@zeyue0329/xiaoma-cli 1.0.49 → 6.0.0-alpha.14

package/src/modules/xmc/workflows/3-solutioning/architecture/steps/step-04-decisions.md

@@ -0,0 +1,317 @@
+# Step 4: Core Architectural Decisions
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+
+- 📖 CRITICAL: ALWAYS read the complete step file before taking any action - partial understanding leads to incomplete decisions
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure the entire file is read and understood before proceeding
+- ✅ ALWAYS treat this as collaborative discovery between architectural peers
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- 💬 FOCUS on making critical architectural decisions collaboratively
+- 🌐 ALWAYS verify current technology versions using WebSearch
+- ⚠️ ABSOLUTELY NO TIME ESTIMATES - AI development speed has fundamentally changed
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Show your analysis before taking any action
+- 🌐 Use WebSearch to verify technology versions and options
+- ⚠️ Present A/P/C menu after each major decision category
+- 💾 ONLY save when user chooses C (Continue)
+- 📖 Update frontmatter `stepsCompleted: [1, 2, 3, 4]` before loading next step
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to load next step until C is selected
+
+## COLLABORATION MENUS (A/P/C):
+
+This step will generate content and present choices for each decision category:
+
+- **A (Advanced Elicitation)**: Use discovery protocols to explore innovative approaches to specific decisions
+- **P (Party Mode)**: Bring multiple perspectives to evaluate decision trade-offs
+- **C (Continue)**: Save the current decisions and proceed to next decision category
+
+## PROTOCOL INTEGRATION:
+
+- When 'A' selected: Execute {project-root}/{xiaoma_folder}/core/tasks/advanced-elicitation.xml
+- When 'P' selected: Execute {project-root}/{xiaoma_folder}/core/workflows/party-mode/workflow.md
+- PROTOCOLS always return to display this step's A/P/C menu after the A or P have completed
+- User accepts/rejects protocol changes before proceeding
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Project context from step 2 is available
+- Starter template choice from step 3 is available
+- Project context file may contain technical preferences and rules
+- Technical preferences discovered in step 3 are available
+- Focus on decisions not already made by starter template or existing preferences
+- Collaborative decision making, not recommendations
+
+## YOUR TASK:
+
+Facilitate collaborative architectural decision making, leveraging existing technical preferences and starter template decisions, focusing on remaining choices critical to the project's success.
+
+## DECISION MAKING SEQUENCE:
+
+### 1. Load Decision Framework & Check Existing Preferences
+
+**Review Technical Preferences from Step 3:**
+"Based on our technical preferences discussion in step 3, let's build on those foundations:
+
+**Your Technical Preferences:**
+{{user_technical_preferences_from_step_3}}
+
+**Starter Template Decisions:**
+{{starter_template_decisions}}
+
+**Project Context Technical Rules:**
+{{project_context_technical_rules}}"
+
+**Identify Remaining Decisions:**
+Based on technical preferences, starter template choice, and project context, identify remaining critical decisions:
+
+**Already Decided (Don't re-decide these):**
+
+- {{starter_template_decisions}}
+- {{user_technology_preferences}}
+- {{project_context_technical_rules}}
+
+**Critical Decisions:** Must be decided before implementation can proceed
+**Important Decisions:** Shape the architecture significantly
+**Nice-to-Have:** Can be deferred if needed
+
+### 2. Decision Categories by Priority
+
+#### Category 1: Data Architecture
+
+- Database choice (if not determined by starter)
+- Data modeling approach
+- Data validation strategy
+- Migration approach
+- Caching strategy
+
+#### Category 2: Authentication & Security
+
+- Authentication method
+- Authorization patterns
+- Security middleware
+- Data encryption approach
+- API security strategy
+
+#### Category 3: API & Communication
+
+- API design patterns (REST, GraphQL, etc.)
+- API documentation approach
+- Error handling standards
+- Rate limiting strategy
+- Communication between services
+
+#### Category 4: Frontend Architecture (if applicable)
+
+- State management approach
+- Component architecture
+- Routing strategy
+- Performance optimization
+- Bundle optimization
+
+#### Category 5: Infrastructure & Deployment
+
+- Hosting strategy
+- CI/CD pipeline approach
+- Environment configuration
+- Monitoring and logging
+- Scaling strategy
+
+### 3. Facilitate Each Decision Category
+
+For each category, facilitate collaborative decision making:
+
+**Present the Decision:**
+Based on user skill level and project context:
+
+**Expert Mode:**
+"{{Decision_Category}}: {{Specific_Decision}}
+
+Options: {{concise_option_list_with_tradeoffs}}
+
+What's your preference for this decision?"
+
+**Intermediate Mode:**
+"Next decision: {{Human_Friendly_Category}}
+
+We need to choose {{Specific_Decision}}.
+
+Common options:
+{{option_list_with_brief_explanations}}
+
+For your project, I'd lean toward {{recommendation}} because {{reason}}. What are your thoughts?"
+
+**Beginner Mode:**
+"Let's talk about {{Human_Friendly_Category}}.
+
+{{Educational_Context_About_Why_This_Matters}}
+
+Think of it like {{real_world_analogy}}.
+
+Your main options:
+{{friendly_options_with_pros_cons}}
+
+My suggestion: {{recommendation}}
+This is good for you because {{beginner_friendly_reason}}.
+
+What feels right to you?"
+
+**Verify Technology Versions:**
+If decision involves specific technology:
+
+```
+WebSearch: {{technology}} latest stable version 2024
+WebSearch: {{technology}} current LTS version
+WebSearch: {{technology}} production readiness 2024
+```
+
+**Get User Input:**
+"What's your preference? (or 'explain more' for details)"
+
+**Handle User Response:**
+
+- If user wants more info: Provide deeper explanation
+- If user has preference: Discuss implications and record decision
+- If user wants alternatives: Explore other options
+
+**Record the Decision:**
+
+- Category: {{category}}
+- Decision: {{user_choice}}
+- Version: {{verified_version_if_applicable}}
+- Rationale: {{user_reasoning_or_default}}
+- Affects: {{components_or_epics}}
+- Provided by Starter: {{yes_if_from_starter}}
+
+### 4. Check for Cascading Implications
+
+After each major decision, identify related decisions:
+
+"This choice means we'll also need to decide:
+
+- {{related_decision_1}}
+- {{related_decision_2}}"
+
+### 5. Generate Decisions Content
+
+After facilitating all decision categories, prepare the content to append:
+
+#### Content Structure:
+
+```markdown
+## Core Architectural Decisions
+
+### Decision Priority Analysis
+
+**Critical Decisions (Block Implementation):**
+{{critical_decisions_made}}
+
+**Important Decisions (Shape Architecture):**
+{{important_decisions_made}}
+
+**Deferred Decisions (Post-MVP):**
+{{decisions_deferred_with_rationale}}
+
+### Data Architecture
+
+{{data_related_decisions_with_versions_and_rationale}}
+
+### Authentication & Security
+
+{{security_related_decisions_with_versions_and_rationale}}
+
+### API & Communication Patterns
+
+{{api_related_decisions_with_versions_and_rationale}}
+
+### Frontend Architecture
+
+{{frontend_related_decisions_with_versions_and_rationale}}
+
+### Infrastructure & Deployment
+
+{{infrastructure_related_decisions_with_versions_and_rationale}}
+
+### Decision Impact Analysis
+
+**Implementation Sequence:**
+{{ordered_list_of_decisions_for_implementation}}
+
+**Cross-Component Dependencies:**
+{{how_decisions_affect_each_other}}
+```
+
+### 6. Present Content and Menu
+
+Show the generated decisions content and present choices:
+
+"I've documented all the core architectural decisions we've made together.
+
+**Here's what I'll add to the document:**
+
+[Show the complete markdown content from step 5]
+
+**What would you like to do?**
+[A] Advanced Elicitation - Explore innovative approaches to any specific decisions
+[P] Party Mode - Review decisions from multiple perspectives
+[C] Continue - Save these decisions and move to implementation patterns"
+
+### 7. Handle Menu Selection
+
+#### If 'A' (Advanced Elicitation):
+
+- Execute {project-root}/{xiaoma_folder}/core/tasks/advanced-elicitation.xml with specific decision categories
+- Process enhanced insights about particular decisions
+- Ask user: "Accept these enhancements to the architectural decisions? (y/n)"
+- If yes: Update content, then return to A/P/C menu
+- If no: Keep original content, then return to A/P/C menu
+
+#### If 'P' (Party Mode):
+
+- Execute {project-root}/{xiaoma_folder}/core/workflows/party-mode/workflow.md with architectural decisions context
+- Process collaborative insights about decision trade-offs
+- Ask user: "Accept these changes to the architectural decisions? (y/n)"
+- If yes: Update content, then return to A/P/C menu
+- If no: Keep original content, then return to A/P/C menu
+
+#### If 'C' (Continue):
+
+- Append the final content to `{output_folder}/architecture.md`
+- Update frontmatter: `stepsCompleted: [1, 2, 3, 4]`
+- Load `./step-05-patterns.md`
+
+## APPEND TO DOCUMENT:
+
+When user selects 'C', append the content directly to the document using the structure from step 5.
+
+## SUCCESS METRICS:
+
+✅ All critical architectural decisions made collaboratively
+✅ Technology versions verified using WebSearch
+✅ Decision rationale clearly documented
+✅ Cascading implications identified and addressed
+✅ User provided appropriate level of explanation for skill level
+✅ A/P/C menu presented and handled correctly for each category
+✅ Content properly appended to document when C selected
+
+## FAILURE MODES:
+
+❌ Making recommendations instead of facilitating decisions
+❌ Not verifying technology versions with WebSearch
+❌ Missing cascading implications between decisions
+❌ Not adapting explanations to user skill level
+❌ Forgetting to document decisions made by starter template
+❌ Not presenting A/P/C menu after content generation
+
+❌ **CRITICAL**: Reading only partial step file - leads to incomplete understanding and poor decisions
+❌ **CRITICAL**: Proceeding with 'C' without fully reading and understanding the next step file
+❌ **CRITICAL**: Making decisions without complete understanding of step requirements and protocols
+
+## NEXT STEP:
+
+After user selects 'C' and content is saved to document, load `./step-05-patterns.md` to define implementation patterns that ensure consistency across AI agents.
+
+Remember: Do NOT proceed to step-05 until user explicitly selects 'C' from the A/P/C menu and content is saved!

package/src/modules/xmc/workflows/3-solutioning/architecture/steps/step-05-patterns.md

@@ -0,0 +1,358 @@
+# Step 5: Implementation Patterns & Consistency Rules
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+
+- 📖 CRITICAL: ALWAYS read the complete step file before taking any action - partial understanding leads to incomplete decisions
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure the entire file is read and understood before proceeding
+- ✅ ALWAYS treat this as collaborative discovery between architectural peers
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- 💬 FOCUS on patterns that prevent AI agent implementation conflicts
+- 🎯 EMPHASIZE what agents could decide DIFFERENTLY if not specified
+- ⚠️ ABSOLUTELY NO TIME ESTIMATES - AI development speed has fundamentally changed
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Show your analysis before taking any action
+- 🎯 Focus on consistency, not implementation details
+- ⚠️ Present A/P/C menu after generating patterns content
+- 💾 ONLY save when user chooses C (Continue)
+- 📖 Update frontmatter `stepsCompleted: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]` before loading next step
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to load next step until C is selected
+
+## COLLABORATION MENUS (A/P/C):
+
+This step will generate content and present choices:
+
+- **A (Advanced Elicitation)**: Use discovery protocols to develop comprehensive consistency patterns
+- **P (Party Mode)**: Bring multiple perspectives to identify potential conflict points
+- **C (Continue)**: Save the patterns and proceed to project structure
+
+## PROTOCOL INTEGRATION:
+
+- When 'A' selected: Execute {project-root}/{xiaoma_folder}/core/tasks/advanced-elicitation.xml
+- When 'P' selected: Execute {project-root}/{xiaoma_folder}/core/workflows/party-mode/workflow.md
+- PROTOCOLS always return to display this step's A/P/C menu after the A or P have completed
+- User accepts/rejects protocol changes before proceeding
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Core architectural decisions from step 4 are complete
+- Technology stack is decided and versions are verified
+- Focus on HOW agents should implement, not WHAT they should implement
+- Consider what could vary between different AI agents
+
+## YOUR TASK:
+
+Define implementation patterns and consistency rules that ensure multiple AI agents write compatible, consistent code that works together seamlessly.
+
+## PATTERNS DEFINITION SEQUENCE:
+
+### 1. Identify Potential Conflict Points
+
+Based on the chosen technology stack and decisions, identify where AI agents could make different choices:
+
+**Naming Conflicts:**
+
+- Database table/column naming conventions
+- API endpoint naming patterns
+- File and directory naming
+- Component/function/variable naming
+- Route parameter formats
+
+**Structural Conflicts:**
+
+- Where tests are located
+- How components are organized
+- Where utilities and helpers go
+- Configuration file organization
+- Static asset organization
+
+**Format Conflicts:**
+
+- API response wrapper formats
+- Error response structures
+- Date/time formats in APIs and UI
+- JSON field naming conventions
+- API status code usage
+
+**Communication Conflicts:**
+
+- Event naming conventions
+- Event payload structures
+- State update patterns
+- Action naming conventions
+- Logging formats and levels
+
+**Process Conflicts:**
+
+- Loading state handling
+- Error recovery patterns
+- Retry implementation approaches
+- Authentication flow patterns
+- Validation timing and methods
+
+### 2. Facilitate Pattern Decisions
+
+For each conflict category, facilitate collaborative pattern definition:
+
+**Present the Conflict Point:**
+"Given that we're using {{tech_stack}}, different AI agents might handle {{conflict_area}} differently.
+
+For example, one agent might name database tables 'users' while another uses 'Users' - this would cause conflicts.
+
+We need to establish consistent patterns that all agents follow."
+
+**Show Options and Trade-offs:**
+"Common approaches for {{pattern_category}}:
+
+1. {{option_1}} - {{pros_and_cons}}
+2. {{option_2}} - {{pros_and_cons}}
+3. {{option_3}} - {{pros_and_cons}}
+
+Which approach makes the most sense for our project?"
+
+**Get User Decision:**
+"What's your preference for this pattern? (or discuss the trade-offs more)"
+
+### 3. Define Pattern Categories
+
+#### Naming Patterns
+
+**Database Naming:**
+
+- Table naming: users, Users, or user?
+- Column naming: user_id or userId?
+- Foreign key format: user_id or fk_user?
+- Index naming: idx_users_email or users_email_index?
+
+**API Naming:**
+
+- REST endpoint naming: /users or /user? Plural or singular?
+- Route parameter format: :id or {id}?
+- Query parameter naming: user_id or userId?
+- Header naming conventions: X-Custom-Header or Custom-Header?
+
+**Code Naming:**
+
+- Component naming: UserCard or user-card?
+- File naming: UserCard.tsx or user-card.tsx?
+- Function naming: getUserData or get_user_data?
+- Variable naming: userId or user_id?
+
+#### Structure Patterns
+
+**Project Organization:**
+
+- Where do tests live? **tests**/ or \*.test.ts co-located?
+- How are components organized? By feature or by type?
+- Where do shared utilities go?
+- How are services and repositories organized?
+
+**File Structure:**
+
+- Config file locations and naming
+- Static asset organization
+- Documentation placement
+- Environment file organization
+
+#### Format Patterns
+
+**API Formats:**
+
+- API response wrapper? {data: ..., error: ...} or direct response?
+- Error format? {message, code} or {error: {type, detail}}?
+- Date format in JSON? ISO strings or timestamps?
+- Success response structure?
+
+**Data Formats:**
+
+- JSON field naming: snake_case or camelCase?
+- Boolean representations: true/false or 1/0?
+- Null handling patterns
+- Array vs object for single items
+
+#### Communication Patterns
+
+**Event Systems:**
+
+- Event naming convention: user.created or UserCreated?
+- Event payload structure standards
+- Event versioning approach
+- Async event handling patterns
+
+**State Management:**
+
+- State update patterns: immutable updates or direct mutation?
+- Action naming conventions
+- Selector patterns
+- State organization principles
+
+#### Process Patterns
+
+**Error Handling:**
+
+- Global error handling approach
+- Error boundary patterns
+- User-facing error message format
+- Logging vs user error distinction
+
+**Loading States:**
+
+- Loading state naming conventions
+- Global vs local loading states
+- Loading state persistence
+- Loading UI patterns
+
+### 4. Generate Patterns Content
+
+Prepare the content to append to the document:
+
+#### Content Structure:
+
+```markdown
+## Implementation Patterns & Consistency Rules
+
+### Pattern Categories Defined
+
+**Critical Conflict Points Identified:**
+{{number_of_potential_conflicts}} areas where AI agents could make different choices
+
+### Naming Patterns
+
+**Database Naming Conventions:**
+{{database_naming_rules_with_examples}}
+
+**API Naming Conventions:**
+{{api_naming_rules_with_examples}}
+
+**Code Naming Conventions:**
+{{code_naming_rules_with_examples}}
+
+### Structure Patterns
+
+**Project Organization:**
+{{project_structure_rules_with_examples}}
+
+**File Structure Patterns:**
+{{file_organization_rules_with_examples}}
+
+### Format Patterns
+
+**API Response Formats:**
+{{api_response_structure_rules}}
+
+**Data Exchange Formats:**
+{{data_format_rules_with_examples}}
+
+### Communication Patterns
+
+**Event System Patterns:**
+{{event_naming_and_structure_rules}}
+
+**State Management Patterns:**
+{{state_update_and_organization_rules}}
+
+### Process Patterns
+
+**Error Handling Patterns:**
+{{consistent_error_handling_approaches}}
+
+**Loading State Patterns:**
+{{loading_state_management_rules}}
+
+### Enforcement Guidelines
+
+**All AI Agents MUST:**
+
+- {{mandatory_pattern_1}}
+- {{mandatory_pattern_2}}
+- {{mandatory_pattern_3}}
+
+**Pattern Enforcement:**
+
+- How to verify patterns are followed
+- Where to document pattern violations
+- Process for updating patterns
+
+### Pattern Examples
+
+**Good Examples:**
+{{concrete_examples_of_correct_pattern_usage}}
+
+**Anti-Patterns:**
+{{examples_of_what_to_avoid}}
+```
+
+### 5. Present Content and Menu
+
+Show the generated patterns content and present choices:
+
+"I've documented implementation patterns that will prevent conflicts between AI agents working on this project.
+
+**Here's what I'll add to the document:**
+
+[Show the complete markdown content from step 4]
+
+**What would you like to do?**
+[A] Advanced Elicitation - Explore additional consistency patterns
+[P] Party Mode - Review patterns from different implementation perspectives
+[C] Continue - Save these patterns and move to project structure"
+
+### 6. Handle Menu Selection
+
+#### If 'A' (Advanced Elicitation):
+
+- Execute {project-root}/{xiaoma_folder}/core/tasks/advanced-elicitation.xml with current patterns
+- Process enhanced consistency rules that come back
+- Ask user: "Accept these additional pattern refinements? (y/n)"
+- If yes: Update content, then return to A/P/C menu
+- If no: Keep original content, then return to A/P/C menu
+
+#### If 'P' (Party Mode):
+
+- Execute {project-root}/{xiaoma_folder}/core/workflows/party-mode/workflow.md with implementation patterns context
+- Process collaborative insights about potential conflicts
+- Ask user: "Accept these changes to the implementation patterns? (y/n)"
+- If yes: Update content, then return to A/P/C menu
+- If no: Keep original content, then return to A/P/C menu
+
+#### If 'C' (Continue):
+
+- Append the final content to `{output_folder}/architecture.md`
+- Update frontmatter: `stepsCompleted: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]`
+- Load `./step-06-structure.md`
+
+## APPEND TO DOCUMENT:
+
+When user selects 'C', append the content directly to the document using the structure from step 4.
+
+## SUCCESS METRICS:
+
+✅ All potential AI agent conflict points identified and addressed
+✅ Comprehensive patterns defined for naming, structure, and communication
+✅ Concrete examples provided for each pattern
+✅ Enforcement guidelines clearly documented
+✅ User collaborated on pattern decisions rather than receiving recommendations
+✅ A/P/C menu presented and handled correctly
+✅ Content properly appended to document when C selected
+
+## FAILURE MODES:
+
+❌ Missing potential conflict points that could cause agent conflicts
+❌ Being too prescriptive about implementation details instead of focusing on consistency
+❌ Not providing concrete examples for each pattern
+❌ Failing to address cross-cutting concerns like error handling
+❌ Not considering the chosen technology stack when defining patterns
+❌ Not presenting A/P/C menu after content generation
+
+❌ **CRITICAL**: Reading only partial step file - leads to incomplete understanding and poor decisions
+❌ **CRITICAL**: Proceeding with 'C' without fully reading and understanding the next step file
+❌ **CRITICAL**: Making decisions without complete understanding of step requirements and protocols
+
+## NEXT STEP:
+
+After user selects 'C' and content is saved to document, load `./step-06-structure.md` to define the complete project structure.
+
+Remember: Do NOT proceed to step-06 until user explicitly selects 'C' from the A/P/C menu and content is saved!