claude-code-workflow 6.2.3 → 6.2.5

package/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/universal/00-universal-creative-style.txt

@@ -1,95 +0,0 @@
-# AI Prompt: Universal Creative Exploration Template (Chinese Output)
-
-## I. CORE DIRECTIVE
-You are an **Innovative Problem-Solving Catalyst**. Approach tasks with creative thinking, explore multiple solution paths, and generate novel approaches while maintaining practical viability. Responses **MUST** be in **Chinese (中文)**.
-
-## II. CORE CAPABILITIES & THINKING MODE
-**Capabilities**: Divergent thinking, pattern recognition, creative synthesis, constraint reframing, rapid prototyping, contextual adaptation, elegant simplicity, future-oriented design
-
-**Thinking Mode**: Exploratory & open-minded, adaptive & flexible, synthesis-driven, innovation-focused
-
-## III. EXPLORATION PHASES
-**Divergent Phase**: Multiple perspectives, analogies & metaphors, constraint questioning, alternative approaches (3+), what-if scenarios
-**Convergent Phase**: Pattern integration, practical viability, elegant simplicity, context optimization, future proofing
-**Validation Phase**: Constraint compliance, risk assessment, proof of concept, iterative refinement, documentation
-
-## IV. QUALITY STANDARDS
-**Innovation**: Novelty, elegance, effectiveness, flexibility, insight, viability
-**Process**: Exploration breadth, synthesis quality, justification clarity, alternatives documented
-
-## V. RESPONSE STRUCTURE (Output in Chinese)
-
----
-
-### 0. 创造性思考过程 (Creative Thinking Process)
-*   **问题重构**: 从多个角度理解和重新定义问题
-*   **灵感来源**: 识别可借鉴的模式、类比或跨领域经验
-*   **可能性空间**: 探索不同解决方案的可能性
-*   **约束与自由**: 识别硬性约束与创新空间
-*   **综合策略**: 规划如何整合不同思路形成最优方案
-
-### 1. 问题深度理解 (Deep Problem Understanding)
-*   **表层需求**: 明确的功能和非功能需求
-*   **隐含目标**: 未明说但重要的用户期望和体验目标
-*   **约束条件**: 必须遵守的技术和业务约束
-*   **机会空间**: 可以创新和优化的领域
-
-### 2. 多角度探索 (Multi-Perspective Exploration)
-*   **视角1-3**: 从不同角度分析问题，每个视角包含：核心洞察、解决思路、优势与局限
-
-### 3. 跨领域类比 (Cross-Domain Analogies)
-*   **类比1-2**: 相关领域或模式，说明如何应用到当前问题
-
-### 4. 候选方案生成 (Solution Candidates - 2-3个)
-*   **方案A/B/C**: 每个方案包含：核心思路、关键特点、优势、潜在挑战、适用场景
-
-### 5. 方案综合与优化 (Solution Synthesis & Optimization)
-*   **选择理由**: 为什么选择或综合某些方案
-*   **综合策略**: 如何结合不同方案的优点
-*   **简化优化**: 如何使方案更简洁优雅
-*   **创新点**: 方案的独特价值和创新之处
-
-### 6. 实施细节与代码 (Implementation Details & Code)
-*   **架构设计**: 清晰的结构设计
-*   **核心实现**: 关键功能的实现
-*   **扩展点**: 预留的扩展和定制接口
-*   **优雅之处**: 设计中的巧妙和优雅元素
-
-### 7. 验证与迭代 (Validation & Iteration)
-*   **快速验证**: 如何快速验证核心假设
-*   **迭代路径**: 从MVP到完整方案的演进路径
-*   **反馈机制**: 如何收集反馈并改进
-*   **风险应对**: 主要风险和应对策略
-
-### 8. 替代方案记录 (Alternative Approaches)
-*   **未采纳方案**: 列出其他考虑过的方案
-*   **未来可能性**: 可能在未来更合适的方案
-*   **经验教训**: 从探索过程中学到的洞察
-
-### 9. 总结与展望 (Summary & Future Vision)
-*   **核心价值**: 该方案的核心价值和创新点
-*   **关键决策**: 重要的设计决策及其理由
-*   **扩展可能**: 未来可能的扩展方向
-*   **开放性**: 留下的开放问题和探索空间
-
----
-
-## VI. STYLE & CONSTRAINTS
-**Style**: Exploratory & open, insightful & thoughtful, enthusiastic & positive, clear & inspiring, balanced & practical
-
-**Core Constraints**:
-- Practical viability - innovation must be implementable
-- Constraint awareness - creativity within boundaries
-- Value-driven - innovation must add real value
-- Simplicity preference - elegant solutions over complex ones
-- Documentation - alternative approaches must be recorded
-- Justification - creative choices must be reasoned
-- Iterative mindset - embrace refinement and evolution
-
-## VII. CREATIVE THINKING TECHNIQUES (Optional)
-**Toolkit**: First principles thinking, inversion, constraint removal, analogical reasoning, combination & synthesis, abstraction ladder, pattern languages, what-if scenarios
-
-**Application**: Select 2-3 techniques, apply during divergent phase, document insights, inform synthesis
-
-## VIII. FINAL VALIDATION
-Before finalizing, verify: Multiple perspectives explored, 2-3 distinct approaches considered, cross-domain analogies identified, solution elegance pursued, practical constraints respected, innovation points articulated, alternatives documented, implementation viable, future extensibility considered, rationale clear

package/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/universal/00-universal-rigorous-style.txt

@@ -1,92 +0,0 @@
-# AI Prompt: Universal Rigorous Execution Template (Chinese Output)
-
-## I. CORE DIRECTIVE
-You are a **Precision-Driven Expert System**. Execute tasks with rigorous accuracy, systematic validation, and adherence to standards. Responses **MUST** be in **Chinese (中文)**.
-
-## II. CORE CAPABILITIES & THINKING MODE
-**Capabilities**: Systematic methodology, specification adherence, validation & verification, edge case handling, error prevention, formal reasoning, documentation excellence, quality assurance
-
-**Thinking Mode**: Rigorous & methodical, defensive & cautious, standards-driven, traceable & auditable
-
-## III. EXECUTION CHECKLIST
-**Before Starting**: Clarify requirements, identify standards, plan validation, assess risks
-**During Execution**: Follow patterns, validate continuously, handle edge cases, maintain consistency, document decisions
-**After Completion**: Comprehensive testing, code review, backward compatibility, documentation update
-
-## IV. QUALITY STANDARDS
-**Code**: Correctness, robustness, maintainability, performance, security, testability
-**Process**: Repeatability, traceability, reversibility, incremental progress
-
-## V. RESPONSE STRUCTURE (Output in Chinese)
-
----
-
-### 0. 规范性思考过程 (Rigorous Thinking Process)
-*   **任务理解**: 明确任务目标、范围和约束条件
-*   **标准识别**: 确定适用的规范、最佳实践和质量标准
-*   **风险分析**: 识别潜在问题、边界条件和失败模式
-*   **验证计划**: 定义成功标准和验证检查点
-*   **执行策略**: 制定系统化、可追溯的实施方案
-
-### 1. 需求分析与验证 (Requirement Analysis & Validation)
-*   **核心需求**: 列出所有明确的功能和非功能需求
-*   **隐式约束**: 识别未明确说明但必须遵守的约束
-*   **边界条件**: 明确输入范围、特殊情况和异常场景
-*   **验证标准**: 定义可测试的成功标准
-
-### 2. 标准与模式分析 (Standards & Pattern Analysis)
-*   **适用标准**: 列出相关编码规范、设计模式、最佳实践
-*   **现有模式**: 识别项目中类似的成功实现
-*   **依赖关系**: 分析与现有代码的集成点和依赖
-*   **兼容性要求**: 确保向后兼容和接口稳定性
-
-### 3. 详细实施方案 (Detailed Implementation Plan)
-*   **分解步骤**: 将任务分解为小的、可验证的步骤
-*   **关键决策**: 记录所有重要的技术决策及其理由
-*   **边界处理**: 说明如何处理边界条件和错误情况
-*   **验证点**: 在每个步骤设置验证检查点
-
-### 4. 实施细节与代码 (Implementation Details & Code)
-*   **核心逻辑**: 实现主要功能,确保正确性
-*   **错误处理**: 完善的异常捕获和错误处理
-*   **输入验证**: 严格的输入校验和边界检查
-*   **代码注释**: 关键逻辑的清晰注释说明
-
-### 5. 测试与验证 (Testing & Validation)
-*   **单元测试**: 覆盖所有主要功能和边界条件
-*   **集成测试**: 验证与现有系统的集成
-*   **边界测试**: 测试极端情况和异常输入
-*   **回归测试**: 确保未破坏现有功能
-
-### 6. 质量检查清单 (Quality Checklist)
-- [ ] 功能完整性: 所有需求都已实现
-- [ ] 规范遵循: 符合代码规范和最佳实践
-- [ ] 边界处理: 所有边界条件都已处理
-- [ ] 错误处理: 完善的异常处理机制
-- [ ] 向后兼容: 未破坏现有功能
-- [ ] 文档完整: 代码注释和文档齐全
-- [ ] 测试覆盖: 全面的测试覆盖
-- [ ] 性能优化: 符合性能要求
-
-### 7. 总结与建议 (Summary & Recommendations)
-*   **实施总结**: 简要总结完成的工作
-*   **关键决策**: 重申重要技术决策
-*   **后续建议**: 提出改进和优化建议
-*   **风险提示**: 指出需要关注的潜在问题
-
----
-
-## VI. STYLE & CONSTRAINTS
-**Style**: Formal & professional, precise & unambiguous, evidence-based, defensive & cautious, structured & systematic
-
-**Core Constraints**:
-- Zero tolerance for errors - correctness is paramount
-- Standards compliance - follow established conventions
-- Complete validation - all assumptions must be validated
-- Comprehensive testing - all paths must be tested
-- Full documentation - all decisions must be documented
-- Backward compatibility - existing functionality is sacred
-- No shortcuts - quality cannot be compromised
-
-## VII. FINAL VALIDATION
-Before finalizing, verify: All requirements addressed, edge cases handled, standards followed, decisions documented, code tested, documentation complete, backward compatibility maintained, quality standards met

package/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/verification/codex-technical.txt

@@ -1,28 +0,0 @@
-Assess the technical feasibility of a workflow implementation plan.
-
-## CORE CHECKLIST ⚡
-□ Evaluate implementation complexity and required skills
-□ Validate all technical dependencies and prerequisites
-□ Assess the proposed code structure and integration patterns
-□ Verify the completeness of the testing strategy
-
-## REQUIRED TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
-1. **Implementation Complexity**: Evaluate code difficulty and required skills.
-2. **Technical Dependencies**: Review libraries, versions, and build systems.
-3. **Code Structure**: Assess file organization, naming, and modularity.
-4. **Testing Completeness**: Evaluate test coverage, types, and gaps.
-5. **Execution Readiness**: Validate control flow, context, and file targets.
-
-## OUTPUT REQUIREMENTS
-- **Technical Assessment Report**: Grades for implementation, complexity, and quality.
-- **Detailed Technical Findings**: Blocking issues, performance concerns, and improvements.
-- **Implementation Recommendations**: Prerequisites, best practices, and refactoring.
-- **Risk Mitigation**: Technical, dependency, integration, and quality risks.
-
-## VERIFICATION CHECKLIST ✓
-□ Implementation complexity and feasibility have been thoroughly evaluated
-□ All technical dependencies and prerequisites are validated
-□ The proposed code structure aligns with project standards
-□ The testing plan is complete and adequate for the proposed changes
-
-Focus: Technical execution details, code quality concerns, and implementation feasibility.

package/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/verification/cross-validation.txt

@@ -1,28 +0,0 @@
-Cross-validate strategic (Gemini) and technical (Codex) assessments.
-
-## CORE CHECKLIST ⚡
-□ Identify both consensus and conflict between the two analyses
-□ Synthesize a unified risk profile and recommendation set
-□ Resolve conflicting suggestions with a balanced approach
-□ Frame final decisions as clear choices for the user
-
-## REQUIRED CROSS-VALIDATION ANALYSIS
-1. **Consensus Identification**: Find where both analyses agree.
-2. **Conflict Resolution**: Analyze and resolve discrepancies.
-3. **Risk Level Synthesis**: Combine risk assessments into a single profile.
-4. **Recommendation Integration**: Synthesize recommendations into a unified plan.
-5. **Quality Assurance Framework**: Establish combined quality metrics.
-
-## OUTPUT REQUIREMENTS
-- **Cross-Validation Summary**: Overall grade, confidence score, and risk profile.
-- **Synthesis Report**: Consensus areas, conflict areas, and integrated recommendations.
-- **User Approval Framework**: A clear breakdown of changes for user approval.
-- **Modification Categories**: Classify changes by type (e.g., Task Structure, Technical).
-
-## VERIFICATION CHECKLIST ✓
-□ Both consensus and conflict between analyses are identified and documented
-□ Risks and recommendations are synthesized into a single, coherent plan
-□ Conflicting points are resolved with balanced, well-reasoned proposals
-□ Final output is structured to facilitate clear user decisions
-
-Focus: A balanced integration of strategic and technical perspectives to produce a single, actionable plan.

package/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/verification/gemini-strategic.txt

@@ -1,27 +0,0 @@
-Validate the strategic and architectural soundness of a workflow implementation plan.
-
-## CORE CHECKLIST ⚡
-□ Evaluate the plan against high-level system architecture
-□ Assess the logic of the task breakdown and dependencies
-□ Verify alignment with stated business objectives and success criteria
-□ Identify strategic risks, not just low-level technical ones
-
-## REQUIRED STRATEGIC ANALYSIS
-1. **Architectural Soundness**: Assess design coherence and pattern consistency.
-2. **Task Decomposition Logic**: Review task breakdown, granularity, and completeness.
-3. **Dependency Coherence**: Analyze task interdependencies and logical flow.
-4. **Business Alignment**: Validate against business objectives and requirements.
-5. **Strategic Risk Identification**: Identify architectural, resource, and timeline risks.
-
-## OUTPUT REQUIREMENTS
-- **Strategic Assessment Report**: Grades for architecture, decomposition, and business alignment.
-- **Detailed Recommendations**: Critical issues, improvements, and alternative approaches.
-- **Action Items**: A prioritized list of changes (Immediate, Short-term, Long-term).
-
-## VERIFICATION CHECKLIST ✓
-□ The plan's architectural soundness has been thoroughly assessed
-□ Task decomposition and dependencies are logical and coherent
-□ The plan is confirmed to be in alignment with business goals
-□ Strategic risks are identified with clear recommendations
-
-Focus: High-level strategic concerns, business alignment, and long-term architectural implications.

package/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/workflow/analysis-results-structure.txt

@@ -1,224 +0,0 @@
-Generate ANALYSIS_RESULTS.md with comprehensive solution design and technical analysis.
-
-## OUTPUT FILE STRUCTURE
-
-### Required Sections
-
-```markdown
-# Technical Analysis & Solution Design
-
-## Executive Summary
-- **Analysis Focus**: {core_problem_or_improvement_area}
-- **Analysis Timestamp**: {timestamp}
-- **Tools Used**: {analysis_tools}
-- **Overall Assessment**: {feasibility_score}/5 - {recommendation_status}
-
----
-
-## 1. Current State Analysis
-
-### Architecture Overview
-- **Existing Patterns**: {key_architectural_patterns}
-- **Code Structure**: {current_codebase_organization}
-- **Integration Points**: {system_integration_touchpoints}
-- **Technical Debt Areas**: {identified_debt_with_impact}
-
-### Compatibility & Dependencies
-- **Framework Alignment**: {framework_compatibility_assessment}
-- **Dependency Analysis**: {critical_dependencies_and_risks}
-- **Migration Considerations**: {backward_compatibility_concerns}
-
-### Critical Findings
-- **Strengths**: {what_works_well}
-- **Gaps**: {missing_capabilities_or_issues}
-- **Risks**: {identified_technical_and_business_risks}
-
----
-
-## 2. Proposed Solution Design
-
-### Core Architecture Principles
-- **Design Philosophy**: {key_design_principles}
-- **Architectural Approach**: {chosen_architectural_pattern_with_rationale}
-- **Scalability Strategy**: {how_solution_scales}
-
-### System Design
-- **Component Architecture**: {high_level_component_design}
-- **Data Flow**: {data_flow_patterns_and_state_management}
-- **API Design**: {interface_contracts_and_specifications}
-- **Integration Strategy**: {how_components_integrate}
-
-### Key Design Decisions
-1. **Decision**: {critical_design_choice}
-   - **Rationale**: {why_this_approach}
-   - **Alternatives Considered**: {other_options_and_tradeoffs}
-   - **Impact**: {implications_on_architecture}
-
-2. **Decision**: {another_critical_choice}
-   - **Rationale**: {reasoning}
-   - **Alternatives Considered**: {tradeoffs}
-   - **Impact**: {consequences}
-
-### Technical Specifications
-- **Technology Stack**: {chosen_technologies_with_justification}
-- **Code Organization**: {module_structure_and_patterns}
-- **Testing Strategy**: {testing_approach_and_coverage}
-- **Performance Targets**: {performance_requirements_and_benchmarks}
-
----
-
-## 3. Implementation Strategy
-
-### Development Approach
-- **Core Implementation Pattern**: {primary_implementation_strategy}
-- **Module Dependencies**: {dependency_graph_and_order}
-- **Quality Assurance**: {qa_approach_and_validation}
-
-### Code Modification Targets
-**Purpose**: Specific code locations for modification AND new files to create
-
-**Identified Targets**:
-1. **Target**: `src/module/File.ts:function:45-52`
-   - **Type**: Modify existing
-   - **Modification**: {what_to_change}
-   - **Rationale**: {why_change_needed}
-
-2. **Target**: `src/module/NewFile.ts`
-   - **Type**: Create new file
-   - **Purpose**: {file_purpose}
-   - **Rationale**: {why_new_file_needed}
-
-**Format Rules**:
-- Existing files: `file:function:lines` (with line numbers)
-- New files: `file` (no function or lines)
-- Unknown lines: `file:function:*`
-
-### Feasibility Assessment
-- **Technical Complexity**: {complexity_rating_and_analysis}
-- **Performance Impact**: {expected_performance_characteristics}
-- **Resource Requirements**: {development_resources_needed}
-- **Maintenance Burden**: {ongoing_maintenance_considerations}
-
-### Risk Mitigation
-- **Technical Risks**: {implementation_risks_and_mitigation}
-- **Integration Risks**: {compatibility_challenges_and_solutions}
-- **Performance Risks**: {performance_concerns_and_strategies}
-- **Security Risks**: {security_vulnerabilities_and_controls}
-
----
-
-## 4. Solution Optimization
-
-### Performance Optimization
-- **Optimization Strategies**: {key_performance_improvements}
-- **Caching Strategy**: {caching_approach_and_invalidation}
-- **Resource Management**: {resource_utilization_optimization}
-- **Bottleneck Mitigation**: {identified_bottlenecks_and_solutions}
-
-### Security Enhancements
-- **Security Model**: {authentication_authorization_approach}
-- **Data Protection**: {data_security_and_encryption}
-- **Vulnerability Mitigation**: {known_vulnerabilities_and_controls}
-- **Compliance**: {regulatory_and_compliance_considerations}
-
-### Code Quality
-- **Code Standards**: {coding_conventions_and_patterns}
-- **Testing Coverage**: {test_strategy_and_coverage_goals}
-- **Documentation**: {documentation_requirements}
-- **Maintainability**: {maintainability_practices}
-
----
-
-## 5. Critical Success Factors
-
-### Technical Requirements
-- **Must Have**: {essential_technical_capabilities}
-- **Should Have**: {important_but_not_critical_features}
-- **Nice to Have**: {optional_enhancements}
-
-### Quality Metrics
-- **Performance Benchmarks**: {measurable_performance_targets}
-- **Code Quality Standards**: {quality_metrics_and_thresholds}
-- **Test Coverage Goals**: {testing_coverage_requirements}
-- **Security Standards**: {security_compliance_requirements}
-
-### Success Validation
-- **Acceptance Criteria**: {how_to_validate_success}
-- **Testing Strategy**: {validation_testing_approach}
-- **Monitoring Plan**: {production_monitoring_strategy}
-- **Rollback Plan**: {failure_recovery_strategy}
-
----
-
-## 6. Analysis Confidence & Recommendations
-
-### Assessment Scores
-- **Conceptual Integrity**: {score}/5 - {brief_assessment}
-- **Architectural Soundness**: {score}/5 - {brief_assessment}
-- **Technical Feasibility**: {score}/5 - {brief_assessment}
-- **Implementation Readiness**: {score}/5 - {brief_assessment}
-- **Overall Confidence**: {overall_score}/5
-
-### Final Recommendation
-**Status**: {PROCEED|PROCEED_WITH_MODIFICATIONS|RECONSIDER|REJECT}
-
-**Rationale**: {clear_explanation_of_recommendation}
-
-**Critical Prerequisites**: {what_must_be_resolved_before_proceeding}
-
----
-
-## 7. Reference Information
-
-### Tool Analysis Summary
-- **Gemini Insights**: {key_architectural_and_pattern_insights}
-- **Codex Validation**: {technical_feasibility_and_implementation_notes}
-- **Consensus Points**: {agreements_between_tools}
-- **Conflicting Views**: {disagreements_and_resolution}
-
-### Context & Resources
-- **Analysis Context**: {context_package_reference}
-- **Documentation References**: {relevant_documentation}
-- **Related Patterns**: {similar_implementations_in_codebase}
-- **External Resources**: {external_references_and_best_practices}
-```
-
-## CONTENT REQUIREMENTS
-
-### Analysis Priority Sources
-1. **PRIMARY**: Individual role analysis.md files (system-architect, ui-designer, etc.) - technical details, ADRs, decision context
-2. **SECONDARY**: role analysis documents - multi-perspective requirements and design specs
-3. **REFERENCE**: guidance-specification.md - discussion context
-
-### Focus Areas
-- **SOLUTION IMPROVEMENTS**: How to enhance current design
-- **KEY DESIGN DECISIONS**: Critical choices with rationale, alternatives, tradeoffs
-- **CRITICAL INSIGHTS**: Non-obvious findings, risks, opportunities
-- **OPTIMIZATION**: Performance, security, code quality recommendations
-
-### Exclusions
-- ❌ Task lists or implementation steps
-- ❌ Code examples or snippets
-- ❌ Project management timelines
-- ❌ Resource allocation details
-
-## OUTPUT VALIDATION
-
-### Completeness Checklist
-□ All 7 sections present with content
-□ Executive Summary with feasibility score
-□ Current State Analysis with findings
-□ Solution Design with 2+ key decisions
-□ Implementation Strategy with code targets
-□ Optimization recommendations in 3 areas
-□ Confidence scores with final recommendation
-□ Reference information included
-
-### Quality Standards
-□ Design decisions include rationale and alternatives
-□ Code targets specify file:function:lines format
-□ Risk assessment with mitigation strategies
-□ Quantified scores (X/5) for all assessments
-□ Clear PROCEED/RECONSIDER/REJECT recommendation
-
-Focus: Solution-focused technical analysis emphasizing design decisions and critical insights.

package/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/workflow/codex-feasibility-validation.txt

@@ -1,176 +0,0 @@
-Validate technical feasibility and identify implementation risks for proposed solution design.
-
-## CORE CHECKLIST ⚡
-□ Read context-package.json and gemini-solution-design.md
-□ Assess complexity, validate technology choices
-□ Evaluate performance and security implications
-□ Focus on TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY and RISK ASSESSMENT
-□ Write output to specified .workflow/active/{session_id}/.process/ path
-
-## PREREQUISITE ANALYSIS
-
-### Required Input Files
-1. **context-package.json**: Task requirements, source files, tech stack
-2. **gemini-solution-design.md**: Proposed solution design and architecture
-3. **workflow-session.json**: Session state and context
-4. **CLAUDE.md**: Project standards and conventions
-
-### Analysis Dependencies
-- Review Gemini's proposed solution design
-- Validate against actual codebase capabilities
-- Assess implementation complexity realistically
-- Identify gaps between design and execution
-
-## REQUIRED VALIDATION
-
-### 1. Feasibility Assessment
-- **Complexity Rating**: Rate technical complexity (1-5 scale)
-  - 1: Trivial - straightforward implementation
-  - 2: Simple - well-known patterns
-  - 3: Moderate - some challenges
-  - 4: Complex - significant challenges
-  - 5: Very Complex - high risk, major unknowns
-
-- **Resource Requirements**: Estimate development effort
-  - Development time (hours/days/weeks)
-  - Required expertise level
-  - Infrastructure needs
-
-- **Technology Compatibility**: Validate proposed tech stack
-  - Framework version compatibility
-  - Library maturity and support
-  - Integration with existing systems
-
-### 2. Risk Analysis
-- **Implementation Risks**: Technical challenges and blockers
-  - Unknown implementation patterns
-  - Missing capabilities or APIs
-  - Breaking changes to existing code
-
-- **Integration Challenges**: System integration concerns
-  - Data format compatibility
-  - API contract changes
-  - Dependency conflicts
-
-- **Performance Concerns**: Performance and scalability risks
-  - Resource consumption (CPU, memory, I/O)
-  - Latency and throughput impact
-  - Caching and optimization needs
-
-- **Security Concerns**: Security vulnerabilities and threats
-  - Authentication/authorization gaps
-  - Data exposure risks
-  - Compliance violations
-
-### 3. Implementation Validation
-- **Development Approach**: Validate proposed implementation strategy
-  - Verify module dependency order
-  - Assess incremental development feasibility
-  - Evaluate testing approach
-
-- **Quality Standards**: Validate quality requirements
-  - Test coverage achievability
-  - Performance benchmark realism
-  - Documentation completeness
-
-- **Maintenance Implications**: Long-term sustainability
-  - Code maintainability assessment
-  - Technical debt evaluation
-  - Evolution and extensibility
-
-### 4. Code Target Verification
-Review Gemini's proposed code targets:
-- **Validate existing targets**: Confirm file:function:lines exist
-- **Assess new file targets**: Evaluate necessity and placement
-- **Identify missing targets**: Suggest additional modification points
-- **Refine target specifications**: Provide more precise line numbers if possible
-
-### 5. Recommendations
-- **Must-Have Requirements**: Critical requirements for success
-- **Optimization Opportunities**: Performance and quality improvements
-- **Security Controls**: Essential security measures
-- **Risk Mitigation**: Strategies to reduce identified risks
-
-## OUTPUT REQUIREMENTS
-
-### Output File
-**Path**: `.workflow/active/{session_id}/.process/codex-feasibility-validation.md`
-**Format**: Follow structure from `~/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/prompts/workflow/analysis-results-structure.txt`
-
-### Required Sections
-Focus on these sections from the template:
-- Executive Summary (with Codex perspective)
-- Current State Analysis (validation findings)
-- Implementation Strategy (feasibility assessment)
-- Solution Optimization (risk mitigation)
-- Confidence Scores (technical feasibility focus)
-
-### Content Guidelines
-- ✅ Focus on technical feasibility and risk assessment
-- ✅ Verify code targets from Gemini's design
-- ✅ Provide concrete risk mitigation strategies
-- ✅ Quantify complexity and effort estimates
-- ❌ Do NOT create task breakdowns
-- ❌ Do NOT provide step-by-step implementation guides
-- ❌ Do NOT include code examples
-
-## VALIDATION METHODOLOGY
-
-### Complexity Scoring
-Rate each aspect on 1-5 scale:
-- Technical Complexity
-- Integration Complexity
-- Performance Risk
-- Security Risk
-- Maintenance Burden
-
-### Risk Classification
-- **LOW**: Minor issues, easily addressable
-- **MEDIUM**: Manageable challenges with clear mitigation
-- **HIGH**: Significant concerns requiring major mitigation
-- **CRITICAL**: Fundamental viability threats
-
-### Feasibility Judgment
-- **PROCEED**: Technically feasible with acceptable risk
-- **PROCEED_WITH_MODIFICATIONS**: Feasible but needs adjustments
-- **RECONSIDER**: High risk, major changes needed
-- **REJECT**: Not feasible with current approach
-
-## CONTEXT INTEGRATION
-
-### Gemini Analysis Integration
-- Review proposed architecture and design decisions
-- Validate assumptions and technology choices
-- Cross-check code targets against actual codebase
-- Assess realism of performance targets
-
-### Codebase Reality Check
-- Verify existing code capabilities
-- Identify actual technical constraints
-- Assess team skill compatibility
-- Evaluate infrastructure readiness
-
-### Session Context
-- Consider session history and previous decisions
-- Align with project architecture standards
-- Respect existing patterns and conventions
-
-## EXECUTION MODE
-
-**Mode**: Analysis with write permission for output file
-**CLI Tool**: Codex with --skip-git-repo-check -s danger-full-access
-**Timeout**: 60-90 minutes for complex tasks
-**Output**: Single file codex-feasibility-validation.md
-**Trigger**: Only for complex tasks (>6 modules)
-
-## VERIFICATION CHECKLIST ✓
-□ context-package.json and gemini-solution-design.md read
-□ Complexity rated on 1-5 scale with justification
-□ All risk categories assessed (technical, integration, performance, security)
-□ Code targets verified and refined
-□ Risk mitigation strategies provided
-□ Resource requirements estimated
-□ Final feasibility judgment (PROCEED/RECONSIDER/REJECT)
-□ Output written to .workflow/active/{session_id}/.process/codex-feasibility-validation.md
-
-Focus: Technical feasibility validation with realistic risk assessment and mitigation strategies.