claude-mpm 4.24.0__py3-none-any.whl → 5.0.9__py3-none-any.whl

claude_mpm/agents/templates/structured-questions-examples.md

@@ -0,0 +1,615 @@
+# Structured Questions Examples
+
+**Purpose**: Comprehensive examples of using structured question templates for consistent user interaction
+**Usage**: Reference for PM when using AskUserQuestion tool with validation templates
+**Related**: validation-templates.md, pr-workflow-examples.md, context-management-examples.md
+
+---
+
+## Project Initialization Workflow
+
+### Complete /mpm-init Example
+
+**Scenario**: User initializes new project with `/mpm-init` command
+
+```
+User: "/mpm-init"
+
+Step 1: PM Detects Project Context
+PM checks:
+- .git directory: exists ✅
+- package.json: not found
+- requirements.txt: not found
+- Project type: unknown
+- Language: unknown
+
+Step 2: PM Uses ProjectTypeTemplate
+```python
+ProjectTypeTemplate(
+    existing_files=False,
+    detected_language=None
+)
+```
+
+Step 3: PM Asks User with AskUserQuestion
+```json
+{
+  "questions": [
+    {
+      "question": "What type of project is this?",
+      "header": "Project Type",
+      "multiSelect": false,
+      "options": [
+        {
+          "label": "Web Application",
+          "description": "Full-stack web app with frontend and backend"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "API Service",
+          "description": "Backend API only (REST or GraphQL)"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "CLI Tool",
+          "description": "Command-line application or script"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "Library/Package",
+          "description": "Reusable library to be published"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "question": "What is the primary programming language?",
+      "header": "Language",
+      "multiSelect": false,
+      "options": [
+        {
+          "label": "JavaScript/TypeScript",
+          "description": "Node.js backend or frontend framework"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "Python",
+          "description": "Python application or service"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "Go",
+          "description": "Go application or service"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "Rust",
+          "description": "Rust application or service"
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+Step 4: User Responds
+```
+User selections:
+- Project Type: "Web Application"
+- Language: "JavaScript/TypeScript"
+```
+
+Step 5: PM Parses Responses and Continues
+```python
+project_type = "web_application"
+language = "typescript"
+
+# PM now uses DevelopmentWorkflowTemplate
+DevelopmentWorkflowTemplate(
+    project_type="web_application",
+    language="typescript"
+)
+```
+
+Step 6: PM Asks Development Preferences
+```json
+{
+  "questions": [
+    {
+      "question": "Which testing framework should we use?",
+      "header": "Testing",
+      "multiSelect": false,
+      "options": [
+        {
+          "label": "Jest",
+          "description": "Industry standard, 70% market share, React ecosystem"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "Vitest",
+          "description": "Modern, Vite-native, faster than Jest"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "No testing framework",
+          "description": "Skip testing setup for now"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "question": "Do you want CI/CD configured?",
+      "header": "CI/CD",
+      "multiSelect": false,
+      "options": [
+        {
+          "label": "GitHub Actions",
+          "description": "Set up .github/workflows/ci.yml"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "GitLab CI",
+          "description": "Set up .gitlab-ci.yml"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "No CI/CD",
+          "description": "Skip CI/CD setup"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "question": "Which package manager?",
+      "header": "Package Manager",
+      "multiSelect": false,
+      "options": [
+        {
+          "label": "npm",
+          "description": "Default Node.js package manager"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "pnpm",
+          "description": "Faster, disk-efficient alternative"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "yarn",
+          "description": "Popular alternative with workspaces support"
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+Step 7: User Responds
+```
+User selections:
+- Testing: "Vitest"
+- CI/CD: "GitHub Actions"
+- Package Manager: "pnpm"
+```
+
+Step 8: PM Delegates to Engineer
+```
+PM → Engineer: "Initialize project with following configuration:
+
+📋 PROJECT SETUP:
+- Type: Web Application
+- Language: TypeScript
+- Testing: Vitest
+- CI/CD: GitHub Actions
+- Package Manager: pnpm
+
+Tasks:
+1. Create package.json with TypeScript + Vitest dependencies
+2. Set up tsconfig.json for web application
+3. Create vitest.config.ts
+4. Set up .github/workflows/ci.yml for GitHub Actions
+5. Create basic project structure:
+   - src/
+   - tests/
+   - public/ (if frontend)
+6. Create README.md with setup instructions
+7. Create .gitignore for Node.js + TypeScript
+
+Use pnpm for all package management operations."
+
+Engineer executes setup...
+
+Engineer → PM: "Project initialized:
+- package.json created with TypeScript, Vitest, React
+- tsconfig.json configured for React + strict mode
+- vitest.config.ts set up with coverage
+- GitHub Actions CI configured (lint, test, build)
+- Project structure created
+- README.md with setup instructions
+- .gitignore configured
+
+Ready to start development. Run: pnpm install"
+```
+
+Step 9: PM Reports to User
+```
+PM → User: "✅ Project initialized successfully
+
+Configuration:
+- Web Application (TypeScript)
+- Testing: Vitest with coverage
+- CI/CD: GitHub Actions
+- Package Manager: pnpm
+
+Next steps:
+1. Run: pnpm install
+2. Run: pnpm test (verify setup)
+3. Run: pnpm dev (start development server)
+
+Project structure ready for development."
+```
+```
+
+**Key Flow**:
+1. PM asks project type + language
+2. PM uses responses to configure development workflow template
+3. PM asks testing, CI/CD, package manager preferences
+4. PM delegates complete setup to engineer with all context
+5. User has fully configured project ready for development
+
+---
+
+## PR Strategy Template Usage
+
+### Multi-Ticket PR Creation
+
+**Scenario**: User requests PRs for multiple tickets
+
+```
+User: "Create PRs for PROJ-101, PROJ-102, PROJ-103"
+
+Step 1: PM Analyzes Context
+PM checks:
+- Ticket count: 3 tickets
+- CI configuration: .github/workflows/ci.yml exists ✅
+- Dependencies: PROJ-102 depends on PROJ-101
+
+Step 2: PM Uses PRWorkflowTemplate
+```python
+PRWorkflowTemplate(
+    num_tickets=3,
+    has_ci=True,
+    dependencies_detected=True
+)
+```
+
+Step 3: PM Asks User with AskUserQuestion
+```json
+{
+  "questions": [
+    {
+      "question": "How should we create PRs for these 3 tickets? (Dependencies detected: PROJ-102 → PROJ-101)",
+      "header": "PR Strategy",
+      "multiSelect": false,
+      "options": [
+        {
+          "label": "Main-based PRs (independent)",
+          "description": "Each ticket gets its own PR to main. Good for parallel review. ⚠️ May cause conflicts with detected dependencies."
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "Stacked PRs (sequential)",
+          "description": "PRs build on each other (PROJ-102 → PROJ-101 → main). Recommended when dependencies exist."
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "question": "Should PRs be created as drafts?",
+      "header": "Draft Mode",
+      "multiSelect": false,
+      "options": [
+        {
+          "label": "Draft PRs",
+          "description": "Create as drafts for early feedback before formal review"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "Ready for Review",
+          "description": "Create as ready-to-review (recommended if all tests passing)"
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+Step 4: User Responds
+```
+User selections:
+- PR Strategy: "Stacked PRs (sequential)"
+- Draft Mode: "Ready for Review"
+```
+
+Step 5: PM Delegates to version-control
+```
+PM → version-control: "Create stacked PRs for PROJ-101, PROJ-102, PROJ-103
+
+Strategy: Stacked (respects dependencies)
+- PR #1: PROJ-101 → main
+- PR #2: PROJ-102 → feature/PROJ-101
+- PR #3: PROJ-103 → main (independent)
+
+Draft mode: false (ready for review)
+```
+```
+
+**Template Advantage**: PM automatically detects dependencies and warns user about potential conflicts with main-based strategy.
+
+---
+
+## Scope Validation Template Usage
+
+### Research Discovery Scenario
+
+**Scenario**: Research discovers additional work during ticket implementation
+
+```
+User: "Implement TICKET-456: Add payment processing"
+
+Research Agent discovers 8 additional items:
+1. PCI compliance requirements (out-of-scope)
+2. Webhook handler for payment events (scope-adjacent)
+3. Payment retry logic (in-scope)
+4. Refund processing (scope-adjacent)
+5. Invoice generation (out-of-scope)
+6. Currency conversion (out-of-scope)
+7. Payment method storage (in-scope)
+8. Error handling for payment failures (in-scope)
+
+PM Classifies:
+- In-Scope (3): Payment retry logic, payment method storage, error handling
+- Scope-Adjacent (2): Webhook handler, refund processing
+- Out-of-Scope (3): PCI compliance, invoice generation, currency conversion
+
+PM Uses ScopeValidationTemplate:
+```python
+ScopeValidationTemplate(
+    originating_ticket="TICKET-456",
+    ticket_title="Add payment processing",
+    in_scope_items=[
+        "Payment retry logic",
+        "Payment method storage",
+        "Error handling for payment failures"
+    ],
+    scope_adjacent_items=[
+        "Webhook handler for payment events",
+        "Refund processing"
+    ],
+    out_of_scope_items=[
+        "PCI compliance requirements",
+        "Invoice generation",
+        "Currency conversion"
+    ]
+)
+```
+
+PM Asks User:
+```json
+{
+  "questions": [
+    {
+      "question": "Research discovered 8 items during TICKET-456 work. How should we handle scope?",
+      "header": "Scope Decision",
+      "multiSelect": false,
+      "options": [
+        {
+          "label": "Include all 8 in TICKET-456",
+          "description": "Expands ticket scope significantly. Delays completion by ~5 days."
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "Create 3 subtasks, defer 5 to backlog",
+          "description": "Subtasks for in-scope items. Defer scope-adjacent and out-of-scope."
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "Create 3 subtasks + 2 follow-up tickets",
+          "description": "Subtasks for in-scope. Create tickets for scope-adjacent. Defer out-of-scope."
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+User chooses: "Create 3 subtasks + 2 follow-up tickets"
+
+PM Delegates to Ticketing:
+```
+PM → Ticketing: "Based on TICKET-456 scope validation:
+
+1. Create 3 subtasks under TICKET-456:
+   - TICKET-456-1: Payment retry logic
+   - TICKET-456-2: Payment method storage
+   - TICKET-456-3: Error handling for payment failures
+
+2. Create 2 follow-up tickets (same epic):
+   - PAYMENT-101: Webhook handler for payment events
+   - PAYMENT-102: Refund processing
+
+3. Defer to backlog (no tickets yet):
+   - PCI compliance requirements
+   - Invoice generation
+   - Currency conversion"
+```
+```
+
+**Template Advantage**: Structured approach prevents scope creep while capturing valuable discoveries for future work.
+
+---
+
+## Building Custom Questions Patterns
+
+### Advanced Use Cases Beyond Templates
+
+**Scenario**: PM needs custom questions not covered by standard templates
+
+```
+User: "Set up monitoring for our application"
+
+PM Analysis:
+- Requires custom questions (not covered by existing templates)
+- Multiple decisions: monitoring tool, metrics, alerting
+- Need user preferences before delegating to ops
+
+PM Builds Custom Questions:
+```json
+{
+  "questions": [
+    {
+      "question": "Which monitoring solution should we use?",
+      "header": "Monitoring",
+      "multiSelect": false,
+      "options": [
+        {
+          "label": "Prometheus + Grafana",
+          "description": "Self-hosted, full control, requires infrastructure"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "Datadog",
+          "description": "SaaS, easy setup, costs scale with usage"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "CloudWatch",
+          "description": "AWS native, integrates well if already on AWS"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "question": "What should we monitor?",
+      "header": "Metrics",
+      "multiSelect": true,  // Multiple selections allowed
+      "options": [
+        {
+          "label": "Application metrics",
+          "description": "Request rate, error rate, latency (RED metrics)"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "Infrastructure metrics",
+          "description": "CPU, memory, disk usage"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "Business metrics",
+          "description": "User signups, payments, conversions"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "Database metrics",
+          "description": "Query performance, connection pool, locks"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "question": "Set up alerting?",
+      "header": "Alerting",
+      "multiSelect": false,
+      "options": [
+        {
+          "label": "Yes, with PagerDuty",
+          "description": "24/7 on-call rotation, escalation policies"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "Yes, with Slack",
+          "description": "Alerts to Slack channel, no on-call"
+        },
+        {
+          "label": "No alerting yet",
+          "description": "Just dashboards for now"
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+}
+```
+
+User Responds:
+```
+User selections:
+- Monitoring: "Prometheus + Grafana"
+- Metrics: ["Application metrics", "Infrastructure metrics", "Database metrics"]
+- Alerting: "Yes, with Slack"
+```
+
+PM Delegates to ops:
+```
+PM → ops: "Set up monitoring infrastructure
+
+Configuration:
+- Tool: Prometheus + Grafana (self-hosted)
+- Metrics to collect:
+  - Application: Request rate, error rate, latency (RED)
+  - Infrastructure: CPU, memory, disk
+  - Database: Query performance, connection pool, locks
+- Alerting: Slack integration (no PagerDuty)
+
+Tasks:
+1. Deploy Prometheus server
+2. Deploy Grafana for dashboards
+3. Configure application instrumentation (RED metrics)
+4. Set up node_exporter for infrastructure metrics
+5. Configure PostgreSQL exporter for database metrics
+6. Create Grafana dashboards for each metric category
+7. Set up Slack webhook for alerts
+8. Configure alert rules (error rate >5%, latency p95 >500ms, DB connections >80%)"
+```
+```
+
+**Custom Question Benefits**:
+- Flexible for any decision-making scenario
+- Multi-select support for collecting multiple preferences
+- Clear descriptions guide user choices
+- PM gets structured data to delegate effectively
+
+---
+
+## Template Selection Decision Tree
+
+**When to use which template?**
+
+```
+User Request → PM Analysis → Template Selection
+
+"Create PRs for X tickets"
+→ Multiple tickets detected
+→ Use PRWorkflowTemplate
+
+"/mpm-init" or "Initialize project"
+→ Project setup needed
+→ Use ProjectTypeTemplate + DevelopmentWorkflowTemplate
+
+Research discovers additional work
+→ Scope boundary clarification needed
+→ Use ScopeValidationTemplate
+
+Monitoring, deployment, or custom workflow
+→ No standard template fits
+→ Build custom questions with AskUserQuestion
+
+Context reaching 70%
+→ Token management needed
+→ Use ContextManagementTemplate (auto-generated)
+```
+
+---
+
+## Success Criteria
+
+**Structured questions are working if**:
+- ✅ PM uses templates for common scenarios (PRs, init, scope)
+- ✅ PM builds custom questions when templates don't fit
+- ✅ User receives clear options with descriptions
+- ✅ PM parses responses correctly and delegates with full context
+- ✅ Decisions are documented and followed in delegation
+- ✅ Multi-select used appropriately (multiple metrics, features, etc.)
+
+**Red Flags**:
+- ❌ PM assumes user preferences instead of asking
+- ❌ Questions lack clear descriptions
+- ❌ Options are not mutually exclusive (unless multi-select)
+- ❌ PM doesn't use template responses in delegation
+- ❌ User confused by question phrasing
+- ❌ PM asks for same information multiple times
+
+---
+
+## Related References
+
+- **Validation Templates**: See [validation-templates.md](validation-templates.md)
+- **PR Workflow**: See [pr-workflow-examples.md](pr-workflow-examples.md)
+- **Context Management**: See [context-management-examples.md](context-management-examples.md)
+- **PM Examples**: See [pm-examples.md](pm-examples.md)
+
+---
+
+**Last Updated**: 2025-12-01
+**Phase**: Phase 3 Optimization - Example Extraction