mirror of
https://github.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow.git
synced 2026-02-14 02:42:04 +08:00
- Introduced quality gates specification for skill tuning, detailing quality dimensions, scoring, and gate definitions. - Added comprehensive tuning strategies for various issue categories, including context explosion, long-tail forgetting, data flow, and agent coordination. - Created templates for diagnosis reports and fix proposals to standardize documentation and reporting processes.
6.9 KiB
6.9 KiB
Problem Taxonomy
Classification of skill execution issues with detection patterns and severity criteria.
When to Use
| Phase | Usage | Section |
|---|---|---|
| All Diagnosis Actions | Issue classification | All sections |
| action-propose-fixes | Strategy selection | Fix Mapping |
| action-generate-report | Severity assessment | Severity Criteria |
Problem Categories
1. Context Explosion (P2)
Definition: Excessive token accumulation causing prompt size to grow unbounded.
Root Causes:
- Unbounded conversation history
- Full content passing instead of references
- Missing summarization mechanisms
- Agent returning full output instead of path+summary
Detection Patterns:
| Pattern ID | Regex/Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| CTX-001 | /history\s*[.=].*push|concat/ |
History array growth |
| CTX-002 | /JSON\.stringify\s*\(\s*state\s*\)/ |
Full state serialization |
| CTX-003 | /Read\([^)]+\)\s*[\+,]/ |
Multiple file content concatenation |
| CTX-004 | /return\s*\{[^}]*content:/ |
Agent returning full content |
| CTX-005 | File length > 5000 chars without summarize | Long prompt without compression |
Impact Levels:
- Critical: Context exceeds model limit (128K tokens)
- High: Context > 50K tokens per iteration
- Medium: Context grows 10%+ per iteration
- Low: Potential for growth but currently manageable
2. Long-tail Forgetting (P3)
Definition: Loss of early instructions, constraints, or goals in long execution chains.
Root Causes:
- No explicit constraint propagation
- Reliance on implicit context
- Missing checkpoint/restore mechanisms
- State schema without requirements field
Detection Patterns:
| Pattern ID | Regex/Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| MEM-001 | Later phases missing constraint reference | Constraint not carried forward |
| MEM-002 | /\[TASK\][^[]*(?!\[CONSTRAINTS\])/ |
Task without constraints section |
| MEM-003 | Key phases without checkpoint | Missing state preservation |
| MEM-004 | State schema lacks original_requirements |
No constraint persistence |
| MEM-005 | No verification phase | Output not checked against intent |
Impact Levels:
- Critical: Original goal completely lost
- High: Key constraints ignored in output
- Medium: Some requirements missing
- Low: Minor goal drift
3. Data Flow Disruption (P0)
Definition: Inconsistent state management causing data loss or corruption.
Root Causes:
- Multiple state storage locations
- Inconsistent field naming
- Missing schema validation
- Format transformation without normalization
Detection Patterns:
| Pattern ID | Regex/Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| DF-001 | Multiple state file writes | Scattered state storage |
| DF-002 | Same concept, different names | Field naming inconsistency |
| DF-003 | JSON.parse without validation | Missing schema validation |
| DF-004 | Files written but never read | Orphaned outputs |
| DF-005 | Autonomous skill without state-schema | Undefined state structure |
Impact Levels:
- Critical: Data loss or corruption
- High: State inconsistency between phases
- Medium: Potential for inconsistency
- Low: Minor naming inconsistencies
4. Agent Coordination Failure (P1)
Definition: Fragile agent call patterns causing cascading failures.
Root Causes:
- Missing error handling in Task calls
- No result validation
- Inconsistent agent configurations
- Deeply nested agent calls
Detection Patterns:
| Pattern ID | Regex/Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| AGT-001 | Task without try-catch | Missing error handling |
| AGT-002 | Result used without validation | No return value check |
| AGT-003 | > 3 different agent types | Agent type proliferation |
| AGT-004 | Nested Task in prompt | Agent calling agent |
| AGT-005 | Task used but not in allowed-tools | Tool declaration mismatch |
| AGT-006 | Multiple return formats | Inconsistent agent output |
Impact Levels:
- Critical: Workflow crash on agent failure
- High: Unpredictable agent behavior
- Medium: Occasional coordination issues
- Low: Minor inconsistencies
Severity Criteria
Global Severity Matrix
| Severity | Definition | Action Required |
|---|---|---|
| Critical | Blocks execution or causes data loss | Immediate fix required |
| High | Significantly impacts reliability | Should fix before deployment |
| Medium | Affects quality or maintainability | Fix in next iteration |
| Low | Minor improvement opportunity | Optional fix |
Severity Calculation
function calculateIssueSeverity(issue) {
const weights = {
impact_on_execution: 40, // Does it block workflow?
data_integrity_risk: 30, // Can it cause data loss?
frequency: 20, // How often does it occur?
complexity_to_fix: 10 // How hard to fix?
};
let score = 0;
// Impact on execution
if (issue.blocks_execution) score += weights.impact_on_execution;
else if (issue.degrades_execution) score += weights.impact_on_execution * 0.5;
// Data integrity
if (issue.causes_data_loss) score += weights.data_integrity_risk;
else if (issue.causes_inconsistency) score += weights.data_integrity_risk * 0.5;
// Frequency
if (issue.occurs_every_run) score += weights.frequency;
else if (issue.occurs_sometimes) score += weights.frequency * 0.5;
// Complexity (inverse - easier to fix = higher priority)
if (issue.fix_complexity === 'low') score += weights.complexity_to_fix;
else if (issue.fix_complexity === 'medium') score += weights.complexity_to_fix * 0.5;
// Map score to severity
if (score >= 70) return 'critical';
if (score >= 50) return 'high';
if (score >= 30) return 'medium';
return 'low';
}
Fix Mapping
| Problem Type | Recommended Strategies | Priority Order |
|---|---|---|
| Context Explosion | sliding_window, path_reference, context_summarization | 1, 2, 3 |
| Long-tail Forgetting | constraint_injection, state_constraints_field, checkpoint | 1, 2, 3 |
| Data Flow Disruption | state_centralization, schema_enforcement, field_normalization | 1, 2, 3 |
| Agent Coordination | error_wrapping, result_validation, flatten_nesting | 1, 2, 3 |
Cross-Category Dependencies
Some issues may trigger others:
Context Explosion ──→ Long-tail Forgetting
(Large context causes important info to be pushed out)
Data Flow Disruption ──→ Agent Coordination Failure
(Inconsistent data causes agents to fail)
Agent Coordination Failure ──→ Context Explosion
(Failed retries add to context)
When fixing, address in this order:
- P0 Data Flow - Foundation for other fixes
- P1 Agent Coordination - Stability
- P2 Context Explosion - Efficiency
- P3 Long-tail Forgetting - Quality