mirror of
https://github.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow.git
synced 2026-03-01 15:03:57 +08:00
feat(workflow): add lightweight interactive planning workflow with in-memory execution and code exploration
- Introduced `lite-plan` command for intelligent task analysis and planning. - Implemented dynamic exploration and clarification phases based on task complexity. - Added support for auto mode and forced exploration flags. - Defined output artifacts and session structure for planning results. - Enhanced execution process with context handoff to `lite-execute`. chore(temp): create temporary memory content and import script - Added `.temp-memory-content.txt` to store session details and execution plan. - Implemented `temp-import-memory.cjs` to handle memory import using core-memory command. - Ensured cleanup of temporary files after execution.
This commit is contained in:
catlog22
@@ -0,0 +1,202 @@
|
||||
# Command: spec-quality
|
||||
|
||||
## Purpose
|
||||
|
||||
5-dimension spec quality check with weighted scoring, quality gate determination, and readiness report generation.
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 2: Context Loading
|
||||
|
||||
| Input | Source | Required |
|
||||
|-------|--------|----------|
|
||||
| Spec documents | `<session_folder>/spec/` (all .md files) | Yes |
|
||||
| Original requirements | Product brief objectives section | Yes |
|
||||
| Quality gate config | specs/quality-gates.md | No |
|
||||
| Session folder | Task description `Session:` field | Yes |
|
||||
|
||||
**Spec document phases** (matched by filename/directory):
|
||||
|
||||
| Phase | Expected Path | Required |
|
||||
|-------|--------------|---------|
|
||||
| product-brief | spec/product-brief.md | Yes |
|
||||
| prd | spec/requirements/*.md | Yes |
|
||||
| architecture | spec/architecture/_index.md + ADR-*.md | Yes |
|
||||
| user-stories | spec/epics/*.md | Yes |
|
||||
| implementation-plan | plan/plan.json | No (impl-only/full-lifecycle) |
|
||||
| test-strategy | spec/test-strategy.md | No (optional, not generated by pipeline) |
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 3: 5-Dimension Scoring
|
||||
|
||||
### Dimension Weights
|
||||
|
||||
| Dimension | Weight | Focus |
|
||||
|-----------|--------|-------|
|
||||
| Completeness | 25% | All required sections present with substance |
|
||||
| Consistency | 20% | Terminology, format, references, naming |
|
||||
| Traceability | 25% | Goals -> Reqs -> Components -> Stories chain |
|
||||
| Depth | 20% | AC testable, ADRs justified, stories estimable |
|
||||
| Coverage | 10% | Original requirements mapped to spec |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Dimension 1: Completeness (25%)
|
||||
|
||||
Check each spec document for required sections.
|
||||
|
||||
**Required sections by phase**:
|
||||
|
||||
| Phase | Required Sections |
|
||||
|-------|------------------|
|
||||
| product-brief | Vision Statement, Problem Statement, Target Audience, Success Metrics, Constraints |
|
||||
| prd | Goals, Requirements, User Stories, Acceptance Criteria, Non-Functional Requirements |
|
||||
| architecture | System Overview, Component Design, Data Models, API Specifications, Technology Stack |
|
||||
| user-stories | Story List, Acceptance Criteria, Priority, Estimation |
|
||||
| implementation-plan | Task Breakdown, Dependencies, Timeline, Resource Allocation |
|
||||
|
||||
> **Note**: `test-strategy` is optional — skip scoring if `spec/test-strategy.md` is absent. Do not penalize completeness score for missing optional phases.
|
||||
|
||||
**Scoring formula**:
|
||||
- Section present: 50% credit
|
||||
- Section has substantial content (>100 chars beyond header): additional 50% credit
|
||||
- Per-document score = (present_ratio * 50) + (substantial_ratio * 50)
|
||||
- Overall = average across all documents
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Dimension 2: Consistency (20%)
|
||||
|
||||
Check cross-document consistency across four areas.
|
||||
|
||||
| Area | What to Check | Severity |
|
||||
|------|--------------|----------|
|
||||
| Terminology | Same concept with different casing/spelling across docs | Medium |
|
||||
| Format | Mixed header styles at same level across docs | Low |
|
||||
| References | Broken links (`./` or `../` paths that don't resolve) | High |
|
||||
| Naming | Mixed naming conventions (camelCase vs snake_case vs kebab-case) | Low |
|
||||
|
||||
**Scoring**:
|
||||
- Penalty weights: High = 10, Medium = 5, Low = 2
|
||||
- Score = max(0, 100 - (total_penalty / 100) * 100)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Dimension 3: Traceability (25%)
|
||||
|
||||
Build and validate traceability chains: Goals -> Requirements -> Components -> Stories.
|
||||
|
||||
**Chain building flow**:
|
||||
1. Extract goals from product-brief (pattern: `- Goal: <text>`)
|
||||
2. Extract requirements from PRD (pattern: `- REQ-NNN: <text>`)
|
||||
3. Extract components from architecture (pattern: `- Component: <text>`)
|
||||
4. Extract stories from user-stories (pattern: `- US-NNN: <text>`)
|
||||
5. Link by keyword overlap (threshold: 30% keyword match)
|
||||
|
||||
**Chain completeness**: A chain is complete when a goal links to at least one requirement, one component, and one story.
|
||||
|
||||
**Scoring**: (complete chains / total chains) * 100
|
||||
|
||||
**Weak link identification**: For each incomplete chain, report which link is missing (no requirements, no components, or no stories).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Dimension 4: Depth (20%)
|
||||
|
||||
Assess the analytical depth of spec content across four sub-dimensions.
|
||||
|
||||
| Sub-dimension | Source | Testable Criteria |
|
||||
|---------------|--------|-------------------|
|
||||
| AC Testability | PRD / User Stories | Contains measurable verbs (display, return, validate) or Given/When/Then or numbers |
|
||||
| ADR Justification | Architecture | Contains rationale, alternatives, consequences, or trade-offs |
|
||||
| Story Estimability | User Stories | Has "As a/I want/So that" + AC, or explicit estimate |
|
||||
| Technical Detail | Architecture + Plan | Contains code blocks, API terms, HTTP methods, DB terms |
|
||||
|
||||
**Scoring**: Average of sub-dimension scores (each 0-100%)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Dimension 5: Coverage (10%)
|
||||
|
||||
Map original requirements to spec requirements.
|
||||
|
||||
**Flow**:
|
||||
1. Extract original requirements from product-brief objectives section
|
||||
2. Extract spec requirements from all documents (pattern: `- REQ-NNN:` or `- Requirement:` or `- Feature:`)
|
||||
3. For each original requirement, check keyword overlap with any spec requirement (threshold: 40%)
|
||||
4. Score = (covered_count / total_original) * 100
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Quality Gate Decision Table
|
||||
|
||||
| Gate | Criteria | Message |
|
||||
|------|----------|---------|
|
||||
| PASS | Overall score >= 80% AND coverage >= 70% | Ready for implementation |
|
||||
| FAIL | Overall score < 60% OR coverage < 50% | Major revisions required |
|
||||
| REVIEW | All other cases | Improvements needed, may proceed with caution |
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 4: Validation
|
||||
|
||||
### Readiness Report Format
|
||||
|
||||
Write to `<session_folder>/spec/readiness-report.md`:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
# Specification Readiness Report
|
||||
|
||||
**Generated**: <timestamp>
|
||||
**Overall Score**: <score>%
|
||||
**Quality Gate**: <PASS|REVIEW|FAIL> - <message>
|
||||
**Recommended Action**: <action>
|
||||
|
||||
## Dimension Scores
|
||||
|
||||
| Dimension | Score | Weight | Weighted Score |
|
||||
|-----------|-------|--------|----------------|
|
||||
| Completeness | <n>% | 25% | <n>% |
|
||||
| Consistency | <n>% | 20% | <n>% |
|
||||
| Traceability | <n>% | 25% | <n>% |
|
||||
| Depth | <n>% | 20% | <n>% |
|
||||
| Coverage | <n>% | 10% | <n>% |
|
||||
|
||||
## Completeness Analysis
|
||||
(per-phase breakdown: sections present/expected, missing sections)
|
||||
|
||||
## Consistency Analysis
|
||||
(issues by area: terminology, format, references, naming)
|
||||
|
||||
## Traceability Analysis
|
||||
(complete chains / total, weak links)
|
||||
|
||||
## Depth Analysis
|
||||
(per sub-dimension scores)
|
||||
|
||||
## Requirement Coverage
|
||||
(covered / total, uncovered requirements list)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Spec Summary Format
|
||||
|
||||
Write to `<session_folder>/spec/spec-summary.md`:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
# Specification Summary
|
||||
|
||||
**Overall Quality Score**: <score>%
|
||||
**Quality Gate**: <gate>
|
||||
|
||||
## Documents Reviewed
|
||||
(per document: phase, path, size, section list)
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Findings
|
||||
### Strengths (dimensions scoring >= 80%)
|
||||
### Areas for Improvement (dimensions scoring < 70%)
|
||||
### Recommendations
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Error Handling
|
||||
|
||||
| Scenario | Resolution |
|
||||
|----------|------------|
|
||||
| Spec folder empty | FAIL gate, report no documents found |
|
||||
| Missing phase document | Score 0 for that phase in completeness, note in report |
|
||||
| No original requirements found | Score coverage at 100% (nothing to cover) |
|
||||
| Broken references | Flag in consistency, do not fail entire review |
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user