claude-code-workflow 6.2.5 → 6.2.6

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

@@ -0,0 +1,95 @@
+# 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

@@ -0,0 +1,92 @@
+# 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

@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+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

@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+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

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+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

@@ -0,0 +1,224 @@
+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

@@ -0,0 +1,176 @@
+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.