mirror of
https://github.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow.git
synced 2026-03-26 19:56:37 +08:00
1e560ab8e8
- Delete 21 old team skill directories using CSV-wave pipeline pattern (~100+ files) - Delete old team-lifecycle (v3) and team-planex-v2 - Create generic team-worker.toml and team-supervisor.toml (replacing tlv4-specific TOMLs) - Convert 19 team skills from Claude Code format (Agent/SendMessage/TaskCreate) to Codex format (spawn_agent/wait_agent/tasks.json/request_user_input) - Update team-lifecycle-v4 to use generic agent types (team_worker/team_supervisor) - Convert all coordinator role files: dispatch.md, monitor.md, role.md - Convert all worker role files: remove run_in_background, fix Bash syntax - Convert all specs/pipelines.md references - Final state: 20 team skills, 217 .md files, zero Claude Code API residuals Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2.0 KiB
2.0 KiB
role, prefix, inner_loop, message_types
| role | prefix | inner_loop | message_types | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| challenger | CHALLENGE | false |
|
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 | /ideas/*.md files | Yes |
| Previous critiques | /.msg/meta.json critique_insights | No |
- Extract session path from task description (match "Session: ")
- Glob idea files from /ideas/
- Read all idea files for analysis
- 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
- Count challenges by severity level
- Determine signal: REVISION_NEEDED if critical+high > 0, else CONVERGED
- Update shared state:
- Append challenges to .msg/meta.json critique_insights
- Each entry: idea, severity, key_challenge, round