Refine sm-flow trigger and scale rules
This commit is contained in:
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: sm-flow
|
||||
description: OpenSpec-first 的结构化工程开发协议层 harness。编排 OpenSpec 的完整生命周期,通过阶段、门控、人类对齐和长期记忆,约束 agent 以正确的顺序、条件和标准使用 OpenSpec。用户想把粗略想法、issue、PRD 或已有 research 推进为准确 OpenSpec change,并通过 OpenSpec apply 实现、验证、归档时使用。
|
||||
description: OpenSpec-first 工程流程 harness。仅在用户显式调用 /sm-flow、/sm-flow explore、/sm-flow apply、/sm-flow archive,或明确要求使用 sm-flow 流程时使用;不要根据需求类型自动触发。
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# SM Flow
|
||||
@@ -9,6 +9,15 @@ SM Flow 是一个**协议层 harness**——编排 OpenSpec 的完整生命周
|
||||
|
||||
sm-flow 会自动维护 `devflow/` 目录作为项目长期记忆。用户不需要手动管理它,sm-flow 会在流程中自动读取和回填。
|
||||
|
||||
## 触发规则
|
||||
|
||||
只在用户显式调用时使用 sm-flow:
|
||||
|
||||
- 用户输入 `/sm-flow`、`/sm-flow explore`、`/sm-flow apply`、`/sm-flow archive`。
|
||||
- 用户用自然语言明确要求"使用 sm-flow"、"走 sm-flow 流程"或等价表达。
|
||||
|
||||
不要根据需求类型自动触发 sm-flow。即使任务涉及 OpenSpec、跨模块、接口契约、需求澄清或 devflow 归档,只要用户没有显式要求 sm-flow,就按普通工程任务处理。
|
||||
|
||||
## 四层架构
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
@@ -30,10 +39,10 @@ sm-flow → 编排层(harness):阶段、门控、产物约束、人
|
||||
|
||||
1. **OpenSpec 是唯一执行真理源**。apply 阶段必须读取 Committed OpenSpec 文件作为执行依据;对话中的描述不等于产物。Draft OpenSpec 是讨论对象,不是执行许可。
|
||||
2. **不得跳过 context**。生成 OpenSpec 前,必须先读取相关 devflow 上下文(glossary、ADR、历史项目)。
|
||||
3. **不得跳过 grill**。即使需求看起来很清楚,至少解决三个高价值澄清或验证问题。
|
||||
3. **不得跳过 grill**。必须按 `references/scales.md` 的当前分档要求完成澄清或验证。
|
||||
4. **不得跳过 commit**。进入 apply 前,Draft OpenSpec 必须通过 commit 检查成为 Committed OpenSpec。
|
||||
5. **冲突必须先分类再处理**。OpenSpec 不准(规格遗漏)→ 修正 OpenSpec;代码偏离(实现偏差)→ 修正代码;不确定或涉及设计方向 → 暂停并等待用户确认。
|
||||
6. **子 skill 必须显式调用**。每个阶段指定的子 skill 必须显式调用;如果子 skill 不存在,流程失败,不得静默跳过或降级执行。
|
||||
6. **能力来源必须显式声明**。每个阶段先声明使用外部子 skill / OpenSpec CLI / sm-flow 内置协议;外部能力不可用时可使用 `references/fallbacks.md` 的内置协议,但必须标注为 fallback。若外部能力和内置协议都不可用,流程失败。
|
||||
|
||||
每个阶段的过程约束(question pool、one-at-a-time、cross-artifact 对齐、冲突回写等)和质量约束(可观测产出要求)见 `references/phase-contracts.md` 中对应阶段的退出条件和 checkpoint。
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -48,11 +57,26 @@ sm-flow → 编排层(harness):阶段、门控、产物约束、人
|
||||
|
||||
用户也可以用自然语言指定从某个阶段继续,例如"ops-message-support 的 grill 已经做完了,继续"。harness 识别意图后,自动补做最小前置检查,然后从指定阶段继续。
|
||||
|
||||
## 可见 Checkpoint
|
||||
|
||||
内部阶段不是用户 API。对用户汇报进度时,默认只暴露 4 个 checkpoint:
|
||||
|
||||
| Checkpoint | 覆盖内部阶段 | 用户可见含义 |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Discover | clarify + context + propose + grill | 澄清目标、读取 devflow、形成轻量 proposal、解决关键问题 |
|
||||
| Commit | specify + audit + commit | 补全 OpenSpec、做架构/产物对齐、生成 Committed OpenSpec |
|
||||
| Apply | apply | 基于 Committed OpenSpec 实现和验证 |
|
||||
| Archive | archive | 回填 devflow、汇报验收、询问是否归档 OpenSpec |
|
||||
|
||||
除非用户要求看细节,进度汇报、暂停点和恢复提示应使用 checkpoint 名称,而不是逐个暴露 9 个内部阶段。内部阶段仍按顺序执行,并以 `references/phase-contracts.md` 为准。
|
||||
|
||||
## 首次加载
|
||||
|
||||
执行前只读取当前任务需要的 reference 文件:
|
||||
|
||||
- 需要执行阶段时,先读取 `references/phase-contracts.md`;如果当前阶段涉及接口影响分级、分档、启动规则、快速模式或完成标准,再补读 `references/operating-rules.md`。
|
||||
- 需要执行阶段时,先读取 `references/phase-contracts.md`;如果当前阶段涉及接口影响分级、分档、启动规则、快速模式或完成标准,再补读 `references/operating-rules.md`;如果外部 OpenSpec 能力或子 skill 不可用,再补读 `references/fallbacks.md`。
|
||||
- 判断或执行 `micro / standard / complex` 分档时,读取 `references/scales.md`;其它文件不得重复定义分档细节。
|
||||
- 当 checkpoint / gate / fallback / Draft / Committed 等术语含义不清,或需要统一对用户说明时,读取 `references/glossary.md`。
|
||||
- 创建或更新 PRD、ADR、验收报告、词汇表、复合知识文档时,读取 `references/templates.md`。
|
||||
- archive 阶段或需要从 OpenSpec 提取产物时,读取 `references/archive-rules.md`。
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -11,8 +11,8 @@ Archive 阶段必须按以下顺序执行,不得跳过或重排:
|
||||
- [ ] 创建 `devflow/projects/YYYY-MM-DD-{slug}/brief.md`
|
||||
(从 proposal.md 提取:背景、目标、范围、非目标)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] 创建 `devflow/projects/YYYY-MM-DD-{slug}/evidence.md`
|
||||
(从 decisions.md 提取:evidence-driven 记录)
|
||||
- [ ] 按 `references/scales.md` 的当前分档决定是否创建 `devflow/projects/YYYY-MM-DD-{slug}/evidence.md`
|
||||
(创建时从 decisions.md 提取 evidence-driven 记录)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] 创建 `devflow/projects/YYYY-MM-DD-{slug}/decisions.md`
|
||||
(整理为最终版:关键决策、权衡、风险)
|
||||
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ Archive 阶段必须按以下顺序执行,不得跳过或重排:
|
||||
### Step 2: 更新索引(必需)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] 在 `devflow/index.md` 末尾追加或更新一行:
|
||||
`| YYYY-MM-DD | slug | 领域 | 关键词 | openspec/changes/xxx | archived |`
|
||||
`| YYYY-MM-DD | slug | 领域 | 关键词 | openspec/changes/xxx | {status} |`
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 3: 标记 OpenSpec(必需)
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -53,10 +53,10 @@ Archive 阶段必须按以下顺序执行,不得跳过或重排:
|
||||
devflow/projects/YYYY-MM-DD-{slug}/
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
archive 阶段创建以下文件:
|
||||
archive 阶段按 `references/scales.md` 的当前分档创建以下文件:
|
||||
|
||||
- `brief.md`:从 proposal.md 提取背景、目标、范围、非目标。
|
||||
- `evidence.md`:从 decisions.md 中的 evidence-driven 记录提取。
|
||||
- `evidence.md`:从 decisions.md 中的 evidence-driven 记录提取;是否独立创建按 `references/scales.md` 执行。
|
||||
- `decisions.md`:保持为最终版,整理格式。
|
||||
- `acceptance.md`:从实现结果和验证结果提取。
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -77,11 +77,7 @@ archive 阶段创建以下文件:
|
||||
|
||||
## 产物分档
|
||||
|
||||
| 分档 | 适用场景 | 必须文件 | 扩展文件 |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| `micro` | 小改动、低风险、需求明确 | `brief.md`、`decisions.md`、`acceptance.md` | 证据少时并入 `brief.md` |
|
||||
| `standard` | 默认模式 | `brief.md`、`evidence.md`、`decisions.md`、`acceptance.md` | 按需 ADR/compound |
|
||||
| `complex` | 高风险、跨模块、需求不清、多人协作 | standard 全部文件 | 按需 `prd.md`、`research.md`、`design.md`、`tasks.md`、`alignment.md` |
|
||||
分档的适用场景和必须文件见 `references/scales.md`。本文件只定义 archive 阶段的创建顺序、提取映射和索引规则。
|
||||
|
||||
## 提取映射
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
|
||||
# 内置执行协议
|
||||
|
||||
本文件只在外部 OpenSpec CLI 或子 skill 不可用时使用。fallback 不是跳过阶段,而是由 sm-flow 用文件方式完成同等最小产物。每次使用 fallback 都必须写入 `decisions.md` 或 `acceptance.md`,说明能力来源、缺失能力、影响和剩余风险。
|
||||
|
||||
## 通用规则
|
||||
|
||||
- 优先使用外部能力;只有不可用、不可发现或无法在当前环境调用时才使用内置协议。
|
||||
- 不得因为使用 fallback 跳过 context、grill、commit、apply 授权或 archive 确认。
|
||||
- fallback 产物仍写入 `openspec/changes/{slug}/` 和 `devflow/projects/YYYY-MM-DD-{slug}/`。
|
||||
- 如果内置协议也无法满足阶段退出条件,暂停并向用户说明阻塞项。
|
||||
|
||||
## grill 内置协议
|
||||
|
||||
- 建立 question pool,至少覆盖术语、边界、验收;涉及参考实现或项目基础设施时加入技术实现问题。
|
||||
- 将问题标记为 `evidence-driven` 或 `user-interview`。
|
||||
- 先查证 evidence-driven 问题并汇报结论,再逐个询问 user-interview 问题。
|
||||
- 按 `references/scales.md` 的当前分档满足 grill 要求。
|
||||
- 将 question pool、证据结论、用户原话和确认状态写入 `decisions.md`;影响实现的结论回写 `proposal.md`。
|
||||
|
||||
## openspec 提案内置协议
|
||||
|
||||
- 在 `openspec/changes/{slug}/` 创建或更新:
|
||||
- `proposal.md`:问题、方案、范围、非目标、上下文约束、风险。
|
||||
- 设计产物:实现设计、接口影响、关键决策、架构风险;形式按 `references/scales.md` 的当前分档要求执行。
|
||||
- `specs/*/spec.md` 或等价 functional spec:描述用户可观察行为和验收场景。
|
||||
- `tasks.md`:按可执行切片拆分任务,并给每项写可验证验收标准。
|
||||
- 运行 cross-artifact 对齐检查:proposal → 设计产物 → specs → tasks。
|
||||
- 如果发现 gap,先修正 OpenSpec,再进入 commit。
|
||||
|
||||
## audit 内置协议
|
||||
|
||||
- 用 5 句话以内说明模块链路、数据所有权、跨模块依赖、架构风险和是否需要回写 OpenSpec。
|
||||
- 如果风险影响实现,修正设计产物或 `tasks.md`。
|
||||
- 将结论写入 `decisions.md`。
|
||||
|
||||
## openspec apply 内置协议
|
||||
|
||||
- 只依据 Committed OpenSpec 的 specs/tasks 实现;devflow 只作上下文参考。
|
||||
- 开始前检查 `.committed` 文件;缺失则返回 commit。
|
||||
- 如触发 pre-apply checkpoint,先阅读参考实现、grep 项目基础设施模式,并把技术栈清单写入 `decisions.md`。
|
||||
- 按 tasks 的纵向切片实现、验证并更新任务状态。
|
||||
- 发现冲突时按三类处理:OpenSpec 不准则修 OpenSpec,代码偏离则修代码,不确定则暂停等用户确认。
|
||||
|
||||
## openspec archive 内置协议
|
||||
|
||||
- 不删除或移动 OpenSpec change;只标记归档准备状态。
|
||||
- 完成 devflow 回填、更新 `devflow/index.md`、创建 `.archive-ready`。
|
||||
- 向用户汇报已创建文件、验证分类、剩余风险,并询问是否需要真实 OpenSpec archive。
|
||||
- 如果外部 archive 能力仍不可用,在 `acceptance.md` 标记 `accepted-unarchived`。
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
|
||||
# 术语表
|
||||
|
||||
本文件统一 sm-flow 协议中的核心词。优先使用这些词,避免同一概念多种说法。
|
||||
|
||||
| 术语 | 含义 | 使用边界 |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| sm-flow | 协议层 harness | 编排 OpenSpec 生命周期,不替代 OpenSpec |
|
||||
| OpenSpec | 当前变更的执行真理源 | apply 只能依据 Committed OpenSpec |
|
||||
| devflow | 长期记忆和上下文层 | 提供术语、历史决策、验收记录,不直接指挥实现 |
|
||||
| checkpoint | 用户可见检查点 | 默认只暴露 Discover / Commit / Apply / Archive |
|
||||
| gate | 硬门控 | 不满足就不能进入下一关键动作,如 commit gate |
|
||||
| Draft OpenSpec | 讨论和审计对象 | propose/specify 期间产生,不能直接 apply |
|
||||
| Committed OpenSpec | 已通过 commit gate 的 OpenSpec | apply 的唯一执行依据 |
|
||||
| fallback | 内置执行协议 | 外部 OpenSpec CLI 或子 skill 不可用时使用,必须标注 |
|
||||
| decisions.md | 过程日志 | clarify 到 apply 期间记录问题、证据、决策、冲突和回写 |
|
||||
| .committed | commit gate 标记文件 | 存在才可进入合规 apply |
|
||||
| .archive-ready | archive 准备标记文件 | 表示 devflow 已回填,等待用户确认是否 archive |
|
||||
| Discover | 用户可见 checkpoint | 覆盖 clarify + context + propose + grill |
|
||||
| Commit | 用户可见 checkpoint | 覆盖 specify + audit + commit |
|
||||
| Apply | 用户可见 checkpoint | 覆盖 apply |
|
||||
| Archive | 用户可见 checkpoint | 覆盖 archive |
|
||||
@@ -27,13 +27,14 @@
|
||||
- `/sm-flow apply [change]`:只执行,检查 commit gate → apply。
|
||||
- `/sm-flow explore`:带上下文的探索模式,不走标准阶段链。
|
||||
- `/sm-flow archive [change]`:收尾,回填 devflow + 归档确认。
|
||||
- 明确要求"使用 sm-flow"或"走 sm-flow 流程":按显式调用处理。
|
||||
- 自然语言指定阶段继续:识别意图后,自动补做最小前置检查,然后从指定阶段继续。
|
||||
2. 判断启动模式:
|
||||
- 完整模式:用户提供粗略想法或初始 PRD。
|
||||
- Research 模式:用户已有 research,需要转成或修正 OpenSpec。
|
||||
- PRD 文件模式:用户提供已有 PRD 路径。
|
||||
- 恢复模式:用户希望从某个阶段继续(补做最小前置检查)。
|
||||
- 快速模式:小改动,合并 gate(见下文)。
|
||||
- 快速模式:小改动,合并 gate;具体分档规则见 `references/scales.md`。
|
||||
3. 如果缺少 `devflow/`,初始化:
|
||||
- `devflow/projects/`
|
||||
- `devflow/glossary/CONTEXT.md`
|
||||
@@ -42,7 +43,25 @@
|
||||
5. 检查 OpenSpec 和子 skill 是否可用:
|
||||
- OpenSpec 能力:`openspec-propose`、`openspec-apply-change`、`openspec-archive-change`。
|
||||
- 辅助能力:`to-prd`、`grill-with-docs`、`diagnose`、`tdd`、`zoom-out`。
|
||||
6. 如果 OpenSpec 不可用,不要直接绕过;使用内置执行协议(见 `references/fallbacks.md`),并在 apply 前向用户说明。
|
||||
6. 如果 OpenSpec 或子 skill 不可用,不要静默跳过;使用内置执行协议(见 `references/fallbacks.md`),并在当前 checkpoint 说明 fallback 来源、影响和剩余风险。
|
||||
|
||||
## 进度汇报
|
||||
|
||||
用户可见进度默认折叠为 4 个 checkpoint:
|
||||
|
||||
| Checkpoint | 内部阶段 |
|
||||
| --- | --- |
|
||||
| Discover | clarify + context + propose + grill |
|
||||
| Commit | specify + audit + commit |
|
||||
| Apply | apply |
|
||||
| Archive | archive |
|
||||
|
||||
汇报规则:
|
||||
|
||||
- 面向用户时优先使用 checkpoint 名称,不逐个汇报 9 个内部阶段。
|
||||
- 内部阶段只在 checkpoint 摘要中作为证据列出,例如"Discover 已完成:读取了 devflow、生成 proposal、解决 2 个问题"。
|
||||
- 只有发生阻塞、冲突、fallback、用户要求继续某个内部阶段,或需要解释恢复位置时,才暴露内部阶段名。
|
||||
- 当前分档的汇报压缩规则见 `references/scales.md`;无论分档如何,都不要把内部阶段名当作用户操作入口。
|
||||
|
||||
## 项目标识规则
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -63,7 +82,7 @@ Devflow 是 sm-flow 自动维护的项目长期记忆层,不复制 OpenSpec
|
||||
**最终档案**(archive 阶段从 decisions.md + OpenSpec 产物提取):
|
||||
|
||||
- `brief.md`:背景、目标、范围、非目标、分档、关联 OpenSpec change。
|
||||
- `evidence.md`:代码/文档证据、历史决策、evidence-driven 结论和汇报状态。
|
||||
- `evidence.md`:代码/文档证据、历史决策、evidence-driven 结论和汇报状态;分档要求见 `references/scales.md` 和 `references/archive-rules.md`。
|
||||
- `acceptance.md`:实现结果、验证命令、未验证项、归档状态、后续事项。
|
||||
|
||||
**按需产物**(archive 阶段按需创建):
|
||||
@@ -75,28 +94,17 @@ Devflow 是 sm-flow 自动维护的项目长期记忆层,不复制 OpenSpec
|
||||
- `alignment.md` / `clarifications.md`:仅在 gap 或澄清很多时使用。
|
||||
- `adr/*.md` 和 `compound/*.md`:仅在满足 ADR / compound knowledge 规则时使用。
|
||||
|
||||
**规模分档**:
|
||||
|
||||
- `micro`:小且低风险,gate 合并(见快速模式),最终档案同 standard。
|
||||
- `standard`:默认模式。
|
||||
- `complex`:高风险、跨模块、需求不清或多人协作时,在 standard 基础上按需增加扩展产物。
|
||||
**规模分档**:`micro / standard / complex` 的唯一规则源是 `references/scales.md`。
|
||||
|
||||
## 快速模式
|
||||
|
||||
快速模式适用于小而低风险的变更。它合并 gate 而不仅仅是压缩产物:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
standard 流程:clarify → context → propose checkpoint → grill → specify → audit checkpoint → commit
|
||||
micro 流程:clarify+context 合并 checkpoint → propose+specify 合并 checkpoint → grill(最少 1 个问题) → commit(简化检查)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
micro 的定位:**gate 变少但保留最关键的**(grill 最小澄清 + commit gate)。
|
||||
快速模式适用于 `references/scales.md` 定义的 micro 变更。它合并 gate 而不仅仅是压缩产物;具体覆盖规则见 `references/scales.md`。
|
||||
|
||||
无论什么模式,以下内容必须保留:
|
||||
|
||||
- context 最小上下文收集:至少检查 glossary 和相关 ADR。
|
||||
- grill 最小澄清:至少一个术语问题、一个边界问题、一个验收问题;evidence-driven 结论仍需汇报。
|
||||
- commit gate:确认没有未解决用户问题、接口影响已记录、OpenSpec tasks/specs 可执行。
|
||||
- grill 最小澄清:按 `references/scales.md` 当前分档要求执行;evidence-driven 结论仍需汇报。
|
||||
- commit gate:确认没有未解决用户问题、接口影响已记录、OpenSpec tasks/specs 可执行;完整性检查按 `references/scales.md` 当前分档要求执行。
|
||||
- apply 仍由 OpenSpec tasks/specs 驱动执行。
|
||||
- archive 轻量回填:记录验收结果、OpenSpec 链接和归档状态。
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -104,8 +112,9 @@ micro 的定位:**gate 变少但保留最关键的**(grill 最小澄清 + co
|
||||
|
||||
只有同时满足以下条件,流程才算完成:
|
||||
|
||||
- OpenSpec proposal/design/specs/tasks 已生成或更新到可执行状态。
|
||||
- 用户可见的 Discover、Commit、Apply、Archive checkpoint 已完成,或未完成项已明确标记为暂停/不适用。
|
||||
- OpenSpec proposal、设计产物、specs、tasks 已按当前分档生成或更新到可执行状态。
|
||||
- 实现或规划工作已完成,且执行依据来自 OpenSpec。
|
||||
- 已运行验证,或已记录未运行验证的原因。
|
||||
- `devflow/projects/YYYY-MM-DD-{slug}/` 包含 brief.md、evidence.md、decisions.md、acceptance.md。
|
||||
- `devflow/projects/YYYY-MM-DD-{slug}/` 包含 `references/scales.md` 和 `references/archive-rules.md` 要求的当前分档档案。
|
||||
- 用户知道剩余风险与下一步,并已被询问是否归档 OpenSpec change。
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -4,6 +4,18 @@
|
||||
|
||||
执行顺序:clarify → context → propose → grill → specify → audit → commit → apply → archive。
|
||||
|
||||
## 目录
|
||||
|
||||
- clarify — 入口澄清
|
||||
- context — 上下文收集
|
||||
- propose — 轻量 propose
|
||||
- grill — 人类对齐澄清
|
||||
- specify — 细化 + 对齐
|
||||
- audit — 架构审计
|
||||
- commit — Commit OpenSpec
|
||||
- apply — OpenSpec 执行
|
||||
- archive — 回填 + 归档
|
||||
|
||||
## clarify — 入口澄清
|
||||
|
||||
**进入条件**:用户提供粗略想法、初始 PRD、已有 research、issue,或要求启动 SM Flow。
|
||||
@@ -13,7 +25,7 @@
|
||||
- 如果用户已有 research,先识别它是否已经包含用户价值、技术方案、验收标准和任务拆分。
|
||||
- 如果输入过于模糊,最多追加三轮聚焦问题。
|
||||
- 当答案会改变 OpenSpec proposal/specs/tasks 时,优先一次只问一个问题。
|
||||
- 如果需要判断 `micro / standard / complex` 分档,补读 `references/operating-rules.md`。
|
||||
- 如果需要判断 `micro / standard / complex` 分档,补读 `references/scales.md`。
|
||||
|
||||
**退出条件**:
|
||||
- 问题可以用 1-2 句话说清楚。
|
||||
@@ -36,7 +48,7 @@
|
||||
- 读取 `devflow/glossary/CONTEXT.md`,提取相关术语和业务规则。
|
||||
- 搜索 `devflow/projects/` 中相关 PRD、design、tasks、acceptance 和 ADR。
|
||||
- 搜索 `devflow/compound/` 中可复用 learning、trick、decision、explore。
|
||||
- 记录哪些上下文会影响 OpenSpec proposal/design/specs/tasks。
|
||||
- 记录哪些上下文会影响 OpenSpec proposal、设计产物、specs 或 tasks。
|
||||
- 如果发现旧根目录 `CONTEXT.md` 与 `devflow/glossary/CONTEXT.md` 冲突,暂停并向用户汇报。
|
||||
|
||||
**退出条件**:
|
||||
@@ -70,13 +82,13 @@
|
||||
|
||||
**Human checkpoint**:
|
||||
- 向用户简要说明 proposal 范围、关键假设、主要风险、devflow 上下文如何影响方案。
|
||||
- 询问是否继续进入 grill 澄清阶段;用户明确要求"全自动执行"时可跳过等待。
|
||||
- 作为 Discover checkpoint 的中间状态汇报;询问是否继续完成 Discover 的人类澄清部分。用户明确要求"全自动执行"时可跳过等待。
|
||||
|
||||
## grill — 人类对齐澄清
|
||||
|
||||
**进入条件**:propose 已有轻量 proposal.md。
|
||||
|
||||
**显式子 skill**:`grill-with-docs`。进入本阶段必须调用 `.agents/skills/grill-with-docs/SKILL.md`。
|
||||
**能力来源**:优先使用 `grill-with-docs`;不可用时使用 `references/fallbacks.md#grill-内置协议`,并在 `decisions.md` 标注 fallback。
|
||||
|
||||
**动作**:
|
||||
- 优先使用 `grill-with-docs`。
|
||||
@@ -101,7 +113,7 @@
|
||||
|
||||
**退出条件**:
|
||||
- question pool 已建立并覆盖当前 change 所需维度。
|
||||
- 至少解决三个高价值澄清或验证问题,并记录每个问题属于 `evidence-driven` 还是 `user-interview`。
|
||||
- 已满足 `references/scales.md` 中当前分档的 grill 要求。每个问题都必须记录属于 `evidence-driven` 还是 `user-interview`。
|
||||
- 所有 evidence-driven 结论已向用户汇报。
|
||||
- 所有 user-interview 决策已获得用户确认。
|
||||
- 没有未解决或代理代确认的 user-interview 问题。
|
||||
@@ -117,20 +129,20 @@
|
||||
|
||||
**Human checkpoint**:
|
||||
- 汇报已解决和未解决的问题、proposal 变更、术语和 ADR 更新。
|
||||
- 询问是否继续进入 specify 细化阶段。
|
||||
- 汇报 Discover checkpoint 完成情况,并询问是否继续进入 Commit checkpoint。
|
||||
|
||||
## specify — 细化 + 对齐
|
||||
|
||||
**进入条件**:grill 已退出,需求已通过澄清稳定下来。
|
||||
|
||||
**显式子 skill**:`openspec-propose`(基于已稳定的 proposal 补全完整 OpenSpec);`to-prd`(按需生成 PRD)。进入本阶段必须先声明调用方式。
|
||||
**能力来源**:优先使用 `openspec-propose`(基于已稳定的 proposal 补全完整 OpenSpec);按需使用 `to-prd`。进入本阶段必须先声明调用方式;外部能力不可用时使用 `references/fallbacks.md#openspec-提案-内置协议`,并在 `decisions.md` 标注 fallback。
|
||||
|
||||
**动作**:
|
||||
- 基于已稳定的 proposal.md 补全 design.md、specs/、tasks.md:
|
||||
- 优先调用 `openspec-propose`,输入中明确说明"proposal.md 已存在,本次只需补全 design/specs/tasks"。
|
||||
- 如果不可用,执行 `references/fallbacks.md#openspec-提案-降级`。
|
||||
- 基于已稳定的 proposal.md 补全设计产物、specs/、tasks.md:
|
||||
- 优先调用 `openspec-propose`,输入中明确说明"proposal.md 已存在,本次只需按当前分档补全设计产物/specs/tasks"。
|
||||
- 如果不可用,执行 `references/fallbacks.md#openspec-提案-内置协议`。
|
||||
- 如果没有结构化 PRD,按需按 `to-prd` 协议生成 `brief.md`;复杂需求、对外协作或用户明确要求时再生成 `prd.md`。
|
||||
- `micro` 模式默认不创建独立 PRD,除非用户要求或需求复杂度升级。
|
||||
- 独立 PRD 是否需要按 `references/scales.md` 的当前分档和用户要求判断。
|
||||
- 用 grill 阶段的 decisions.md 记录增强 OpenSpec 产物:确保 design/specs/tasks 反映所有已确认的决策。
|
||||
- **显式 cross-artifact 对齐检查**——在 checkpoint 中输出对齐检查表:
|
||||
- `brief/prd` 中的目标、范围、非目标和验收预期 → `proposal` 是否覆盖。
|
||||
@@ -147,14 +159,14 @@
|
||||
- 如果发现不一致,优先修正 OpenSpec,而不是只修改 devflow 文档。
|
||||
|
||||
**退出条件**:
|
||||
- `design.md`、`specs/`、`tasks.md` 存在且与 proposal 对齐。
|
||||
- OpenSpec 细化产物存在且与 proposal 对齐;产物形态按 `references/scales.md` 的当前分档要求执行。
|
||||
- `brief.md` 已覆盖背景、目标、范围和非目标;复杂需求存在独立 `prd.md` 或用户明确不需要 PRD。
|
||||
- cross-artifact 对齐检查表已生成(4 行,每行标记已对齐/存在 gap),没有未处理 gap。
|
||||
- 涉及接口变更时,已记录接口影响等级和产物要求;不确定项已标记。
|
||||
- 所有已知冲突已修正或等待用户决策。
|
||||
|
||||
**输出**:
|
||||
- 完整的 Draft OpenSpec:proposal.md + design.md + specs/ + tasks.md。
|
||||
- Draft OpenSpec:按 `references/scales.md` 的当前分档要求生成 proposal、设计、specs 和 tasks。
|
||||
- `brief.md`,以及按需创建的 `prd.md`。
|
||||
- cross-artifact 对齐检查表(写入 checkpoint 或 decisions.md)。
|
||||
- 必要的 OpenSpec 修正。
|
||||
@@ -163,7 +175,7 @@
|
||||
|
||||
**进入条件**:specify 已退出,完整 OpenSpec 产物已存在。
|
||||
|
||||
**显式子 skill**:`zoom-out`。进入本阶段必须调用 `.agents/skills/zoom-out/SKILL.md`。
|
||||
**能力来源**:优先使用 `zoom-out`;不可用时使用 `references/fallbacks.md#audit-内置协议`,并在 `decisions.md` 标注 fallback。
|
||||
|
||||
**动作**:
|
||||
- 画出输入 → 处理 → 输出的模块链路。
|
||||
@@ -175,20 +187,20 @@
|
||||
|
||||
**退出条件**:
|
||||
- 架构风险已被接受,或流程返回 grill/specify 修正 OpenSpec。
|
||||
- OpenSpec design/tasks 已反映会影响实现的架构审计结论。
|
||||
- OpenSpec 设计产物/tasks 已反映会影响实现的架构审计结论。
|
||||
|
||||
**输出**:
|
||||
- 架构审计记录,写入 `decisions.md`;复杂架构审计可拆出 `design.md`。
|
||||
- 必要的 OpenSpec design/tasks 修正。
|
||||
- 必要的 OpenSpec 设计产物/tasks 修正。
|
||||
|
||||
**Human checkpoint**:
|
||||
- 用不超过五句话向用户说明架构风险、OpenSpec 修正点和实现计划。
|
||||
- 询问是否进入 commit。
|
||||
- 作为 Commit checkpoint 的中间状态汇报;询问是否继续完成 commit gate。
|
||||
|
||||
## commit — Commit OpenSpec
|
||||
|
||||
**进入条件**:
|
||||
- grill 已解决术语、边界、验收三个维度的高价值问题。
|
||||
- grill 已满足 `references/scales.md` 中当前分档要求。
|
||||
- 所有 `user-interview` 问题都已获得用户显式确认。
|
||||
- audit 已经完成,或快速模式下已记录跳过原因;快速模式定义见 `references/operating-rules.md#快速模式`。
|
||||
- Draft OpenSpec 已回写所有会影响实现的澄清、接口影响和架构审计结论。
|
||||
@@ -198,7 +210,7 @@
|
||||
- 检查 design 是否记录上下文约束、关键技术决策、架构风险和接口影响。
|
||||
- 检查 specs 是否表达外部可观察行为,并覆盖验收口径。
|
||||
- 检查 tasks 是否是可执行的纵向切片,而不是泛泛描述。
|
||||
- 复核 cross-artifact 对齐:`brief/prd → proposal → design → specs → tasks` 是否闭环,没有把字段、范围项、验收行为或实现切片丢在上游产物里。
|
||||
- 复核 cross-artifact 对齐:`brief/prd → proposal → 设计产物 → specs → tasks` 是否闭环,没有把字段、范围项、验收行为或实现切片丢在上游产物里。
|
||||
- 检查 `decisions.md` 中所有影响实现的发现,是否已回写到 proposal、design、specs 或 tasks。
|
||||
- 接口影响分级定义见 `references/operating-rules.md#接口影响分级`。
|
||||
- 检查接口影响是否已按 L1/L4 判级;L3/L4 是否有独立接口文档或等价独立章节。
|
||||
@@ -207,14 +219,14 @@
|
||||
|
||||
**退出条件**:
|
||||
- Draft OpenSpec 已达到可执行状态,并记录为 Committed OpenSpec。
|
||||
- **文件完整性检查**(必须全部通过):
|
||||
- [ ] `proposal.md` 存在,包含问题描述(至少 50 字)、建议方案(至少 100 字)、范围/非目标
|
||||
- [ ] `design.md` 存在,包含架构设计(文字或图)、数据结构定义(至少 1 个)、关键决策记录(至少 2 条)
|
||||
- [ ] `specs/` 目录存在,至少 1 个 functional-spec.md 包含 ≥3 个 requirement
|
||||
- [ ] `tasks.md` 存在,包含 ≥5 个可执行子任务,每个任务有验收标准
|
||||
- **文件完整性检查**(按 `references/scales.md` 的当前分档要求执行):
|
||||
- [ ] proposal 存在,且足以说明问题、建议方案、范围和非目标。
|
||||
- [ ] 设计产物存在,形式符合当前分档要求。
|
||||
- [ ] specs 存在,且表达用户可观察行为。
|
||||
- [ ] tasks 存在,且任务可执行、验收标准可验证。
|
||||
- **一致性检查**(必须通过):
|
||||
- [ ] proposal 中的核心概念在 design 中有对应设计
|
||||
- [ ] design 中的关键决策在 tasks 中有对应实现任务
|
||||
- [ ] proposal 中的核心概念在设计产物中有对应设计
|
||||
- [ ] 设计产物中的关键决策在 tasks 中有对应实现任务
|
||||
- [ ] tasks 的验收标准可验证(不是"正确实现""完成功能"这类模糊描述)
|
||||
- **标记文件**:检查通过后,创建 `openspec/changes/{slug}/.committed` 文件标记为 Committed OpenSpec
|
||||
- 所有 preflight 风险已消除或明确记录为已接受。
|
||||
@@ -225,28 +237,28 @@
|
||||
|
||||
**Human checkpoint**:
|
||||
- 用不超过五句话说明 Committed OpenSpec 的范围、接口影响、剩余风险和执行计划。
|
||||
- 询问是否进入 apply;除非用户在启动时明确要求"全自动执行",必须等待用户明确说出进入 apply、开始实现、执行修改或等价授权。
|
||||
- 汇报 Commit checkpoint 完成情况,并询问是否进入 Apply checkpoint;除非用户在启动时明确要求"全自动执行",必须等待用户明确说出进入 apply、开始实现、执行修改或等价授权。
|
||||
- 不得把 grill 的单个决策确认当作本 checkpoint 的授权。
|
||||
|
||||
## apply — OpenSpec 执行
|
||||
|
||||
**进入条件**:
|
||||
- `openspec/changes/{slug}/` 中 proposal/design/specs/tasks 已通过 commit,成为 Committed OpenSpec。
|
||||
- `openspec/changes/{slug}/` 中 proposal、设计产物、specs、tasks 已通过 commit,成为 Committed OpenSpec。
|
||||
- **前置门控检查**(硬约束):
|
||||
- 检查 `openspec/changes/{slug}/.committed` 文件是否存在
|
||||
- 如不存在,执行以下流程:
|
||||
1. 汇报:Draft OpenSpec 未通过 commit 检查
|
||||
2. 列出缺失的 checkpoint 项(文件完整性、一致性检查)
|
||||
3. 询问用户:是否补做 commit 检查,或明确跳过(需显式确认)
|
||||
3. 询问用户:是否补做 commit 检查;如用户要求不补做,则中止 apply 或标记为 `emergency-bypass`,且本次流程不得视为合规 sm-flow apply
|
||||
- commit 后已获得用户明确的 apply 授权,除非用户在启动时要求"全自动执行"。
|
||||
- devflow 与 OpenSpec 没有未解决冲突。
|
||||
- 没有未解决的 user-interview 问题、未判级接口影响、未汇报 evidence-driven 结论或未接受架构风险。
|
||||
|
||||
**显式子 skill**:`openspec-apply-change`;遇到 bug/不确定行为时显式调用 `diagnose`;需要测试驱动时显式调用 `tdd`。进入本阶段必须调用指定子 skill,不得静默跳过。
|
||||
**能力来源**:优先使用 `openspec-apply-change`;不可用时使用 `references/fallbacks.md#openspec-apply-内置协议`,并在 `decisions.md` 标注 fallback。遇到 bug/不确定行为时优先使用 `diagnose`;需要测试驱动时优先使用 `tdd`。不可用时执行对应最小协议并记录原因,不得静默跳过。
|
||||
|
||||
**动作**:
|
||||
|
||||
### Pre-apply Checkpoint(15-20 分钟)
|
||||
### Pre-apply Checkpoint
|
||||
|
||||
**触发条件**:当 OpenSpec 涉及以下任一情况时必须执行
|
||||
- design 或 tasks 中提到"参考 XXX 实现"
|
||||
@@ -254,12 +266,12 @@
|
||||
- 技术栈不熟悉或第一次在该项目实现类似功能
|
||||
|
||||
**执行步骤**:
|
||||
1. **完整阅读所有参考实现**(约 10 分钟)
|
||||
1. **阅读所有参考实现**
|
||||
- 从 OpenSpec design 或 tasks 中定位参考实现文件
|
||||
- 如果路径不明确,通过 Grep 搜索关键类名或模式
|
||||
- 逐行理解关键逻辑,提取可复用代码片段和模式
|
||||
- 理解关键逻辑,提取可复用代码片段和模式
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Grep 关键技术栈**(约 5 分钟)
|
||||
2. **Grep 关键技术栈**
|
||||
- 请求/响应结构模式(如 `RequestMsg`、`ResponseMsg`、DTO 规范)
|
||||
- 消息队列模式(如 `@KafkaListener`、`@YkMsg`、发送模板)
|
||||
- 统一工具类(如 `XxxUtil`、`XxxHelper`、加密/验签工具)
|
||||
@@ -273,11 +285,11 @@
|
||||
- 识别需要新建的工具类或基础设施
|
||||
|
||||
**输出要求**:
|
||||
- 技术栈清单已写入 `decisions.md` 的 "Pre-apply Research" 章节 ✅
|
||||
- 已列出所有参考实现的文件路径 ✅
|
||||
- 已识别需要新建的工具类/基础设施 ✅
|
||||
- 技术栈清单已写入 `decisions.md` 的 "Pre-apply Research" 章节。
|
||||
- 已列出所有参考实现的文件路径。
|
||||
- 已识别需要新建的工具类/基础设施。
|
||||
|
||||
**快速模式**:micro 分档可缩短为 5-10 分钟快速扫描,但仍需形成清单。
|
||||
**按风险执行**:执行深度按 `references/scales.md` 的当前分档和实现风险决定;退出判断以清单是否足以指导实现为准。
|
||||
|
||||
### 实现过程
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -299,9 +311,9 @@
|
||||
- 修改文件前遵守仓库指令,例如 `AGENTS.md`。
|
||||
|
||||
**退出条件**:
|
||||
- 已完成 pre-apply checkpoint(如触发条件满足),技术栈清单已写入 `decisions.md` ✅
|
||||
- 已完成 pre-apply checkpoint(如触发条件满足),技术栈清单已写入 `decisions.md`。
|
||||
- OpenSpec tasks 已完成,或剩余 tasks 已明确记录。
|
||||
- 核心功能已实现或明确标注"待联调",无纯 TODO 占位 ✅
|
||||
- 核心功能已实现或明确标注"待联调",无纯 TODO 占位。
|
||||
- 所有实现期冲突已分类并处理;没有未确认的规格遗漏、设计冲突或用户变更。
|
||||
- 已运行验证,或记录了未验证原因。
|
||||
- 已列出已知限制。
|
||||
@@ -315,13 +327,13 @@
|
||||
|
||||
**进入条件**:实现或规划工作已经达到可交接状态。
|
||||
|
||||
**显式子 skill**:`openspec-archive-change` 在用户确认 archive 后调用;archive 回填由 `sm-flow` 执行。必须调用子 skill,不得静默跳过。
|
||||
**能力来源**:`openspec-archive-change` 在用户确认 archive 后优先调用;不可用时使用 `references/fallbacks.md#openspec-archive-内置协议`,并在 `acceptance.md` 标注 fallback。archive 回填由 `sm-flow` 执行。
|
||||
|
||||
**动作**:
|
||||
- 遵循 `references/archive-rules.md`。
|
||||
- 从 `decisions.md`(过程日志)+ OpenSpec 产物提炼完整 devflow 档案:
|
||||
- `brief.md`:从 proposal.md 提取背景、目标、范围、非目标。
|
||||
- `evidence.md`:从 decisions.md 中的 evidence-driven 记录提取。
|
||||
- `evidence.md`:按 `references/scales.md` 和 `references/archive-rules.md` 的当前分档要求处理。
|
||||
- `decisions.md`:保持为最终版,整理格式。
|
||||
- `acceptance.md`:从实现结果和验证结果提取。
|
||||
- 只在复杂场景按需拆出 PRD/research/design/tasks/alignment。
|
||||
@@ -331,7 +343,7 @@
|
||||
- 询问用户是否要 archive OpenSpec change;不要默认执行归档。
|
||||
|
||||
**退出条件**:
|
||||
- `devflow/projects/YYYY-MM-DD-{slug}/` 包含 brief.md、evidence.md、decisions.md、acceptance.md;archive checkpoint 必须列出所有已创建的文件路径,验证文件实际存在于磁盘。
|
||||
- `devflow/projects/YYYY-MM-DD-{slug}/` 包含 `references/scales.md` 和 `references/archive-rules.md` 要求的当前分档档案;archive checkpoint 必须列出所有已创建的文件路径,验证文件实际存在于磁盘。
|
||||
- `devflow/index.md` 已包含或更新本项目条目。
|
||||
- 用户已被询问是否 archive OpenSpec change。
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
|
||||
# 分档规则
|
||||
|
||||
本文件是 `micro / standard / complex` 的唯一规则源。其它文件只引用本文件,不重复定义分档细节。
|
||||
|
||||
## standard 基准
|
||||
|
||||
standard 是默认分档,适用于普通功能、明确但有一定实现范围的变更。
|
||||
|
||||
- 用户可见 checkpoint:Discover → Commit → Apply → Archive。
|
||||
- OpenSpec 产物:`proposal.md`、独立 `design.md`、`specs/`、`tasks.md`。
|
||||
- grill:解决术语、边界、验收三个维度的高价值问题。
|
||||
- commit gate:检查 proposal、design、specs、tasks 的完整性和一致性。
|
||||
- devflow 档案:`brief.md`、`evidence.md`、`decisions.md`、`acceptance.md`。
|
||||
|
||||
## micro 覆盖
|
||||
|
||||
micro 适用于小改动、低风险、需求明确的变更。micro 是 standard 的减法,不是跳过流程。
|
||||
|
||||
- checkpoint 可合并:Discover + Commit 可在无阻塞时合并汇报。
|
||||
- micro 内部流程压缩为:clarify+context 合并 checkpoint → 轻量 propose → grill → specify+commit 合并 checkpoint。
|
||||
- context 保留最小收集:至少检查 glossary 和相关 ADR。
|
||||
- grill 保留最小澄清:至少解决一个高价值问题,并记录术语、边界、验收三类是否明确;不明确项必须补问或标记风险。
|
||||
- OpenSpec 仍需要 `proposal.md`、`specs/`、`tasks.md`。
|
||||
- `design.md` 可不独立创建;允许在 `proposal.md` 或 `tasks.md` 中写等价设计小节。
|
||||
- `specs/` 和 `tasks.md` 可轻量,但必须表达可观察行为和可执行任务。
|
||||
- commit gate 仍必须通过,并创建 `.committed`。
|
||||
- devflow 档案至少包含 `brief.md`、`decisions.md`、`acceptance.md`;证据少时可并入 `brief.md` 或 `decisions.md`。
|
||||
- apply 仍只能依据 Committed OpenSpec。
|
||||
- archive 仍要轻量回填 devflow,并询问是否归档 OpenSpec。
|
||||
|
||||
micro 不适用于接口影响不清、跨团队消费者、迁移/回滚、复杂状态机、长期架构决策或需求边界不清的变更;遇到这些情况应升级为 standard 或 complex。
|
||||
|
||||
## complex 增量
|
||||
|
||||
complex 适用于高风险、跨模块、需求不清、多人协作或长期架构影响明显的变更。complex 是 standard 的加法。
|
||||
|
||||
- 需要更完整的 Discover:增加需求澄清、证据查证、范围确认和风险接受。
|
||||
- checkpoint 内可补充关键内部阶段结果,但不要把内部阶段名当作用户操作入口。
|
||||
- 按需创建 `prd.md`、`research.md`、`alignment.md`、接口文档、ADR 或 compound knowledge。
|
||||
- 接口影响、迁移、灰度、回滚、兼容性和消费者边界必须显式记录。
|
||||
- audit 需要覆盖模块链路、数据所有权、生命周期、耦合风险和 ADR 冲突。
|
||||
- archive 在 standard 档案基础上按需提炼长期 design、research、tasks、ADR 和 compound knowledge。
|
||||
@@ -124,7 +124,7 @@
|
||||
|
||||
- 触发来源:用户质疑 / 用户变更 / 代码发现 / 测试失败 / 运行行为
|
||||
- 冲突对象:proposal / design / specs / tasks / ADR / 代码行为
|
||||
- 分类:实现偏差 / 规格遗漏 / 设计冲突 / 用户变更
|
||||
- 分类:OpenSpec 不准 / 代码偏离 / 不确定
|
||||
|
||||
## 证据
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@
|
||||
|
||||
- 决策:
|
||||
- 是否需要用户确认:是 / 否
|
||||
- OpenSpec 回写:不需要 / 已回写 / 待回写
|
||||
- OpenSpec 回写:不需要 / 已回写 / 待回写 / 等待用户确认
|
||||
- 代码处理:
|
||||
- 验证方式:
|
||||
```
|
||||
@@ -353,8 +353,8 @@ specify 阶段的 checkpoint 必须包含此检查表。每项标记"已对齐"
|
||||
| 上游 → 下游 | 检查内容 | 状态 |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| brief/prd → proposal | 目标、范围、非目标、验收预期是否进入 proposal | 已对齐 / 存在 gap |
|
||||
| proposal → design | 范围、约束、关键承诺是否进入 design | 已对齐 / 存在 gap |
|
||||
| design → specs/tasks | 影响实现的约束、接口影响、架构结论是否进入 specs 或 tasks | 已对齐 / 存在 gap |
|
||||
| proposal → 设计产物 | 范围、约束、关键承诺是否进入 design.md 或等价设计小节 | 已对齐 / 存在 gap |
|
||||
| 设计产物 → specs/tasks | 影响实现的约束、接口影响、架构结论是否进入 specs 或 tasks | 已对齐 / 存在 gap |
|
||||
| specs → tasks | 可观察行为是否被 tasks 覆盖为可执行切片 | 已对齐 / 存在 gap |
|
||||
|
||||
### Gap 详情(如有)
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -10,3 +10,5 @@
|
||||
| 2026-05-19 | dev-flow-skill-evaluation | sm-flow | dev-flow, sm-flow, skill-evaluation, fallback, phase-contracts | 未关联 | accepted-unarchived |
|
||||
| 2026-05-21 | sm-flow-v3-1-upgrade | sm-flow | interface-impact, commit-gate, devflow-index, apply-conflict, skill-compatibility | `openspec/changes/archive/2026-05-21-sm-flow-v3-1-upgrade/` | archived |
|
||||
| 2026-05-22 | sm-flow-execution-hardening | sm-flow | execution-hardening, checklist, phase-gate, cross-artifact, question-pool | 未关联 | active |
|
||||
| 2026-07-05 | validate-sm-flow-explicit-trigger | sm-flow | explicit-trigger, scale-source, fallback, validation | `openspec/archive/2026-07-05-validate-sm-flow-explicit-trigger/` | archived |
|
||||
| 2026-07-05 | validate-sm-flow-standard-change | sm-flow | standard-change, full-artifacts, evidence, validation | `openspec/archive/2026-07-05-validate-sm-flow-standard-change/` | archived |
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
|
||||
# Validate SM Flow Explicit Trigger Acceptance
|
||||
|
||||
## Result
|
||||
|
||||
Accepted and archived.
|
||||
|
||||
## Static Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- Trigger rule verification:
|
||||
- `SKILL.md` frontmatter says sm-flow is only used for explicit `/sm-flow` commands or explicit natural-language requests.
|
||||
- `SKILL.md` trigger section says task type alone must not auto-trigger sm-flow.
|
||||
- `operating-rules.md` startup checks now include explicit natural-language requests.
|
||||
|
||||
- Scale source verification:
|
||||
- Scale definition scan found `standard`, `micro`, and `complex` definition headings and definition phrases only in `references/scales.md`.
|
||||
- Other files refer to `references/scales.md` instead of redefining the scale rules.
|
||||
|
||||
- Obsolete wording verification:
|
||||
- No matches for minute/hour/second/timebox metrics.
|
||||
- No matches for old skip semantics or old fixed `proposal.md + design.md` expression.
|
||||
- No matches for old conflict wording targeted by this validation.
|
||||
|
||||
## Script Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- Passed: `python C:/Users/兜/.codex/skills/.system/skill-creator/scripts/quick_validate.py .agents/skills/sm-flow`
|
||||
- Passed: reference integrity scan for `references/*.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Browser Or Manual Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- Not applicable. This change only modifies skill protocol text and validation records.
|
||||
|
||||
## Unverified
|
||||
|
||||
- Real external OpenSpec CLI integration was not executed because the current tool surface does not expose those child commands.
|
||||
- Forward-testing with an independent subagent was not run in this pass.
|
||||
|
||||
## Fixed During Apply
|
||||
|
||||
- Replaced remaining hard-coded `design.md` wording in phase/audit fallback rules where the protocol must respect scale-specific design artifacts.
|
||||
- Added explicit natural-language sm-flow requests to startup checks.
|
||||
|
||||
## OpenSpec Archive
|
||||
|
||||
- `.archive-ready` is present.
|
||||
- User confirmed archive.
|
||||
- Archived location: `openspec/archive/2026-07-05-validate-sm-flow-explicit-trigger/`.
|
||||
- Status: `archived`.
|
||||
- Archive method: local filesystem archive following existing repository convention because external `openspec-archive-change` is not directly callable in the current tool surface.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
|
||||
# Validate SM Flow Explicit Trigger Brief
|
||||
|
||||
## Background
|
||||
|
||||
`sm-flow` was simplified so it should only run on explicit user invocation. Related cleanup centralized scale rules, removed time-based metrics, and separated fallback/glossary details into references.
|
||||
|
||||
## Goal
|
||||
|
||||
Validate the current `sm-flow` design by running a real micro OpenSpec change through Discover, Commit, Apply, and Archive.
|
||||
|
||||
## Scope
|
||||
|
||||
- Validate `.agents/skills/sm-flow/SKILL.md`.
|
||||
- Validate `.agents/skills/sm-flow/references/*.md`.
|
||||
- Fix any protocol inconsistency found during validation.
|
||||
- Record fallback capability source because external OpenSpec commands are unavailable in the current tool surface.
|
||||
|
||||
## Non-Goals
|
||||
|
||||
- No business code changes.
|
||||
- No changes to the four visible checkpoints or nine internal phases.
|
||||
- No automatic trigger heuristics.
|
||||
- No historical archive rewrites.
|
||||
|
||||
## Scale
|
||||
|
||||
- Scale: `micro`.
|
||||
- Evidence is folded into `decisions.md`.
|
||||
- Linked OpenSpec change: `openspec/changes/validate-sm-flow-explicit-trigger/`.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
|
||||
# Validate SM Flow Explicit Trigger Decisions
|
||||
|
||||
## Capability Source
|
||||
|
||||
- Discover: sm-flow built-in protocol.
|
||||
- Propose/specify/apply/archive: fallback protocol from `.agents/skills/sm-flow/references/fallbacks.md`.
|
||||
- Missing external capability: OpenSpec CLI and OpenSpec child skills are not directly callable from the current tool surface.
|
||||
- Impact: validation is file-based and static; it can verify current protocol text and artifacts but cannot exercise a real external OpenSpec command.
|
||||
- Remaining risk: future tool availability may require rechecking integration behavior.
|
||||
|
||||
## Context
|
||||
|
||||
- `devflow/index.md` contains related sm-flow history:
|
||||
- `dev-flow-skill-evaluation`
|
||||
- `sm-flow-v3-1-upgrade`
|
||||
- `sm-flow-execution-hardening`
|
||||
- `devflow/glossary/CONTEXT.md` is project-level glossary and does not define sm-flow protocol terms.
|
||||
- Current validation change is new: `validate-sm-flow-explicit-trigger`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Scale Decision
|
||||
|
||||
- Scale: `micro`.
|
||||
- Reason: documentation/protocol validation only, no business code, no external interface contract change.
|
||||
- Interface impact: L1 internal documentation/protocol validation.
|
||||
- Micro constraints retained: proposal, specs, tasks, commit gate, apply verification, devflow archive, archive confirmation.
|
||||
|
||||
## Question Pool
|
||||
|
||||
| Question | Mode | Status | Result |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| Does top-level trigger text require explicit sm-flow invocation only? | evidence-driven | confirmed | `SKILL.md` frontmatter and trigger section both state explicit invocation only. |
|
||||
| Are scale definitions centralized in `references/scales.md`? | evidence-driven | confirmed | Scan for scale definition headings and definition phrases only matched `references/scales.md`. |
|
||||
| Are time/minute metrics absent from skill rules? | evidence-driven | confirmed | Obsolete time metric scan returned no matches. |
|
||||
| Does fallback usage remain explicit and recorded? | evidence-driven | confirmed | This file records fallback source, impact, and remaining risk. |
|
||||
| Is user confirmation needed for product scope? | user-interview | not required | User already requested this validation run; no unresolved product preference blocks this micro validation. |
|
||||
|
||||
## Cross-Artifact Alignment
|
||||
|
||||
| Link | Status | Notes |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| brief/prd -> proposal | not applicable | Micro validation has no separate brief/prd before archive. |
|
||||
| proposal -> design artifact | aligned | Proposal contains inline micro design notes. |
|
||||
| design artifact -> specs | aligned | Specs cover explicit trigger, scale source, no time metrics, and fallback recording. |
|
||||
| specs -> tasks | aligned | Tasks include scans, validation, patching if needed, and archive handoff. |
|
||||
|
||||
## Commit Gate
|
||||
|
||||
- Passed.
|
||||
- Proposal explains why, what, scope, non-goals, inline design, and risks.
|
||||
- Specs describe observable validation behavior.
|
||||
- Tasks are executable and have validation evidence.
|
||||
- Cross-artifact alignment has no unresolved gap.
|
||||
- `.committed` created.
|
||||
|
||||
## Apply Log
|
||||
|
||||
- Validation found one consistency issue: `phase-contracts.md` still hard-coded `design.md` in specify/audit wording even though `scales.md` allows micro changes to use an equivalent inline design section.
|
||||
- Fix applied: changed those references to "设计产物" where the rule must respect the current scale.
|
||||
- Fix applied: `fallbacks.md` audit fallback now says to repair the design artifact instead of only `design.md`.
|
||||
- Fix applied: `operating-rules.md` startup checks now include explicit natural-language requests to use sm-flow.
|
||||
- Validation commands passed:
|
||||
- `python C:/Users/兜/.codex/skills/.system/skill-creator/scripts/quick_validate.py .agents/skills/sm-flow`
|
||||
- reference integrity scan for `references/*.md`
|
||||
- obsolete wording scan for time metrics, old skip semantics, old conflict wording, and fixed `design.md` expressions.
|
||||
- scale definition duplication scan.
|
||||
|
||||
## Archive Log
|
||||
|
||||
- User confirmed OpenSpec archive.
|
||||
- External `openspec-archive-change` was not directly callable in the current tool surface.
|
||||
- Archived by moving the OpenSpec change to `openspec/archive/2026-07-05-validate-sm-flow-explicit-trigger/`, matching existing repository archive convention.
|
||||
- `devflow/index.md` status updated to `archived`.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
|
||||
# Validate SM Flow Standard Change Acceptance
|
||||
|
||||
## Result
|
||||
|
||||
Accepted and archived.
|
||||
|
||||
## Static Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- Scale rule centralization passed.
|
||||
- Obsolete wording scan passed.
|
||||
- Standard artifact completeness passed.
|
||||
- Cross-artifact alignment passed.
|
||||
|
||||
## Script Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- Passed: skill quick validation.
|
||||
- Passed: reference integrity scan.
|
||||
|
||||
## Browser Or Manual Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- Not applicable. This validation covers skill protocol files and OpenSpec/devflow records.
|
||||
|
||||
## Unverified
|
||||
|
||||
- External OpenSpec CLI integration.
|
||||
- Independent forward-testing by a separate agent.
|
||||
|
||||
## OpenSpec Archive
|
||||
|
||||
- User confirmed archive.
|
||||
- Archived location: `openspec/archive/2026-07-05-validate-sm-flow-standard-change/`.
|
||||
- Status: `archived`.
|
||||
- Archive method: local filesystem archive following existing repository convention because external `openspec-archive-change` is not directly callable in the current tool surface.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
|
||||
# Validate SM Flow Standard Change Brief
|
||||
|
||||
## Background
|
||||
|
||||
The micro validation confirmed the reduced path. This record validates the normal standard path, where independent design and separate evidence are required.
|
||||
|
||||
## Goal
|
||||
|
||||
Confirm that the current `sm-flow` skill supports a standard change with complete OpenSpec and devflow artifacts.
|
||||
|
||||
## Scope
|
||||
|
||||
- Validate standard artifact requirements.
|
||||
- Validate scale rule centralization.
|
||||
- Validate skill structure and reference integrity.
|
||||
|
||||
## Non-Goals
|
||||
|
||||
- No business code changes.
|
||||
- No archive move without user confirmation.
|
||||
- No complex migration, rollback, or cross-team interface test.
|
||||
|
||||
## Linked OpenSpec
|
||||
|
||||
`openspec/changes/validate-sm-flow-standard-change/`
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
|
||||
# Validate SM Flow Standard Change Decisions
|
||||
|
||||
## Capability Source
|
||||
|
||||
- This is an ordinary engineering validation, not an explicit sm-flow invocation.
|
||||
- External OpenSpec child commands are not directly callable in the current tool surface.
|
||||
- Validation uses file-based OpenSpec fixtures and static/script checks.
|
||||
|
||||
## Scale Decision
|
||||
|
||||
- Scale: `standard`.
|
||||
- Reason: this validation intentionally exercises the full normal artifact set: proposal, independent design, specs, tasks, and separate evidence.
|
||||
- Interface impact: L1 internal documentation/protocol validation.
|
||||
|
||||
## Question Pool
|
||||
|
||||
| Question | Mode | Status | Result |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| Does standard require independent `design.md`? | evidence-driven | confirmed | `references/scales.md` defines independent `design.md` for standard. |
|
||||
| Does standard require separate `evidence.md` in devflow? | evidence-driven | confirmed | `references/scales.md` defines `brief.md`, `evidence.md`, `decisions.md`, `acceptance.md`. |
|
||||
| Are standard scale definitions duplicated outside `scales.md`? | evidence-driven | confirmed | Scale definition scan matched complete scale definitions only in `references/scales.md`. |
|
||||
| Is user scope confirmation needed? | user-interview | not required | User asked to validate a regular change; no product scope choice is blocked. |
|
||||
|
||||
## Cross-Artifact Alignment
|
||||
|
||||
| Link | Status | Notes |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| proposal -> design | aligned | Proposal asks for standard artifact validation; design defines standard artifact model. |
|
||||
| design -> specs | aligned | Specs require full OpenSpec artifacts, evidence archive, and centralized scale definitions. |
|
||||
| specs -> tasks | aligned | Tasks include fixture creation, validation scans, commit gate, and devflow records. |
|
||||
|
||||
## Findings
|
||||
|
||||
- Standard OpenSpec artifact completeness passed: `proposal.md`, independent `design.md`, spec file, and `tasks.md` exist.
|
||||
- Cross-artifact alignment passed: proposal -> design -> specs -> tasks.
|
||||
- Scale duplication scan passed.
|
||||
- Obsolete wording scan passed.
|
||||
- Skill quick validation passed.
|
||||
- Reference integrity scan passed.
|
||||
|
||||
## Commit Gate
|
||||
|
||||
- `.committed` created.
|
||||
- Status: committed standard validation fixture.
|
||||
|
||||
## Archive Status
|
||||
|
||||
- Devflow standard records created.
|
||||
- User confirmed OpenSpec archive.
|
||||
- External `openspec-archive-change` was not directly callable in the current tool surface.
|
||||
- Archived by moving the OpenSpec change to `openspec/archive/2026-07-05-validate-sm-flow-standard-change/`, matching existing repository archive convention.
|
||||
- `devflow/index.md` status updated to `archived`.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
|
||||
# Validate SM Flow Standard Change Evidence
|
||||
|
||||
## Static Evidence
|
||||
|
||||
- Scale definition scan found complete `standard / micro / complex` definition headings and definition phrases only in `.agents/skills/sm-flow/references/scales.md`.
|
||||
- Obsolete wording scan returned no matches for:
|
||||
- minute/hour/second/timebox metrics
|
||||
- old skip semantics
|
||||
- old fixed `proposal.md + design.md` expression
|
||||
- old conflict wording targeted by prior validation
|
||||
|
||||
## Script Evidence
|
||||
|
||||
- Passed: `python C:/Users/兜/.codex/skills/.system/skill-creator/scripts/quick_validate.py .agents/skills/sm-flow`
|
||||
- Passed: `references/*.md` integrity scan.
|
||||
|
||||
## Artifact Evidence
|
||||
|
||||
- OpenSpec standard artifacts exist:
|
||||
- `openspec/changes/validate-sm-flow-standard-change/proposal.md`
|
||||
- `openspec/changes/validate-sm-flow-standard-change/design.md`
|
||||
- `openspec/changes/validate-sm-flow-standard-change/specs/sm-flow-standard-change/spec.md`
|
||||
- `openspec/changes/validate-sm-flow-standard-change/tasks.md`
|
||||
- Devflow standard artifacts exist:
|
||||
- `brief.md`
|
||||
- `evidence.md`
|
||||
- `decisions.md`
|
||||
- `acceptance.md`
|
||||
|
||||
## Limits
|
||||
|
||||
- This validation is static/file-based.
|
||||
- It does not run a real external OpenSpec CLI command.
|
||||
- It does not include independent subagent forward-testing.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
|
||||
Devflow archive files are ready for validate-sm-flow-explicit-trigger.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
|
||||
Committed OpenSpec for validate-sm-flow-explicit-trigger.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
|
||||
# Validate SM Flow Explicit Trigger
|
||||
|
||||
## Why
|
||||
|
||||
Recent edits simplified `sm-flow` so it should only run when the user explicitly invokes it. The same cleanup also centralized scale rules in `references/scales.md`, removed time-based metrics, and split fallback/glossary concepts out of the top-level skill.
|
||||
|
||||
This change validates those protocol decisions through a real micro `sm-flow` run instead of another informal review.
|
||||
|
||||
## What Changes
|
||||
|
||||
- Verify `sm-flow` only triggers on `/sm-flow`, `/sm-flow explore`, `/sm-flow apply`, `/sm-flow archive`, or an explicit natural-language request to use sm-flow.
|
||||
- Verify task type alone does not trigger `sm-flow`, even when the task mentions OpenSpec, devflow, cross-module work, or clarification.
|
||||
- Verify `micro / standard / complex` definitions live only in `references/scales.md`.
|
||||
- Verify the skill has no time/minute-based metrics.
|
||||
- Verify fallback usage is recorded when external OpenSpec capabilities are unavailable.
|
||||
|
||||
## Design Notes
|
||||
|
||||
- Scale: `micro`.
|
||||
- Interface impact: L1 internal documentation/protocol validation only.
|
||||
- No business code changes.
|
||||
- Independent `design.md` is intentionally omitted; this section is the micro design artifact.
|
||||
- OpenSpec CLI and external OpenSpec child skills are not directly callable in the current tool surface, so this run uses `references/fallbacks.md` and records that capability source in devflow.
|
||||
|
||||
## Scope
|
||||
|
||||
In scope:
|
||||
|
||||
- `.agents/skills/sm-flow/SKILL.md`
|
||||
- `.agents/skills/sm-flow/references/*.md`
|
||||
- Validation OpenSpec and devflow records for this change
|
||||
|
||||
Out of scope:
|
||||
|
||||
- Business code
|
||||
- Rewriting historical OpenSpec archives
|
||||
- Changing the four visible checkpoints or nine internal phases
|
||||
- Adding automatic trigger heuristics
|
||||
|
||||
## Risks
|
||||
|
||||
- A future edit may duplicate scale rules outside `references/scales.md`.
|
||||
- The frontmatter description may drift from the top-level trigger rule.
|
||||
- Validation can prove current text consistency, but cannot force future agents to obey it without continued review.
|
||||
+53
@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
|
||||
# sm-flow Explicit Trigger Spec
|
||||
|
||||
## ADDED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Explicit Trigger Only
|
||||
|
||||
`sm-flow` SHALL be used only when the user explicitly invokes `/sm-flow`, `/sm-flow explore`, `/sm-flow apply`, `/sm-flow archive`, or clearly asks to use the sm-flow process in natural language.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Plain engineering request
|
||||
|
||||
- **Given** a user asks for an engineering task that mentions OpenSpec, devflow, cross-module work, or clarification
|
||||
- **When** the user does not explicitly request sm-flow
|
||||
- **Then** the agent handles the task as ordinary engineering work
|
||||
- **And** the agent does not auto-trigger sm-flow based on task type
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Explicit sm-flow request
|
||||
|
||||
- **Given** a user invokes `/sm-flow` or clearly asks to use sm-flow
|
||||
- **When** the agent starts the process
|
||||
- **Then** the agent follows the visible checkpoints Discover, Commit, Apply, and Archive
|
||||
- **And** the internal phase order remains clarify, context, propose, grill, specify, audit, commit, apply, archive
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Scale Rules Have One Source
|
||||
|
||||
The `micro / standard / complex` scale definitions SHALL be defined in `references/scales.md`; other files may only reference that file instead of redefining scale details.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Scale guidance is needed
|
||||
|
||||
- **Given** a phase needs to choose or enforce a scale
|
||||
- **When** the rule is read
|
||||
- **Then** it points to `references/scales.md`
|
||||
- **And** no other reference file carries a competing full definition of the three scales
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: No Time-Based Skill Metrics
|
||||
|
||||
The skill SHALL NOT use minute, hour, second, or timebox metrics to define scale, effort, or validation thresholds.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Protocol text is scanned
|
||||
|
||||
- **Given** the sm-flow skill files are scanned
|
||||
- **When** obsolete time metrics are searched
|
||||
- **Then** no matching scale or effort rule remains
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Fallback Capability Is Explicit
|
||||
|
||||
When OpenSpec CLI or child skill capabilities are unavailable, `sm-flow` SHALL use `references/fallbacks.md` only as an explicit fallback and record the capability source in the current devflow process log.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: External capability unavailable
|
||||
|
||||
- **Given** OpenSpec child skills are not directly callable
|
||||
- **When** a change is still executed
|
||||
- **Then** the decisions log records fallback source, impact, and remaining risk
|
||||
- **And** the fallback does not skip context, grill, commit, apply, or archive gates
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
|
||||
# Tasks
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Discover
|
||||
|
||||
- [x] 1.1 Read current `sm-flow` top-level trigger rule and relevant references.
|
||||
- [x] 1.2 Read `devflow/index.md` and glossary context for related history.
|
||||
- [x] 1.3 Classify this validation as `micro` and record capability fallback.
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Commit
|
||||
|
||||
- [x] 2.1 Create micro OpenSpec proposal with inline design notes.
|
||||
- [x] 2.2 Create specs that express the observable validation expectations.
|
||||
- [x] 2.3 Create executable validation tasks.
|
||||
- [x] 2.4 Run cross-artifact alignment and create `.committed`.
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Apply
|
||||
|
||||
- [x] 3.1 Scan `sm-flow` files for obsolete trigger, scale, time metric, and fallback wording.
|
||||
- [x] 3.2 Patch any discovered inconsistency in the skill files.
|
||||
- [x] 3.3 Run skill validation and reference integrity checks.
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. Archive
|
||||
|
||||
- [x] 4.1 Create micro devflow archive files.
|
||||
- [x] 4.2 Update `devflow/index.md`.
|
||||
- [x] 4.3 Create `.archive-ready` and ask whether to archive OpenSpec.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
|
||||
Devflow archive files are ready for validate-sm-flow-standard-change.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
|
||||
Committed OpenSpec for validate-sm-flow-standard-change.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
|
||||
# Design
|
||||
|
||||
## Scale
|
||||
|
||||
Scale: `standard`.
|
||||
|
||||
Rationale: this validation has a clear target and no business-code risk, but it intentionally exercises the full normal artifact set rather than the reduced micro path.
|
||||
|
||||
## Interface Impact
|
||||
|
||||
Interface impact: L1 internal documentation/protocol validation.
|
||||
|
||||
No API, DTO, database, event, service, or cross-module runtime contract changes are expected.
|
||||
|
||||
## Artifact Model
|
||||
|
||||
Standard validation requires:
|
||||
|
||||
- OpenSpec: `proposal.md`, independent `design.md`, `specs/`, `tasks.md`.
|
||||
- Devflow archive: `brief.md`, `evidence.md`, `decisions.md`, `acceptance.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
The validation checks that current skill rules point to `references/scales.md` for the exact standard artifact requirements instead of redefining them elsewhere.
|
||||
|
||||
## Execution Design
|
||||
|
||||
1. Build the standard OpenSpec fixture.
|
||||
2. Run static scans for standard artifact wording and duplicated scale definitions.
|
||||
3. Run skill validation and reference integrity checks.
|
||||
4. Record evidence separately in `devflow/.../evidence.md`.
|
||||
5. Mark the fixture as committed only if artifact completeness and alignment pass.
|
||||
|
||||
## Risks
|
||||
|
||||
- The external OpenSpec archive/apply commands are not exposed in the current tool surface; this validation uses file-based checks.
|
||||
- File presence does not prove independent-agent usability; forward-testing remains a separate optional validation surface.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
|
||||
# Validate SM Flow Standard Change
|
||||
|
||||
## Why
|
||||
|
||||
The previous validation covered a micro change. A standard change has stricter expectations: an independent `design.md`, complete OpenSpec artifacts, and a separate `evidence.md` in devflow.
|
||||
|
||||
This validation checks whether the current `sm-flow` skill can still describe and validate a normal standard change after the recent simplification work.
|
||||
|
||||
## What Changes
|
||||
|
||||
- Create a standard-scale validation fixture for `sm-flow`.
|
||||
- Verify standard OpenSpec artifacts exist and are aligned: `proposal.md`, `design.md`, `specs/`, and `tasks.md`.
|
||||
- Verify standard devflow archive artifacts exist: `brief.md`, `evidence.md`, `decisions.md`, and `acceptance.md`.
|
||||
- Verify standard still uses the same four visible checkpoints and nine internal phases without exposing phase names as user commands.
|
||||
|
||||
## Scope
|
||||
|
||||
In scope:
|
||||
|
||||
- Standard-scale validation records.
|
||||
- Static checks over `.agents/skills/sm-flow`.
|
||||
- Narrow fixes to the skill if standard validation reveals inconsistency.
|
||||
|
||||
Out of scope:
|
||||
|
||||
- Business code changes.
|
||||
- Reworking archived historical changes.
|
||||
- Changing the current trigger policy.
|
||||
|
||||
## Non-Goals
|
||||
|
||||
- This change does not test a complex migration, rollback, or cross-team interface change.
|
||||
- This change does not require independent browser/manual validation.
|
||||
- This change does not replace the micro validation already archived.
|
||||
|
||||
## Risks
|
||||
|
||||
- A standard validation fixture can become noise if left unarchived; status must be explicit.
|
||||
- If standard rules are only validated by file presence, semantic drift may still require future forward-testing.
|
||||
+36
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
|
||||
# sm-flow Standard Change Spec
|
||||
|
||||
## ADDED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Standard Change Has Full OpenSpec Artifacts
|
||||
|
||||
A standard `sm-flow` change SHALL have `proposal.md`, independent `design.md`, `specs/`, and `tasks.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Standard fixture is committed
|
||||
|
||||
- **Given** a change is classified as `standard`
|
||||
- **When** commit validation runs
|
||||
- **Then** `proposal.md`, `design.md`, at least one spec file, and `tasks.md` exist
|
||||
- **And** the artifacts are aligned from proposal to design to specs to tasks
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Standard Archive Has Evidence
|
||||
|
||||
A standard `sm-flow` archive SHALL include `brief.md`, `evidence.md`, `decisions.md`, and `acceptance.md` in devflow.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Standard fixture is archived or accepted
|
||||
|
||||
- **Given** a standard validation change has completed apply checks
|
||||
- **When** devflow records are written
|
||||
- **Then** `evidence.md` exists as a separate file
|
||||
- **And** it records the static and script validation evidence used for acceptance
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Scale Definitions Remain Centralized
|
||||
|
||||
Standard-specific artifact requirements SHALL be defined by `references/scales.md`; other files may reference those requirements but not carry a competing full definition.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Standard wording is scanned
|
||||
|
||||
- **Given** sm-flow references mention standard behavior
|
||||
- **When** scale definition phrases are scanned
|
||||
- **Then** complete standard definitions appear only in `references/scales.md`
|
||||
- **And** operational files defer to the current scale rather than hard-coding alternative standard rules
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
|
||||
# Tasks
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Standard OpenSpec Fixture
|
||||
|
||||
- [x] 1.1 Create `proposal.md`.
|
||||
- [x] 1.2 Create independent `design.md`.
|
||||
- [x] 1.3 Create at least one spec under `specs/`.
|
||||
- [x] 1.4 Create `tasks.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Standard Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- [x] 2.1 Run scale duplication scan.
|
||||
- [x] 2.2 Run obsolete wording scan.
|
||||
- [x] 2.3 Run skill quick validation.
|
||||
- [x] 2.4 Run reference integrity scan.
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Commit Gate
|
||||
|
||||
- [x] 3.1 Confirm OpenSpec artifact completeness.
|
||||
- [x] 3.2 Confirm proposal -> design -> specs -> tasks alignment.
|
||||
- [x] 3.3 Create `.committed`.
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. Devflow Records
|
||||
|
||||
- [x] 4.1 Create `brief.md`.
|
||||
- [x] 4.2 Create separate `evidence.md`.
|
||||
- [x] 4.3 Create `decisions.md`.
|
||||
- [x] 4.4 Create `acceptance.md`.
|
||||
- [x] 4.5 Update `devflow/index.md`.
|
||||
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
|
||||
# SM-Flow 工作流
|
||||
|
||||
## 当前设计理念(v4 方向)
|
||||
## 当前设计理念(v4.3)
|
||||
|
||||
**核心定位**:sm-flow 是一个**用提示词实现的协议层 harness**——编排 OpenSpec 的完整生命周期,通过阶段、门控、人类对齐和长期记忆,约束 agent 以正确的顺序、条件和标准使用 OpenSpec。
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -22,6 +22,15 @@ sm-flow → 编排层(harness):阶段、门控、产物约束、人
|
||||
| `/sm-flow apply` | 只执行(已有 Committed OpenSpec) |
|
||||
| `/sm-flow archive` | 收尾(回填 devflow + 归档确认) |
|
||||
|
||||
**触发边界**:
|
||||
|
||||
sm-flow 只在用户显式调用时使用:
|
||||
|
||||
- 用户输入 `/sm-flow`、`/sm-flow explore`、`/sm-flow apply`、`/sm-flow archive`。
|
||||
- 用户用自然语言明确要求“使用 sm-flow”“走 sm-flow 流程”或等价表达。
|
||||
|
||||
不要根据任务类型自动触发 sm-flow。即使任务涉及 OpenSpec、跨模块、接口契约、需求澄清或 devflow 归档,只要用户没有显式要求 sm-flow,就按普通工程任务处理。
|
||||
|
||||
**内部阶段(9 个,英文动词命名)**:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
@@ -29,7 +38,7 @@ clarify → context → propose → grill → specify → audit → commit → a
|
||||
入口澄清 上下文 轻量提案 澄清 细化 审计 提交 执行 归档
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
阶段名是 harness 的内部协议词汇(用于 checkpoint 汇报和进度通知),不是用户 API。用户只需知道 4 个命令,其余通过自然语言交互,由 harness 识别意图后编排。
|
||||
阶段名是 harness 的内部协议词汇,不是用户 API。面向用户默认只暴露 4 个可见 checkpoint:Discover、Commit、Apply、Archive;内部阶段仍按顺序执行。
|
||||
|
||||
**关键设计决策**:
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -37,7 +46,9 @@ clarify → context → propose → grill → specify → audit → commit → a
|
||||
- **Draft / Committed 分离**:propose 产出 Draft OpenSpec(讨论对象),commit gate 后成为 Committed OpenSpec(执行许可)。apply 只执行 Committed OpenSpec。
|
||||
- **grill 在 specify 前**:先澄清需求再细化产物,避免"细化 → grill → 回写细化"的返工循环。propose 只写轻量 proposal.md,grill 稳定需求后 specify 才补全 design/specs/tasks。
|
||||
- **devflow 延迟写入**:clarify → apply 期间只维护 `decisions.md` 作为过程日志,archive 阶段从中提取完整 devflow 档案(brief/evidence/acceptance)。
|
||||
- **micro ≠ skip**:快速模式合并 gate(clarify+context 合并 checkpoint → propose+specify 合并 checkpoint → grill 最少 1 个问题 → commit 简化检查),但保留最关键的门控。
|
||||
- **micro ≠ skip**:micro 是 standard 的减法,不是跳过流程。它可以合并 checkpoint、减少独立产物,但仍保留 context、grill、commit、apply 和 archive gate。
|
||||
- **分档单一来源**:`micro / standard / complex` 的完整定义只放在 `.agents/skills/sm-flow/references/scales.md`,其它文件只引用当前分档要求。
|
||||
- **能力来源显式声明**:每个阶段都要说明使用外部子 skill、OpenSpec CLI 还是 sm-flow 内置 fallback;fallback 不是跳过阶段,必须写入 `decisions.md` 或 `acceptance.md`。
|
||||
- **质量约束可观测**:质量约束必须转化为可观测产出(写入文件 + checkpoint 检查),否则不是约束而是建议。
|
||||
|
||||
**使用方式**:
|
||||
@@ -92,14 +103,14 @@ Phase 4 openspec:apply Phase 2 grill-with-docs → CONTEXT.md + ADR
|
||||
|
||||
## 新增技能的投入产出
|
||||
|
||||
| 技能 | 学多久 | 一次省多少 | 什么时候用 |
|
||||
| 技能 | 接入成本 | 主要收益 | 什么时候用 |
|
||||
|------|--------|-----------|-----------|
|
||||
| to-prd | 0 分钟(自动综合) | 10-15 分钟 | openspec research 结束后 |
|
||||
| grill-with-docs | 替换已有 grill-me | 0 额外时间 + 产出文档 | 需求澄清阶段 |
|
||||
| zoom-out | 10 秒(一句话) | 避免方向性返工 | grill 完成后、apply 前 |
|
||||
| diagnose | 5 分钟了解流程 | 每次 bug 省 20-30 分钟 | apply 中遇到问题 |
|
||||
| tdd | 5 分钟了解流程 | 减少回归 bug | apply 中写代码 |
|
||||
| git-guardrails | 0 分钟(被动生效) | 防止灾难性操作 | 全程自动 |
|
||||
| to-prd | 自动综合 | 结构化需求 | openspec research 结束后 |
|
||||
| grill-with-docs | 替换已有 grill-me | 产出文档化澄清 | 需求澄清阶段 |
|
||||
| zoom-out | 低 | 避免方向性返工 | grill 完成后、apply 前 |
|
||||
| diagnose | 低 | 减少猜测式 bug 修复 | apply 中遇到问题 |
|
||||
| tdd | 低 | 减少回归 bug | apply 中写代码 |
|
||||
| git-guardrails | 被动生效 | 防止灾难性操作 | 全程自动 |
|
||||
|
||||
## 为什么这套组合优于单纯依赖 openspec
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -804,7 +815,7 @@ v4:
|
||||
|
||||
| # | 问题 | 具体表现 | 分析结论 |
|
||||
|---|------|----------|----------|
|
||||
| 1 | propose 阶段越界 | 在 propose 阶段一次性生成了 proposal + design + specs + tasks,跳过 grill 和 specify | 需求小时 agent 本能跳过门控。现有硬约束 #3(不得跳过 grill)和阶段流程顺序已覆盖,属于执行层面问题,不需要改协议 |
|
||||
| 1 | propose 阶段越界 | 在 propose 阶段一次性生成了 proposal + design + specs + tasks,跳过 grill 和 specify | 需求较小场景下 agent 本能跳过门控。现有硬约束 #3(不得跳过 grill)和阶段流程顺序已覆盖,属于执行层面问题,不需要改协议 |
|
||||
| 2 | 子 skill 伪调用 | grill 阶段读了 grill-with-docs 的 SKILL.md 后自行执行,audit 阶段跳过了 zoom-out | Skill 工具调用和 Read 后执行效果等价,关键是"不能跳过"而非"用什么工具调用"。硬约束 #6 已覆盖,不需要改协议 |
|
||||
| 3 | spec 遗漏用户行为 | spec 写的是"添加 .expanded class"(实现细节),没有写"展开后显示完整正文"(用户可观察行为) | 导致第一版实现只切换了 CSS class,正文内容仍显示截断文本。spec 应描述用户可观察的结果而非实现方式 |
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -852,7 +863,7 @@ v4:
|
||||
|
||||
#### 修改 2:apply 阶段增加 Pre-apply Checkpoint
|
||||
|
||||
在 apply 阶段开始前增加 15-20 分钟的强制调研步骤:
|
||||
在 apply 阶段开始前增加强制调研步骤:
|
||||
|
||||
**触发条件**(3 条):
|
||||
- design 或 tasks 中提到"参考 XXX 实现"
|
||||
@@ -860,12 +871,12 @@ v4:
|
||||
- 技术栈不熟悉或第一次在该项目实现类似功能
|
||||
|
||||
**执行步骤**(3 步):
|
||||
1. **完整阅读所有参考实现**(约 10 分钟)
|
||||
1. **完整阅读所有参考实现**
|
||||
- 从 OpenSpec design 或 tasks 中定位参考实现文件
|
||||
- 如果路径不明确,通过 Grep 搜索关键类名或模式
|
||||
- 逐行理解关键逻辑,提取可复用代码片段和模式
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Grep 关键技术栈**(约 5 分钟)
|
||||
2. **Grep 关键技术栈**
|
||||
- 请求/响应结构模式
|
||||
- 消息队列模式
|
||||
- 统一工具类
|
||||
@@ -883,7 +894,7 @@ v4:
|
||||
- ✅ 已列出所有参考实现的文件路径
|
||||
- ✅ 已识别需要新建的工具类/基础设施
|
||||
|
||||
**快速模式支持**:micro 分档可缩短为 5-10 分钟快速扫描,但仍需形成清单。
|
||||
**快速模式支持**:micro 分档可按风险缩小调研范围,但仍需形成清单。
|
||||
|
||||
#### 修改 3:apply 实现过程增强
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -905,15 +916,10 @@ v4:
|
||||
|------|------|------|------|
|
||||
| 返工次数 | 4-5 次 | 0-1 次 | -80% |
|
||||
| 核心功能空实现率 | 高(3/3 核心功能) | 0% | -100% |
|
||||
| 实现时间(含返工) | 2 小时 | 1.5 小时 | -25% |
|
||||
| 前置调研时间 | 0 分钟 | 15-20 分钟 | +20 分钟 |
|
||||
|
||||
**ROI 分析**:
|
||||
```
|
||||
投入:15-20 分钟调研
|
||||
回报:节省 60 分钟返工 + 避免核心功能遗漏
|
||||
ROI = (60 - 20) / 20 = 200%
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
前置调研的收益来自减少返工和避免核心功能遗漏。v4.3 之后不再用固定投入指标定义投入或收益,改按风险和实现复杂度决定调研深度。
|
||||
|
||||
### 复杂度评估
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -941,7 +947,7 @@ ROI = (60 - 20) / 20 = 200%
|
||||
- 设计文档提到"参考 XXX 实现"
|
||||
|
||||
🟡 **可选执行**:
|
||||
- micro 分档的简单需求(可缩短为 5-10 分钟)
|
||||
- micro 分档的简单需求(可按风险缩小范围)
|
||||
- 纯数据处理或工具脚本(技术栈熟悉)
|
||||
|
||||
❌ **不推荐**:
|
||||
@@ -1002,7 +1008,7 @@ v4.2 不增加新阶段或新规则,而是**把现有约束变成可验证的
|
||||
2. 如不存在:
|
||||
- 汇报:Draft OpenSpec 未通过 commit 检查
|
||||
- 列出缺失的 checkpoint 项
|
||||
- 询问用户:是否补做 commit,或明确跳过(需显式确认)
|
||||
- 询问用户:是否补做 commit;如用户要求不补做,则中止 apply 或标记为 `emergency-bypass`
|
||||
|
||||
#### 修改 3:Archive 阶段增加强制执行顺序
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1115,3 +1121,115 @@ v4.2 的改进是执行机制层面的,不涉及业务逻辑:
|
||||
- 修改文件:
|
||||
- `.agents/skills/sm-flow/references/phase-contracts.md`
|
||||
- `.agents/skills/sm-flow/references/archive-rules.md`
|
||||
|
||||
## v4.3:显式触发、分档单一来源与验证闭环(2026-07-05)
|
||||
|
||||
### 背景
|
||||
|
||||
v4.2 之后,流程门控更可靠,但 skill 本身开始显得庞大:frontmatter、触发规则、分档规则、fallback、术语解释和阶段契约交织在一起。实际 review 中发现几个风险:
|
||||
|
||||
- 触发范围容易被写宽,导致任务只要涉及 OpenSpec、跨模块或 devflow 就自动触发 sm-flow。
|
||||
- `micro / standard / complex` 的规则散落在多个文件里,后续维护容易不一致。
|
||||
- `micro`、`standard`、`complex` 的要求同时分布在不同文件中,review 时很难判断哪个是权威。
|
||||
- 规则中出现固定投入估算,容易把经验值误读成流程标准。
|
||||
- fallback、checkpoint、Draft/Committed 等词缺少统一词条,解释容易漂移。
|
||||
|
||||
### 核心结论
|
||||
|
||||
v4.3 保留 v4 的精华,但收紧触发面、降低重复定义,并用真实 change 验证 micro 和 standard 两条路径:
|
||||
|
||||
- **只显式触发**:sm-flow 只在用户输入 `/sm-flow`、`/sm-flow explore`、`/sm-flow apply`、`/sm-flow archive`,或自然语言明确要求“使用 sm-flow / 走 sm-flow 流程”时触发。
|
||||
- **不按需求类型自动触发**:OpenSpec、跨模块、接口契约、需求澄清、devflow 归档都不是自动触发条件。
|
||||
- **4 个用户可见 checkpoint 保留**:Discover、Commit、Apply、Archive。
|
||||
- **9 个内部阶段保留**:clarify → context → propose → grill → specify → audit → commit → apply → archive。
|
||||
- **分档单一来源**:`references/scales.md` 是 `micro / standard / complex` 的唯一完整规则源。
|
||||
- **fallback 独立成文**:外部 OpenSpec 能力或子 skill 不可用时,使用 `references/fallbacks.md`,并记录 capability source、影响和剩余风险。
|
||||
- **词条独立成文**:`references/glossary.md` 统一 checkpoint、fallback、Draft、Committed、gate、scale 等术语。
|
||||
- **不使用固定投入指标**:skill 规则不再用具体投入单位或时间盒定义分档、努力程度或验证阈值。
|
||||
|
||||
### 文件结构调整
|
||||
|
||||
新增 reference:
|
||||
|
||||
```text
|
||||
.agents/skills/sm-flow/references/
|
||||
├── fallbacks.md # 外部 OpenSpec/子 skill 不可用时的内置协议
|
||||
├── glossary.md # checkpoint/gate/fallback/Draft/Committed/scale 等术语
|
||||
└── scales.md # micro / standard / complex 的唯一完整定义
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
职责调整:
|
||||
|
||||
- `SKILL.md`:只保留触发边界、四层架构、6 条硬约束、4 个用户命令、4 个 checkpoint、9 个内部阶段和首次加载规则。
|
||||
- `phase-contracts.md`:保留阶段进入条件、动作、输出和退出条件;涉及分档时只引用 `scales.md`。
|
||||
- `operating-rules.md`:保留启动检查、进度汇报、接口影响、devflow 分层和完成标准;不再重复定义分档细节。
|
||||
- `archive-rules.md`:只定义归档顺序、提取映射和索引规则;产物分档引用 `scales.md`。
|
||||
- `templates.md`:保留模板和检查表,不再作为分档规则来源。
|
||||
|
||||
### 分档验证
|
||||
|
||||
#### micro 验证
|
||||
|
||||
验证 change:`validate-sm-flow-explicit-trigger`
|
||||
|
||||
归档位置:
|
||||
|
||||
```text
|
||||
openspec/archive/2026-07-05-validate-sm-flow-explicit-trigger/
|
||||
devflow/projects/2026-07-05-validate-sm-flow-explicit-trigger/
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
验证内容:
|
||||
|
||||
- 显式触发规则生效:没有 `/sm-flow` 或明确“使用 sm-flow”时,不自动触发正式 sm-flow。
|
||||
- micro 可以使用内联设计小节,但仍需要 `proposal.md`、`specs/`、`tasks.md`、`.committed` 和 devflow 回填。
|
||||
- 发现并修复一个真实不一致:部分阶段契约仍硬编码 `design.md`,与 micro 允许等价设计小节冲突;已改为“设计产物”。
|
||||
- devflow micro 档案使用 `brief.md`、`decisions.md`、`acceptance.md`;证据并入过程日志。
|
||||
|
||||
#### standard 验证
|
||||
|
||||
验证 change:`validate-sm-flow-standard-change`
|
||||
|
||||
归档位置:
|
||||
|
||||
```text
|
||||
openspec/archive/2026-07-05-validate-sm-flow-standard-change/
|
||||
devflow/projects/2026-07-05-validate-sm-flow-standard-change/
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
验证内容:
|
||||
|
||||
- standard 需要完整 OpenSpec 四件套:`proposal.md`、独立 `design.md`、`specs/`、`tasks.md`。
|
||||
- standard devflow 档案需要 `brief.md`、独立 `evidence.md`、`decisions.md`、`acceptance.md`。
|
||||
- 分档定义扫描只命中 `references/scales.md`,没有发现其它文件重新定义 standard/micro/complex。
|
||||
- standard 路径未发现新的规则不一致。
|
||||
|
||||
### 验证命令与结果
|
||||
|
||||
本轮验证通过:
|
||||
|
||||
- `python C:/Users/兜/.codex/skills/.system/skill-creator/scripts/quick_validate.py .agents/skills/sm-flow`
|
||||
- `references/*.md` 引用完整性扫描
|
||||
- 旧问题词扫描:固定投入指标、旧跳过语义、旧 conflict 表达、旧固定设计文件组合表达
|
||||
- 分档重复定义扫描
|
||||
- micro 和 standard OpenSpec/devflow 文件存在性检查
|
||||
|
||||
### 当前取舍
|
||||
|
||||
- 保留 3 个分档:`micro`、`standard`、`complex`。它们不是三套流程,而是同一流程在产物和审查强度上的三档覆盖。
|
||||
- 不引入显式状态文件,例如 `.sm-flow-state`。当前只保留 `.committed` 和 `.archive-ready` 两个必要 gate 文件。
|
||||
- 不把内部 9 阶段暴露成用户 API。用户交互继续以 4 个 checkpoint 为主。
|
||||
- 不默认做 OpenSpec archive;archive 仍是用户确认后的动作。
|
||||
|
||||
### 对 v4.1/v4.2 的修正
|
||||
|
||||
v4.1 的 Pre-apply Research 仍然保留,但不再用固定投入指标描述执行深度。当前规则是:按 `references/scales.md` 的当前分档和实现风险决定调研深度,退出判断以技术栈清单是否足以指导实现为准。
|
||||
|
||||
v4.2 的 `.committed` 和 `.archive-ready` 继续保留。v4.3 只是把文件完整性检查改为“按当前分档要求执行”,避免 standard 的独立 `design.md` 要求误套到 micro。
|
||||
|
||||
### 相关档案
|
||||
|
||||
- `devflow/projects/2026-07-05-validate-sm-flow-explicit-trigger/`
|
||||
- `devflow/projects/2026-07-05-validate-sm-flow-standard-change/`
|
||||
- `openspec/archive/2026-07-05-validate-sm-flow-explicit-trigger/`
|
||||
- `openspec/archive/2026-07-05-validate-sm-flow-standard-change/`
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user