mirror of
https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git
synced 2026-08-09 07:46:08 +02:00
Merge branch 'main' into garrytan/team-supabase-store
Resolved 15 conflicts: - session-runner.ts: kept both costs array (ours) and model/timing telemetry (main), renamed loop var to avoid shadowing model param - skill-e2e.test.ts: accepted deletion (main split into separate files) - gen-skill-docs.ts: kept our codex review flow with $PROJECTS_DIR paths - plan review templates: took main + re-applied $PROJECTS_DIR paths, replaced gstack-review-log with inline approach - TODOS.md: took main's shipped status for E2E model pinning - Generated SKILL.md + .agents/ files: regenerated from resolved templates Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Garry Tan
+178
-4
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ allowed-tools:
|
||||
- Glob
|
||||
- Bash
|
||||
- AskUserQuestion
|
||||
- WebSearch
|
||||
---
|
||||
<!-- AUTO-GENERATED from SKILL.md.tmpl — do not edit directly -->
|
||||
<!-- Regenerate: bun run gen:skill-docs -->
|
||||
@@ -135,6 +136,26 @@ AI-assisted coding makes the marginal cost of completeness near-zero. When you p
|
||||
- BAD: "Let's defer test coverage to a follow-up PR." (Tests are the cheapest lake to boil.)
|
||||
- BAD: Quoting only human-team effort: "This would take 2 weeks." (Say: "2 weeks human / ~1 hour CC.")
|
||||
|
||||
## Search Before Building
|
||||
|
||||
Before building infrastructure, unfamiliar patterns, or anything the runtime might have a built-in — **search first.** Read `~/.claude/skills/gstack/ETHOS.md` for the full philosophy.
|
||||
|
||||
**Three layers of knowledge:**
|
||||
- **Layer 1** (tried and true — in distribution). Don't reinvent the wheel. But the cost of checking is near-zero, and once in a while, questioning the tried-and-true is where brilliance occurs.
|
||||
- **Layer 2** (new and popular — search for these). But scrutinize: humans are subject to mania. Search results are inputs to your thinking, not answers.
|
||||
- **Layer 3** (first principles — prize these above all). Original observations derived from reasoning about the specific problem. The most valuable of all.
|
||||
|
||||
**Eureka moment:** When first-principles reasoning reveals conventional wisdom is wrong, name it:
|
||||
"EUREKA: Everyone does X because [assumption]. But [evidence] shows this is wrong. Y is better because [reasoning]."
|
||||
|
||||
Log eureka moments:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
jq -n --arg ts "$(date -u +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ)" --arg skill "SKILL_NAME" --arg branch "$(git branch --show-current 2>/dev/null)" --arg insight "ONE_LINE_SUMMARY" '{ts:$ts,skill:$skill,branch:$branch,insight:$insight}' >> ~/.gstack/analytics/eureka.jsonl 2>/dev/null || true
|
||||
```
|
||||
Replace SKILL_NAME and ONE_LINE_SUMMARY. Runs inline — don't stop the workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
**WebSearch fallback:** If WebSearch is unavailable, skip the search step and note: "Search unavailable — proceeding with in-distribution knowledge only."
|
||||
|
||||
## Contributor Mode
|
||||
|
||||
If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. You're a gstack user who also helps make it better.
|
||||
@@ -332,6 +353,21 @@ DESIGN=$(ls -t $PROJECTS_DIR/$SLUG/*-$BRANCH-design-*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1)
|
||||
```
|
||||
If a design doc exists (from `/office-hours`), read it. Use it as the source of truth for the problem statement, constraints, and chosen approach. If it has a `Supersedes:` field, note that this is a revised design.
|
||||
|
||||
**Handoff note check** (reuses $SLUG and $BRANCH from the design doc check above):
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
HANDOFF=$(ls -t $PROJECTS_DIR/$SLUG/*-$BRANCH-ceo-handoff-*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1)
|
||||
[ -n "$HANDOFF" ] && echo "HANDOFF_FOUND: $HANDOFF" || echo "NO_HANDOFF"
|
||||
```
|
||||
If this block runs in a separate shell from the design doc check, recompute $SLUG and $BRANCH first using the same commands from that block.
|
||||
If a handoff note is found: read it. This contains system audit findings and discussion
|
||||
from a prior CEO review session that paused so the user could run `/office-hours`. Use it
|
||||
as additional context alongside the design doc. The handoff note helps you avoid re-asking
|
||||
questions the user already answered. Do NOT skip any steps — run the full review, but use
|
||||
the handoff note to inform your analysis and avoid redundant questions.
|
||||
|
||||
Tell the user: "Found a handoff note from your prior CEO review session. I'll use that
|
||||
context to pick up where we left off."
|
||||
|
||||
## Prerequisite Skill Offer
|
||||
|
||||
When the design doc check above prints "No design doc found," offer the prerequisite
|
||||
@@ -351,6 +387,39 @@ Options:
|
||||
If they skip: "No worries — standard review. If you ever want sharper input, try
|
||||
/office-hours first next time." Then proceed normally. Do not re-offer later in the session.
|
||||
|
||||
**Handoff note save (BENEFITS_FROM):** If the user chose A (run /office-hours first),
|
||||
save a handoff context note before they leave. Reuse $SLUG and $BRANCH from the
|
||||
design doc check block above (they use the same `remote-slug || basename` fallback
|
||||
that handles repos without an origin remote). Then run:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
mkdir -p $PROJECTS_DIR/$SLUG
|
||||
USER=$(whoami)
|
||||
DATETIME=$(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S)
|
||||
```
|
||||
Write to `$PROJECTS_DIR/$SLUG/$USER-$BRANCH-ceo-handoff-$DATETIME.md`:
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# CEO Review Handoff Note
|
||||
|
||||
Generated by /plan-ceo-review on {date}
|
||||
Branch: {branch}
|
||||
Repo: {owner/repo}
|
||||
|
||||
## Why I paused
|
||||
User chose to run /office-hours first (no design doc found).
|
||||
|
||||
## System Audit Summary
|
||||
{Summarize what the system audit found — recent git history, diff scope,
|
||||
CLAUDE.md key points, TODOS.md relevant items, known pain points}
|
||||
|
||||
## Discussion So Far
|
||||
{Empty — handoff happened before Step 0. Frontend/UI scope detection has not
|
||||
run yet — it will be assessed when the review resumes.}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Tell the user: "Context saved. Run /office-hours in another window. When you come back
|
||||
and invoke /plan-ceo-review, I'll pick up the context automatically — including the
|
||||
design doc /office-hours produces."
|
||||
|
||||
**Mid-session detection:** During Step 0A (Premise Challenge), if the user can't
|
||||
articulate the problem, keeps changing the problem statement, answers with "I'm not
|
||||
sure," or is clearly exploring rather than reviewing — offer `/office-hours`:
|
||||
@@ -363,6 +432,15 @@ sure," or is clearly exploring rather than reviewing — offer `/office-hours`:
|
||||
Options: A) Yes, run /office-hours first. B) No, keep going.
|
||||
If they keep going, proceed normally — no guilt, no re-asking.
|
||||
|
||||
**Handoff note save (mid-session):** If the user chose A (run /office-hours first from
|
||||
mid-session detection), save a handoff context note with the same format above, but
|
||||
include any Step 0A progress in the "Discussion So Far" section — premises discussed,
|
||||
problem framing attempts, user answers so far. Use the same bash block to generate the
|
||||
file path.
|
||||
|
||||
Tell the user: "Context saved with your discussion so far. Run /office-hours, then
|
||||
come back to /plan-ceo-review."
|
||||
|
||||
When reading TODOS.md, specifically:
|
||||
* Note any TODOs this plan touches, blocks, or unlocks
|
||||
* Check if deferred work from prior reviews relates to this plan
|
||||
@@ -385,6 +463,22 @@ Analyze the plan. If it involves ANY of: new UI screens/pages, changes to existi
|
||||
Identify 2-3 files or patterns in the existing codebase that are particularly well-designed. Note them as style references for the review. Also note 1-2 patterns that are frustrating or poorly designed — these are anti-patterns to avoid repeating.
|
||||
Report findings before proceeding to Step 0.
|
||||
|
||||
### Landscape Check
|
||||
|
||||
Read ETHOS.md for the Search Before Building framework (the preamble's Search Before Building section has the path). Before challenging scope, understand the landscape. WebSearch for:
|
||||
- "[product category] landscape {current year}"
|
||||
- "[key feature] alternatives"
|
||||
- "why [incumbent/conventional approach] [succeeds/fails]"
|
||||
|
||||
If WebSearch is unavailable, skip this check and note: "Search unavailable — proceeding with in-distribution knowledge only."
|
||||
|
||||
Run the three-layer synthesis:
|
||||
- **[Layer 1]** What's the tried-and-true approach in this space?
|
||||
- **[Layer 2]** What are the search results saying?
|
||||
- **[Layer 3]** First-principles reasoning — where might the conventional wisdom be wrong?
|
||||
|
||||
Feed into the Premise Challenge (0A) and Dream State Mapping (0C). If you find a eureka moment, surface it during the Expansion opt-in ceremony as a differentiation opportunity. Log it (see preamble).
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 0: Nuclear Scope Challenge + Mode Selection
|
||||
|
||||
### 0A. Premise Challenge
|
||||
@@ -950,6 +1044,16 @@ List every ASCII diagram in files this plan touches. Still accurate?
|
||||
### Unresolved Decisions
|
||||
If any AskUserQuestion goes unanswered, note it here. Never silently default.
|
||||
|
||||
## Handoff Note Cleanup
|
||||
|
||||
After producing the Completion Summary, clean up any handoff notes for this branch —
|
||||
the review is complete and the context is no longer needed.
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
eval $(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)
|
||||
rm -f $PROJECTS_DIR/$SLUG/*-$BRANCH-ceo-handoff-*.md 2>/dev/null || true
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Review Log
|
||||
|
||||
After producing the Completion Summary above, persist the review result.
|
||||
@@ -963,7 +1067,7 @@ command breaks the review readiness dashboard in /ship.
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
eval $(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)
|
||||
mkdir -p $PROJECTS_DIR/$SLUG/reviews
|
||||
echo '{"skill":"plan-ceo-review","timestamp":"TIMESTAMP","status":"STATUS","unresolved":N,"critical_gaps":N,"mode":"MODE","commit":"COMMIT"}' >> $PROJECTS_DIR/$SLUG/reviews/$BRANCH.jsonl
|
||||
echo '{"skill":"plan-ceo-review","timestamp":"TIMESTAMP","status":"STATUS","unresolved":N,"critical_gaps":N,"mode":"MODE","scope_proposed":N,"scope_accepted":N,"scope_deferred":N,"commit":"COMMIT"}' >> $PROJECTS_DIR/$SLUG/reviews/$BRANCH.jsonl
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Before running this command, substitute the placeholder values from the Completion Summary you just produced:
|
||||
@@ -972,6 +1076,9 @@ Before running this command, substitute the placeholder values from the Completi
|
||||
- **unresolved**: number from "Unresolved decisions" in the summary
|
||||
- **critical_gaps**: number from "Failure modes: ___ CRITICAL GAPS" in the summary
|
||||
- **MODE**: the mode the user selected (SCOPE_EXPANSION / SELECTIVE_EXPANSION / HOLD_SCOPE / SCOPE_REDUCTION)
|
||||
- **scope_proposed**: number from "Scope proposals: ___ proposed" in the summary (0 for HOLD/REDUCTION)
|
||||
- **scope_accepted**: number from "Scope proposals: ___ accepted" in the summary (0 for HOLD/REDUCTION)
|
||||
- **scope_deferred**: number of items deferred to TODOS.md from scope decisions (0 for HOLD/REDUCTION)
|
||||
- **COMMIT**: output of `git rev-parse --short HEAD`
|
||||
|
||||
## Review Readiness Dashboard
|
||||
@@ -985,7 +1092,7 @@ echo "---CONFIG---"
|
||||
~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config get skip_eng_review 2>/dev/null || echo "false"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, plan-eng-review, plan-design-review, design-review-lite, codex-review). Ignore entries with timestamps older than 7 days. For Design Review, show whichever is more recent between `plan-design-review` (full visual audit) and `design-review-lite` (code-level check). Append "(FULL)" or "(LITE)" to the status to distinguish. Display:
|
||||
Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, plan-eng-review, plan-design-review, design-review-lite, adversarial-review, codex-review). Ignore entries with timestamps older than 7 days. For the Adversarial row, show whichever is more recent between `adversarial-review` (new auto-scaled) and `codex-review` (legacy). For Design Review, show whichever is more recent between `plan-design-review` (full visual audit) and `design-review-lite` (code-level check). Append "(FULL)" or "(LITE)" to the status to distinguish. Display:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
+====================================================================+
|
||||
@@ -996,7 +1103,7 @@ Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, pl
|
||||
| Eng Review | 1 | 2026-03-16 15:00 | CLEAR | YES |
|
||||
| CEO Review | 0 | — | — | no |
|
||||
| Design Review | 0 | — | — | no |
|
||||
| Codex Review | 0 | — | — | no |
|
||||
| Adversarial | 0 | — | — | no |
|
||||
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
|
||||
| VERDICT: CLEARED — Eng Review passed |
|
||||
+====================================================================+
|
||||
@@ -1006,7 +1113,7 @@ Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, pl
|
||||
- **Eng Review (required by default):** The only review that gates shipping. Covers architecture, code quality, tests, performance. Can be disabled globally with \`gstack-config set skip_eng_review true\` (the "don't bother me" setting).
|
||||
- **CEO Review (optional):** Use your judgment. Recommend it for big product/business changes, new user-facing features, or scope decisions. Skip for bug fixes, refactors, infra, and cleanup.
|
||||
- **Design Review (optional):** Use your judgment. Recommend it for UI/UX changes. Skip for backend-only, infra, or prompt-only changes.
|
||||
- **Codex Review (enabled by default when Codex CLI is installed):** Independent review + adversarial challenge from OpenAI Codex CLI. Shows pass/fail gate. Runs automatically when enabled — configure with \`gstack-config set codex_reviews enabled|disabled\`.
|
||||
- **Adversarial Review (automatic):** Auto-scales by diff size. Small diffs (<50 lines) skip adversarial. Medium diffs (50–199) get cross-model adversarial. Large diffs (200+) get all 4 passes: Claude structured, Codex structured, Claude adversarial subagent, Codex adversarial. No configuration needed.
|
||||
|
||||
**Verdict logic:**
|
||||
- **CLEARED**: Eng Review has >= 1 entry within 7 days with status "clean" (or \`skip_eng_review\` is \`true\`)
|
||||
@@ -1020,6 +1127,73 @@ Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, pl
|
||||
- For entries without a \`commit\` field (legacy entries): display "Note: {skill} review from {date} has no commit tracking — consider re-running for accurate staleness detection"
|
||||
- If all reviews match the current HEAD, do not display any staleness notes
|
||||
|
||||
## Plan File Review Report
|
||||
|
||||
After displaying the Review Readiness Dashboard in conversation output, also update the
|
||||
**plan file** itself so review status is visible to anyone reading the plan.
|
||||
|
||||
### Detect the plan file
|
||||
|
||||
1. Check if there is an active plan file in this conversation (the host provides plan file
|
||||
paths in system messages — look for plan file references in the conversation context).
|
||||
2. If not found, skip this section silently — not every review runs in plan mode.
|
||||
|
||||
### Generate the report
|
||||
|
||||
Read the review log output you already have from the Review Readiness Dashboard step above.
|
||||
Parse each JSONL entry. Each skill logs different fields:
|
||||
|
||||
- **plan-ceo-review**: \`status\`, \`unresolved\`, \`critical_gaps\`, \`mode\`, \`scope_proposed\`, \`scope_accepted\`, \`scope_deferred\`, \`commit\`
|
||||
→ Findings: "{scope_proposed} proposals, {scope_accepted} accepted, {scope_deferred} deferred"
|
||||
→ If scope fields are 0 or missing (HOLD/REDUCTION mode): "mode: {mode}, {critical_gaps} critical gaps"
|
||||
- **plan-eng-review**: \`status\`, \`unresolved\`, \`critical_gaps\`, \`issues_found\`, \`mode\`, \`commit\`
|
||||
→ Findings: "{issues_found} issues, {critical_gaps} critical gaps"
|
||||
- **plan-design-review**: \`status\`, \`initial_score\`, \`overall_score\`, \`unresolved\`, \`decisions_made\`, \`commit\`
|
||||
→ Findings: "score: {initial_score}/10 → {overall_score}/10, {decisions_made} decisions"
|
||||
- **codex-review**: \`status\`, \`gate\`, \`findings\`, \`findings_fixed\`
|
||||
→ Findings: "{findings} findings, {findings_fixed}/{findings} fixed"
|
||||
|
||||
All fields needed for the Findings column are now present in the JSONL entries.
|
||||
For the review you just completed, you may use richer details from your own Completion
|
||||
Summary. For prior reviews, use the JSONL fields directly — they contain all required data.
|
||||
|
||||
Produce this markdown table:
|
||||
|
||||
\`\`\`markdown
|
||||
## GSTACK REVIEW REPORT
|
||||
|
||||
| Review | Trigger | Why | Runs | Status | Findings |
|
||||
|--------|---------|-----|------|--------|----------|
|
||||
| CEO Review | \`/plan-ceo-review\` | Scope & strategy | {runs} | {status} | {findings} |
|
||||
| Codex Review | \`/codex review\` | Independent 2nd opinion | {runs} | {status} | {findings} |
|
||||
| Eng Review | \`/plan-eng-review\` | Architecture & tests (required) | {runs} | {status} | {findings} |
|
||||
| Design Review | \`/plan-design-review\` | UI/UX gaps | {runs} | {status} | {findings} |
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
|
||||
Below the table, add these lines (omit any that are empty/not applicable):
|
||||
|
||||
- **CODEX:** (only if codex-review ran) — one-line summary of codex fixes
|
||||
- **CROSS-MODEL:** (only if both Claude and Codex reviews exist) — overlap analysis
|
||||
- **UNRESOLVED:** total unresolved decisions across all reviews
|
||||
- **VERDICT:** list reviews that are CLEAR (e.g., "CEO + ENG CLEARED — ready to implement").
|
||||
If Eng Review is not CLEAR and not skipped globally, append "eng review required".
|
||||
|
||||
### Write to the plan file
|
||||
|
||||
**PLAN MODE EXCEPTION — ALWAYS RUN:** This writes to the plan file, which is the one
|
||||
file you are allowed to edit in plan mode. The plan file review report is part of the
|
||||
plan's living status.
|
||||
|
||||
- Search the plan file for a \`## GSTACK REVIEW REPORT\` section **anywhere** in the file
|
||||
(not just at the end — content may have been added after it).
|
||||
- If found, **replace it** entirely using the Edit tool. Match from \`## GSTACK REVIEW REPORT\`
|
||||
through either the next \`## \` heading or end of file, whichever comes first. This ensures
|
||||
content added after the report section is preserved, not eaten. If the Edit fails
|
||||
(e.g., concurrent edit changed the content), re-read the plan file and retry once.
|
||||
- If no such section exists, **append it** to the end of the plan file.
|
||||
- Always place it as the very last section in the plan file. If it was found mid-file,
|
||||
move it: delete the old location and append at the end.
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps — Review Chaining
|
||||
|
||||
After displaying the Review Readiness Dashboard, recommend the next review(s) based on what this CEO review discovered. Read the dashboard output to see which reviews have already been run and whether they are stale.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ allowed-tools:
|
||||
- Glob
|
||||
- Bash
|
||||
- AskUserQuestion
|
||||
- WebSearch
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
{{PREAMBLE}}
|
||||
@@ -111,8 +112,56 @@ DESIGN=$(ls -t $PROJECTS_DIR/$SLUG/*-$BRANCH-design-*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1)
|
||||
```
|
||||
If a design doc exists (from `/office-hours`), read it. Use it as the source of truth for the problem statement, constraints, and chosen approach. If it has a `Supersedes:` field, note that this is a revised design.
|
||||
|
||||
**Handoff note check** (reuses $SLUG and $BRANCH from the design doc check above):
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
HANDOFF=$(ls -t $PROJECTS_DIR/$SLUG/*-$BRANCH-ceo-handoff-*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1)
|
||||
[ -n "$HANDOFF" ] && echo "HANDOFF_FOUND: $HANDOFF" || echo "NO_HANDOFF"
|
||||
```
|
||||
If this block runs in a separate shell from the design doc check, recompute $SLUG and $BRANCH first using the same commands from that block.
|
||||
If a handoff note is found: read it. This contains system audit findings and discussion
|
||||
from a prior CEO review session that paused so the user could run `/office-hours`. Use it
|
||||
as additional context alongside the design doc. The handoff note helps you avoid re-asking
|
||||
questions the user already answered. Do NOT skip any steps — run the full review, but use
|
||||
the handoff note to inform your analysis and avoid redundant questions.
|
||||
|
||||
Tell the user: "Found a handoff note from your prior CEO review session. I'll use that
|
||||
context to pick up where we left off."
|
||||
|
||||
{{BENEFITS_FROM}}
|
||||
|
||||
**Handoff note save (BENEFITS_FROM):** If the user chose A (run /office-hours first),
|
||||
save a handoff context note before they leave. Reuse $SLUG and $BRANCH from the
|
||||
design doc check block above (they use the same `remote-slug || basename` fallback
|
||||
that handles repos without an origin remote). Then run:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
mkdir -p $PROJECTS_DIR/$SLUG
|
||||
USER=$(whoami)
|
||||
DATETIME=$(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S)
|
||||
```
|
||||
Write to `$PROJECTS_DIR/$SLUG/$USER-$BRANCH-ceo-handoff-$DATETIME.md`:
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# CEO Review Handoff Note
|
||||
|
||||
Generated by /plan-ceo-review on {date}
|
||||
Branch: {branch}
|
||||
Repo: {owner/repo}
|
||||
|
||||
## Why I paused
|
||||
User chose to run /office-hours first (no design doc found).
|
||||
|
||||
## System Audit Summary
|
||||
{Summarize what the system audit found — recent git history, diff scope,
|
||||
CLAUDE.md key points, TODOS.md relevant items, known pain points}
|
||||
|
||||
## Discussion So Far
|
||||
{Empty — handoff happened before Step 0. Frontend/UI scope detection has not
|
||||
run yet — it will be assessed when the review resumes.}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Tell the user: "Context saved. Run /office-hours in another window. When you come back
|
||||
and invoke /plan-ceo-review, I'll pick up the context automatically — including the
|
||||
design doc /office-hours produces."
|
||||
|
||||
**Mid-session detection:** During Step 0A (Premise Challenge), if the user can't
|
||||
articulate the problem, keeps changing the problem statement, answers with "I'm not
|
||||
sure," or is clearly exploring rather than reviewing — offer `/office-hours`:
|
||||
@@ -125,6 +174,15 @@ sure," or is clearly exploring rather than reviewing — offer `/office-hours`:
|
||||
Options: A) Yes, run /office-hours first. B) No, keep going.
|
||||
If they keep going, proceed normally — no guilt, no re-asking.
|
||||
|
||||
**Handoff note save (mid-session):** If the user chose A (run /office-hours first from
|
||||
mid-session detection), save a handoff context note with the same format above, but
|
||||
include any Step 0A progress in the "Discussion So Far" section — premises discussed,
|
||||
problem framing attempts, user answers so far. Use the same bash block to generate the
|
||||
file path.
|
||||
|
||||
Tell the user: "Context saved with your discussion so far. Run /office-hours, then
|
||||
come back to /plan-ceo-review."
|
||||
|
||||
When reading TODOS.md, specifically:
|
||||
* Note any TODOs this plan touches, blocks, or unlocks
|
||||
* Check if deferred work from prior reviews relates to this plan
|
||||
@@ -147,6 +205,22 @@ Analyze the plan. If it involves ANY of: new UI screens/pages, changes to existi
|
||||
Identify 2-3 files or patterns in the existing codebase that are particularly well-designed. Note them as style references for the review. Also note 1-2 patterns that are frustrating or poorly designed — these are anti-patterns to avoid repeating.
|
||||
Report findings before proceeding to Step 0.
|
||||
|
||||
### Landscape Check
|
||||
|
||||
Read ETHOS.md for the Search Before Building framework (the preamble's Search Before Building section has the path). Before challenging scope, understand the landscape. WebSearch for:
|
||||
- "[product category] landscape {current year}"
|
||||
- "[key feature] alternatives"
|
||||
- "why [incumbent/conventional approach] [succeeds/fails]"
|
||||
|
||||
If WebSearch is unavailable, skip this check and note: "Search unavailable — proceeding with in-distribution knowledge only."
|
||||
|
||||
Run the three-layer synthesis:
|
||||
- **[Layer 1]** What's the tried-and-true approach in this space?
|
||||
- **[Layer 2]** What are the search results saying?
|
||||
- **[Layer 3]** First-principles reasoning — where might the conventional wisdom be wrong?
|
||||
|
||||
Feed into the Premise Challenge (0A) and Dream State Mapping (0C). If you find a eureka moment, surface it during the Expansion opt-in ceremony as a differentiation opportunity. Log it (see preamble).
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 0: Nuclear Scope Challenge + Mode Selection
|
||||
|
||||
### 0A. Premise Challenge
|
||||
@@ -652,6 +726,16 @@ List every ASCII diagram in files this plan touches. Still accurate?
|
||||
### Unresolved Decisions
|
||||
If any AskUserQuestion goes unanswered, note it here. Never silently default.
|
||||
|
||||
## Handoff Note Cleanup
|
||||
|
||||
After producing the Completion Summary, clean up any handoff notes for this branch —
|
||||
the review is complete and the context is no longer needed.
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
eval $(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)
|
||||
rm -f $PROJECTS_DIR/$SLUG/*-$BRANCH-ceo-handoff-*.md 2>/dev/null || true
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Review Log
|
||||
|
||||
After producing the Completion Summary above, persist the review result.
|
||||
@@ -665,7 +749,7 @@ command breaks the review readiness dashboard in /ship.
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
eval $(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)
|
||||
mkdir -p $PROJECTS_DIR/$SLUG/reviews
|
||||
echo '{"skill":"plan-ceo-review","timestamp":"TIMESTAMP","status":"STATUS","unresolved":N,"critical_gaps":N,"mode":"MODE","commit":"COMMIT"}' >> $PROJECTS_DIR/$SLUG/reviews/$BRANCH.jsonl
|
||||
echo '{"skill":"plan-ceo-review","timestamp":"TIMESTAMP","status":"STATUS","unresolved":N,"critical_gaps":N,"mode":"MODE","scope_proposed":N,"scope_accepted":N,"scope_deferred":N,"commit":"COMMIT"}' >> $PROJECTS_DIR/$SLUG/reviews/$BRANCH.jsonl
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Before running this command, substitute the placeholder values from the Completion Summary you just produced:
|
||||
@@ -674,10 +758,15 @@ Before running this command, substitute the placeholder values from the Completi
|
||||
- **unresolved**: number from "Unresolved decisions" in the summary
|
||||
- **critical_gaps**: number from "Failure modes: ___ CRITICAL GAPS" in the summary
|
||||
- **MODE**: the mode the user selected (SCOPE_EXPANSION / SELECTIVE_EXPANSION / HOLD_SCOPE / SCOPE_REDUCTION)
|
||||
- **scope_proposed**: number from "Scope proposals: ___ proposed" in the summary (0 for HOLD/REDUCTION)
|
||||
- **scope_accepted**: number from "Scope proposals: ___ accepted" in the summary (0 for HOLD/REDUCTION)
|
||||
- **scope_deferred**: number of items deferred to TODOS.md from scope decisions (0 for HOLD/REDUCTION)
|
||||
- **COMMIT**: output of `git rev-parse --short HEAD`
|
||||
|
||||
{{REVIEW_DASHBOARD}}
|
||||
|
||||
{{PLAN_FILE_REVIEW_REPORT}}
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps — Review Chaining
|
||||
|
||||
After displaying the Review Readiness Dashboard, recommend the next review(s) based on what this CEO review discovered. Read the dashboard output to see which reviews have already been run and whether they are stale.
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user