
|
||||
|
||||
| # | 场景 | 预期 |
|
||||
|---|------|------|
|
||||
| 1 | @Public() 装饰的接口 | 放行 |
|
||||
| 2 | 无装饰器 | 403 |
|
||||
| 3 | @RequirePermission('a')，用户有 'a' | 放行 |
|
||||
| 4 | @RequirePermission('a')，用户无 'a' | 403 |
|
||||
| 5 | @ReqPerm('a') + @ReqPerm('b')，用户有 'a' 无 'b' | 403（AND 不满足） |
|
||||
|
||||
**RbacService.getUserPermissions（3 用例）**：
|
||||
|
||||
| # | 场景 | 预期 |
|
||||
|---|------|------|
|
||||
| 1 | 单角色用户 | 返回该角色全部权限 |
|
||||
| 2 | 多角色用户 | 返回并集去重 |
|
||||
| 3 | 无角色用户 | 返回空数组 |
|
||||
|
||||
### 9.2 e2e 测试
|
||||
|
||||
| # | 场景 | 步骤 | 预期 |
|
||||
|---|------|------|------|
|
||||
| 1 | 超管全通链路 | 登录 → GET /students → POST /students | 全部 200 |
|
||||
| 2 | 宿管老师受限链路 | 登录 → GET /students → 200；POST /rbac/roles → 403 | 学生可查，角色管理拒绝 |
|
||||
|
||||
### 9.3 迁移验证
|
||||
|
||||
- SQLite 环境：`npm run migration:run` → 表结构正确 → 种子数据完整
|
||||
- MySQL 环境：同上
|
||||
- 现有 admin 用户：迁移后登录 → 拥有 `super_admin` 角色 → 全部权限可访问
|
||||
|
||||
## 10. 风险与缓解
|
||||
|
||||
| 风险 | 等级 | 缓解措施 |
|
||||
|------|------|---------|
|
||||
| users 表结构变更破坏现有业务 | 中 | 迁移在事务中执行，失败自动回滚；部署前 staging 验证 |
|
||||
| JWT payload 增大 | 低 | ~42 个短字符串约 500 bytes，可接受；后续若权限点过多可改用压缩编码 |
|
||||
| 权限变更在下次登录才生效 | 低 | 关键操作可额外做实时校验；后续可用 Redis 黑名单强制下线 |
|
||||
| 前端改造面大 | 中 | 分步迁移：先建组件 → 逐页替换 → 每步可编译可运行 |
|
||||
| synchronize → migration 切换有学习成本 | 低 | 保留 `synchronize: true` 作为本地开发模式，migration 仅用于生产部署 |
|
||||
|
||||
## 11. 后续扩展预留
|
||||
|
||||
本次 RBAC 基础设施为以下扩展预留架构空间：
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
当前阶段（本 change） 后续阶段
|
||||
══════════════════════════ ══════════════════════════
|
||||
User ↔ Role ↔ Permission User ↔ Organization（数据级）
|
||||
操作级：student:create 数据级：student:view:org-1
|
||||
→ RBAC + 数据策略组合
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- `Permission.code` 保持纯粹的操作定义（`module:action`），不混入数据范围
|
||||
- 后续数据级权限通过新增 `DataPolicy` 实体 + `@DataScope` 装饰器实现
|
||||
- `Role` 实体预留扩展空间，可关联数据策略
|
||||
@@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ const ClassroomsPage: React.FC = () => {
|
||||
<PermissionButton permission="classroom:create" type="primary" icon={<PlusOutlined />} onClick={() => { setEditing(null); form.resetFields(); setModalOpen(true); }}>
|
||||
添加教室
|
||||
</PermissionButton>
|
||||
<PermissionButton permission="classroom:import">
|
||||
<PermissionButton permission="classroom:create">
|
||||
<Upload
|
||||
accept=".xlsx,.xls"
|
||||
showUploadList={false}
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ const ExpensesPage: React.FC = () => {
|
||||
onChange={v => setRoomTypeFilter(v)}
|
||||
options={expenseTypeOptions}
|
||||
/>
|
||||
<PermissionButton permission="expense:import">
|
||||
<PermissionButton permission="expense:create">
|
||||
<Upload
|
||||
accept=".xlsx,.xls"
|
||||
showUploadList={false}
|
||||
@@ -319,7 +319,7 @@ const ExpensesPage: React.FC = () => {
|
||||
onChange={v => setPersonalTypeFilter(v)}
|
||||
options={personalExpenseTypeOptions}
|
||||
/>
|
||||
<PermissionButton permission="expense:import">
|
||||
<PermissionButton permission="expense:create">
|
||||
<Upload
|
||||
accept=".xlsx,.xls"
|
||||
showUploadList={false}
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ const OccupanciesPage: React.FC = () => {
|
||||
<PermissionButton permission="occupancy:checkin" type="primary" icon={<PlusOutlined />} onClick={() => { checkInForm.resetFields(); checkInForm.setFieldsValue({ checkInDate: dayjs() }); setCheckInModal(true); }}>
|
||||
入住登记
|
||||
</PermissionButton>
|
||||
<PermissionButton permission="occupancy:import">
|
||||
<PermissionButton permission="occupancy:checkin">
|
||||
<Upload
|
||||
accept=".xlsx,.xls"
|
||||
showUploadList={false}
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ const RoomsPage: React.FC = () => {
|
||||
<PermissionButton permission="room:create" type="primary" icon={<PlusOutlined />} onClick={() => { setEditing(null); form.resetFields(); setModalOpen(true); }}>
|
||||
添加宿舍
|
||||
</PermissionButton>
|
||||
<PermissionButton permission="room:import">
|
||||
<PermissionButton permission="room:create">
|
||||
<Upload
|
||||
accept=".xlsx,.xls"
|
||||
showUploadList={false}
|
||||
|
||||
2
openspec/changes/rbac-refactor/.openspec.yaml
Normal file
2
openspec/changes/rbac-refactor/.openspec.yaml
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
|
||||
schema: spec-driven
|
||||
created: 2026-07-02
|
||||
161
openspec/changes/rbac-refactor/design.md
Normal file
161
openspec/changes/rbac-refactor/design.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,161 @@
|
||||
## Context
|
||||
|
||||
当前系统采用 NestJS + TypeORM + JWT，User 实体通过 `role` 字段（admin/operator）和 `allowedMenus` 字段（JSON 数组）控制前端菜单可见性。后端接口仅使用 `JwtAuthGuard` 验证 Token 有效性，不做权限校验。需要重构为标准 RBAC 模型，为后续多角色（超管、机构负责人、老师、宿管老师）和数据级权限扩展提供架构基础。
|
||||
|
||||
## Goals / Non-Goals
|
||||
|
||||
**Goals:**
|
||||
- 建立 Role、Permission、RolePermission、UserRole 四表 RBAC 数据模型
|
||||
- 实现 `@RequirePermission` 装饰器 + `PermissionGuard`，对所有业务接口实施操作级权限校验
|
||||
- 权限点按 `module:action` 命名规范（如 `student:create`、`bill:export`），覆盖全部现有功能
|
||||
- 前端实现路由级和按钮级权限控制
|
||||
- 提供角色管理、权限一览、用户-角色分配三个管理页面
|
||||
- 用户可拥有多个角色，权限为所有角色权限的并集
|
||||
- 现有 admin 用户自动迁移为超管角色，无缝升级
|
||||
|
||||
**Non-Goals:**
|
||||
- 不实现数据级权限过滤（如「老师只能看本班学生」），需等待机构/班级实体
|
||||
- 不实现用户级别的直接权限覆盖（所有权限通过角色获得，无需单独增删）
|
||||
- 不改变现有业务接口的功能逻辑
|
||||
- 不实现权限变更后的实时推送（刷新页面或重新登录后生效）
|
||||
|
||||
## Decisions
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. 数据模型设计
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐
|
||||
│ User │ │ Role │ │ Permission │
|
||||
├──────────────┤ ├──────────────────┤ ├──────────────┤
|
||||
│ id │ │ id │ │ id │
|
||||
│ username │ │ name │ │ code (UK) │
|
||||
│ passwordHash │ │ description │ │ name │
|
||||
│ name │ │ isSystem │ │ group │
|
||||
│ isActive │ │ status │ │ description │
|
||||
│ ... │ │ created_at │ └──────┬───────┘
|
||||
└──────┬───────┘ └────────┬─────────┘ │
|
||||
│ │ │
|
||||
│ N:M │ M:N │
|
||||
▼ ▼ ▼
|
||||
┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────────┐
|
||||
│ UserRole │ │ RolePermission │
|
||||
├──────────────┤ ├──────────────────┤
|
||||
│ userId (FK) │ │ roleId (FK) │
|
||||
│ roleId (FK) │ │ permissionId(FK) │
|
||||
└──────────────┘ └──────────────────┘
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**User 实体变更：**
|
||||
- 移除 `role` 列（原 varchar admin/operator）
|
||||
- 移除 `allowedMenus` 列（原 JSON text）
|
||||
- 新增 `@ManyToMany` → Role 关联
|
||||
|
||||
**为什么不用 JSON 字段存储权限？** JSON 字段无法做数据库级的外键约束和联表查询；当需要「某权限被哪些角色拥有」时，JSON 需全表扫描，而关联表只需索引查询。
|
||||
|
||||
**为什么不用用户-权限直连？** 当前阶段不需要。Comet 基本原则是"不实现用户级别的直接权限覆盖"，简化模型，所有权限通过角色中转。
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. 权限编码规范
|
||||
|
||||
权限点采用 `module:action` 格式，模块名与现有目录结构一致：
|
||||
|
||||
| Group | 权限点示例 |
|
||||
|-------|----------|
|
||||
| dashboard | `dashboard:view` |
|
||||
| student | `student:view`, `student:create`, `student:edit`, `student:delete`, `student:import`, `student:export` |
|
||||
| room | `room:view`, `room:create`, `room:edit`, `room:delete` |
|
||||
| occupancy | `occupancy:view`, `occupancy:checkin`, `occupancy:checkout`, `occupancy:transfer` |
|
||||
| expense | `expense:view`, `expense:create`, `expense:edit`, `expense:delete` |
|
||||
| bill | `bill:view`, `bill:generate`, `bill:confirm`, `bill:export-excel`, `bill:export-pdf`, `bill:delete` |
|
||||
| deposit | `deposit:view`, `deposit:create`, `deposit:edit`, `deposit:delete` |
|
||||
| classroom | `classroom:view`, `classroom:create`, `classroom:edit`, `classroom:delete` |
|
||||
| tenant | `tenant:view`, `tenant:create`, `tenant:edit`, `tenant:delete` |
|
||||
| classroom-rental | `rental:view`, `rental:create`, `rental:edit`, `rental:delete` |
|
||||
| log | `log:view` |
|
||||
| user | `user:view`, `user:create`, `user:edit`, `user:delete`, `user:reset-password` |
|
||||
| role | `role:view`, `role:create`, `role:edit`, `role:delete` |
|
||||
|
||||
**为什么不在 code 中包含数据范围（如 `student:view:class-1`）？** 数据范围属于数据级权限，当前阶段只做操作级。code 保持纯粹的操作定义，后续通过 RBAC + 数据策略组合实现数据过滤。
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. 预置角色与权限映射
|
||||
|
||||
| 角色 | isSystem | 权限范围 |
|
||||
|------|----------|---------|
|
||||
| 超管 (super_admin) | true | 全部权限点（不可删除/禁用的系统角色） |
|
||||
| 机构负责人 (institution_head) | true | 预留角色，暂分配教室/租赁相关权限 |
|
||||
| 老师 (teacher) | true | 预留角色，暂分配学生查看权限 |
|
||||
| 宿管老师 (dormitory_supervisor) | true | 学生、宿舍、入住、费用、账单、押金、日志查看权限（替代原 operator） |
|
||||
|
||||
> 机构负责人和老师角色的大部分实际业务权限点（课表、考勤等）在当前系统中尚不存在，创建为占位角色，后续 change 再补充权限。
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. @RequirePermission 装饰器设计
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
// 单一权限
|
||||
@RequirePermission('student:create')
|
||||
|
||||
// 任一权限满足（OR）
|
||||
@RequirePermission('bill:export-excel', 'bill:export-pdf')
|
||||
|
||||
// 全部权限满足（AND）
|
||||
@RequirePermission('bill:view')
|
||||
@RequirePermission('bill:delete')
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
替代方案考虑：
|
||||
- **NestJS CASL**：功能强大但引入额外依赖和概念负担，对当前需求过度。当前只需简单的「有权限/无权限」二值判断。
|
||||
- **Guards 函数**：每个模块写独立 Guard 过于分散，不如装饰器统一声明式管理。
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. JWT Payload 扩展
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
变更前: { sub, username, role }
|
||||
变更后: { sub, username, permissions: ["student:view", "bill:export", ...] }
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**为什么不每次从数据库查询权限？** 每次请求都查数据库会造成 N+1 问题和性能开销。权限列表在登录时打入 JWT，JWT 有有效期（默认 24h），角色变更在下次登录时生效。折中方案：对于安全性要求极高的操作（删除/确认账单），可额外在 Controller 层做一次实时校验。
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. 前端权限控制方案
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
路由级（App.tsx）:
|
||||
<Route path="users" element={
|
||||
<PermissionRoute permission="user:view"><UsersPage /></PermissionRoute>
|
||||
} />
|
||||
|
||||
菜单级（MainLayout）:
|
||||
菜单项配置 permission 字段，按用户 permissions 过滤
|
||||
|
||||
按钮级（各页面）:
|
||||
<PermissionButton permission="student:delete">删除</PermissionButton>
|
||||
用 display:none 或 disabled 控制
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
权限判断逻辑封装为 `usePermission()` hook：
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
const { hasPermission, hasAnyPermission, hasAllPermissions } = usePermission();
|
||||
hasPermission('student:create') // boolean
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 7. 迁移策略
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
数据库迁移脚本（TypeORM migration）：
|
||||
1. 创建 roles, permissions, role_permissions, user_roles 表
|
||||
2. INSERT 种子数据（4 角色 + ~40 权限点 + 角色-权限关联）
|
||||
3. 查找 role='admin' 的用户 → INSERT user_roles (userId, super_admin_role_id)
|
||||
4. 查找 role='operator' 的用户 → INSERT user_roles (userId, dormitory_supervisor_role_id)
|
||||
（因为宿管老师角色权限与原 operator 允许的菜单最接近）
|
||||
5. ALTER TABLE users DROP COLUMN role, DROP COLUMN allowed_menus
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
回滚策略：
|
||||
1. 备份 users 表的 role 和 allowedMenus 值到临时表
|
||||
2. 迁移失败时从备份恢复并 DROP 新表
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Risks / Trade-offs
|
||||
|
||||
- **[迁移风险] users 表结构变更破坏现有业务** → 迁移脚本在事务中执行，失败自动回滚；部署前在 staging 环境验证
|
||||
- **[性能风险] JWT payload 增大** → ~40 个权限点编码为短字符串数组，JWT 体积增加约 500 bytes，在可接受范围内
|
||||
- **[安全风险] 权限变更在下一次登录才生效** → 对于关键角色变更（如降级用户），提供「强制下线」能力（使当前 JWT 失效）；后续可用 Redis 黑名单优化
|
||||
- **[复杂度风险] 前端现有代码改造面大** → 分步迁移：先建组件（PermissionButton/usePermission），再逐页替换，确保每一步可编译可运行
|
||||
31
openspec/changes/rbac-refactor/proposal.md
Normal file
31
openspec/changes/rbac-refactor/proposal.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
|
||||
## Why
|
||||
|
||||
当前系统采用硬编码双角色鉴权（admin/operator），权限控制仅通过前端菜单可见性（`allowedMenus` JSON 字段）实现软限制，后端所有接口零权限校验。随着角色需求扩展到超管、机构负责人、老师、宿管老师等多种角色，并为后续数据级权限（机构→班级→学生）扩展预留基础，需要将鉴权体系重构为标准 RBAC（基于角色的访问控制）模型。
|
||||
|
||||
## What Changes
|
||||
|
||||
- **RBAC 实体层**：新增 Role、Permission、RolePermission、UserRole 四张表，替代 users 表的单一 `role` 字段和 `allowedMenus` 字段
|
||||
- **权限守卫**：新增 `@RequirePermission` 装饰器和 PermissionGuard，在后端对所有 API 接口实施权限校验（**BREAKING**：现有接口仅依赖 JwtAuthGuard 无权限控制）
|
||||
- **用户实体迁移**：users 表移除 `role` 和 `allowedMenus` 字段，改为通过 UserRole 多对多关联角色；现有 admin 用户自动迁移获得超管角色
|
||||
- **种子数据**：应用启动时自动创建超管角色（含全部权限点）、四个预置角色（超管、机构负责人、老师、宿管老师）、约 40+ 权限点
|
||||
- **前端权限管理界面**：角色管理（CRUD + 权限勾选）、权限一览（按模块分组展示）、用户-角色关联编辑
|
||||
- **前端权限适配**：路由守卫按权限控制页面访问，按钮/操作按权限控制可见性，登录后 JWT 携带权限点列表
|
||||
- **权限点定义**：从现有 18 个 API endpoint + 前端按钮操作反推，覆盖学生/宿舍/入住/费用/账单/教室/押金/操作日志/账号管理全部模块
|
||||
|
||||
## Capabilities
|
||||
|
||||
### New Capabilities
|
||||
- `db-migration`: TypeORM Migration 基础设施搭建（CLI 配置、迁移脚本生成与执行命令），用于 RBAC 建表、种子数据插入和 users 表结构变更
|
||||
- `rbac-core`: RBAC 核心实体与数据库层（Role、Permission、RolePermission、UserRole 表，种子数据初始化，users 表迁移）
|
||||
- `permission-guard`: 后端权限守卫（@RequirePermission 装饰器、PermissionGuard、JWT payload 扩展、403 响应）
|
||||
- `permission-admin-ui`: 前端权限管理界面（角色 CRUD、权限一览、用户-角色分配）
|
||||
|
||||
### Modified Capabilities
|
||||
<!-- 本次为纯新增基础设施，不修改现有 spec 级别的行为需求 -->
|
||||
|
||||
## Impact
|
||||
|
||||
- **数据库**：新增 4 张表（roles、permissions、role_permissions、user_roles）；users 表删除 `role` 和 `allowedMenus` 列
|
||||
- **后端**：所有 Controller 方法需添加 `@RequirePermission` 装饰器；auth module 重构为 rbac module；JWT payload 扩展携带权限列表
|
||||
- **前端**：MainLayout 菜单过滤逻辑从 `allowedMenus` 改为权限点匹配；App.tsx 路由增加权限守卫；Login 页登录成功处理调整；Users 管理页重构为用户-角色分配
|
||||
- **破坏性变更**：`api.login()` 返回的 `user` 对象结构变化（`role` + `allowedMenus` → `roles` 数组 + `permissions` 数组），所有依赖这些字段的前端代码需同步更新
|
||||
20
openspec/config.yaml
Normal file
20
openspec/config.yaml
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
|
||||
schema: spec-driven
|
||||
|
||||
# Project context (optional)
|
||||
# This is shown to AI when creating artifacts.
|
||||
# Add your tech stack, conventions, style guides, domain knowledge, etc.
|
||||
# Example:
|
||||
# context: |
|
||||
# Tech stack: TypeScript, React, Node.js
|
||||
# We use conventional commits
|
||||
# Domain: e-commerce platform
|
||||
|
||||
# Per-artifact rules (optional)
|
||||
# Add custom rules for specific artifacts.
|
||||
# Example:
|
||||
# rules:
|
||||
# proposal:
|
||||
# - Keep proposals under 500 words
|
||||
# - Always include a "Non-goals" section
|
||||
# tasks:
|
||||
# - Break tasks into chunks of max 2 hours
|
||||
1127
package-lock.json
generated
Normal file
1127
package-lock.json
generated
Normal file
File diff suppressed because it is too large
Load Diff
5
package.json
Normal file
5
package.json
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
|
||||
{
|
||||
"dependencies": {
|
||||
"@fission-ai/openspec": "^1.5.0"
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
89
skills-lock.json
Normal file
89
skills-lock.json
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
|
||||
{
|
||||
"version": 1,
|
||||
"skills": {
|
||||
"brainstorming": {
|
||||
"source": "obra/superpowers",
|
||||
"sourceType": "github",
|
||||
"skillPath": "skills/brainstorming/SKILL.md",
|
||||
"computedHash": "253570c46990ea018dd4520dba80cd77c35f9e5a8654057da1812face7be30cd"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"dispatching-parallel-agents": {
|
||||
"source": "obra/superpowers",
|
||||
"sourceType": "github",
|
||||
"skillPath": "skills/dispatching-parallel-agents/SKILL.md",
|
||||
"computedHash": "85df55d2235a7623b315dac4bc340c14a37dcdc57c869c80a829e1a53a174689"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"executing-plans": {
|
||||
"source": "obra/superpowers",
|
||||
"sourceType": "github",
|
||||
"skillPath": "skills/executing-plans/SKILL.md",
|
||||
"computedHash": "08604f93f2e38dd3575e5503c79cda5c623c78a8df0e472457ac5ef7a33f22b8"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"finishing-a-development-branch": {
|
||||
"source": "obra/superpowers",
|
||||
"sourceType": "github",
|
||||
"skillPath": "skills/finishing-a-development-branch/SKILL.md",
|
||||
"computedHash": "aa2632ed96df59c36348bd8f8ec1ff0fb0c5cc68b60691834687bf4cedc6be3f"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"receiving-code-review": {
|
||||
"source": "obra/superpowers",
|
||||
"sourceType": "github",
|
||||
"skillPath": "skills/receiving-code-review/SKILL.md",
|
||||
"computedHash": "3f56080356c62e4f74a183d7371686babc661e41a952dc67a97c2c76fe8a9329"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"requesting-code-review": {
|
||||
"source": "obra/superpowers",
|
||||
"sourceType": "github",
|
||||
"skillPath": "skills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md",
|
||||
"computedHash": "cde520e9118d7e6b74b5ab0123cff2f68d9c07bddb3f82c997753b6126600aed"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"subagent-driven-development": {
|
||||
"source": "obra/superpowers",
|
||||
"sourceType": "github",
|
||||
"skillPath": "skills/subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md",
|
||||
"computedHash": "aaeb6686111c76b3c38e09156fe18af44d73b324ee055e5cb0ab63dc776f216f"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"systematic-debugging": {
|
||||
"source": "obra/superpowers",
|
||||
"sourceType": "github",
|
||||
"skillPath": "skills/systematic-debugging/SKILL.md",
|
||||
"computedHash": "792a368e074981d7e3138edb439e138489b2ac247cd1e5739fab52af680fb17b"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"test-driven-development": {
|
||||
"source": "obra/superpowers",
|
||||
"sourceType": "github",
|
||||
"skillPath": "skills/test-driven-development/SKILL.md",
|
||||
"computedHash": "eee144aea35d783296d178017e9fe843c6d16cc8b240e106f5e50910f6caf329"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"using-git-worktrees": {
|
||||
"source": "obra/superpowers",
|
||||
"sourceType": "github",
|
||||
"skillPath": "skills/using-git-worktrees/SKILL.md",
|
||||
"computedHash": "212ad917e5543e84ea3adf4e3fab537675db976fdab05d4de432870e38b49e80"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"using-superpowers": {
|
||||
"source": "obra/superpowers",
|
||||
"sourceType": "github",
|
||||
"skillPath": "skills/using-superpowers/SKILL.md",
|
||||
"computedHash": "e94af48fd52e1c329952fae638bde84671997744901c780281aff6e6986b8f1d"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"verification-before-completion": {
|
||||
"source": "obra/superpowers",
|
||||
"sourceType": "github",
|
||||
"skillPath": "skills/verification-before-completion/SKILL.md",
|
||||
"computedHash": "9b446f0c7fe1cfb560b1d34439523b1a76d5f177290007b2c053a1c749a4a8ba"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"writing-plans": {
|
||||
"source": "obra/superpowers",
|
||||
"sourceType": "github",
|
||||
"skillPath": "skills/writing-plans/SKILL.md",
|
||||
"computedHash": "b73b59d43c34c3fc225bfae419c458bb216af80df25fc0c545dfa7fd2a161722"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"writing-skills": {
|
||||
"source": "obra/superpowers",
|
||||
"sourceType": "github",
|
||||
"skillPath": "skills/writing-skills/SKILL.md",
|
||||
"computedHash": "985a2c1a4242d89bd44a0060cd0e2c81ebb3683e820026fa52ccd7213804ce03"
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user