CalvinBackup/gstack
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git synced 2026-08-23 14:32:33 +02:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

feat: review chaining + commit hash staleness tracking

Browse Source 
Each plan review skill now suggests the next review via AskUserQuestion:
- CEO review → eng review (required gate) + design review (if UI scope)
- Design review → eng review + CEO review (if product gaps)
- Eng review → design review (if UI changes) + CEO review (soft suggestion)

Reviews now track HEAD commit hash in JSONL entries for deterministic
staleness detection. Dashboard compares stored hash against current HEAD
and reports drift. Respects skip_eng_review config in chaining logic.

Also adds commit tracking to design-review-lite entries.
This commit is contained in:
Garry Tan
2026-03-18 23:32:29 -07:00
parent bc86a665b7
commit 7fd1c23770
5 changed files with 111 additions and 6 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
plan-design-review/SKILL.md.tmpl
+17 -1
View File
@@ -269,7 +269,7 @@ After producing the Completion Summary above, persist the review result:
```bash
eval $(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)
mkdir -p ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG
echo '{"skill":"plan-design-review","timestamp":"TIMESTAMP","status":"STATUS","overall_score":N,"unresolved":N,"decisions_made":N}' >> ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG/$BRANCH-reviews.jsonl
echo '{"skill":"plan-design-review","timestamp":"TIMESTAMP","status":"STATUS","overall_score":N,"unresolved":N,"decisions_made":N,"commit":"COMMIT"}' >> ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG/$BRANCH-reviews.jsonl
```
Substitute values from the Completion Summary:
@@ -278,9 +278,25 @@ Substitute values from the Completion Summary:
- **overall_score**: final overall design score (0-10)
- **unresolved**: number of unresolved design decisions
- **decisions_made**: number of design decisions added to the plan
- **COMMIT**: output of `git rev-parse --short HEAD`
{{REVIEW_DASHBOARD}}
## Next Steps — Review Chaining
After displaying the Review Readiness Dashboard, recommend the next review(s) based on what this design review discovered. Read the dashboard output to see which reviews have already been run and whether they are stale.
**Recommend /plan-eng-review if eng review is not skipped globally** — check the dashboard output for `skip_eng_review`. If it is `true`, eng review is opted out — do not recommend it. Otherwise, eng review is the required shipping gate. If this design review added significant interaction specifications, new user flows, or changed the information architecture, emphasize that eng review needs to validate the architectural implications. If an eng review already exists but the commit hash shows it predates this design review, note that it may be stale and should be re-run.
**Consider recommending /plan-ceo-review** — but only if this design review revealed fundamental product direction gaps. Specifically: if the overall design score started below 4/10, if the information architecture had major structural problems, or if the review surfaced questions about whether the right problem is being solved. AND no CEO review exists in the dashboard. This is a selective recommendation — most design reviews should NOT trigger a CEO review.
**If both are needed, recommend eng review first** (required gate).
Use AskUserQuestion to present the next step. Include only applicable options:
- **A)** Run /plan-eng-review next (required gate)
- **B)** Run /plan-ceo-review (only if fundamental product gaps found)
- **C)** Skip — I'll handle reviews manually
## Formatting Rules
* NUMBER issues (1, 2, 3...) and LETTERS for options (A, B, C...).
* Label with NUMBER + LETTER (e.g., "3A", "3B").