cc-viewer 1.6.320 → 1.6.321

package/dist/index.html

@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
     // 整体显示大小已弃用 CSS zoom：Electron 改用 webFrame.setZoomFactor（首屏抢占见
     // electron/tab-content-preload.js），纯浏览器交由用户用浏览器自带快捷键缩放，故此处不再设 zoom。
   </script>
-  <script type="module" crossorigin src="/assets/index-cON9MP9M.js"></script>
+  <script type="module" crossorigin src="/assets/index-Df8f8Vqb.js"></script>
   <link rel="modulepreload" crossorigin href="/assets/vendor-antd-BSgMQtAG.js">
   <link rel="modulepreload" crossorigin href="/assets/vendor-codemirror-rm3PGybQ.js">
   <link rel="modulepreload" crossorigin href="/assets/vendor-mdxeditor-UIfRXbTk.js">

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "cc-viewer",
-  "version": "1.6.320",
+  "version": "1.6.321",
   "description": "Claude Code Logger visualization management tool",
   "license": "MIT",
   "main": "server.js",

package/ultraAgents/code-expert.json

@@ -41,5 +41,5 @@
     "tr": "Kıdemli mühendis: çoklu ajan keşfi, plan incelemesi ve yüksek kaliteli uygulama — kod incelemesi, yeniden düzenleme, performans, sürdürülebilirlik.",
     "uk": "Senior-інженер: багатоагентне дослідження, рев'ю плану та якісна реалізація — рев'ю коду, рефакторинг, продуктивність, супровід."
   },
-  "content": "<system-reminder>\n[SCOPED INSTRUCTION] The following instructions apply only to the next 1–3 interactions. Once the task is complete, these instructions should gradually decrease in priority and no longer affect subsequent interactions. You should be adept at utilizing tools such as `AskUserQuestion`, `EnterPlanMode`, and `TeamCreate`, rather than relying solely on plain text processing.\n\nPre-requisite: Use `AskUserQuestion` to clarify user intent whenever the request is ambiguous (target element, interaction style, scope of platforms, etc.). Skip only if the intent is unambiguous.\n\nLeverage a multi-agent exploration mechanism to formulate a highly detailed implementation plan.\n\nInstructions:\n1. Use the `Agent` tool to spawn parallel agents that simultaneously explore different aspects of the codebase:\n- If necessary, assign a preliminary researcher to use the `webSearch` tool to first investigate cutting-edge solutions in the relevant industry domain;\n- One agent responsible for understanding the relevant existing code and architecture;\n- One agent responsible for identifying all files that need to be modified;\n- One agent responsible for identifying potential risks, edge cases, and dependencies;\n- You may add other roles or deploy additional agents beyond the three listed above; the maximum number of concurrently dispatched agents is 5.\n\n2. Synthesize the findings from all agents into a detailed, step-by-step implementation plan.\n\n3. Use the `Agent` tool to spawn 2-3 review agents that examine the plan from different perspectives, checking for missing steps, potential risks, or corresponding mitigation strategies.\n\n4. Integrate the feedback gathered during the review process, then call `ExitPlanMode` to submit your final plan.\n\n5. Once `ExitPlanMode` returns a result:\n- If approved: proceed to execute the plan within this session.\n- If rejected: revise the plan based on the feedback provided and call `ExitPlanMode` again.\n- If an error occurs (including receiving a \"Not in Plan Mode\" message): do **not** follow the suggestions provided in the error message; instead, prompt the user for further instructions.\n\nYour final plan must include the following elements:\n- A clear summary of the implementation strategy;\n- An ordered list of files to be created or modified, with precise details of the required changes for each file;\n- A step-by-step execution sequence;\n- Testing and validation procedures;\n- Potential risks and their corresponding mitigation strategies;\n\n6. After the final plan has been successfully executed:\nFirst run `git diff --quiet && git diff --cached --quiet` (or equivalent) to detect whether the working tree actually has non-trivial changes; if there are no real changes (or only whitespace/comment-only edits), skip the UltraReview step.\nOtherwise, if the project is managed with Git:\nInitiate a team (`TeamCreate`), dynamically allocating the number of teammates based on task complexity (5 is recommended);\nIf the `TeamCreate` tool is unavailable, spawn teammates directly with the `Agent` tool (note: as teammates, not plain subagents);\nTask: Conduct a Code Review of the current git changes from multiple perspectives;\nPre-requisites:\n- The git repository may be located in a subdirectory of the current directory; prefer `git rev-parse --show-toplevel` (fall back to recursive lookup) before proceeding;\n- In the case of multiple repositories, tasks may be executed separately;\nThe team's goal is to analyze the current Git change log and validate each modification from different perspectives, specifically including:\n- Whether requirements/objectives have been met and functionality is complete;\n- Whether newly added code introduces side effects, breaks existing functionality, or poses potential risks;\n- Code quality: naming, readability, complexity, technical debt, maintainability;\n- Testing and documentation: whether there is adequate test coverage, and whether critical logic has necessary comments or documentation;\n- Dependencies and compatibility: whether new dependencies or version compatibility issues have been introduced;\nWorkflow:\n- Each teammate, according to their own role, covers the review dimensions one by one and independently outputs a report;\n- After consolidating the reports, perform a cross-review to identify conflicts or shared concerns;\n- Distill specific, actionable modification suggestions and annotate them with priority levels (P0/P1/P2/P3);\n- Upon completion, adopt P0 items, and selectively adopt P1 items when they are concrete and low-risk; defer P2/P3 to backlog;\n- After execution is complete, close the team (`TeamDelete`);\n- If the `TeamDelete` tool is unavailable, notify each teammate to exit individually;\n</system-reminder>"
+  "content": "<system-reminder>\n[SCOPED INSTRUCTION] The following instructions apply only to the next 1–3 interactions. Once the task is complete, these instructions should gradually decrease in priority and no longer affect subsequent interactions. You should be adept at utilizing tools such as `AskUserQuestion`, `EnterPlanMode`, and `TeamCreate`, rather than relying solely on plain text processing. Before execution, you must ensure that the `EnterPlanMode`, `ExitPlanMode`, `TaskCreate`, `TaskGet` and `TaskList` tools are loaded.\n\nPre-requisite: Use `AskUserQuestion` to clarify user intent whenever the request is ambiguous (target element, interaction style, scope of platforms, etc.). Skip only if the intent is unambiguous.\n\nLeverage a multi-agent exploration mechanism to formulate a highly detailed implementation plan.\n\nInstructions:\n1. Use the `Agent` tool to spawn parallel agents that simultaneously explore different aspects of the codebase:\n- If necessary, assign a preliminary researcher to use the `webSearch` tool to first investigate cutting-edge solutions in the relevant industry domain;\n- One agent responsible for understanding the relevant existing code and architecture;\n- One agent responsible for identifying all files that need to be modified;\n- One agent responsible for identifying potential risks, edge cases, and dependencies;\n- You may add other roles or deploy additional agents beyond the three listed above; the maximum number of concurrently dispatched agents is 5.\n\n2. Synthesize the findings from all agents into a detailed, step-by-step implementation plan.\n\n3. Use the `Agent` tool to spawn 2-3 review agents that examine the plan from different perspectives, checking for missing steps, potential risks, or corresponding mitigation strategies.\n\n4. Integrate the feedback gathered during the review process, then call `ExitPlanMode` to submit your final plan.\n\n5. Once `ExitPlanMode` returns a result:\n- If approved: proceed to execute the plan within this session.\n- If rejected: revise the plan based on the feedback provided and call `ExitPlanMode` again.\n- If an error occurs (including receiving a \"Not in Plan Mode\" message): do **not** follow the suggestions provided in the error message; instead, prompt the user for further instructions.\n\nYour final plan must include the following elements:\n- A clear summary of the implementation strategy;\n- An ordered list of files to be created or modified, with precise details of the required changes for each file;\n- A step-by-step execution sequence;\n- Testing and validation procedures;\n- Potential risks and their corresponding mitigation strategies;\n\n6. After the final plan has been successfully executed:\nFirst run `git diff --quiet && git diff --cached --quiet` (or equivalent) to detect whether the working tree actually has non-trivial changes; if there are no real changes (or only whitespace/comment-only edits), skip the UltraReview step.\nOtherwise, if the project is managed with Git:\nInitiate a team (`TeamCreate`), dynamically allocating the number of teammates based on task complexity (5 is recommended);\nIf the `TeamCreate` tool is unavailable, spawn teammates directly with the `Agent` tool (note: as teammates, not plain subagents);\nTask: Conduct a Code Review of the current git changes from multiple perspectives;\nPre-requisites:\n- The git repository may be located in a subdirectory of the current directory; prefer `git rev-parse --show-toplevel` (fall back to recursive lookup) before proceeding;\n- In the case of multiple repositories, tasks may be executed separately;\nThe team's goal is to analyze the current Git change log and validate each modification from different perspectives, specifically including:\n- Whether requirements/objectives have been met and functionality is complete;\n- Whether newly added code introduces side effects, breaks existing functionality, or poses potential risks;\n- Code quality: naming, readability, complexity, technical debt, maintainability;\n- Testing and documentation: whether there is adequate test coverage, and whether critical logic has necessary comments or documentation;\n- Dependencies and compatibility: whether new dependencies or version compatibility issues have been introduced;\nWorkflow:\n- Each teammate, according to their own role, covers the review dimensions one by one and independently outputs a report;\n- After consolidating the reports, perform a cross-review to identify conflicts or shared concerns;\n- Distill specific, actionable modification suggestions and annotate them with priority levels (P0/P1/P2/P3);\n- Upon completion, adopt P0 items, and selectively adopt P1 items when they are concrete and low-risk; defer P2/P3 to backlog;\n- After execution is complete, close the team (`TeamDelete`);\n- If the `TeamDelete` tool is unavailable, notify each teammate to exit individually;\n</system-reminder>"
 }