@fro.bot/systematic 1.22.7 → 1.23.0

package/skills/ce-brainstorm/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,146 @@
+---
+name: ce-brainstorm
+description: Explore requirements and approaches through collaborative dialogue before planning implementation
+argument-hint: '[feature idea or problem to explore]'
+---
+
+# Brainstorm a Feature or Improvement
+
+**Note: The current year is 2026.** Use this when dating brainstorm documents.
+
+Brainstorming helps answer **WHAT** to build through collaborative dialogue. It precedes `/ce:plan`, which answers **HOW** to build it.
+
+**Process knowledge:** Load the `brainstorming` skill for detailed question techniques, approach exploration patterns, and YAGNI principles.
+
+## Feature Description
+
+<feature_description> #$ARGUMENTS </feature_description>
+
+**If the feature description above is empty, ask the user:** "What would you like to explore? Please describe the feature, problem, or improvement you're thinking about."
+
+Do not proceed until you have a feature description from the user.
+
+## Execution Flow
+
+### Phase 0: Assess Requirements Clarity
+
+Evaluate whether brainstorming is needed based on the feature description.
+
+**Clear requirements indicators:**
+- Specific acceptance criteria provided
+- Referenced existing patterns to follow
+- Described exact expected behavior
+- Constrained, well-defined scope
+
+**If requirements are already clear:**
+Use **question tool** to suggest: "Your requirements seem detailed enough to proceed directly to planning. Should I run `/ce:plan` instead, or would you like to explore the idea further?"
+
+### Phase 1: Understand the Idea
+
+#### 1.1 Repository Research (Lightweight)
+
+Run a quick repo scan to understand existing patterns:
+
+- task systematic:research:repo-research-analyst("Understand existing patterns related to: <feature_description>")
+
+Focus on: similar features, established patterns, AGENTS.md guidance.
+
+#### 1.2 Collaborative Dialogue
+
+Use the **question tool** to ask questions **one at a time**.
+
+**Guidelines (see `brainstorming` skill for detailed techniques):**
+- Prefer multiple choice when natural options exist
+- Start broad (purpose, users) then narrow (constraints, edge cases)
+- Validate assumptions explicitly
+- Ask about success criteria
+
+**Exit condition:** Continue until the idea is clear OR user says "proceed"
+
+### Phase 2: Explore Approaches
+
+Propose **2-3 concrete approaches** based on research and conversation.
+
+For each approach, provide:
+- Brief description (2-3 sentences)
+- Pros and cons
+- When it's best suited
+
+Lead with your recommendation and explain why. Apply YAGNI—prefer simpler solutions.
+
+Use **question tool** to ask which approach the user prefers.
+
+### Phase 3: Capture the Design
+
+Write a brainstorm document to `docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-brainstorm.md`.
+
+**Document structure:** See the `brainstorming` skill for the template format. Key sections: What We're Building, Why This Approach, Key Decisions, Open Questions.
+
+Ensure `docs/brainstorms/` directory exists before writing.
+
+**IMPORTANT:** Before proceeding to Phase 4, check if there are any Open Questions listed in the brainstorm document. If there are open questions, YOU MUST ask the user about each one using question before offering to proceed to planning. Move resolved questions to a "Resolved Questions" section.
+
+### Phase 4: Handoff
+
+Use **question tool** to present next steps:
+
+**Question:** "Brainstorm captured. What would you like to do next?"
+
+**Options:**
+1. **Review and refine** - Improve the document through structured self-review
+2. **Proceed to planning** - Run `/ce:plan` (will auto-detect this brainstorm)
+3. **Share to Proof** - Upload to Proof for collaborative review and sharing
+4. **Ask more questions** - I have more questions to clarify before moving on
+5. **Done for now** - Return later
+
+**If user selects "Share to Proof":**
+
+```bash
+CONTENT=$(cat docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-brainstorm.md)
+TITLE="Brainstorm: <topic title>"
+RESPONSE=$(curl -s -X POST https://www.proofeditor.ai/share/markdown \
+  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
+  -d "$(jq -n --arg title "$TITLE" --arg markdown "$CONTENT" --arg by "ai:compound" '{title: $title, markdown: $markdown, by: $by}')")
+PROOF_URL=$(echo "$RESPONSE" | jq -r '.tokenUrl')
+```
+
+Display the URL prominently: `View & collaborate in Proof: <PROOF_URL>`
+
+If the curl fails, skip silently. Then return to the Phase 4 options.
+
+**If user selects "Ask more questions":** YOU (Claude) return to Phase 1.2 (Collaborative Dialogue) and continue asking the USER questions one at a time to further refine the design. The user wants YOU to probe deeper - ask about edge cases, constraints, preferences, or areas not yet explored. Continue until the user is satisfied, then return to Phase 4.
+
+**If user selects "Review and refine":**
+
+Load the `document-review` skill and apply it to the brainstorm document.
+
+When document-review returns "Review complete", present next steps:
+
+1. **Move to planning** - Continue to `/ce:plan` with this document
+2. **Done for now** - Brainstorming complete. To start planning later: `/ce:plan [document-path]`
+
+## Output Summary
+
+When complete, display:
+
+```
+Brainstorm complete!
+
+Document: docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-brainstorm.md
+
+Key decisions:
+- [Decision 1]
+- [Decision 2]
+
+Next: Run `/ce:plan` when ready to implement.
+```
+
+## Important Guidelines
+
+- **Stay focused on WHAT, not HOW** - Implementation details belong in the plan
+- **Ask one question at a time** - Don't overwhelm
+- **Apply YAGNI** - Prefer simpler approaches
+- **Keep outputs concise** - 200-300 words per section max
+
+NEVER CODE! Just explore and document decisions.
+

package/skills/ce-compound/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,317 @@
+---
+name: ce-compound
+description: Document a recently solved problem to compound your team's knowledge
+argument-hint: '[optional: brief context about the fix]'
+---
+
+# /compound
+
+Coordinate multiple subagents working in parallel to document a recently solved problem.
+
+## Purpose
+
+Captures problem solutions while context is fresh, creating structured documentation in `docs/solutions/` with YAML frontmatter for searchability and future reference. Uses parallel subagents for maximum efficiency.
+
+**Why "compound"?** Each documented solution compounds your team's knowledge. The first time you solve a problem takes research. Document it, and the next occurrence takes minutes. Knowledge compounds.
+
+## Usage
+
+```bash
+/ce:compound                    # Document the most recent fix
+/ce:compound [brief context]    # Provide additional context hint
+```
+
+## Execution Strategy: Context-Aware Orchestration
+
+### Phase 0: Context Budget Check
+
+<critical_requirement>
+**Run this check BEFORE launching any subagents.**
+
+The /compound command is token-heavy - it launches 5 parallel subagents that collectively consume ~10k tokens of context. Running near context limits risks compaction mid-compound, which degrades output quality significantly.
+</critical_requirement>
+
+Before proceeding, the orchestrator MUST:
+
+1. **Assess context usage**: Check how long the current conversation has been running. If there has been significant back-and-forth (many tool calls, large file reads, extensive debugging), context is likely constrained.
+
+2. **Warn the user**:
+   ```
+   ⚠️ Context Budget Check
+
+   /compound launches 5 parallel subagents (~10k tokens). Long conversations
+   risk compaction mid-compound, which degrades documentation quality.
+
+   Tip: For best results, run /compound early in a session - right after
+   verifying a fix, before continuing other work.
+   ```
+
+3. **Offer the user a choice**:
+   ```
+   How would you like to proceed?
+
+   1. Full compound (5 parallel subagents, ~10k tokens) - best quality
+   2. Compact-safe mode (single pass, ~2k tokens) - safe near context limits
+   ```
+
+4. **If the user picks option 1** (or confirms full mode): proceed to Phase 1 below.
+5. **If the user picks option 2** (or requests compact-safe): skip to the **Compact-Safe Mode** section below.
+
+---
+
+### Full Mode
+
+<critical_requirement>
+**Only ONE file gets written - the final documentation.**
+
+Phase 1 subagents return TEXT DATA to the orchestrator. They must NOT use Write, Edit, or create any files. Only the orchestrator (Phase 2) writes the final documentation file.
+</critical_requirement>
+
+### Phase 1: Parallel Research
+
+<parallel_tasks>
+
+Launch these subagents IN PARALLEL. Each returns text data to the orchestrator.
+
+#### 1. **Context Analyzer**
+   - Extracts conversation history
+   - Identifies problem type, component, symptoms
+   - Validates against schema
+   - Returns: YAML frontmatter skeleton
+
+#### 2. **Solution Extractor**
+   - Analyzes all investigation steps
+   - Identifies root cause
+   - Extracts working solution with code examples
+   - Returns: Solution content block
+
+#### 3. **Related Docs Finder**
+   - Searches `docs/solutions/` for related documentation
+   - Identifies cross-references and links
+   - Finds related GitHub issues
+   - Returns: Links and relationships
+
+#### 4. **Prevention Strategist**
+   - Develops prevention strategies
+   - Creates best practices guidance
+   - Generates test cases if applicable
+   - Returns: Prevention/testing content
+
+#### 5. **Category Classifier**
+   - Determines optimal `docs/solutions/` category
+   - Validates category against schema
+   - Suggests filename based on slug
+   - Returns: Final path and filename
+
+</parallel_tasks>
+
+### Phase 2: Assembly & Write
+
+<sequential_tasks>
+
+**WAIT for all Phase 1 subagents to complete before proceeding.**
+
+The orchestrating agent (main conversation) performs these steps:
+
+1. Collect all text results from Phase 1 subagents
+2. Assemble complete markdown file from the collected pieces
+3. Validate YAML frontmatter against schema
+4. Create directory if needed: `mkdir -p docs/solutions/[category]/`
+5. Write the SINGLE final file: `docs/solutions/[category]/[filename].md`
+
+</sequential_tasks>
+
+### Phase 3: Optional Enhancement
+
+**WAIT for Phase 2 to complete before proceeding.**
+
+<parallel_tasks>
+
+Based on problem type, optionally invoke specialized agents to review the documentation:
+
+- **performance_issue** → `performance-oracle`
+- **security_issue** → `security-sentinel`
+- **database_issue** → `data-integrity-guardian`
+- **test_failure** → `cora-test-reviewer`
+- Any code-heavy issue → `kieran-rails-reviewer` + `code-simplicity-reviewer`
+
+</parallel_tasks>
+
+---
+
+### Compact-Safe Mode
+
+<critical_requirement>
+**Single-pass alternative for context-constrained sessions.**
+
+When context budget is tight, this mode skips parallel subagents entirely. The orchestrator performs all work in a single pass, producing a minimal but complete solution document.
+</critical_requirement>
+
+The orchestrator (main conversation) performs ALL of the following in one sequential pass:
+
+1. **Extract from conversation**: Identify the problem, root cause, and solution from conversation history
+2. **Classify**: Determine category and filename (same categories as full mode)
+3. **Write minimal doc**: Create `docs/solutions/[category]/[filename].md` with:
+   - YAML frontmatter (title, category, date, tags)
+   - Problem description (1-2 sentences)
+   - Root cause (1-2 sentences)
+   - Solution with key code snippets
+   - One prevention tip
+4. **Skip specialized agent reviews** (Phase 3) to conserve context
+
+**Compact-safe output:**
+```
+✓ Documentation complete (compact-safe mode)
+
+File created:
+- docs/solutions/[category]/[filename].md
+
+Note: This was created in compact-safe mode. For richer documentation
+(cross-references, detailed prevention strategies, specialized reviews),
+re-run /compound in a fresh session.
+```
+
+**No subagents are launched. No parallel tasks. One file written.**
+
+---
+
+## What It Captures
+
+- **Problem symptom**: Exact error messages, observable behavior
+- **Investigation steps tried**: What didn't work and why
+- **Root cause analysis**: Technical explanation
+- **Working solution**: Step-by-step fix with code examples
+- **Prevention strategies**: How to avoid in future
+- **Cross-references**: Links to related issues and docs
+
+## Preconditions
+
+<preconditions enforcement="advisory">
+  <check condition="problem_solved">
+    Problem has been solved (not in-progress)
+  </check>
+  <check condition="solution_verified">
+    Solution has been verified working
+  </check>
+  <check condition="non_trivial">
+    Non-trivial problem (not simple typo or obvious error)
+  </check>
+</preconditions>
+
+## What It Creates
+
+**Organized documentation:**
+
+- File: `docs/solutions/[category]/[filename].md`
+
+**Categories auto-detected from problem:**
+
+- build-errors/
+- test-failures/
+- runtime-errors/
+- performance-issues/
+- database-issues/
+- security-issues/
+- ui-bugs/
+- integration-issues/
+- logic-errors/
+
+## Common Mistakes to Avoid
+
+| ❌ Wrong | ✅ Correct |
+|----------|-----------|
+| Subagents write files like `context-analysis.md`, `solution-draft.md` | Subagents return text data; orchestrator writes one final file |
+| Research and assembly run in parallel | Research completes → then assembly runs |
+| Multiple files created during workflow | Single file: `docs/solutions/[category]/[filename].md` |
+
+## Success Output
+
+```
+✓ Documentation complete
+
+Subagent Results:
+  ✓ Context Analyzer: Identified performance_issue in brief_system
+  ✓ Solution Extractor: 3 code fixes
+  ✓ Related Docs Finder: 2 related issues
+  ✓ Prevention Strategist: Prevention strategies, test suggestions
+  ✓ Category Classifier: `performance-issues`
+
+Specialized Agent Reviews (Auto-Triggered):
+  ✓ performance-oracle: Validated query optimization approach
+  ✓ kieran-rails-reviewer: Code examples meet Rails standards
+  ✓ code-simplicity-reviewer: Solution is appropriately minimal
+  ✓ every-style-editor: Documentation style verified
+
+File created:
+- docs/solutions/performance-issues/n-plus-one-brief-generation.md
+
+This documentation will be searchable for future reference when similar
+issues occur in the Email Processing or Brief System modules.
+
+What's next?
+1. Continue workflow (recommended)
+2. Link related documentation
+3. Update other references
+4. View documentation
+5. Other
+```
+
+## The Compounding Philosophy
+
+This creates a compounding knowledge system:
+
+1. First time you solve "N+1 query in brief generation" → Research (30 min)
+2. Document the solution → docs/solutions/performance-issues/n-plus-one-briefs.md (5 min)
+3. Next time similar issue occurs → Quick lookup (2 min)
+4. Knowledge compounds → Team gets smarter
+
+The feedback loop:
+
+```
+Build → Test → Find Issue → Research → Improve → Document → Validate → Deploy
+    ↑                                                                      ↓
+    └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+```
+
+**Each unit of engineering work should make subsequent units of work easier—not harder.**
+
+## Auto-Invoke
+
+<auto_invoke> <trigger_phrases> - "that worked" - "it's fixed" - "working now" - "problem solved" </trigger_phrases>
+
+<manual_override> Use /ce:compound [context] to document immediately without waiting for auto-detection. </manual_override> </auto_invoke>
+
+## Routes To
+
+`compound-docs` skill
+
+## Applicable Specialized Agents
+
+Based on problem type, these agents can enhance documentation:
+
+### Code Quality & Review
+- **kieran-rails-reviewer**: Reviews code examples for Rails best practices
+- **code-simplicity-reviewer**: Ensures solution code is minimal and clear
+- **pattern-recognition-specialist**: Identifies anti-patterns or repeating issues
+
+### Specific Domain Experts
+- **performance-oracle**: Analyzes performance_issue category solutions
+- **security-sentinel**: Reviews security_issue solutions for vulnerabilities
+- **cora-test-reviewer**: Creates test cases for prevention strategies
+- **data-integrity-guardian**: Reviews database_issue migrations and queries
+
+### Enhancement & Documentation
+- **best-practices-researcher**: Enriches solution with industry best practices
+- **every-style-editor**: Reviews documentation style and clarity
+- **framework-docs-researcher**: Links to Rails/gem documentation references
+
+### When to Invoke
+- **Auto-triggered** (optional): Agents can run post-documentation for enhancement
+- **Manual trigger**: User can invoke agents after /ce:compound completes for deeper review
+- **Customize agents**: Edit `compound-engineering.local.md` or invoke the `setup` skill to configure which review agents are used across all workflows
+
+## Related Commands
+
+- `/research [topic]` - Deep investigation (searches docs/solutions/ for patterns)
+- `/ce:plan` - Planning workflow (references documented solutions)
+