mirror of
https://github.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow.git
synced 2026-02-12 02:37:45 +08:00
Enhance workflow commands and context management
- Updated `plan.md` to include new fields in context-package.json: prioritized_context, user_intent, priority_tiers, dependency_order, and sorting_rationale. - Added validation for the existence of the prioritized_context field in context-package.json. - Modified user decision flow in task generation to present action choices after planning completion. - Improved context-gathering process in `context-gather.md` to integrate user intent and prioritize context based on user goals. - Revised conflict-resolution documentation to require planning notes records after conflict analysis. - Streamlined task generation in `task-generate-agent.md` to utilize pre-sorted context without redundant sorting. - Removed unused settings persistence functions and corresponding tests from `claude-cli-tools.ts` and `settings-persistence.test.ts`.
This commit is contained in:
catlog22
@@ -150,114 +150,299 @@ Create internal representations (do not include raw artifacts in output):
|
||||
- Task-to-task dependencies (depends_on, blocks)
|
||||
- Requirement-level dependencies (from synthesis)
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Detection Passes (Token-Efficient Analysis)
|
||||
### 4. Detection Passes (Agent-Driven Multi-Dimensional Analysis)
|
||||
|
||||
**Token Budget Strategy**:
|
||||
- **Total Limit**: 50 findings maximum (aggregate remainder in overflow summary)
|
||||
- **Priority Allocation**: CRITICAL (unlimited) → HIGH (15) → MEDIUM (20) → LOW (15)
|
||||
- **Early Exit**: If CRITICAL findings > 0 in User Intent/Requirements Coverage, skip LOW/MEDIUM priority checks
|
||||
**Execution Strategy**:
|
||||
- Single `cli-explore-agent` invocation
|
||||
- Agent executes multiple CLI analyses internally (different dimensions: A-H)
|
||||
- Token Budget: 50 findings maximum (aggregate remainder in overflow summary)
|
||||
- Priority Allocation: CRITICAL (unlimited) → HIGH (15) → MEDIUM (20) → LOW (15)
|
||||
- Early Exit: If CRITICAL findings > 0 in User Intent/Requirements Coverage, skip LOW/MEDIUM checks
|
||||
|
||||
**Execution Order** (Process in sequence; skip if token budget exhausted):
|
||||
**Execution Order** (Agent orchestrates internally):
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Tier 1 (CRITICAL Path)**: A, B, C - User intent, coverage, consistency (process fully)
|
||||
2. **Tier 2 (HIGH Priority)**: D, E - Dependencies, synthesis alignment (limit 15 findings total)
|
||||
1. **Tier 1 (CRITICAL Path)**: A, B, C - User intent, coverage, consistency (full analysis)
|
||||
2. **Tier 2 (HIGH Priority)**: D, E - Dependencies, synthesis alignment (limit 15 findings)
|
||||
3. **Tier 3 (MEDIUM Priority)**: F - Specification quality (limit 20 findings)
|
||||
4. **Tier 4 (LOW Priority)**: G, H - Duplication, feasibility (limit 15 findings total)
|
||||
4. **Tier 4 (LOW Priority)**: G, H - Duplication, feasibility (limit 15 findings)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### A. User Intent Alignment (CRITICAL - Tier 1)
|
||||
#### Phase 4.1: Launch Unified Verification Agent
|
||||
|
||||
- **Goal Alignment**: IMPL_PLAN objectives match user's original intent
|
||||
- **Scope Drift**: Plan covers user's stated scope without unauthorized expansion
|
||||
- **Success Criteria Match**: Plan's success criteria reflect user's expectations
|
||||
- **Intent Conflicts**: Tasks contradicting user's original objectives
|
||||
**Single Agent, Multi-Dimensional Analysis**:
|
||||
|
||||
#### B. Requirements Coverage Analysis
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
Task(
|
||||
subagent_type="cli-explore-agent",
|
||||
run_in_background=false, // ⚠️ MANDATORY: Must wait for results
|
||||
description="Multi-dimensional plan verification",
|
||||
prompt=`
|
||||
## Plan Verification Task
|
||||
|
||||
- **Orphaned Requirements**: Requirements in synthesis with zero associated tasks
|
||||
- **Unmapped Tasks**: Tasks with no clear requirement linkage
|
||||
- **NFR Coverage Gaps**: Non-functional requirements (performance, security, scalability) not reflected in tasks
|
||||
Execute comprehensive verification across dimensions A-H, using Gemini CLI for semantic analysis.
|
||||
|
||||
#### C. Consistency Validation
|
||||
### MANDATORY FIRST STEPS
|
||||
1. Read: ${session_file} (user intent/context)
|
||||
2. Read: ${IMPL_PLAN} (implementation plan)
|
||||
3. Glob: ${task_dir}/*.json (all task JSON files)
|
||||
4. Glob: ${SYNTHESIS_DIR}/*/analysis.md (role analysis documents)
|
||||
5. Read: \~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/schemas/verify-json-schema.json (output schema reference)
|
||||
|
||||
- **Requirement Conflicts**: Tasks contradicting synthesis requirements
|
||||
- **Architecture Drift**: IMPL_PLAN architecture not matching synthesis ADRs
|
||||
- **Terminology Drift**: Same concept named differently across IMPL_PLAN and tasks
|
||||
- **Data Model Inconsistency**: Tasks referencing entities/fields not in synthesis data model
|
||||
### Output Location
|
||||
${process_dir}/verification-findings.json
|
||||
|
||||
#### D. Dependency Integrity
|
||||
### Verification Dimensions
|
||||
|
||||
- **Circular Dependencies**: Task A depends on B, B depends on C, C depends on A
|
||||
- **Missing Dependencies**: Task requires outputs from another task but no explicit dependency
|
||||
- **Broken Dependencies**: Task depends on non-existent task ID
|
||||
- **Logical Ordering Issues**: Implementation tasks before foundational setup without dependency note
|
||||
#### Dimension A: User Intent Alignment (CRITICAL - Tier 1)
|
||||
- Goal Alignment: IMPL_PLAN objectives match user's original intent
|
||||
- Scope Drift: Plan covers user's stated scope without unauthorized expansion
|
||||
- Success Criteria Match: Plan's success criteria reflect user's expectations
|
||||
- Intent Conflicts: Tasks contradicting user's original objectives
|
||||
|
||||
#### E. Synthesis Alignment
|
||||
#### Dimension B: Requirements Coverage Analysis (CRITICAL - Tier 1)
|
||||
- Orphaned Requirements: Requirements in synthesis with zero associated tasks
|
||||
- Unmapped Tasks: Tasks with no clear requirement linkage
|
||||
- NFR Coverage Gaps: Non-functional requirements not reflected in tasks
|
||||
|
||||
- **Priority Conflicts**: High-priority synthesis requirements mapped to low-priority tasks
|
||||
- **Success Criteria Mismatch**: IMPL_PLAN success criteria not covering synthesis acceptance criteria
|
||||
- **Risk Mitigation Gaps**: Critical risks in synthesis without corresponding mitigation tasks
|
||||
#### Dimension C: Consistency Validation (CRITICAL - Tier 1)
|
||||
- Requirement Conflicts: Tasks contradicting synthesis requirements
|
||||
- Architecture Drift: IMPL_PLAN architecture not matching synthesis ADRs
|
||||
- Terminology Drift: Same concept named differently across artifacts
|
||||
- Data Model Inconsistency: Tasks referencing entities/fields not in synthesis
|
||||
|
||||
#### F. Task Specification Quality
|
||||
#### Dimension D: Dependency Integrity (HIGH - Tier 2)
|
||||
- Circular Dependencies: Cyclic task dependencies
|
||||
- Missing Dependencies: Task requires outputs from another task but no explicit dependency
|
||||
- Broken Dependencies: Task depends on non-existent task ID
|
||||
- Logical Ordering Issues: Implementation tasks before foundational setup
|
||||
|
||||
- **Ambiguous Focus Paths**: Tasks with vague or missing focus_paths
|
||||
- **Underspecified Acceptance**: Tasks without clear acceptance criteria
|
||||
- **Missing Artifacts References**: Tasks not referencing relevant brainstorming artifacts in context.artifacts
|
||||
- **Weak Flow Control**: Tasks without clear implementation_approach or pre_analysis steps
|
||||
- **Missing Target Files**: Tasks without flow_control.target_files specification
|
||||
#### Dimension E: Synthesis Alignment (HIGH - Tier 2)
|
||||
- Priority Conflicts: High-priority synthesis requirements mapped to low-priority tasks
|
||||
- Success Criteria Mismatch: IMPL_PLAN success criteria not covering synthesis acceptance criteria
|
||||
- Risk Mitigation Gaps: Critical risks without corresponding mitigation tasks
|
||||
|
||||
#### G. Duplication Detection
|
||||
#### Dimension F: Task Specification Quality (MEDIUM - Tier 3)
|
||||
- Ambiguous Focus Paths: Tasks with vague/missing focus_paths
|
||||
- Underspecified Acceptance: Tasks without clear acceptance criteria
|
||||
- Missing Artifacts References: Tasks not referencing brainstorming artifacts
|
||||
- Weak Flow Control: Tasks without clear implementation_approach or pre_analysis
|
||||
- Missing Target Files: Tasks without flow_control.target_files
|
||||
|
||||
- **Overlapping Task Scope**: Multiple tasks with nearly identical descriptions
|
||||
- **Redundant Requirements Coverage**: Same requirement covered by multiple tasks without clear partitioning
|
||||
#### Dimension G: Duplication Detection (LOW - Tier 4)
|
||||
- Overlapping Task Scope: Multiple tasks with nearly identical descriptions
|
||||
- Redundant Requirements Coverage: Same requirement covered by multiple tasks
|
||||
|
||||
#### H. Feasibility Assessment
|
||||
#### Dimension H: Feasibility Assessment (LOW - Tier 4)
|
||||
- Complexity Misalignment: Task marked "simple" but requires multiple file modifications
|
||||
- Resource Conflicts: Parallel tasks requiring same resources/files
|
||||
- Skill Gap Risks: Tasks requiring unavailable team skills
|
||||
|
||||
- **Complexity Misalignment**: Task marked "simple" but requires multiple file modifications
|
||||
- **Resource Conflicts**: Parallel tasks requiring same resources/files
|
||||
- **Skill Gap Risks**: Tasks requiring skills not in team capability assessment (from synthesis)
|
||||
### CLI Analysis Execution
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Severity Assignment
|
||||
**Execute Tier 1 Analysis (All Dimensions)**:
|
||||
|
||||
Use this heuristic to prioritize findings:
|
||||
\`\`\`bash
|
||||
ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Multi-dimensional plan verification for Tier 1 (user intent, coverage, consistency)
|
||||
TASK:
|
||||
• Verify user original intent matches IMPL_PLAN objectives (dimension A)
|
||||
• Check all synthesis requirements have corresponding tasks (dimension B)
|
||||
• Identify conflicts between tasks and synthesis decisions (dimension C)
|
||||
• Find orphaned requirements or unmapped tasks
|
||||
CONTEXT: @${session_dir}/**/* | Memory: Verification session WFS-${session_id}
|
||||
EXPECTED: Findings JSON array with: dimension, severity, location, summary, recommendation
|
||||
CONSTRAINTS: Focus on CRITICAL issues only | Identify all intent misalignments
|
||||
" --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-review-architecture
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
|
||||
- **CRITICAL**:
|
||||
- Violates user's original intent (goal misalignment, scope drift)
|
||||
- Violates synthesis authority (requirement conflict)
|
||||
- Core requirement with zero coverage
|
||||
- Circular dependencies
|
||||
- Broken dependencies
|
||||
**If CRITICAL findings == 0, continue to Tier 2**:
|
||||
|
||||
- **HIGH**:
|
||||
- NFR coverage gaps
|
||||
- Priority conflicts
|
||||
- Missing risk mitigation tasks
|
||||
- Ambiguous acceptance criteria
|
||||
\`\`\`bash
|
||||
ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Plan verification for Tier 2 (dependencies and synthesis alignment)
|
||||
TASK:
|
||||
• Detect circular or broken task dependencies (dimension D)
|
||||
• Identify priority conflicts between synthesis and tasks (dimension E)
|
||||
• Check risk mitigation coverage
|
||||
CONTEXT: @${session_dir}/**/* | Previous: Tier 1 verified, no critical issues
|
||||
EXPECTED: Findings JSON with dimension D-E results
|
||||
CONSTRAINTS: Limit to 15 HIGH severity findings
|
||||
" --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-diagnose-bug-root-cause
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
|
||||
- **MEDIUM**:
|
||||
- Terminology drift
|
||||
- Missing artifacts references
|
||||
- Weak flow control
|
||||
- Logical ordering issues
|
||||
**If High findings <= 15, continue to Tier 3**:
|
||||
|
||||
- **LOW**:
|
||||
- Style/wording improvements
|
||||
- Minor redundancy not affecting execution
|
||||
\`\`\`bash
|
||||
ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Plan verification for Tier 3 (task specification quality)
|
||||
TASK:
|
||||
• Check for missing or vague acceptance criteria (dimension F)
|
||||
• Validate flow control specifications in tasks
|
||||
• Identify missing artifact references
|
||||
CONTEXT: @${task_dir}/**/* @${IMPL_PLAN}
|
||||
EXPECTED: Findings JSON with dimension F results
|
||||
CONSTRAINTS: Limit to 20 MEDIUM severity findings
|
||||
" --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-analyze-code-patterns
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Produce Compact Analysis Report
|
||||
**If Medium findings <= 20, execute Tier 4**:
|
||||
|
||||
**Report Generation**: Generate report content and save to file.
|
||||
\`\`\`bash
|
||||
ccw cli -p "PURPOSE: Plan verification for Tier 4 (duplication and feasibility)
|
||||
TASK:
|
||||
• Detect overlapping task scopes (dimension G)
|
||||
• Assess complexity alignment and resource conflicts (dimension H)
|
||||
CONTEXT: @${task_dir}/**/*
|
||||
EXPECTED: Findings JSON with dimension G-H results
|
||||
CONSTRAINTS: Limit to 15 LOW severity findings
|
||||
" --tool gemini --mode analysis --rule analysis-analyze-code-patterns
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
|
||||
### Severity Assignment
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL**:
|
||||
- Violates user's original intent (goal misalignment, scope drift)
|
||||
- Violates synthesis authority (requirement conflict)
|
||||
- Core requirement with zero coverage
|
||||
- Circular dependencies
|
||||
- Broken dependencies
|
||||
|
||||
**HIGH**:
|
||||
- NFR coverage gaps
|
||||
- Priority conflicts
|
||||
- Missing risk mitigation tasks
|
||||
- Ambiguous acceptance criteria
|
||||
|
||||
**MEDIUM**:
|
||||
- Terminology drift
|
||||
- Missing artifacts references
|
||||
- Weak flow control
|
||||
- Logical ordering issues
|
||||
|
||||
**LOW**:
|
||||
- Style/wording improvements
|
||||
- Minor redundancy not affecting execution
|
||||
|
||||
### Output Schema
|
||||
|
||||
JSON findings array (reference from step 5 above):
|
||||
|
||||
\`\`\`json
|
||||
{
|
||||
"session_id": "${session_id}",
|
||||
"timestamp": "2025-01-27T...",
|
||||
"verification_tiers_completed": ["Tier 1", "Tier 2"],
|
||||
"findings": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"id": "C1",
|
||||
"dimension": "A",
|
||||
"dimension_name": "User Intent Alignment",
|
||||
"severity": "CRITICAL",
|
||||
"location": ["${IMPL_PLAN}:L45", "synthesis:FR-03"],
|
||||
"summary": "User goal: add user profiles, but IMPL_PLAN focuses on authentication",
|
||||
"recommendation": "Update IMPL_PLAN to include profile management tasks"
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"id": "H1",
|
||||
"dimension": "D",
|
||||
"dimension_name": "Dependency Integrity",
|
||||
"severity": "HIGH",
|
||||
"location": ["task:IMPL-2.3"],
|
||||
"summary": "Depends on non-existent IMPL-2.4",
|
||||
"recommendation": "Fix depends_on reference or remove dependency"
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
"summary": {
|
||||
"critical_count": 2,
|
||||
"high_count": 3,
|
||||
"medium_count": 5,
|
||||
"low_count": 8,
|
||||
"total_findings": 18,
|
||||
"coverage_percentage": 92,
|
||||
"recommendation": "PROCEED_WITH_FIXES"
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
|
||||
### Success Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] All Tier 1 findings identified (no early exit)
|
||||
- [ ] Tier 2-4 executed in sequence (skipped only by token budget exhaustion)
|
||||
- [ ] Each finding includes: dimension, severity, location, recommendation
|
||||
- [ ] Findings aggregated in single JSON output file
|
||||
- [ ] Agent returns completion summary with quality gate recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
### Return Output
|
||||
|
||||
Write: \`${process_dir}/verification-findings.json\`
|
||||
|
||||
Return: 2-3 sentence summary with quality gate decision (BLOCK_EXECUTION / PROCEED_WITH_FIXES / PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION / PROCEED)
|
||||
`
|
||||
)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Phase 4.2: Parse and Aggregate Agent Results
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
// Load agent findings
|
||||
const findings = JSON.parse(Read(\`${process_dir}/verification-findings.json\`))
|
||||
|
||||
// Organize by severity
|
||||
const byServerity = {
|
||||
CRITICAL: findings.findings.filter(f => f.severity === 'CRITICAL'),
|
||||
HIGH: findings.findings.filter(f => f.severity === 'HIGH'),
|
||||
MEDIUM: findings.findings.filter(f => f.severity === 'MEDIUM'),
|
||||
LOW: findings.findings.filter(f => f.severity === 'LOW')
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Determine quality gate
|
||||
const recommendation =
|
||||
byServerity.CRITICAL.length > 0 ? 'BLOCK_EXECUTION' :
|
||||
byServerity.HIGH.length > 0 ? 'PROCEED_WITH_FIXES' :
|
||||
byServerity.MEDIUM.length > 0 ? 'PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION' :
|
||||
'PROCEED'
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Generate Human-Readable Report
|
||||
|
||||
**Report Generation**: Transform agent findings JSON into comprehensive Markdown report.
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 5.1: Load Agent Findings**
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
// Load verification findings from agent
|
||||
const findingsData = JSON.parse(Read(`${process_dir}/verification-findings.json`))
|
||||
|
||||
// Extract key metrics
|
||||
const { session_id, timestamp, verification_tiers_completed, findings, summary } = findingsData
|
||||
const { critical_count, high_count, medium_count, low_count, total_findings, coverage_percentage, recommendation } = summary
|
||||
|
||||
// Organize findings by severity
|
||||
const bySeverity = {
|
||||
CRITICAL: findings.filter(f => f.severity === 'CRITICAL'),
|
||||
HIGH: findings.filter(f => f.severity === 'HIGH'),
|
||||
MEDIUM: findings.filter(f => f.severity === 'MEDIUM'),
|
||||
LOW: findings.filter(f => f.severity === 'LOW')
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Organize findings by dimension
|
||||
const byDimension = findings.reduce((acc, f) => {
|
||||
acc[f.dimension] = acc[f.dimension] || []
|
||||
acc[f.dimension].push(f)
|
||||
return acc
|
||||
}, {})
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 5.2: Generate Markdown Report**
|
||||
|
||||
Output a Markdown report with the following structure:
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# Plan Verification Report
|
||||
|
||||
**Session**: WFS-{session-id}
|
||||
**Generated**: {timestamp}
|
||||
**Artifacts Analyzed**: role analysis documents, IMPL_PLAN.md, {N} task files
|
||||
**User Intent Analysis**: {user_intent_analysis or "SKIPPED: workflow-session.json not found"}
|
||||
**Session**: WFS-${session_id}
|
||||
**Generated**: ${timestamp}
|
||||
**Verification Tiers Completed**: ${verification_tiers_completed.join(', ')}
|
||||
**Artifacts Analyzed**: role analysis documents, IMPL_PLAN.md, ${task_files_count} task files
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -267,18 +452,27 @@ Output a Markdown report with the following structure:
|
||||
|
||||
| Metric | Value | Status |
|
||||
|--------|-------|--------|
|
||||
| Overall Risk Level | CRITICAL \| HIGH \| MEDIUM \| LOW | {status_emoji} |
|
||||
| Critical Issues | {count} | 🔴 |
|
||||
| High Issues | {count} | 🟠 |
|
||||
| Medium Issues | {count} | 🟡 |
|
||||
| Low Issues | {count} | 🟢 |
|
||||
| Overall Risk Level | ${critical_count > 0 ? 'CRITICAL' : high_count > 0 ? 'HIGH' : medium_count > 0 ? 'MEDIUM' : 'LOW'} | ${critical_count > 0 ? '🔴' : high_count > 0 ? '🟠' : medium_count > 0 ? '🟡' : '🟢'} |
|
||||
| Critical Issues | ${critical_count} | 🔴 |
|
||||
| High Issues | ${high_count} | 🟠 |
|
||||
| Medium Issues | ${medium_count} | 🟡 |
|
||||
| Low Issues | ${low_count} | 🟢 |
|
||||
| Requirements Coverage | ${coverage_percentage}% | ${coverage_percentage >= 90 ? '🟢' : coverage_percentage >= 75 ? '🟡' : '🔴'} |
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
**{RECOMMENDATION}**
|
||||
**${recommendation}**
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision Rationale**:
|
||||
{brief explanation based on severity criteria}
|
||||
${
|
||||
recommendation === 'BLOCK_EXECUTION' ?
|
||||
`Critical issues detected that violate core requirements or user intent. Must be resolved before implementation.` :
|
||||
recommendation === 'PROCEED_WITH_FIXES' ?
|
||||
`No critical issues, but high-severity concerns exist. Recommended to fix before execution to ensure quality.` :
|
||||
recommendation === 'PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION' ?
|
||||
`Medium-severity issues detected. May proceed but address concerns during/after implementation.` :
|
||||
`No significant issues detected. Safe to proceed with implementation.`
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality Gate Criteria**:
|
||||
- **BLOCK_EXECUTION**: Critical issues > 0 (must fix before proceeding)
|
||||
@@ -290,146 +484,217 @@ Output a Markdown report with the following structure:
|
||||
|
||||
## Findings Summary
|
||||
|
||||
| ID | Category | Severity | Location(s) | Summary | Recommendation |
|
||||
|----|----------|----------|-------------|---------|----------------|
|
||||
| C1 | Coverage | CRITICAL | synthesis:FR-03 | Requirement "User auth" has zero task coverage | Add authentication implementation task |
|
||||
| H1 | Consistency | HIGH | IMPL-1.2 vs synthesis:ADR-02 | Task uses REST while synthesis specifies GraphQL | Align task with ADR-02 decision |
|
||||
| M1 | Specification | MEDIUM | IMPL-2.1 | Missing context.artifacts reference | Add @synthesis reference |
|
||||
| L1 | Duplication | LOW | IMPL-3.1, IMPL-3.2 | Similar scope | Consider merging |
|
||||
| ID | Dimension | Severity | Location(s) | Summary | Recommendation |
|
||||
|----|-----------|----------|-------------|---------|----------------|
|
||||
${findings.map(f => `| ${f.id} | ${f.dimension_name} | ${f.severity} | ${f.location.join(', ')} | ${f.summary} | ${f.recommendation} |`).join('\n')}
|
||||
|
||||
(Generate stable IDs prefixed by severity initial: C/H/M/L + number)
|
||||
(IDs prefixed by severity initial: C/H/M/L + number)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## User Intent Alignment Analysis
|
||||
## User Intent Alignment Analysis (Dimension A)
|
||||
|
||||
{IF user_intent_analysis != "SKIPPED"}
|
||||
${
|
||||
byDimension['A'] && byDimension['A'].length > 0 ?
|
||||
byDimension['A'].map(f => `
|
||||
### ${f.summary}
|
||||
|
||||
### Goal Alignment
|
||||
- **User Intent**: {user_original_intent}
|
||||
- **IMPL_PLAN Objectives**: {plan_objectives}
|
||||
- **Alignment Status**: {ALIGNED/MISALIGNED/PARTIAL}
|
||||
- **Findings**: {specific alignment issues}
|
||||
**Severity**: ${f.severity}
|
||||
**Location**: ${f.location.join(', ')}
|
||||
|
||||
### Scope Verification
|
||||
- **User Scope**: {user_defined_scope}
|
||||
- **Plan Scope**: {plan_actual_scope}
|
||||
- **Drift Detection**: {NONE/MINOR/MAJOR}
|
||||
- **Findings**: {specific scope issues}
|
||||
**Issue Description**:
|
||||
${f.summary}
|
||||
|
||||
{ELSE}
|
||||
> ⚠️ User intent alignment analysis was skipped because workflow-session.json was not found.
|
||||
|
||||
{END IF}
|
||||
**Recommendation**:
|
||||
${f.recommendation}
|
||||
`).join('\n') :
|
||||
`> ✅ No user intent alignment issues detected. IMPL_PLAN objectives and scope match user's original intent.`
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Requirements Coverage Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
### Functional Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
| Requirement ID | Requirement Summary | Has Task? | Task IDs | Priority Match | Notes |
|
||||
|----------------|---------------------|-----------|----------|----------------|-------|
|
||||
| FR-01 | User authentication | Yes | IMPL-1.1, IMPL-1.2 | Match | Complete |
|
||||
| FR-02 | Data export | Yes | IMPL-2.3 | Mismatch | High req → Med priority task |
|
||||
| FR-03 | Profile management | No | - | - | **CRITICAL: Zero coverage** |
|
||||
|
||||
### Non-Functional Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
| Requirement ID | Requirement Summary | Has Task? | Task IDs | Notes |
|
||||
|----------------|---------------------|-----------|----------|-------|
|
||||
| NFR-01 | Response time <200ms | No | - | **HIGH: No performance tasks** |
|
||||
| NFR-02 | Security compliance | Yes | IMPL-4.1 | Complete |
|
||||
|
||||
### Business Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
| Requirement ID | Requirement Summary | Has Task? | Task IDs | Notes |
|
||||
|----------------|---------------------|-----------|----------|-------|
|
||||
| BR-01 | Launch by Q2 | Yes | IMPL-1.* through IMPL-5.* | Timeline realistic |
|
||||
## Requirements Coverage Analysis (Dimension B)
|
||||
|
||||
### Coverage Metrics
|
||||
|
||||
| Requirement Type | Total | Covered | Coverage % |
|
||||
|------------------|-------|---------|------------|
|
||||
| Functional | {count} | {count} | {percent}% |
|
||||
| Non-Functional | {count} | {count} | {percent}% |
|
||||
| Business | {count} | {count} | {percent}% |
|
||||
| **Overall** | **{total}** | **{covered}** | **{percent}%** |
|
||||
| Metric | Value |
|
||||
|--------|-------|
|
||||
| Overall Coverage | ${coverage_percentage}% |
|
||||
| Total Findings | ${byDimension['B']?.length || 0} |
|
||||
|
||||
### Findings
|
||||
|
||||
${
|
||||
byDimension['B'] && byDimension['B'].length > 0 ?
|
||||
byDimension['B'].map(f => `
|
||||
#### ${f.id}: ${f.summary}
|
||||
|
||||
- **Severity**: ${f.severity}
|
||||
- **Location**: ${f.location.join(', ')}
|
||||
- **Recommendation**: ${f.recommendation}
|
||||
`).join('\n') :
|
||||
`> ✅ All synthesis requirements have corresponding tasks. No coverage gaps detected.`
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Dependency Integrity
|
||||
## Consistency Validation (Dimension C)
|
||||
|
||||
### Dependency Graph Analysis
|
||||
${
|
||||
byDimension['C'] && byDimension['C'].length > 0 ?
|
||||
byDimension['C'].map(f => `
|
||||
### ${f.id}: ${f.summary}
|
||||
|
||||
**Circular Dependencies**: {None or List}
|
||||
|
||||
**Broken Dependencies**:
|
||||
- IMPL-2.3 depends on "IMPL-2.4" (non-existent)
|
||||
|
||||
**Missing Dependencies**:
|
||||
- IMPL-5.1 (integration test) has no dependency on IMPL-1.* (implementation tasks)
|
||||
|
||||
**Logical Ordering Issues**:
|
||||
{List or "None detected"}
|
||||
- **Severity**: ${f.severity}
|
||||
- **Location**: ${f.location.join(', ')}
|
||||
- **Recommendation**: ${f.recommendation}
|
||||
`).join('\n') :
|
||||
`> ✅ No consistency issues detected. Tasks align with synthesis requirements and architecture.`
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Synthesis Alignment Issues
|
||||
## Dependency Integrity (Dimension D)
|
||||
|
||||
| Issue Type | Synthesis Reference | IMPL_PLAN/Task | Impact | Recommendation |
|
||||
|------------|---------------------|----------------|--------|----------------|
|
||||
| Architecture Conflict | synthesis:ADR-01 (JWT auth) | IMPL_PLAN uses session cookies | HIGH | Update IMPL_PLAN to use JWT |
|
||||
| Priority Mismatch | synthesis:FR-02 (High) | IMPL-2.3 (Medium) | MEDIUM | Elevate task priority |
|
||||
| Missing Risk Mitigation | synthesis:Risk-03 (API rate limits) | No mitigation tasks | HIGH | Add rate limiting implementation task |
|
||||
${
|
||||
byDimension['D'] && byDimension['D'].length > 0 ?
|
||||
byDimension['D'].map(f => `
|
||||
### ${f.id}: ${f.summary}
|
||||
|
||||
- **Severity**: ${f.severity}
|
||||
- **Location**: ${f.location.join(', ')}
|
||||
- **Recommendation**: ${f.recommendation}
|
||||
`).join('\n') :
|
||||
`> ✅ No dependency issues detected. All task dependencies are valid and logically ordered.`
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Task Specification Quality
|
||||
## Synthesis Alignment (Dimension E)
|
||||
|
||||
### Aggregate Statistics
|
||||
${
|
||||
byDimension['E'] && byDimension['E'].length > 0 ?
|
||||
byDimension['E'].map(f => `
|
||||
### ${f.id}: ${f.summary}
|
||||
|
||||
| Quality Dimension | Tasks Affected | Percentage |
|
||||
|-------------------|----------------|------------|
|
||||
| Missing Artifacts References | {count} | {percent}% |
|
||||
| Weak Flow Control | {count} | {percent}% |
|
||||
| Missing Target Files | {count} | {percent}% |
|
||||
| Ambiguous Focus Paths | {count} | {percent}% |
|
||||
|
||||
### Sample Issues
|
||||
|
||||
- **IMPL-1.2**: No context.artifacts reference to synthesis
|
||||
- **IMPL-3.1**: Missing flow_control.target_files specification
|
||||
- **IMPL-4.2**: Vague focus_paths ["src/"] - needs refinement
|
||||
- **Severity**: ${f.severity}
|
||||
- **Location**: ${f.location.join(', ')}
|
||||
- **Recommendation**: ${f.recommendation}
|
||||
`).join('\n') :
|
||||
`> ✅ No synthesis alignment issues. Task priorities and success criteria match synthesis specifications.`
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Feasibility Concerns
|
||||
## Task Specification Quality (Dimension F)
|
||||
|
||||
| Concern | Tasks Affected | Issue | Recommendation |
|
||||
|---------|----------------|-------|----------------|
|
||||
| Skill Gap | IMPL-6.1, IMPL-6.2 | Requires Kubernetes expertise not in team | Add training task or external consultant |
|
||||
| Resource Conflict | IMPL-3.1, IMPL-3.2 | Both modify src/auth/service.ts in parallel | Add dependency or serialize |
|
||||
${
|
||||
byDimension['F'] && byDimension['F'].length > 0 ?
|
||||
byDimension['F'].map(f => `
|
||||
### ${f.id}: ${f.summary}
|
||||
|
||||
- **Severity**: ${f.severity}
|
||||
- **Location**: ${f.location.join(', ')}
|
||||
- **Recommendation**: ${f.recommendation}
|
||||
`).join('\n') :
|
||||
`> ✅ All tasks have clear specifications with proper focus_paths, acceptance criteria, and flow control.`
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Duplication Detection (Dimension G)
|
||||
|
||||
${
|
||||
byDimension['G'] && byDimension['G'].length > 0 ?
|
||||
byDimension['G'].map(f => `
|
||||
### ${f.id}: ${f.summary}
|
||||
|
||||
- **Severity**: ${f.severity}
|
||||
- **Location**: ${f.location.join(', ')}
|
||||
- **Recommendation**: ${f.recommendation}
|
||||
`).join('\n') :
|
||||
`> ✅ No duplicate task scopes detected. All tasks have distinct responsibilities.`
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Feasibility Assessment (Dimension H)
|
||||
|
||||
${
|
||||
byDimension['H'] && byDimension['H'].length > 0 ?
|
||||
byDimension['H'].map(f => `
|
||||
### ${f.id}: ${f.summary}
|
||||
|
||||
- **Severity**: ${f.severity}
|
||||
- **Location**: ${f.location.join(', ')}
|
||||
- **Recommendation**: ${f.recommendation}
|
||||
`).join('\n') :
|
||||
`> ✅ No feasibility concerns. Task complexity assessments and resource allocations are appropriate.`
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Detailed Findings by Severity
|
||||
|
||||
### CRITICAL Issues ({count})
|
||||
### CRITICAL Issues (${critical_count})
|
||||
|
||||
{Detailed breakdown of each critical issue with location, impact, and recommendation}
|
||||
${
|
||||
bySeverity.CRITICAL.length > 0 ?
|
||||
bySeverity.CRITICAL.map(f => `
|
||||
#### ${f.id}: ${f.summary}
|
||||
|
||||
### HIGH Issues ({count})
|
||||
- **Dimension**: ${f.dimension_name} (${f.dimension})
|
||||
- **Location**: ${f.location.join(', ')}
|
||||
- **Impact**: Blocks execution - must be resolved before implementation
|
||||
- **Recommendation**: ${f.recommendation}
|
||||
`).join('\n') :
|
||||
`> ✅ No critical issues detected.`
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
{Detailed breakdown of each high issue with location, impact, and recommendation}
|
||||
### HIGH Issues (${high_count})
|
||||
|
||||
### MEDIUM Issues ({count})
|
||||
${
|
||||
bySeverity.HIGH.length > 0 ?
|
||||
bySeverity.HIGH.map(f => `
|
||||
#### ${f.id}: ${f.summary}
|
||||
|
||||
{Detailed breakdown of each medium issue with location, impact, and recommendation}
|
||||
- **Dimension**: ${f.dimension_name} (${f.dimension})
|
||||
- **Location**: ${f.location.join(', ')}
|
||||
- **Impact**: Significant quality concern - recommended to fix before execution
|
||||
- **Recommendation**: ${f.recommendation}
|
||||
`).join('\n') :
|
||||
`> ✅ No high-severity issues detected.`
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
### LOW Issues ({count})
|
||||
### MEDIUM Issues (${medium_count})
|
||||
|
||||
{Detailed breakdown of each low issue with location, impact, and recommendation}
|
||||
${
|
||||
bySeverity.MEDIUM.length > 0 ?
|
||||
bySeverity.MEDIUM.map(f => `
|
||||
#### ${f.id}: ${f.summary}
|
||||
|
||||
- **Dimension**: ${f.dimension_name} (${f.dimension})
|
||||
- **Location**: ${f.location.join(', ')}
|
||||
- **Impact**: Quality improvement opportunity - address during/after implementation
|
||||
- **Recommendation**: ${f.recommendation}
|
||||
`).join('\n') :
|
||||
`> ✅ No medium-severity issues detected.`
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
### LOW Issues (${low_count})
|
||||
|
||||
${
|
||||
bySeverity.LOW.length > 0 ?
|
||||
bySeverity.LOW.map(f => `
|
||||
#### ${f.id}: ${f.summary}
|
||||
|
||||
- **Dimension**: ${f.dimension_name} (${f.dimension})
|
||||
- **Location**: ${f.location.join(', ')}
|
||||
- **Impact**: Minor improvement - optional
|
||||
- **Recommendation**: ${f.recommendation}
|
||||
`).join('\n') :
|
||||
`> ✅ No low-severity issues detected.`
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -437,14 +702,13 @@ Output a Markdown report with the following structure:
|
||||
|
||||
| Metric | Value |
|
||||
|--------|-------|
|
||||
| Total Requirements | {count} ({functional} functional, {nonfunctional} non-functional, {business} business) |
|
||||
| Total Tasks | {count} |
|
||||
| Overall Coverage | {percent}% ({covered}/{total} requirements with ≥1 task) |
|
||||
| Critical Issues | {count} |
|
||||
| High Issues | {count} |
|
||||
| Medium Issues | {count} |
|
||||
| Low Issues | {count} |
|
||||
| Total Findings | {total_findings} |
|
||||
| Requirements Coverage | ${coverage_percentage}% |
|
||||
| Total Findings | ${total_findings} |
|
||||
| Critical Issues | ${critical_count} |
|
||||
| High Issues | ${high_count} |
|
||||
| Medium Issues | ${medium_count} |
|
||||
| Low Issues | ${low_count} |
|
||||
| Verification Tiers Completed | ${verification_tiers_completed.join(', ')} |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -459,69 +723,103 @@ Output a Markdown report with the following structure:
|
||||
|
||||
### Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
Based on the quality gate recommendation ({RECOMMENDATION}):
|
||||
Based on the quality gate recommendation (**${recommendation}**):
|
||||
|
||||
{IF BLOCK_EXECUTION}
|
||||
${
|
||||
recommendation === 'BLOCK_EXECUTION' ?
|
||||
`
|
||||
**🛑 BLOCK EXECUTION**
|
||||
|
||||
You must resolve all CRITICAL issues before proceeding with implementation:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Review each critical issue in detail
|
||||
2. Determine remediation approach (modify IMPL_PLAN.md, update task.json, or add new tasks)
|
||||
1. Review each critical issue in detail (see section "CRITICAL Issues" above)
|
||||
2. Determine remediation approach:
|
||||
- Modify IMPL_PLAN.md for goal/scope conflicts
|
||||
- Update task.json for requirement misalignments
|
||||
- Add new tasks for coverage gaps
|
||||
- Fix dependencies for circular/broken references
|
||||
3. Apply fixes systematically
|
||||
4. Re-run verification to confirm resolution
|
||||
|
||||
{ELSE IF PROCEED_WITH_FIXES}
|
||||
4. Re-run verification to confirm resolution: \`/workflow:plan-verify --session ${session_id}\`
|
||||
` :
|
||||
recommendation === 'PROCEED_WITH_FIXES' ?
|
||||
`
|
||||
**⚠️ PROCEED WITH FIXES RECOMMENDED**
|
||||
|
||||
No critical issues detected, but HIGH issues exist. Recommended workflow:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Review high-priority issues
|
||||
2. Apply fixes before execution for optimal results
|
||||
3. Re-run verification (optional)
|
||||
|
||||
{ELSE IF PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION}
|
||||
1. Review high-priority issues (see section "HIGH Issues" above)
|
||||
2. Apply fixes before execution for optimal results:
|
||||
- Use IMPL_PLAN.md for architecture/priority misalignments
|
||||
- Update task.json for specification improvements
|
||||
- Add missing dependencies or risk mitigation tasks
|
||||
3. Re-run verification to confirm resolution: \`/workflow:plan-verify --session ${session_id}\`
|
||||
4. Proceed to implementation when ready
|
||||
` :
|
||||
recommendation === 'PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION' ?
|
||||
`
|
||||
**✅ PROCEED WITH CAUTION**
|
||||
|
||||
Only MEDIUM issues detected. You may proceed with implementation:
|
||||
|
||||
- Address medium issues during or after implementation
|
||||
- Review medium-severity issues (see section "MEDIUM Issues" above)
|
||||
- Address concerns during or after implementation
|
||||
- Maintain awareness of identified concerns
|
||||
|
||||
{ELSE}
|
||||
- Schedule remediation for future improvement cycles
|
||||
` :
|
||||
`
|
||||
**✅ PROCEED**
|
||||
|
||||
No significant issues detected. Safe to execute implementation workflow.
|
||||
No significant issues detected. Safe to execute implementation workflow:
|
||||
|
||||
{END IF}
|
||||
- Requirements fully covered
|
||||
- User intent aligned
|
||||
- Dependencies valid and logically ordered
|
||||
- All tasks properly specified
|
||||
- Ready for immediate execution
|
||||
`
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**Report End**
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Save and Display Report
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 6.1: Generate Complete Markdown Report**
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
// Build complete report from template above using findings data
|
||||
const fullReport = \`
|
||||
# Plan Verification Report
|
||||
... [complete markdown template generated above] ...
|
||||
\`
|
||||
|
||||
// Write report to file
|
||||
const reportPath = \`${process_dir}/PLAN_VERIFICATION.md\`
|
||||
Write(reportPath, fullReport)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 7. Save and Display Report
|
||||
**Step 6.2: Display Summary to User**
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 7.1: Save Report**:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
report_path = ".workflow/active/WFS-{session}/.process/PLAN_VERIFICATION.md"
|
||||
Write(report_path, full_report_content)
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
console.log(\`
|
||||
=== Plan Verification Complete ===
|
||||
Report saved to: ${reportPath}
|
||||
|
||||
Quality Gate: \${recommendation}
|
||||
Critical: \${critical_count} | High: \${high_count} | Medium: \${medium_count} | Low: \${low_count}
|
||||
Coverage: \${coverage_percentage}%
|
||||
|
||||
Next: Review full report at ${reportPath} for detailed findings and recommendations
|
||||
\`)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 7.2: Display Summary to User**:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Display executive summary in terminal
|
||||
echo "=== Plan Verification Complete ==="
|
||||
echo "Report saved to: {report_path}"
|
||||
echo ""
|
||||
echo "Quality Gate: {RECOMMENDATION}"
|
||||
echo "Critical: {count} | High: {count} | Medium: {count} | Low: {count}"
|
||||
echo ""
|
||||
echo "Next: Review full report for detailed findings and recommendations"
|
||||
```
|
||||
**Step 6.3: Completion**
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 7.3: Completion**:
|
||||
- Report is saved to `.process/PLAN_VERIFICATION.md`
|
||||
- User can review findings and decide on remediation approach
|
||||
- No automatic modifications are made to source artifacts
|
||||
- User can manually apply fixes or use separate remediation command (if available)
|
||||
- ✅ Agent JSON findings saved to: \`${process_dir}/verification-findings.json\`
|
||||
- ✅ Human-readable report saved to: \`${process_dir}/PLAN_VERIFICATION.md\`
|
||||
- ✅ Quality gate decision: \`${recommendation}\`
|
||||
- ℹ️ No automatic modifications to IMPL_PLAN.md, tasks, or synthesis artifacts
|
||||
- ℹ️ User can review findings and decide on remediation approach
|
||||
- ℹ️ Re-run verification after fixes: \`/workflow:plan-verify --session ${session_id}\`
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user