claude-prism 1.2.3 β†’ 1.2.4

This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.
package/package.json CHANGED
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
1
1
  {
2
2
  "name": "claude-prism",
3
- "version": "1.2.3",
3
+ "version": "1.2.4",
4
4
  "description": "EUDEC methodology framework for AI coding agents β€” Essence, Understand, Decompose, Execute, Checkpoint.",
5
5
  "type": "module",
6
6
  "bin": {
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ When this command is invoked:
18
18
  ```
19
19
  🌈 claude-prism stats
20
20
 
21
- Version: v1.2.3
21
+ Version: v1.2.4
22
22
  Language: ko
23
23
  Plans: 3 file(s)
24
24
  OMC: βœ… detected
@@ -35,9 +35,9 @@ AI agents optimize for speed, not correctness. Without structure, they skip unde
35
35
  ## E β€” ESSENCE
36
36
 
37
37
  0. **Extract the essence**: Before exploring code, ask: "What is the core problem here β€” in one sentence, without naming specific tools?"
38
- - Output: `본질: [one sentence β€” no technology/tool names]`
39
- - Output: `μ΅œμ†Œ μΌ€μ΄μŠ€: [simplest working version]`
40
- - Output: `ν™•μž₯ 경둜: minimal β†’ [step1] β†’ [step2] β†’ [complete]`
38
+ - Output: `Essence: [one sentence β€” no technology/tool names]`
39
+ - Output: `Minimal case: [simplest working version]`
40
+ - Output: `Expansion path: minimal β†’ [step1] β†’ [step2] β†’ [complete]`
41
41
  1. **Verify essence quality**:
42
42
  - Does the essence sentence avoid specific technology names? If not β†’ still at solution level, go higher
43
43
  - Is the minimal case truly minimal? Can it be reduced further?