agestra 4.7.0 → 4.8.0

package/commands/design.md

@@ -23,69 +23,42 @@ If `$ARGUMENTS` is empty, present a starting-point choice using AskUserQuestion
 
 If `$ARGUMENTS` is provided, use it directly as the subject.
 
-## Step 2: Check environment and available providers
+## Step 2: Check environment and select mode
 
 Call `environment_check` to determine which providers and modes are available.
 
-If no providers are available, skip to running the `agestra-designer` agent directly (Claude only).
+- If **no providers are available**: run the `agestra-designer` agent directly (Claude only) with the subject as context. The designer will ask questions to understand intent, explore the codebase for existing patterns, propose 2-3 approaches with trade-offs, refine based on feedback, and produce a design document in `docs/plans/`. Skip to presenting the result.
+- If **1+ providers are available**: proceed to 끝장토론 execution below.
 
-## Step 3: Present choices
+## Step 3: Execute 끝장토론
 
-Use AskUserQuestion to present these options (in the user's language):
-
-| Option | Condition | Description |
-|--------|-----------|-------------|
-| **Claude only** | Always | 플러그인 전문 에이전트가 소크라테스식 질문으로 아키텍처 탐색 |
-| **각자 독립** | 1+ provider available | 에이전트 팀(moderator + designer + 외부 AI)이 각자 독립 설계 후 취합 문서 작성 |
-| **끝장토론** | 1+ provider available | 각자 독립 설계 후 취합 문서를 돌아가며 분석/피드백, 모두 동의할 때까지 |
-
-Only show options whose conditions are met. If no providers are available, skip and run Claude only.
-
-## Step 4: Execute based on selection
-
-### If "Claude only":
-Spawn the `agestra-designer` agent with the subject as context. The designer will ask questions to understand intent, explore the codebase for existing patterns, propose 2-3 approaches with trade-offs, refine based on feedback, and produce a design document in `docs/plans/`.
+**팀 구성:** `agestra-moderator` (리더) + `agestra-designer` (Claude) + 사용 가능한 외부 AI (gemini, codex, ollama 등)
 
-### If "각자 독립":
+1. Independent work + initial aggregation:
 
-**팀 구성:** `agestra-moderator` (리더) + `agestra-designer` (Claude) + 사용 가능한 외부 AI (gemini, codex, ollama 등)
+   a. In parallel:
+      - Spawn the `agestra-designer` agent for Claude's independent architecture exploration.
+        After the agent completes, save Claude's result as a document via `workspace_create_document`:
+        - **title:** `Architecture Design — claude/designer`
+        - **metadata:** `{ "Provider": "claude/designer", "Task": "{subject}", "Mode": "Independent" }`
+        - **content:** The designer agent's full output.
+      - For each available provider, call `ai_chat` with `save_as_document` to let each AI produce its own document directly:
+        - **save_as_document.title:** `Architecture Design — {provider}`
+        - **save_as_document.metadata:** `{ "Task": "{subject}", "Mode": "Independent" }`
+        - **prompt:**
 
-1. In parallel:
-   - Spawn the `agestra-designer` agent for Claude's independent architecture exploration.
-     After the agent completes, save Claude's result as a document via `workspace_create_document`:
-     - **title:** `Architecture Design — claude/designer`
-     - **metadata:** `{ "Provider": "claude/designer", "Task": "{subject}", "Mode": "Independent" }`
-     - **content:** The designer agent's full output.
-   - For each available provider, call `ai_chat` with `save_as_document` to let each AI produce its own document directly:
-     - **save_as_document.title:** `Architecture Design — {provider}`
-     - **save_as_document.metadata:** `{ "Task": "{subject}", "Mode": "Independent" }`
-     - **prompt:**
-
-       > Propose an architecture approach for [subject]. Consider existing patterns in the codebase, trade-offs (complexity, performance, maintainability), and implementation steps. Present 2-3 distinct approaches with pros/cons for each.
-       >
-       > Subject: [the design subject]
-
-2. Collect all document IDs from step 1.
-
-3. Spawn the `agestra-moderator` agent in **Independent Aggregation** mode:
-   - Pass the **document ID list**.
-   - Moderator reads each document via `workspace_read`.
-   - Moderator classifies: consensus approaches, unique ideas, disputed trade-offs.
-   - Moderator creates an **aggregated document** via `workspace_create_document`.
-
-4. Present a **summary report** to the user:
-   - Key consensus approaches (1-3 lines).
-   - Notable unique design ideas (if any).
-   - Trade-off disagreements (if any).
-   - Individual document IDs for reference.
-   - Aggregated document ID for the full integrated analysis.
-
-### If "끝장토론":
+          > Create a complete design document for [subject]. Include: 1) Problem definition — what exactly we're solving and why. 2) Constraints and requirements — technical limits, compatibility needs, performance targets. 3) 2-3 architecture approaches — each with detailed pros/cons, component diagrams, data flow, and effort estimates. 4) Recommended approach — pick one and justify the choice. 5) Implementation plan — step-by-step build sequence with dependencies. 6) Risks and mitigations. Be thorough and detailed — this document will be debated and refined.
+          >
+          > Subject: [the design subject]
 
-**팀 구성:** `agestra-moderator` (리더) + `agestra-designer` (Claude) + 사용 가능한 외부 AI (gemini, codex, ollama 등)
+   b. Collect all document IDs.
 
-1. Execute "각자 독립" steps 1-3 above (independent work + initial aggregation).
-   - The moderator's integrated document becomes the starting document.
+   c. Spawn the `agestra-moderator` agent in **Independent Aggregation** mode:
+      - Pass the **document ID list**.
+      - Moderator reads each document via `workspace_read`.
+      - Moderator classifies: consensus approaches, unique ideas, disputed trade-offs.
+      - Moderator creates an **aggregated document** via `workspace_create_document`.
+      - The moderator's integrated document becomes the starting document.
 
 2. Document review rounds (no max — until all agree):
    a. Moderator sends the current document to each AI for review:
@@ -101,6 +74,3 @@ Spawn the `agestra-designer` agent with the subject as context. The designer wil
 3. Present the final document:
    - Consensus sections: marked as agreed
    - Disputed sections: show split positions with each provider's rationale
-
-### If "Other":
-Follow the user's specified approach.

package/commands/idea.md

@@ -12,69 +12,38 @@ You are executing the `/agestra idea` command.
 If `$ARGUMENTS` is empty, ask the user what area to explore using AskUserQuestion:
 - "What area would you like to find improvements for? (feature area, project aspect, or general)"
 
-## Step 2: Check environment and available providers
+## Step 2: Check environment and select mode
 
 Call `environment_check` to determine which providers and modes are available.
 
-If no providers are available, skip to running the `agestra-ideator` agent directly (Claude only).
+- If **no providers are available**: run the `agestra-ideator` agent directly (Claude only) with the topic as context. The ideator will research similar projects, collect user complaints, build feature comparisons, and generate prioritized recommendations. Skip to presenting the result.
+- If **1+ providers are available**: proceed to 끝장토론 execution below.
 
-## Step 3: Present choices
-
-Use AskUserQuestion to present these options (in the user's language):
-
-| Option | Condition | Description |
-|--------|-----------|-------------|
-| **Claude only** | Always | 플러그인 전문 에이전트가 단독으로 개선점 탐색 |
-| **각자 독립** | 1+ provider available | 에이전트 팀(moderator + ideator + 외부 AI)이 각자 독립 탐색 후 취합 문서 작성 |
-| **끝장토론** | 1+ provider available | 각자 독립 탐색 후 취합 문서를 돌아가며 분석/피드백, 모두 동의할 때까지 |
-
-Only show options whose conditions are met. If no providers are available, skip and run Claude only.
-
-## Step 4: Execute based on selection
-
-### If "Claude only":
-Spawn the `agestra-ideator` agent with the topic as context. The ideator will research similar projects, collect user complaints, build feature comparisons, and generate prioritized recommendations.
-
-### If "각자 독립":
+## Step 3: Execute 끝장토론
 
 **팀 구성:** `agestra-moderator` (리더) + `agestra-ideator` (Claude) + 사용 가능한 외부 AI (gemini, codex, ollama 등)
 
-1. In parallel:
-   - Spawn the `agestra-ideator` agent for Claude's independent improvement research.
-     After the agent completes, save Claude's result as a document via `workspace_create_document`:
-     - **title:** `Idea Exploration — claude/ideator`
-     - **metadata:** `{ "Provider": "claude/ideator", "Task": "{topic}", "Mode": "Independent" }`
-     - **content:** The ideator agent's full output.
-   - For each available provider, call `ai_chat` with `save_as_document` to let each AI produce its own document directly:
-     - **save_as_document.title:** `Idea Exploration — {provider}`
-     - **save_as_document.metadata:** `{ "Task": "{topic}", "Mode": "Independent" }`
-     - **prompt:**
+1. Independent work + initial aggregation:
 
-       > Research improvements for [topic]. Look at similar projects, common user complaints, missing features, and opportunities. For each suggestion, provide: title, category (UX/Performance/Feature/Integration/DX), source of the idea, priority (HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW), and a brief description.
-       >
-       > Topic: [the topic]
+   a. In parallel:
+      - Spawn the `agestra-ideator` agent for Claude's independent improvement research.
+        After the agent completes, save Claude's result as a document via `workspace_create_document`:
+        - **title:** `Idea Exploration — claude/ideator`
+        - **metadata:** `{ "Provider": "claude/ideator", "Task": "{topic}", "Mode": "Independent" }`
+        - **content:** The ideator agent's full output.
+      - For each available provider, call `ai_chat` with `save_as_document` to let each AI produce its own document directly:
+        - **save_as_document.title:** `Idea Exploration — {provider}`
+        - **save_as_document.metadata:** `{ "Task": "{topic}", "Mode": "Independent" }`
+        - **prompt:** Use the appropriate prompt from the `agestra-idea` skill — Mode A (existing project) or Mode B (new project) — including the user interview context collected earlier. The prompt must include structured output requirements (Title, Category, Evidence/Why, Effort, Priority) and the user's constraints.
 
-2. Collect all document IDs from step 1.
+   b. Collect all document IDs.
 
-3. Spawn the `agestra-moderator` agent in **Independent Aggregation** mode:
-   - Pass the **document ID list**.
-   - Moderator reads each document via `workspace_read`.
-   - Moderator classifies: consensus suggestions, unique ideas, disputed priorities.
-   - Moderator creates an **aggregated document** via `workspace_create_document`.
-
-4. Present a **summary report** to the user:
-   - Key consensus suggestions (1-3 lines).
-   - Notable unique ideas (if any).
-   - Priority disagreements (if any).
-   - Individual document IDs for reference.
-   - Aggregated document ID for the full integrated analysis.
-
-### If "끝장토론":
-
-**팀 구성:** `agestra-moderator` (리더) + `agestra-ideator` (Claude) + 사용 가능한 외부 AI (gemini, codex, ollama 등)
-
-1. Execute "각자 독립" steps 1-3 above (independent work + initial aggregation).
-   - The moderator's integrated document becomes the starting document.
+   c. Spawn the `agestra-moderator` agent in **Independent Aggregation** mode:
+      - Pass the **document ID list**.
+      - Moderator reads each document via `workspace_read`.
+      - Moderator classifies: consensus suggestions, unique ideas, disputed priorities.
+      - Moderator creates an **aggregated document** via `workspace_create_document`.
+      - The moderator's integrated document becomes the starting document.
 
 2. Document review rounds (no max — until all agree):
    a. Moderator sends the current document to each AI for review:
@@ -90,6 +59,3 @@ Spawn the `agestra-ideator` agent with the topic as context. The ideator will re
 3. Present the final document:
    - Consensus sections: marked as agreed
    - Disputed sections: show split positions with each provider's rationale
-
-### If "Other":
-Follow the user's specified approach.

package/commands/review.md

@@ -43,99 +43,69 @@ Ask the user what to focus on using AskUserQuestion with **multiSelect: true** (
 
 Pass the selected focus areas to all reviewers (agent and external AIs) as part of the review instructions.
 
-## Step 3: Check environment and available providers
+## Step 3: Check environment and select mode
 
 Call `environment_check` to determine which providers and modes are available.
 
-If no providers are available, skip to running the `agestra-reviewer` agent directly (Claude only).
-
-## Step 4: Select mode
-
-Use AskUserQuestion to present these options (in the user's language):
-
-| Option | Condition | Description |
-|--------|-----------|-------------|
-| **Claude only** | Always | 플러그인 전문 에이전트가 단독 리뷰 |
-| **각자 독립** | 1+ provider available | 에이전트 팀(moderator + reviewer + 외부 AI)이 각자 독립 리뷰 후 취합 문서 작성 |
-| **끝장토론** | 1+ provider available | 각자 독립 리뷰 후 취합 문서를 돌아가며 분석/피드백, 모두 동의할 때까지 |
-
-Only show options whose conditions are met. If no providers are available, skip and run Claude only.
-
-## Step 5: Execute based on selection
-
-### Execution discipline for "각자 독립" and "끝장토론"
-
-- Prefer Agestra MCP tools for external providers (`ai_chat`, `ai_analyze_files`, `agent_debate_*`, `workspace_*`, `cli_job_submit` when a direct provider retry is needed).
-- Do NOT launch raw Bash retries such as `codex exec ...` or `gemini ...` yourself, and do NOT invent provider-specific flags. If a retry is required, use `cli_job_submit` with the provider's default mapping unless you have just verified the current CLI help output in this environment.
-- Exclude `ollama` from review workflows even if it is available. For repository/code reviews, use only review-capable external providers such as `gemini`, `codex`, and registered Claude-backed reviewers.
-- Treat the Claude reviewer agent as asynchronous work that may legitimately take several minutes. Poll about once per minute; an empty or slowly growing output file is not a failure by itself.
-- Do NOT stop or replace the Claude reviewer with a duplicate main-thread review unless there is an explicit error, the user asks to cancel, or there has been no visible progress for at least 8 minutes. For large review scopes, allow up to 15 minutes before declaring the reviewer stalled.
-- If a background reviewer is still running, tell the user you are waiting and continue the orchestration. Do not short-circuit the workflow just because another provider finished earlier.
-- For "끝장토론", do NOT use `agent_debate_moderate` as the primary review path. Use the turn-based flow (`agent_debate_create` + iterative `agent_debate_review` / `agent_debate_turn` + `agent_debate_conclude`) so long-running review rounds do not get cut off by host tool-call time limits.
-
-### If "Claude only":
-Spawn the `agestra-reviewer` agent with the target and selected focus areas as context.
-
-### If "각자 독립":
-
-**팀 구성:** `agestra-moderator` (리더) + `agestra-reviewer` (Claude) + 리뷰용 외부 AI (`gemini`, `codex`, 등록된 Claude-backed reviewer 등; `ollama` 제외)
-
-1. In parallel:
-   - Spawn the `agestra-reviewer` agent for Claude's independent analysis.
-     After the agent completes, save Claude's result as a document via `workspace_create_document`:
-     - **title:** `Code Review — claude/reviewer`
-     - **metadata:** `{ "Provider": "claude/reviewer", "Task": "{review target}", "Focus": "{selected focus areas}", "Mode": "Independent" }`
-     - **content:** The reviewer agent's full output.
-   - For each available provider, call `ai_chat` with `save_as_document` to let each AI produce its own document directly:
-     - **save_as_document.title:** `Code Review — {provider}`
-     - **save_as_document.metadata:** `{ "Task": "{review target}", "Focus": "{selected focus areas}", "Mode": "Independent" }`
-     - **prompt:**
-
-       > Review the following code. Focus on: [selected focus areas].
-       > For each finding, provide severity (CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW), file:line location, and evidence.
-       >
-       > Target: [the review target]
-
-2. Collect all document IDs from step 1.
-
-3. Spawn the `agestra-moderator` agent in **Independent Aggregation** mode:
-   - Pass the **document ID list**.
-   - Moderator reads each document via `workspace_read`.
-   - Moderator classifies: consensus findings, unique findings, disputed points.
-   - Moderator creates an **aggregated document** via `workspace_create_document`.
-
-4. Present a **summary report** to the user:
-   - Key consensus findings (1-3 lines).
-   - Notable unique findings (if any).
-   - Disputed points (if any).
-   - Individual document IDs for reference.
-   - Aggregated document ID for the full integrated analysis.
-
-### If "끝장토론":
-
-**팀 구성:** `agestra-moderator` (리더) + `agestra-reviewer` (Claude) + 리뷰용 외부 AI (`gemini`, `codex`, 등록된 Claude-backed reviewer 등; `ollama` 제외)
-
-1. Execute "각자 독립" steps 1-3 above (independent work + initial aggregation).
-   - The moderator's integrated document becomes the starting document.
-
-2. Start a turn-based debate session with `agent_debate_create`.
-   - Use the integrated document's title/topic as the debate topic.
-   - Reuse the same reviewer set from step 1, excluding `ollama`.
-
-3. Document review rounds (no max — until all agree):
-   a. Moderator sends the current document to Claude reviewer asynchronously.
-   b. Moderator sends the same current document to non-Claude providers with `agent_debate_review`.
-   c. Moderator collects all feedback and updates the working document.
-   d. If a provider needs a follow-up reply to another provider's point, add a targeted `agent_debate_turn` in the same debate session rather than restarting the workflow.
-   e. If all providers agree on all sections → consensus reached.
-   f. If not → next round with the revised document.
-   g. **Every 10 rounds:** Ask the user via AskUserQuestion whether to continue or stop with current state.
-
-4. When consensus is reached, record the moderator's final synthesis with `agent_debate_conclude`.
-
-5. Present the final document:
-   - Consensus sections: marked as agreed
-   - Disputed sections: show split positions with each provider's rationale
-
-### If "Other":
-Follow the user's specified approach.
+- If **no providers are available**: run the `agestra-reviewer` agent directly (Claude only) with the target and selected focus areas as context. Skip to presenting the result.
+- If **1+ providers are available**: proceed to 끝장토론 execution below.
+
+## Step 4: Execute 끝장토론
+
+### Execution discipline
+
+- Prefer Agestra MCP tools for external providers (`ai_chat`, `ai_analyze_files`, `agent_debate_*`, `workspace_*`, `cli_job_submit` when a direct provider retry is needed).
+- Do NOT launch raw Bash retries such as `codex exec ...` or `gemini ...` yourself, and do NOT invent provider-specific flags. If a retry is required, use `cli_job_submit` with the provider's default mapping unless you have just verified the current CLI help output in this environment.
+- Exclude `ollama` from review workflows even if it is available. For repository/code reviews, use only review-capable external providers such as `gemini`, `codex`, and registered Claude-backed reviewers.
+- Treat the Claude reviewer agent as asynchronous work that may legitimately take several minutes. Poll about once per minute; an empty or slowly growing output file is not a failure by itself.
+- Do NOT stop or replace the Claude reviewer with a duplicate main-thread review unless there is an explicit error, the user asks to cancel, or there has been no visible progress for at least 8 minutes. For large review scopes, allow up to 15 minutes before declaring the reviewer stalled.
+- If a background reviewer is still running, tell the user you are waiting and continue the orchestration. Do not short-circuit the workflow just because another provider finished earlier.
+- Do NOT use `agent_debate_moderate` as the primary review path. Use the turn-based flow (`agent_debate_create` + iterative `agent_debate_review` / `agent_debate_turn` + `agent_debate_conclude`) so long-running review rounds do not get cut off by host tool-call time limits.
+
+**팀 구성:** `agestra-moderator` (리더) + `agestra-reviewer` (Claude) + 리뷰용 외부 AI (`gemini`, `codex`, 등록된 Claude-backed reviewer 등; `ollama` 제외)
+
+1. Independent work + initial aggregation:
+
+   a. In parallel:
+      - Spawn the `agestra-reviewer` agent for Claude's independent analysis.
+        After the agent completes, save Claude's result as a document via `workspace_create_document`:
+        - **title:** `Code Review — claude/reviewer`
+        - **metadata:** `{ "Provider": "claude/reviewer", "Task": "{review target}", "Focus": "{selected focus areas}", "Mode": "Independent" }`
+        - **content:** The reviewer agent's full output.
+      - For each available provider, call `ai_chat` with `save_as_document` to let each AI produce its own document directly:
+        - **save_as_document.title:** `Code Review — {provider}`
+        - **save_as_document.metadata:** `{ "Task": "{review target}", "Focus": "{selected focus areas}", "Mode": "Independent" }`
+        - **prompt:**
+
+          > Review the following code. Focus on: [selected focus areas].
+          > For each finding, provide severity (CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW), file:line location, and evidence.
+          >
+          > Target: [the review target]
+
+   b. Collect all document IDs.
+
+   c. Spawn the `agestra-moderator` agent in **Independent Aggregation** mode:
+      - Pass the **document ID list**.
+      - Moderator reads each document via `workspace_read`.
+      - Moderator classifies: consensus findings, unique findings, disputed points.
+      - Moderator creates an **aggregated document** via `workspace_create_document`.
+      - The moderator's integrated document becomes the starting document.
+
+2. Start a turn-based debate session with `agent_debate_create`.
+   - Use the integrated document's title/topic as the debate topic.
+   - Reuse the same reviewer set from step 1, excluding `ollama`.
+
+3. Document review rounds (no max — until all agree):
+   a. Moderator sends the current document to Claude reviewer asynchronously.
+   b. Moderator sends the same current document to non-Claude providers with `agent_debate_review`.
+   c. Moderator collects all feedback and updates the working document.
+   d. If a provider needs a follow-up reply to another provider's point, add a targeted `agent_debate_turn` in the same debate session rather than restarting the workflow.
+   e. If all providers agree on all sections → consensus reached.
+   f. If not → next round with the revised document.
+   g. **Every 10 rounds:** Ask the user via AskUserQuestion whether to continue or stop with current state.
+
+4. When consensus is reached, record the moderator's final synthesis with `agent_debate_conclude`.
+
+5. Present the final document:
+   - Consensus sections: marked as agreed
+   - Disputed sections: show split positions with each provider's rationale