@fernado03/zoo-flow 0.5.3 → 0.7.0

package/tests/golden-transcripts/02-diagnosis-golden.md

@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+# Golden: Diagnosis
+
+## User
+Checkout randomly crashes after payment. It used to work.
+
+## Workflow
+diagnosis -> /fix -> system-architect -> code-tweaker -> system-architect
+
+## Expected structure
+1. Orchestrator proposes "diagnosis" in plain language.
+2. User approves.
+3. Orchestrator delegates /fix to system-architect.
+4. System Architect reads domain docs, reproduces, minimizes, hypothesizes.
+5. System Architect hands to code-tweaker for fix.
+6. Code Tweaker implements, verifies.
+7. Control returns to system-architect for post-mortem.
+8. System Architect uses attempt_completion.
+
+## Must include
+- Reproduction before hypothesis
+- Hypothesis before fix
+- Post-mortem after fix
+
+## Must not include
+- Built-in mode delegation
+- /fix in user-facing suggestions

package/tests/golden-transcripts/03-verification-golden.md

@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+# Golden: Verification
+
+## User
+Run tests for this change and make sure nothing broke.
+
+## Workflow
+verification -> /verify -> code-tweaker
+
+## Expected structure
+1. Orchestrator proposes "verification" in plain language.
+2. User approves.
+3. Orchestrator delegates /verify to code-tweaker.
+4. Code Tweaker reads verify skill.
+5. Code Tweaker inspects project type and changed files.
+6. Code Tweaker picks smallest useful checks.
+7. Code Tweaker runs checks, captures output.
+8. Code Tweaker reports: verification result with status, commands run, evidence, remaining risk.
+9. Code Tweaker uses attempt_completion.
+
+## Evidence format
+- Status: pass | fail | partial | blocked
+- Commands run with pass/fail per command
+- Evidence: short summary of output
+- Remaining risk: what was not checked

package/tests/golden-transcripts/04-review-golden.md

@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+# Golden: Review
+
+## User
+Review this branch before I commit it.
+
+## Workflow
+review -> /review -> system-architect
+
+## Expected structure
+1. Orchestrator proposes "review" in plain language.
+2. User approves.
+3. Orchestrator delegates /review to system-architect.
+4. System Architect reads review skill.
+5. System Architect identifies target (branch diff).
+6. System Architect reads targeted diffs.
+7. System Architect evaluates axes: standards, spec, security/risk.
+8. System Architect reports findings by severity.
+9. System Architect ends with canonical result line.
+10. System Architect uses attempt_completion.
+
+## Result line
+- Review result: approve | approve with nits | changes requested | blocked
+
+## Must include
+- Severity-ordered findings
+- Security/Risk axis when change touches auth/payments/PII/data

package/tests/golden-transcripts/05-feature-planning-golden.md

@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+# Golden: Feature Planning
+
+## User
+Add team invitations with email invites and pending invite states.
+
+## Workflow
+feature planning -> /feature -> system-architect -> code-tweaker -> system-architect
+
+## Expected structure
+1. Orchestrator proposes "feature planning" in plain language.
+2. User approves phase gates.
+3. Orchestrator delegates /feature to system-architect.
+4. System Architect reads domain docs (CONTEXT.md, ADRs).
+5. System Architect sharpens scope, may produce PRD.
+6. System Architect slices into issues.
+7. System Architect hands to code-tweaker for implementation.
+8. Code Tweaker implements TDD loop.
+9. Control returns to system-architect for close.
+10. System Architect uses attempt_completion.
+
+## Must not include
+- Implementation before planning
+- Skipping phase gates

package/templates/full/.roo/skills/in-progress/review/SKILL.md

@@ -1,39 +0,0 @@
----
-name: review
-description: Review the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes — Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding standards?) and Spec (does the code match what the originating issue/PRD asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side. Use when the user wants to review a branch, a PR, work-in-progress changes, or asks to "review since X".
----
-
-# Review
-
-Issue tracker should exist; run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` missing.
-
-## 1. Fixed point
-
-1. Use user-supplied commit/branch/tag/`main`/`HEAD~N` exactly.
-2. If missing, ask: `Review against what — a branch, a commit, or main?`
-3. Diff: `git diff {fixed-point}...HEAD`.
-4. Commits: `git log {fixed-point}..HEAD --oneline`.
-
-## 2. Spec
-
-Order:
-1. Issue refs in commits (`#123`, `Closes #45`, GitLab refs); fetch via `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`.
-2. User path.
-3. Matching PRD/spec under `docs/`, `specs/`, `.scratch/`.
-4. If none, ask. If no spec, skip Spec axis with `no spec available`.
-
-## 3. Standards
-
-Collect: `CLAUDE.md`, `AGENTS.md`, `CONTRIBUTING.md`, context docs, `docs/adr/`, `.editorconfig`, `eslint.config.*`, `biome.json`, Prettier config, `tsconfig.json`, `STYLE.md`, `STANDARDS.md`, `STYLEGUIDE.md`, similar.
-
-## 4. Parallel sub-agents
-
-Standards prompt: diff command; commits; standards files; report documented-standard violations per file/hunk; cite standard; hard vs judgement; skip tooling-enforced; under 400 words.
-
-Spec prompt: diff command; commits; spec path/content; report missing/partial requirements, scope creep, wrong-looking implementation; quote spec line; under 400 words.
-
-## 5. Aggregate
-
-1. Present `## Standards` and `## Spec` separately.
-2. DO NOT merge/rerank axes.
-3. End with counts per axis + worst issue.