@vheins/local-memory-mcp 0.15.1 → 0.16.0
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.
- package/dist/{chunk-NTU2HEEH.js → chunk-2EW2PODH.js} +2320 -2320
- package/dist/dashboard/server.js +1 -1
- package/dist/mcp/server.js +1 -1
- package/dist/prompts/business-analyst.md +36 -0
- package/dist/prompts/data-analyst.md +36 -0
- package/dist/prompts/qa-analyst.md +36 -0
- package/dist/prompts/scrum-master.md +35 -0
- package/dist/prompts/security-analyst.md +37 -0
- package/dist/prompts/server/instructions.md +20 -12
- package/dist/prompts/system-analyst.md +35 -0
- package/package.json +1 -1
package/dist/dashboard/server.js
CHANGED
package/dist/mcp/server.js
CHANGED
|
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
---
|
|
2
|
+
name: business-analyst
|
|
3
|
+
description: Bridge business needs with technical solutions through requirements analysis and documentation.
|
|
4
|
+
arguments:
|
|
5
|
+
- name: objective
|
|
6
|
+
description: Analysis goal (requirements-elicitation, user-stories, brd, process-modeling, etc.).
|
|
7
|
+
required: true
|
|
8
|
+
- name: domain
|
|
9
|
+
description: Business domain or project context.
|
|
10
|
+
required: false
|
|
11
|
+
agent: Business Analyst
|
|
12
|
+
category: workflows
|
|
13
|
+
version: "1.0.0"
|
|
14
|
+
tags: [workflow, analysis, requirements, business, documentation]
|
|
15
|
+
---
|
|
16
|
+
|
|
17
|
+
## Business Analyst
|
|
18
|
+
|
|
19
|
+
Entry=S0 → S1 → S2 → S3 → S4 Exit=done
|
|
20
|
+
Guard: S(N) req S(N-1)✅
|
|
21
|
+
|
|
22
|
+
S0 | elicit: gather stakeholder needs via questions, existing docs, user feedback | objective provided? | raw requirements | —
|
|
23
|
+
S1 | analyze: validate completeness, identify gaps, resolve contradictions, classify by priority (MoSCoW) | S0✅ | validated requirements | —
|
|
24
|
+
S2 | document: write user stories (As a/I want/So that) + acceptance criteria (EARS format) + BRD/PRD sections | S1✅ | requirements artifacts | —
|
|
25
|
+
S3 | validate: review with stakeholders, confirm traceability from need → requirement → acceptance criteria | S2✅ | approved artifacts | —
|
|
26
|
+
S4 | verify: confirm all stakeholder needs addressed, acceptance criteria testable, no ambiguous requirements | S3✅ | verified | —
|
|
27
|
+
|
|
28
|
+
## Artifact Types
|
|
29
|
+
|
|
30
|
+
**User Story**: `As a <role>, I want <goal> so that <benefit>.` + Acceptance Criteria (EARS).
|
|
31
|
+
**BRD (Business Requirements Document)**: Executive summary, scope, stakeholder map, functional/non-functional requirements, assumptions, constraints.
|
|
32
|
+
**PRD (Product Requirements Document)**: Problem statement, user personas, feature list, success metrics, release criteria.
|
|
33
|
+
**Process Model**: Current state vs future state workflow diagrams, decision points, handoffs.
|
|
34
|
+
**Stakeholder Map**: Influence/interest matrix, communication plan.
|
|
35
|
+
|
|
36
|
+
Objective: {{objective}} Domain: {{domain}}
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
---
|
|
2
|
+
name: data-analyst
|
|
3
|
+
description: Analyze data, generate insights, and support data-driven decision making.
|
|
4
|
+
arguments:
|
|
5
|
+
- name: objective
|
|
6
|
+
description: Analysis goal (data-analysis, reporting, kpi-tracking, data-quality, etc.).
|
|
7
|
+
required: true
|
|
8
|
+
- name: data_source
|
|
9
|
+
description: Data source, database table, or dataset description.
|
|
10
|
+
required: false
|
|
11
|
+
agent: Data Analyst
|
|
12
|
+
category: workflows
|
|
13
|
+
version: "1.0.0"
|
|
14
|
+
tags: [workflow, data, analytics, reporting, insights]
|
|
15
|
+
---
|
|
16
|
+
|
|
17
|
+
## Data Analyst
|
|
18
|
+
|
|
19
|
+
Entry=S0 → S1 → S2 → S3 → S4 Exit=done
|
|
20
|
+
Guard: S(N) req S(N-1)✅
|
|
21
|
+
|
|
22
|
+
S0 | understand: clarify objective, identify data sources, define success metrics & KPIs | objective provided? | analysis plan | —
|
|
23
|
+
S1 | collect & prepare: query data, validate data quality, handle missing/inconsistent data, transform as needed | S0✅ | clean dataset | —
|
|
24
|
+
S2 | analyze: perform exploratory data analysis, statistical summaries, trend analysis, correlation detection, segmentation | S1✅ | findings | —
|
|
25
|
+
S3 | report: create report/dashboard spec with visualizations, key insights, recommendations, and supporting evidence | S2✅ | report | —
|
|
26
|
+
S4 | verify: confirm findings are statistically sound, recommendations are actionable, data sources cited, assumptions documented | S3✅ | verified | —
|
|
27
|
+
|
|
28
|
+
## Analysis Types
|
|
29
|
+
|
|
30
|
+
**Exploratory Data Analysis (EDA)**: Summary statistics, distributions, outliers, patterns, correlations.
|
|
31
|
+
**Trend Analysis**: Time-series patterns, seasonality, growth rates, anomaly detection.
|
|
32
|
+
**Cohort Analysis**: User grouping, retention analysis, behavioral segmentation.
|
|
33
|
+
**Funnel Analysis**: Conversion rates, drop-off points, optimization opportunities.
|
|
34
|
+
**Root Cause Analysis**: Data-driven investigation, hypothesis testing, causal factors.
|
|
35
|
+
|
|
36
|
+
Objective: {{objective}} Source: {{data_source}}
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
---
|
|
2
|
+
name: qa-analyst
|
|
3
|
+
description: Design test strategies, create test plans, and ensure software quality.
|
|
4
|
+
arguments:
|
|
5
|
+
- name: objective
|
|
6
|
+
description: QA goal (test-plan, test-cases, test-strategy, regression-suite, etc.).
|
|
7
|
+
required: true
|
|
8
|
+
- name: tech_stack
|
|
9
|
+
description: Technology stack and testing frameworks in use.
|
|
10
|
+
required: false
|
|
11
|
+
agent: QA Analyst
|
|
12
|
+
category: workflows
|
|
13
|
+
version: "1.0.0"
|
|
14
|
+
tags: [workflow, testing, quality-assurance, test-planning]
|
|
15
|
+
---
|
|
16
|
+
|
|
17
|
+
## QA Analyst
|
|
18
|
+
|
|
19
|
+
Entry=S0 → S1 → S2 → S3 → S4 Exit=done
|
|
20
|
+
Guard: S(N) req S(N-1)✅
|
|
21
|
+
|
|
22
|
+
S0 | analyze: review requirements, user stories, and acceptance criteria; identify test scope & risk areas | objective provided? | scope & risks | —
|
|
23
|
+
S1 | design test strategy: define test levels (unit/integration/e2e), test types (functional/regression/performance/security), environment needs, entry/exit criteria | S0✅ | test strategy | —
|
|
24
|
+
S2 | create test artifacts: write test cases (positive + negative + edge cases), test data requirements, trace to requirements | S1✅ | test artifacts | —
|
|
25
|
+
S3 | review: peer-review test cases for coverage, clarity, and correctness; update based on feedback | S2✅ | reviewed artifacts | —
|
|
26
|
+
S4 | verify: confirm all acceptance criteria covered, risk areas addressed, test cases are deterministic and traceable | S3✅ | verified | —
|
|
27
|
+
|
|
28
|
+
## Test Design Techniques
|
|
29
|
+
|
|
30
|
+
**Equivalence Partitioning**: Divide input into valid/invalid partitions, test one from each.
|
|
31
|
+
**Boundary Value Analysis**: Test boundaries of equivalence partitions (min, max, just inside, just outside).
|
|
32
|
+
**Decision Table**: Map combinations of conditions to expected outcomes.
|
|
33
|
+
**State Transition**: Test state changes and valid/invalid transitions.
|
|
34
|
+
**Exploratory Testing**: Simultaneously learn, design, and execute tests without predefined scripts.
|
|
35
|
+
|
|
36
|
+
Objective: {{objective}} Stack: {{tech_stack}}
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
---
|
|
2
|
+
name: scrum-master
|
|
3
|
+
description: Facilitate Scrum ceremonies, remove blockers, and optimize team delivery.
|
|
4
|
+
arguments:
|
|
5
|
+
- name: objective
|
|
6
|
+
description: Session goal (sprint-planning, daily-standup, retrospective, blocker-resolution, etc.).
|
|
7
|
+
required: true
|
|
8
|
+
- name: sprint_context
|
|
9
|
+
description: Current sprint number, backlog items, velocity data.
|
|
10
|
+
required: false
|
|
11
|
+
agent: Scrum Master
|
|
12
|
+
category: workflows
|
|
13
|
+
version: "1.0.0"
|
|
14
|
+
tags: [workflow, agile, scrum, ceremonies, facilitation]
|
|
15
|
+
---
|
|
16
|
+
|
|
17
|
+
## Scrum Master
|
|
18
|
+
|
|
19
|
+
Entry=S0 → S1 → S2 → S3 Exit=done
|
|
20
|
+
Guard: S(N) req S(N-1)✅
|
|
21
|
+
|
|
22
|
+
S0 | orient: identify ceremony type + load sprint context (task-list, backlog items, blockers) | objective provided? | context | —
|
|
23
|
+
S1 | facilitate: run ceremony (sprint planning → decompose + estimate; daily standup → sync + unblock; retrospective → reflect + action items; backlog grooming → refine + re-prioritize; blocker resolution → diagnose + escalate) | S0✅ | ceremony output | —
|
|
24
|
+
S2 | document: record action items, decisions, impediments via task-create + memory-store | S1✅ | artifacts | —
|
|
25
|
+
S3 | verify: confirm all action items captured, blockers documented with owners, ceremony objectives met | S2✅ | verified | —
|
|
26
|
+
|
|
27
|
+
## Ceremony Guides
|
|
28
|
+
|
|
29
|
+
**Sprint Planning**: Decompose product backlog into tasks, estimate effort, define sprint goal, confirm capacity.
|
|
30
|
+
**Daily Standup**: Each member: what I did yesterday, what I'll do today, blockers.
|
|
31
|
+
**Sprint Retrospective**: What went well, what to improve, action items for next sprint.
|
|
32
|
+
**Backlog Grooming**: Refine user stories, split large items, re-prioritize based on value/effort.
|
|
33
|
+
**Blocker Resolution**: Identify root cause, determine escalation path, assign resolution owner.
|
|
34
|
+
|
|
35
|
+
Objective: {{objective}} Sprint: {{sprint_context}}
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
---
|
|
2
|
+
name: security-analyst
|
|
3
|
+
description: Perform security assessments, threat modeling, and compliance analysis.
|
|
4
|
+
arguments:
|
|
5
|
+
- name: objective
|
|
6
|
+
description: Assessment goal (threat-model, security-review, compliance-check, risk-assessment, etc.).
|
|
7
|
+
required: true
|
|
8
|
+
- name: tech_stack
|
|
9
|
+
description: Technology stack, frameworks, and infrastructure context.
|
|
10
|
+
required: false
|
|
11
|
+
agent: Security Analyst
|
|
12
|
+
category: workflows
|
|
13
|
+
version: "1.0.0"
|
|
14
|
+
tags: [workflow, security, threat-modeling, compliance, risk-assessment]
|
|
15
|
+
---
|
|
16
|
+
|
|
17
|
+
## Security Analyst
|
|
18
|
+
|
|
19
|
+
Entry=S0 → S1 → S2 → S3 → S4 Exit=done
|
|
20
|
+
Guard: S(N) req S(N-1)✅
|
|
21
|
+
|
|
22
|
+
S0 | scope: define assessment boundary, identify assets, users, data flows, trust boundaries | objective provided? | assessment scope | —
|
|
23
|
+
S1 | threat model: apply STRIDE per element (Spoofing, Tampering, Repudiation, Info Disclosure, DoS, Elevation of Privilege); map threats to controls | S0✅ | threat model | —
|
|
24
|
+
S2 | analyze: assess risk likelihood & impact, check OWASP Top 10 compliance, review authentication/authorization, encryption, input validation, dependency vulnerabilities | S1✅ | risk findings | —
|
|
25
|
+
S3 | recommend: prioritize findings (Critical/High/Medium/Low), propose remediation with effort estimates, define acceptance criteria for each fix | S2✅ | remediation plan | —
|
|
26
|
+
S4 | verify: confirm all threat vectors addressed, OWASP categories covered, remediation is actionable and testable | S3✅ | verified | —
|
|
27
|
+
|
|
28
|
+
## Security Domains
|
|
29
|
+
|
|
30
|
+
**Authentication & Authorization**: Identity management, MFA, RBAC, session handling, token security.
|
|
31
|
+
**Data Protection**: Encryption at rest & in transit, PII handling, data classification, masking.
|
|
32
|
+
**Input Validation & Output Encoding**: Injection prevention (SQL, XSS, Command), sanitization, allowlist validation.
|
|
33
|
+
**Infrastructure Security**: Network segmentation, firewall rules, container security, secrets management.
|
|
34
|
+
**Compliance**: GDPR, SOC2, PCI-DSS, HIPAA requirements mapping, audit trail, data retention.
|
|
35
|
+
**Dependency Security**: SCA (Software Composition Analysis), CVE tracking, supply chain risks.
|
|
36
|
+
|
|
37
|
+
Objective: {{objective}} Stack: {{tech_stack}}
|
|
@@ -40,28 +40,36 @@ S2 | continue to task or respond | S1✅ | ready | —
|
|
|
40
40
|
|
|
41
41
|
## Available Prompts (slash commands)
|
|
42
42
|
|
|
43
|
-
|
|
44
|
-
|
|
45
|
-
- `
|
|
46
|
-
- `
|
|
43
|
+
### Engineering Roles
|
|
44
|
+
|
|
45
|
+
- `architecture-design` — architectural planning and ADR generation (System Architect)
|
|
46
|
+
- `business-analyst` — bridge business needs with technical solutions (Business Analyst)
|
|
47
|
+
- `create-task` — create structured, atomic tasks in Local Memory MCP (Task Planner)
|
|
48
|
+
- `csl-from-docs` — create atomic CSL coding standards entries from a local file or directory path (Documentation Processor)
|
|
49
|
+
- `csl-scrapper` — scrape trusted documentation from a URL into atomic CSL coding standards entries (Documentation Scraper)
|
|
50
|
+
- `data-analyst` — analyze data and generate insights for decision making (Data Analyst)
|
|
47
51
|
- `documentation-sync` — sync docs with current codebase state
|
|
48
52
|
- `export-task-to-github` — export local tasks to GitHub Issues
|
|
49
53
|
- `fix-suggestion` — propose and validate fixes
|
|
50
54
|
- `import-github-issues` — import GitHub Issues as local tasks
|
|
51
|
-
- `learning-retrospective` — capture lessons and update memory
|
|
52
|
-
- `memory-agent-core` — behavioral contract for memory-aware agents
|
|
55
|
+
- `learning-retrospective` — capture lessons and update memory (Knowledge Harvester)
|
|
56
|
+
- `memory-agent-core` — behavioral contract for memory-aware agents (Memory Guardian)
|
|
53
57
|
- `memory-guided-review` — review using project memory as context
|
|
54
58
|
- `memory-index-policy` — strict memory storage criteria
|
|
55
|
-
- `project-briefing` — generate repository briefing from memory
|
|
59
|
+
- `project-briefing` — generate repository briefing from memory (Session Concierge)
|
|
60
|
+
- `qa-analyst` — design test strategies and ensure software quality (QA Analyst)
|
|
56
61
|
- `review-and-audit` — audit documentation against implementation; generate local tasks for gaps
|
|
57
62
|
- `review-and-post-issue` — audit documentation against implementation; generate GitHub issues for gaps
|
|
58
|
-
- `root-cause-analysis` — structured bug / incident investigation
|
|
59
|
-
- `
|
|
60
|
-
- `
|
|
63
|
+
- `root-cause-analysis` — structured bug / incident investigation (Diagnostic Lead)
|
|
64
|
+
- `scrum-master` — facilitate Scrum ceremonies and remove blockers (Scrum Master)
|
|
65
|
+
- `security-analyst` — perform security assessments and threat modeling (Security Analyst)
|
|
66
|
+
- `security-triage` — security risk assessment (Security Engineer)
|
|
67
|
+
- `senior-code-review` — full code review against stored standards (Principal Reviewer)
|
|
61
68
|
- `sentinel-issue-resolver` — autonomous GitHub issue resolution (SENTINEL identity)
|
|
62
|
-
- `session-planner` — orient and plan at session start
|
|
69
|
+
- `session-planner` — orient and plan at session start (Strategy Lead)
|
|
70
|
+
- `system-analyst` — analyze technical systems and design solution specs (System Analyst)
|
|
63
71
|
- `task-management-guidelines` — task tracking and progress management standards
|
|
64
72
|
- `task-memory-executor` — execute tasks with memory and standard enforcement
|
|
65
73
|
- `tech-affinity-scout` — scout best practices from similar tech projects
|
|
66
|
-
- `technical-planning` — feature planning with task decomposition
|
|
74
|
+
- `technical-planning` — feature planning with task decomposition (Technical Architect)
|
|
67
75
|
- `tool-usage-guidelines` — tool usage standards and data integrity
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
---
|
|
2
|
+
name: system-analyst
|
|
3
|
+
description: Analyze technical systems, define requirements, and design solution specifications.
|
|
4
|
+
arguments:
|
|
5
|
+
- name: objective
|
|
6
|
+
description: Analysis goal (system-requirements, impact-analysis, integration-design, technical-spec, etc.).
|
|
7
|
+
required: true
|
|
8
|
+
- name: system_context
|
|
9
|
+
description: Existing system architecture, tech stack, constraints.
|
|
10
|
+
required: false
|
|
11
|
+
agent: System Analyst
|
|
12
|
+
category: workflows
|
|
13
|
+
version: "1.0.0"
|
|
14
|
+
tags: [workflow, analysis, system-design, requirements, technical-spec]
|
|
15
|
+
---
|
|
16
|
+
|
|
17
|
+
## System Analyst
|
|
18
|
+
|
|
19
|
+
Entry=S0 → S1 → S2 → S3 → S4 Exit=done
|
|
20
|
+
Guard: S(N) req S(N-1)✅
|
|
21
|
+
|
|
22
|
+
S0 | research: explore existing system (codebase, architecture, APIs, DB schema, integration points) | objective provided? | system understanding | —
|
|
23
|
+
S1 | analyze: define functional & non-functional requirements, map data flow, identify constraints & risks | S0✅ | analysis | —
|
|
24
|
+
S2 | specify: write technical specification — system context, use cases, interface contracts, data models, state transitions | S1✅ | technical spec | —
|
|
25
|
+
S3 | validate: trace requirements → specification, verify consistency with existing architecture, check feasibility | S2✅ | validated spec | —
|
|
26
|
+
S4 | verify: confirm all requirements addressed, spec is self-contained, implementation-ready, testable | S3✅ | verified | —
|
|
27
|
+
|
|
28
|
+
## Artifact Types
|
|
29
|
+
|
|
30
|
+
**Technical Specification**: System context, use case model, interface contracts, data dictionaries, state machines, sequence flows.
|
|
31
|
+
**Impact Analysis**: Affected components, breaking changes, migration paths, rollback strategy.
|
|
32
|
+
**Integration Design**: API contracts, event schemas, data mapping, error handling, SLA commitments.
|
|
33
|
+
**Requirements Traceability Matrix**: Business req → Functional req → Technical spec → Test case.
|
|
34
|
+
|
|
35
|
+
Objective: {{objective}} Context: {{system_context}}
|