mirror of
https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git
synced 2026-11-01 14:34:42 +01:00
Garry Tanandcapy-ai[bot]
5b9b8372c4
* docs(designs): honest work and gate integrity plan (autoplan-reviewed) Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * test(e2e): review-gate-integrity rule case registered in touchfiles and the PR profile Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * feat(honesty): claims-need-evidence kernel, no_claim card field, CEO value test, implementer dispatch rules, ACCEPTANCE_EDITED, Honest Work ethos Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * feat(gate-diff): gate-edit detector lib + CLI, patch fixtures, calibration script, tests_ran in gstack-evidence Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * fix(gate-diff): RH-15? only on CI/config floors after calibration Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * feat(review,ship): Gate Integrity category, GATE_SCAN_BLOCK, one-way gate disposition, actor stamping, ZERO-RUN lanes, draft-while-open Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * chore: re-measure parity and context budgets on the integrated tree Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * test(touchfiles): gate-diff fixtures and helpers select review-gate-integrity Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * fix: archaeology lint wording, paid-file census, harness-version non-behavioral record Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * fix: pin review Step 3.5 rename, plan-path placeholder, mktemp template, per-stream evidence tail Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * test: ACCEPTANCE_EDITED fence substitutes the <plan-path> placeholder Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * fix(gate-diff): shallow boundary commits report no_base instead of a whole-tree inventory; recalibrate Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> --------- Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
218 lines
8.1 KiB
JSON
218 lines
8.1 KiB
JSON
{
|
|
"source": "Step and phase headings of the judged workflow skills, derived on 2026-10-04 from the generated Claude SKILL.md and sections (templates at the integration head). qa-only lists its template's own top-level headings. C1 calibration showed the workflow judges pass a bundle with a required step removed, so missing-step coverage lives here.",
|
|
"skills": {
|
|
"qa": {
|
|
"SKILL.md": [
|
|
"## Step 0: Detect platform and base branch",
|
|
"## Phases 1-6: QA Baseline",
|
|
"## Phase 7: Triage",
|
|
"## Phase 8: Fix Loop",
|
|
"### 8a. Diagnose and reproduce",
|
|
"### 8a.5. Regression test before repair",
|
|
"### 8b. Fix",
|
|
"### 8c. Re-test",
|
|
"### 8d. Commit verified work",
|
|
"### 8e. Classify",
|
|
"### 8e.5. Regression Test record",
|
|
"### 8f. Self-Regulation (STOP AND EVALUATE)",
|
|
"## Phase 9: Final QA",
|
|
"## Phase 10: Report",
|
|
"## Phase 11: TODOS.md Update"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/exploratory.md": [
|
|
"## 1. Charter and preflight",
|
|
"## 2. Probe loop",
|
|
"## 3. Parent handoff",
|
|
"## 4. Final report"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/qa-patterns.md": [
|
|
"### Phase 1: Initialize",
|
|
"### Phase 2: Authenticate (if needed)",
|
|
"### Phase 3: Orient",
|
|
"### Phase 4: Explore",
|
|
"### Phase 5: Document",
|
|
"### Phase 6: Wrap Up"
|
|
]
|
|
},
|
|
"qa-only": {
|
|
"SKILL.md": [
|
|
"## Request Parameters",
|
|
"## Test Plan Context",
|
|
"## Select Surfaces and Isolation",
|
|
"## Prepare Report Artifacts",
|
|
"## Browser Setup (conditional)",
|
|
"## Run the Selected Checks",
|
|
"## Output",
|
|
"## Additional Rules (qa-only specific)"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/exploratory.md": [
|
|
"## 0. Preparation gate",
|
|
"## 1. Charter and preflight",
|
|
"## 2. Probe loop",
|
|
"## 3. Parent handoff",
|
|
"## 4. Final report"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/reporting.md": [
|
|
"## 1. Establish each finding once",
|
|
"## 2. Fill timing fields from their actual boundaries",
|
|
"## 3. Assemble and check every repetition before writing",
|
|
"## 4. Capture permitted notes, then write the report"
|
|
]
|
|
},
|
|
"review": {
|
|
"SKILL.md": [
|
|
"## Step 0: Detect platform and base branch",
|
|
"## Step 1: Check branch",
|
|
"## Step 1.5: Scope Drift Detection",
|
|
"## Step 2: Read the checklist",
|
|
"## Step 2.5: Check for Greptile review comments",
|
|
"## Step 3: Get the diff",
|
|
"## Step 3.4: Workspace-aware queue status (advisory)",
|
|
"## Step 3.5: Diff scans",
|
|
"## Step 3.6: Gather review context",
|
|
"## Step 4: Critical pass (core review)",
|
|
"### Step 4.7: Exploratory QA (before Fix-First)",
|
|
"## Step 5: Fix-First Review",
|
|
"### Step 5.0: Cross-review finding dedup",
|
|
"### Step 5a: Classify each finding",
|
|
"### Step 5b: Auto-fix all AUTO-FIX items",
|
|
"### Step 5c: Batch-ask about ASK items",
|
|
"### Step 5d: Apply user-approved fixes",
|
|
"## Step 5.8: Persist Eng Review result",
|
|
"### 1. Re-review after edits",
|
|
"### 2. Fill the record"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/adversarial.md": [
|
|
"## Step 4.8: Adversarial review (always-on)"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/review-army.md": [
|
|
"## Step 4.5: Review Army — Specialist Dispatch",
|
|
"### Step 4.6: Collect and merge findings",
|
|
"#### 1. Parse outputs",
|
|
"#### 2. Validate severity",
|
|
"#### 3. Identify and merge",
|
|
"#### 4. Apply specialist confidence gates",
|
|
"#### 5. Score and present specialists",
|
|
"#### 6. Save specialist activity",
|
|
"#### 7. Hand off to Fix-First"
|
|
]
|
|
},
|
|
"ship": {
|
|
"SKILL.md": [
|
|
"## Step 0: Detect platform and base branch",
|
|
"## Step 0.9: Apple target detection",
|
|
"## Step 1: Pre-flight",
|
|
"## Step 2: Distribution Pipeline Check",
|
|
"## Step 3: Merge the base branch (BEFORE tests)",
|
|
"## Step 11.5: Bind the reviews",
|
|
"## Step 12: Version bump (auto-decide)",
|
|
"## Step 14: TODOS.md (auto-update)",
|
|
"## Step 14.5: Documentation audit (every ship)",
|
|
"## Step 15: Commit (bisectable chunks)",
|
|
"## Step 16: Verification Gate",
|
|
"### 1. Finish writers and prepare outputs",
|
|
"### 2. Choose the change route",
|
|
"### 3. Resolve documentation freshness",
|
|
"### 4. Verify the frozen candidate",
|
|
"### 5. Report, then push",
|
|
"## Step 17: Push",
|
|
"## Step 18: Prepare publication metadata",
|
|
"## Step 20: Persist ship metrics",
|
|
"## Step 21: Plan-tune discoverability nudge (first-successful-ship only)"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/adversarial.md": [
|
|
"## Step 11: Adversarial review (always-on)"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/changelog.md": [
|
|
"## Step 13: CHANGELOG (auto-generate)"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/greptile-early.md": [
|
|
"## Step 6.5: Early Greptile PR (after the free tests pass)"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/greptile.md": [
|
|
"## Step 10: Address Greptile review comments (if PR exists)"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/plan-completion.md": [
|
|
"## Step 8: Plan Completion Audit",
|
|
"## Step 8.1: Plan Verification",
|
|
"## Step 8.2: Scope Drift Detection"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/pr-body.md": [
|
|
"## Step 19: Create PR/MR"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/review-army.md": [
|
|
"## Step 9: Pre-Landing Review",
|
|
"## Step 9.1: Review Army — Specialist Dispatch",
|
|
"### Step 9.2: Collect and merge findings",
|
|
"#### 1. Parse outputs",
|
|
"#### 2. Validate severity",
|
|
"#### 3. Identify and merge",
|
|
"#### 4. Apply specialist confidence gates",
|
|
"#### 5. Score and present specialists",
|
|
"#### 6. Save specialist activity",
|
|
"#### 7. Hand off to Fix-First",
|
|
"### Step 9.2.1: Exploratory QA (before Fix-First)",
|
|
"### Step 9.3: Cross-review finding dedup",
|
|
"## Step 9.4: Fix-First and persistence"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/test-coverage.md": [
|
|
"## Step 7: Test Coverage Audit"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/tests.md": [
|
|
"## Step 4: Test Framework Bootstrap",
|
|
"## Step 5: Run tests (on merged code)",
|
|
"## Step 6: Eval Suites (conditional)"
|
|
]
|
|
},
|
|
"plan-ceo-review": {
|
|
"SKILL.md": [
|
|
"## Step 0: Detect platform and base branch",
|
|
"## Step 0: Nuclear Scope Challenge + Mode Selection",
|
|
"### 0A. Premise Challenge",
|
|
"### 0B. Existing Code Leverage",
|
|
"### 0C. Dream State Mapping",
|
|
"### 0D. Alternatives (reusable decision procedure)",
|
|
"### 0E. Mode Selection",
|
|
"### 0F. Expansion Framing (shared by EXPANSION and SELECTIVE EXPANSION)",
|
|
"### 0G. Mode-Specific Analysis",
|
|
"### 0H. Persist CEO Plan (EXPANSION and SELECTIVE EXPANSION only)",
|
|
"### 0I. Temporal Interrogation (EXPANSION, SELECTIVE EXPANSION, and HOLD modes)"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/review-sections.md": [
|
|
"### Section 1: Architecture Review",
|
|
"### Section 2: Error & Rescue Map",
|
|
"### Section 3: Security & Threat Model",
|
|
"### Section 4: Data Flow & Interaction Edge Cases",
|
|
"### Section 5: Code Quality Review",
|
|
"### Section 6: Test Review",
|
|
"### Section 7: Performance Review",
|
|
"### Section 8: Observability & Debuggability Review",
|
|
"### Section 9: Deployment & Rollout Review",
|
|
"### Section 10: Long-Term Trajectory Review",
|
|
"### Section 11: Design & UX Review (skip if no UI scope detected)"
|
|
]
|
|
},
|
|
"plan-eng-review": {
|
|
"SKILL.md": [
|
|
"### Step 0: Scope Challenge"
|
|
],
|
|
"sections/review-sections.md": [
|
|
"### 1. Architecture review",
|
|
"### 2. Code quality review",
|
|
"### 3. Test review",
|
|
"### 4. Performance review"
|
|
]
|
|
},
|
|
"setup-deploy": {
|
|
"SKILL.md": [
|
|
"### Step 1: Check existing configuration",
|
|
"### Step 2: Detect platform",
|
|
"### Step 3: Platform-specific setup",
|
|
"### Step 4: Write configuration",
|
|
"### Step 5: Verify",
|
|
"### Step 6: Summary"
|
|
]
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
}
|