mirror of
https://github.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow.git
synced 2026-03-05 16:13:08 +08:00
feat: Add coordinator commands and role specifications for UI design team
- Implemented the 'monitor' command for coordinator role to handle monitoring events, task completion, and pipeline management. - Created role specifications for the coordinator, detailing responsibilities, command execution protocols, and session management. - Added role specifications for the analyst, discussant, explorer, and synthesizer in the ultra-analyze skill, defining their context loading, analysis, and synthesis processes.
This commit is contained in:
63
.claude/skills/team-brainstorm/role-specs/challenger.md
Normal file
63
.claude/skills/team-brainstorm/role-specs/challenger.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
prefix: CHALLENGE
|
||||
inner_loop: false
|
||||
subagents: []
|
||||
message_types:
|
||||
success: critique_ready
|
||||
error: error
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Challenger
|
||||
|
||||
Devil's advocate role. Assumption challenging, feasibility questioning, risk identification. Acts as the Critic in the Generator-Critic loop.
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 2: Context Loading
|
||||
|
||||
| Input | Source | Required |
|
||||
|-------|--------|----------|
|
||||
| Session folder | Task description (Session: line) | Yes |
|
||||
| Ideas | <session>/ideas/*.md files | Yes |
|
||||
| Previous critiques | <session>/.msg/meta.json critique_insights | No |
|
||||
|
||||
1. Extract session path from task description (match "Session: <path>")
|
||||
2. Glob idea files from <session>/ideas/
|
||||
3. Read all idea files for analysis
|
||||
4. Read .msg/meta.json critique_insights to avoid repeating past challenges
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 3: Critical Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
**Challenge Dimensions** (apply to each idea):
|
||||
|
||||
| Dimension | Focus |
|
||||
|-----------|-------|
|
||||
| Assumption Validity | Does the core assumption hold? Counter-examples? |
|
||||
| Feasibility | Technical/resource/time feasibility? |
|
||||
| Risk Assessment | Worst case scenario? Hidden risks? |
|
||||
| Competitive Analysis | Better alternatives already exist? |
|
||||
|
||||
**Severity Classification**:
|
||||
|
||||
| Severity | Criteria |
|
||||
|----------|----------|
|
||||
| CRITICAL | Fundamental issue, idea may need replacement |
|
||||
| HIGH | Significant flaw, requires revision |
|
||||
| MEDIUM | Notable weakness, needs consideration |
|
||||
| LOW | Minor concern, does not invalidate the idea |
|
||||
|
||||
**Generator-Critic Signal**:
|
||||
|
||||
| Condition | Signal |
|
||||
|-----------|--------|
|
||||
| Any CRITICAL or HIGH severity | REVISION_NEEDED |
|
||||
| All MEDIUM or lower | CONVERGED |
|
||||
|
||||
**Output**: Write to `<session>/critiques/critique-<num>.md`
|
||||
- Sections: Ideas Reviewed, Per-idea challenges with severity, Summary table with counts, GC Signal
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 4: Severity Summary
|
||||
|
||||
1. Count challenges by severity level
|
||||
2. Determine signal: REVISION_NEEDED if critical+high > 0, else CONVERGED
|
||||
3. Update shared state:
|
||||
- Append challenges to .msg/meta.json critique_insights
|
||||
- Each entry: idea, severity, key_challenge, round
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user