mirror of
https://github.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow.git
synced 2026-02-10 02:24:35 +08:00
refactor: convert synthesis command to agent-based execution
- Convert synthesis.md to use action-planning-agent with FLOW_CONTROL - Create synthesis-role.md template with comprehensive document structure - Reorganize phase sequencing: validation → discovery → update check → agent execution - Extract task tracking as protocol section outside phase sequence - Add explicit OUTPUT_FILE and OUTPUT_PATH to agent context - Move cross-role analysis logic into agent responsibilities - Simplify Quality Assurance and Next Steps sections 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
catlog22
393
.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/synthesis-role.md
Normal file
393
.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/synthesis-role.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,393 @@
|
||||
# Synthesis Role Template
|
||||
|
||||
## Purpose
|
||||
Generate comprehensive synthesis-specification.md that consolidates all role perspectives from brainstorming into actionable implementation specification.
|
||||
|
||||
## Role Focus
|
||||
- **Cross-Role Integration**: Synthesize insights from all participating roles
|
||||
- **Decision Transparency**: Document both adopted and rejected alternatives
|
||||
- **Process Integration**: Include team capabilities, risks, and collaboration patterns
|
||||
- **Visual Documentation**: Key diagrams via Mermaid (architecture, data model, user journey)
|
||||
- **Priority Matrix**: Quantified recommendations with multi-dimensional evaluation
|
||||
- **Actionable Planning**: Phased implementation roadmap with clear next steps
|
||||
|
||||
## Document Structure Template
|
||||
|
||||
### synthesis-specification.md
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# [Topic] - Integrated Implementation Specification
|
||||
|
||||
**Framework Reference**: @topic-framework.md | **Generated**: [timestamp] | **Session**: WFS-[topic-slug]
|
||||
**Source Integration**: All brainstorming role perspectives consolidated
|
||||
**Document Type**: Requirements & Design Specification (WHAT to build)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Executive Summary
|
||||
|
||||
Provide strategic overview covering:
|
||||
- **Key Insights**: Major findings from cross-role analysis
|
||||
- **Breakthrough Opportunities**: Innovation opportunities identified
|
||||
- **Implementation Priorities**: High-level prioritization with rationale
|
||||
- **Strategic Direction**: Recommended approach and vision
|
||||
|
||||
Include metrics from role synthesis:
|
||||
- Roles synthesized: [count]
|
||||
- Requirements captured: [FR/NFR/BR counts]
|
||||
- Controversial decisions: [count]
|
||||
- Risk factors identified: [count]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Designs & Decisions
|
||||
|
||||
### Core Architecture Diagram
|
||||
```mermaid
|
||||
graph TD
|
||||
A[Component A] --> B[Component B]
|
||||
B --> C[Component C]
|
||||
```
|
||||
*Reference: @system-architect/analysis.md#architecture-diagram*
|
||||
|
||||
### User Journey Map
|
||||
|
||||
*Reference: @ux-expert/analysis.md#user-journey*
|
||||
|
||||
### Data Model Overview
|
||||
```mermaid
|
||||
erDiagram
|
||||
USER ||--o{ ORDER : places
|
||||
ORDER ||--|{ LINE-ITEM : contains
|
||||
```
|
||||
*Reference: @data-architect/analysis.md#data-model*
|
||||
|
||||
### Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)
|
||||
|
||||
**ADR-01: [Decision Title]**
|
||||
- **Context**: Background and problem statement
|
||||
- **Decision**: Chosen approach
|
||||
- **Rationale**: Why this approach was selected
|
||||
- **Consequences**: Expected impacts and tradeoffs
|
||||
- **Reference**: @[role]/analysis.md#adr-01
|
||||
|
||||
[Repeat for each major architectural decision]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Controversial Points & Alternatives
|
||||
|
||||
Document disagreements and alternative approaches considered:
|
||||
|
||||
| Point | Adopted Solution | Alternative Solution(s) | Decision Rationale | Dissenting Roles |
|
||||
|-------|------------------|-------------------------|--------------------| -----------------|
|
||||
| Authentication | JWT Token (@security-expert) | Session-Cookie (@system-architect) | Stateless API support for multi-platform | System Architect noted session performance benefits |
|
||||
| UI Framework | React (@ui-designer) | Vue.js (@subject-matter-expert) | Team expertise and ecosystem maturity | Subject Matter Expert preferred Vue for learning curve |
|
||||
|
||||
*This section preserves decision context and rejected alternatives for future reference.*
|
||||
|
||||
**Analysis Guidelines**:
|
||||
- Identify where roles disagreed on approach
|
||||
- Document both solutions with equal respect
|
||||
- Explain why one was chosen over the other
|
||||
- Preserve dissenting perspectives for future consideration
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Requirements & Acceptance Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
### Functional Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
| ID | Description | Rationale Summary | Source | Priority | Acceptance Criteria | Dependencies |
|
||||
|----|-------------|-------------------|--------|----------|---------------------|--------------|
|
||||
| FR-01 | User authentication | Enable secure multi-platform access | @product-manager/analysis.md | High | User can login via email/password with MFA | None |
|
||||
| FR-02 | Data export | User-requested analytics feature | @product-owner/analysis.md | Medium | Export to CSV/JSON formats | FR-01 |
|
||||
|
||||
**Guidelines**:
|
||||
- Extract from product-manager, product-owner, and other role analyses
|
||||
- Include rationale summary for immediate understanding
|
||||
- Specify clear, testable acceptance criteria
|
||||
- Map dependencies between requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Non-Functional Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
| ID | Description | Rationale Summary | Target | Validation Method | Source |
|
||||
|----|-------------|-------------------|--------|-------------------|--------|
|
||||
| NFR-01 | Response time | UX research shows <200ms critical for engagement | <200ms | Load testing | @ux-expert/analysis.md |
|
||||
| NFR-02 | Data encryption | Compliance requirement (GDPR, HIPAA) | AES-256 | Security audit | @security-expert/analysis.md |
|
||||
|
||||
**Guidelines**:
|
||||
- Extract performance, security, scalability requirements
|
||||
- Include specific, measurable targets
|
||||
- Reference source role for traceability
|
||||
|
||||
### Business Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
| ID | Description | Rationale Summary | Value | Success Metric | Source |
|
||||
|----|-------------|-------------------|-------|----------------|--------|
|
||||
| BR-01 | User retention | Market analysis shows engagement gap | High | 80% 30-day retention | @product-manager/analysis.md |
|
||||
| BR-02 | Revenue growth | Business case justification for investment | High | 25% MRR increase | @product-owner/analysis.md |
|
||||
|
||||
**Guidelines**:
|
||||
- Capture business value and success metrics
|
||||
- Link to product-manager and product-owner analyses
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Design Specifications
|
||||
|
||||
### UI/UX Guidelines
|
||||
**Consolidated from**: @ui-designer/analysis.md, @ux-expert/analysis.md
|
||||
|
||||
- **Component Specifications**: Reusable UI components and patterns
|
||||
- **Interaction Patterns**: User interaction flows and behaviors
|
||||
- **Visual Design System**: Colors, typography, spacing guidelines
|
||||
- **Accessibility Requirements**: WCAG compliance, screen reader support
|
||||
- **User Flow Specifications**: Step-by-step user journeys
|
||||
- **Responsive Design**: Mobile, tablet, desktop breakpoints
|
||||
|
||||
### Architecture Design
|
||||
**Consolidated from**: @system-architect/analysis.md, @data-architect/analysis.md
|
||||
|
||||
- **System Architecture**: High-level component architecture and interactions
|
||||
- **Data Flow**: Data processing pipelines and transformations
|
||||
- **Storage Strategy**: Database selection, schema design, caching
|
||||
- **Technology Stack**: Languages, frameworks, infrastructure decisions
|
||||
- **Integration Patterns**: Service communication, API design
|
||||
- **Scalability Approach**: Horizontal/vertical scaling strategies
|
||||
|
||||
### Domain Expertise & Standards
|
||||
**Consolidated from**: @subject-matter-expert/analysis.md
|
||||
|
||||
- **Industry Standards**: Compliance requirements (HIPAA, GDPR, etc.)
|
||||
- **Best Practices**: Domain-specific proven patterns
|
||||
- **Regulatory Requirements**: Legal and compliance constraints
|
||||
- **Technical Quality**: Code quality, testing, documentation standards
|
||||
- **Domain-Specific Patterns**: Industry-proven architectural patterns
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Process & Collaboration Concerns
|
||||
**Consolidated from**: @scrum-master/analysis.md, @product-owner/analysis.md
|
||||
|
||||
### Team Capability Assessment
|
||||
|
||||
| Required Skill | Current Level | Gap Analysis | Mitigation Strategy | Reference |
|
||||
|----------------|---------------|--------------|---------------------|-----------|
|
||||
| Kubernetes | Intermediate | Need advanced knowledge for scaling | Training + external consultant | @scrum-master/analysis.md |
|
||||
| React Hooks | Advanced | Team ready | None | @scrum-master/analysis.md |
|
||||
| GraphQL | Beginner | Significant gap for API layer | 2-week training + mentor pairing | @scrum-master/analysis.md |
|
||||
|
||||
**Guidelines**:
|
||||
- Identify all required technical skills
|
||||
- Assess team's current capability level
|
||||
- Document gap and mitigation plan
|
||||
- Estimate timeline impact of skill gaps
|
||||
|
||||
### Process Risks
|
||||
|
||||
| Risk | Impact | Probability | Mitigation | Owner | Reference |
|
||||
|------|--------|-------------|------------|-------|-----------|
|
||||
| Cross-team API dependency | High | Medium | Early API contract definition | Tech Lead | @scrum-master/analysis.md |
|
||||
| UX-Dev alignment gap | Medium | High | Weekly design sync meetings | Product Manager | @ux-expert/analysis.md |
|
||||
|
||||
**Guidelines**:
|
||||
- Capture both technical and process risks
|
||||
- Include probability and impact assessment
|
||||
- Specify concrete mitigation strategies
|
||||
- Assign ownership for risk management
|
||||
|
||||
### Collaboration Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
Document recommended collaboration workflows:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Design-Dev Pairing**: UI Designer and Frontend Dev pair programming for complex interactions
|
||||
- **Architecture Reviews**: Weekly arch review for system-level decisions
|
||||
- **User Testing Cadence**: Bi-weekly UX testing sessions with real users
|
||||
- **Code Review Process**: PR review within 24 hours, 2 approvals required
|
||||
- **Daily Standups**: 15-minute sync across all roles
|
||||
|
||||
*Reference: @scrum-master/analysis.md#collaboration*
|
||||
|
||||
### Timeline Constraints
|
||||
|
||||
Document known constraints that affect planning:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Blocking Dependencies**: Project-X API must complete before Phase 2
|
||||
- **Resource Constraints**: Only 2 backend developers available in Q1
|
||||
- **External Dependencies**: Third-party OAuth provider integration timeline (6 weeks)
|
||||
- **Hard Deadlines**: MVP launch date for investor demo (Q2 end)
|
||||
|
||||
*Reference: @scrum-master/analysis.md#constraints*
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Roadmap (High-Level)
|
||||
|
||||
### Development Phases
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 1** (0-3 months): Foundation and Core Features
|
||||
- Infrastructure setup and basic architecture
|
||||
- Core authentication and user management
|
||||
- Essential functional requirements (FR-01, FR-02, FR-03)
|
||||
- Foundational UI components
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 2** (3-6 months): Advanced Features and Integrations
|
||||
- Advanced functional requirements
|
||||
- Third-party integrations
|
||||
- Analytics and reporting
|
||||
- Advanced UI/UX enhancements
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 3** (6+ months): Optimization and Innovation
|
||||
- Performance optimization
|
||||
- Advanced analytics and ML features
|
||||
- Innovation opportunities from brainstorming
|
||||
- Technical debt reduction
|
||||
|
||||
### Technical Guidelines
|
||||
|
||||
**Development Standards**:
|
||||
- Code organization and project structure
|
||||
- Naming conventions and style guides
|
||||
- Version control and branching strategy
|
||||
- Development environment setup
|
||||
|
||||
**Testing Strategy**:
|
||||
- Unit testing (80% coverage minimum)
|
||||
- Integration testing approach
|
||||
- E2E testing for critical paths
|
||||
- Performance testing benchmarks
|
||||
|
||||
**Deployment Approach**:
|
||||
- CI/CD pipeline configuration
|
||||
- Staging and production environments
|
||||
- Monitoring and alerting setup
|
||||
- Rollback procedures
|
||||
|
||||
### Feature Grouping (Epic-Level)
|
||||
|
||||
**Epic 1: User Authentication & Authorization**
|
||||
- Requirements: FR-01, FR-03, NFR-02
|
||||
- Priority: High
|
||||
- Dependencies: None
|
||||
- Estimated Timeline: 4 weeks
|
||||
|
||||
**Epic 2: Data Management & Export**
|
||||
- Requirements: FR-02, FR-05, NFR-01
|
||||
- Priority: Medium
|
||||
- Dependencies: Epic 1
|
||||
- Estimated Timeline: 6 weeks
|
||||
|
||||
[Continue for all major feature groups]
|
||||
|
||||
**Note**: Detailed task breakdown into executable work items is handled by `/workflow:plan` → `IMPL_PLAN.md`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Risk Assessment & Mitigation
|
||||
|
||||
### Critical Risks Identified
|
||||
|
||||
**Technical Risks**:
|
||||
1. **Risk**: Database scalability under projected load
|
||||
- **Impact**: High (system downtime, user dissatisfaction)
|
||||
- **Probability**: Medium
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Early load testing, database sharding plan, caching strategy
|
||||
- **Owner**: System Architect
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Risk**: Third-party API reliability and rate limits
|
||||
- **Impact**: Medium (feature degradation)
|
||||
- **Probability**: High
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Implement circuit breakers, fallback mechanisms, local caching
|
||||
- **Owner**: Backend Lead
|
||||
|
||||
**Process Risks**:
|
||||
3. **Risk**: Cross-team coordination delays
|
||||
- **Impact**: High (timeline slippage)
|
||||
- **Probability**: Medium
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Weekly sync meetings, clear API contracts, buffer time in estimates
|
||||
- **Owner**: Scrum Master
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Risk**: Skill gap in new technologies
|
||||
- **Impact**: Medium (quality issues, slower delivery)
|
||||
- **Probability**: High
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Training program, pair programming, external consultant support
|
||||
- **Owner**: Engineering Manager
|
||||
|
||||
### Success Factors
|
||||
|
||||
**Key factors for implementation success**:
|
||||
- Strong product-engineering collaboration with weekly syncs
|
||||
- Clear acceptance criteria and definition of done
|
||||
- Regular user testing and feedback integration
|
||||
- Proactive risk monitoring and mitigation
|
||||
|
||||
**Continuous Monitoring Requirements**:
|
||||
- Sprint velocity and burndown tracking
|
||||
- Code quality metrics (coverage, complexity, tech debt)
|
||||
- Performance metrics (response time, error rate, uptime)
|
||||
- User satisfaction metrics (NPS, usage analytics)
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality Gates and Validation Checkpoints**:
|
||||
- Code review approval before merge
|
||||
- Automated test suite passing (unit, integration, E2E)
|
||||
- Security scan and vulnerability assessment
|
||||
- Performance benchmark validation
|
||||
- Stakeholder demo and approval before production
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
*Complete implementation specification consolidating all role perspectives into actionable guidance*
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Analysis Guidelines for Agent
|
||||
|
||||
### Cross-Role Synthesis Process
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Load All Role Analyses**: Read topic-framework.md and all discovered */analysis.md files
|
||||
2. **Extract Key Insights**: Identify main recommendations, concerns, and innovations from each role
|
||||
3. **Identify Consensus Areas**: Find common themes across multiple roles
|
||||
4. **Document Disagreements**: Capture controversial points where roles differ
|
||||
5. **Prioritize Recommendations**: Use multi-dimensional scoring:
|
||||
- Business impact (product-manager, product-owner)
|
||||
- Technical feasibility (system-architect, data-architect)
|
||||
- Implementation effort (scrum-master, developers)
|
||||
- Risk assessment (security-expert, subject-matter-expert)
|
||||
6. **Create Comprehensive Roadmap**: Synthesize into phased implementation plan
|
||||
|
||||
### Quality Standards
|
||||
|
||||
- **Completeness**: Integrate ALL discovered role analyses without gaps
|
||||
- **Visual Clarity**: Include key diagrams (architecture, data model, user journey) via Mermaid or images
|
||||
- **Decision Transparency**: Document not just decisions, but alternatives and why they were rejected
|
||||
- **Insight Generation**: Identify cross-role patterns and deep insights beyond individual analyses
|
||||
- **Actionability**: Provide specific, executable recommendations with clear rationale
|
||||
- **Balance**: Give equal weight to all role perspectives (process, UX, compliance, functional)
|
||||
- **Forward-Looking**: Include long-term strategic and innovation considerations
|
||||
- **Traceability**: Every major decision links to source role analysis via @ references
|
||||
|
||||
### @ Reference System
|
||||
|
||||
Use @ references to link back to source role analyses:
|
||||
- `@role/analysis.md` - Reference entire role analysis
|
||||
- `@role/analysis.md#section` - Reference specific section
|
||||
- `@topic-framework.md#point-3` - Reference framework discussion point
|
||||
|
||||
### Dynamic Role Handling
|
||||
|
||||
- Not all roles participate in every brainstorming session
|
||||
- Synthesize only roles that produced analysis.md files
|
||||
- Adapt structure based on available role perspectives
|
||||
- If role missing, acknowledge gap if relevant to topic
|
||||
|
||||
### Output Validation
|
||||
|
||||
Before completing, verify:
|
||||
- [ ] All discovered role analyses integrated
|
||||
- [ ] Framework discussion points addressed across roles
|
||||
- [ ] Controversial points documented with dissenting roles identified
|
||||
- [ ] Process concerns (team skills, risks, collaboration) captured
|
||||
- [ ] Quantified priority recommendations with evaluation criteria
|
||||
- [ ] Actionable implementation plan with phased approach
|
||||
- [ ] Comprehensive risk assessment with mitigation strategies
|
||||
- [ ] @ references to source analyses throughout document
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user