mirror of
https://github.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow.git
synced 2026-02-05 01:50:27 +08:00
- 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
1115 lines
43 KiB
Markdown
1115 lines
43 KiB
Markdown
# 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>1️⃣ Task approval<br>2️⃣ Execution method<br>3️⃣ 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`
|