know-thy-build 0.4.0 → 0.6.0
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/README.md +182 -79
- package/bin/cli.js +27 -5
- package/package.json +10 -5
- package/templates/know-thy-build/architect.md +636 -0
- package/templates/know-thy-build/designer.md +672 -0
- package/templates/know-thy-build/feature.md +474 -54
- package/templates/know-thy-build/finish.md +258 -0
- package/templates/know-thy-build/project.md +626 -91
- package/templates/know-thy-build/qa.md +1073 -0
- package/templates/know-thy-build/technical.md +498 -76
package/README.md
CHANGED
|
@@ -2,17 +2,22 @@
|
|
|
2
2
|
|
|
3
3
|
Before you write a single line of code, know what you're building, why, and how.
|
|
4
4
|
|
|
5
|
-
**know-thy-build** is a
|
|
5
|
+
**know-thy-build** is a multi-agent project definition and quality assurance framework for [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/claude-code). Through Socratic dialogue — not forms — it helps you define your project, design features, establish a QA framework, and orchestrate implementation with built-in design and architecture review.
|
|
6
|
+
|
|
7
|
+
The result is a set of living documents and an automated workflow where every implementation is reviewed by designer, architect, and QA agents before it ships.
|
|
6
8
|
|
|
7
9
|
## Why
|
|
8
10
|
|
|
9
11
|
We jump into code too fast. A new project starts, and within minutes we're picking frameworks, creating files, writing functions — before we've truly asked ourselves what we're building and why.
|
|
10
12
|
|
|
11
|
-
The cost of skipping this step is real
|
|
12
|
-
|
|
13
|
-
|
|
13
|
+
The cost of skipping this step is real:
|
|
14
|
+
- Vague goals → wasted effort
|
|
15
|
+
- Undefined boundaries → scope creep
|
|
16
|
+
- Unspoken assumptions → wrong decisions — by you or by AI agents
|
|
17
|
+
- No QA framework → "done" is an opinion, not a fact
|
|
18
|
+
- No design intent → developers guess what to build
|
|
14
19
|
|
|
15
|
-
|
|
20
|
+
know-thy-build exists to **define the project, design the experience, establish what "done" means, and enforce quality through multi-agent review** — all before you write a line of code.
|
|
16
21
|
|
|
17
22
|
## Quick start
|
|
18
23
|
|
|
@@ -20,95 +25,195 @@ That clarity doesn't stay in your head. It becomes structured documents that AI
|
|
|
20
25
|
npx know-thy-build
|
|
21
26
|
```
|
|
22
27
|
|
|
23
|
-
Pick a language, and
|
|
28
|
+
Pick a language, and six commands are installed into your `.claude/commands/`:
|
|
24
29
|
|
|
25
|
-
| Command |
|
|
26
|
-
|
|
27
|
-
| `/know-thy-build:project` | Define what
|
|
28
|
-
| `/know-thy-build:technical` | Define how
|
|
30
|
+
| Command | Role | Output |
|
|
31
|
+
|---------|------|--------|
|
|
32
|
+
| `/know-thy-build:project` | Define what and why | `docs/PROJECT.md` |
|
|
33
|
+
| `/know-thy-build:technical` | Define how to build | `docs/TECHNICAL.md` |
|
|
29
34
|
| `/know-thy-build:feature` | Design a specific feature | `docs/features/NNN.md` |
|
|
35
|
+
| `/know-thy-build:qa` | Build QA framework + test | `docs/QA.md` |
|
|
36
|
+
| `/know-thy-build:designer` | UX deep dive | `## Design` in feature spec |
|
|
37
|
+
| `/know-thy-build:architect` | Implementation design | Code stubs + tests |
|
|
30
38
|
|
|
31
|
-
## The
|
|
39
|
+
## The pipeline
|
|
32
40
|
|
|
33
41
|
```
|
|
34
|
-
:project
|
|
42
|
+
Define: :project → :technical → :qa setup
|
|
43
|
+
Per feature: :feature → :qa review → [:designer] → implement → [:architect] → QA test → ship
|
|
35
44
|
```
|
|
36
45
|
|
|
37
|
-
|
|
46
|
+
`[ ]` = optional, invoked when needed.
|
|
38
47
|
|
|
39
|
-
### 1
|
|
48
|
+
### Phase 1: Project Definition (once)
|
|
40
49
|
|
|
41
50
|
```
|
|
42
|
-
/know-thy-build:project
|
|
51
|
+
/know-thy-build:project What are we building and why?
|
|
52
|
+
/know-thy-build:technical How do we build it? (stack, architecture, testing strategy)
|
|
53
|
+
/know-thy-build:qa Set up the QA framework (environment, behavioral axes, test profiles)
|
|
43
54
|
```
|
|
44
55
|
|
|
45
|
-
|
|
56
|
+
These three commands run once at project start. They produce the foundation documents that every subsequent command reads.
|
|
57
|
+
|
|
58
|
+
### Phase 2: Feature Development (per feature, repeating)
|
|
46
59
|
|
|
47
|
-
|
|
48
|
-
-
|
|
49
|
-
-
|
|
50
|
-
-
|
|
51
|
-
|
|
52
|
-
-
|
|
53
|
-
-
|
|
60
|
+
```
|
|
61
|
+
/know-thy-build:feature Define the feature (problem, value, stories, AC, design intent)
|
|
62
|
+
/know-thy-build:qa Define test cases for this feature (what "done" means)
|
|
63
|
+
/know-thy-build:designer [optional] Deep UX analysis (heuristics, prototyping, accessibility)
|
|
64
|
+
implement Build the feature
|
|
65
|
+
/know-thy-build:architect [optional] Code design for complex features (stubs, tests, sub-agents)
|
|
66
|
+
/know-thy-build:qa Test the running product against QA.md test cases
|
|
67
|
+
```
|
|
54
68
|
|
|
55
|
-
|
|
69
|
+
A feature is complete ONLY when all its test cases in `docs/QA.md` pass with evidence.
|
|
56
70
|
|
|
57
|
-
|
|
71
|
+
---
|
|
58
72
|
|
|
59
|
-
|
|
73
|
+
## Roles
|
|
74
|
+
|
|
75
|
+
### Project — What & Why
|
|
60
76
|
|
|
61
77
|
```
|
|
62
|
-
/know-thy-build:
|
|
78
|
+
/know-thy-build:project
|
|
63
79
|
```
|
|
64
80
|
|
|
65
|
-
|
|
81
|
+
Socratic conversation that explores: Problem, Persona, Competitive Landscape, Vision, Output, User Journey, Boundaries, Success, Risks, Principles.
|
|
82
|
+
|
|
83
|
+
Also generates a **Development Workflow** in `CLAUDE.md` — the orchestrator model that enforces multi-agent review for all implementation.
|
|
84
|
+
|
|
85
|
+
Result: `docs/PROJECT.md`
|
|
86
|
+
|
|
87
|
+
### Technical — How
|
|
66
88
|
|
|
67
|
-
|
|
89
|
+
```
|
|
90
|
+
/know-thy-build:technical
|
|
91
|
+
```
|
|
68
92
|
|
|
69
|
-
|
|
70
|
-
- **Architecture** — Components, interactions, structural pattern
|
|
71
|
-
- **Data** — Storage, key entities, formats
|
|
72
|
-
- **Interfaces** — CLI commands, API endpoints, input/output contracts
|
|
73
|
-
- **Constraints** — Performance, security, deployment, platforms
|
|
93
|
+
Requires `docs/PROJECT.md`. Explores: Tech Stack (with structured comparison research), Architecture (with Component Responsibility Map), Data, Interfaces, Testing Strategy, Error & Resilience, Constraints.
|
|
74
94
|
|
|
75
|
-
|
|
95
|
+
Every significant decision is recorded as a **Technical Decision Record (TDR)** — context, options, decision, rationale, consequences, validation method. Includes a **Technical Adversarial Review** (Minimalist, Operator, Future Developer) and **Risk-First Validation**.
|
|
76
96
|
|
|
77
|
-
Result: `docs/TECHNICAL.md`
|
|
97
|
+
Result: `docs/TECHNICAL.md`
|
|
78
98
|
|
|
79
|
-
###
|
|
99
|
+
### Feature — Specific Work
|
|
80
100
|
|
|
81
101
|
```
|
|
82
102
|
/know-thy-build:feature
|
|
83
103
|
```
|
|
84
104
|
|
|
85
|
-
References both `PROJECT.md` and `TECHNICAL.md`.
|
|
105
|
+
References both `docs/PROJECT.md` and `docs/TECHNICAL.md`. 3-pass exploration:
|
|
86
106
|
|
|
87
|
-
|
|
88
|
-
- **
|
|
89
|
-
- **
|
|
90
|
-
|
|
91
|
-
|
|
92
|
-
|
|
107
|
+
- **Pass 1**: Problem → Value → User Stories → Solution → Scope
|
|
108
|
+
- **Pass 2**: Acceptance Criteria (Given-When-Then → AC → edge cases → verification)
|
|
109
|
+
- **Pass 3** (UI features): Design Intent Map (action → outcome → decision → QA verification)
|
|
110
|
+
|
|
111
|
+
Result: `docs/features/NNN.md`
|
|
112
|
+
|
|
113
|
+
### QA — Test the Product
|
|
114
|
+
|
|
115
|
+
```
|
|
116
|
+
/know-thy-build:qa
|
|
117
|
+
```
|
|
118
|
+
|
|
119
|
+
Produces and maintains `docs/QA.md` — the single source of truth for all testing.
|
|
120
|
+
|
|
121
|
+
**Three modes:**
|
|
122
|
+
|
|
123
|
+
| Mode | When | What |
|
|
124
|
+
|------|------|------|
|
|
125
|
+
| **SETUP** | After `:technical` | Build QA framework: environment, tools, behavioral axes, test profiles, failure injection methods |
|
|
126
|
+
| **REVIEW** | After each `:feature` | Define executable test cases per feature — this IS the definition of "done" |
|
|
127
|
+
| **TEST** | After implementation | Actually run the product, execute test cases, capture evidence |
|
|
128
|
+
|
|
129
|
+
**Research-grounded approach** (PersonaTester FSE 2026, τ-bench CMU 2026, VISTA 2026):
|
|
130
|
+
|
|
131
|
+
- **Behavioral Testing Axes** instead of character personas — orthogonal axes (Mindset × Strategy × Habit × Cooperation) combined into test profiles
|
|
132
|
+
- **Turn-level behavior instructions** instead of narrative descriptions — "3초 안에 반응 없으면 새로고침하라" not "act like an impatient user"
|
|
133
|
+
- **Failure State Injection** — network failure, resource deletion, session expiry, concurrent mutation (+42% unique failures vs UI-only, VISTA 2026)
|
|
134
|
+
- **QA Self-Check** — metrics to prevent "easy mode" (scenario diversity, unique failures, cooperation drift)
|
|
135
|
+
- **Insight Synthesis** — patterns, failure taxonomy, actionable recommendations (not just pass/fail)
|
|
136
|
+
|
|
137
|
+
Result: `docs/QA.md`
|
|
138
|
+
|
|
139
|
+
### Designer — User Experience (Deep Dive)
|
|
140
|
+
|
|
141
|
+
```
|
|
142
|
+
/know-thy-build:designer
|
|
143
|
+
```
|
|
93
144
|
|
|
94
|
-
|
|
145
|
+
Optional. For features with complex UI that need deeper analysis than the feature's Pass 3 Design Intent.
|
|
95
146
|
|
|
96
|
-
|
|
147
|
+
Produces a **Design Intent Map** — every user action traced to the design decision that enables it. Includes flow decomposition, state catalog, visual direction, prototyping, Nielsen heuristic evaluation, accessibility audit, cognitive walkthrough.
|
|
148
|
+
|
|
149
|
+
**Anti-Slop Protocol** — explicit list of AI-generated design clichés to avoid.
|
|
150
|
+
|
|
151
|
+
Result: `## Design` section in the feature spec + prototype artifact(s)
|
|
152
|
+
|
|
153
|
+
### Architect — Implementation Design
|
|
154
|
+
|
|
155
|
+
```
|
|
156
|
+
/know-thy-build:architect
|
|
157
|
+
```
|
|
158
|
+
|
|
159
|
+
Optional. For Architectural features (new subsystem, multi-component, structural change). Uses **Program Sketching** — creates code scaffolds with Design by Contract comments (PRE/POST/WHY/EXAMPLE) and signature tests, then orchestrates sub-agents.
|
|
160
|
+
|
|
161
|
+
Includes CRC Cards, Adversarial Review (Minimalist/Implementer/Skeptic), Over-Specification Prevention, Hardest-First Vertical Slice.
|
|
162
|
+
|
|
163
|
+
Result: Code stubs + test suites + `## Architecture Notes` in feature spec
|
|
164
|
+
|
|
165
|
+
---
|
|
166
|
+
|
|
167
|
+
## Multi-Agent Development Workflow
|
|
168
|
+
|
|
169
|
+
When you run `/know-thy-build:project`, it generates a **Development Workflow** in your `CLAUDE.md`. This workflow enforces:
|
|
170
|
+
|
|
171
|
+
```
|
|
172
|
+
User Session (Orchestrator only — never implements directly)
|
|
173
|
+
│
|
|
174
|
+
├── Dispatches Implementation Sub-Agent
|
|
175
|
+
│ ├── Pre-work: reads PROJECT.md, TECHNICAL.md, feature spec, QA.md
|
|
176
|
+
│ ├── Implements within defined scope
|
|
177
|
+
│ │
|
|
178
|
+
│ └── Post-implementation Review Loop
|
|
179
|
+
│ ├── Designer Review Agent (Design Intent verification)
|
|
180
|
+
│ ├── Architect Review Agent (code quality, patterns, structure)
|
|
181
|
+
│ │ └── Both must pass before QA begins
|
|
182
|
+
│ └── QA Review Agent (runs the product, executes test cases)
|
|
183
|
+
│ └── All test cases must be ✅ with evidence
|
|
184
|
+
│
|
|
185
|
+
└── Loop until all reviewers pass → Feature complete
|
|
186
|
+
```
|
|
187
|
+
|
|
188
|
+
## Documents Produced
|
|
189
|
+
|
|
190
|
+
| Document | Created by | Purpose |
|
|
191
|
+
|----------|-----------|---------|
|
|
192
|
+
| `docs/PROJECT.md` | `:project` | Project identity, persona, vision, principles |
|
|
193
|
+
| `docs/TECHNICAL.md` | `:technical` | Tech stack, architecture, TDRs, testing strategy |
|
|
194
|
+
| `docs/QA.md` | `:qa` | Test environment, behavioral axes, test cases, results |
|
|
195
|
+
| `docs/features/NNN.md` | `:feature` + `:designer` + `:architect` | Feature spec, design intent, architecture notes |
|
|
196
|
+
| `CLAUDE.md` | `:project` | Project compass + development workflow |
|
|
197
|
+
| Code stubs + tests | `:architect` | Implementation scaffolds |
|
|
97
198
|
|
|
98
199
|
## Evolution
|
|
99
200
|
|
|
100
201
|
All documents support evolution. Run the same command again on a completed document:
|
|
101
202
|
|
|
102
|
-
|
|
103
|
-
|
|
104
|
-
|
|
203
|
+
| Command | On complete document | Effect |
|
|
204
|
+
|---------|---------------------|--------|
|
|
205
|
+
| `:project` | `docs/PROJECT.md` | Evolve mode — what changed and why |
|
|
206
|
+
| `:technical` | `docs/TECHNICAL.md` | Evolve mode — update TDRs, re-run adversarial review |
|
|
207
|
+
| `:feature` | `docs/features/NNN.md` | Edit by number |
|
|
208
|
+
| `:qa` | `docs/QA.md` | Re-test after changes, regression check |
|
|
209
|
+
| `:designer` | `## Design` section | Update design, re-verify |
|
|
210
|
+
|
|
211
|
+
Changes are tracked with reasoning in a changelog — not just *what* changed, but *why*.
|
|
105
212
|
|
|
106
213
|
### Migration from v0.3.x
|
|
107
214
|
|
|
108
215
|
If you have existing `PROJECT.md`, `TECHNICAL.md`, or `features/` at your project root, they will be automatically moved to `docs/` the next time you run any `/know-thy-build:*` command. References in `CLAUDE.md` are updated automatically.
|
|
109
216
|
|
|
110
|
-
Changes are tracked with reasoning in a changelog — not just *what* changed, but *why*.
|
|
111
|
-
|
|
112
217
|
## Session resilience
|
|
113
218
|
|
|
114
219
|
All conversations track state in document frontmatter. If a session breaks, run the same command again — it picks up where you left off.
|
|
@@ -119,21 +224,12 @@ All conversations track state in document frontmatter. If a session breaks, run
|
|
|
119
224
|
| `complete` | Done — running again enters evolve mode |
|
|
120
225
|
| `evolving` | Evolve in progress — will resume |
|
|
121
226
|
|
|
122
|
-
##
|
|
123
|
-
|
|
124
|
-
```bash
|
|
125
|
-
npx know-thy-build --global # install to ~/.claude/commands/
|
|
126
|
-
```
|
|
127
|
-
|
|
128
|
-
Commands become available in all projects.
|
|
129
|
-
|
|
130
|
-
## Language support
|
|
227
|
+
## Install options
|
|
131
228
|
|
|
132
229
|
```bash
|
|
133
|
-
npx know-thy-build #
|
|
134
|
-
npx know-thy-build --
|
|
135
|
-
npx know-thy-build --lang
|
|
136
|
-
npx know-thy-build --lang en # English (default)
|
|
230
|
+
npx know-thy-build # Install in current project
|
|
231
|
+
npx know-thy-build --global # Install to ~/.claude/commands/ (all projects)
|
|
232
|
+
npx know-thy-build --lang ko # Skip language prompt (Korean)
|
|
137
233
|
```
|
|
138
234
|
|
|
139
235
|
Supported shortcuts: `en`, `ko`, `ja`, `zh`, `es`, `fr`, `de`, `pt` — or pass any language name directly.
|
|
@@ -144,41 +240,48 @@ All conversation and generated documents use the chosen language. Technical term
|
|
|
144
240
|
|
|
145
241
|
know-thy-build draws on established techniques from philosophy, software engineering, and AI research.
|
|
146
242
|
|
|
147
|
-
###
|
|
243
|
+
### Socratic Prompting
|
|
148
244
|
|
|
149
|
-
The tool applies the [Socratic method](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method) — questioning to surface latent knowledge
|
|
245
|
+
The tool applies the [Socratic method](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method) — questioning to surface latent knowledge. In Plato's *Meno*, Socrates demonstrates that learning is **recollection**: the right questions draw out what the learner already knows. know-thy-build operates on the same premise — you already know what you want to build, you just haven't articulated it yet.
|
|
150
246
|
|
|
151
|
-
- Chang, ["Prompting Large Language Models With the Socratic Method"](https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.08769) (2023)
|
|
152
|
-
- Princeton NLP, ["The Socratic Method for Self-Discovery in Large Language Models"](https://princeton-nlp.github.io/SocraticAI/)
|
|
153
|
-
- [SocraticLM](https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2024/hash/9bae399d1f34b8650351c1bd3692aeae-Abstract-Conference.html) (NeurIPS 2024 Spotlight)
|
|
247
|
+
- Chang, ["Prompting Large Language Models With the Socratic Method"](https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.08769) (2023)
|
|
248
|
+
- Princeton NLP, ["The Socratic Method for Self-Discovery in Large Language Models"](https://princeton-nlp.github.io/SocraticAI/)
|
|
249
|
+
- [SocraticLM](https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2024/hash/9bae399d1f34b8650351c1bd3692aeae-Abstract-Conference.html) (NeurIPS 2024 Spotlight)
|
|
154
250
|
|
|
155
|
-
### Dialectical
|
|
251
|
+
### Dialectical Reasoning
|
|
156
252
|
|
|
157
|
-
Each exchange follows a thesis-antithesis-synthesis cycle
|
|
253
|
+
Each exchange follows a thesis-antithesis-synthesis cycle. This is [Hegelian dialectic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#Hegelian_dialectic) applied to project definition.
|
|
158
254
|
|
|
159
255
|
- ["Self-reflecting LLMs: A Hegelian Dialectical Approach"](https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.14917) (2025)
|
|
160
256
|
|
|
161
|
-
### Requirements
|
|
257
|
+
### Requirements Elicitation
|
|
162
258
|
|
|
163
|
-
|
|
259
|
+
[Requirements elicitation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Requirements_elicitation) is the process of discovering what stakeholders actually need — requirements are *discovered*, not merely captured.
|
|
164
260
|
|
|
165
261
|
- Zave & Jackson, "Four Dark Corners of Requirements Engineering" (1997, ACM TOSEM)
|
|
166
262
|
- ["AI-based Multiagent Approach for Requirements Elicitation and Analysis"](https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.00038) (2024)
|
|
167
263
|
|
|
168
|
-
###
|
|
264
|
+
### Behavioral Testing Research
|
|
169
265
|
|
|
170
|
-
|
|
266
|
+
The QA framework is grounded in 2026 research on AI agent-based testing:
|
|
171
267
|
|
|
172
|
-
|
|
173
|
-
|
|
174
|
-
[
|
|
268
|
+
- [PersonaTester](https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.24160) (FSE 2026) — orthogonal behavioral axes for test persona definition
|
|
269
|
+
- [Mind the Sim2Real Gap](https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.11245) (CMU 2026) — LLM simulators inflate success rates vs human baselines
|
|
270
|
+
- [VISTA](https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.11079) (2026) — QA quality self-measurement, failure state injection (+42%)
|
|
271
|
+
- [NCUser](https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.23124) (ICLR 2026) — non-cooperative user axes
|
|
272
|
+
- [Persona Policies](https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.12894) (UW 2026) — turn-level behavior instructions outperform character descriptions
|
|
273
|
+
- [CANDOR](https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.02943) (TOSEM 2026) — role separation: oracle accuracy requires requirement understanding
|
|
175
274
|
|
|
176
275
|
### Multi-Agent Debate
|
|
177
276
|
|
|
178
|
-
|
|
277
|
+
know-thy-build adopts multiple perspectives through specialized roles (project, technical, feature, designer, QA, architect) — each with its own adversarial review protocol.
|
|
179
278
|
|
|
180
279
|
- Liang et al., ["Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate"](https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.19118) (EMNLP 2024)
|
|
181
280
|
|
|
281
|
+
### Design Thinking
|
|
282
|
+
|
|
283
|
+
The output maps to the **Define** phase of [Design Thinking](https://web.stanford.edu/~mshanks/MichaelShanks/files/509554.pdf) (Stanford d.school).
|
|
284
|
+
|
|
182
285
|
## License
|
|
183
286
|
|
|
184
287
|
MIT
|
package/bin/cli.js
CHANGED
|
@@ -117,11 +117,24 @@ function install(lang, global) {
|
|
|
117
117
|
console.log(`
|
|
118
118
|
Done! Installed ${scope} (${lang})
|
|
119
119
|
|
|
120
|
-
|
|
120
|
+
Pipeline:
|
|
121
121
|
|
|
122
|
-
|
|
123
|
-
|
|
124
|
-
|
|
122
|
+
Define (once):
|
|
123
|
+
/know-thy-build:project Define your project (What & Why)
|
|
124
|
+
/know-thy-build:technical Define technical foundation (How)
|
|
125
|
+
|
|
126
|
+
Per feature (worktree workflow):
|
|
127
|
+
/know-thy-build:feature Design feature spec (main) → create worktree → dispatch sub-agent
|
|
128
|
+
|
|
129
|
+
Sub-agent orchestrates in worktree:
|
|
130
|
+
Define:
|
|
131
|
+
/know-thy-build:architect Code structure (stubs, tests)
|
|
132
|
+
/know-thy-build:designer UX design intent (UI features)
|
|
133
|
+
/know-thy-build:qa Test cases (what "done" means)
|
|
134
|
+
Implement → Review → Gate check
|
|
135
|
+
/know-thy-build:finish Merge gate + squash merge + cleanup
|
|
136
|
+
|
|
137
|
+
Start with /know-thy-build:project
|
|
125
138
|
`);
|
|
126
139
|
}
|
|
127
140
|
|
|
@@ -131,13 +144,22 @@ const args = process.argv.slice(2);
|
|
|
131
144
|
|
|
132
145
|
if (args.includes("--help") || args.includes("-h")) {
|
|
133
146
|
console.log(`
|
|
134
|
-
know-thy-build -
|
|
147
|
+
know-thy-build — Multi-agent project definition & QA framework for Claude Code
|
|
135
148
|
|
|
136
149
|
Usage:
|
|
137
150
|
npx know-thy-build Install in current project
|
|
138
151
|
npx know-thy-build --global Install globally (~/.claude/commands/)
|
|
139
152
|
npx know-thy-build --lang ko Skip language prompt
|
|
140
153
|
|
|
154
|
+
Commands installed:
|
|
155
|
+
:project Define what and why → docs/PROJECT.md + CLAUDE.md + hooks
|
|
156
|
+
:technical Define how to build → docs/TECHNICAL.md
|
|
157
|
+
:feature Design feature + worktree + agent → docs/features/NNN.md + worktree
|
|
158
|
+
:architect Code structure (stubs, tests) → scaffold + signature tests
|
|
159
|
+
:designer UX design intent (UI features) → design intent in feature spec
|
|
160
|
+
:qa QA framework + test the product → docs/QA.md
|
|
161
|
+
:finish Merge gate + squash merge → main branch + cleanup
|
|
162
|
+
|
|
141
163
|
Options:
|
|
142
164
|
--global, -g Install to ~/.claude/commands/ (available in all projects)
|
|
143
165
|
--lang, -l Language shortcut: ko, en, ja, zh, es, fr, de, pt
|
package/package.json
CHANGED
|
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
|
|
|
1
1
|
{
|
|
2
2
|
"name": "know-thy-build",
|
|
3
|
-
"version": "0.
|
|
4
|
-
"description": "
|
|
3
|
+
"version": "0.6.0",
|
|
4
|
+
"description": "Multi-agent project definition & QA framework for Claude Code — Socratic dialogue, behavioral testing axes, design intent, orchestrated review",
|
|
5
5
|
"bin": {
|
|
6
6
|
"know-thy-build": "./bin/cli.js"
|
|
7
7
|
},
|
|
@@ -11,10 +11,15 @@
|
|
|
11
11
|
],
|
|
12
12
|
"keywords": [
|
|
13
13
|
"claude-code",
|
|
14
|
-
"
|
|
15
|
-
"
|
|
14
|
+
"project-definition",
|
|
15
|
+
"multi-agent",
|
|
16
|
+
"qa-framework",
|
|
17
|
+
"socratic",
|
|
16
18
|
"ai-agent",
|
|
17
|
-
"
|
|
19
|
+
"design-intent",
|
|
20
|
+
"behavioral-testing",
|
|
21
|
+
"code-review",
|
|
22
|
+
"orchestration"
|
|
18
23
|
],
|
|
19
24
|
"license": "MIT",
|
|
20
25
|
"type": "module",
|