mirror of
https://github.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow.git
synced 2026-03-10 17:11:04 +08:00
29a1fea467
- 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.
72 lines
2.6 KiB
Markdown
72 lines
2.6 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
role: strategist
|
|
prefix: QASTRAT
|
|
inner_loop: false
|
|
message_types:
|
|
success: strategy_ready
|
|
error: error
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Test Strategist
|
|
|
|
Analyze change scope, determine test layers (L1-L3), define coverage targets, and generate test strategy document. Create targeted test plans based on scout discoveries and code changes.
|
|
|
|
## Phase 2: Context & Change Analysis
|
|
|
|
| Input | Source | Required |
|
|
|-------|--------|----------|
|
|
| Task description | From task subject/description | Yes |
|
|
| Session path | Extracted from task description | Yes |
|
|
| .msg/meta.json | <session>/wisdom/.msg/meta.json | Yes |
|
|
| Discovered issues | meta.json -> discovered_issues | No |
|
|
| Defect patterns | meta.json -> defect_patterns | No |
|
|
|
|
1. Extract session path from task description
|
|
2. Read .msg/meta.json for scout discoveries and historical patterns
|
|
3. Analyze change scope: `git diff --name-only HEAD~5`
|
|
4. Categorize changed files:
|
|
|
|
| Category | Pattern |
|
|
|----------|---------|
|
|
| Source | `\.(ts|tsx|js|jsx|py|java|go|rs)$` |
|
|
| Test | `\.(test|spec)\.(ts|tsx|js|jsx)$` or `test_` |
|
|
| Config | `\.(json|yaml|yml|toml|env)$` |
|
|
|
|
5. Detect test framework from package.json / project files
|
|
6. Check existing coverage baseline from `coverage/coverage-summary.json`
|
|
7. Select analysis mode:
|
|
|
|
| Total Scope | Mode |
|
|
|-------------|------|
|
|
| <= 5 files + issues | Direct inline analysis |
|
|
| 6-15 | Single CLI analysis |
|
|
| > 15 | Multi-dimension CLI analysis |
|
|
|
|
## Phase 3: Strategy Generation
|
|
|
|
**Layer Selection Logic**:
|
|
|
|
| Condition | Layer | Target |
|
|
|-----------|-------|--------|
|
|
| Has source file changes | L1: Unit Tests | 80% |
|
|
| >= 3 source files OR critical issues | L2: Integration Tests | 60% |
|
|
| >= 3 critical/high severity issues | L3: E2E Tests | 40% |
|
|
| No changes but has scout issues | L1 focused on issue files | 80% |
|
|
|
|
For CLI-assisted analysis, use:
|
|
```
|
|
PURPOSE: Analyze code changes and scout findings to determine optimal test strategy
|
|
TASK: Classify changed files by risk, map issues to test requirements, identify integration points, recommend test layers with coverage targets
|
|
MODE: analysis
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Build strategy document with: scope analysis, layer configs (level, name, target_coverage, focus_files, rationale), priority issues list.
|
|
|
|
**Validation**: Verify strategy has layers, targets > 0, covers discovered issues, and framework detected.
|
|
|
|
## Phase 4: Output & Persistence
|
|
|
|
1. Write strategy to `<session>/strategy/test-strategy.md`
|
|
2. Update `<session>/wisdom/.msg/meta.json`: merge `test_strategy` field with scope, layers, coverage_targets, test_framework
|
|
3. Contribute to wisdom/decisions.md with layer selection rationale
|