create-ai-project 1.14.11 → 1.14.13

package/.claude/commands-en/add-integration-tests.md

@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
 ---
-name: add-integration-tests
 description: Add integration/E2E tests to existing backend codebase using Design Doc
 ---
 
@@ -7,110 +6,123 @@ description: Add integration/E2E tests to existing backend codebase using Design
 
 **Scope**: Backend only (acceptance-test-generator supports backend only)
 
-**Role**: Orchestrator
+## Orchestrator Definition
+
+**Core Identity**: "I am not a worker. I am an orchestrator."
+
+**First Action**: Register Steps 0-8 to TodoWrite before any execution.
+
+**Why Delegate**: Orchestrator's context is shared across all steps. Direct implementation consumes context needed for review and quality check phases. Task files create context boundaries. Subagents work in isolated context.
 
 **Execution Method**:
-- Skeleton generation -> delegate to acceptance-test-generator
-- Task file creation -> orchestrator creates directly
-- Test implementation -> delegate to task-executor
-- Test review -> delegate to integration-test-reviewer
-- Quality checks -> delegate to quality-fixer
+- Skeleton generation → delegate to acceptance-test-generator
+- Task file creation → orchestrator creates directly (minimal context usage)
+- Test implementation → delegate to task-executor
+- Test review → delegate to integration-test-reviewer
+- Quality checks → delegate to quality-fixer
 
 Design Doc path: $ARGUMENTS
 
-**TodoWrite**: Register steps and update as each completes.
-
 ## Prerequisites
 - Design Doc must exist (created manually or via reverse-engineer)
 - Existing implementation to test
 
 ## Execution Flow
 
-### 1. Validate Design Doc (Orchestrator)
+### Step 0: Execute Skill
+
+Execute Skill: documentation-criteria (for task file template in Step 3)
+
+### Step 1: Validate Design Doc
+
 ```bash
 # Verify Design Doc exists
 ls $ARGUMENTS || ls docs/design/*.md | grep -v template | tail -1
 ```
 
-### 2. Skeleton Generation
+### Step 2: Skeleton Generation
 
-**Task tool invocation**:
-```
-subagent_type: acceptance-test-generator
-prompt: |
-  Generate test skeletons from Design Doc.
+Invoke acceptance-test-generator using Task tool:
+- `subagent_type`: "acceptance-test-generator"
+- `description`: "Generate test skeletons"
+- `prompt`: "Generate test skeletons from Design Doc at [path from Step 1]"
 
-  Design Doc: [path from Step 1]
+**Expected output**: `generatedFiles` containing integration and e2e paths
 
-  Output:
-  - Integration test skeletons (*.int.test.ts)
-  - E2E test skeletons if applicable (*.e2e.test.ts)
-```
+### Step 3: Create Task File [GATE]
 
-**Expected output**: `generatedFiles` containing integration and e2e paths
+Create task file at: `docs/plans/tasks/integration-tests-YYYYMMDD.md`
 
-### 3. Create Task File (Orchestrator)
+**Template**:
+```markdown
+---
+name: Implement integration tests for [feature name]
+type: test-implementation
+---
 
-Create task file following task template (see documentation-criteria skill):
-- Path: `docs/plans/tasks/integration-tests-YYYYMMDD.md`
-- Content: Test implementation tasks based on generated skeletons
-- Include skeleton file paths from Step 2 output in Target Files section
+## Objective
 
-### 4. Test Implementation
+Implement test cases defined in skeleton files.
 
-**Task tool invocation**:
-```
-subagent_type: task-executor
-prompt: |
-  Implement tests following the task file.
+## Target Files
 
-  Task file: docs/plans/tasks/integration-tests-YYYYMMDD.md
+- Skeleton: [path from Step 2 generatedFiles]
+- Design Doc: [path from Step 1]
 
-  Requirements:
-  - Follow TDD principles (Red-Green-Refactor)
-  - Implement each skeleton test case
-  - Run tests and verify they pass
-```
+## Tasks
 
-**Expected output**: `status`, `testsAdded`
+- [ ] Implement each test case in skeleton
+- [ ] Verify all tests pass
+- [ ] Ensure coverage meets requirements
 
-### 5. Test Review
+## Acceptance Criteria
 
-**Task tool invocation**:
+- All skeleton test cases implemented
+- All tests passing
+- No quality issues
 ```
-subagent_type: integration-test-reviewer
-prompt: |
-  Review test quality.
 
-  Test files: [paths from Step 2 generatedFiles]
-  Skeleton files: [original skeleton paths]
-```
+**Output**: "Task file created at [path]. Ready for Step 4."
+
+### Step 4: Test Implementation
+
+Invoke task-executor using Task tool:
+- `subagent_type`: "task-executor"
+- `description`: "Implement integration tests"
+- `prompt`: "Task file: docs/plans/tasks/integration-tests-YYYYMMDD.md. Implement tests following the task file."
+
+**Expected output**: `status`, `testsAdded`
+
+### Step 5: Test Review
+
+Invoke integration-test-reviewer using Task tool:
+- `subagent_type`: "integration-test-reviewer"
+- `description`: "Review test quality"
+- `prompt`: "Review test quality. Test files: [paths from Step 4 testsAdded]. Skeleton files: [paths from Step 2 generatedFiles]"
 
 **Expected output**: `status` (approved/needs_revision), `requiredFixes`
 
-**Flow control**:
-- `status: needs_revision` -> Return to Step 4 with `requiredFixes`
-- `status: approved` -> Proceed to Step 6
+### Step 6: Apply Review Fixes
 
-### 6. Quality Check
+Check Step 5 result:
+- `status: approved` → Mark complete, proceed to Step 7
+- `status: needs_revision` → Invoke task-executor with requiredFixes, then return to Step 5
 
-**Task tool invocation**:
-```
-subagent_type: quality-fixer
-prompt: |
-  Final quality assurance for test files.
+Invoke task-executor using Task tool:
+- `subagent_type`: "task-executor"
+- `description`: "Fix review findings"
+- `prompt`: "Fix the following issues in test files: [requiredFixes from Step 5]"
 
-  Scope: Test files added in this workflow
+### Step 7: Quality Check
 
-  Requirements:
-  - Run all tests
-  - Verify coverage meets requirements
-  - Fix any quality issues
-```
+Invoke quality-fixer using Task tool:
+- `subagent_type`: "quality-fixer"
+- `description`: "Final quality assurance"
+- `prompt`: "Final quality assurance for test files added in this workflow. Run all tests and verify coverage."
 
 **Expected output**: `approved` (true/false)
 
-### 7. Commit (Orchestrator)
+### Step 8: Commit
 
 On `approved: true` from quality-fixer:
 - Commit test files with appropriate message using Bash

package/.claude/commands-en/build.md

@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ Work plan: $ARGUMENTS
 
 ### Task Generation Decision Flow
 
-**Think deeply** Analyze task file existence state and determine the appropriate action:
+Analyze task file existence state and determine the appropriate action:
 
 | State | Criteria | Next Action |
 |-------|----------|-------------|
@@ -40,12 +40,11 @@ Generate tasks from the work plan? (y/n):
 ```
 
 ### 2. Task Decomposition (if approved)
-```
-@task-decomposer Read work plan and decompose into atomic tasks:
-- Input: docs/plans/[plan-name].md
-- Output: Individual task files in docs/plans/tasks/
-- Granularity: 1 task = 1 commit = independently executable
-```
+
+Invoke task-decomposer using Task tool:
+- `subagent_type`: "task-decomposer"
+- `description`: "Decompose work plan into tasks"
+- `prompt`: "Read work plan and decompose into atomic tasks. Input: docs/plans/[plan-name].md. Output: Individual task files in docs/plans/tasks/. Granularity: 1 task = 1 commit = independently executable"
 
 ### 3. Verify Generation
 ```bash

package/.claude/commands-en/design.md

@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ Requirements → requirement-analyzer → [Stop: Scale determination]
 
 Requirements: $ARGUMENTS
 
-**Think harder** Considering the deep impact on design, first engage in dialogue to understand the background and purpose of requirements:
+Considering the deep impact on design, first engage in dialogue to understand the background and purpose of requirements:
 - What problems do you want to solve?
 - Expected outcomes and success criteria
 - Relationship with existing systems

package/.claude/commands-en/diagnose.md

@@ -37,11 +37,10 @@ If the following are unclear, **ask with AskUserQuestion** before proceeding:
 
 ### 0.3 Problem Essence Understanding
 
-**Invoke rule-advisor via Task tool**:
-```
-subagent_type: rule-advisor
-prompt: Identify the essence and required rules for this problem: [Problem reported by user]
-```
+Invoke rule-advisor using Task tool:
+- `subagent_type`: "rule-advisor"
+- `description`: "Identify problem essence"
+- `prompt`: "Identify the essence and required rules for this problem: [Problem reported by user]"
 
 Confirm from rule-advisor output:
 - `taskAnalysis.mainFocus`: Primary focus of the problem
@@ -79,13 +78,10 @@ Register the following in TodoWrite and execute:
 
 ### Step 1: Investigation (investigator)
 
-**Task tool invocation**:
-```
-subagent_type: investigator
-prompt: Comprehensively collect information related to the following phenomenon.
-
-Phenomenon: [Problem reported by user]
-```
+Invoke investigator using Task tool:
+- `subagent_type`: "investigator"
+- `description`: "Collect problem information"
+- `prompt`: "Comprehensively collect information related to the following phenomenon. Phenomenon: [Problem reported by user]"
 
 **Expected output**: Evidence matrix, comparison analysis results, causal tracking results, list of unexplored areas, investigation limitations
 
@@ -115,13 +111,10 @@ Proceed to verifier once quality is satisfied.
 
 ### Step 3: Verification (verifier)
 
-**Task tool invocation**:
-```
-subagent_type: verifier
-prompt: Verify the following investigation results.
-
-Investigation results: [Investigation JSON output]
-```
+Invoke verifier using Task tool:
+- `subagent_type`: "verifier"
+- `description`: "Verify investigation results"
+- `prompt`: "Verify the following investigation results. Investigation results: [Investigation JSON output]"
 
 **Expected output**: Alternative hypotheses (at least 3), Devil's Advocate evaluation, final conclusion, confidence
 
@@ -132,15 +125,10 @@ Investigation results: [Investigation JSON output]
 
 ### Step 4: Solution Derivation (solver)
 
-**Task tool invocation**:
-```
-subagent_type: solver
-prompt: Derive solutions based on the following verified conclusion.
-
-Causes: [verifier's conclusion.causes]
-Causes relationship: [causesRelationship: independent/dependent/exclusive]
-Confidence: [high/medium/low]
-```
+Invoke solver using Task tool:
+- `subagent_type`: "solver"
+- `description`: "Derive solutions"
+- `prompt`: "Derive solutions based on the following verified conclusion. Causes: [verifier's conclusion.causes]. Causes relationship: [causesRelationship: independent/dependent/exclusive]. Confidence: [high/medium/low]"
 
 **Expected output**: Multiple solutions (at least 3), tradeoff analysis, recommendation and implementation steps, residual risks
 

package/.claude/commands-en/front-build.md

@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ Work plan: $ARGUMENTS
 
 ### Task Generation Decision Flow
 
-**Think deeply**: Analyze task file existence state and determine the appropriate action:
+Analyze task file existence state and determine the appropriate action:
 
 | State | Criteria | Next Action |
 |-------|----------|-------------|
@@ -52,12 +52,11 @@ Generate tasks from the work plan? (y/n):
 ```
 
 ### 2. Task Decomposition (if approved)
-```
-@task-decomposer Read work plan and decompose into atomic tasks:
-- Input: docs/plans/[plan-name].md
-- Output: Individual task files in docs/plans/tasks/
-- Granularity: 1 task = 1 commit = independently executable
-```
+
+Invoke task-decomposer using Task tool:
+- `subagent_type`: "task-decomposer"
+- `description`: "Decompose work plan into tasks"
+- `prompt`: "Read work plan and decompose into atomic tasks. Input: docs/plans/[plan-name].md. Output: Individual task files in docs/plans/tasks/. Granularity: 1 task = 1 commit = independently executable"
 
 ### 3. Verify Generation
 ```bash

package/.claude/commands-en/front-design.md

@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ Requirements: $ARGUMENTS
 ## Execution Flow
 
 ### 1. Requirement Analysis Phase
-**Think harder**: Considering the deep impact on design, first engage in dialogue to understand the background and purpose of requirements:
+Considering the deep impact on design, first engage in dialogue to understand the background and purpose of requirements:
 - What problems do you want to solve?
 - Expected outcomes and success criteria
 - Relationship with existing systems

package/.claude/commands-en/front-plan.md

@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ Invoke **work-planner** using Task tool:
 - `prompt: "Create work plan from Design Doc at [path]"`
 - Interact with user to complete plan and obtain approval for plan content
 
-**Think deeply** Create a work plan from the selected design document, clarifying specific implementation steps and risks.
+Create a work plan from the selected design document, clarifying specific implementation steps and risks.
 
 **Scope**: Up to work plan creation and obtaining approval for plan content.
 

package/.claude/commands-en/front-reverse-design.md

@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
 ---
-name: front-reverse-design
 description: Generate frontend Design Docs from existing codebase using existing PRD
 ---
 

package/.claude/commands-en/front-review.md

@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
 ---
-name: front-review
 description: Design Doc compliance validation with optional auto-fixes
 ---
 

package/.claude/commands-en/plan.md

@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ Follow subagents-orchestration-guide skill strictly and create work plan with th
    - Utilize deliverables from previous process according to subagents-orchestration-guide skill coordination specification
    - Interact with user to complete plan and obtain approval for plan content
 
-**Think deeply** Create a work plan from the selected design document, clarifying specific implementation steps and risks.
+Create a work plan from the selected design document, clarifying specific implementation steps and risks.
 
 **Scope**: Up to work plan creation and obtaining approval for plan content.
 

package/.claude/commands-en/reverse-engineer.md

@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
 ---
-name: reverse-engineer
 description: Generate PRD and Design Docs from existing codebase through discovery, generation, verification, and review workflow
 ---
 

package/.claude/commands-en/review.md

@@ -7,7 +7,6 @@ description: Design Doc compliance validation with optional auto-fixes
 ## Execution Method
 
 - Compliance validation → performed by code-reviewer
-- Rule analysis → performed by rule-advisor
 - Fix implementation → performed by task-executor
 - Quality checks → performed by quality-fixer
 - Re-validation → performed by code-reviewer
@@ -16,7 +15,7 @@ Orchestrator invokes sub-agents and passes structured JSON between them.
 
 Design Doc (uses most recent if omitted): $ARGUMENTS
 
-**Think deeply** Understand the essence of compliance validation and execute:
+Understand the essence of compliance validation and execute the following steps:
 
 ## Execution Flow
 
@@ -55,14 +54,13 @@ Execute fixes? (y/n):
 
 If user selects `y`:
 
-## Pre-fix Metacognition
-**Required**: `rule-advisor → TodoWrite → task-executor → quality-fixer`
+#### Fix Execution Steps
+**Required**: `TodoWrite → task-executor → quality-fixer`
 
-1. **Execute rule-advisor**: Understand fix essence (symptomatic treatment vs root solution)
-2. **Update TodoWrite**: Register work steps. Always include: first "Confirm skill constraints", final "Verify skill fidelity". Create task file following task template (see documentation-criteria skill) -> `docs/plans/tasks/review-fixes-YYYYMMDD.md`
-3. **Execute task-executor**: Staged auto-fixes (stops at 5 files)
-4. **Execute quality-fixer**: Confirm quality gate passage
-5. **Re-validate**: Measure improvement with code-reviewer
+1. **Update TodoWrite**: Register work steps. Always include: first "Confirm skill constraints", final "Verify skill fidelity". Create task file following task template (see documentation-criteria skill) -> `docs/plans/tasks/review-fixes-YYYYMMDD.md`
+2. **Execute task-executor**: Staged auto-fixes (stops at 5 files)
+3. **Execute quality-fixer**: Confirm quality gate passage
+4. **Re-validate**: Measure improvement with code-reviewer
 
 ### 4. Final Report
 ```
@@ -85,4 +83,4 @@ Remaining issues:
 - Architecture-level modifications
 - Design Doc deficiencies
 
-**Scope**: Design Doc compliance validation and auto-fixes.
+**Scope**: Design Doc compliance validation and auto-fixes.

package/.claude/commands-en/update-doc.md

@@ -0,0 +1,178 @@
+---
+description: Update existing design documents (Design Doc / PRD / ADR) with review
+---
+
+**Command Context**: This command is dedicated to updating existing design documents.
+
+## Orchestrator Definition
+
+**Core Identity**: "I am not a worker. I am an orchestrator." (see subagents-orchestration-guide skill)
+
+**First Action**: Register Steps 1-6 to TodoWrite before any execution.
+
+**Execution Protocol**:
+1. **Delegate all work** to sub-agents (NEVER edit documents yourself)
+2. **Execute update flow**:
+   - Identify target → Clarify changes → Update document → Review → Consistency check
+   - **Stop at every `[Stop: ...]` marker** → Wait for user approval before proceeding
+3. **Scope**: Complete when updated document receives approval
+
+**CRITICAL**: NEVER skip document-reviewer or stopping points.
+
+## Workflow Overview
+
+```
+Target document → [Stop: Confirm changes]
+                        ↓
+              technical-designer / prd-creator (update mode)
+                        ↓
+              document-reviewer → [Stop: Review approval]
+                        ↓ (Design Doc only)
+              design-sync → [Stop: Final approval]
+```
+
+## Scope Boundaries
+
+**Included in this command**:
+- Existing document identification and selection
+- Change content clarification with user
+- Document update with appropriate agent (update mode)
+- Document review with document-reviewer
+- Consistency verification with design-sync (Design Doc only)
+
+**NOT included**:
+- New requirement analysis (use /design for new documents)
+- Work planning or implementation (use /plan or /task after this command)
+
+**Responsibility Boundary**: This command completes with updated document approval.
+
+Target document: $ARGUMENTS
+
+## Execution Flow
+
+### Step 1: Target Document Identification
+
+```bash
+# Check existing documents
+ls docs/design/*.md docs/prd/*.md docs/adr/*.md 2>/dev/null | grep -v template
+```
+
+**Decision flow**:
+
+| Situation | Action |
+|-----------|--------|
+| $ARGUMENTS specifies a path | Use specified document |
+| $ARGUMENTS describes a topic | Search documents matching the topic |
+| Multiple candidates found | Present options with AskUserQuestion |
+| No documents found | Report and end (suggest /design instead) |
+
+### Step 2: Document Type Determination
+
+Determine type from document path:
+
+| Path Pattern | Type | Update Agent | Notes |
+|-------------|------|--------------|-------|
+| `docs/design/*.md` | Design Doc | technical-designer | - |
+| `docs/prd/*.md` | PRD | prd-creator | - |
+| `docs/adr/*.md` | ADR | technical-designer | Minor changes: update existing file; Major changes: create new ADR file |
+
+**ADR Update Guidance**:
+- **Minor changes** (clarification, typo fix, small scope adjustment): Update the existing ADR file
+- **Major changes** (decision reversal, significant scope change): Create a new ADR that supersedes the original
+
+### Step 3: Change Content Clarification [Stop]
+
+Use AskUserQuestion to clarify what changes are needed:
+- What sections need updating
+- Reason for the change (bug fix findings, spec change, review feedback, etc.)
+- Expected outcome after the update
+
+Confirm understanding of changes with user before proceeding.
+
+### Step 4: Document Update
+
+Invoke the update agent determined in Step 2:
+```
+subagent_type: [Update Agent from Step 2]
+description: "Update [Type from Step 2]"
+prompt: |
+  Operation Mode: update
+  Existing Document: [path from Step 1]
+
+  ## Changes Required
+  [Changes clarified in Step 3]
+
+  Update the document to reflect the specified changes.
+  Add change history entry.
+```
+
+### Step 5: Document Review [Stop]
+
+Invoke document-reviewer:
+```
+subagent_type: document-reviewer
+description: "Review updated document"
+prompt: |
+  Review the following updated document.
+
+  doc_type: [Design Doc / PRD / ADR]
+  target: [path from Step 1]
+  mode: standard
+
+  Focus on:
+  - Consistency of updated sections with rest of document
+  - No contradictions introduced by changes
+  - Completeness of change history
+```
+
+**On review result**:
+- Approved → Proceed to Step 6
+- Needs revision → Return to Step 4 with reviewer feedback (max 2 iterations)
+- **After 2 rejections** → Flag for human review, present accumulated feedback to user and end
+
+Present review result to user for approval.
+
+### Step 6: Consistency Verification (Design Doc only) [Stop]
+
+**Skip condition**: Document type is PRD or ADR → Proceed to completion.
+
+For Design Doc, invoke design-sync:
+```
+subagent_type: design-sync
+description: "Verify consistency"
+prompt: |
+  Verify consistency of the updated Design Doc with other design documents.
+
+  Updated document: [path from Step 1]
+```
+
+**On consistency result**:
+- No conflicts → Present result to user for final approval
+- Conflicts detected → Present conflicts to user with AskUserQuestion:
+  - A: Return to Step 4 to resolve conflicts in this document
+  - B: End command and address conflicts separately
+
+## Error Handling
+
+| Error | Action |
+|-------|--------|
+| Target document not found | Report and end (suggest /design instead) |
+| Sub-agent update fails | Log failure, present error to user, retry once |
+| Review rejects after 2 revisions | Stop loop, flag for human intervention |
+| design-sync detects conflicts | Present to user for resolution decision |
+
+## Completion Criteria
+
+- [ ] Identified target document
+- [ ] Clarified change content with user
+- [ ] Updated document with appropriate agent (update mode)
+- [ ] Executed document-reviewer and addressed feedback
+- [ ] Executed design-sync for consistency verification (Design Doc only)
+- [ ] Obtained user approval for updated document
+
+## Output Example
+Document update completed.
+- Updated document: docs/design/[document-name].md
+- Approval status: User approved
+
+**Important**: This command ends with document approval. Does not propose transition to next phase.