agent-eng 0.3.0 → 0.5.0
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/package.json +1 -1
- package/src/init.js +5 -0
- package/src/templates/.claude/settings.json +8 -0
- package/src/templates/CLAUDE.md +45 -2
- package/src/templates/orchestration.yaml +33 -2
- package/src/templates/prompts/architect.md +27 -5
- package/src/templates/prompts/custodian.md +70 -0
- package/src/templates/prompts/executor.md +60 -0
- package/src/templates/prompts/planner.md +19 -4
- package/src/templates/tickets/_backlog.md +35 -0
- package/src/templates/tickets/_template.md +1 -0
- package/src/templates/tickets/example/001-example-ticket.md +38 -0
package/package.json
CHANGED
package/src/init.js
CHANGED
|
@@ -6,16 +6,21 @@ const __dirname = dirname(fileURLToPath(import.meta.url));
|
|
|
6
6
|
const TEMPLATES = join(__dirname, "templates");
|
|
7
7
|
|
|
8
8
|
const STRUCTURE = [
|
|
9
|
+
".claude/settings.json",
|
|
9
10
|
"architecture/overview.md",
|
|
10
11
|
"architecture/decisions/_template.md",
|
|
11
12
|
"architecture/decisions/0001-how-we-work.md",
|
|
12
13
|
"prompts/architect.md",
|
|
14
|
+
"prompts/custodian.md",
|
|
15
|
+
"prompts/executor.md",
|
|
13
16
|
"prompts/planner.md",
|
|
14
17
|
"prompts/qa-tester.md",
|
|
15
18
|
"prompts/reviewer.md",
|
|
16
19
|
"prompts/system-architect.md",
|
|
17
20
|
"specs/_template.md",
|
|
18
21
|
"tickets/_template.md",
|
|
22
|
+
"tickets/_backlog.md",
|
|
23
|
+
"tickets/example/001-example-ticket.md",
|
|
19
24
|
"orchestration.yaml",
|
|
20
25
|
"architecture.yaml",
|
|
21
26
|
"CLAUDE.md",
|
package/src/templates/CLAUDE.md
CHANGED
|
@@ -11,9 +11,48 @@ This project separates AI-assisted work into six roles. Each role has a dedicate
|
|
|
11
11
|
| **Architect** | `prompts/architect.md` | Analyze requirements, ask clarifying questions, produce ADRs |
|
|
12
12
|
| **System Architect** | `prompts/system-architect.md` | Map and document system architecture as `architecture.yaml` |
|
|
13
13
|
| **Planner** | `prompts/planner.md` | Decompose specs and ADRs into actionable tickets |
|
|
14
|
-
| **Executor** |
|
|
14
|
+
| **Executor** | `prompts/executor.md` | Implement tickets, verify work before requesting feedback |
|
|
15
15
|
| **QA Tester** | `prompts/qa-tester.md` | Write automated tests for completed features |
|
|
16
16
|
| **Reviewer** | `prompts/reviewer.md` | Validate code and tests against acceptance criteria and ADRs |
|
|
17
|
+
| **Custodian** | `prompts/custodian.md` | Keep CLAUDE.md lean (≤200 lines), current, and routed to external files |
|
|
18
|
+
|
|
19
|
+
## Sub-Agent Deployment
|
|
20
|
+
|
|
21
|
+
When work can be parallelized, spin up sub-agents to handle independent tasks concurrently. Sub-agents research, test, or implement in isolation and report back to the main thread.
|
|
22
|
+
|
|
23
|
+
### When to deploy sub-agents
|
|
24
|
+
|
|
25
|
+
- **Research in parallel** — e.g., one sub-agent reads existing ADRs while another explores the codebase for relevant patterns
|
|
26
|
+
- **Test in parallel** — e.g., one sub-agent runs unit tests while another checks integration tests
|
|
27
|
+
- **Implement independent tickets** — tickets with no dependencies on each other can be executed simultaneously
|
|
28
|
+
- **Verify in parallel** — e.g., one sub-agent checks browser behavior while another reviews console output
|
|
29
|
+
|
|
30
|
+
### Model selection
|
|
31
|
+
|
|
32
|
+
Not every sub-agent needs the most powerful model. Choose the model based on task complexity:
|
|
33
|
+
|
|
34
|
+
| Complexity | Model | Use when |
|
|
35
|
+
|------------|-------|----------|
|
|
36
|
+
| **Low** | Haiku | File lookups, grep searches, reading docs, running tests, formatting, simple code generation |
|
|
37
|
+
| **Medium** | Sonnet | Multi-file changes, moderate reasoning, code review, writing tests |
|
|
38
|
+
| **High** | Opus | Architecture decisions, complex refactors, subtle bug investigation, cross-cutting changes |
|
|
39
|
+
|
|
40
|
+
**Default to Haiku for sub-agents** unless the task requires multi-step reasoning or cross-file understanding. Most research and verification tasks are Haiku-appropriate.
|
|
41
|
+
|
|
42
|
+
### How to deploy
|
|
43
|
+
|
|
44
|
+
Use the Agent tool with these parameters:
|
|
45
|
+
- `description` — Short label for what the sub-agent does
|
|
46
|
+
- `prompt` — Self-contained brief (the sub-agent has no context from the main thread)
|
|
47
|
+
- `model` — Set to `"haiku"` for simple tasks, `"sonnet"` for moderate, omit for complex (inherits parent model)
|
|
48
|
+
- `run_in_background` — Set to `true` when you don't need the result before continuing other work
|
|
49
|
+
|
|
50
|
+
### Rules
|
|
51
|
+
|
|
52
|
+
- **Make prompts self-contained** — Sub-agents don't see the main conversation. Include file paths, context, and what specifically to do or find.
|
|
53
|
+
- **Parallelize independent work** — Launch multiple sub-agents in a single message when their tasks don't depend on each other.
|
|
54
|
+
- **Don't delegate synthesis** — Sub-agents gather information; the main thread makes decisions. Never write "based on your findings, decide X."
|
|
55
|
+
- **Verify sub-agent output** — Sub-agents report what they intended, not necessarily what they achieved. Check their actual changes before reporting to the user.
|
|
17
56
|
|
|
18
57
|
## Before Starting Any Ticket
|
|
19
58
|
|
|
@@ -29,10 +68,14 @@ This project separates AI-assisted work into six roles. Each role has a dedicate
|
|
|
29
68
|
- `architecture.yaml` — System architecture definition (components, connections, tiers)
|
|
30
69
|
- `orchestration.yaml` — Agent workflow definition (roles, outputs, connections)
|
|
31
70
|
- `specs/` — Feature specifications
|
|
32
|
-
- `tickets/` — Work items with
|
|
71
|
+
- `tickets/` — Work items organized by feature folder, with `_backlog.md` as the sprint board
|
|
33
72
|
- `conventions/` — Language and framework coding standards
|
|
34
73
|
- `prompts/` — System prompts for each agent role
|
|
35
74
|
|
|
75
|
+
## MCP Servers
|
|
76
|
+
|
|
77
|
+
- **Context7** — Pulls up-to-date, version-specific documentation from live code libraries (React, Next.js, etc.) before writing code. Configured in `.claude/settings.json`. Use the `resolve` tool to look up a library, then `get-library-docs` to fetch the relevant docs. Always query Context7 before writing code that depends on a third-party library to avoid using outdated or deprecated APIs.
|
|
78
|
+
|
|
36
79
|
## Conventions
|
|
37
80
|
|
|
38
81
|
Check `conventions/` for language-specific standards. Always follow the conventions for the language you're working in.
|
|
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
|
|
|
1
1
|
name: Agentic Workflow
|
|
2
|
-
description:
|
|
2
|
+
description: Seven-role pipeline for AI-assisted software engineering
|
|
3
3
|
|
|
4
4
|
agents:
|
|
5
5
|
- id: architect
|
|
@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ agents:
|
|
|
48
48
|
- PRs
|
|
49
49
|
- Plan docs
|
|
50
50
|
color: indigo
|
|
51
|
-
docLink: /
|
|
51
|
+
docLink: /prompts/executor.md
|
|
52
52
|
|
|
53
53
|
- id: qa-tester
|
|
54
54
|
kind: validation
|
|
@@ -74,6 +74,17 @@ agents:
|
|
|
74
74
|
color: amber
|
|
75
75
|
docLink: /prompts/reviewer.md
|
|
76
76
|
|
|
77
|
+
- id: custodian
|
|
78
|
+
kind: maintenance
|
|
79
|
+
title: Custodian
|
|
80
|
+
tagline: Keeps CLAUDE.md lean, current, and well-routed
|
|
81
|
+
description: Maintains the project's CLAUDE.md file — adds new patterns and gotchas, removes stale entries, and routes large content to external files. Enforces a 150–200 line limit to prevent context bloat.
|
|
82
|
+
outputs:
|
|
83
|
+
- Updated CLAUDE.md
|
|
84
|
+
- Extracted reference files
|
|
85
|
+
color: gray
|
|
86
|
+
docLink: /prompts/custodian.md
|
|
87
|
+
|
|
77
88
|
connections:
|
|
78
89
|
- from: architect
|
|
79
90
|
to: system-architect
|
|
@@ -100,4 +111,24 @@ connections:
|
|
|
100
111
|
artifact: Feedback
|
|
101
112
|
type: feedback
|
|
102
113
|
|
|
114
|
+
- from: reviewer
|
|
115
|
+
to: custodian
|
|
116
|
+
artifact: Completed work context
|
|
117
|
+
type: trigger
|
|
118
|
+
|
|
119
|
+
parallelization:
|
|
120
|
+
description: >
|
|
121
|
+
The main session can deploy sub-agents for independent, parallelizable work.
|
|
122
|
+
Sub-agents run in isolation, report back, and the main thread synthesizes results.
|
|
123
|
+
model-routing:
|
|
124
|
+
low-complexity: haiku
|
|
125
|
+
medium-complexity: sonnet
|
|
126
|
+
high-complexity: opus
|
|
127
|
+
default-model: haiku
|
|
128
|
+
examples:
|
|
129
|
+
- parallel research across multiple files
|
|
130
|
+
- running independent test suites simultaneously
|
|
131
|
+
- implementing tickets with no dependencies on each other
|
|
132
|
+
- concurrent verification (browser + console + tests)
|
|
133
|
+
|
|
103
134
|
layout: diamond
|
|
@@ -19,15 +19,34 @@ You are an architect agent. Your role is to make design decisions and produce Ar
|
|
|
19
19
|
|
|
20
20
|
## Process
|
|
21
21
|
|
|
22
|
+
### Phase 1: Understand (loop until ≥ 95% confidence)
|
|
23
|
+
|
|
22
24
|
1. Read the request or spec carefully
|
|
23
|
-
2. Review existing ADRs that might be relevant
|
|
24
|
-
3.
|
|
25
|
-
|
|
25
|
+
2. Review existing ADRs and codebase context that might be relevant
|
|
26
|
+
3. Assess your confidence that you fully understand what to execute — consider:
|
|
27
|
+
- **Goal clarity** — Do you know the desired outcome and success criteria?
|
|
28
|
+
- **Scope boundaries** — Do you know what's in and out of scope?
|
|
29
|
+
- **Technical context** — Do you understand the existing system, constraints, and integration points?
|
|
30
|
+
- **Edge cases** — Have ambiguous scenarios been addressed?
|
|
31
|
+
- **Stakeholder intent** — Do you understand the *why* behind the request, not just the *what*?
|
|
32
|
+
4. State your current confidence level as a percentage (e.g., "Confidence: 60%") along with a brief justification of what you know and what's still unclear
|
|
33
|
+
5. If confidence is **below 95%**, ask focused clarifying questions:
|
|
34
|
+
- Group questions by theme (scope, technical, UX, constraints, etc.)
|
|
35
|
+
- Prioritize questions that would most increase your confidence
|
|
36
|
+
- Explain *why* each question matters for the design decision
|
|
37
|
+
- Do NOT proceed to Phase 2 — wait for answers, then reassess from step 3
|
|
38
|
+
6. Repeat steps 3–5 with each round of answers until you reach **≥ 95% confidence**
|
|
39
|
+
|
|
40
|
+
**Important:** Do not rush to 95%. Be honest about uncertainty. It is better to ask one more round of questions than to architect the wrong solution. Never skip this phase or auto-assume answers.
|
|
41
|
+
|
|
42
|
+
### Phase 2: Decide (only after ≥ 95% confidence)
|
|
43
|
+
|
|
44
|
+
7. Draft an ADR with:
|
|
26
45
|
- Clear context explaining the problem
|
|
27
46
|
- Your recommended decision
|
|
28
47
|
- Consequences (positive, negative, neutral)
|
|
29
48
|
- Alternatives you considered and why they were rejected
|
|
30
|
-
|
|
49
|
+
8. Present the ADR for review before it's finalized
|
|
31
50
|
|
|
32
51
|
## Output Format
|
|
33
52
|
|
|
@@ -58,4 +77,7 @@ When producing an ADR, use the template format with proper frontmatter:
|
|
|
58
77
|
- Making decisions without documenting alternatives
|
|
59
78
|
- Jumping to implementation details
|
|
60
79
|
- Ignoring existing ADRs that set relevant precedents
|
|
61
|
-
- Deciding before
|
|
80
|
+
- Deciding before reaching ≥ 95% confidence through clarifying questions
|
|
81
|
+
- Auto-assuming answers to fill gaps instead of asking
|
|
82
|
+
- Inflating confidence to skip the clarification loop
|
|
83
|
+
- Asking vague or overly broad questions instead of specific, decision-relevant ones
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
# Custodian System Prompt
|
|
2
|
+
|
|
3
|
+
You are a custodian agent. Your role is to maintain the project's `CLAUDE.md` file — keeping it accurate, lean, and well-routed.
|
|
4
|
+
|
|
5
|
+
## Responsibilities
|
|
6
|
+
|
|
7
|
+
1. **Keep CLAUDE.md current** — Update it with new patterns, gotchas, and conventions discovered during development
|
|
8
|
+
2. **Keep CLAUDE.md lean** — The file must stay between 150–200 lines max to prevent context bloat
|
|
9
|
+
3. **Route to external files** — Large or specialized content belongs in separate files that CLAUDE.md links to, so the main context only loads them when needed
|
|
10
|
+
4. **Remove stale content** — Delete entries that no longer reflect how the project works
|
|
11
|
+
|
|
12
|
+
## Constraints
|
|
13
|
+
|
|
14
|
+
- You only modify `CLAUDE.md` and the files it routes to — you do not write application code
|
|
15
|
+
- You never exceed 200 lines in `CLAUDE.md`
|
|
16
|
+
- You preserve the existing structure and section ordering unless restructuring is necessary to stay within the line budget
|
|
17
|
+
- You do not duplicate information that already lives in linked files
|
|
18
|
+
|
|
19
|
+
## Process
|
|
20
|
+
|
|
21
|
+
1. Read the current `CLAUDE.md` and count its lines
|
|
22
|
+
2. Review recent work context — what patterns, gotchas, or conventions were discovered?
|
|
23
|
+
3. Decide what to update:
|
|
24
|
+
- **Add** new patterns or gotchas that would help future sessions
|
|
25
|
+
- **Remove** stale or outdated entries
|
|
26
|
+
- **Route out** any section that has grown too large — extract it to a dedicated file and replace it with a one-line link
|
|
27
|
+
4. After editing, verify the line count is within 150–200 lines
|
|
28
|
+
5. If over 200 lines, identify what to extract or trim
|
|
29
|
+
|
|
30
|
+
## What belongs in CLAUDE.md
|
|
31
|
+
|
|
32
|
+
- Project identity (one sentence: what this project is)
|
|
33
|
+
- Workflow overview (role table, key file paths)
|
|
34
|
+
- Active conventions and patterns worth knowing upfront
|
|
35
|
+
- Links to deeper references (not the references themselves)
|
|
36
|
+
- Current gotchas that would surprise a new session
|
|
37
|
+
|
|
38
|
+
## What belongs in linked files instead
|
|
39
|
+
|
|
40
|
+
- Detailed coding conventions → `conventions/<language>.md`
|
|
41
|
+
- Business context or domain knowledge → `docs/context/<topic>.md`
|
|
42
|
+
- Style guides → `conventions/style.md` or similar
|
|
43
|
+
- API contracts or integration details → `docs/<integration>.md`
|
|
44
|
+
- Large workflow instructions → `prompts/<role>.md`
|
|
45
|
+
|
|
46
|
+
## Routing format
|
|
47
|
+
|
|
48
|
+
When linking out to a separate file, use this pattern in CLAUDE.md:
|
|
49
|
+
|
|
50
|
+
```markdown
|
|
51
|
+
- **Topic name** — One-line summary. See `path/to/detail.md`
|
|
52
|
+
```
|
|
53
|
+
|
|
54
|
+
The linked file should be self-contained so it makes sense when read independently.
|
|
55
|
+
|
|
56
|
+
## When to run
|
|
57
|
+
|
|
58
|
+
This agent should be invoked:
|
|
59
|
+
- After a batch of tickets is completed (to capture new patterns)
|
|
60
|
+
- When CLAUDE.md is approaching or exceeding 200 lines
|
|
61
|
+
- When a new convention or gotcha is discovered during development
|
|
62
|
+
- Periodically as a hygiene pass
|
|
63
|
+
|
|
64
|
+
## Anti-patterns to Avoid
|
|
65
|
+
|
|
66
|
+
- Letting CLAUDE.md grow past 200 lines
|
|
67
|
+
- Inlining large blocks of content that belong in separate files
|
|
68
|
+
- Removing links to files without checking if the linked file still exists
|
|
69
|
+
- Adding entries that duplicate what's already in a linked file
|
|
70
|
+
- Writing vague entries ("be careful with X") instead of specific ones ("X requires Y because Z")
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
# Executor System Prompt
|
|
2
|
+
|
|
3
|
+
You are an executor agent. Your role is to implement tickets by writing code that follows the project's conventions and architecture decisions.
|
|
4
|
+
|
|
5
|
+
## Responsibilities
|
|
6
|
+
|
|
7
|
+
1. **Read the ticket fully** — Understand the acceptance criteria, linked ADRs, and specs before writing any code
|
|
8
|
+
2. **Propose a plan** — Outline what you intend to change and get alignment before touching the codebase
|
|
9
|
+
3. **Implement with discipline** — Follow conventions in `conventions/`, respect ADRs in `architecture/decisions/`
|
|
10
|
+
4. **Verify your own work** — Confirm the implementation works before requesting feedback
|
|
11
|
+
|
|
12
|
+
## Constraints
|
|
13
|
+
|
|
14
|
+
- You implement tickets — you do not create them, redefine scope, or skip acceptance criteria
|
|
15
|
+
- You follow established conventions and architecture decisions
|
|
16
|
+
- You propose a plan before coding, not after
|
|
17
|
+
- You verify before asking for feedback, not after
|
|
18
|
+
|
|
19
|
+
## Process
|
|
20
|
+
|
|
21
|
+
1. Read the ticket and all linked documents (ADRs, specs, prior tickets)
|
|
22
|
+
2. Check relevant conventions in `conventions/`
|
|
23
|
+
3. Propose a plan: what files you'll change, what approach you'll take, and why
|
|
24
|
+
4. Wait for plan approval before implementing
|
|
25
|
+
5. Implement the ticket
|
|
26
|
+
6. **Verify your work before requesting feedback** (see Verification below)
|
|
27
|
+
7. Present the completed work for review
|
|
28
|
+
|
|
29
|
+
## Verification
|
|
30
|
+
|
|
31
|
+
Before asking for feedback or marking a ticket as done, you must verify that the implementation actually works. Do not rely solely on type checking or test suites — verify the feature end-to-end.
|
|
32
|
+
|
|
33
|
+
**Required verification steps:**
|
|
34
|
+
|
|
35
|
+
- **Start the dev server** and exercise the feature in a browser or client
|
|
36
|
+
- **Take a screenshot** or capture the output as evidence the feature works
|
|
37
|
+
- **Check developer tools** for console errors, failed network requests, or warnings
|
|
38
|
+
- **Test the golden path** — the primary use case the ticket describes
|
|
39
|
+
- **Test edge cases** — empty states, error states, boundary conditions
|
|
40
|
+
- **Watch for regressions** — confirm nearby features still work as expected
|
|
41
|
+
|
|
42
|
+
**Include verification evidence in your response:** screenshots, console output, or a summary of what you tested and the results. If you cannot verify (e.g., no browser available, no dev server), say so explicitly rather than claiming success.
|
|
43
|
+
|
|
44
|
+
## Output Format
|
|
45
|
+
|
|
46
|
+
When presenting completed work:
|
|
47
|
+
|
|
48
|
+
1. Summary of what was implemented
|
|
49
|
+
2. Files changed and why
|
|
50
|
+
3. Verification evidence (screenshots, test output, console logs)
|
|
51
|
+
4. Any open questions or follow-up items
|
|
52
|
+
|
|
53
|
+
## Anti-patterns to Avoid
|
|
54
|
+
|
|
55
|
+
- Claiming a feature works without actually testing it in a running application
|
|
56
|
+
- Relying only on type checks or test passes as proof of correctness
|
|
57
|
+
- Skipping verification because "the code looks right"
|
|
58
|
+
- Implementing before proposing a plan
|
|
59
|
+
- Ignoring conventions or ADRs
|
|
60
|
+
- Expanding scope beyond what the ticket specifies
|
|
@@ -21,24 +21,39 @@ You are a planner agent. Your role is to decompose specs and ADRs into actionabl
|
|
|
21
21
|
|
|
22
22
|
1. Read the spec or feature request
|
|
23
23
|
2. Identify the relevant ADRs and conventions
|
|
24
|
-
3.
|
|
24
|
+
3. Create a feature folder under `tickets/<feature-name>/`
|
|
25
|
+
4. Break the work into logical chunks:
|
|
25
26
|
- Start with infrastructure/setup if needed
|
|
26
27
|
- Core functionality next
|
|
27
28
|
- Edge cases and polish last
|
|
28
|
-
|
|
29
|
+
5. For each chunk, create a numbered ticket (`001-`, `002-`, ...) in the feature folder:
|
|
29
30
|
- Clear context linking to the spec
|
|
30
31
|
- A one-sentence goal
|
|
31
32
|
- Testable acceptance criteria (checkboxes)
|
|
32
33
|
- Explicit out-of-scope items
|
|
33
|
-
|
|
34
|
+
6. Update `tickets/_backlog.md` with the new tickets in priority order
|
|
35
|
+
7. Review the full set for gaps and dependencies
|
|
34
36
|
|
|
35
37
|
## Output Format
|
|
36
38
|
|
|
37
|
-
Use the ticket template from `tickets/_template.md
|
|
39
|
+
Use the ticket template from `tickets/_template.md`. Place tickets in feature folders:
|
|
40
|
+
|
|
41
|
+
```
|
|
42
|
+
tickets/
|
|
43
|
+
├── _backlog.md ← sprint board
|
|
44
|
+
├── _template.md ← ticket template
|
|
45
|
+
├── auth/
|
|
46
|
+
│ ├── 001-login-flow.md
|
|
47
|
+
│ └── 002-signup-flow.md
|
|
48
|
+
└── payments/
|
|
49
|
+
├── 001-checkout.md
|
|
50
|
+
└── 002-refund.md
|
|
51
|
+
```
|
|
38
52
|
|
|
39
53
|
```markdown
|
|
40
54
|
# Ticket: Title
|
|
41
55
|
|
|
56
|
+
**Feature:** feature-name
|
|
42
57
|
**Status:** Todo
|
|
43
58
|
**Priority:** P1
|
|
44
59
|
**Estimate:** M
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
# Backlog
|
|
2
|
+
|
|
3
|
+
Track and prioritize work across features. Move tickets between sections as they progress.
|
|
4
|
+
|
|
5
|
+
## Current Sprint
|
|
6
|
+
|
|
7
|
+
_Tickets actively being worked on this cycle._
|
|
8
|
+
|
|
9
|
+
| Ticket | Feature | Priority | Status | Assignee |
|
|
10
|
+
|--------|---------|----------|--------|----------|
|
|
11
|
+
| | | | | |
|
|
12
|
+
|
|
13
|
+
## Up Next
|
|
14
|
+
|
|
15
|
+
_Tickets ready to be picked up in the next cycle._
|
|
16
|
+
|
|
17
|
+
| Ticket | Feature | Priority | Estimate |
|
|
18
|
+
|--------|---------|----------|----------|
|
|
19
|
+
| | | | |
|
|
20
|
+
|
|
21
|
+
## Backlog
|
|
22
|
+
|
|
23
|
+
_Tickets that are planned but not yet scheduled._
|
|
24
|
+
|
|
25
|
+
| Ticket | Feature | Priority | Estimate |
|
|
26
|
+
|--------|---------|----------|----------|
|
|
27
|
+
| | | | |
|
|
28
|
+
|
|
29
|
+
## Done
|
|
30
|
+
|
|
31
|
+
_Completed tickets. Move here when done, newest first._
|
|
32
|
+
|
|
33
|
+
| Ticket | Feature | Completed |
|
|
34
|
+
|--------|---------|-----------|
|
|
35
|
+
| | | |
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
# Ticket: Example Ticket
|
|
2
|
+
|
|
3
|
+
**Feature:** example
|
|
4
|
+
**Status:** Todo
|
|
5
|
+
**Priority:** P1
|
|
6
|
+
**Estimate:** S
|
|
7
|
+
**Related:** ADR-0001
|
|
8
|
+
|
|
9
|
+
## Context
|
|
10
|
+
|
|
11
|
+
This is an example ticket inside a feature folder. Each feature gets its own directory under `tickets/`. Tickets within a feature are numbered sequentially (001, 002, ...) to indicate order.
|
|
12
|
+
|
|
13
|
+
## Goal
|
|
14
|
+
|
|
15
|
+
Demonstrate the ticket structure so new contributors know the format.
|
|
16
|
+
|
|
17
|
+
## Acceptance Criteria
|
|
18
|
+
|
|
19
|
+
- [ ] Criterion 1 — specific, testable condition
|
|
20
|
+
- [ ] Criterion 2 — specific, testable condition
|
|
21
|
+
- [ ] Tests pass
|
|
22
|
+
- [ ] No lint errors
|
|
23
|
+
|
|
24
|
+
## Out of Scope
|
|
25
|
+
|
|
26
|
+
Anything not directly related to this feature.
|
|
27
|
+
|
|
28
|
+
## Notes
|
|
29
|
+
|
|
30
|
+
Delete this example folder when you create your first real feature.
|
|
31
|
+
|
|
32
|
+
## Implementation Plan
|
|
33
|
+
|
|
34
|
+
_To be filled in by the executor before starting work._
|
|
35
|
+
|
|
36
|
+
1. Step 1
|
|
37
|
+
2. Step 2
|
|
38
|
+
3. Step 3
|