@howlil/ez-agents 3.4.1 → 3.5.0

package/ez-agents/templates/research-project/SUMMARY.md

@@ -1,170 +1,170 @@
-# Research Summary Template
-
-Template for `.planning/research/SUMMARY.md` — executive summary of project research with roadmap implications.
-
-<template>
-
-```markdown
-# Project Research Summary
-
-**Project:** [name from PROJECT.md]
-**Domain:** [inferred domain type]
-**Researched:** [date]
-**Confidence:** [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]
-
-## Executive Summary
-
-[2-3 paragraph overview of research findings]
-
-- What type of product this is and how experts build it
-- The recommended approach based on research
-- Key risks and how to mitigate them
-
-## Key Findings
-
-### Recommended Stack
-
-[Summary from STACK.md — 1-2 paragraphs]
-
-**Core technologies:**
-- [Technology]: [purpose] — [why recommended]
-- [Technology]: [purpose] — [why recommended]
-- [Technology]: [purpose] — [why recommended]
-
-### Expected Features
-
-[Summary from FEATURES.md]
-
-**Must have (table stakes):**
-- [Feature] — users expect this
-- [Feature] — users expect this
-
-**Should have (competitive):**
-- [Feature] — differentiator
-- [Feature] — differentiator
-
-**Defer (v2+):**
-- [Feature] — not essential for launch
-
-### Architecture Approach
-
-[Summary from ARCHITECTURE.md — 1 paragraph]
-
-**Major components:**
-1. [Component] — [responsibility]
-2. [Component] — [responsibility]
-3. [Component] — [responsibility]
-
-### Critical Pitfalls
-
-[Top 3-5 from PITFALLS.md]
-
-1. **[Pitfall]** — [how to avoid]
-2. **[Pitfall]** — [how to avoid]
-3. **[Pitfall]** — [how to avoid]
-
-## Implications for Roadmap
-
-Based on research, suggested phase structure:
-
-### Phase 1: [Name]
-**Rationale:** [why this comes first based on research]
-**Delivers:** [what this phase produces]
-**Addresses:** [features from FEATURES.md]
-**Avoids:** [pitfall from PITFALLS.md]
-
-### Phase 2: [Name]
-**Rationale:** [why this order]
-**Delivers:** [what this phase produces]
-**Uses:** [stack elements from STACK.md]
-**Implements:** [architecture component]
-
-### Phase 3: [Name]
-**Rationale:** [why this order]
-**Delivers:** [what this phase produces]
-
-[Continue for suggested phases...]
-
-### Phase Ordering Rationale
-
-- [Why this order based on dependencies discovered]
-- [Why this grouping based on architecture patterns]
-- [How this avoids pitfalls from research]
-
-### Research Flags
-
-Phases likely needing deeper research during planning:
-- **Phase [X]:** [reason — e.g., "complex integration, needs API research"]
-- **Phase [Y]:** [reason — e.g., "niche domain, sparse documentation"]
-
-Phases with standard patterns (skip research-phase):
-- **Phase [X]:** [reason — e.g., "well-documented, established patterns"]
-
-## Confidence Assessment
-
-| Area | Confidence | Notes |
-|------|------------|-------|
-| Stack | [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] | [reason] |
-| Features | [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] | [reason] |
-| Architecture | [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] | [reason] |
-| Pitfalls | [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] | [reason] |
-
-**Overall confidence:** [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]
-
-### Gaps to Address
-
-[Any areas where research was inconclusive or needs validation during implementation]
-
-- [Gap]: [how to handle during planning/execution]
-- [Gap]: [how to handle during planning/execution]
-
-## Sources
-
-### Primary (HIGH confidence)
-- [Context7 library ID] — [topics]
-- [Official docs URL] — [what was checked]
-
-### Secondary (MEDIUM confidence)
-- [Source] — [finding]
-
-### Tertiary (LOW confidence)
-- [Source] — [finding, needs validation]
-
----
-*Research completed: [date]*
-*Ready for roadmap: yes*
-```
-
-</template>
-
-<guidelines>
-
-**Executive Summary:**
-- Write for someone who will only read this section
-- Include the key recommendation and main risk
-- 2-3 paragraphs maximum
-
-**Key Findings:**
-- Summarize, don't duplicate full documents
-- Link to detailed docs (STACK.md, FEATURES.md, etc.)
-- Focus on what matters for roadmap decisions
-
-**Implications for Roadmap:**
-- This is the most important section
-- Directly informs roadmap creation
-- Be explicit about phase suggestions and rationale
-- Include research flags for each suggested phase
-
-**Confidence Assessment:**
-- Be honest about uncertainty
-- Note gaps that need resolution during planning
-- HIGH = verified with official sources
-- MEDIUM = community consensus, multiple sources agree
-- LOW = single source or inference
-
-**Integration with roadmap creation:**
-- This file is loaded as context during roadmap creation
-- Phase suggestions here become starting point for roadmap
-- Research flags inform phase planning
-
-</guidelines>
+# Research Summary Template
+
+Template for `.planning/research/SUMMARY.md` — executive summary of project research with roadmap implications.
+
+<template>
+
+```markdown
+# Project Research Summary
+
+**Project:** [name from PROJECT.md]
+**Domain:** [inferred domain type]
+**Researched:** [date]
+**Confidence:** [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+[2-3 paragraph overview of research findings]
+
+- What type of product this is and how experts build it
+- The recommended approach based on research
+- Key risks and how to mitigate them
+
+## Key Findings
+
+### Recommended Stack
+
+[Summary from STACK.md — 1-2 paragraphs]
+
+**Core technologies:**
+- [Technology]: [purpose] — [why recommended]
+- [Technology]: [purpose] — [why recommended]
+- [Technology]: [purpose] — [why recommended]
+
+### Expected Features
+
+[Summary from FEATURES.md]
+
+**Must have (table stakes):**
+- [Feature] — users expect this
+- [Feature] — users expect this
+
+**Should have (competitive):**
+- [Feature] — differentiator
+- [Feature] — differentiator
+
+**Defer (v2+):**
+- [Feature] — not essential for launch
+
+### Architecture Approach
+
+[Summary from ARCHITECTURE.md — 1 paragraph]
+
+**Major components:**
+1. [Component] — [responsibility]
+2. [Component] — [responsibility]
+3. [Component] — [responsibility]
+
+### Critical Pitfalls
+
+[Top 3-5 from PITFALLS.md]
+
+1. **[Pitfall]** — [how to avoid]
+2. **[Pitfall]** — [how to avoid]
+3. **[Pitfall]** — [how to avoid]
+
+## Implications for Roadmap
+
+Based on research, suggested phase structure:
+
+### Phase 1: [Name]
+**Rationale:** [why this comes first based on research]
+**Delivers:** [what this phase produces]
+**Addresses:** [features from FEATURES.md]
+**Avoids:** [pitfall from PITFALLS.md]
+
+### Phase 2: [Name]
+**Rationale:** [why this order]
+**Delivers:** [what this phase produces]
+**Uses:** [stack elements from STACK.md]
+**Implements:** [architecture component]
+
+### Phase 3: [Name]
+**Rationale:** [why this order]
+**Delivers:** [what this phase produces]
+
+[Continue for suggested phases...]
+
+### Phase Ordering Rationale
+
+- [Why this order based on dependencies discovered]
+- [Why this grouping based on architecture patterns]
+- [How this avoids pitfalls from research]
+
+### Research Flags
+
+Phases likely needing deeper research during planning:
+- **Phase [X]:** [reason — e.g., "complex integration, needs API research"]
+- **Phase [Y]:** [reason — e.g., "niche domain, sparse documentation"]
+
+Phases with standard patterns (skip research-phase):
+- **Phase [X]:** [reason — e.g., "well-documented, established patterns"]
+
+## Confidence Assessment
+
+| Area | Confidence | Notes |
+|------|------------|-------|
+| Stack | [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] | [reason] |
+| Features | [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] | [reason] |
+| Architecture | [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] | [reason] |
+| Pitfalls | [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] | [reason] |
+
+**Overall confidence:** [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]
+
+### Gaps to Address
+
+[Any areas where research was inconclusive or needs validation during implementation]
+
+- [Gap]: [how to handle during planning/execution]
+- [Gap]: [how to handle during planning/execution]
+
+## Sources
+
+### Primary (HIGH confidence)
+- [Context7 library ID] — [topics]
+- [Official docs URL] — [what was checked]
+
+### Secondary (MEDIUM confidence)
+- [Source] — [finding]
+
+### Tertiary (LOW confidence)
+- [Source] — [finding, needs validation]
+
+---
+*Research completed: [date]*
+*Ready for roadmap: yes*
+```
+
+</template>
+
+<guidelines>
+
+**Executive Summary:**
+- Write for someone who will only read this section
+- Include the key recommendation and main risk
+- 2-3 paragraphs maximum
+
+**Key Findings:**
+- Summarize, don't duplicate full documents
+- Link to detailed docs (STACK.md, FEATURES.md, etc.)
+- Focus on what matters for roadmap decisions
+
+**Implications for Roadmap:**
+- This is the most important section
+- Directly informs roadmap creation
+- Be explicit about phase suggestions and rationale
+- Include research flags for each suggested phase
+
+**Confidence Assessment:**
+- Be honest about uncertainty
+- Note gaps that need resolution during planning
+- HIGH = verified with official sources
+- MEDIUM = community consensus, multiple sources agree
+- LOW = single source or inference
+
+**Integration with roadmap creation:**
+- This file is loaded as context during roadmap creation
+- Phase suggestions here become starting point for roadmap
+- Research flags inform phase planning
+
+</guidelines>

package/ez-agents/templates/retrospective.md

@@ -1,54 +1,54 @@
-# Project Retrospective
-
-*A living document updated after each milestone. Lessons feed forward into future planning.*
-
-## Milestone: v{version} — {name}
-
-**Shipped:** {date}
-**Phases:** {count} | **Plans:** {count} | **Sessions:** {count}
-
-### What Was Built
-- {Key deliverable 1}
-- {Key deliverable 2}
-- {Key deliverable 3}
-
-### What Worked
-- {Efficiency win or successful pattern}
-- {What went smoothly}
-
-### What Was Inefficient
-- {Missed opportunity}
-- {What took longer than expected}
-
-### Patterns Established
-- {New pattern or convention that should persist}
-
-### Key Lessons
-1. {Specific, actionable lesson}
-2. {Another lesson}
-
-### Cost Observations
-- Model mix: {X}% opus, {Y}% sonnet, {Z}% haiku
-- Sessions: {count}
-- Notable: {efficiency observation}
-
----
-
-## Cross-Milestone Trends
-
-### Process Evolution
-
-| Milestone | Sessions | Phases | Key Change |
-|-----------|----------|--------|------------|
-| v{X} | {N} | {M} | {What changed in process} |
-
-### Cumulative Quality
-
-| Milestone | Tests | Coverage | Zero-Dep Additions |
-|-----------|-------|----------|-------------------|
-| v{X} | {N} | {Y}% | {count} |
-
-### Top Lessons (Verified Across Milestones)
-
-1. {Lesson verified by multiple milestones}
-2. {Another cross-validated lesson}
+# Project Retrospective
+
+*A living document updated after each milestone. Lessons feed forward into future planning.*
+
+## Milestone: v{version} — {name}
+
+**Shipped:** {date}
+**Phases:** {count} | **Plans:** {count} | **Sessions:** {count}
+
+### What Was Built
+- {Key deliverable 1}
+- {Key deliverable 2}
+- {Key deliverable 3}
+
+### What Worked
+- {Efficiency win or successful pattern}
+- {What went smoothly}
+
+### What Was Inefficient
+- {Missed opportunity}
+- {What took longer than expected}
+
+### Patterns Established
+- {New pattern or convention that should persist}
+
+### Key Lessons
+1. {Specific, actionable lesson}
+2. {Another lesson}
+
+### Cost Observations
+- Model mix: {X}% opus, {Y}% sonnet, {Z}% haiku
+- Sessions: {count}
+- Notable: {efficiency observation}
+
+---
+
+## Cross-Milestone Trends
+
+### Process Evolution
+
+| Milestone | Sessions | Phases | Key Change |
+|-----------|----------|--------|------------|
+| v{X} | {N} | {M} | {What changed in process} |
+
+### Cumulative Quality
+
+| Milestone | Tests | Coverage | Zero-Dep Additions |
+|-----------|-------|----------|-------------------|
+| v{X} | {N} | {Y}% | {count} |
+
+### Top Lessons (Verified Across Milestones)
+
+1. {Lesson verified by multiple milestones}
+2. {Another cross-validated lesson}