owflow 0.5.0 → 0.7.0
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/LICENSE +21 -21
- package/README.md +448 -261
- package/dist/agents/bottleneck-analyzer.md +332 -329
- package/dist/agents/code-quality-pragmatist.md +353 -354
- package/dist/agents/code-reviewer.md +238 -239
- package/dist/agents/codebase-analysis-reporter.md +245 -246
- package/dist/agents/docs-operator.md +22 -23
- package/dist/agents/e2e-test-verifier.md +447 -448
- package/dist/agents/gap-analyzer.md +501 -502
- package/dist/agents/implementation-completeness-checker.md +219 -220
- package/dist/agents/implementation-planner.md +308 -309
- package/dist/agents/information-gatherer.md +690 -691
- package/dist/agents/production-readiness-checker.md +278 -279
- package/dist/agents/project-analyzer.md +403 -403
- package/dist/agents/reality-assessor.md +365 -366
- package/dist/agents/research-planner.md +449 -450
- package/dist/agents/research-synthesizer.md +402 -403
- package/dist/agents/solution-brainstormer.md +256 -257
- package/dist/agents/solution-designer.md +371 -372
- package/dist/agents/spec-auditor.md +297 -298
- package/dist/agents/specification-creator.md +333 -334
- package/dist/agents/task-classifier.md +449 -450
- package/dist/agents/task-group-implementer.md +283 -284
- package/dist/agents/test-suite-runner.md +194 -195
- package/dist/agents/user-docs-generator.md +508 -509
- package/dist/commands/reviews-code.md +90 -90
- package/dist/commands/reviews-pragmatic.md +99 -99
- package/dist/commands/reviews-production-readiness.md +113 -113
- package/dist/commands/reviews-reality-check.md +110 -110
- package/dist/commands/reviews-spec-audit.md +114 -114
- package/dist/commands/work.md +280 -280
- package/dist/configuration/agents-config.d.ts +2 -0
- package/dist/configuration/agents-config.js +8 -44
- package/dist/configuration/commands-config.d.ts +23 -0
- package/dist/configuration/commands-config.js +17 -17
- package/dist/configuration/skills-config.d.ts +2 -0
- package/dist/configuration/skills-config.js +3 -3
- package/dist/hooks/hooks-diagnostics.d.ts +3 -0
- package/dist/hooks/hooks-diagnostics.js +21 -0
- package/dist/hooks/hooks-persistence.d.ts +17 -0
- package/dist/hooks/hooks-persistence.js +207 -0
- package/dist/hooks/hooks-registry.d.ts +6 -0
- package/dist/hooks/hooks-registry.js +104 -0
- package/dist/hooks/hooks-wrapper.d.ts +25 -0
- package/dist/hooks/hooks-wrapper.js +318 -0
- package/dist/hooks/internal/before-tool.d.ts +6 -0
- package/dist/hooks/internal/before-tool.js +13 -0
- package/dist/hooks/internal/session-compaction.d.ts +9 -0
- package/dist/hooks/{session-compaction.js → internal/session-compaction.js} +9 -7
- package/dist/hooks/runtime/circuit-breaker.d.ts +23 -0
- package/dist/hooks/runtime/circuit-breaker.js +39 -0
- package/dist/hooks/runtime/failure-policy.d.ts +15 -0
- package/dist/hooks/runtime/failure-policy.js +49 -0
- package/dist/hooks/runtime/process-executor.d.ts +33 -0
- package/dist/hooks/runtime/process-executor.js +147 -0
- package/dist/hooks/runtime/status-recorder.d.ts +27 -0
- package/dist/hooks/runtime/status-recorder.js +111 -0
- package/dist/index.d.ts +7 -0
- package/dist/index.js +111 -40
- package/dist/skills/agents-md-generator/SKILL.md +223 -223
- package/dist/skills/codebase-analyzer/SKILL.md +162 -162
- package/dist/skills/codebase-analyzer/references/code-analysis.md +63 -63
- package/dist/skills/codebase-analyzer/references/combined.md +31 -31
- package/dist/skills/codebase-analyzer/references/context-discovery.md +63 -63
- package/dist/skills/codebase-analyzer/references/file-discovery.md +51 -51
- package/dist/skills/codebase-analyzer/references/migration-target.md +23 -23
- package/dist/skills/codebase-analyzer/references/pattern-mining.md +22 -22
- package/dist/skills/dev-analyze/SKILL.md +115 -115
- package/dist/skills/dev-bugfix/SKILL.md +452 -452
- package/dist/skills/dev-finalize/SKILL.md +118 -118
- package/dist/skills/dev-implement/SKILL.md +167 -167
- package/dist/skills/dev-plan/SKILL.md +147 -147
- package/dist/skills/dev-spec/SKILL.md +182 -182
- package/dist/skills/dev-tdd-red/SKILL.md +94 -94
- package/dist/skills/dev-verify/SKILL.md +153 -153
- package/dist/skills/development/SKILL.md +260 -260
- package/dist/skills/diagrams-mermaid/SKILL.md +183 -159
- package/dist/skills/diagrams-mermaid/references/reference.md +220 -148
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/SKILL.md +379 -379
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/docs/INDEX.md +199 -199
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/docs/standards/backend/api.md +25 -25
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/docs/standards/backend/migrations.md +22 -22
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/docs/standards/backend/models.md +25 -25
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/docs/standards/backend/queries.md +22 -22
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/docs/standards/frontend/accessibility.md +25 -25
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/docs/standards/frontend/components.md +28 -28
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/docs/standards/frontend/css.md +16 -16
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/docs/standards/frontend/responsive.md +28 -28
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/docs/standards/global/coding-style.md +25 -25
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/docs/standards/global/commenting.md +10 -10
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/docs/standards/global/conventions.md +31 -31
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/docs/standards/global/error-handling.md +22 -22
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/docs/standards/global/minimal-implementation.md +22 -22
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/docs/standards/global/validation.md +28 -28
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/docs/standards/testing/test-writing.md +25 -25
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/references/agents-md-template.md +29 -29
- package/dist/skills/docs-manager/references/index-md-template.md +73 -73
- package/dist/skills/flow-init/SKILL.md +234 -234
- package/dist/skills/flow-init/references/architecture-template.md +45 -45
- package/dist/skills/flow-init/references/roadmap-templates.md +93 -93
- package/dist/skills/flow-init/references/tech-stack-template.md +70 -70
- package/dist/skills/flow-init/references/vision-templates.md +75 -75
- package/dist/skills/goal-development/SKILL.md +96 -96
- package/dist/skills/goal-migration/SKILL.md +114 -114
- package/dist/skills/goal-performance/SKILL.md +126 -0
- package/dist/skills/goal-research/SKILL.md +118 -118
- package/dist/skills/html-renderer/SKILL.md +173 -173
- package/dist/skills/html-renderer/references/index.html +318 -318
- package/dist/skills/html-renderer/references/styles.css +388 -388
- package/dist/skills/html-renderer/references/tokens.json +104 -104
- package/dist/skills/implementation-plan-executor/SKILL.md +378 -378
- package/dist/skills/implementation-verifier/SKILL.md +307 -307
- package/dist/skills/migration/SKILL.md +268 -268
- package/dist/skills/migration-analyze/SKILL.md +126 -126
- package/dist/skills/migration-finalize/SKILL.md +161 -161
- package/dist/skills/migration-fix/SKILL.md +155 -155
- package/dist/skills/migration-implement/SKILL.md +131 -131
- package/dist/skills/migration-plan/SKILL.md +131 -131
- package/dist/skills/migration-spec/SKILL.md +135 -135
- package/dist/skills/migration-spec/references/migration-strategies.md +430 -430
- package/dist/skills/migration-target/SKILL.md +134 -134
- package/dist/skills/migration-target/references/migration-types.md +489 -489
- package/dist/skills/migration-verify/SKILL.md +184 -184
- package/dist/skills/orchestrator-framework/SKILL.md +65 -65
- package/dist/skills/orchestrator-framework/references/command-namespacing.md +7 -7
- package/dist/skills/orchestrator-framework/references/confirm-or-revise-exception.md +20 -20
- package/dist/skills/orchestrator-framework/references/delegation-rules.md +54 -54
- package/dist/skills/orchestrator-framework/references/dispatcher-handoff.md +27 -27
- package/dist/skills/orchestrator-framework/references/fix-loop-contract.md +65 -65
- package/dist/skills/orchestrator-framework/references/gate-contract.md +122 -117
- package/dist/skills/orchestrator-framework/references/orchestrator-creation-checklist.md +51 -51
- package/dist/skills/orchestrator-framework/references/orchestrator-patterns.md +235 -235
- package/dist/skills/performance/SKILL.md +267 -437
- package/dist/skills/performance-analyze/SKILL.md +129 -0
- package/dist/skills/{performance → performance-analyze}/references/performance-optimization-guide.md +271 -365
- package/dist/skills/performance-finalize/SKILL.md +117 -0
- package/dist/skills/performance-implement/SKILL.md +114 -0
- package/dist/skills/performance-plan/SKILL.md +112 -0
- package/dist/skills/performance-spec/SKILL.md +145 -0
- package/dist/skills/performance-verify/SKILL.md +164 -0
- package/dist/skills/research/SKILL.md +249 -249
- package/dist/skills/research-brainstorm/SKILL.md +120 -120
- package/dist/skills/research-brainstorm/references/brainstorming-techniques.md +84 -84
- package/dist/skills/research-converge/SKILL.md +130 -130
- package/dist/skills/research-design/SKILL.md +146 -146
- package/dist/skills/research-design/references/design-techniques.md +40 -40
- package/dist/skills/research-finalize/SKILL.md +125 -125
- package/dist/skills/research-fork/SKILL.md +190 -190
- package/dist/skills/research-gather/SKILL.md +133 -133
- package/dist/skills/research-plan/SKILL.md +141 -141
- package/dist/skills/research-plan/references/research-methodologies.md +710 -710
- package/dist/skills/research-quick/SKILL.md +139 -139
- package/dist/skills/research-synthesize/SKILL.md +127 -127
- package/dist/skills/rule-reviewer/SKILL.md +334 -334
- package/dist/skills/standards-discover/SKILL.md +260 -260
- package/dist/skills/standards-discover/references/aggregation-strategy.md +76 -76
- package/dist/skills/standards-discover/references/code-pattern-prompt.md +68 -68
- package/dist/skills/standards-discover/references/config-analyzer-prompt.md +67 -67
- package/dist/skills/standards-discover/references/docs-extractor-prompt.md +65 -65
- package/dist/skills/standards-discover/references/external-analyzer-prompt.md +75 -75
- package/dist/skills/standards-update/SKILL.md +207 -207
- package/dist/templates/orchestrator-state-base.yml +17 -17
- package/dist/templates/orchestrator-state-development.yml +95 -95
- package/dist/templates/orchestrator-state-migration.yml +95 -95
- package/dist/templates/orchestrator-state-performance.yml +64 -53
- package/dist/templates/orchestrator-state-research.yml +67 -67
- package/dist/tools/fork_task.d.ts +17 -0
- package/dist/tools/fork_task.js +21 -11
- package/dist/tools/verify_template.d.ts +11 -0
- package/dist/tools/verify_template.js +32 -17
- package/dist/tui/hooks-dialogs.d.ts +20 -0
- package/dist/tui/hooks-dialogs.js +181 -0
- package/dist/tui/hooks-presenter.d.ts +15 -0
- package/dist/tui/hooks-presenter.js +70 -0
- package/dist/tui/hooks-sidebar.d.ts +10 -0
- package/dist/tui/hooks-sidebar.js +104 -0
- package/dist/tui/primitives.d.ts +21 -0
- package/dist/tui/primitives.js +47 -0
- package/dist/tui.d.ts +12 -0
- package/dist/tui.js +129 -0
- package/dist/types/hook-types.d.ts +125 -0
- package/dist/types/hook-types.js +76 -0
- package/dist/types/opencode-types.d.ts +13 -0
- package/dist/utils/file-util.d.ts +2 -0
- package/dist/utils/file-util.js +6 -6
- package/dist/utils/fork-task.d.ts +27 -0
- package/dist/utils/fork-task.js +18 -23
- package/dist/utils/plugin-info.d.ts +3 -0
- package/dist/utils/plugin-info.js +8 -10
- package/dist/utils/workflow-paths.d.ts +17 -0
- package/dist/utils/workflow-paths.js +18 -0
- package/dist/utils/yaml-structure.d.ts +7 -0
- package/dist/utils/yaml-structure.js +7 -11
- package/package.json +68 -48
- package/dist/hooks/before-tool.js +0 -19
|
@@ -1,90 +1,90 @@
|
|
|
1
|
-
---
|
|
2
|
-
name: owflow:reviews-code
|
|
3
|
-
description: Run automated code quality, security, and performance analysis on your code
|
|
4
|
-
---
|
|
5
|
-
|
|
6
|
-
**ACTION REQUIRED**: This command delegates to a subagent. The `<command-name>` tag refers to THIS command, not the target. Invoke the code-reviewer subagent via the Task tool NOW. Pass path and scope arguments. Do not read files, explore code, or execute workflow steps yourself.
|
|
7
|
-
|
|
8
|
-
You are running a comprehensive code review using the `code-reviewer` subagent.
|
|
9
|
-
|
|
10
|
-
## Your Task
|
|
11
|
-
|
|
12
|
-
You are performing automated code analysis to identify quality, security, and performance issues.
|
|
13
|
-
|
|
14
|
-
## Parse User Request
|
|
15
|
-
|
|
16
|
-
**Determine the following from the user's request:**
|
|
17
|
-
|
|
18
|
-
1. **Path to analyze**:
|
|
19
|
-
- If provided: Use the specified path
|
|
20
|
-
- If not provided: Use question to ask what to analyze
|
|
21
|
-
|
|
22
|
-
2. **Analysis scope**:
|
|
23
|
-
- If `--scope=quality`: Only code quality analysis
|
|
24
|
-
- If `--scope=security`: Only security analysis
|
|
25
|
-
- If `--scope=performance`: Only performance analysis
|
|
26
|
-
- If `--scope=all` or no scope: Complete analysis (recommended)
|
|
27
|
-
|
|
28
|
-
## Your Instructions
|
|
29
|
-
|
|
30
|
-
**Invoke the code-reviewer subagent NOW using the Task tool:**
|
|
31
|
-
|
|
32
|
-
```
|
|
33
|
-
Use Task tool:
|
|
34
|
-
subagent_type: "code-reviewer"
|
|
35
|
-
description: "Code quality review"
|
|
36
|
-
prompt: |
|
|
37
|
-
Analyze code at: [path from user or from question]
|
|
38
|
-
Scope: [quality|security|performance|all]
|
|
39
|
-
Report path: [path]/code-review-report.md
|
|
40
|
-
```
|
|
41
|
-
|
|
42
|
-
**Wait for the subagent to complete before proceeding.**
|
|
43
|
-
|
|
44
|
-
The code-reviewer subagent will:
|
|
45
|
-
|
|
46
|
-
1. Analyze code for complexity, duplication, and code smells
|
|
47
|
-
2. Detect security vulnerabilities and hardcoded secrets
|
|
48
|
-
3. Identify performance issues (N+1 queries, missing indexes, caching opportunities)
|
|
49
|
-
4. Generate comprehensive report with findings categorized by severity
|
|
50
|
-
5. Provide actionable recommendations with code examples
|
|
51
|
-
|
|
52
|
-
## Examples
|
|
53
|
-
|
|
54
|
-
**Example 1**: Review specific task
|
|
55
|
-
|
|
56
|
-
```
|
|
57
|
-
User: /owflow:reviews-code .owflow/tasks/development/2025-10-24-auth/
|
|
58
|
-
```
|
|
59
|
-
|
|
60
|
-
**Example 2**: Review with specific scope
|
|
61
|
-
|
|
62
|
-
```
|
|
63
|
-
User: /owflow:reviews-code src/api/ --scope=security
|
|
64
|
-
```
|
|
65
|
-
|
|
66
|
-
**Example 3**: Review entire project
|
|
67
|
-
|
|
68
|
-
```
|
|
69
|
-
User: /owflow:reviews-code src/
|
|
70
|
-
```
|
|
71
|
-
|
|
72
|
-
## What to Expect
|
|
73
|
-
|
|
74
|
-
The code-reviewer will provide:
|
|
75
|
-
|
|
76
|
-
- Summary of issues found (critical, warnings, info)
|
|
77
|
-
- Detailed findings with file locations and line numbers
|
|
78
|
-
- Code examples showing issues and fixes
|
|
79
|
-
- Metrics on code quality, security, and performance
|
|
80
|
-
- Prioritized recommendations
|
|
81
|
-
- Go/no-go assessment for code review
|
|
82
|
-
|
|
83
|
-
## Notes
|
|
84
|
-
|
|
85
|
-
- This is analysis only - no code will be modified
|
|
86
|
-
- Focus on actionable findings
|
|
87
|
-
- Severity levels guide prioritization:
|
|
88
|
-
- **Critical**: Must fix before production
|
|
89
|
-
- **Warning**: Should fix before merge
|
|
90
|
-
- **Info**: Nice to have improvements
|
|
1
|
+
---
|
|
2
|
+
name: owflow:reviews-code
|
|
3
|
+
description: Run automated code quality, security, and performance analysis on your code
|
|
4
|
+
---
|
|
5
|
+
|
|
6
|
+
**ACTION REQUIRED**: This command delegates to a subagent. The `<command-name>` tag refers to THIS command, not the target. Invoke the code-reviewer subagent via the Task tool NOW. Pass path and scope arguments. Do not read files, explore code, or execute workflow steps yourself.
|
|
7
|
+
|
|
8
|
+
You are running a comprehensive code review using the `code-reviewer` subagent.
|
|
9
|
+
|
|
10
|
+
## Your Task
|
|
11
|
+
|
|
12
|
+
You are performing automated code analysis to identify quality, security, and performance issues.
|
|
13
|
+
|
|
14
|
+
## Parse User Request
|
|
15
|
+
|
|
16
|
+
**Determine the following from the user's request:**
|
|
17
|
+
|
|
18
|
+
1. **Path to analyze**:
|
|
19
|
+
- If provided: Use the specified path
|
|
20
|
+
- If not provided: Use question to ask what to analyze
|
|
21
|
+
|
|
22
|
+
2. **Analysis scope**:
|
|
23
|
+
- If `--scope=quality`: Only code quality analysis
|
|
24
|
+
- If `--scope=security`: Only security analysis
|
|
25
|
+
- If `--scope=performance`: Only performance analysis
|
|
26
|
+
- If `--scope=all` or no scope: Complete analysis (recommended)
|
|
27
|
+
|
|
28
|
+
## Your Instructions
|
|
29
|
+
|
|
30
|
+
**Invoke the code-reviewer subagent NOW using the Task tool:**
|
|
31
|
+
|
|
32
|
+
```
|
|
33
|
+
Use Task tool:
|
|
34
|
+
subagent_type: "code-reviewer"
|
|
35
|
+
description: "Code quality review"
|
|
36
|
+
prompt: |
|
|
37
|
+
Analyze code at: [path from user or from question]
|
|
38
|
+
Scope: [quality|security|performance|all]
|
|
39
|
+
Report path: [path]/code-review-report.md
|
|
40
|
+
```
|
|
41
|
+
|
|
42
|
+
**Wait for the subagent to complete before proceeding.**
|
|
43
|
+
|
|
44
|
+
The code-reviewer subagent will:
|
|
45
|
+
|
|
46
|
+
1. Analyze code for complexity, duplication, and code smells
|
|
47
|
+
2. Detect security vulnerabilities and hardcoded secrets
|
|
48
|
+
3. Identify performance issues (N+1 queries, missing indexes, caching opportunities)
|
|
49
|
+
4. Generate comprehensive report with findings categorized by severity
|
|
50
|
+
5. Provide actionable recommendations with code examples
|
|
51
|
+
|
|
52
|
+
## Examples
|
|
53
|
+
|
|
54
|
+
**Example 1**: Review specific task
|
|
55
|
+
|
|
56
|
+
```
|
|
57
|
+
User: /owflow:reviews-code .owflow/tasks/development/2025-10-24-auth/
|
|
58
|
+
```
|
|
59
|
+
|
|
60
|
+
**Example 2**: Review with specific scope
|
|
61
|
+
|
|
62
|
+
```
|
|
63
|
+
User: /owflow:reviews-code src/api/ --scope=security
|
|
64
|
+
```
|
|
65
|
+
|
|
66
|
+
**Example 3**: Review entire project
|
|
67
|
+
|
|
68
|
+
```
|
|
69
|
+
User: /owflow:reviews-code src/
|
|
70
|
+
```
|
|
71
|
+
|
|
72
|
+
## What to Expect
|
|
73
|
+
|
|
74
|
+
The code-reviewer will provide:
|
|
75
|
+
|
|
76
|
+
- Summary of issues found (critical, warnings, info)
|
|
77
|
+
- Detailed findings with file locations and line numbers
|
|
78
|
+
- Code examples showing issues and fixes
|
|
79
|
+
- Metrics on code quality, security, and performance
|
|
80
|
+
- Prioritized recommendations
|
|
81
|
+
- Go/no-go assessment for code review
|
|
82
|
+
|
|
83
|
+
## Notes
|
|
84
|
+
|
|
85
|
+
- This is analysis only - no code will be modified
|
|
86
|
+
- Focus on actionable findings
|
|
87
|
+
- Severity levels guide prioritization:
|
|
88
|
+
- **Critical**: Must fix before production
|
|
89
|
+
- **Warning**: Should fix before merge
|
|
90
|
+
- **Info**: Nice to have improvements
|
|
@@ -1,99 +1,99 @@
|
|
|
1
|
-
---
|
|
2
|
-
name: owflow:reviews-pragmatic
|
|
3
|
-
description: Run pragmatic code review to detect over-engineering and ensure code matches project scale
|
|
4
|
-
---
|
|
5
|
-
|
|
6
|
-
**ACTION REQUIRED**: This command delegates to a different skill. The `<command-name>` tag refers to THIS command, not the target. Call the Task tool with subagent_type="code-quality-pragmatist" NOW. Pass the path to analyze in the prompt. Do not read files, explore code, or execute workflow steps yourself.
|
|
7
|
-
|
|
8
|
-
You are running a pragmatic code review using the `code-quality-pragmatist` agent.
|
|
9
|
-
|
|
10
|
-
## Your Task
|
|
11
|
-
|
|
12
|
-
You are performing pragmatic analysis to identify over-engineering, unnecessary complexity, and developer experience issues.
|
|
13
|
-
|
|
14
|
-
## Parse User Request
|
|
15
|
-
|
|
16
|
-
**Determine the following from the user's request:**
|
|
17
|
-
|
|
18
|
-
1. **Path to analyze**:
|
|
19
|
-
- If provided: Use the specified path
|
|
20
|
-
- If not provided: Use question to ask what to analyze (file, directory, or task path)
|
|
21
|
-
|
|
22
|
-
## Your Instructions
|
|
23
|
-
|
|
24
|
-
**Invoke the code-quality-pragmatist agent NOW using the Task tool:**
|
|
25
|
-
|
|
26
|
-
```
|
|
27
|
-
Task Tool:
|
|
28
|
-
- subagent_type: code-quality-pragmatist
|
|
29
|
-
- description: Pragmatic code review
|
|
30
|
-
- prompt: |
|
|
31
|
-
You are the code-quality-pragmatist agent. Review the code at: [path]
|
|
32
|
-
|
|
33
|
-
Your task:
|
|
34
|
-
1. Assess overall complexity relative to project scale (check .owflow/docs/project/ for scale)
|
|
35
|
-
2. Detect over-engineering patterns (infrastructure overkill, excessive abstraction, enterprise patterns in simple code)
|
|
36
|
-
3. Assess developer experience (setup complexity, feedback loops, error messages, consistency)
|
|
37
|
-
4. Verify requirements alignment (if spec.md available, compare implementation to requirements)
|
|
38
|
-
5. Recommend specific simplifications with before/after examples
|
|
39
|
-
6. Prioritize top 3 changes with highest impact
|
|
40
|
-
|
|
41
|
-
Generate comprehensive pragmatic review report.
|
|
42
|
-
Save to: verification/pragmatic-review.md
|
|
43
|
-
|
|
44
|
-
Focus on: Simple solutions for simple problems. Code should match project needs, not theoretical best practices.
|
|
45
|
-
```
|
|
46
|
-
|
|
47
|
-
**Wait for the agent to complete before proceeding.**
|
|
48
|
-
|
|
49
|
-
The code-quality-pragmatist agent will:
|
|
50
|
-
|
|
51
|
-
1. Assess complexity relative to project scale (MVP vs Enterprise)
|
|
52
|
-
2. Detect over-engineering (Redis in MVP, excessive layers, premature optimization)
|
|
53
|
-
3. Identify developer experience friction points
|
|
54
|
-
4. Compare implementation to requirements (if spec available)
|
|
55
|
-
5. Recommend concrete simplifications with impact estimates
|
|
56
|
-
6. Provide top 3 priority actions
|
|
57
|
-
|
|
58
|
-
## Examples
|
|
59
|
-
|
|
60
|
-
**Example 1**: Review specific feature
|
|
61
|
-
|
|
62
|
-
```
|
|
63
|
-
User: /owflow:reviews-pragmatic .owflow/tasks/development/2025-11-17-user-management/
|
|
64
|
-
```
|
|
65
|
-
|
|
66
|
-
**Example 2**: Review source directory
|
|
67
|
-
|
|
68
|
-
```
|
|
69
|
-
User: /owflow:reviews-pragmatic src/features/payments/
|
|
70
|
-
```
|
|
71
|
-
|
|
72
|
-
**Example 3**: Review specific file
|
|
73
|
-
|
|
74
|
-
```
|
|
75
|
-
User: /owflow:reviews-pragmatic src/services/cache-service.ts
|
|
76
|
-
```
|
|
77
|
-
|
|
78
|
-
## What to Expect
|
|
79
|
-
|
|
80
|
-
The code-quality-pragmatist will provide:
|
|
81
|
-
|
|
82
|
-
- Complexity assessment (Low/Medium/High) relative to project scale
|
|
83
|
-
- Over-engineering patterns with severity (Critical/High/Medium/Low)
|
|
84
|
-
- Developer experience issues and friction points
|
|
85
|
-
- Requirements alignment assessment
|
|
86
|
-
- Concrete simplification recommendations with before/after examples
|
|
87
|
-
- Top 3 priority actions with estimated impact
|
|
88
|
-
- Summary statistics (LOC reduction potential, dependencies removable)
|
|
89
|
-
|
|
90
|
-
## Notes
|
|
91
|
-
|
|
92
|
-
- This is analysis only - no code will be modified
|
|
93
|
-
- Focus on pragmatism: appropriate complexity for actual needs
|
|
94
|
-
- Identifies unnecessary infrastructure, abstractions, and patterns
|
|
95
|
-
- Severity levels guide prioritization:
|
|
96
|
-
- **Critical**: Severe over-engineering blocking development
|
|
97
|
-
- **High**: Significant unnecessary complexity
|
|
98
|
-
- **Medium**: Moderate complexity issues
|
|
99
|
-
- **Low**: Minor improvements
|
|
1
|
+
---
|
|
2
|
+
name: owflow:reviews-pragmatic
|
|
3
|
+
description: Run pragmatic code review to detect over-engineering and ensure code matches project scale
|
|
4
|
+
---
|
|
5
|
+
|
|
6
|
+
**ACTION REQUIRED**: This command delegates to a different skill. The `<command-name>` tag refers to THIS command, not the target. Call the Task tool with subagent_type="code-quality-pragmatist" NOW. Pass the path to analyze in the prompt. Do not read files, explore code, or execute workflow steps yourself.
|
|
7
|
+
|
|
8
|
+
You are running a pragmatic code review using the `code-quality-pragmatist` agent.
|
|
9
|
+
|
|
10
|
+
## Your Task
|
|
11
|
+
|
|
12
|
+
You are performing pragmatic analysis to identify over-engineering, unnecessary complexity, and developer experience issues.
|
|
13
|
+
|
|
14
|
+
## Parse User Request
|
|
15
|
+
|
|
16
|
+
**Determine the following from the user's request:**
|
|
17
|
+
|
|
18
|
+
1. **Path to analyze**:
|
|
19
|
+
- If provided: Use the specified path
|
|
20
|
+
- If not provided: Use question to ask what to analyze (file, directory, or task path)
|
|
21
|
+
|
|
22
|
+
## Your Instructions
|
|
23
|
+
|
|
24
|
+
**Invoke the code-quality-pragmatist agent NOW using the Task tool:**
|
|
25
|
+
|
|
26
|
+
```
|
|
27
|
+
Task Tool:
|
|
28
|
+
- subagent_type: code-quality-pragmatist
|
|
29
|
+
- description: Pragmatic code review
|
|
30
|
+
- prompt: |
|
|
31
|
+
You are the code-quality-pragmatist agent. Review the code at: [path]
|
|
32
|
+
|
|
33
|
+
Your task:
|
|
34
|
+
1. Assess overall complexity relative to project scale (check .owflow/docs/project/ for scale)
|
|
35
|
+
2. Detect over-engineering patterns (infrastructure overkill, excessive abstraction, enterprise patterns in simple code)
|
|
36
|
+
3. Assess developer experience (setup complexity, feedback loops, error messages, consistency)
|
|
37
|
+
4. Verify requirements alignment (if spec.md available, compare implementation to requirements)
|
|
38
|
+
5. Recommend specific simplifications with before/after examples
|
|
39
|
+
6. Prioritize top 3 changes with highest impact
|
|
40
|
+
|
|
41
|
+
Generate comprehensive pragmatic review report.
|
|
42
|
+
Save to: verification/pragmatic-review.md
|
|
43
|
+
|
|
44
|
+
Focus on: Simple solutions for simple problems. Code should match project needs, not theoretical best practices.
|
|
45
|
+
```
|
|
46
|
+
|
|
47
|
+
**Wait for the agent to complete before proceeding.**
|
|
48
|
+
|
|
49
|
+
The code-quality-pragmatist agent will:
|
|
50
|
+
|
|
51
|
+
1. Assess complexity relative to project scale (MVP vs Enterprise)
|
|
52
|
+
2. Detect over-engineering (Redis in MVP, excessive layers, premature optimization)
|
|
53
|
+
3. Identify developer experience friction points
|
|
54
|
+
4. Compare implementation to requirements (if spec available)
|
|
55
|
+
5. Recommend concrete simplifications with impact estimates
|
|
56
|
+
6. Provide top 3 priority actions
|
|
57
|
+
|
|
58
|
+
## Examples
|
|
59
|
+
|
|
60
|
+
**Example 1**: Review specific feature
|
|
61
|
+
|
|
62
|
+
```
|
|
63
|
+
User: /owflow:reviews-pragmatic .owflow/tasks/development/2025-11-17-user-management/
|
|
64
|
+
```
|
|
65
|
+
|
|
66
|
+
**Example 2**: Review source directory
|
|
67
|
+
|
|
68
|
+
```
|
|
69
|
+
User: /owflow:reviews-pragmatic src/features/payments/
|
|
70
|
+
```
|
|
71
|
+
|
|
72
|
+
**Example 3**: Review specific file
|
|
73
|
+
|
|
74
|
+
```
|
|
75
|
+
User: /owflow:reviews-pragmatic src/services/cache-service.ts
|
|
76
|
+
```
|
|
77
|
+
|
|
78
|
+
## What to Expect
|
|
79
|
+
|
|
80
|
+
The code-quality-pragmatist will provide:
|
|
81
|
+
|
|
82
|
+
- Complexity assessment (Low/Medium/High) relative to project scale
|
|
83
|
+
- Over-engineering patterns with severity (Critical/High/Medium/Low)
|
|
84
|
+
- Developer experience issues and friction points
|
|
85
|
+
- Requirements alignment assessment
|
|
86
|
+
- Concrete simplification recommendations with before/after examples
|
|
87
|
+
- Top 3 priority actions with estimated impact
|
|
88
|
+
- Summary statistics (LOC reduction potential, dependencies removable)
|
|
89
|
+
|
|
90
|
+
## Notes
|
|
91
|
+
|
|
92
|
+
- This is analysis only - no code will be modified
|
|
93
|
+
- Focus on pragmatism: appropriate complexity for actual needs
|
|
94
|
+
- Identifies unnecessary infrastructure, abstractions, and patterns
|
|
95
|
+
- Severity levels guide prioritization:
|
|
96
|
+
- **Critical**: Severe over-engineering blocking development
|
|
97
|
+
- **High**: Significant unnecessary complexity
|
|
98
|
+
- **Medium**: Moderate complexity issues
|
|
99
|
+
- **Low**: Minor improvements
|
|
@@ -1,113 +1,113 @@
|
|
|
1
|
-
---
|
|
2
|
-
name: owflow:reviews-production-readiness
|
|
3
|
-
description: Verify production deployment readiness with comprehensive checks
|
|
4
|
-
---
|
|
5
|
-
|
|
6
|
-
**ACTION REQUIRED**: This command delegates to a subagent. The `<command-name>` tag refers to THIS command, not the target. Invoke the production-readiness-checker subagent via the Task tool NOW. Pass path and target arguments. Do not read files, explore code, or execute workflow steps yourself.
|
|
7
|
-
|
|
8
|
-
You are verifying production deployment readiness using the `production-readiness-checker` subagent.
|
|
9
|
-
|
|
10
|
-
## Your Task
|
|
11
|
-
|
|
12
|
-
You are performing comprehensive production readiness analysis covering configuration, monitoring, error handling, performance, security, and deployment considerations.
|
|
13
|
-
|
|
14
|
-
## Parse User Request
|
|
15
|
-
|
|
16
|
-
**Determine the following from the user's request:**
|
|
17
|
-
|
|
18
|
-
1. **Path to analyze**:
|
|
19
|
-
- If provided: Use the specified path
|
|
20
|
-
- If not provided: Use question to ask what to check
|
|
21
|
-
|
|
22
|
-
2. **Target environment**:
|
|
23
|
-
- If `--target=prod`: Full production checks (recommended)
|
|
24
|
-
- If `--target=staging`: Relaxed staging checks
|
|
25
|
-
- If not specified: Assume production (full rigor)
|
|
26
|
-
|
|
27
|
-
## Your Instructions
|
|
28
|
-
|
|
29
|
-
**Invoke the production-readiness-checker subagent NOW using the Task tool:**
|
|
30
|
-
|
|
31
|
-
```
|
|
32
|
-
Use Task tool:
|
|
33
|
-
subagent_type: "production-readiness-checker"
|
|
34
|
-
description: "Production readiness check"
|
|
35
|
-
prompt: |
|
|
36
|
-
Verify production readiness at: [path from user or from question]
|
|
37
|
-
Target: [production|staging]
|
|
38
|
-
Report path: [path]/production-readiness-report.md
|
|
39
|
-
```
|
|
40
|
-
|
|
41
|
-
**Wait for the subagent to complete before proceeding.**
|
|
42
|
-
|
|
43
|
-
The production-readiness-checker subagent will:
|
|
44
|
-
|
|
45
|
-
1. Verify configuration management (env vars, secrets, feature flags)
|
|
46
|
-
2. Check monitoring & observability (logging, metrics, error tracking, health checks)
|
|
47
|
-
3. Assess error handling & resilience (retries, circuit breakers, graceful shutdown)
|
|
48
|
-
4. Evaluate performance & scalability (connection pooling, caching, rate limiting)
|
|
49
|
-
5. Review security hardening (HTTPS, CORS, security headers, vulnerabilities)
|
|
50
|
-
6. Analyze deployment considerations (migrations, zero-downtime, rollback plan)
|
|
51
|
-
7. Generate go/no-go deployment recommendation
|
|
52
|
-
|
|
53
|
-
## Examples
|
|
54
|
-
|
|
55
|
-
**Example 1**: Check specific task for production
|
|
56
|
-
|
|
57
|
-
```
|
|
58
|
-
User: /owflow:reviews-production-readiness .owflow/tasks/development/2025-10-24-payment-api/
|
|
59
|
-
```
|
|
60
|
-
|
|
61
|
-
**Example 2**: Check feature for staging
|
|
62
|
-
|
|
63
|
-
```
|
|
64
|
-
User: /owflow:reviews-production-readiness src/features/notifications/ --target=staging
|
|
65
|
-
```
|
|
66
|
-
|
|
67
|
-
**Example 3**: Comprehensive project check
|
|
68
|
-
|
|
69
|
-
```
|
|
70
|
-
User: /owflow:reviews-production-readiness .
|
|
71
|
-
```
|
|
72
|
-
|
|
73
|
-
## What to Expect
|
|
74
|
-
|
|
75
|
-
The production-readiness-checker will provide:
|
|
76
|
-
|
|
77
|
-
- Overall readiness score and status (Ready / Concerns / Not Ready)
|
|
78
|
-
- Clear GO/NO-GO deployment decision
|
|
79
|
-
- Category scores (Configuration, Monitoring, Error Handling, Performance, Security, Deployment)
|
|
80
|
-
- Deployment blockers that must be fixed
|
|
81
|
-
- Concerns with mitigation plans
|
|
82
|
-
- Recommendations for improvements
|
|
83
|
-
- Risk assessment and rollback criteria
|
|
84
|
-
- Post-deployment verification checklist
|
|
85
|
-
|
|
86
|
-
## Deployment Decision Outcomes
|
|
87
|
-
|
|
88
|
-
**Ready to Deploy**:
|
|
89
|
-
|
|
90
|
-
- All critical checks passed
|
|
91
|
-
- Low risk deployment
|
|
92
|
-
- Optional improvements listed
|
|
93
|
-
|
|
94
|
-
**Deploy with Caution**:
|
|
95
|
-
|
|
96
|
-
- No blockers but concerns exist
|
|
97
|
-
- Mitigation plan required
|
|
98
|
-
- Close monitoring needed
|
|
99
|
-
- Medium risk
|
|
100
|
-
|
|
101
|
-
**Do Not Deploy**:
|
|
102
|
-
|
|
103
|
-
- Critical issues present
|
|
104
|
-
- High/critical risk
|
|
105
|
-
- Must fix before deployment
|
|
106
|
-
|
|
107
|
-
## Notes
|
|
108
|
-
|
|
109
|
-
- This is verification only - no code will be modified
|
|
110
|
-
- Production checks are more rigorous than staging
|
|
111
|
-
- Focus on required items first (deployment blockers)
|
|
112
|
-
- Strongly recommended items should be addressed or have mitigation plan
|
|
113
|
-
- Nice to have items can be addressed post-deployment
|
|
1
|
+
---
|
|
2
|
+
name: owflow:reviews-production-readiness
|
|
3
|
+
description: Verify production deployment readiness with comprehensive checks
|
|
4
|
+
---
|
|
5
|
+
|
|
6
|
+
**ACTION REQUIRED**: This command delegates to a subagent. The `<command-name>` tag refers to THIS command, not the target. Invoke the production-readiness-checker subagent via the Task tool NOW. Pass path and target arguments. Do not read files, explore code, or execute workflow steps yourself.
|
|
7
|
+
|
|
8
|
+
You are verifying production deployment readiness using the `production-readiness-checker` subagent.
|
|
9
|
+
|
|
10
|
+
## Your Task
|
|
11
|
+
|
|
12
|
+
You are performing comprehensive production readiness analysis covering configuration, monitoring, error handling, performance, security, and deployment considerations.
|
|
13
|
+
|
|
14
|
+
## Parse User Request
|
|
15
|
+
|
|
16
|
+
**Determine the following from the user's request:**
|
|
17
|
+
|
|
18
|
+
1. **Path to analyze**:
|
|
19
|
+
- If provided: Use the specified path
|
|
20
|
+
- If not provided: Use question to ask what to check
|
|
21
|
+
|
|
22
|
+
2. **Target environment**:
|
|
23
|
+
- If `--target=prod`: Full production checks (recommended)
|
|
24
|
+
- If `--target=staging`: Relaxed staging checks
|
|
25
|
+
- If not specified: Assume production (full rigor)
|
|
26
|
+
|
|
27
|
+
## Your Instructions
|
|
28
|
+
|
|
29
|
+
**Invoke the production-readiness-checker subagent NOW using the Task tool:**
|
|
30
|
+
|
|
31
|
+
```
|
|
32
|
+
Use Task tool:
|
|
33
|
+
subagent_type: "production-readiness-checker"
|
|
34
|
+
description: "Production readiness check"
|
|
35
|
+
prompt: |
|
|
36
|
+
Verify production readiness at: [path from user or from question]
|
|
37
|
+
Target: [production|staging]
|
|
38
|
+
Report path: [path]/production-readiness-report.md
|
|
39
|
+
```
|
|
40
|
+
|
|
41
|
+
**Wait for the subagent to complete before proceeding.**
|
|
42
|
+
|
|
43
|
+
The production-readiness-checker subagent will:
|
|
44
|
+
|
|
45
|
+
1. Verify configuration management (env vars, secrets, feature flags)
|
|
46
|
+
2. Check monitoring & observability (logging, metrics, error tracking, health checks)
|
|
47
|
+
3. Assess error handling & resilience (retries, circuit breakers, graceful shutdown)
|
|
48
|
+
4. Evaluate performance & scalability (connection pooling, caching, rate limiting)
|
|
49
|
+
5. Review security hardening (HTTPS, CORS, security headers, vulnerabilities)
|
|
50
|
+
6. Analyze deployment considerations (migrations, zero-downtime, rollback plan)
|
|
51
|
+
7. Generate go/no-go deployment recommendation
|
|
52
|
+
|
|
53
|
+
## Examples
|
|
54
|
+
|
|
55
|
+
**Example 1**: Check specific task for production
|
|
56
|
+
|
|
57
|
+
```
|
|
58
|
+
User: /owflow:reviews-production-readiness .owflow/tasks/development/2025-10-24-payment-api/
|
|
59
|
+
```
|
|
60
|
+
|
|
61
|
+
**Example 2**: Check feature for staging
|
|
62
|
+
|
|
63
|
+
```
|
|
64
|
+
User: /owflow:reviews-production-readiness src/features/notifications/ --target=staging
|
|
65
|
+
```
|
|
66
|
+
|
|
67
|
+
**Example 3**: Comprehensive project check
|
|
68
|
+
|
|
69
|
+
```
|
|
70
|
+
User: /owflow:reviews-production-readiness .
|
|
71
|
+
```
|
|
72
|
+
|
|
73
|
+
## What to Expect
|
|
74
|
+
|
|
75
|
+
The production-readiness-checker will provide:
|
|
76
|
+
|
|
77
|
+
- Overall readiness score and status (Ready / Concerns / Not Ready)
|
|
78
|
+
- Clear GO/NO-GO deployment decision
|
|
79
|
+
- Category scores (Configuration, Monitoring, Error Handling, Performance, Security, Deployment)
|
|
80
|
+
- Deployment blockers that must be fixed
|
|
81
|
+
- Concerns with mitigation plans
|
|
82
|
+
- Recommendations for improvements
|
|
83
|
+
- Risk assessment and rollback criteria
|
|
84
|
+
- Post-deployment verification checklist
|
|
85
|
+
|
|
86
|
+
## Deployment Decision Outcomes
|
|
87
|
+
|
|
88
|
+
**Ready to Deploy**:
|
|
89
|
+
|
|
90
|
+
- All critical checks passed
|
|
91
|
+
- Low risk deployment
|
|
92
|
+
- Optional improvements listed
|
|
93
|
+
|
|
94
|
+
**Deploy with Caution**:
|
|
95
|
+
|
|
96
|
+
- No blockers but concerns exist
|
|
97
|
+
- Mitigation plan required
|
|
98
|
+
- Close monitoring needed
|
|
99
|
+
- Medium risk
|
|
100
|
+
|
|
101
|
+
**Do Not Deploy**:
|
|
102
|
+
|
|
103
|
+
- Critical issues present
|
|
104
|
+
- High/critical risk
|
|
105
|
+
- Must fix before deployment
|
|
106
|
+
|
|
107
|
+
## Notes
|
|
108
|
+
|
|
109
|
+
- This is verification only - no code will be modified
|
|
110
|
+
- Production checks are more rigorous than staging
|
|
111
|
+
- Focus on required items first (deployment blockers)
|
|
112
|
+
- Strongly recommended items should be addressed or have mitigation plan
|
|
113
|
+
- Nice to have items can be addressed post-deployment
|