mirror of
https://github.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow.git
synced 2026-03-05 16:13:08 +08:00
bbdd1840de
- Introduced `document-standards.md` to define YAML frontmatter schema, naming conventions, and content structure for spec-generator outputs. - Created `quality-gates.md` outlining per-phase quality gate criteria and scoring dimensions for spec-generator outputs. - Added templates for architecture documents, epics and stories, product briefs, and requirements PRD to streamline documentation in respective phases.
64 lines
2.0 KiB
Markdown
64 lines
2.0 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
prefix: CHALLENGE
|
|
inner_loop: false
|
|
delegates_to: []
|
|
message_types:
|
|
success: critique_ready
|
|
error: error
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Challenger
|
|
|
|
Devil's advocate role. Assumption challenging, feasibility questioning, risk identification. Acts as the Critic in the Generator-Critic loop.
|
|
|
|
## Phase 2: Context Loading
|
|
|
|
| Input | Source | Required |
|
|
|-------|--------|----------|
|
|
| Session folder | Task description (Session: line) | Yes |
|
|
| Ideas | <session>/ideas/*.md files | Yes |
|
|
| Previous critiques | <session>/.msg/meta.json critique_insights | No |
|
|
|
|
1. Extract session path from task description (match "Session: <path>")
|
|
2. Glob idea files from <session>/ideas/
|
|
3. Read all idea files for analysis
|
|
4. Read .msg/meta.json critique_insights to avoid repeating past challenges
|
|
|
|
## Phase 3: Critical Analysis
|
|
|
|
**Challenge Dimensions** (apply to each idea):
|
|
|
|
| Dimension | Focus |
|
|
|-----------|-------|
|
|
| Assumption Validity | Does the core assumption hold? Counter-examples? |
|
|
| Feasibility | Technical/resource/time feasibility? |
|
|
| Risk Assessment | Worst case scenario? Hidden risks? |
|
|
| Competitive Analysis | Better alternatives already exist? |
|
|
|
|
**Severity Classification**:
|
|
|
|
| Severity | Criteria |
|
|
|----------|----------|
|
|
| CRITICAL | Fundamental issue, idea may need replacement |
|
|
| HIGH | Significant flaw, requires revision |
|
|
| MEDIUM | Notable weakness, needs consideration |
|
|
| LOW | Minor concern, does not invalidate the idea |
|
|
|
|
**Generator-Critic Signal**:
|
|
|
|
| Condition | Signal |
|
|
|-----------|--------|
|
|
| Any CRITICAL or HIGH severity | REVISION_NEEDED |
|
|
| All MEDIUM or lower | CONVERGED |
|
|
|
|
**Output**: Write to `<session>/critiques/critique-<num>.md`
|
|
- Sections: Ideas Reviewed, Per-idea challenges with severity, Summary table with counts, GC Signal
|
|
|
|
## Phase 4: Severity Summary
|
|
|
|
1. Count challenges by severity level
|
|
2. Determine signal: REVISION_NEEDED if critical+high > 0, else CONVERGED
|
|
3. Update shared state:
|
|
- Append challenges to .msg/meta.json critique_insights
|
|
- Each entry: idea, severity, key_challenge, round
|