Files
Claude-Code-Workflow/WORKFLOW_GUIDE.md
catlog22 16f27c080a docs: add Level 5 intelligent orchestration workflow guide to English version
- Added Level 5 (CCW Coordinator) chapter with complete Minimum Execution Units definition
- Added 3-Phase Workflow explanation (Analyze Requirements, Discover Commands, Execute)
- Integrated command port system for dynamic pipeline composition
- Added JavaScript task analysis and complexity assessment functions
- Included state file structure and complete Mermaid flowchart (119 lines)
- Updated Quick Selection Table to reference ccw-coordinator for complex workflows
- Updated Decision Flowchart to include Level 5 at top level
- Updated Summary Level Overview table to include Level 5 row
- Updated Core Principles with Level 5 selection criteria and usage guidelines
- Synchronized English version with WORKFLOW_GUIDE_CN.md Level 5 content
2026-01-24 21:41:31 +08:00

1115 lines
43 KiB
Markdown
Raw Permalink Blame History

This file contains invisible Unicode characters
This file contains invisible Unicode characters that are indistinguishable to humans but may be processed differently by a computer. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
# CCW Workflow Difficulty Guide
## Overview
CCW provides two workflow systems: **Main Workflow** and **Issue Workflow**, working together to cover the complete software development lifecycle.
```
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Main Workflow │
│ │
│ ┌─────────────┐ ┌─────────────┐ ┌─────────────┐ ┌─────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ │
│ │ Level 1 │ → │ Level 2 │ → │ Level 3 │ → │ Level 4 │→ │ Level 5 │ │
│ │ Rapid │ │ Lightweight │ │ Standard │ │ Brainstorm │ │ Intelligent │ │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Orchestration│ │
│ │ lite-lite- │ │ lite-plan │ │ plan │ │ brainstorm │ │ ccw- │ │
│ │ lite │ │ lite-fix │ │ tdd-plan │ │ :auto- │ │ coordinator │ │
│ │ │ │ multi-cli- │ │ test-fix- │ │ parallel │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │ plan │ │ gen │ │ ↓ │ │ Auto- │ │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ plan │ │ analyze & │ │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ recommend │ │
│ └─────────────┘ └─────────────┘ └─────────────┘ └─────────────┘ └──────────────┘ │
│ │
│ Manual Degree: ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━▶ │
│ High (manual selection) Low (fully auto) │
│ │
│ Complexity: ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━▶ │
│ Low High │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│ After development
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Issue Workflow │
│ │
│ ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ │
│ │ Accumulate │ → │ Plan │ → │ Execute │ │
│ │ Discover & │ │ Batch │ │ Parallel │ │
│ │ Collect │ │ Planning │ │ Execution │ │
│ └──────────────┘ └──────────────┘ └──────────────┘ │
│ │
│ Supplementary role: Maintain main branch stability, worktree isolation │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
```
---
## Main Workflow vs Issue Workflow
### Design Philosophy
| Aspect | Main Workflow | Issue Workflow |
|--------|---------------|----------------|
| **Purpose** | Primary development cycle | Post-development maintenance |
| **Timing** | Feature development phase | After main workflow completes |
| **Scope** | Complete feature implementation | Targeted fixes/enhancements |
| **Parallelism** | Dependency analysis → Agent parallel | Worktree isolation (optional) |
| **Branch Model** | Work on current branch | Can use isolated worktree |
### Why Main Workflow Doesn't Use Worktree Automatically?
**Dependency analysis already solves parallelism**:
1. Planning phase (`/workflow:plan`) performs dependency analysis
2. Automatically identifies task dependencies and critical paths
3. Partitions into **parallel groups** (independent tasks) and **serial chains** (dependent tasks)
4. Agents execute independent tasks in parallel without filesystem isolation
```
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Dependency Analysis │
│ │
│ Task A ─────┐ │
│ ├──→ Parallel Group 1 ──→ Agent 1 │
│ Task B ─────┘ │
│ │
│ Task C ────────→ Serial Chain ──────→ Agent 2 │
│ ↓ │
│ Task D ────────→ │
│ │
│ Same worktree, parallelism through scheduling │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
```
### Why Issue Workflow Supports Worktree?
Issue Workflow serves as a **supplementary mechanism** with different scenarios:
1. Main development complete, merged to `main`
2. Issues discovered requiring fixes
3. Need to fix without affecting current development
4. Worktree isolation keeps main branch stable
```
Development → Release → Discover Issue → Worktree Fix → Merge back
↑ │
└────────────── Continue new feature ←─────────────────┘
```
---
## Level 1: Rapid Execution (lite-lite-lite)
**Simplest - Single CLI analysis to execution, zero artifacts**
### Characteristics
| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Complexity** | Low |
| **Artifacts** | None |
| **State** | Stateless |
| **CLI Selection** | Auto-analyze task type |
| **Iteration** | Via AskUser |
### Flow
```
User Input → Clarification → Auto-select CLI → Parallel Analysis → Show Results → Direct Execute
No intermediate files
```
### Command
```bash
/workflow:lite-lite-lite
# Or CCW auto-selects for simple tasks
```
### Use Cases
- ✅ Quick fixes
- ✅ Simple feature additions
- ✅ Configuration adjustments
- ✅ Small-scope renaming
- ❌ Multi-module changes
- ❌ Need persistent records
---
## Level 2: Lightweight Planning
**Lightweight - In-memory planning or single analysis, fast iteration**
### Included Workflows
| Workflow | Purpose | Artifacts | Execution |
|----------|---------|-----------|-----------|
| `lite-plan` | Clear requirement development | memory://plan | → `lite-execute` |
| `lite-fix` | Bug diagnosis and fix | `.workflow/.lite-fix/` | → `lite-execute` |
| `multi-cli-plan` | Multi-perspective tasks | `.workflow/.multi-cli-plan/` | → `lite-execute` |
### Common Characteristics
| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Complexity** | Low-Medium |
| **State** | Session-scoped / Lightweight persistence |
| **Execution** | Unified via `lite-execute` |
| **Use Case** | Relatively clear requirements |
---
### 2.1 lite-plan → lite-execute
**In-memory planning + Direct execution**
```
┌─────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────┐
│ lite-plan │ ──→ │ lite-execute │
│ In-memory plan │ │ Direct execute │
└─────────────────┘ └─────────────────┘
```
```bash
/workflow:lite-plan # Planning
/workflow:lite-execute # Execution
```
**Use Case**: Clear single-module features
---
### 2.2 lite-fix
**Intelligent diagnosis + Fix (5 phases)**
```
Phase 1: Bug Analysis & Diagnosis
├─ Intelligent severity pre-assessment (Low/Medium/High/Critical)
└─ Parallel cli-explore-agent diagnosis (1-4 angles)
Phase 2: Clarification (optional)
└─ Aggregate clarification needs, AskUserQuestion
Phase 3: Fix Planning
├─ Low/Medium → Claude direct planning
└─ High/Critical → cli-lite-planning-agent
Phase 4: Confirmation & Selection
└─ User confirms execution method
Phase 5: Execute
└─ SlashCommand("/workflow:lite-execute --in-memory --mode bugfix")
```
```bash
/workflow:lite-fix # Standard fix
/workflow:lite-fix --hotfix # Emergency hotfix (skip diagnosis)
```
**Artifacts**: `.workflow/.lite-fix/{bug-slug}-{date}/`
- `diagnosis-{angle}.json` (1-4 diagnosis files)
- `diagnoses-manifest.json`
- `fix-plan.json`
**Use Case**: Bug diagnosis, production emergencies
---
### 2.3 multi-cli-plan → lite-execute
**Multi-CLI collaborative analysis + Consensus convergence (5 phases)**
```
Phase 1: Context Gathering
└─ ACE semantic search, build context package
Phase 2: Multi-CLI Discussion (iterative)
├─ cli-discuss-agent executes Gemini + Codex + Claude
├─ Cross-verification, synthesize solutions
└─ Loop until convergence or max rounds
Phase 3: Present Options
└─ Display solutions with trade-offs
Phase 4: User Decision
└─ User selects solution
Phase 5: Plan Generation
├─ cli-lite-planning-agent generates plan
└─ → lite-execute
```
```bash
/workflow:multi-cli-plan "task description" # Multi-CLI collaborative planning
/workflow:lite-execute # Execute selected solution
```
**Artifacts**: `.workflow/.multi-cli-plan/{MCP-task-slug-date}/`
- `rounds/*/synthesis.json` (per-round analysis)
- `context-package.json`
- `IMPL_PLAN.md` + `plan.json`
**vs lite-plan comparison**:
| Aspect | multi-cli-plan | lite-plan |
|--------|---------------|-----------|
| **Context** | ACE semantic search | Manual file patterns |
| **Analysis** | Multi-CLI cross-verification | Single planning |
| **Iteration** | Multiple rounds until convergence | Single round |
| **Confidence** | High (consensus-driven) | Medium (single perspective) |
**Use Case**: Multi-perspective analysis, technology selection, solution comparison
---
## Level 3: Standard Planning
**Standard - Complete planning + Persistent Session + Verification**
### Included Workflows
| Workflow | Purpose | Phases | Artifact Location |
|----------|---------|--------|-------------------|
| `plan` | Complex feature development | 5 phases | `.workflow/active/{session}/` |
| `tdd-plan` | Test-driven development | 6 phases | `.workflow/active/{session}/` |
| `test-fix-gen` | Test fix generation | 5 phases | `.workflow/active/WFS-test-{session}/` |
### Common Characteristics
| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Complexity** | Medium-High |
| **Artifacts** | Persistent files (`.workflow/active/{session}/`) |
| **State** | Full session management |
| **Verification** | Built-in verification steps |
| **Execution** | `/workflow:execute` |
| **Use Case** | Multi-module, traceable tasks |
---
### 3.1 plan → verify → execute
**5-phase complete planning workflow**
```
Phase 1: Session Discovery
└─ /workflow:session:start --auto
Phase 2: Context Gathering
└─ /workflow:tools:context-gather
└─ Returns context-package.json + conflict_risk
Phase 3: Conflict Resolution (conditional)
└─ IF conflict_risk ≥ medium → /workflow:tools:conflict-resolution
Phase 4: Task Generation
└─ /workflow:tools:task-generate-agent
└─ Returns IMPL_PLAN.md + IMPL-*.json + TODO_LIST.md
Return: Summary + Next Steps
```
```bash
/workflow:plan "task description" # Complete planning
/workflow:plan-verify # Verify plan (recommended)
/workflow:execute # Execute
/workflow:review # (optional) Review
```
**Artifacts**: `.workflow/active/{WFS-session}/`
- `workflow-session.json`
- `IMPL_PLAN.md`
- `TODO_LIST.md`
- `.task/IMPL-*.json`
- `.process/context-package.json`
**Use Case**: Multi-module changes, refactoring, dependency analysis needed
---
### 3.2 tdd-plan → execute → tdd-verify
**6-phase test-driven development workflow**
```
Phase 1: Session Discovery
└─ /workflow:session:start --type tdd --auto
Phase 2: Context Gathering
└─ /workflow:tools:context-gather
Phase 3: Test Coverage Analysis
└─ /workflow:tools:test-context-gather
└─ Detect test framework, analyze coverage
Phase 4: Conflict Resolution (conditional)
└─ IF conflict_risk ≥ medium → /workflow:tools:conflict-resolution
Phase 5: TDD Task Generation
└─ /workflow:tools:task-generate-tdd
└─ Generate IMPL tasks with built-in Red-Green-Refactor cycles
Phase 6: TDD Structure Validation
└─ Verify TDD structure compliance
```
```bash
/workflow:tdd-plan "feature description" # TDD planning
/workflow:plan-verify # Verify (recommended)
/workflow:execute # Execute (follow Red-Green-Refactor)
/workflow:tdd-verify # Verify TDD compliance
```
**TDD Task Structure**:
- Each IMPL task contains complete internal Red-Green-Refactor cycle
- `meta.tdd_workflow: true`
- `flow_control.implementation_approach` contains 3 steps (red/green/refactor)
- Green phase includes test-fix-cycle configuration
**Use Case**: Test-driven development, high-quality feature requirements
---
### 3.3 test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute
**5-phase test fix generation workflow**
```
Phase 1: Create Test Session
└─ /workflow:session:start --type test --new
Phase 2: Gather Test Context
├─ Session Mode: /workflow:tools:test-context-gather
└─ Prompt Mode: /workflow:tools:context-gather
Phase 3: Test Generation Analysis
└─ /workflow:tools:test-concept-enhanced
└─ Multi-layer test requirements (L0: Static, L1: Unit, L2: Integration, L3: E2E)
Phase 4: Generate Test Tasks
└─ /workflow:tools:test-task-generate
└─ IMPL-001 (generate) + IMPL-001.5 (quality gate) + IMPL-002 (execute fix)
Phase 5: Return Summary
└─ → /workflow:test-cycle-execute
```
**Dual-mode support**:
| Mode | Input Pattern | Context Source |
|------|---------------|----------------|
| Session Mode | `WFS-xxx` | Source session summaries |
| Prompt Mode | Text/file path | Direct codebase analysis |
```bash
/workflow:test-fix-gen WFS-user-auth-v2 # Session Mode
/workflow:test-fix-gen "Test the auth API" # Prompt Mode
/workflow:test-cycle-execute # Execute test-fix cycle
```
**Artifacts**: `.workflow/active/WFS-test-{session}/`
- `.task/IMPL-001.json` (test understanding & generation)
- `.task/IMPL-001.5-review.json` (quality gate)
- `.task/IMPL-002.json` (test execution & fix cycle)
- `.process/TEST_ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md`
**Use Case**: Test failure fixes, coverage improvement
---
## Level 4: Brainstorming (brainstorm:auto-parallel)
**Most Complex - Multi-role brainstorming + Complete planning + Execution**
### Characteristics
| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Complexity** | High |
| **Artifacts** | Multi-role analysis docs + `IMPL_PLAN.md` |
| **Role Count** | 3-9 (default 3) |
| **Execution Mode** | Phase 1/3 sequential, Phase 2 parallel |
### 3-Phase Flow
```
Phase 1: Interactive Framework Generation
└─ /workflow:brainstorm:artifacts
├─ Topic analysis, generate questions
├─ Role selection (user confirmation)
├─ Role question collection
├─ Conflict detection and resolution
└─ Generate guidance-specification.md
Phase 2: Parallel Role Analysis (parallel)
└─ N × Task(conceptual-planning-agent)
├─ Each role analyzes independently
└─ Parallel generate {role}/analysis.md
Phase 3: Synthesis Integration
└─ /workflow:brainstorm:synthesis
└─ Integrate all role analyses → synthesis-specification.md
```
### Commands
```bash
/workflow:brainstorm:auto-parallel "topic" [--count N] [--style-skill package]
/workflow:plan --session {sessionId} # Plan based on brainstorm results
/workflow:plan-verify # Verify
/workflow:execute # Execute
```
### Available Roles
| Role | Description |
|------|-------------|
| `system-architect` | System Architect |
| `ui-designer` | UI Designer |
| `ux-expert` | UX Expert |
| `product-manager` | Product Manager |
| `product-owner` | Product Owner |
| `data-architect` | Data Architect |
| `scrum-master` | Scrum Master |
| `subject-matter-expert` | Domain Expert |
| `test-strategist` | Test Strategist |
### Artifact Structure
```
.workflow/active/WFS-{topic}/
├── workflow-session.json # Session metadata
└── .brainstorming/
├── guidance-specification.md # Framework (Phase 1)
├── {role}/
│ ├── analysis.md # Main document
│ └── analysis-{slug}.md # Sub-documents (optional, max 5)
└── synthesis-specification.md # Integration (Phase 3)
```
### Use Cases
- ✅ New feature design
- ✅ System architecture refactoring
- ✅ Exploratory requirements
- ✅ Uncertain implementation approach
- ✅ Multi-dimensional trade-offs needed
- ❌ Clear requirements
- ❌ Time-sensitive tasks
---
## Level 5: Intelligent Orchestration (CCW Coordinator)
**Most Intelligent - Automated command chain orchestration + Sequential execution + State persistence**
### Core Concept: Minimum Execution Units
**Definition**: A set of commands that must execute together as an atomic group to achieve a meaningful workflow milestone. Splitting these commands breaks the logical flow and creates incomplete states.
**Why This Matters**:
- **Prevents Incomplete States**: Avoid stopping after task generation without execution
- **User Experience**: User gets complete results, not intermediate artifacts requiring manual follow-up
- **Workflow Integrity**: Maintains logical coherence of multi-step operations
### Minimum Execution Units
**Planning + Execution Units**:
| Unit Name | Commands | Purpose | Output |
|-----------|----------|---------|--------|
| **Quick Implementation** | lite-plan → lite-execute | Lightweight plan and immediate execution | Working code |
| **Multi-CLI Planning** | multi-cli-plan → lite-execute | Multi-perspective analysis and execution | Working code |
| **Bug Fix** | lite-fix → lite-execute | Quick bug diagnosis and fix execution | Fixed code |
| **Full Planning + Execution** | plan → execute | Detailed planning and execution | Working code |
| **Verified Planning + Execution** | plan → plan-verify → execute | Planning with verification and execution | Working code |
| **Replanning + Execution** | replan → execute | Update plan and execute changes | Working code |
| **TDD Planning + Execution** | tdd-plan → execute | Test-driven development planning and execution | Working code |
| **Test Generation + Execution** | test-gen → execute | Generate test suite and execute | Generated tests |
**Testing Units**:
| Unit Name | Commands | Purpose | Output |
|-----------|----------|---------|--------|
| **Test Validation** | test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute | Generate test tasks and execute test-fix cycle | Tests passed |
**Review Units**:
| Unit Name | Commands | Purpose | Output |
|-----------|----------|---------|--------|
| **Code Review (Session)** | review-session-cycle → review-fix | Complete review cycle and apply fixes | Fixed code |
| **Code Review (Module)** | review-module-cycle → review-fix | Module review cycle and apply fixes | Fixed code |
### 3-Phase Workflow
#### Phase 1: Analyze Requirements
Parse task description to extract: goal, scope, constraints, complexity, and task type.
```javascript
function analyzeRequirements(taskDescription) {
return {
goal: extractMainGoal(taskDescription), // e.g., "Implement user registration"
scope: extractScope(taskDescription), // e.g., ["auth", "user_management"]
constraints: extractConstraints(taskDescription), // e.g., ["no breaking changes"]
complexity: determineComplexity(taskDescription), // 'simple' | 'medium' | 'complex'
task_type: detectTaskType(taskDescription) // See task type patterns below
};
}
// Task Type Detection Patterns
function detectTaskType(text) {
// Priority order (first match wins)
if (/fix|bug|error|crash|fail|debug|diagnose/.test(text)) return 'bugfix';
if (/tdd|test-driven|test first/.test(text)) return 'tdd';
if (/test fail|fix test|failing test/.test(text)) return 'test-fix';
if (/generate test|add test/.test(text)) return 'test-gen';
if (/review/.test(text)) return 'review';
if (/explore|brainstorm/.test(text)) return 'brainstorm';
if (/multi-perspective|comparison/.test(text)) return 'multi-cli';
return 'feature'; // Default
}
// Complexity Assessment
function determineComplexity(text) {
let score = 0;
if (/refactor|migrate|architect|system/.test(text)) score += 2;
if (/multiple|across|all|entire/.test(text)) score += 2;
if (/integrate|api|database/.test(text)) score += 1;
if (/security|performance|scale/.test(text)) score += 1;
return score >= 4 ? 'complex' : score >= 2 ? 'medium' : 'simple';
}
```
#### Phase 2: Discover Commands & Recommend Chain
Dynamic command chain assembly using port-based matching.
**Display to user**:
```
Recommended Command Chain:
Pipeline (visual):
Requirement → lite-plan → Plan → lite-execute → Code → test-cycle-execute → Tests Passed
Commands:
1. /workflow:lite-plan
2. /workflow:lite-execute
3. /workflow:test-cycle-execute
Proceed? [Confirm / Show Details / Adjust / Cancel]
```
**User Confirmation**:
```javascript
async function getUserConfirmation(chain) {
// Present chain with options:
// - Confirm and execute
// - Show details
// - Adjust chain
// - Cancel
}
```
#### Phase 3: Execute Sequential Command Chain
```javascript
async function executeCommandChain(chain, analysis) {
const sessionId = `ccw-coord-${Date.now()}`;
const stateDir = `.workflow/.ccw-coordinator/${sessionId}`;
// Initialize state
const state = {
session_id: sessionId,
status: 'running',
created_at: new Date().toISOString(),
analysis: analysis,
command_chain: chain.map((cmd, idx) => ({ ...cmd, index: idx, status: 'pending' })),
execution_results: [],
prompts_used: []
};
// Save initial state
Write(`${stateDir}/state.json`, JSON.stringify(state, null, 2));
for (let i = 0; i < chain.length; i++) {
const cmd = chain[i];
// Assemble prompt
let prompt = formatCommand(cmd, state.execution_results, analysis);
prompt += `\n\nTask: ${analysis.goal}`;
if (state.execution_results.length > 0) {
prompt += '\n\nPrevious results:\n';
state.execution_results.forEach(r => {
if (r.session_id) {
prompt += `- ${r.command}: ${r.session_id}\n`;
}
});
}
// Launch CLI in background
const taskId = Bash(
`ccw cli -p "${escapePrompt(prompt)}" --tool claude --mode write`,
{ run_in_background: true }
).task_id;
// Save checkpoint
state.execution_results.push({
index: i,
command: cmd.command,
status: 'in-progress',
task_id: taskId,
session_id: null,
artifacts: [],
timestamp: new Date().toISOString()
});
// Stop here - wait for hook callback
Write(`${stateDir}/state.json`, JSON.stringify(state, null, 2));
break;
}
state.status = 'waiting';
Write(`${stateDir}/state.json`, JSON.stringify(state, null, 2));
return state;
}
```
### State File Structure
**Location**: `.workflow/.ccw-coordinator/{session_id}/state.json`
```json
{
"session_id": "ccw-coord-20250124-143025",
"status": "running|waiting|completed|failed",
"created_at": "2025-01-24T14:30:25Z",
"updated_at": "2025-01-24T14:35:45Z",
"analysis": {
"goal": "Implement user registration",
"scope": ["authentication", "user_management"],
"constraints": ["no breaking changes"],
"complexity": "medium",
"task_type": "feature"
},
"command_chain": [
{
"index": 0,
"command": "/workflow:plan",
"name": "plan",
"status": "completed"
},
{
"index": 1,
"command": "/workflow:execute",
"name": "execute",
"status": "running"
}
],
"execution_results": [
{
"index": 0,
"command": "/workflow:plan",
"status": "completed",
"task_id": "task-001",
"session_id": "WFS-plan-20250124",
"artifacts": ["IMPL_PLAN.md"],
"timestamp": "2025-01-24T14:30:25Z",
"completed_at": "2025-01-24T14:30:45Z"
}
]
}
```
### Complete Lifecycle Decision Flowchart
```mermaid
flowchart TD
Start([Start New Task]) --> Q0{Is this a bug fix?}
Q0 -->|Yes| BugFix[🐛 Bug Fix Process]
Q0 -->|No| Q1{Do you know what to do?}
BugFix --> BugSeverity{Understand root cause?}
BugSeverity -->|Clear| LiteFix[/workflow:lite-fix<br>Standard fix /]
BugSeverity -->|Production incident| HotFix[/workflow:lite-fix --hotfix<br>Emergency hotfix /]
BugSeverity -->|Unclear| BugDiag[/workflow:lite-fix<br>Auto-diagnose root cause /]
BugDiag --> LiteFix
LiteFix --> BugComplete[Bug fixed]
HotFix --> FollowUp[/Auto-generate follow-up tasks<br>Complete fix + post-mortem /]
FollowUp --> BugComplete
BugComplete --> End([Task Complete])
Q1 -->|No| Ideation[💡 Exploration Phase<br>Clarify requirements]
Q1 -->|Yes| Q2{Do you know how to do it?}
Ideation --> BrainIdea[/workflow:brainstorm:auto-parallel<br>Explore product direction /]
BrainIdea --> Q2
Q2 -->|No| Design[🏗️ Design Exploration<br>Explore architecture]
Q2 -->|Yes| Q3{Need planning?}
Design --> BrainDesign[/workflow:brainstorm:auto-parallel<br>Explore technical solutions /]
BrainDesign --> Q3
Q3 -->|Quick and simple| LitePlan[⚡ Lightweight Planning<br>/workflow:lite-plan]
Q3 -->|Complex and complete| FullPlan[📋 Standard Planning<br>/workflow:plan]
LitePlan --> Q4{Need code exploration?}
Q4 -->|Yes| LitePlanE[/workflow:lite-plan -e<br>Task description /]
Q4 -->|No| LitePlanNormal[/workflow:lite-plan<br>Task description /]
LitePlanE --> LiteConfirm[Three-dimensional confirmation:<br>1⃣ Task approval<br>2⃣ Execution method<br>3⃣ Code review]
LitePlanNormal --> LiteConfirm
LiteConfirm --> Q5{Select execution method}
Q5 -->|Agent| LiteAgent[/workflow:lite-execute<br>Use @code-developer /]
Q5 -->|CLI tool| LiteCLI[CLI Execution<br>Gemini/Qwen/Codex]
Q5 -->|Plan only| UserImpl[User manual implementation]
FullPlan --> PlanVerify{Verify plan quality?}
PlanVerify -->|Yes| Verify[/workflow:action-plan-verify /]
PlanVerify -->|No| Execute
Verify --> Q6{Verification passed?}
Q6 -->|No| FixPlan[Fix plan issues]
Q6 -->|Yes| Execute
FixPlan --> Execute
Execute[🚀 Execution Phase<br>/workflow:execute]
LiteAgent --> TestDecision
LiteCLI --> TestDecision
UserImpl --> TestDecision
Execute --> TestDecision
TestDecision{Need tests?}
TestDecision -->|TDD mode| TDD[/workflow:tdd-plan<br>Test-driven development /]
TestDecision -->|Post-test| TestGen[/workflow:test-gen<br>Generate tests /]
TestDecision -->|Tests exist| TestCycle[/workflow:test-cycle-execute<br>Test-fix cycle /]
TestDecision -->|Not needed| Review
TDD --> TDDExecute[/workflow:execute<br>Red-Green-Refactor /]
TDDExecute --> TDDVerify[/workflow:tdd-verify<br>Verify TDD compliance /]
TDDVerify --> Review
TestGen --> TestExecute[/workflow:execute<br>Execute test tasks /]
TestExecute --> TestResult{Tests passed?}
TestResult -->|No| TestCycle
TestResult -->|Yes| Review
TestCycle --> TestPass{Pass rate ≥ 95%?}
TestPass -->|No, continue fixing| TestCycle
TestPass -->|Yes| Review
Review[📝 Review Phase]
Review --> Q7{Need specialized review?}
Q7 -->|Security| SecurityReview[/workflow:review<br>--type security /]
Q7 -->|Architecture| ArchReview[/workflow:review<br>--type architecture /]
Q7 -->|Quality| QualityReview[/workflow:review<br>--type quality /]
Q7 -->|General| GeneralReview[/workflow:review<br>General review /]
Q7 -->|Not needed| Complete
SecurityReview --> Complete
ArchReview --> Complete
QualityReview --> Complete
GeneralReview --> Complete
Complete[✅ Completion Phase<br>/workflow:session:complete]
Complete --> End
style Start fill:#e1f5ff
style BugFix fill:#ffccbc
style LiteFix fill:#ffccbc
style HotFix fill:#ff8a65
style BugDiag fill:#ffccbc
style BugComplete fill:#c8e6c9
style End fill:#c8e6c9
style BrainIdea fill:#fff9c4
style BrainDesign fill:#fff9c4
style LitePlan fill:#b3e5fc
style FullPlan fill:#b3e5fc
style Execute fill:#c5e1a5
style TDD fill:#ffccbc
style TestGen fill:#ffccbc
style TestCycle fill:#ffccbc
style Review fill:#d1c4e9
style Complete fill:#c8e6c9
```
### Commands
```bash
/ccw-coordinator "task description"
# Auto-analyze → recommend command chain → execute sequentially
```
### Use Cases
- ✅ Complex multi-step workflows
- ✅ Uncertain which commands to use
- ✅ Desire end-to-end automation
- ✅ Need full state tracking and resumability
- ✅ Team collaboration with unified execution flow
- ❌ Simple single-command tasks
- ❌ Already know exact commands needed
### Relationship with Other Levels
| Level | Manual Degree | CCW Coordinator Role |
|-------|---------------|-----------------------|
| Level 1-4 | Manual command selection | Auto-combine these commands |
| Level 5 | Auto command selection | Intelligent orchestrator |
**CCW Coordinator uses Level 1-4 internally**:
- Analyzes task → Auto-selects appropriate Level
- Assembles command chain → Includes Level 1-4 commands
- Executes sequentially → Follows Minimum Execution Units
---
## Issue Workflow
**Main Workflow Supplement - Post-development continuous maintenance**
### Two-Phase Lifecycle
```
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Phase 1: Accumulation │
│ │
│ Triggers: │
│ • Post-task review │
│ • Code review findings │
│ • Test failures │
│ │
│ ┌────────────┐ ┌────────────┐ ┌────────────┐ │
│ │ discover │ │ discover- │ │ new │ │
│ │ Auto-find │ │ by-prompt │ │ Manual │ │
│ └────────────┘ └────────────┘ └────────────┘ │
│ │
│ Continuously accumulate issues to pending queue │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│ After sufficient accumulation
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Phase 2: Batch Resolution │
│ │
│ ┌────────────┐ ┌────────────┐ ┌────────────┐ │
│ │ plan │ ──→ │ queue │ ──→ │ execute │ │
│ │ --all- │ │ Optimize │ │ Parallel │ │
│ │ pending │ │ order │ │ execution │ │
│ └────────────┘ └────────────┘ └────────────┘ │
│ │
│ Supports worktree isolation, maintains main branch stability │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
```
### Command List
**Accumulation Phase:**
```bash
/issue:discover # Multi-perspective auto-discovery
/issue:discover-by-prompt # Prompt-based discovery
/issue:new # Manual creation
```
**Batch Resolution:**
```bash
/issue:plan --all-pending # Batch plan all pending
/issue:queue # Generate optimized execution queue
/issue:execute # Parallel execution
```
### Collaboration with Main Workflow
```
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Development Iteration Loop │
│ │
│ ┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐ │
│ │ Feature │ ──→ Main Workflow ──→ Done ──→│ Review │ │
│ │ Request │ (Level 1-4) └────┬────┘ │
│ └─────────┘ │ │
│ ▲ │ Issues found │
│ │ ▼ │
│ │ ┌─────────┐ │
│ │ │ Issue │ │
│ │ │ Workflow│ │
│ Continue│ └────┬────┘ │
│ new │ │ │
│ feature │ ┌──────────────────────────┘ │
│ │ │ Fix complete │
│ │ ▼ │
│ ┌────┴────┐◀────── │
│ │ Main │ Merge │
│ │ Branch │ back │
│ └─────────┘ │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
```
---
## Workflow Selection Guide
### Quick Selection Table
| Scenario | Recommended Workflow | Level |
|----------|---------------------|-------|
| Quick fixes, config adjustments | `lite-lite-lite` | 1 |
| Clear single-module features | `lite-plan → lite-execute` | 2 |
| Bug diagnosis and fix | `lite-fix` | 2 |
| Production emergencies | `lite-fix --hotfix` | 2 |
| Technology selection, solution comparison | `multi-cli-plan → lite-execute` | 2 |
| Multi-module changes, refactoring | `plan → verify → execute` | 3 |
| Test-driven development | `tdd-plan → execute → tdd-verify` | 3 |
| Test failure fixes | `test-fix-gen → test-cycle-execute` | 3 |
| New features, architecture design | `brainstorm:auto-parallel → plan → execute` | 4 |
| Complex multi-step workflows, uncertain commands | `ccw-coordinator` | 5 |
| Post-development issue fixes | Issue Workflow | - |
### Decision Flowchart
```
Start
├─ Is it post-development maintenance?
│ ├─ Yes → Issue Workflow
│ └─ No ↓
├─ Uncertain which commands to use?
│ ├─ Yes → Level 5 (ccw-coordinator - auto-analyze & recommend)
│ └─ No ↓
├─ Are requirements clear?
│ ├─ Uncertain → Level 4 (brainstorm:auto-parallel)
│ └─ Clear ↓
├─ Need persistent Session?
│ ├─ Yes → Level 3 (plan / tdd-plan / test-fix-gen)
│ └─ No ↓
├─ Need multi-perspective / solution comparison?
│ ├─ Yes → Level 2 (multi-cli-plan)
│ └─ No ↓
├─ Is it a bug fix?
│ ├─ Yes → Level 2 (lite-fix)
│ └─ No ↓
├─ Need planning?
│ ├─ Yes → Level 2 (lite-plan)
│ └─ No → Level 1 (lite-lite-lite)
```
### Complexity Indicators
System auto-evaluates complexity based on these keywords:
| Weight | Keywords |
|--------|----------|
| +2 | refactor, migrate, architect, system |
| +2 | multiple, across, all, entire |
| +1 | integrate, api, database |
| +1 | security, performance, scale |
- **High complexity** (≥4): Auto-select Level 3-4
- **Medium complexity** (2-3): Auto-select Level 2
- **Low complexity** (<2): Auto-select Level 1
---
## Semantic CLI Invocation
Users can **semantically specify CLI tools** in prompts - the system automatically invokes the corresponding CLI.
### Basic Invocation
| User Prompt | System Action |
|-------------|---------------|
| "Use Gemini to analyze the auth module" | Auto-invoke `gemini` CLI for analysis |
| "Let Codex review this code" | Auto-invoke `codex` CLI for review |
| "Ask Qwen about performance optimization" | Auto-invoke `qwen` CLI for consultation |
### Multi-CLI Orchestration
| Pattern | User Prompt Example |
|---------|---------------------|
| **Collaborative** | "Use Gemini and Codex to collaboratively analyze security vulnerabilities" |
| **Parallel** | "Have Gemini, Codex, and Qwen analyze the architecture in parallel" |
| **Iterative** | "Use Gemini to diagnose, then Codex to fix, iterate until resolved" |
| **Pipeline** | "Gemini designs the solution, Codex implements, Claude reviews" |
### Custom CLI Registration
Register **any API as a custom CLI** via Dashboard interface:
```bash
ccw view # Open Dashboard → Status → API Settings → Add Custom CLI
```
| Field | Example |
|-------|---------|
| **Name** | `deepseek` |
| **Endpoint** | `https://api.deepseek.com/v1/chat` |
| **API Key** | `your-api-key` |
> Register once, invoke semantically forever - no code changes needed.
---
## ACE Tool Configuration
ACE (Augment Context Engine) provides powerful semantic code search. Two configuration methods available:
| Method | Link |
|--------|------|
| **Official** | [Augment MCP Documentation](https://docs.augmentcode.com/context-services/mcp/overview) |
| **Proxy** | [ace-tool (GitHub)](https://github.com/eastxiaodong/ace-tool) |
### Usage Example
```javascript
mcp__ace-tool__search_context({
project_root_path: "/path/to/project",
query: "authentication logic"
})
```
---
## Summary
### Level Overview
| Level | Name | Included Workflows | Artifacts | Execution |
|-------|------|-------------------|-----------|-----------|
| **1** | Rapid | `lite-lite-lite` | None | Direct execute |
| **2** | Lightweight | `lite-plan`, `lite-fix`, `multi-cli-plan` | Memory/Lightweight files | → `lite-execute` |
| **3** | Standard | `plan`, `tdd-plan`, `test-fix-gen` | Session persistence | → `execute` / `test-cycle-execute` |
| **4** | Brainstorm | `brainstorm:auto-parallel``plan` | Multi-role analysis + Session | → `execute` |
| **5** | Intelligent | `ccw-coordinator` | Full state persistence | Auto-analyze & recommend |
| **-** | Issue | `discover``plan``queue``execute` | Issue records | Worktree isolation (optional) |
### Core Principles
1. **Main Workflow** solves parallelism through **dependency analysis + Agent parallel execution**, no worktree needed
2. **Issue Workflow** serves as a **supplementary mechanism**, supporting worktree isolation to maintain main branch stability
3. Select appropriate workflow level based on task complexity, **avoid over-engineering**
4. **Level 1-4** require manual command selection; **Level 5** auto-analyzes and recommends optimal command chains
5. Level 2 workflow selection criteria:
- Clear requirements → `lite-plan`
- Bug fix → `lite-fix`
- Need multi-perspective → `multi-cli-plan`
6. Level 3 workflow selection criteria:
- Standard development → `plan`
- Test-driven → `tdd-plan`
- Test fix → `test-fix-gen`
7. Level 5 usage:
- Uncertain which commands to use → `ccw-coordinator`
- Need end-to-end workflow automation → `ccw-coordinator`
- Require complete state tracking and resumability → `ccw-coordinator`