@mrciphersmith/keryx 0.2.9

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/orchestration/feature-analyzer/SKILL.opencode.md

@@ -0,0 +1,1412 @@
+---
+name: feature-analyzer
+description: "Deep cross-repository analysis of feature branches: requires explicit context gathering from user (source/target repos, branch), git diff analysis, mandatory Deep Dive with code examples, API contract analysis, and structured documentation. Use when: analyzing branch changes across repos, planning feature implementation, understanding backend→frontend contracts. NEVER start analysis without explicit user confirmation of source, target, and branch."
+triggers:
+  - "Analyze branch"
+  - "Analyze changes"
+  - "Analyze commit"
+  - "Study changes"
+  - "Cross-repo analysis"
+  - "Backend to frontend analysis"
+  - "Feature analyzer"
+metadata:
+  author: "MrCipherSmith"
+  version: "2.4.0"
+  category: "analysis"
+license: "MIT"
+compatibility: "cursor,codex,zed,opencode"
+---
+
+# Feature Analyzer
+
+## ⚠️ MANDATORY: DO NOT PROCEED WITHOUT CONTEXT
+
+**CRITICAL RULE: You CANNOT start analysis until user explicitly provides:**
+1. ✅ Source repository (local path)
+2. ✅ Target repository (local path)  
+3. ✅ Branch to analyze
+4. ✅ Confirmation of analysis scope
+
+**DO NOT assume defaults. DO NOT use current directory. DO NOT proceed without asking.**
+
+**If user says:** "Analyze everything related to variables in pipelines"
+
+**You MUST respond:**
+```
+I'll help you analyze variables in pipelines. First, I need to clarify the context:
+
+**SOURCE Repository** (where the changes exist):
+- Local path: [user must provide, e.g., /Users/.../<PROJECT>]
+- GitHub repo: [owner/repo]
+- Branch to analyze: [branch-name]
+
+**TARGET Repository** (where implementation will happen):
+- Local path: [user must provide, e.g., /Users/.../<PROJECT>]  
+- GitHub repo: [owner/repo]
+- Current branch: [branch-name]
+
+**FOCUS** (from your request): "variables in pipelines"
+- Keywords: variable, pipeline, param
+
+Once you provide these details, I'll begin the focused analysis.
+```
+
+**If user doesn't provide all required info → STOP and ask again.**
+
+---
+
+## Purpose
+
+Performs deep cross-repository analysis to understand business logic, architecture, API contracts, and implementation requirements. Generates structured documentation for both human developers and AI agents.
+
+**Two Analysis Modes:**
+
+**Mode A - Changes Analysis** (when base-branch provided):
+- Analyze what changed FROM base-branch TO current branch
+- Shows: additions, modifications, deletions
+- Use for: reviewing PRs, understanding feature implementation
+
+**Mode B - Current State Analysis** (when NO base-branch provided):
+- Analyze ENTIRE codebase as it exists NOW
+- Shows: existing functionality, architecture, patterns
+- Use for: understanding system, formalizing features, exploring codebase
+
+**Key Capabilities:**
+- Cross-repository analysis (Source → Target)
+- API contract validation (DTOs, interfaces)
+- Business logic extraction and formalization
+- Implementation planning
+- Multi-language documentation (EN for AI agents, EN/RU for humans)
+- Focus-based prioritization (e.g., "variables in pipelines")
+
+## When to Use
+
+### Mode A: Changes Analysis (provide base-branch)
+- "Analyze feature branch changes from main"
+- "Review what changed in this PR"
+- "Compare feature-x with develop branch"
+- Understanding backend API changes for frontend implementation
+- Planning feature implementation based on changes
+
+### Mode B: Current State Analysis (no base-branch)
+- "Analyze everything related to variables in pipelines" (explore current system)
+- "How does authentication work in this codebase?"
+- "Document the pipeline execution flow"
+- "Formalize the user management feature"
+- Understanding existing system architecture
+- Creating feature specification from existing code
+
+### Examples by Mode
+
+**Mode A Examples (with base-branch):**
+- "Analyze branch feature/auth-v2 from main" → Changes Analysis
+- "Review changes in PR #123 against develop" → Changes Analysis
+- "What changed in DTOs since last release?" → Changes Analysis
+
+**Mode B Examples (without base-branch):**
+- "Analyze variables in pipelines" → Current State Analysis
+- "How does error handling work?" → Current State Analysis
+- "Document the caching mechanism" → Current State Analysis
+- "Explain the user workflow" → Current State Analysis
+
+## User-Specified Analysis Focus (Optional but Recommended)
+
+User can request **targeted analysis** with specific focus:
+
+**Examples:**
+- "Analyze everything related to **variables in pipelines**"
+- "Focus on **authentication changes** in this branch"
+- "Find all changes related to **DTO validations**"
+- "Analyze **performance optimizations** specifically"
+- "Focus on **error handling** modifications"
+
+### Focus Keywords Priority System
+
+When user specifies focus, adjust priorities:
+
+**Priority Boost Rules:**
+- Files matching focus keywords → **Boost to P0** (even if normally P1/P2)
+- Files referencing focus entities → **+1 priority level**
+- Files in relevant directories → **+1 priority level**
+
+**Example:** Focus = "variables in pipelines"
+```
+Files containing "variable" in path or content:
+  - src/pipelines/variable-resolver.ts → P0 (boosted from P1)
+  - src/models/pipeline-variable.dto.ts → P0 (already P0)
+  - src/components/variable-input.tsx → P0 (boosted from P2)
+
+Files in pipelines directory:
+  - src/pipelines/pipeline-runner.ts → P1 (context, +1 priority)
+```
+
+### Search Strategy for Focus Areas
+
+**Step 1: Keyword Extraction**
+Extract key terms from user request:
+- Main concept: "variables"
+- Context: "pipelines"
+- Action: "analyze"
+
+**Step 2: Multi-Scope Search**
+Search across entire codebase (not just changed files):
+
+```bash
+# Search in changed files first
+git diff --name-only | xargs grep -l "variable" 2>/dev/null
+
+# Search in broader codebase for context
+grep -r "variable" --include="*.ts" --include="*.tsx" src/pipelines/ | head -20
+
+# Search related terms
+grep -ri "var\|param\|arg\|input" --include="*.ts" src/pipelines/ | head -20
+```
+
+**Step 3: Relationship Mapping**
+Identify related components:
+- What uses variables? → PipelineRunner, PipelineBuilder
+- What defines variables? → VariableService, VariableDTO
+- Where are variables stored? → VariableStore, PipelineContext
+
+**Step 4: Cross-Reference Analysis**
+Check target repository for:
+- Files importing Variable-related types
+- Components using pipeline variables
+- Tests covering variable functionality
+
+### Focus-Based File Prioritization Algorithm
+
+```
+Standard Priority + Focus Boost = Final Priority
+
+For each changed file:
+1. Assign base priority (P0/P1/P2)
+2. IF file matches focus keywords → Boost to P0
+3. IF file references focus entities → +1 level
+4. IF file in focus directory → +1 level
+5. IF file is dependency of focus files → Keep base priority
+6. ELSE → Standard priority
+
+Select top 7 files by final priority
+```
+
+### Focus Analysis Workflow Adjustment
+
+Add to workflow:
+```
+Analysis Progress:
+...
+□ Step 4.5: Apply focus filter and boost priorities
+□ Step 5.5: Search broader codebase for focus context
+□ Step 6.5: Map relationships between focus entities
+...
+```
+
+## Workflow
+
+Copy this checklist and track progress based on your Analysis Mode:
+
+### Mode A: Changes Analysis (with base-branch)
+
+Use when analyzing what changed FROM base-branch TO current branch.
+
+```
+Analysis Progress - Mode A (Changes):
+🚫 PRE-STEP: VALIDATE CONTEXT
+  □ Source repository path: _____________
+  □ Target repository path: _____________
+  □ Branch to analyze: _____________
+  □ Base branch provided: _____________ (e.g., "main")
+  □ Analysis Mode: A (Changes)
+  □ User explicitly confirmed: _____________
+□ Step 1: Gather context (source, target, branch, base-branch, focus)
+□ Step 1.5: Parse focus keywords (if focus specified)
+□ Step 2: Verify GitHub MCP availability
+□ Step 3: Analyze GitHub issue/PR (if provided)
+□ Step 4: Calculate BASE_SHA from merge-base (last branching point)
+□ Step 5: Collect git changes (git diff BASE_SHA..HEAD)
+□ Step 6: Categorize changed files: P0/P1/P2
+□ Step 6.5: Apply focus-based priority boost
+□ Step 7: Select 3-7 key files from CHANGED files
+□ Step 8: Deep Dive - read changed files
+□ Step 9: Analyze related tests
+□ Step 10: Check rules compliance
+□ Step 11: Cross-repo dependency analysis
+□ Step 12: UI analysis (if applicable)
+□ Step 13: Intermediate review
+□ Step 14: Generate documentation
+□ Step 15: Final review and delivery
+```
+
+### Mode B: Current State Analysis (without base-branch)
+
+Use when analyzing ENTIRE codebase to understand existing functionality.
+
+```
+Analysis Progress - Mode B (Current State):
+🚫 PRE-STEP: VALIDATE CONTEXT
+  □ Source repository path: _____________
+  □ Target repository path: _____________
+  □ Branch to analyze: _____________
+  □ Base branch: NOT PROVIDED (Mode B)
+  □ Analysis Mode: B (Current State)
+  □ User explicitly confirmed: _____________
+□ Step 1: Gather context (source, target, branch, focus)
+□ Step 1.5: Parse focus keywords (if focus specified)
+□ Step 2: Verify GitHub MCP availability
+□ Step 3: Analyze GitHub issue/PR (if provided)
+□ Step 4: SKIP (no base-branch comparison)
+□ Step 5: Search ENTIRE codebase for focus-related files
+□ Step 6: Discover and categorize ALL relevant files: P0/P1/P2
+□ Step 6.5: Apply focus-based priority boost
+□ Step 7: Select 3-10 key files from ENTIRE codebase
+□ Step 8: Deep Dive - read files to understand functionality
+□ Step 8.5: FORMALIZE functionality (document what exists)
+  - Business logic
+  - API contracts
+  - State management
+  - Data flow
+  - Integration points
+□ Step 9: Analyze tests (understand coverage)
+□ Step 10: Check rules compliance
+□ Step 11: Cross-repo dependency analysis (find usages)
+□ Step 12: UI analysis (if applicable)
+□ Step 13: Intermediate review with formalization
+□ Step 14: Generate documentation (Feature Specification)
+□ Step 15: Final review and delivery
+```
+
+---
+
+## Mode B: Feature Formalization (Current State Analysis)
+
+When user does NOT provide base-branch, you must **formalize existing functionality** instead of analyzing changes.
+
+### What is Feature Formalization?
+
+**Purpose**: Create comprehensive specification of existing functionality as it works RIGHT NOW.
+
+**Difference from Changes Analysis**:
+- **Changes Analysis**: "What changed from version A to version B?"
+- **Feature Formalization**: "How does this functionality work in the current codebase?"
+
+### Formalization Checklist
+
+For each analyzed component, document:
+
+```
+COMPONENT FORMALIZATION TEMPLATE:
+
+1. PURPOSE
+   - What business problem does this solve?
+   - Who are the users?
+   - When is it used?
+
+2. API CONTRACT (if applicable)
+   - Input parameters
+   - Return types
+   - Error responses
+   - Authentication/authorization requirements
+
+3. BUSINESS LOGIC
+   - Core algorithms
+   - Validation rules
+   - Business constraints
+   - Decision trees
+
+4. STATE MANAGEMENT
+   - What state is maintained?
+   - Where is it stored?
+   - How is it updated?
+   - Lifecycle of state
+
+5. DATA FLOW
+   - Input sources
+   - Processing steps
+   - Output destinations
+   - Side effects
+
+6. INTEGRATION POINTS
+   - External services called
+   - Events published/consumed
+   - Database interactions
+   - File system operations
+
+7. ERROR HANDLING
+   - Expected error scenarios
+   - Recovery mechanisms
+   - Fallback behavior
+
+8. EDGE CASES
+   - Boundary conditions
+   - Empty/null handling
+   - Concurrency issues
+   - Performance constraints
+
+9. TESTING
+   - Test coverage
+   - Critical test scenarios
+   - Manual testing steps
+
+10. USAGE EXAMPLES
+    - Code examples
+    - Common patterns
+    - Anti-patterns to avoid
+```
+
+### Search Strategy for Mode B
+
+When no base-branch provided, search ENTIRE codebase:
+
+```bash
+# 1. Find all files related to focus keywords
+grep -r "focus_keyword" --include="*.ts" --include="*.tsx" src/ | head -50
+
+# 2. Find files in relevant directories
+find src/path -type f \( -name "*.ts" -o -name "*.tsx" \) | head -30
+
+# 3. Find entity definitions
+# (classes, interfaces, types matching focus)
+grep -l "class Focus\|interface Focus\|type Focus" --include="*.ts" src/
+
+# 4. Find consumers (what uses these entities)
+grep -l "import.*Focus\|from.*focus" --include="*.ts" src/
+
+# 5. Find tests related to focus
+grep -r "focus_keyword" --include="*.spec.ts" --include="*.test.ts" src/
+```
+
+### Output for Mode B
+
+Generate **Feature Specification Document** instead of Change Analysis:
+
+```
+<DOCS_ROOT>/analysis/<feature>-current-state-<date>/
+├── README.md
+├── specification/
+│   ├── en/
+│   │   └── feature-specification.md    # Human-readable spec
+│   ├── ru/
+│   │   └── feature-specification.md    # Human-readable spec (RU)
+│   └── ai/
+│       └── feature-specification.md    # Gherkin format
+├── architecture/
+│   ├── data-flow.md                    # Data flow diagrams
+│   ├── component-diagram.md            # Component relationships
+│   └── api-contracts.md                # API specifications
+├── usage/
+│   ├── examples.md                     # Code examples
+│   └── patterns.md                     # Common patterns
+└── tests/
+    └── test-coverage.md                # Testing documentation
+```
+
+---
+
+## Timeouts and Limits (CRITICAL)
+
+**Analysis must be time-boxed to prevent excessive duration.**
+
+### Default Timeouts
+
+| Phase | Max Duration | Action on Timeout |
+|-------|-------------|-------------------|
+| GitHub MCP verification | 30 seconds | Ask user to restart or skip |
+| Git history analysis | 2 minutes | Proceed with limited history |
+| Single file reading | 30 seconds per file | Skip and mark as "partial" |
+| Cross-repo dependency search | 3 minutes | Provide partial results |
+| Documentation generation | 5 minutes | Generate minimal report |
+| **Total analysis** | **30 minutes** | Force intermediate review |
+
+### Timeout Handling Strategy
+
+**When approaching timeout:**
+1. Notify user: "Analysis approaching 30-minute limit"
+2. Show current progress and what remains
+3. Offer options:
+   - **Continue**: Extend timeout by 15 minutes
+   - **Split**: Break into multiple smaller analyses
+   - **Partial**: Generate report with current findings
+   - **Prioritize**: Focus only on P0 files
+
+### File Count Limits
+
+**Automatic scope reduction when limits exceeded:**
+
+| Total Changed Files | Action |
+|-------------------|---------|
+| 1-10 files | Analyze all P0, selected P1 |
+| 11-30 files | Analyze P0 only (up to 10) |
+| 31-50 files | Top 7 P0 files only |
+| 50+ files | **STOP** — ask user to narrow scope |
+
+**When 50+ files detected:**
+```
+⚠️ LARGE CHANGESET DETECTED
+
+Found [N] changed files. This is too large for effective analysis.
+
+Options:
+1. Analyze specific directory: [suggest paths]
+2. Analyze specific file types: [API files only]
+3. Split by commits: analyze first [N] commits
+4. Manual selection: user specifies which files
+
+Recommended: Option [suggested]
+```
+
+### Progress Monitoring
+
+**Every 10 minutes, provide status update:**
+```
+⏱️ Time elapsed: [X] minutes
+📊 Progress:
+  - Phase: [current phase]
+  - Files analyzed: [N]/[total]
+  - P0: [N] complete
+  - P1: [N] complete
+⏰ Estimated remaining: [X] minutes
+```
+
+---
+
+## Cache and Existing Reports Check (Step 0.1)
+
+**Before starting analysis, check for existing reports to avoid duplication.**
+
+### Cache Lookup
+
+```bash
+# Check if analysis already exists for this branch
+git_branch="$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD)"
+git_sha="$(git rev-parse HEAD)"
+analysis_dir="<DOCS_ROOT>/analysis/${git_branch}-*"
+
+# Look for recent analysis (within last 7 days)
+find <DOCS_ROOT>/analysis/ -name "*.md" -mtime -7 | grep "${git_branch}"
+```
+
+### Existing Report Detection
+
+**If recent analysis found, ask user:**
+
+```
+🔍 EXISTING ANALYSIS DETECTED
+
+Found existing analysis for branch [branch-name]:
+- Date: [creation date]
+- Path: [path/to/analysis]
+- Coverage: [N files analyzed]
+- Completeness: [full/partial]
+
+Options:
+1. ⏩ Use existing (skip new analysis)
+2. 🔄 Refresh (update with latest changes)
+3. 📊 Compare (show diff between existing and current)
+4. 🆕 New analysis (ignore existing, start fresh)
+5. 🗑️ Archive old & create new
+
+Recommended: [suggested option based on age and changes]
+```
+
+### Cache Invalidation Rules
+
+**Always create new analysis when:**
+- [ ] Branch has new commits since last analysis
+- [ ] BASE_SHA changed (rebased branch)
+- [ ] User explicitly requests fresh analysis
+- [ ] Existing analysis older than 7 days
+- [ ] Existing analysis marked as "partial" or "incomplete"
+
+**Can reuse existing when:**
+- [x] Same commit SHA
+- [x] Same BASE_SHA
+- [x] Analysis complete and recent (< 7 days)
+- [x] User confirms no significant changes
+
+### Incremental Analysis
+
+**If refreshing existing analysis:**
+
+1. Load previous analysis metadata
+2. Identify new commits since last analysis: `git log ${LAST_SHA}..HEAD`
+3. Analyze only new/changed files
+4. Merge findings with previous report
+5. Update timestamps and version
+
+```
+🔄 INCREMENTAL UPDATE MODE
+
+Previous analysis: [date]
+New commits since then: [N]
+Files changed in new commits: [N]
+
+Analyzing only new changes...
+```
+
+### Cache Storage
+
+**Metadata file for caching:** `<DOCS_ROOT>/analysis/.cache/index.json`
+
+```json
+{
+  "analyses": [
+    {
+      "branch": "feature-name",
+      "sha": "abc123",
+      "base_sha": "def456",
+      "path": "feature-name-2024-01-15",
+      "created_at": "2024-01-15T10:00:00Z",
+      "updated_at": "2024-01-15T10:00:00Z",
+      "status": "complete",
+      "files_analyzed": 12,
+      "coverage": "full"
+    }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Step 0: Context Gathering (MANDATORY)
+
+**CRITICAL**: User MUST specify both Source and Target repositories.
+
+### Analysis Mode Selection (CRITICAL)
+
+User can choose between **two analysis modes**:
+
+**Mode A: Changes Analysis** (with base-branch)
+- Analyze changes FROM base-branch TO current branch
+- Shows what changed, what was added/removed/modified
+- Use when: reviewing feature implementation, checking PR changes
+
+**Mode B: Current State Analysis** (without base-branch)
+- Analyze ENTIRE codebase as it exists NOW
+- Shows current functionality, architecture, patterns
+- Use when: understanding existing system, formalizing features, exploring codebase
+
+If user doesn't specify base-branch, default to **Mode B**.
+
+---
+
+### Context Questions
+
+Ask in one message:
+
+```
+For cross-repository analysis, I need:
+
+1. **SOURCE Repository** (where to analyze):
+   - Local path: ?
+   - GitHub repo (owner/repo): ?
+   - Branch to analyze: ?
+
+2. **TARGET Repository** (where implementation will happen, if applicable):
+   - Local path: ?
+   - GitHub repo (owner/repo): ?
+   - Current branch: ?
+   - (Can be same as source for single-repo analysis)
+
+3. **Analysis Mode**:
+   A. Changes Analysis - compare against base-branch (see what changed)
+      - Base branch: ? (e.g., "main", "develop", "master")
+   B. Current State Analysis - analyze entire codebase as-is
+      - No base branch needed
+
+4. **Ticket/Reference** (GitHub Issue/PR URL, optional): ?
+
+5. **Analysis Focus** (optional):
+   - [ ] API contracts only
+   - [ ] Full implementation plan
+   - [ ] Breaking changes assessment
+   - [ ] Business logic understanding
+   - [ ] Specific area (e.g., "variables in pipelines", "auth changes")
+   - [ ] Feature formalization (document existing functionality)
+
+6. **Specific Focus Area** (if "Specific area" selected above):
+   - What to focus on: ? (e.g., "variables", "pipelines", "authentication", "DTOs")
+   - Where to look: ? (e.g., "src/pipelines", "src/auth", "src/models")
+   - Context keywords: ? (optional, comma-separated)
+```
+
+**No default paths** - user must provide all locations explicitly.
+
+**If user provides natural language focus** (e.g., "analyze everything related to variables in pipelines"):
+- Parse and extract: Focus = "variables", Location = "pipelines"
+- Apply Focus-Based Prioritization (see above)
+
+---
+
+## ⛔ GUARD CLAUSE: Validate Context Before Proceeding
+
+**Before Step 1, verify you have explicit user confirmation:**
+
+```
+CONTEXT VALIDATION CHECKLIST:
+□ Source repository path: [PROVIDED / NOT PROVIDED]
+□ Target repository path: [PROVIDED / NOT PROVIDED]
+□ Branch to analyze: [PROVIDED / NOT PROVIDED]
+□ Analysis mode: [A - Changes / B - Current State / NOT SPECIFIED]
+□ Base branch (if Mode A): [PROVIDED / NOT PROVIDED]
+□ Focus area (if any): [PARSED / NOT SPECIFIED]
+
+IF Source, Target, or Branch is "NOT PROVIDED":
+  → STOP analysis
+  → Ask user for missing information
+  → DO NOT proceed until all fields are provided
+
+IF Analysis mode is "NOT SPECIFIED":
+  → ASK: "Do you want to analyze (A) changes from base-branch or (B) current codebase state?"
+  → Wait for user choice
+
+IF Mode A and Base branch is "NOT PROVIDED":
+  → ASK: "What is the base branch to compare against? (e.g., main, develop)"
+  → OR: "If you want to analyze current state without comparing to base, choose Mode B"
+  
+IF user says "just use current directory" or similar:
+  → EXPLICITLY CONFIRM: "I will analyze [current path] @ [current branch]. Confirm? [Y/n]"
+  → Wait for explicit Y before proceeding
+```
+
+### Analysis Mode Decision Tree
+
+```
+User Request: "Analyze variables in pipelines"
+
+├─→ User provides base-branch (e.g., "from main")
+│   └─→ Mode A: Changes Analysis
+│       └─→ Analyze diff between main..current-branch
+│       └─→ Focus on what CHANGED regarding variables
+│
+└─→ User does NOT provide base-branch
+    └─→ Mode B: Current State Analysis
+        └─→ Analyze entire codebase as-is
+        └─→ Focus on what EXISTS regarding variables
+        └─→ Formalize functionality, document patterns
+```
+
+**Example conversation:**
+```
+User: "Analyze everything related to variables in pipelines"
+
+Agent: "I'll help you analyze variables in pipelines. First, I need context:
+
+SOURCE Repository (where changes exist):
+- Local path: ?"
+
+User: "/Users/.../<PROJECT>"
+
+Agent: "✓ Source: /Users/.../<PROJECT>
+
+TARGET Repository (where to implement):
+- Local path: ?"
+
+User: "/Users/.../<PROJECT>"
+
+Agent: "✓ Target: /Users/.../<PROJECT>
+
+Branch to analyze:
+- Branch name: ?"
+
+User: "feature/pipeline-variables"
+
+Agent: "✓ Branch: feature/pipeline-variables
+
+**CONFIRMATION:**
+Analyze 'feature/pipeline-variables' with focus on 'variables in pipelines'?
+- Source: /Users/.../<PROJECT>
+- Target: /Users/.../<PROJECT>
+- Focus: variables in pipelines
+
+Start analysis? [Y/n]"
+
+User: "Y"
+
+Agent: "✓ Starting analysis..."
+```
+
+---
+
+## Step 1: GitHub MCP Availability Check
+
+Before starting analysis:
+
+```bash
+# Check if GitHub MCP is responsive
+# Try to fetch a simple repo info
+```
+
+**If GitHub MCP unavailable:**
+1. Notify user: "GitHub MCP is not available. Options:"
+2. Option A: "Restart GitHub MCP and continue"
+3. Option B: "Proceed with git-only analysis (limited context)"
+4. Wait for user choice before proceeding
+
+---
+
+## Step 2: GitHub Issue/PR Analysis (if provided)
+
+- Use GitHub MCP to fetch Issue/PR and all comments
+- **CRITICAL**: Understand business goal - what problem does the feature solve?
+- Extract acceptance criteria and requirements
+- Note any architectural decisions or constraints mentioned
+
+---
+
+## Step 3: Git Changes Collection
+
+### Base Branch Determination Rule (CRITICAL)
+
+**The base branch MUST be determined from the last branching point (merge-base), NOT from the current HEAD of the parent branch.**
+
+This ensures you analyze only the changes made in the feature branch, not changes that occurred in the parent branch after the feature was branched.
+
+**Why this matters:**
+- If you compare against `origin/main` HEAD, you'll see unrelated changes from other merged PRs
+- You MUST find the exact commit where the feature branch diverged
+- Use `git merge-base` to find this point
+
+### Calculate BASE_SHA
+
+**ALGORITHM - Find the last branching point:**
+
+```bash
+BRANCH="$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD)"
+UPSTREAM_REF="$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref --symbolic-full-name @{upstream} 2>/dev/null || true)"
+
+# Step 1: Determine parent branch candidate
+PARENT=""
+if git rev-parse --verify -q "origin/main" >/dev/null; then
+  PARENT="origin/main"
+elif git rev-parse --verify -q "origin/master" >/dev/null; then
+  PARENT="origin/master"
+elif git rev-parse --verify -q "main" >/dev/null; then
+  PARENT="main"
+elif git rev-parse --verify -q "master" >/dev/null; then
+  PARENT="master"
+elif [ -n "$UPSTREAM_REF" ] && [ "$UPSTREAM_REF" != "$BRANCH" ] && [ "$UPSTREAM_REF" != "origin/$BRANCH" ]; then
+  PARENT="@{upstream}"
+else
+  echo "Cannot determine parent ref" >&2
+  exit 1
+fi
+
+# Step 2: CRITICAL - Find the actual branching point (merge-base)
+# This gives you the commit where feature branch diverged from parent
+BASE_SHA="$(git merge-base HEAD "$PARENT")"
+```
+
+**Verification:**
+```bash
+# Verify BASE_SHA is correct
+echo "Feature branch: $BRANCH"
+echo "Parent branch: $PARENT"
+echo "Branching point (BASE_SHA): $BASE_SHA"
+echo "Commits in feature branch:"
+git log --oneline "${BASE_SHA}..HEAD"
+```
+
+**Result:** `BASE_SHA` is the exact commit where your feature branch started - this is your analysis starting point.
+fi
+
+BASE_SHA="$(git merge-base HEAD "$PARENT")"
+```
+
+### Collect Changes
+```bash
+# Committed changes
+git log --oneline "${BASE_SHA}..HEAD"
+git diff --stat "${BASE_SHA}..HEAD"
+git diff --name-status "${BASE_SHA}..HEAD"
+git diff "${BASE_SHA}..HEAD"
+
+# Full snapshot (commits + staged + unstaged)
+git diff --stat "${BASE_SHA}"
+git diff --name-status "${BASE_SHA}"
+git diff "${BASE_SHA}"
+git ls-files --others --exclude-standard
+```
+
+---
+
+## Step 4: File Categorization and Prioritization
+
+### Priority Levels
+
+**P0 - MUST ANALYZE (Critical)**:
+- ✅ **API Contracts**: DTOs, interfaces, type definitions
+- Public API endpoints (controllers, routes)
+- Database schema changes
+- Breaking changes in shared libraries
+- Authentication/authorization changes
+- Configuration changes affecting multiple services
+
+**P1 - SHOULD ANALYZE (Important)**:
+- Business logic implementation (services, use cases)
+- State management changes (stores, contexts)
+- New features and capabilities
+- Error handling and validation logic
+- Integration points with external services
+
+**P2 - NICE TO HAVE (Optional)**:
+- UI component updates (pure presentation)
+- Refactoring without logic changes
+- Test file updates
+- Documentation updates
+- Package dependency updates (non-breaking)
+
+### File Selection Algorithm
+
+#### Standard Algorithm (No Focus Specified)
+From P0 files, select up to 5 most important:
+1. Sort by: API contracts → Business logic → Infrastructure
+2. Within each tier, pick files with most changes (lines changed)
+3. Ensure coverage of: entry points, data flow, state management
+
+From P1 files, select up to 3 if P0 < 3:
+1. Focus on files interacting with P0 files
+2. Business-critical paths
+
+**Skip P2 files** unless P0+P1 < 3 total.
+
+#### Focus-Based Algorithm (User Specified Focus)
+When user specifies focus (e.g., "variables in pipelines"):
+
+**Step 1: Boost Priorities Based on Focus**
+```
+For each changed file:
+1. Assign base priority (P0/P1/P2)
+2. IF file matches focus keywords → Boost to P0
+3. IF file in focus directory → +1 level
+4. IF file references focus entities → +1 level
+5. Final priority = MIN(P0, base + boosts)
+```
+
+**Step 2: Search Broader Context**
+Search beyond changed files for focus understanding:
+```bash
+# Search focus keywords in entire codebase
+grep -r "focus_keyword" --include="*.ts" src/ | head -30
+
+# Find all files in focus directory
+find src/focus_directory -type f -name "*.ts" -o -name "*.tsx"
+
+# Identify focus entity definitions
+grep -l "class FocusEntity\|interface FocusEntity" --include="*.ts" src/
+```
+
+**Step 3: Map Relationships**
+Identify related components that use/interact with focus entities:
+- What imports focus entities? → Consumers
+- What defines focus entities? → Definitions
+- What modifies focus entities? → Mutators
+
+**Step 4: Selection with Focus**
+1. Select ALL focus-matching P0 files (even if >5)
+2. If < 5 focus files, add non-focus P0 by standard rules
+3. Add focus-matching P1 files (up to 3)
+4. Include 1-2 context files (files that use focus entities)
+
+**Example:** Focus = "variables in pipelines"
+```
+Selected files:
+✅ P0: src/pipelines/variable-resolver.ts (focus match)
+✅ P0: src/models/pipeline-variable.dto.ts (focus match)
+✅ P1: src/pipelines/pipeline-runner.ts (context - uses variables)
+✅ P1: src/services/variable-service.ts (focus match)
+✅ P0: src/pipelines/pipeline-builder.ts (context - creates pipelines)
+```
+
+**Skip non-focus files** unless needed for context.
+
+---
+
+## Step 5: Deep Dive Protocol
+
+**You CANNOT make conclusions from git diff alone. You MUST:**
+
+1. **Read selected files**:
+   - For small/medium files: read completely - no partial reads.
+   - **CRITICAL**: For large files (> 500 lines), DO NOT read the entire file. First use code-outline (`view_file_outline`) or `grep_search` tools to locate the relevant classes or functions, then read only those specific line ranges using `view_file`.
+2. **Understand context**:
+   - How does this file fit in the architecture?
+   - What are its dependencies?
+   - What depends on it?
+3. **Find and analyze tests**:
+   - Look for test files matching changed files
+   - Understand test coverage and scenarios
+   - Identify edge cases being tested
+4. **Check rules compliance**:
+   - Verify against `code-style-patterns.mdc`
+   - Check architecture patterns
+   - Validate TypeScript usage
+
+---
+
+## Step 6: Cross-Repository Analysis (Source → Target)
+
+**When analyzing external branch (e.g., backend) for implementation in target (e.g., frontend):**
+
+### 6.1 Dependency Search in Target
+Find all files in TARGET repo that:
+- Import or use changed DTOs/APIs from SOURCE
+- Reference modified endpoints
+- Depend on changed business logic
+
+### 6.2 Contract Divergence Analysis
+Compare new contracts from SOURCE with current implementation in TARGET:
+- Field additions/removals
+- Type changes
+- Endpoint modifications
+- Behavior changes
+
+### 6.3 Target Deep Dive
+Read 2-3 key components in TARGET that will need changes:
+- Understand current implementation patterns
+- Identify MobX stores, React hooks, or services affected
+- Check integration points
+
+### 6.4 Target Rules Compliance
+Verify TARGET repository guidelines:
+- Check `.cursor/rules/core/*.mdc` in target repo
+- Validate proposed changes against target patterns
+
+---
+
+## Step 7: UI Analysis (if applicable)
+
+For UI changes, use Playwright/Storybook (see AGENTS.md for available tools):
+
+### Check AGENTS.md for:
+- `core/playwright-testing.mdc` - E2E test patterns
+- `core/storybook-guidelines.mdc` - Component documentation
+- Any UI testing skills in Skills Catalog
+
+### Analyze:
+- Visual regression requirements
+- Component behavior changes
+- Responsive design impact
+- Accessibility considerations
+
+---
+
+## Step 8: Integration with Other Skills
+
+**Leverage other skills via AGENTS.md catalog:**
+
+Before finalizing analysis, consider running:
+- `skills/code-style-review` - if architecture changes detected
+- `skills/code-ai-review` - for self-validation of findings
+- `skills/code-mobx-store-review` - if store changes found
+
+**How to invoke:**
+1. Reference `AGENTS.md` Skills Catalog
+2. Select appropriate skill based on findings
+3. Run skill with context from current analysis
+4. Incorporate findings into final report
+
+---
+
+## Step 9: Intermediate Review (CRITICAL)
+
+After completing analysis, **SHOW USER** before generating full report:
+
+```
+═══════════════════════════════════════════════
+   INTERMEDIATE ANALYSIS SUMMARY
+═══════════════════════════════════════════════
+
+Scope:
+- Source: [repo] @ [branch]
+- Target: [repo] @ [branch]
+- Files analyzed: [N] (P0: [N], P1: [N])
+- BASE_SHA: [sha]
+
+Key Findings:
+1. [Brief finding 1]
+2. [Brief finding 2]
+3. [Brief finding 3]
+
+Cross-Repo Impact:
+- [ ] Breaking API changes detected
+- [ ] New endpoints to implement
+- [ ] DTO changes affecting frontend
+- [ ] Database schema changes
+
+Estimated Complexity: [Low/Medium/High]
+Estimated Implementation Time: [hours/days]
+
+Continue to full documentation? [Y/n]
+- Type 'Y' to generate full report
+- Type 'n' to adjust analysis scope
+- Type 'questions' to ask about specific findings
+═══════════════════════════════════════════════
+```
+
+Wait for user confirmation before proceeding.
+
+---
+
+## Step 10: Documentation Generation
+
+### Output Structure
+```
+<DOCS_ROOT>/analysis/<feature-name>-<YYYY-MM-DD>/
+├── README.md                    # Index and navigation
+├── report/
+│   ├── en/
+│   │   └── report.md           # English for humans
+│   ├── ru/
+│   │   └── report.md           # Russian for humans
+│   └── ai/
+│       └── report.md           # Structured for AI agents (EN)
+├── plans/
+│   ├── en/
+│   │   └── implementation-plan.md
+│   ├── ru/
+│   │   └── implementation-plan.md
+│   └── ai/
+│       └── implementation-plan.md  # Gherkin-style format
+├── contracts/
+│   ├── api-changes.md          # API contract diff
+│   └── dto-comparison.md       # Before/after DTOs
+└── metrics/
+    └── analysis-metrics.md     # Analysis metadata
+```
+
+### AI-Readable Format (Gherkin-style)
+
+For AI agent consumption in `report/ai/report.md` and `plans/ai/implementation-plan.md`.
+
+**Purpose**: Enable other AI agents to parse analysis results programmatically and generate implementation plans.
+
+**Structure Requirements**:
+
+#### 1. Feature Declaration
+```gherkin
+Feature: [Concise Feature Name]
+  As a [type of user]
+  I want [goal]
+  So that [benefit]
+  
+  Background:
+    Given source repository is "[owner/repo]"
+    And source branch is "[branch-name]"
+    And target repository is "[owner/repo]"
+    And target branch is "[branch-name]"
+    And analysis date is "YYYY-MM-DD"
+    And analysis version is "[version]"
+```
+
+#### 2. Metadata Scenario (Required)
+```gherkin
+  Scenario: Analysis Metadata
+    Given the analysis scope
+    Then the following metadata is captured:
+      | Field | Value |
+      | BASE_SHA | [commit-hash] |
+      | Parent Branch | [origin/main] |
+      | Files Analyzed | [N] |
+      | P0 Files | [N] |
+      | P1 Files | [N] |
+      | Complexity Score | [N] |
+      | Risk Level | [Low/Medium/High] |
+```
+
+#### 3. API Contract Scenarios (One per changed endpoint)
+```gherkin
+  Scenario: API Contract - [Endpoint Name]
+    Given the endpoint "[METHOD /path/to/resource]"
+    And the endpoint purpose is "[business purpose]"
+    When comparing contracts between source and target
+    Then the request changes are:
+      | Field | Type | Required | Description |
+      | [field] | [type] | [Y/N] | [desc] |
+    And the response changes are:
+      | Field | Type | Required | Description |
+      | [field] | [type] | [Y/N] | [desc] |
+    And breaking changes are "[Y/N]"
+    And backward compatibility is "[Y/N]"
+    Examples:
+      | Version | Change Type |
+      | old | [before state] |
+      | new | [after state] |
+```
+
+#### 4. Business Logic Scenarios (One per P0 file)
+```gherkin
+  Scenario: Business Logic - [File Name]
+    Given the file "[path/to/file.ts]"
+    And the file purpose is "[purpose description]"
+    When analyzing the implementation
+    Then the following functions/methods are present:
+      | Name | Purpose | Input | Output |
+      | [name] | [purpose] | [input] | [output] |
+    And the key logic includes:
+      """
+      [code snippet with comments]
+      """
+    And the business rules are:
+      1. [rule 1]
+      2. [rule 2]
+    And the edge cases handled are:
+      | Case | Handling |
+      | [case] | [how handled] |
+```
+
+#### 5. State Management Scenarios (if applicable)
+```gherkin
+  Scenario: State Management - [Store Name]
+    Given the MobX store "[StoreName]"
+    And the store manages "[what state]"
+    Then the observables are:
+      | Name | Type | Initial Value |
+      | [name] | [type] | [value] |
+    And the actions are:
+      | Name | Purpose | Async |
+      | [name] | [purpose] | [Y/N] |
+    And the computed values are:
+      | Name | Dependencies | Purpose |
+      | [name] | [deps] | [purpose] |
+```
+
+#### 6. Cross-Repository Impact Scenarios
+```gherkin
+  Scenario: Cross-Repository Impact - [Component/Service]
+    Given the target component "[path/to/component.tsx]"
+    And it depends on source API "[endpoint]"
+    When the API changes are applied
+    Then the following changes are required:
+      | Location | Change Type | Description |
+      | [file] | [modify/add/remove] | [desc] |
+    And the migration steps are:
+      1. [step 1]
+      2. [step 2]
+    And the risk level is "[Low/Medium/High]"
+```
+
+#### 7. Implementation Plan (in plans/ai/)
+```gherkin
+Feature: Implementation Plan for [Feature Name]
+  Background:
+    Given analysis from "[path/to/analysis]"
+    And target repository is "[owner/repo]"
+  
+  Scenario: Phase 1 - Setup and Dependencies
+    Given the current state of target repository
+    Then install/update the following dependencies:
+      | Package | Version | Purpose |
+      | [pkg] | [ver] | [purpose] |
+    And configure the following:
+      | Config | Value |
+      | [key] | [value] |
+  
+  Scenario: Phase 2 - API Layer Implementation
+    Given the API contract changes
+    Then implement the following files:
+      | File | Purpose | Key Methods |
+      | [path] | [purpose] | [methods] |
+    And update DTOs:
+      | DTO | Changes |
+      | [name] | [changes] |
+  
+  Scenario: Phase 3 - Business Logic Implementation
+    Given the business requirements
+    Then implement:
+      """
+      [pseudo-code or code structure]
+      """
+    And handle edge cases:
+      | Case | Implementation |
+      | [case] | [solution] |
+  
+  Scenario: Phase 4 - UI Integration
+    Given the UI requirements
+    Then update components:
+      | Component | Changes |
+      | [name] | [desc] |
+  
+  Scenario: Phase 5 - Testing
+    Given the implementation
+    Then write tests for:
+      | Type | Coverage |
+      | Unit | [what to test] |
+      | Integration | [scenarios] |
+    And verify:
+      | Check | Expected |
+      | [check] | [result] |
+  
+  Scenario: Verification and Rollout
+    Given all phases complete
+    Then verify:
+      | Check | Command/Method |
+      | Build | npm run build |
+      | Tests | npm test |
+      | Lint | npm run lint |
+    And deploy to:
+      | Environment | Steps |
+      | [env] | [steps] |
+```
+
+#### Gherkin Syntax Rules:
+- Use **Given** for preconditions and context
+- Use **When** for actions or analysis steps
+- Use **Then** for expected outcomes and validations
+- Use **And/But** to continue previous statement
+- Use **Examples** for tabular data variations
+- Use **"""** for multi-line text (code snippets)
+- Use **|** for tables with headers
+- Keep scenarios focused and atomic (one concept per scenario)
+- Use descriptive names: "API Contract - User Creation Endpoint" not "Scenario 1"
+
+---
+
+## Step 11: Content Requirements
+
+### Evidence-Based Documentation
+- Every claim MUST reference specific code
+- Use format: `[filename.ts:L123](file:///absolute/path#L123)`
+- Minimum 3 code examples in report
+
+### Visualization
+- Mermaid diagrams for architecture
+- Tables for DTO changes
+- Flowcharts for data flow changes
+
+### Multi-Language Support
+- **report/en/**: Full detail for humans
+- **report/ru/**: Full detail for humans (Russian)
+- **report/ai/**: Gherkin-style for AI agents (English)
+
+---
+
+## Step 12: Error Handling and Fallbacks
+
+### GitHub MCP Unavailable
+```markdown
+**Status**: GitHub MCP not responding
+**Fallback**: Using git history and commit messages only
+**Impact**: Limited business context
+**Action**: Ask user to restart MCP or proceed with limited analysis
+```
+
+### No Tests Found
+```markdown
+**Warning**: No test files found for analyzed components
+**Risk**: Untested logic may have edge cases
+**Recommendation**: Add test coverage for critical paths
+```
+
+### Cannot Determine BASE_SHA
+```markdown
+**Strategy 1**: Ask user for parent branch name
+**Strategy 2**: Use `git log --first-parent` to estimate
+**Strategy 3**: Analyze only HEAD commit (limited scope)
+```
+
+### Empty Diff
+```markdown
+**Check 1**: Staged changes only? `git diff --cached`
+**Check 2**: Untracked files? `git status`
+**Check 3**: Wrong branch? `git branch -a`
+```
+
+### Cross-Repo Access Denied
+```markdown
+**Status**: Cannot access target repository
+**Options**:
+1. Provide target repo path manually
+2. Skip cross-repo analysis (source-only)
+3. Export analysis for manual review
+```
+
+---
+
+## Step 13: Analysis Metrics
+
+Track and report:
+
+```markdown
+## Analysis Metrics
+
+- **Duration**: [X minutes]
+- **Files Analyzed**: [N total] (P0: [N], P1: [N], P2: [N])
+- **Lines of Code Changed**: [N]
+- **Cross-Repo Dependencies**: [N files affected]
+- **API Endpoints Changed**: [N]
+- **DTOs Modified**: [N]
+- **Breaking Changes**: [Y/N, count]
+- **Test Coverage**: [% or N/A]
+- **Risk Level**: [Low/Medium/High]
+- **Estimated Effort**: [X hours/days]
+
+## Complexity Score
+Calculate: (P0_files × 3) + (P1_files × 2) + (P2_files × 1) + (breaking_changes × 5)
+- 0-10: Low complexity
+- 11-25: Medium complexity
+- 26+: High complexity
+```
+
+---
+
+## Step 14: Validation Checklist
+
+Before finalizing, verify:
+
+```markdown
+## Pre-Delivery Checklist
+
+- [ ] Source repository fully analyzed (all P0 files)
+- [ ] Target repository analyzed (if cross-repo)
+- [ ] Minimum 3 code examples included
+- [ ] All file references include line numbers
+- [ ] API contracts documented (if applicable)
+- [ ] Breaking changes clearly identified
+- [ ] Implementation plan provided
+- [ ] Metrics calculated and documented
+- [ ] Multi-language reports generated (EN, RU, AI)
+- [ ] User approved intermediate review
+- [ ] AGENTS.md updated if new patterns discovered
+```
+
+---
+
+## Step 15: Post-Analysis
+
+### Update Documentation Registry
+Follow `documentation-management.mdc`:
+- Update `<DOCS_ROOT>/readme.md`
+- Add entry to analysis index
+- Tag with relevant keywords
+
+### Archive Old Analyses
+User manages cleanup manually, but suggest:
+```
+Tip: Consider archiving analyses older than 3 months to:
+<DOCS_ROOT>/analysis/archived/
+```
+
+---
+
+## Rules and Guidelines
+
+1. **Always follow** `documentation-management.mdc` for doc structure
+2. **Always check** `code-style-patterns.mdc` for compliance
+3. **Always use** AGENTS.md to discover available skills and tools
+4. **Never assume** - ask user when unclear
+5. **Never skip** intermediate review for complex analyses (P0 files > 3)
+6. **Always provide** concrete, actionable recommendations
+7. **Always include** both human-readable and AI-readable formats
+
+---
+
+## Success Criteria
+
+Analysis is successful when:
+- Business logic is fully understood and documented
+- API contracts are clearly specified
+- Breaking changes are identified
+- Implementation plan is actionable
+- User confirms understanding via intermediate review
+- All P0 files analyzed completely