mirror of
https://github.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow.git
synced 2026-03-25 19:48:33 +08:00
refactor: remove redundant schema instructions from lite-plan and consolidate analyze-with-file schemas
- lite-plan: remove schema reading instructions from plan agent prompt (agent handles schema loading internally) - analyze-with-file: consolidate JSON schemas into dedicated <schemas> section, add Technical Solution Triggers and Record-Before-Continue rule, remove trailing handoff note Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
catlog22
@@ -72,6 +72,12 @@ All `AskUserQuestion` calls MUST comply:
|
||||
|
||||
**Principles**: Immediacy (record as-it-happens), Completeness (context+options+chosen+reason+rejected), Traceability (later phases trace back), Depth (capture reasoning, not just outcomes)
|
||||
|
||||
**Technical Solution Triggers** — record using Technical Solution Record Format when ANY of:
|
||||
- An implementation approach is described with specific files/patterns/code changes
|
||||
- Two or more alternatives are compared with trade-offs
|
||||
- User confirms, modifies, or rejects a proposed approach
|
||||
- A concrete code change strategy emerges (what to modify, how, why)
|
||||
|
||||
### Output Artifacts
|
||||
|
||||
| Phase | Artifact | Description |
|
||||
@@ -325,36 +331,7 @@ CONSTRAINTS: Focus on ${dimensions.join(', ')} | Do NOT re-discover files — us
|
||||
- Present to user at beginning of Phase 3: "初始探索完成后，以下意图的覆盖情况：[list]。接下来的讨论将重点关注未覆盖的部分。"
|
||||
- Purpose: Early course correction — catch drift before spending multiple interactive rounds
|
||||
|
||||
**exploration-codebase.json Schema** (shared Layer 1):
|
||||
- `session_id`, `timestamp`, `topic`, `dimensions[]`
|
||||
- `relevant_files[]`: {path, annotation, dimensions[]}
|
||||
- `patterns[]`, `module_map`: {}
|
||||
- `questions_for_user[]`, `_metadata`
|
||||
|
||||
**research.json Schema** (external research findings):
|
||||
- `topic`, `mode` (detail-verification|api-research|design-research), `timestamp`
|
||||
- `findings[]`: {finding, detail, confidence, source_url}
|
||||
- `best_practices[]`: {practice, rationale, source}
|
||||
- `alternatives[]`: {option, pros, cons, verdict}
|
||||
- `pitfalls[]`: {issue, mitigation, source}
|
||||
- `codebase_gaps[]`: {gap, current_approach, recommended_approach}
|
||||
- `sources[]`: {title, url, key_takeaway}
|
||||
- `_metadata`: {queries_executed, results_found}
|
||||
|
||||
**explorations.json Schema** (single — Layer 1 + CLI analysis + research merged):
|
||||
- `session_id`, `timestamp`, `topic`, `dimensions[]`
|
||||
- `sources[]`: {type, file/summary}
|
||||
- `key_findings[]`, `code_anchors[]`: {file, lines, snippet, significance}
|
||||
- `call_chains[]`: {entry, chain, files}
|
||||
- `discussion_points[]`, `open_questions[]`
|
||||
- `technical_solutions[]`: {round, solution, problem, rationale, alternatives, status: proposed|validated|rejected, evidence_refs[], next_action}
|
||||
- `external_research`: {findings[], best_practices[], codebase_gaps[], sources[]} — merged from research.json if available
|
||||
|
||||
**perspectives.json Schema** (multi — Layer 1 shared + per-perspective Layer 2-3 + research):
|
||||
- `shared_discovery`: {relevant_files[], patterns[], module_map}
|
||||
- `perspectives[]`: [{name, tool, findings, insights, questions, code_anchors[], call_chains[]}]
|
||||
- `external_research`: {findings[], best_practices[], codebase_gaps[], sources[]} — merged from research.json if available
|
||||
- `synthesis`: {convergent_themes, conflicting_views, unique_contributions}
|
||||
> All JSON schemas consolidated in `<schemas>` section below.
|
||||
|
||||
| Condition | Action |
|
||||
|-----------|--------|
|
||||
@@ -402,12 +379,17 @@ const priorContext = `
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Process Response** (always record user choice + impact to discussion.md):
|
||||
|
||||
**Record-Before-Continue Rule**: Each path below MUST write findings and discussion synthesis to `discussion.md` BEFORE proceeding to Step 5. Specifically, after agent/CLI returns results:
|
||||
- Append the exploration results, reasoning, and any technical approaches discussed to the current round section
|
||||
- Apply **Technical Solution Triggers** (see Decision Recording Protocol) — if triggered, record using Technical Solution Record Format
|
||||
- Only THEN proceed to Step 5 for Current Understanding replacement and TOC update
|
||||
|
||||
**继续深入** -> Sub-question to choose direction (AskUserQuestion, single-select, header: "深入方向"):
|
||||
- Dynamically generate **max 3** context-driven options from: unresolved questions, low-confidence findings, unexplored dimensions, user-highlighted areas
|
||||
- Add **1** heuristic option that breaks current frame (e.g., "compare with best practices", "review from security perspective", "explore simpler alternatives")
|
||||
- Total: **max 4 options**. Each specifies: label, description, tool (cli-explore-agent for code-level / Gemini CLI for pattern-level), scope
|
||||
- **"Other" is auto-provided** by AskUserQuestion — covers user-specified custom direction (no need for separate "suggest next step" option)
|
||||
- Execute selected direction -> merge new code_anchors/call_chains -> record confirmed assumptions + deepen angle
|
||||
- Execute selected direction -> merge new code_anchors/call_chains into explorations.json -> **write exploration results, analysis reasoning, and any proposed approaches to discussion.md** -> record confirmed assumptions + deepen angle
|
||||
|
||||
**外部研究** -> Spawn workflow-research-agent for targeted research:
|
||||
- AskUserQuestion (header: "研究主题", freetext via "Other"): What specific technology/pattern/approach needs external research?
|
||||
@@ -420,9 +402,7 @@ const priorContext = `
|
||||
|
||||
**分析完成** -> Exit loop -> Record why concluding
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Update discussion.md**:
|
||||
- **Append** Round N: user input, direction adjustment, Q&A, corrections, new insights
|
||||
- **Append Technical Solutions** — for every solution proposed, validated, or rejected this round, record immediately using Technical Solution Record Format in `#### Technical Solutions`
|
||||
5. **Update discussion.md** (after Record-Before-Continue writes are done):
|
||||
- **Replace** `## Current Understanding` block with latest consolidated understanding (follow Consolidation Rules)
|
||||
- **Update** `## Table of Contents` with links to new Round N sections
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -621,7 +601,45 @@ ${implScope.map((item, i) => `${i+1}. **${item.objective}** [${item.priority}]
|
||||
|
||||
**TodoWrite**: Update `next-step` -> `"completed"` after user selection is handled
|
||||
|
||||
**conclusions.json Schema**:
|
||||
> conclusions.json schema: see `<schemas>` section below.
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
</process>
|
||||
|
||||
<schemas>
|
||||
|
||||
**exploration-codebase.json** (shared Layer 1):
|
||||
- `session_id`, `timestamp`, `topic`, `dimensions[]`
|
||||
- `relevant_files[]`: {path, annotation, dimensions[]}
|
||||
- `patterns[]`, `module_map`: {}
|
||||
- `questions_for_user[]`, `_metadata`
|
||||
|
||||
**research.json** (external research findings):
|
||||
- `topic`, `mode` (detail-verification|api-research|design-research), `timestamp`
|
||||
- `findings[]`: {finding, detail, confidence, source_url}
|
||||
- `best_practices[]`: {practice, rationale, source}
|
||||
- `alternatives[]`: {option, pros, cons, verdict}
|
||||
- `pitfalls[]`: {issue, mitigation, source}
|
||||
- `codebase_gaps[]`: {gap, current_approach, recommended_approach}
|
||||
- `sources[]`: {title, url, key_takeaway}
|
||||
- `_metadata`: {queries_executed, results_found}
|
||||
|
||||
**explorations.json** (single — Layer 1 + CLI analysis + research merged):
|
||||
- `session_id`, `timestamp`, `topic`, `dimensions[]`
|
||||
- `sources[]`: {type, file/summary}
|
||||
- `key_findings[]`, `code_anchors[]`: {file, lines, snippet, significance}
|
||||
- `call_chains[]`: {entry, chain, files}
|
||||
- `discussion_points[]`, `open_questions[]`
|
||||
- `technical_solutions[]`: {round, solution, problem, rationale, alternatives, status: proposed|validated|rejected, evidence_refs[], next_action}
|
||||
- `external_research`: {findings[], best_practices[], codebase_gaps[], sources[]} — merged from research.json if available
|
||||
|
||||
**perspectives.json** (multi — Layer 1 shared + per-perspective Layer 2-3 + research):
|
||||
- `shared_discovery`: {relevant_files[], patterns[], module_map}
|
||||
- `perspectives[]`: [{name, tool, findings, insights, questions, code_anchors[], call_chains[]}]
|
||||
- `external_research`: {findings[], best_practices[], codebase_gaps[], sources[]} — merged from research.json if available
|
||||
- `synthesis`: {convergent_themes, conflicting_views, unique_contributions}
|
||||
|
||||
**conclusions.json**:
|
||||
- `session_id`, `topic`, `completed`, `total_rounds`, `summary`
|
||||
- `key_conclusions[]`: {point, evidence, confidence, code_anchor_refs[]}
|
||||
- `code_anchors[]`: {file, lines, snippet, significance}
|
||||
@@ -631,9 +649,8 @@ ${implScope.map((item, i) => `${i+1}. **${item.objective}** [${item.priority}]
|
||||
- `decision_trail[]`: {round, decision, context, options_considered, chosen, rejected_reasons, reason, impact}
|
||||
- `narrative_trail[]`: {round, starting_point, key_progress, hypothesis_impact, updated_understanding, remaining_questions}
|
||||
- `intent_coverage[]`: {intent, status, where_addressed, notes}
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
</process>
|
||||
</schemas>
|
||||
|
||||
<error_codes>
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -721,9 +738,6 @@ Present 2-3 top directions per dimension, allow multi-select + custom.
|
||||
| Preserve key learnings | Keep insights valuable for future reference |
|
||||
|
||||
</configuration>
|
||||
|
||||
> **Lite-plan handoff**: Phase 4「执行任务」builds structured `handoff-spec` JSON (implementation_scope with acceptance_criteria, code_anchors, key_findings) embedded in `## Prior Analysis` block. lite-plan parses `json:handoff-spec` to directly map scope items → tasks, skipping exploration and using acceptance_criteria as convergence.criteria.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**Now execute analyze-with-file for**: $ARGUMENTS
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user