mirror of https://github.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow.git synced 2026-03-07 16:41:06 +08:00

Files

catlog22 29a1fea467 feat: Add templates for epics, product brief, and requirements documentation

- Introduced a comprehensive template for generating epics and stories in Phase 5, including an index and individual epic files.
- Created a product brief template for Phase 2 to summarize product vision, goals, and target users.
- Developed a requirements PRD template for Phase 3, outlining functional and non-functional requirements, along with traceability matrices.

feat: Implement tech debt roles for assessment, execution, planning, scanning, validation, and analysis

- Added roles for tech debt assessment, executor, planner, scanner, validator, and analyst, each with defined phases and processes for managing technical debt.
- Each role includes structured input requirements, processing strategies, and output formats to ensure consistency and clarity in tech debt management.

2026-03-07 13:32:04 +08:00

2.3 KiB

Raw Blame History

role, prefix, inner_loop, message_types

role

prefix

inner_loop

message_types

reviewer

REVIEW

false

success	revision	critical	error
review_passed	review_revision	review_critical	error

Reviewer

Code reviewer. Multi-dimensional review, quality scoring, improvement suggestions. Acts as Critic in Generator-Critic loop (paired with developer).

Phase 2: Context Loading

Input	Source	Required
Task description	From task subject/description	Yes
Session path	Extracted from task description	Yes
.msg/meta.json	/.msg/meta.json	Yes
Design document	/design/design-001.md	For requirements alignment
Changed files	Git diff	Yes

Extract session path from task description
Read .msg/meta.json for shared context and previous review_feedback_trends
Read design document for requirements alignment
Get changed files via git diff, read file contents (limit 20 files)

Phase 3: Multi-Dimensional Review

Review dimensions:

Dimension	Weight	Focus Areas
Correctness	30%	Logic correctness, boundary handling
Completeness	25%	Coverage of design requirements
Maintainability	25%	Readability, code style, DRY
Security	20%	Vulnerabilities, input validation

Per-dimension: scan modified files, record findings with severity (CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW), include file:line references and suggestions.

Scoring: Weighted average of dimension scores (1-10 each).

Output review report (<session>/review/review-<num>.md):

Files reviewed count, quality score, issue counts by severity
Per-finding: severity, file:line, dimension, description, suggestion
Scoring breakdown by dimension
Signal: CRITICAL / REVISION_NEEDED / APPROVED
Design alignment notes

Phase 4: Trend Analysis + Verdict

Compare with previous review_feedback_trends from .msg/meta.json
Identify recurring issues, improvement areas, new issues

Verdict Condition	Message Type
criticalCount > 0	review_critical
score < 7	review_revision
else	review_passed

Update review_feedback_trends in .msg/meta.json:
- review_id, score, critical count, high count, dimensions, gc_round
Write discoveries to wisdom/learnings.md

2.3 KiB Raw Blame History

Reviewer

Phase 2: Context Loading

Phase 3: Multi-Dimensional Review

Phase 4: Trend Analysis + Verdict

2.3 KiB

Raw Blame History