agileflow 3.4.3 → 4.0.0-alpha.10

package/src/core/commands/choose.md

@@ -1,430 +0,0 @@
----
-description: AI-directed decision making with structured options
-phase: pre-story
-argument-hint: "<decision> [<context>]"
-compact_context:
-  priority: normal
-  preserve_rules:
-    - "Present structured options with trade-offs"
-    - "AI selects best option based on context"
-    - "Always explain selection rationale"
-    - "Can delegate to experts for analysis before choosing"
-  state_fields:
-    - decision_question
-    - options_analyzed
-    - selected_option
-    - selection_rationale
----
-
-# /agileflow:choose
-
-AI-directed decision making. Use when multiple valid approaches exist and you want Claude to analyze trade-offs and recommend the best option.
-
----
-
-## STEP 0: Gather Context
-
-```bash
-node .agileflow/scripts/obtain-context.js choose
-```
-
----
-
-<!-- COMPACT_SUMMARY_START -->
-
-## Compact Summary
-
-**Role**: Decision Advisor - Analyze options and recommend best approach
-
-**When to use:**
-- Multiple valid approaches exist
-- Trade-offs need analysis
-- Expert judgment required
-- Not a simple yes/no question
-
-**Choice block syntax:**
-```
-choice **<decision criteria>**:
-  option "<name>":
-    - Description
-    - Trade-offs
-  option "<name>":
-    - Description
-    - Trade-offs
-```
-
-**Output format:**
-```
-## Decision: <question>
-
-### Options Analyzed
-1. Option A: [analysis]
-2. Option B: [analysis]
-
-### Recommendation
-**Selected: Option X**
-Rationale: [why this is best]
-
-### Trade-offs Accepted
-- [trade-off 1]
-- [trade-off 2]
-
-### Next Steps
-1. [action 1]
-2. [action 2]
-```
-
-<!-- COMPACT_SUMMARY_END -->
-
----
-
-## Usage
-
-```
-/agileflow:choose <decision>
-/agileflow:choose <decision> CONTEXT=<additional_context>
-```
-
----
-
-## How It Works
-
-### 1. Analyze the Decision
-
-First, understand what's being decided:
-- What are the constraints?
-- What matters most? (speed, quality, maintainability, etc.)
-- What's the current context?
-
-### 2. Generate Options
-
-For each viable approach:
-- **Name**: Clear label
-- **Description**: What this approach entails
-- **Pros**: Benefits and strengths
-- **Cons**: Drawbacks and risks
-- **Effort**: Relative implementation cost
-- **Risk**: Potential failure modes
-
-### 3. Evaluate Against Criteria
-
-Score each option against relevant factors:
-- **Fit**: How well it matches requirements
-- **Feasibility**: How practical to implement
-- **Future-proof**: How well it handles change
-- **Team capacity**: Skills and time available
-
-### 4. Make Recommendation
-
-Select the best option and explain:
-- Why this option wins
-- What trade-offs are accepted
-- What risks to monitor
-- What next steps to take
-
----
-
-## Examples
-
-### Performance Optimization
-
-```
-/agileflow:choose best approach to fix slow API response times
-```
-
-**Decision**: Best approach to fix slow API response times
-
-**Options:**
-1. **Add Caching (Redis)**
-   - Pros: Fast reads, reduces DB load
-   - Cons: Cache invalidation complexity, added infrastructure
-   - Effort: Medium
-   - Risk: Stale data issues
-
-2. **Optimize Database Queries**
-   - Pros: Addresses root cause, no new dependencies
-   - Cons: May have diminishing returns, requires deep analysis
-   - Effort: High
-   - Risk: May not be enough
-
-3. **Add Pagination**
-   - Pros: Reduces data transfer, simple to implement
-   - Cons: UI changes needed, doesn't fix underlying issue
-   - Effort: Low
-   - Risk: Just masks the problem
-
-**Recommendation**: Start with **Option 2 (Optimize Queries)**, then add **Option 1 (Caching)** if needed.
-
-**Rationale**: Optimizing queries addresses the root cause. Adding caching on top of slow queries just hides the problem. Start with the foundation, then layer caching for frequently accessed data.
-
----
-
-### Architecture Decision
-
-```
-/agileflow:choose authentication approach for new API CONTEXT="multi-tenant SaaS, 50K users"
-```
-
-**Decision**: Authentication approach for multi-tenant SaaS (50K users)
-
-**Options:**
-1. **JWT with Short Expiry**
-   - Pros: Stateless, scalable, industry standard
-   - Cons: Can't revoke tokens instantly, need refresh token logic
-   - Effort: Medium
-   - Risk: Token theft requires expiry wait
-
-2. **Session-based Auth**
-   - Pros: Instant revocation, simple mental model
-   - Cons: Server state, horizontal scaling needs session store
-   - Effort: Medium
-   - Risk: Session store becomes bottleneck
-
-3. **OAuth 2.0 with Identity Provider**
-   - Pros: SSO support, enterprise ready, offloads auth complexity
-   - Cons: External dependency, more complex integration
-   - Effort: High
-   - Risk: Vendor lock-in, latency from external calls
-
-**Recommendation**: **Option 3 (OAuth 2.0 with Identity Provider)**
-
-**Rationale**: For multi-tenant SaaS with 50K users:
-- Enterprises will expect SSO
-- Managing auth in-house is a liability
-- Auth0/Okta handle the complexity
-- Worth the integration effort upfront
-
----
-
-### Development Approach
-
-```
-/agileflow:choose how to implement the new dashboard feature
-```
-
-**Decision**: Development approach for new dashboard
-
-**Options:**
-1. **Quick Prototype**
-   - Pros: Fast iteration, early feedback
-   - Cons: Tech debt, may need rewrite
-   - Effort: Low
-   - Risk: Prototype becomes production
-
-2. **Full Architecture First**
-   - Pros: Solid foundation, scalable
-   - Cons: Slow, may over-engineer
-   - Effort: High
-   - Risk: Analysis paralysis
-
-3. **Incremental TDD**
-   - Pros: Quality + speed balance, refactorable
-   - Cons: Requires discipline, initial slowdown
-   - Effort: Medium
-   - Risk: Tests may constrain design
-
-**Recommendation**: **Option 3 (Incremental TDD)**
-
-**Rationale**: Dashboard is user-facing with many edge cases. TDD ensures:
-- Components work correctly from the start
-- Refactoring is safe when design evolves
-- Tests serve as documentation
-
----
-
-## Integration with Experts
-
-For complex decisions, delegate analysis to domain experts:
-
-```
-choice **best database for this workload**:
-  experts:
-    - agileflow-database (analyze data patterns)
-    - agileflow-performance (analyze scaling needs)
-  options:
-    - PostgreSQL
-    - MongoDB
-    - DynamoDB
-```
-
-This spawns experts in parallel to analyze, then synthesizes their recommendations.
-
----
-
-## Choice Block Syntax (Advanced)
-
-For embedding choice blocks in workflows:
-
-```markdown
-## Decision Point
-
-choice **<criteria>**:
-  option "<name>":
-    - Description line 1
-    - Description line 2
-  option "<name>":
-    - Description line 1
-    - Description line 2
-
-### After Choice
-
-Proceed with selected option...
-```
-
-The AI evaluates options against the criteria and selects the best one.
-
----
-
-## Output Format
-
-Every choice decision outputs:
-
-```markdown
-## Decision: [question]
-
-### Context
-[Summary of situation and constraints]
-
-### Options Analyzed
-
-#### Option 1: [name]
-**Description**: [what it is]
-**Pros**: [benefits]
-**Cons**: [drawbacks]
-**Effort**: [low/medium/high]
-**Risk**: [potential issues]
-
-#### Option 2: [name]
-...
-
-### Analysis
-
-[Comparison matrix or discussion]
-
-### Recommendation
-
-**Selected: [option name]**
-
-**Rationale**: [why this option is best for this situation]
-
-**Trade-offs Accepted**:
-- [trade-off 1]
-- [trade-off 2]
-
-### Next Steps
-1. [immediate action]
-2. [follow-up action]
-3. [verification step]
-```
-
----
-
-## When NOT to Use
-
-- Simple yes/no questions (just answer directly)
-- Only one viable option (just proceed)
-- User has already decided (just implement)
-- Trivial decisions (don't over-engineer the process)
-
-Use `/agileflow:choose` for decisions that:
-- Have 2+ viable options
-- Involve trade-offs worth analyzing
-- Benefit from structured thinking
-- Need documented rationale
-
----
-
-## Best Practices
-
-1. **Include context**: More context = better recommendations
-2. **Define success criteria**: What matters most?
-3. **Be honest about trade-offs**: Every option has downsides
-4. **Document decisions**: Use `/agileflow:adr` for important architectural choices
-5. **Revisit decisions**: Circumstances change; choices may need updating
-
----
-
-## Expected Output
-
-### Success - Decision Analysis
-
-```
-🤔 Decision Analysis: Database Selection
-══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-
-Context: New microservice needs persistent storage for user data
-
-📊 Options Evaluated:
-
-┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
-│ Option A: PostgreSQL                                        │
-├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
-│ ✅ Pros:                                                    │
-│    - ACID compliance                                        │
-│    - Rich query capabilities                                │
-│    - Team expertise exists                                  │
-│ ❌ Cons:                                                    │
-│    - Scaling complexity                                     │
-│    - Higher operational overhead                            │
-│ Score: 8/10                                                 │
-└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
-
-┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
-│ Option B: MongoDB                                           │
-├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
-│ ✅ Pros:                                                    │
-│    - Flexible schema                                        │
-│    - Horizontal scaling                                     │
-│ ❌ Cons:                                                    │
-│    - No ACID by default                                     │
-│    - Learning curve                                         │
-│ Score: 6/10                                                 │
-└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
-
-🎯 Recommendation: PostgreSQL
-
-Rationale: Given team expertise and ACID requirements,
-PostgreSQL provides better fit despite scaling concerns.
-
-Document this decision?
-→ /agileflow:adr TITLE="Database Selection for User Service"
-```
-
-### Success - Quick Choice
-
-```
-🤔 Quick Choice: Testing Framework
-
-Options: Jest vs Vitest vs Mocha
-
-✅ Recommended: Jest
-- Industry standard
-- Great TypeScript support
-- Existing config in project
-
-Accept recommendation? [Y/n]
-```
-
-### Error - Insufficient Context
-
-```
-❌ Error: Cannot make recommendation without context
-
-Please provide:
-- QUESTION: What decision needs to be made?
-- OPTIONS: At least 2 alternatives
-- CONTEXT: Relevant constraints and requirements
-
-Example:
-/agileflow:choose QUESTION="Which CI provider?" OPTIONS="GitHub Actions, CircleCI, Jenkins"
-```
-
----
-
-## Related Commands
-
-- `/agileflow:adr` - Create Architecture Decision Records
-- `/agileflow:multi-expert` - Deploy multiple experts for analysis
-- `/agileflow:workflow` - Run parameterized workflows
-- `/agileflow:babysit` - Interactive mentor workflow
-- `/agileflow:rpi` - Research-Plan-Implement workflow