@cluesmith/codev 2.0.10 → 2.0.11

This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.
Files changed (10) hide show
  1. package/dashboard/dist/assets/{index-CtErvyA8.js → index-B4PL4V8p.js} +31 -31
  2. package/dashboard/dist/assets/{index-CtErvyA8.js.map → index-B4PL4V8p.js.map} +1 -1
  3. package/dashboard/dist/index.html +1 -1
  4. package/package.json +2 -1
  5. package/skeleton/.claude/skills/af/SKILL.md +26 -0
  6. package/skeleton/porch/prompts/review.md +62 -0
  7. package/skeleton/protocols/spir/prompts/review.md +59 -3
  8. package/skeleton/protocols/spir/protocol.json +8 -0
  9. package/skeleton/protocols/spir/templates/review.md +31 -0
  10. package/skeleton/protocols/tick/templates/review.md +12 -13
package/dashboard/dist/index.html CHANGED
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
5
5
  <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0" />
6
6
  <link rel="icon" href="data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' viewBox='0 0 100 100'><text y='.9em' font-size='90'>🏗️</text></svg>">
7
7
  <title>Agent Farm Dashboard</title>
8
- <script type="module" crossorigin src="./assets/index-CtErvyA8.js"></script>
8
+ <script type="module" crossorigin src="./assets/index-B4PL4V8p.js"></script>
9
9
  <link rel="stylesheet" crossorigin href="./assets/index-Cx2BNcx0.css">
10
10
  </head>
11
11
  <body>
package/package.json CHANGED
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
1
1
  {
2
2
  "name": "@cluesmith/codev",
3
- "version": "2.0.10",
3
+ "version": "2.0.11",
4
4
  "description": "Codev CLI - AI-assisted software development framework",
5
5
  "type": "module",
6
6
  "bin": {
@@ -56,6 +56,7 @@
56
56
  "@types/node": "^22.10.1",
57
57
  "@types/ws": "^8.18.1",
58
58
  "@vitest/coverage-v8": "^4.0.18",
59
+ "jsdom": "^28.1.0",
59
60
  "playwright": "^1.58.0",
60
61
  "tsx": "^4.19.2",
61
62
  "typescript": "^5.7.2",
package/skeleton/.claude/skills/af/SKILL.md CHANGED
@@ -51,6 +51,32 @@ session registered with the Tower (so it appears in the dashboard), and lets
51
51
  porch pick up from whatever phase the builder was in. Works with all spawn
52
52
  modes: positional issue number, `--task`, `--protocol`, `--worktree`.
53
53
 
54
+ ## Cron (Scheduled Tasks)
55
+
56
+ Cron tasks are YAML files in `.af-cron/` at the project root. Tower loads them automatically.
57
+
58
+ ```bash
59
+ af cron list # List all cron tasks
60
+ af cron status <name> # Check status of a specific task
61
+ af cron run <name> # Run a task immediately
62
+ af cron enable <name> # Enable a disabled task
63
+ af cron disable <name> # Disable a task
64
+ ```
65
+
66
+ There is NO `af cron add` — create YAML files in `.af-cron/` directly. Example:
67
+
68
+ ```yaml
69
+ # .af-cron/ci-health.yaml
70
+ name: CI Health Check
71
+ schedule: "*/30 * * * *"
72
+ enabled: true
73
+ command: gh run list --limit 5 --json status,conclusion --jq '...'
74
+ condition: "output != '0'"
75
+ message: "CI Alert: ${output} recent failure(s)"
76
+ target: architect
77
+ timeout: 30
78
+ ```
79
+
54
80
  ## Utility
55
81
 
56
82
  ```bash
package/skeleton/porch/prompts/review.md CHANGED
@@ -85,8 +85,70 @@ One paragraph summarizing what was built and why.
85
85
 
86
86
  - Recommendation for future work
87
87
  - Follow-up items (if any)
88
+
89
+ ## Consultation Feedback
90
+
91
+ [See instructions below]
92
+ ```
93
+
94
+ ### 1b. Include Consultation Feedback
95
+
96
+ **IMPORTANT**: The review document MUST include a `## Consultation Feedback` section that summarizes all consultation concerns raised during every phase of the project and how the builder responded.
97
+
98
+ Read the consultation output files from the project directory (`codev/projects/{project-id}-*/`). For each phase that had consultation, create a subsection organized by phase, round, and model:
99
+
100
+ ```markdown
101
+ ## Consultation Feedback
102
+
103
+ ### Specify Phase (Round 1)
104
+
105
+ #### Gemini
106
+ - **Concern**: [Summary of the concern]
107
+ - **Addressed**: [What was changed to resolve it]
108
+ - **Concern**: [Another concern]
109
+ - **Rebutted**: [Why the current approach is correct]
110
+
111
+ #### Codex
112
+ - **Concern**: [Summary]
113
+ - **N/A**: [Why it's out of scope or already handled]
114
+
115
+ #### Claude
116
+ - No concerns raised (APPROVE)
117
+
118
+ ### Plan Phase (Round 1)
119
+ ...
120
+
121
+ ### Implement Phase: [phase-name] (Round 1)
122
+ ...
88
123
  ```
89
124
 
125
+ **Response types** — each concern gets exactly one:
126
+ - **Addressed**: Builder made a change to resolve the concern
127
+ - **Rebutted**: Builder explains why the concern doesn't apply
128
+ - **N/A**: Concern is out of scope, already handled elsewhere, or moot
129
+
130
+ **Edge cases**:
131
+ - If all reviewers approved with no concerns across all phases: write "No concerns raised — all consultations approved"
132
+ - For COMMENT verdicts: include their feedback (non-blocking but useful context)
133
+ - For CONSULT_ERROR (model failure): note "Consultation failed for [model]"
134
+ - If a phase had multiple rounds (REQUEST_CHANGES → fix → re-review), give each round its own subsection
135
+
136
+ ### 1c. Update Architecture and Lessons Learned Documentation
137
+
138
+ **MANDATORY**: The review document MUST include `## Architecture Updates` and `## Lessons Learned Updates` sections. Porch will block advancement if these are missing.
139
+
140
+ **Architecture Updates** (`codev/resources/arch.md`):
141
+ 1. Read the current `codev/resources/arch.md`
142
+ 2. Determine if this project introduced architectural changes worth documenting (new subsystems, data flows, design decisions, invariants, file locations)
143
+ 3. If yes: make the updates to arch.md and describe what you changed in the `## Architecture Updates` section of the review
144
+ 4. If no: write "No architecture updates needed" in the section with a brief explanation (e.g., "This was a template-only change with no new subsystems or data flows")
145
+
146
+ **Lessons Learned Updates** (`codev/resources/lessons-learned.md`):
147
+ 1. Read the current `codev/resources/lessons-learned.md`
148
+ 2. Determine if this project produced generalizable lessons (patterns, anti-patterns, debugging insights, process improvements)
149
+ 3. If yes: add entries to lessons-learned.md and describe what you added in the `## Lessons Learned Updates` section of the review
150
+ 4. If no: write "No lessons learned updates needed" in the section with a brief explanation (e.g., "Straightforward implementation with no novel insights beyond existing entries")
151
+
90
152
  ### 2. Create Pull Request
91
153
 
92
154
  ```bash
package/skeleton/protocols/spir/prompts/review.md CHANGED
@@ -94,16 +94,72 @@ Brief description of what was implemented.
94
94
  ## Technical Debt
95
95
  - [Any shortcuts taken that should be addressed later]
96
96
 
97
+ ## Consultation Feedback
98
+
99
+ [See instructions below]
100
+
97
101
  ## Follow-up Items
98
102
  - [Any items identified for future work]
99
103
  ```
100
104
 
101
- ### 4. Update Documentation
105
+ ### 3b. Include Consultation Feedback
106
+
107
+ **IMPORTANT**: The review document MUST include a `## Consultation Feedback` section that summarizes all consultation concerns raised during every phase of the project and how the builder responded.
108
+
109
+ Read the consultation output files from the project directory (`codev/projects/{project-id}-*/`). For each phase that had consultation, create a subsection organized by phase, round, and model:
110
+
111
+ ```markdown
112
+ ## Consultation Feedback
113
+
114
+ ### Specify Phase (Round 1)
115
+
116
+ #### Gemini
117
+ - **Concern**: [Summary of the concern]
118
+ - **Addressed**: [What was changed to resolve it]
119
+
120
+ #### Codex
121
+ - **Concern**: [Summary]
122
+ - **Rebutted**: [Why the current approach is correct]
123
+
124
+ #### Claude
125
+ - No concerns raised (APPROVE)
126
+
127
+ ### Plan Phase (Round 1)
128
+ ...
129
+ ```
130
+
131
+ **Response types** — each concern gets exactly one:
132
+ - **Addressed**: Builder made a change to resolve the concern
133
+ - **Rebutted**: Builder explains why the concern doesn't apply
134
+ - **N/A**: Concern is out of scope, already handled elsewhere, or moot
135
+
136
+ **Edge cases**:
137
+ - If all reviewers approved with no concerns: "No concerns raised — all consultations approved"
138
+ - For COMMENT verdicts: include their feedback (non-blocking but useful context)
139
+ - For CONSULT_ERROR (model failure): note "Consultation failed for [model]"
140
+ - If a phase had multiple rounds, give each round its own subsection
141
+
142
+ ### 4. Update Architecture and Lessons Learned Documentation
143
+
144
+ **MANDATORY**: The review document MUST include `## Architecture Updates` and `## Lessons Learned Updates` sections. Porch will block advancement if these are missing.
145
+
146
+ **Architecture Updates** (`codev/resources/arch.md`):
147
+ 1. Read the current `codev/resources/arch.md`
148
+ 2. Determine if this project introduced architectural changes worth documenting (new subsystems, data flows, design decisions, invariants, file locations)
149
+ 3. If yes: make the updates to arch.md and describe what you changed in the `## Architecture Updates` section of the review
150
+ 4. If no: write "No architecture updates needed" in the section with a brief explanation (e.g., "This was a template-only change with no new subsystems or data flows")
151
+
152
+ **Lessons Learned Updates** (`codev/resources/lessons-learned.md`):
153
+ 1. Read the current `codev/resources/lessons-learned.md`
154
+ 2. Determine if this project produced generalizable lessons (patterns, anti-patterns, debugging insights, process improvements)
155
+ 3. If yes: add entries to lessons-learned.md and describe what you added in the `## Lessons Learned Updates` section of the review
156
+ 4. If no: write "No lessons learned updates needed" in the section with a brief explanation (e.g., "Straightforward implementation with no novel insights beyond existing entries")
157
+
158
+ ### 4b. Update Other Documentation
102
159
 
103
- If needed, update:
160
+ If needed, also update:
104
161
  - README.md (new features, changed behavior)
105
162
  - API documentation
106
- - Architecture documentation (`codev/resources/arch.md`)
107
163
 
108
164
  ### 5. Final Verification
109
165
 
package/skeleton/protocols/spir/protocol.json CHANGED
@@ -120,6 +120,14 @@
120
120
  "command": "gh pr list --head \"$(git branch --show-current)\" --json number --jq 'length' | grep -q '^[1-9]'",
121
121
  "description": "PR must be created before signaling completion"
122
122
  },
123
+ "review_has_arch_updates": {
124
+ "command": "grep -q '## Architecture Updates' codev/reviews/${PROJECT_TITLE}.md",
125
+ "description": "Review must include '## Architecture Updates' section (what changed in arch.md, or why no changes needed)"
126
+ },
127
+ "review_has_lessons_updates": {
128
+ "command": "grep -q '## Lessons Learned Updates' codev/reviews/${PROJECT_TITLE}.md",
129
+ "description": "Review must include '## Lessons Learned Updates' section (what changed in lessons-learned.md, or why no changes needed)"
130
+ },
123
131
  "e2e_tests": {
124
132
  "command": "npm run test:e2e 2>&1 || echo 'e2e tests skipped (not configured)'",
125
133
  "description": "Full e2e test suite - only runs in review phase",
package/skeleton/protocols/spir/templates/review.md CHANGED
@@ -69,6 +69,23 @@ Iterations that could have been prevented with better builder behavior:
69
69
 
70
70
  2. **[Pattern]**: [Another avoidable iteration pattern.]
71
71
 
72
+ ## Consultation Feedback
73
+
74
+ [For each phase that had consultation, summarize every reviewer's concerns and how the builder responded. Use **Addressed** (fixed), **Rebutted** (disagreed with reasoning), or **N/A** (out of scope/moot) for each concern. If all reviewers approved with no concerns: "No concerns raised — all consultations approved."]
75
+
76
+ ### [Phase] Phase (Round N)
77
+
78
+ #### Gemini
79
+ - **Concern**: [Summary of concern]
80
+ - **Addressed**: [What was changed]
81
+
82
+ #### Codex
83
+ - **Concern**: [Summary of concern]
84
+ - **Rebutted**: [Why current approach is correct]
85
+
86
+ #### Claude
87
+ - No concerns raised (APPROVE)
88
+
72
89
  ## Lessons Learned
73
90
 
74
91
  ### What Went Well
@@ -80,6 +97,20 @@ Iterations that could have been prevented with better builder behavior:
80
97
  ### What Would Be Done Differently
81
98
  - [Actionable improvement for future builders]
82
99
 
100
+ ## Architecture Updates
101
+
102
+ [What was added/changed in `codev/resources/arch.md`, or why no changes were needed.]
103
+
104
+ - Updated: [section name] — [what was added/changed]
105
+ - Or: "No architecture updates needed — [brief reason]"
106
+
107
+ ## Lessons Learned Updates
108
+
109
+ [What was added/changed in `codev/resources/lessons-learned.md`, or why no changes were needed.]
110
+
111
+ - Added: [category] — [lesson summary]
112
+ - Or: "No lessons learned updates needed — [brief reason]"
113
+
83
114
  ## Technical Debt
84
115
 
85
116
  - [Any shortcuts taken or inconsistencies introduced]
package/skeleton/protocols/tick/templates/review.md CHANGED
@@ -57,23 +57,22 @@
57
57
  - [Improvement area 1]
58
58
  - [Improvement area 2]
59
59
 
60
- ## Multi-Agent Consultation
60
+ ## Consultation Feedback
61
61
 
62
- **Models Consulted**: GPT-5, Gemini Pro
63
- **Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
62
+ [For each phase that had consultation, summarize every reviewer's concerns and how the builder responded. Use **Addressed** (fixed), **Rebutted** (disagreed with reasoning), or **N/A** (out of scope/moot) for each concern. If all reviewers approved with no concerns: "No concerns raised — all consultations approved."]
64
63
 
65
- ### Key Feedback
66
- - [Feedback point 1 from consultation]
67
- - [Feedback point 2 from consultation]
68
- - [Feedback point 3 from consultation]
64
+ ### [Phase] Phase (Round N)
69
65
 
70
- ### Issues Identified
71
- - [Issue 1 found by agents]
72
- - [Issue 2 found by agents]
66
+ #### Gemini
67
+ - **Concern**: [Summary of concern]
68
+ - **Addressed**: [What was changed]
73
69
 
74
- ### Recommendations
75
- - [Recommendation 1]
76
- - [Recommendation 2]
70
+ #### Codex
71
+ - **Concern**: [Summary of concern]
72
+ - **Rebutted**: [Why current approach is correct]
73
+
74
+ #### Claude
75
+ - No concerns raised (APPROVE)
77
76
 
78
77
  ## TICK Protocol Feedback
79
78
  - **Autonomous execution**: [Worked well / Issues encountered]