cclaw-cli 7.7.0 → 8.1.0

package/dist/content/templates.d.ts

@@ -1,26 +0,0 @@
-/**
- * Shared investigation discipline block. Rendered once per
- * elicitation/spec stage skill (brainstorm, scope, design, spec, plan, tdd,
- * review). The block enforces a four-step ladder before drafting and a
- * path-passing rule for delegations so token cost and "jumped into code"
- * regressions stay bounded. Stop-trigger count and ladder-step count are
- * verified by `tests/unit/investigation-discipline-block.test.ts`.
- */
-export declare const INVESTIGATION_DISCIPLINE_BLOCK = "## Investigation Discipline\n\nUse this ladder before drafting or delegating; do not jump straight to the editor.\n\n1. **Search** \u2014 locate the surface (file path, symbol, ref) before reading. Use `rg` / glob / graph; record the query, not the chunk.\n2. **Graph / impact** \u2014 name what the change touches (callers, callees, tests, configs) and its blast radius before opening a file.\n3. **Narrow read** \u2014 read at most 1-3 files, only the sections needed; cite paths with `:line` ranges instead of pasting bodies.\n4. **Draft** \u2014 only after the trace exists; the trace is the authority, not chat history or memory.\n\n**Path-passing in delegations.** When delegating, pass repo-relative paths and refs (e.g. `src/foo/bar.ts:42`, `D-12`, `AC-3`) \u2014 never the file body. The subagent re-reads from path; pasting content fragments breaks freshness and inflates tokens.\n\n**Stop triggers** (any one means halt and re-enter the ladder):\n\n- You are about to read more than 3 files in one pass.\n- You are about to load file content into a delegation prompt instead of paths or refs.\n- You are about to start a draft before any trace (search log, graph note, narrow-read citation) exists.\n";
-export declare const ARTIFACT_TEMPLATES: Record<string, string>;
-export declare const RULEBOOK_MARKDOWN = "# Cclaw Rulebook\n\n## MUST_ALWAYS\n- Follow flow order: brainstorm -> scope -> design -> spec -> plan -> tdd -> review -> ship\n- Require explicit user confirmation after plan before TDD\n- Keep evidence artifacts in `.cclaw/artifacts/`\n- Enforce RED before GREEN in TDD\n- Run two-layer review (spec_compliance and code_quality) before ship\n- Validate all inputs before processing \u2014 never trust external data without sanitization\n- Prefer immutable data patterns and pure functions where the language supports them\n- Follow existing repo conventions, patterns, and directory structure \u2014 match the codebase\n- Verify claims with fresh evidence: \"tests pass\" requires running tests in this message\n- Use conventional commits: `type(scope): description` (feat, fix, refactor, test, docs, chore)\n\n## MUST_NEVER\n- Skip RED phase and jump directly to GREEN in TDD\n- Ship with critical review findings\n- Start implementation during /brainstorm\n- Modify generated cclaw files manually when CLI can regenerate them\n- Commit `.cclaw/` or generated shim files\n- Expose secrets, tokens, API keys, or absolute system paths in agent output\n- Duplicate existing functionality without explicit justification \u2014 search before building\n- Bypass security checks, linting hooks, or type checking to \"move faster\"\n- Claim success (\"Done,\" \"All good,\" \"Tests pass\") without running verification in this message\n- Make changes outside the blast radius of the current task without user consent\n\n## DELEGATION\nWhen a task requires specialist knowledge (security audit, performance profiling, database review),\ndelegate to a specialized agent or skill if the harness supports it. The primary agent should:\n1. Identify the specialist domain\n2. Provide focused context (relevant files, the specific concern)\n3. Evaluate the specialist output before acting on it \u2014 do not blindly apply recommendations\n";
-/**
- * Always-on baseline rule materialized at `.cursor/rules/cclaw-guidelines.mdc`.
- * Independent of skill activation — kicks in even when the agent skips
- * loading skills. Three hard rules cover the most common regressions
- * (premature draft, premature subagent dispatch, command-line echo to chat).
- */
-export declare const CURSOR_GUIDELINES_RULE_MDC = "---\ndescription: cclaw zero-install behavior baseline (always-on)\nglobs:\n  - \"**/*\"\nalwaysApply: true\n---\n\n<!-- cclaw-managed-cursor-guidelines-rule -->\n\n# Cclaw Baseline Guidelines\n\nThese three rules apply to every Cursor agent session in this project,\nregardless of whether stage skills loaded.\n\n## 1. Q&A floor before drafting (brainstorm/scope/design)\n\nBefore drafting any `.cclaw/artifacts/01-brainstorm-*.md`,\n`02-scope-*.md`, or `03-design-*.md`, verify that the artifact's\n`## Q&A Log` table demonstrates Ralph-Loop convergence: every\nforcing-question topic id is tagged `[topic:<id>]` on at least one row\n(see the stage's forcing-questions checklist for the id list), the last\n2 turns produce no new decision-changing impact, OR an explicit user\nstop-signal row is recorded. Walk the stage forcing questions one at a\ntime via the `AskQuestion` tool. If you find yourself proposing a\ndraft after 1-2 questions while forcing topic ids remain untagged, STOP\nand continue the loop.\n\nThe `qa_log_unconverged` linter rule will block `stage-complete` when\nconvergence has not been reached. `[topic:<id>]` tagging is mandatory:\nEnglish keyword detection is intentionally absent because it mis-reports\nconvergence on RU/UA Q&A logs.\n\n## 2. Mandatory subagents run after Q&A approval\n\nFor brainstorm / scope / design, mandatory subagents (\n`product-discovery`, `critic`, `planner`, `architect`) run **only\nAFTER the user approves the elicitation outcome**, never before the Q&A\nloop converges. Dispatching them early preempts the user dialogue and\nviolates the elicitation contract \u2014 the linter will block stage-complete.\n\nSee each stage's \"Run Phase: post-elicitation\" rows in the materialized\nAutomatic Subagent Dispatch table.\n\n## 3. Never echo cclaw command lines to chat\n\nThe user does not run cclaw helpers (`node .cclaw/hooks/...`) manually.\nNEVER paste full command lines, `--evidence-json '{...}'` payloads,\n`--waive-delegation=...`, or shell hash commands (`shasum`,\n`sha256sum`, `Get-FileHash`, `certutil`, etc.) into chat. Run the\nhelper via the tool layer and report only the resulting summary. On\nfailure, report a compact human-readable summary plus the helper JSON in\na single fenced `json` block.\n";
-export declare const CURSOR_WORKFLOW_RULE_MDC = "---\ndescription: cclaw workflow guardrails for Cursor agent sessions\nglobs:\n  - \"**/*\"\nalwaysApply: true\n---\n\n<!-- cclaw-managed-cursor-workflow-rule -->\n\n# Cclaw Workflow Guardrails\n\n## Activation Rule\n\nBefore responding to coding work:\n1. Read `.cclaw/state/flow-state.json`.\n2. Start with `/cc` or continue with `/cc`.\n3. If no software-stage flow applies, respond normally.\n\n## Stage Order\n\n`brainstorm -> scope -> design -> spec -> plan -> tdd -> review -> ship`\n\nTrack-specific skips are allowed only when `flow-state.track` + `skippedStages` explicitly say so.\n\n## Task Classification\n\n| Class | Route |\n|---|---|\n| non-trivial software work | `/cc <idea>` |\n| trivial software fix | `/cc <idea>` (quick track) |\n| bugfix with repro | `/cc <idea>` and enforce RED-first in tdd |\n| pure question / non-software | direct answer (no stage flow) |\n\n## Command Surface\n\n- `/cc` = entry and resume.\n- `/cc` = only progression path.\n- Knowledge capture and recall use the `learnings` skill when requested.\n\n## Verification Discipline\n\n- No completion claim without fresh command evidence in this turn.\n- Stage completion claim requires `stage-complete` exit 0 in the current turn. Quote the single-line success JSON printed to stdout (e.g. `{\"ok\":true,\"command\":\"stage-complete\",...}`); do not paraphrase, do not infer success from empty stdout or from skipped retries.\n\n## Protocol label hygiene\n\n`skip` wording means different things depending on phase: brainstorm/scope/design Q&A stop-signals may still literal **skip**/enough/move-on wording; structured ship closeout retros and compound clustering prompts should expose **no changes** (or accept-as-is language) rather than labeling the passive path as skip. Keep the verbs aligned with the harness question copy you present to the human.\n- Do not mark gates passed from memory.\n- Keep evidence in `.cclaw/artifacts/`; archive through closeout via `/cc` or cancel early via `node .cclaw/hooks/cancel-run.mjs`.\n\n## Delegation And Approvals\n\n- Machine-only checks in design/plan/tdd/review/ship should auto-dispatch when tooling supports it.\n- **For brainstorm / scope / design stages**: ask user input continuously via adaptive elicitation (one question per turn through the harness-native question tool \u2014 `AskQuestion` in Cursor). Walk the stage forcing-questions list one-by-one. **Tag each Q&A Log row's `Decision impact` cell with `[topic:<id>]`** (the id is given in the stage's forcing-questions checklist) so the linter can verify coverage in any natural language. Do NOT batch and do NOT defer to a single approval gate at the end. The `qa_log_unconverged` linter rule will block `stage-complete` when convergence is not reached (forcing topic ids untagged AND last 2 turns still produce decision-changing rows AND no stop-signal).\n- **For other stages** (spec/plan/tdd/build/review/ship): ask user input only at explicit approval gates (scope mode, plan approval, challenge resolution, ship finalization), not for routine progress updates.\n- If you find yourself proposing a draft after 1-2 questions in brainstorm/scope/design, STOP \u2014 go back to the forcing-questions list and continue.\n- Mandatory subagents in brainstorm/scope/design run only AFTER the user approves the elicitation outcome (see each stage's \"Run Phase: post-elicitation\" rows). Dispatching them before the Q&A loop converges violates the contract.\n- Never echo cclaw command lines (`node .cclaw/hooks/...`, `--evidence-json '{...}'`) to chat \u2014 the user does not run cclaw manually. Run helpers via the tool layer; report only the resulting summary.\n- If harness capabilities are partial, record waiver reasons in delegation logs.\n\n## Routing Source Of Truth\n\n- Primary router: `.cclaw/skills/using-cclaw/SKILL.md`.\n- Stage behavior: current stage skill plus `.cclaw/state/flow-state.json`.\n- Preamble budget: keep role/status announcements brief and avoid repeating\n  them unless the stage or role changes.\n";
-/**
- * Per-slice prose file written by `slice-builder` (or the controller)
- * to `<artifacts-dir>/tdd-slices/S-<id>.md`. The main `06-tdd.md` is
- * auto-indexed via `## Slices Index`.
- */
-export declare function tddSliceFileTemplate(sliceId: string): string;
-export declare function buildRulesJson(): Record<string, unknown>;