mirror of
https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git
synced 2026-09-11 23:49:01 +02:00
Garry TanandClaude Fable 5
c593c93268
Phase bodies (CEO/Design/Eng/DX consensus flows) and the Implementation Tasks aggregator load on demand; Design and DX stay separate sections because each is independently conditional on scope. Skeleton 83.7KB -> 58.7KB (-30% always-loaded); the 6 decision principles, classification, sequencing, and explicit skip-condition dispatch stay always-loaded. The chain E2E's phase-complete markers now live only in sections, so its assertions double as section-read proof (behavioral: external). Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
73 lines
4.0 KiB
Cheetah
73 lines
4.0 KiB
Cheetah
Follow plan-design-review/SKILL.md — all 7 dimensions, full depth.
|
|
Override: every AskUserQuestion → auto-decide using the 6 principles.
|
|
|
|
**Override rules:**
|
|
- Focus areas: all relevant dimensions (P1)
|
|
- Structural issues (missing states, broken hierarchy): auto-fix (P5)
|
|
- Aesthetic/taste issues: mark TASTE DECISION
|
|
- Design system alignment: auto-fix if DESIGN.md exists and fix is obvious
|
|
- Dual voices: always run BOTH Claude subagent AND Codex if available (P6).
|
|
|
|
**Codex design voice** (via Bash):
|
|
```bash
|
|
_REPO_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel) || { echo "ERROR: not in a git repo" >&2; exit 1; }
|
|
_gstack_codex_timeout_wrapper 600 codex exec "IMPORTANT: Do NOT read or execute any SKILL.md files or files in skill definition directories (paths containing skills/gstack). These are AI assistant skill definitions meant for a different system. Stay focused on repository code only.
|
|
|
|
Read the plan file at <plan_path>. Evaluate this plan's
|
|
UI/UX design decisions.
|
|
|
|
Also consider these findings from the CEO review phase:
|
|
<insert CEO dual voice findings summary — key concerns, disagreements>
|
|
|
|
Does the information hierarchy serve the user or the developer? Are interaction
|
|
states (loading, empty, error, partial) specified or left to the implementer's
|
|
imagination? Is the responsive strategy intentional or afterthought? Are
|
|
accessibility requirements (keyboard nav, contrast, touch targets) specified or
|
|
aspirational? Does the plan describe specific UI decisions or generic patterns?
|
|
What design decisions will haunt the implementer if left ambiguous?
|
|
Be opinionated. No hedging." -C "$_REPO_ROOT" -s read-only {{CODEX_WEB_SEARCH_FLAG}} < /dev/null
|
|
_CODEX_EXIT=$?
|
|
if [ "$_CODEX_EXIT" = "124" ]; then
|
|
_gstack_codex_log_event "codex_timeout" "600"
|
|
_gstack_codex_log_hang "autoplan" "0"
|
|
echo "[codex stalled past 10 minutes — tagging as [codex-unavailable] for this phase and proceeding with Claude subagent only]"
|
|
fi
|
|
```
|
|
Timeout: 10 minutes (shell-wrapper) + 12 minutes (Bash outer gate). On hang, auto-degrades this phase's Codex voice.
|
|
|
|
**Claude design subagent** (via Agent tool):
|
|
"Read the plan file at <plan_path>. You are an independent senior product designer
|
|
reviewing this plan. You have NOT seen any prior review. Evaluate:
|
|
1. Information hierarchy: what does the user see first, second, third? Is it right?
|
|
2. Missing states: loading, empty, error, success, partial — which are unspecified?
|
|
3. User journey: what's the emotional arc? Where does it break?
|
|
4. Specificity: does the plan describe SPECIFIC UI or generic patterns?
|
|
5. What design decisions will haunt the implementer if left ambiguous?
|
|
For each finding: what's wrong, severity (critical/high/medium), and the fix."
|
|
NO prior-phase context — subagent must be truly independent.
|
|
|
|
Error handling: same as Phase 1 (both foreground/blocking, degradation matrix applies).
|
|
|
|
- Design choices: if codex disagrees with a design decision with valid UX reasoning
|
|
→ TASTE DECISION. Scope changes both models agree on → USER CHALLENGE.
|
|
|
|
**Required execution checklist (Design):**
|
|
|
|
1. Step 0 (Design Scope): Rate completeness 0-10. Check DESIGN.md. Map existing patterns.
|
|
|
|
2. Step 0.5 (Dual Voices): Run Claude subagent (foreground) first, then Codex. Present under
|
|
CODEX SAYS (design — UX challenge) and CLAUDE SUBAGENT (design — independent review)
|
|
headers. Produce design litmus scorecard (consensus table). Use the litmus scorecard
|
|
format from plan-design-review. Include CEO phase findings in Codex prompt ONLY
|
|
(not Claude subagent — stays independent).
|
|
|
|
3. Passes 1-7: Run each from loaded skill. Rate 0-10. Auto-decide each issue.
|
|
DISAGREE items from scorecard → raised in the relevant pass with both perspectives.
|
|
|
|
**PHASE 2 COMPLETE.** Emit phase-transition summary:
|
|
> **Phase 2 complete.** Codex: [N concerns]. Claude subagent: [N issues].
|
|
> Consensus: [X/Y confirmed, Z disagreements → surfaced at gate].
|
|
> Passing to Phase 3.
|
|
|
|
Do NOT begin Phase 3 until all Phase 2 outputs (if run) are written to the plan file.
|