mirror of
https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git
synced 2026-05-02 03:35:09 +02:00
refactor(opus-4.7): split overlay, align routing, fix trailer fallback
Follow-up to wintermute's initial Opus 4.7 migration commit (addresses
ship-quality review findings before v1.6.1.0 release).
Overlay split (model-overlays/):
- Move 4 Opus-4.7-specific nudges (Fan out, Effort-match, Batch your
questions, Literal interpretation) from claude.md into new
opus-4-7.md with {{INHERIT:claude}}
- claude.md now holds only model-agnostic nudges (Todo discipline,
Think before heavy, Dedicated tools over Bash)
- Prevents Opus-4.7-specific guidance leaking onto Sonnet/Haiku
- Uses existing {{INHERIT:claude}} mechanism at
scripts/resolvers/model-overlay.ts:28-43
scripts/models.ts:
- Add opus-4-7 to ALL_MODEL_NAMES
- resolveModel: claude-opus-4-7-* variants route to opus-4-7,
all other claude-* variants continue to route to claude
scripts/resolvers/utility.ts:
- Update coAuthor trailer fallback: Opus 4.6 -> Opus 4.7
(fallback was missed in the initial migration commit)
scripts/resolvers/preamble/generate-routing-injection.ts:
- Align policy with new SKILL.md.tmpl: soft "when in doubt, invoke"
instead of hard "ALWAYS invoke... Do NOT answer directly"
- Replace stale /checkpoint reference with /context-save +
/context-restore (skills were renamed in v1.0.1.0)
- Expand route coverage to match full skill inventory:
/plan-devex-review, /qa-only, /devex-review, /land-and-deploy,
/setup-deploy, /canary, /open-gstack-browser,
/setup-browser-cookies, /benchmark, /learn, /plan-tune, /health
scripts/resolvers/preamble/generate-voice-directive.ts:
- Voice example closing: "Want me to ship it?" -> "Want me to fix it?"
- Preserves directness while routing through review gates
SKILL.md.tmpl:
- Add routing triggers for skills that were missing from the list:
/plan-devex-review, /qa-only, /devex-review, /land-and-deploy,
/setup-deploy, /canary, /open-gstack-browser,
/setup-browser-cookies, /benchmark, /learn, /plan-tune, /health
- Within Opus 4.7 overlay, added scope boundary to
"Literal interpretation" nudge ("fix tests that this branch
introduced or is responsible for")
- Added pacing exception to "Batch your questions" nudge so skills
that require one-question-at-a-time pacing still win
Follow-up commit will regenerate SKILL.md files + update goldens.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
@@ -36,12 +36,18 @@ quality gates that produce better results than answering inline.
|
||||
- User asks to review architecture, lock in the plan, "does this design make sense" → invoke `/plan-eng-review`
|
||||
- User asks about design system, brand, visual identity, "how should this look" → invoke `/design-consultation`
|
||||
- User asks to review design of a plan → invoke `/plan-design-review`
|
||||
- User asks about developer experience of a plan, API/CLI/SDK design → invoke `/plan-devex-review`
|
||||
- User wants all reviews done automatically, "review everything" → invoke `/autoplan`
|
||||
- User reports a bug, error, broken behavior, "why is this broken", "this doesn't work", "wtf", "something's wrong" → invoke `/investigate`
|
||||
- User asks to test the site, find bugs, QA, "does this work", "check the deploy" → invoke `/qa`
|
||||
- User asks to just report bugs without fixing → invoke `/qa-only`
|
||||
- User asks to review code, check the diff, pre-landing review, "look at my changes" → invoke `/review`
|
||||
- User asks about visual polish, design audit of a live site, "this looks off" → invoke `/design-review`
|
||||
- User asks to audit the live developer experience, time-to-hello-world → invoke `/devex-review`
|
||||
- User asks to ship, deploy, push, create a PR, "let's land this", "send it" → invoke `/ship`
|
||||
- User asks to merge + deploy + verify as one flow → invoke `/land-and-deploy`
|
||||
- User asks to configure deployment for the project → invoke `/setup-deploy`
|
||||
- User asks to monitor prod after shipping, post-deploy checks → invoke `/canary`
|
||||
- User asks to update docs after shipping → invoke `/document-release`
|
||||
- User asks for a weekly retro, what did we ship, "how'd we do" → invoke `/retro`
|
||||
- User asks for a second opinion, codex review → invoke `/codex`
|
||||
@@ -52,6 +58,12 @@ quality gates that produce better results than answering inline.
|
||||
- User asks to resume, restore, "where was I" → invoke `/context-restore`
|
||||
- User asks about security, OWASP, vulnerabilities, "is this secure" → invoke `/cso`
|
||||
- User asks to make a PDF, document, publication → invoke `/make-pdf`
|
||||
- User asks to launch a real browser for QA, "open the browser" → invoke `/open-gstack-browser`
|
||||
- User asks to import cookies for authenticated testing → invoke `/setup-browser-cookies`
|
||||
- User asks about page speed, performance regression, benchmarks → invoke `/benchmark`
|
||||
- User asks what gstack has learned, "show learnings" → invoke `/learn`
|
||||
- User asks to tune question sensitivity, "stop asking me that" → invoke `/plan-tune`
|
||||
- User asks for code quality dashboard, "health check" → invoke `/health`
|
||||
|
||||
**When in doubt, invoke the skill.** A false positive (invoking a skill that wasn't
|
||||
needed) is cheaper than a false negative (answering ad-hoc when a structured workflow
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -8,27 +8,3 @@ the user course-correct cheaply instead of mid-flight.
|
||||
|
||||
**Dedicated tools over Bash.** Prefer Read, Edit, Write, Glob, Grep over shell
|
||||
equivalents (cat, sed, find, grep). The dedicated tools are cheaper and clearer.
|
||||
|
||||
**Fan out explicitly.** Opus 4.7 defaults to sequential work and spawns fewer
|
||||
subagents than 4.6. When a task has independent sub-problems (investigating multiple
|
||||
files, testing multiple endpoints, auditing multiple components), explicitly parallelize:
|
||||
spawn subagents in the same turn, run independent checks concurrently, don't serialize
|
||||
work that has no dependencies. If you catch yourself doing A then B then C where none
|
||||
depend on each other, stop and do all three at once.
|
||||
|
||||
**Effort-match the step.** Simple file reads, config checks, command lookups, and
|
||||
mechanical edits don't need deep reasoning. Complete them quickly and move on. Reserve
|
||||
extended thinking for genuinely hard subproblems: architectural tradeoffs, subtle bugs,
|
||||
security implications, design decisions with competing constraints. Over-thinking
|
||||
simple steps wastes tokens and time.
|
||||
|
||||
**Batch your questions.** If you need to clarify multiple things before proceeding,
|
||||
ask all of them in a single AskUserQuestion turn. Do not drip-feed one question per
|
||||
turn. Three questions in one message beats three back-and-forth exchanges.
|
||||
|
||||
**Literal interpretation awareness.** Opus 4.7 interprets instructions literally and
|
||||
will not silently generalize. When the user says "fix the tests," fix ALL failing tests,
|
||||
not just the first one. When the user says "update the docs," update every relevant doc,
|
||||
not just the most obvious one. Read the full scope of what was asked and deliver the
|
||||
full scope. If the request is ambiguous, ask once (batched with any other questions),
|
||||
then execute completely.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
|
||||
{{INHERIT:claude}}
|
||||
|
||||
**Fan out explicitly.** Opus 4.7 defaults to sequential work and spawns fewer
|
||||
subagents than 4.6. When a task has independent sub-problems (investigating multiple
|
||||
files, testing multiple endpoints, auditing multiple components), explicitly parallelize:
|
||||
spawn subagents in the same turn, run independent checks concurrently, don't serialize
|
||||
work that has no dependencies. If you catch yourself doing A then B then C where none
|
||||
depend on each other, stop and do all three at once.
|
||||
|
||||
**Effort-match the step.** Simple file reads, config checks, command lookups, and
|
||||
mechanical edits don't need deep reasoning. Complete them quickly and move on. Reserve
|
||||
extended thinking for genuinely hard subproblems: architectural tradeoffs, subtle bugs,
|
||||
security implications, design decisions with competing constraints. Over-thinking
|
||||
simple steps wastes tokens and time.
|
||||
|
||||
**Batch your questions.** If you need to clarify multiple things before proceeding,
|
||||
ask all of them in a single AskUserQuestion turn. Do not drip-feed one question per
|
||||
turn. Three questions in one message beats three back-and-forth exchanges. Exception:
|
||||
skill workflows that explicitly require one-question-at-a-time pacing (e.g., plan
|
||||
review skills with "STOP. AskUserQuestion once per issue. Do NOT batch.") override this
|
||||
nudge. The skill wins on pacing, always.
|
||||
|
||||
**Literal interpretation awareness.** Opus 4.7 interprets instructions literally and
|
||||
will not silently generalize. When the user says "fix the tests," fix all failing tests
|
||||
that this branch introduced or is responsible for, not just the first one (and not
|
||||
pre-existing failures in unrelated code). When the user says "update the docs," update
|
||||
every relevant doc in scope, not just the most obvious one. Read the full scope of what
|
||||
was asked and deliver the full scope. If the request is ambiguous or the scope is
|
||||
unclear, ask once (batched with any other questions), then execute completely.
|
||||
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
|
||||
|
||||
export const ALL_MODEL_NAMES = [
|
||||
'claude',
|
||||
'opus-4-7',
|
||||
'gpt',
|
||||
'gpt-5.4',
|
||||
'gemini',
|
||||
@@ -51,6 +52,7 @@ export function resolveModel(input: string): Model | null {
|
||||
if (/^gpt-5\.4(-|$)/.test(s)) return 'gpt-5.4';
|
||||
if (/^gpt(-|$)/.test(s)) return 'gpt';
|
||||
if (/^o[0-9]+(-|$)/.test(s)) return 'o-series';
|
||||
if (/^claude-opus-4-7(-|$)/.test(s)) return 'opus-4-7';
|
||||
if (/^claude(-|$)/.test(s)) return 'claude';
|
||||
if (/^gemini(-|$)/.test(s)) return 'gemini';
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -20,23 +20,44 @@ If A: Append this section to the end of CLAUDE.md:
|
||||
|
||||
## Skill routing
|
||||
|
||||
When the user's request matches an available skill, ALWAYS invoke it using the Skill
|
||||
tool as your FIRST action. Do NOT answer directly, do NOT use other tools first.
|
||||
The skill has specialized workflows that produce better results than ad-hoc answers.
|
||||
When the user's request matches an available skill, invoke it via the Skill tool. The
|
||||
skill has multi-step workflows, checklists, and quality gates that produce better
|
||||
results than an ad-hoc answer. When in doubt, invoke the skill. A false positive is
|
||||
cheaper than a false negative.
|
||||
|
||||
Key routing rules:
|
||||
- Product ideas, "is this worth building", brainstorming → invoke office-hours
|
||||
- Bugs, errors, "why is this broken", 500 errors → invoke investigate
|
||||
- Ship, deploy, push, create PR → invoke ship
|
||||
- QA, test the site, find bugs → invoke qa
|
||||
- Code review, check my diff → invoke review
|
||||
- Update docs after shipping → invoke document-release
|
||||
- Weekly retro → invoke retro
|
||||
- Design system, brand → invoke design-consultation
|
||||
- Visual audit, design polish → invoke design-review
|
||||
- Architecture review → invoke plan-eng-review
|
||||
- Save progress, checkpoint, resume → invoke checkpoint
|
||||
- Code quality, health check → invoke health
|
||||
- Product ideas, "is this worth building", brainstorming → invoke /office-hours
|
||||
- Strategy, scope, "think bigger", "what should we build" → invoke /plan-ceo-review
|
||||
- Architecture, "does this design make sense" → invoke /plan-eng-review
|
||||
- Design system, brand, "how should this look" → invoke /design-consultation
|
||||
- Design review of a plan → invoke /plan-design-review
|
||||
- Developer experience of a plan → invoke /plan-devex-review
|
||||
- "Review everything", full review pipeline → invoke /autoplan
|
||||
- Bugs, errors, "why is this broken", "wtf", "this doesn't work" → invoke /investigate
|
||||
- Test the site, find bugs, "does this work" → invoke /qa (or /qa-only for report only)
|
||||
- Code review, check the diff, "look at my changes" → invoke /review
|
||||
- Visual polish, design audit, "this looks off" → invoke /design-review
|
||||
- Developer experience audit, try onboarding → invoke /devex-review
|
||||
- Ship, deploy, create a PR, "send it" → invoke /ship
|
||||
- Merge + deploy + verify → invoke /land-and-deploy
|
||||
- Configure deployment → invoke /setup-deploy
|
||||
- Post-deploy monitoring → invoke /canary
|
||||
- Update docs after shipping → invoke /document-release
|
||||
- Weekly retro, "how'd we do" → invoke /retro
|
||||
- Second opinion, codex review → invoke /codex
|
||||
- Safety mode, careful mode, lock it down → invoke /careful or /guard
|
||||
- Restrict edits to a directory → invoke /freeze or /unfreeze
|
||||
- Upgrade gstack → invoke /gstack-upgrade
|
||||
- Save progress, "save my work" → invoke /context-save
|
||||
- Resume, restore, "where was I" → invoke /context-restore
|
||||
- Security audit, OWASP, "is this secure" → invoke /cso
|
||||
- Make a PDF, document, publication → invoke /make-pdf
|
||||
- Launch real browser for QA → invoke /open-gstack-browser
|
||||
- Import cookies for authenticated testing → invoke /setup-browser-cookies
|
||||
- Performance regression, page speed, benchmarks → invoke /benchmark
|
||||
- Review what gstack has learned → invoke /learn
|
||||
- Tune question sensitivity → invoke /plan-tune
|
||||
- Code quality dashboard → invoke /health
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
|
||||
Then commit the change: \`git add CLAUDE.md && git commit -m "chore: add gstack skill routing rules to CLAUDE.md"\`
|
||||
@@ -46,4 +67,3 @@ Say "No problem. You can add routing rules later by running \`gstack-config set
|
||||
|
||||
This only happens once per project. If \`HAS_ROUTING\` is \`yes\` or \`ROUTING_DECLINED\` is \`true\`, skip this entirely.`;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ Avoid filler, throat-clearing, generic optimism, founder cosplay, and unsupporte
|
||||
- End with what to do. Give the action.
|
||||
|
||||
**Example of the right voice:**
|
||||
"auth.ts:47 returns undefined when the session cookie expires. Your users hit a white screen. Fix: add a null check and redirect to /login. Two lines. Want me to ship it?"
|
||||
"auth.ts:47 returns undefined when the session cookie expires. Your users hit a white screen. Fix: add a null check and redirect to /login. Two lines. Want me to fix it?"
|
||||
Not: "I've identified a potential issue in the authentication flow that may cause problems for some users under certain conditions. Let me explain the approach I'd recommend..."
|
||||
|
||||
**Final test:** does this sound like a real cross-functional builder who wants to help someone make something people want, ship it, and make it actually work?`;
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -369,7 +369,7 @@ Minimum 0 per category.
|
||||
export function generateCoAuthorTrailer(ctx: TemplateContext): string {
|
||||
const { getHostConfig } = require('../../hosts/index');
|
||||
const hostConfig = getHostConfig(ctx.host);
|
||||
return hostConfig.coAuthorTrailer || 'Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>';
|
||||
return hostConfig.coAuthorTrailer || 'Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>';
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
export function generateChangelogWorkflow(_ctx: TemplateContext): string {
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user