sqlew 4.0.2 → 4.0.4

package/assets/sample-commands/sqw-review.md

@@ -1,377 +0,0 @@
----
-description: Validate architectural consistency - research context, then verify decisions and constraints
----
-
-# Sqlew Review Workflow
-
-Validation and consistency checking workflow - invokes researcher for context analysis, then architect for validation.
-
-## Agent Invocation
-
-This workflow uses two specialized sqlew agents in sequence:
-
-```
-Phase 1: Task tool → subagent_type: "sqlew-researcher" (haiku)
-Phase 2: Task tool → subagent_type: "sqlew-architect" (opus)
-```
-
-**Example:**
-```typescript
-// Phase 1: Research context
-Task({
-  subagent_type: "sqlew-researcher",
-  prompt: "Research context for: [review target]. Analyze decisions, constraints, and tasks. Identify patterns and inconsistencies."
-})
-
-// Phase 2: Architectural validation
-Task({
-  subagent_type: "sqlew-architect",
-  prompt: "Based on the research findings, validate architectural consistency. Check constraint compliance and recommend corrections."
-})
-```
-
-## Purpose
-
-Verify architectural consistency, validate decision implementation, and ensure constraints are followed. A two-phase workflow combining historical analysis with expert validation.
-
-## What It Does
-
-### Phase 1: Research Context (Research Agent)
-1. Analyzes relevant decisions, constraints, and tasks
-2. **Uses constraint suggest** (v4.0) to find related constraints efficiently
-3. Identifies patterns and relationships
-4. Detects gaps or inconsistencies
-5. Provides evidence-based findings
-
-### Phase 2: Architectural Validation (Architect Agent)
-1. Reviews research findings
-2. Validates decision consistency
-3. Checks constraint compliance
-4. Recommends corrections or updates
-5. Documents new decisions if needed
-
-## Usage
-
-### Interactive Mode
-```bash
-/sqw-review
-```
-Prompts for what to review and guides through both phases.
-
-### With Arguments
-```bash
-/sqw-review authentication implementation
-/sqw-review security decisions
-/sqw-review performance constraints
-/sqw-review backend agent work
-```
-
-## Workflow
-
-### Phase 1: Researcher Analyzes Context
-
-**Researcher examines:**
-- Related decisions and their versions (using `suggest.by_key`, `suggest.by_tags`)
-- Relevant constraints (v4.0: using `suggest.by_context` with `target: "constraint"`)
-- Constraint compliance with decisions
-- Implementation tasks (completed, in-progress, blocked)
-- Cross-references and relationships
-
-**Example interaction:**
-
-> **Researcher**: Analyzing authentication implementation...
->
-> *Runs suggest({ action: "by_key", key: "authentication" })*
-> *Runs suggest({ action: "by_context", target: "constraint", text: "authentication", tags: ["security"] })*
->
-> **Decisions Found** (3):
-> 1. "api-authentication-method" - JWT tokens (v2, last updated 3 days ago)
-> 2. "jwt-token-expiration-policy" - 15min access, 7d refresh (v1)
-> 3. "session-management-strategy" - stateless sessions (v1)
->
-> **Constraints Found** (2) via suggest (v4.0):
-> 1. "All API endpoints must verify JWT tokens" (security, priority 4, score: 85)
-> 2. "Token refresh must use rotation strategy" (security, priority 3, score: 72)
->
-> **Implementation Tasks** (8):
-> - ✅ 6 completed: JWT service, middleware, token rotation, tests
-> - ⏳ 1 in-progress: Add OAuth2 social login
-> - ❌ 1 blocked: None
->
-> **Potential Issues Detected**:
-> 1. Decision "jwt-token-expiration-policy" doesn't mention refresh token rotation, but constraint requires it
-> 2. OAuth2 task not linked to authentication decisions
-> 3. No constraint for OAuth2 token-to-JWT mapping
->
-> Handing off to architect for validation...
-
-### Phase 2: Architect Validates
-
-**Architect reviews findings:**
-
-> **Architect**: Reviewing authentication consistency...
->
-> **Issue 1: Decision-Constraint Mismatch**
-> - Decision: "jwt-token-expiration-policy" (missing rotation details)
-> - Constraint: "Token refresh must use rotation strategy" (requires rotation)
-> - **Action**: Update decision to include rotation strategy, or document as separate decision
->
-> **Issue 2: Missing Task Links**
-> - Task: "Add OAuth2 social login" (in-progress)
-> - Missing link to: "api-authentication-method" decision
-> - **Action**: Link task to decision for traceability
->
-> **Issue 3: Missing OAuth2 Constraint**
-> - OAuth2 implementation starting
-> - No constraint for token mapping strategy
-> - **Action**: Create constraint "OAuth2 tokens must be converted to internal JWT format"
->
-> **Recommendations**:
-> 1. Version "jwt-token-expiration-policy" to v2 with rotation details
-> 2. Link OAuth2 task to authentication decisions
-> 3. Create OAuth2-to-JWT mapping constraint
-> 4. Consider documenting OAuth2 provider selection as decision
->
-> Should I implement these recommendations?
-
-## When to Use
-
-Use `/sqw-review` when:
-- Verifying implementation follows decisions
-- Checking architectural consistency
-- Auditing constraint compliance
-- Validating completed work
-- Investigating potential issues
-
-**Don't use when:**
-- Creating new decisions (use `/sqw-documentor` instead)
-- Planning new work (use `/sqw-plan` instead)
-- Just querying history (use `/sqw-research` instead)
-
-## Review Types
-
-### Decision Consistency Review
-Verify decisions are:
-- Complete and well-documented
-- Consistent with each other
-- Implemented by tasks
-- Compliant with constraints
-- Properly versioned
-
-### Implementation Review
-Verify tasks:
-- Linked to decisions they implement
-- Following constraint guidelines
-- Properly prioritized
-- Not blocked unnecessarily
-- Completed work matches decisions
-
-### Constraint Compliance Review
-Verify constraints are:
-- Clear and actionable
-- Reflected in decisions
-- Enforced by task acceptance criteria
-- Not conflicting with each other
-- Appropriate priority level
-
-### Agent Workload Review
-Verify agents have:
-- Balanced workload
-- Clear task assignments
-- No prolonged blocked tasks
-- Consistent work patterns
-- Appropriate expertise matches
-
-## Example: Complete Review Session
-
-```bash
-/sqw-review security architecture
-```
-
-### Phase 1: Researcher
-
-> **Researcher**: Analyzing security architecture...
->
-> *Runs suggest({ action: "by_tags", tags: ["security"] })*
-> *Runs suggest({ action: "by_context", target: "constraint", tags: ["security"], layer: "cross-cutting" })*
->
-> **Security Decisions** (5):
-> 1. "api-authentication-method" - JWT tokens
-> 2. "api-authorization-approach" - role-based access control
-> 3. "password-hashing-algorithm" - bcrypt with work factor 12
-> 4. "https-enforcement-strategy" - HTTPS-only in production
-> 5. "security-headers-policy" - strict CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options
->
-> **Security Constraints Found** (4) via suggest (v4.0):
-> 1. "All passwords must be hashed with bcrypt" (security, priority 4, score: 88)
-> 2. "All API endpoints must verify authentication" (security, priority 4, score: 85)
-> 3. "Production must enforce HTTPS" (security, priority 4, score: 80)
-> 4. "All responses must include security headers" (security, priority 3, score: 72)
->
-> **Security Tasks** (12 total):
-> - ✅ 9 completed
-> - ⏳ 2 in-progress: HTTPS redirect middleware, CSP configuration
-> - ❌ 1 blocked: Security audit (waiting for external auditor)
->
-> **Cross-Layer Analysis**:
-> - Presentation: 3 tasks (HTTPS, CSP, HSTS)
-> - Business: 4 tasks (auth, authz, password hashing)
-> - Cross-cutting: 5 tasks (security middleware, logging)
->
-> **Findings**:
-> 1. ✅ All decisions have implementing tasks
-> 2. ✅ All constraints aligned with decisions
-> 3. ⚠️ CSP configuration task in-progress for 5 days (possible stale)
-> 4. ⚠️ No decision documented for session timeout policy
-> 5. ⚠️ HTTPS redirect task not linked to "https-enforcement-strategy" decision
->
-> Handing to architect for validation...
-
-### Phase 2: Architect
-
-> **Architect**: Security architecture validation...
->
-> **Overall Assessment**: Strong security foundation with minor gaps
->
-> **Issue 1: Stale CSP Configuration Task**
-> - Task in-progress for 5 days without updates
-> - **Action**: Check if task is blocked, move to waiting_review, or reassign
->
-> **Issue 2: Missing Session Timeout Decision**
-> - Multiple authentication decisions but no session timeout policy
-> - Constraint: "All API endpoints must verify authentication" implies timeout needed
-> - **Action**: Document "session-timeout-policy" decision
->
-> **Issue 3: Missing Task Link**
-> - HTTPS redirect task not linked to HTTPS enforcement decision
-> - **Action**: Link task to decision for traceability
->
-> **Issue 4: Password Reset Security Not Addressed**
-> - Password hashing documented but not reset/recovery security
-> - **Action**: Consider documenting "password-reset-security" decision
->
-> **Constraint Compliance**: ✅ All active
-> - Password hashing: ✅ Implemented (bcrypt work factor 12)
-> - Authentication verification: ✅ Middleware in place
-> - HTTPS enforcement: ⏳ In progress (nearly complete)
-> - Security headers: ⏳ In progress (CSP configuration)
->
-> **Recommendations**:
-> 1. Investigate CSP configuration task (5 days stale)
-> 2. Document session timeout policy decision
-> 3. Link HTTPS redirect task to enforcement decision
-> 4. Consider password reset security decision
-> 5. Create constraint for session timeout after decision documented
->
-> **Priority Actions** (next 24 hours):
-> 1. Check CSP task status (possibly blocked?)
-> 2. Document session timeout decision (closes security gap)
->
-> Should I implement these recommendations?
-
-## Integration with Other Workflows
-
-This workflow combines:
-- `/sqw-research` - Context analysis (researcher phase)
-- `/sqw-documentor` - Decision updates (architect phase)
-
-Use with:
-- **Before review**: Complete implementation work
-- **During review**: Researcher → architect validation
-- **After review**: Implement recommendations, create corrective tasks
-
-## Token Efficiency
-
-This workflow is efficient for comprehensive validation:
-
-**Manual validation**:
-- Query decisions: 3k tokens
-- Query constraints: 2k tokens
-- Query tasks: 4k tokens
-- Cross-reference: 2k tokens
-- Validate: 3k tokens
-- Total: 14k tokens
-
-**Combined /sqw-review (v4.0)**:
-- Research phase: 5k tokens (using suggest for constraints)
-- Architect phase: 4k tokens (validation)
-- **Total**: 9k tokens (35% savings)
-- Constraint suggest reduces query overhead significantly
-
-**Estimated Token Usage**: 10,000-20,000 tokens per review session
-
-**AI Time Estimate**:
-- Research phase: 10-20 minutes
-- Architect phase: 15-25 minutes
-- **Total**: 25-45 minutes
-
-## Review Checklist
-
-The workflow automatically checks:
-
-### Decision Quality
-- [ ] Key decisions documented
-- [ ] Rationale provided
-- [ ] Alternatives considered
-- [ ] Tradeoffs acknowledged
-- [ ] Properly tagged
-- [ ] Appropriate layer assigned
-
-### Decision Consistency
-- [ ] No conflicting decisions
-- [ ] Versions tracked properly
-- [ ] Related decisions linked
-- [ ] Decision context complete
-
-### Implementation Coverage
-- [ ] Decisions have implementing tasks
-- [ ] Tasks linked to decisions
-- [ ] Acceptance criteria match decisions
-- [ ] No orphaned implementations
-
-### Constraint Compliance
-- [ ] Constraints documented
-- [ ] Constraints aligned with decisions
-- [ ] Tasks follow constraints
-- [ ] Priorities appropriate
-
-### Task Health
-- [ ] No stale in-progress tasks
-- [ ] Blocked tasks have valid reasons
-- [ ] Dependencies logical
-- [ ] Agent assignments appropriate
-
-## Tips
-
-1. **Be specific about review scope** - "authentication" vs "entire security architecture"
-2. **Review regularly** - catch issues early (weekly for active projects)
-3. **Act on findings** - researcher + architect provide actionable recommendations
-4. **Document corrections** - update decisions when inconsistencies found
-5. **Link everything** - tasks ↔ decisions ↔ constraints for traceability
-
-## Review Triggers
-
-Consider running `/sqw-review` when:
-- Completing a major feature
-- Before starting related work
-- After significant decision changes
-- Investigating quality issues
-- Onboarding new team members
-- Preparing for code review
-- Quarterly architecture audits
-
-## Error Recovery
-
-If research finds too many issues:
-- Break review into smaller scopes
-- Prioritize critical issues first
-- Create corrective tasks via scrum master
-- Schedule follow-up review
-
-If architect validation is unclear:
-- Request more specific research
-- Break complex issues into sub-reviews
-- Consult original decision authors
-- Document uncertainty as new decision
-
-You get comprehensive validation combining data-driven research with expert architectural analysis.