workflow-idea-to-pbi Skill

Codex compatibility note:

Invoke repository skills with $skill-name in Codex; this mirrored copy rewrites legacy Claude /skill-name references.

Task tracker mandate: BEFORE executing any workflow or skill step, create/update task tracking for all steps and keep it synchronized as progress changes.

User-question prompts mean to ask the user directly in Codex.

Ignore Claude-specific mode-switch instructions when they appear.

Strict execution contract: when a user explicitly invokes a skill, execute that skill protocol as written.

Subagent authorization: when a skill is user-invoked or AI-detected and its protocol requires subagents, that skill activation authorizes use of the required spawn_agent subagent(s) for that task.

Do not skip, reorder, or merge protocol steps unless the user explicitly approves the deviation first.

For workflow skills, execute each listed child-skill step explicitly and report step-by-step evidence.

If a required step/tool cannot run in this environment, stop and ask the user before adapting.

Codex Project-Reference Loading (No Hooks)

Codex uses static project-reference loading instead of runtime-injected project docs. When coding, planning, debugging, testing, or reviewing, open project docs explicitly using this routing.

Always read:

docs/project-config.json (project-specific paths, commands, modules, and workflow/test settings)
docs/project-reference/docs-index-reference.md (routes to the full docs/project-reference/* catalog)
docs/project-reference/lessons.md (always-on guardrails and anti-patterns)

Missing/stale context route: If docs/project-config.json, the docs index, lessons.md, CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, or any task-required reference doc is missing or stale, auto-run $project-init or the narrow setup route ($project-config, $docs-init, $scan-all, $scan --target=<key>, $claude-md-init) before ordinary project-specific work. If Codex mirrors or AGENTS.md are missing/stale, ask the user to run $sync-codex; do not auto-run it.

Situation-based docs:

Backend/CQRS/API/domain/entity changes: backend-patterns-reference.md, domain-entities-reference.md, project-structure-reference.md
Frontend/UI/styling/design-system: frontend-patterns-reference.md, scss-styling-guide.md, design-system/README.md
Spec authoring, docs/specs/ pathing, or TC format: feature-spec-reference.md, spec-system-reference.md, spec-principles.md
Behavior/public-contract changes or spec-test-code sync: workflow-spec-test-code-cycle-reference.md plus the spec docs above
Derived spec indexes/ERDs/reimplementation guides: spec-system-reference.md and source Feature Specs under docs/specs/
Integration test implementation/review: integration-test-reference.md
E2E test implementation/review: e2e-test-reference.md
Code review/audit work: code-review-rules.md plus domain docs above based on changed files

Do not read all docs blindly. Start from docs-index-reference.md, then open only relevant files for the task.

Quick Summary

Goal: [Workflow] Trigger Idea to PBI workflow in one of two modes. SINGLE-PBI DEEP — capture or review idea/artifact, refine, author the §1-7 Feature Spec draft, generate TDD test specs from the idea, model the domain, plan, derive the PBI and stories, challenge review, DoR gate, mockup, prioritize (idea → draft Feature Spec → specs → from those specs to PBI). MULTI-OPPORTUNITY DISCOVERY — a raw product vision/problem → brainstorm (optionally web-research → deep-research) → RICE opportunity map → user multi-select → a light per-opportunity PBI loop → cross-PBI ranked backlog.

Mode Detection Gate (FIRST — pick the track before any step, then declare it):

| Input | Mode | Track | | ------------------------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | | ONE concrete idea / ticket / brief | Single-PBI Deep | full track incl. spec [mode=draft] + spec [mode=tests] + plan/plan-review/plan-validate → 1 deeply-groomed PBI. SKIP brainstorm/web-research/deep-research. | | Raw product vision / problem spanning multiple opportunities | Multi-Opportunity Discovery | brainstorm (optionally web-research → deep-research) → RICE map → multi-select → light per-opportunity loop → cross-PBI prioritize. spec [mode=draft] + spec [mode=tests] + plan cycle are deep-mode only — never per opportunity; domain-analysis runs once up front. |

When the input is ambiguous, ask via a direct user question before step 1.

Workflow:

Detect — classify request scope and target artifacts.
Execute — apply required steps with evidence-backed actions.
Verify — confirm constraints, output quality, and completion evidence.

Key Rules:

MUST ATTENTION keep claims evidence-based (file:line) with confidence >80% to act.
MUST ATTENTION keep task tracking updated as each step starts/completes.
MUST ATTENTION define success criteria before execution and loop until observable verification passes.
MUST ATTENTION when creating/reviewing specs or tests, name Business Intent / Invariant Guarded or the protected business intent/invariant and ensure the test would fail if that intent breaks.
MUST ATTENTION apply the shared SDD Artifact Contract from shared/sdd-artifact-contract.md in the active skills root; use docs/project-config.json and docs/project-reference/docs-index-reference.md for project-specific conventions.
[BLOCKING] Tech-agnostic output: idea / PBI / story / problem-statement prose stays tech-agnostic per docs/project-reference/spec-principles.md §3 — no framework/product/language/design-pattern names; source paths and class names appear ONLY in evidence fields (**Evidence**, [Source:]), frontmatter, and Mermaid.
MUST ATTENTION treat AI-generated ideas, PBIs, stories, mockups, and TCs as draft/reference until their review or acceptance gate approves them.
MUST ATTENTION allow any supported AI tool to produce or review artifacts when the shared contract, synced context, and local docs are available.
NEVER skip mandatory workflow or skill gates.

When to Use

Single-PBI Deep mode:

PO or BA has a raw idea and needs to shape it into a grooming-ready PBI
PO is handing off an existing ticket, PRD, or brief to the BA team for refinement
Single-PBI refinement with stories, test specifications, challenge review, and DoR validation
Feature needs a structured PBI before entering a sprint

Multi-Opportunity Discovery mode:

PO/BA has a raw product vision or problem statement that spans several opportunities, and needs a prioritized backlog of multiple PBIs out of it in one pass
A discovery sprint is needed: structured brainstorm → RICE opportunity map → multi-select → N PBIs → cross-PBI ranking (no implementation)

When NOT to Use

Just want a (provisional) Feature Spec from an idea, no backlog → use workflow-idea-to-spec
Already have canonical Feature Specs and only need the backlog → use workflow-spec-to-pbi (spec-first entry)
Implementation-only (PBI already exists and is DoR-ready) → use workflow-feature or workflow-big-feature
Bug fixes → use workflow-bugfix

Key Mechanics

1. Step Selection Gate

After confirming the workflow, present the full step list and let the user deselect irrelevant steps:

- [x] Brainstorm (brainstorm)                      — DISCOVERY MODE ONLY; RICE opportunity map
- [ ] Market research (web-research)               — DISCOVERY MODE, CONDITIONAL
- [ ] Deep research (deep-research)                 — DISCOVERY MODE, CONDITIONAL; runs only when web-research ran
- [x] Idea capture (idea)                          — REPEATS per opportunity in discovery mode
- [x] Spec & code discovery (spec-discovery)       — investigate related/affected specs + code before authoring
- [ ] Review existing artifact (review-artifact)   — CONDITIONAL
- [ ] PO → BA handoff (handoff)                    — CONDITIONAL
- [x] Refine to PBI (refine)                        — REPEATS per opportunity in discovery mode
- [x] Refinement rationale review (why-review)
- [x] Feature Spec draft (spec [mode=draft])        — DEEP MODE ONLY; §1-7 Feature Spec (provisional) before §8 tests
- [x] Test specifications (spec [mode=tests])       — DEEP MODE ONLY; idea → draft → specs
- [x] Test-spec rationale review (why-review)       — deep mode
- [x] Test specification review (review-artifact --type=spec-tests)  — deep mode
- [ ] Domain analysis (domain-analysis)            — CONDITIONAL; discovery mode runs it ONCE up front
- [x] Domain rationale review (why-review)
- [x] Implementation plan (plan)                    — DEEP MODE ONLY
- [x] Plan review (plan-review)                     — deep mode
- [x] Plan validation (plan-validate)               — deep mode
- [x] Plan rationale review (why-review)            — deep mode
- [x] PBI review (review-artifact --type=pbi)       — from specs to PBI; REPEATS per opportunity
- [x] User stories (story)                          — REPEATS per opportunity
- [x] Story rationale review (why-review)
- [x] Story review (review-artifact --type=story)   — REPEATS per opportunity
- [x] Dev BA PIC challenge (pbi-challenge)          — REPEATS per opportunity
- [x] Definition of Ready gate (dor-gate)           — REPEATS per opportunity
- [x] PBI HTML mock-up (pbi-mockup)                — CONDITIONAL; REPEATS per opportunity
- [x] Backlog prioritization (prioritize)           — cross-PBI in discovery mode
- [x] Documentation synchronization (docs-update)

Mark skipped steps as completed immediately. In single-PBI deep mode, deselect brainstorm/web-research/deep-research. In discovery mode, deselect spec [mode=draft], spec [mode=tests], review-artifact --type=spec-tests, and the plan/plan-review/plan-validate cycle (deep-mode-only); run domain-analysis once up front.

1a. Multi-Opportunity Discovery Loop (Discovery Mode core mechanic)

Activated only when the input is a raw product vision/problem spanning multiple opportunities (folded in from the former product-discovery workflow).

Brainstorm → opportunity map. Run $brainstorm with Double Diamond (problem framing → opportunity framing → ideation → convergence). Output a RICE-scored opportunity map of 3–8 items to plans/{plan-dir}/brainstorm-opportunity-map.md.
Multi-select. Present the map via a direct user question (multiSelect: true): "Which opportunities should we develop into PBIs?"
Opportunity-map why-review gate (before the loop): challenge whether the top-ranked opportunities are the right problems, whether RICE Reach/Impact are founded or speculative, run a pre-mortem, and name systemic alternatives. FAIL on a high-ranked opportunity → drop it or revisit framing; WARN → document and proceed with user acknowledgment.
Task decomposition gate. Call task tracking for EVERY task (N opportunities × 8 loop steps = N×8 minimum) BEFORE processing any opportunity — never start the loop without a complete task list.
Per-opportunity light loop (for EACH selected opportunity — NO spec [mode=draft], NO spec [mode=tests], NO plan/plan-review/plan-validate; domain-analysis already ran once up front): $idea → $refine → $review-artifact --type=pbi → $story → $review-artifact --type=story → $pbi-challenge → $dor-gate → $pbi-mockup (skip for backend-only PBIs).
Scale management. For 6+ selected opportunities, spawn one sub-agent per opportunity (each gets brainstorm context + its task list); the main context runs $prioritize at the end. Update a session summary table after every 3 opportunities.
Cross-PBI prioritize. After ALL opportunities are processed, run $prioritize across all session PBIs (cross-PBI RICE + dependency graph) → sprint-ready ranked backlog, flagging Must/Should/Could-Have.

2. task tracking Before Starting

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — Call task tracking for every step before beginning any work:

Task tracking: "Brainstorm → RICE opportunity map" [discovery mode]
Task tracking: "Market research (web-research)" [discovery mode, conditional]
Task tracking: "Deep research (deep-research)" [discovery mode, conditional; only when web-research ran]
Task tracking: "Idea capture"
Task tracking: "Refine to PBI"
Task tracking: "Refinement rationale review (why-review after refine)"
Task tracking: "Feature Spec draft (spec [mode=draft])"
Task tracking: "Test specifications (spec [mode=tests])"
Task tracking: "Test-spec rationale review (why-review after spec [mode=tests])"
Task tracking: "Test specification review (review-artifact --type=spec-tests)"
Task tracking: "Domain analysis (domain-analysis)" [if domain entities change]
Task tracking: "Domain rationale review (why-review after domain-analysis)"
Task tracking: "Implementation plan (plan)"
Task tracking: "Plan review (plan-review)"
Task tracking: "Plan validation (plan-validate)"
Task tracking: "Plan rationale review (why-review after plan-validate)"
Task tracking: "PBI review (review-artifact --type=pbi)"
Task tracking: "User stories (story)"
Task tracking: "Story rationale review (why-review after story)"
Task tracking: "Story review"
Task tracking: "Dev BA PIC challenge"
Task tracking: "Definition of Ready gate"
Task tracking: "PBI HTML mock-up" [if UI]
Task tracking: "Prioritize"
Task tracking: "Documentation synchronization (docs-update)"
Task tracking: "Session summary (watzup)"

One task per step. Mark each completed immediately when done — never batch.

3. Why-Review Gates (Purpose-Specific, Repeated)

This is the adversarial design rationale check. Purpose: validate the WHY of each artifact before investing in the next.

The workflow contains repeated $why-review gates after the non-review artifact steps. Use purpose-specific labels in sequence: refinement rationale (after refine), test-spec rationale (after spec [mode=tests]), domain rationale (after domain-analysis), plan rationale (after plan-validate), and story rationale (after story). Do not deduplicate them.

The standalone gate after review-artifact --type=pbi is intentionally omitted: review-artifact --type=pbi (like every review skill) already self-invokes $why-review --validate-findings as an internal Findings Validation Gate, so a separate why-review step right after it would be duplicate work.

Challenge prompts:

Is this the right solution to the stated problem? What was rejected and why?
Are the acceptance criteria constraints justified? What happens if any constraint is removed?
Pre-mortem: if this PBI ships and fails in 3 months, what breaks?
Are there simpler alternatives not yet considered?
Does the scope align with the stated business value?

Output: Why-Review checklist with PASS / WARN / FAIL.

| Result | Action | | ------ | ----------------------------------------------- | | PASS | Proceed to the next artifact step | | WARN | Document risk, proceed with user acknowledgment | | FAIL | Revise PBI in $refine before continuing |

4. TDD-Spec Gate (After refine + spec [mode=draft], Before the PBI is drafted)

Author the canonical §1-7 Feature Spec with $spec [mode=draft] (idea-sourced, provisional, §8 Evidence: TBD), then generate and review §8 test specifications right after refine — BEFORE the PBI is drafted — so the PBI, stories, and plan are derived FROM the draft Feature Spec + its test specs (idea → draft Feature Spec → specs → from those specs to PBI).

AI-generated TC drafts are reference-only until $review-artifact --type=spec-tests, $pbi-challenge, and $dor-gate accept them for delivery planning.

Output requirements:

Map material acceptance criteria and user stories to TC IDs
Route planned TC IDs to Feature doc Section 8 through $spec [mode=tests]; $docs-update later verifies feature docs and §8 TC ↔ integration test code sync.
Cover happy path, validation failure, authorization/permission, and important edge cases where applicable
Run $review-artifact --type=spec-tests before $pbi-challenge

5. PBI Output Format

Each PBI artifact must contain:

| Section | Content | | ------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------- | | Title | Clear, actionable | | Problem Statement | Why this needs to exist | | Hypothesis | If we build X, users will Y, which drives Z | | Acceptance Criteria | GIVEN / WHEN / THEN format | | RICE Score | Reach × Impact × Confidence / Effort | | User Stories | Who / What / Why | | Test Specs | TC IDs mapped to acceptance criteria | | DoR Status | PASS / WARN / FAIL | | Mockup | HTML mock-up based on project reference design docs (if UI) |

6. Artifact Locations

| Step | Output Path | | -------------- | ----------------------------------------------------- | | Idea | team-artifacts/ideas/{YYMMDD}-{role}-idea-{slug}.md | | PBI | team-artifacts/pbis/{YYMMDD}-pbi-{slug}.md | | Stories | Added to PBI artifact | | Test specs | Feature doc Section 8 (canonical TC registry) | | DoR result | Added to PBI artifact | | Mockup | HTML mock-up file saved beside PBI artifact | | Prioritization | team-artifacts/backlog/{YYMMDD}-backlog-update.md | | Docs sync | plans/reports/docs-update-{YYMMDD}-{HHMM}.md |

These roots intentionally match the child skills (idea, refine, story, pbi-mockup, prioritize, docs-update). If artifact roots become configurable later, update this workflow and all child skills in the same change.

Write output IMMEDIATELY after each step — never batch across steps.

7. Conditional Skip Rules

| Step | Skip When | | ---------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | $brainstorm | Single-PBI deep mode (one concrete idea/ticket) | | $web-research | Single-PBI deep mode, internal tool, or well-understood domain | | $deep-research | Single-PBI deep mode, or whenever web-research is skipped (runs only when it ran) | | $review-artifact | No existing artifact — raw idea input | | $spec [mode=draft] | Discovery mode (deep-mode only — never per opportunity) | | $spec [mode=tests], $review-artifact --type=spec-tests | Discovery mode (deep-mode only — never per opportunity) | | $domain-analysis | Idea introduces no new/changed domain entities; in discovery mode run ONCE up front | | $plan, $plan-review, $plan-validate | Discovery mode (deep-mode only — never per opportunity) | | $pbi-mockup | Backend-only PBI — no UI changes |

8. Near-Final Documentation Synchronization

Run $docs-update after $prioritize and before $workflow-end.

Purpose:

Sync refined PBI/story outputs into business feature docs where applicable.
Sync feature doc Section 8 test specifications and docs/specs/ dashboards after $review-artifact --type=spec-tests.
Verify specs, feature docs, and TDD/spec docs do not drift before workflow closure.
Record skipped sub-phases explicitly when no impacted docs exist.

IMPORTANT MANDATORY Steps: $brainstorm -> $web-research -> $deep-research -> $idea -> $spec-discovery -> $review-artifact -> $refine -> $why-review -> $spec [mode=draft] -> $spec [mode=tests] -> $why-review -> $review-artifact --type=spec-tests -> $spec-clarify -> $domain-analysis -> $why-review -> $plan -> $plan-review -> $plan-validate -> $why-review -> $review-artifact --type=pbi -> $story -> $why-review -> $review-artifact --type=story -> $pbi-challenge -> $dor-gate -> $pbi-mockup -> $prioritize -> $docs-update -> $workflow-end -> $watzup

Mode gating of the canonical sequence above — Single-PBI deep mode: skip $brainstorm + $web-research + $deep-research; run the full deep track (one PBI). Discovery mode: run $brainstorm (optionally $web-research → $deep-research), skip $spec [mode=draft], $spec [mode=tests], $review-artifact --type=spec-tests, $spec-clarify, $plan, $plan-review, $plan-validate; loop $idea→/refine→/review-artifact --type=pbi→/story→/review-artifact --type=story→/pbi-challenge→/dor-gate→/pbi-mockup per selected opportunity, then $prioritize cross-PBI.

[BLOCKING] Each step MUST ATTENTION invoke its skill invocation — marking a task completed without skill invocation is a workflow violation. NEVER batch-complete validation gates.

Activate the workflow-idea-to-pbi workflow. Run $start-workflow workflow-idea-to-pbi with the user's prompt as context.

Steps: $brainstorm → $web-research → $deep-research → $idea → $spec-discovery → $review-artifact → $refine → $why-review → $spec [mode=draft] → $spec [mode=tests] → $why-review → $review-artifact --type=spec-tests → $spec-clarify → $domain-analysis → $why-review → $plan → $plan-review → $plan-validate → $why-review → $review-artifact --type=pbi → $story → $why-review → $review-artifact --type=story → $pbi-challenge → $dor-gate → $pbi-mockup → $prioritize → $docs-update → $workflow-end → $watzup

Conditional / mode-gated steps:

$brainstorm, $web-research, $deep-research — DISCOVERY MODE only; skip in single-PBI deep mode ($deep-research runs only when $web-research ran)

$spec [mode=draft], $spec [mode=tests], $review-artifact --type=spec-tests, $plan, $plan-review, $plan-validate — DEEP MODE only; never run per opportunity in discovery mode

$review-artifact — skip if no existing artifact/ticket/PRD; proceed straight to $refine

$domain-analysis — skip if the idea introduces no new/changed domain entities; in discovery mode run once up front

$pbi-mockup — skip if PBI is backend-only (no UI changes)

AI Mistake Prevention — Failure modes to avoid on every task:

Re-read files after context changes. Context compaction, resume, or long-running work can make memory stale; verify current files before acting. Verify generated content against source evidence. AI hallucinates APIs, names, claims, and document facts. Check the relevant source before documenting or referencing. Check downstream references before deleting or renaming. Removing an artifact can stale docs, generated mirrors, configs, and callers; map references first. Trace the full impact chain after edits. Changing a definition can miss derived outputs and consumers. Follow the affected chain before declaring done. Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first. One green check is not all green checks; validate every output surface the change can affect. Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing. Before changing a constant, limit, flag, wording, or pattern, read nearby context and history. Surface ambiguity before acting — don't pick silently. Multiple valid interpretations require an explicit question or stated assumption with risk. Keep shared guidance role-relevant. Universal guidance must help every receiving skill or agent; code-specific obligations belong only in code-specific protocols.

Nested Task Expansion Contract — For workflow-step invocation, the [Workflow] ... row is only a parent container; the child skill still creates visible phase tasks.

Call the current task list first. If a matching active parent workflow row exists, set nested=true and record parentTaskId; otherwise run standalone.

Create one task per declared phase before phase work. When nested, prefix subjects [N.M] $skill-name — phase.

When nested, link the parent with TaskUpdate(parentTaskId, addBlockedBy: [childIds]).

Orchestrators must pre-expand a child skill's phase list and link the workflow row before invoking that child skill or sub-agent.

Mark exactly one child in_progress before work and completed immediately after evidence is written.

Complete the parent only after all child tasks are completed or explicitly cancelled with reason.

Blocked until: the current task list done, child phases created, parent linked when nested, first child marked in_progress.

Critical Thinking Mindset — Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination.

Incremental Result Persistence — MANDATORY for all sub-agents or heavy inline steps processing >3 files.

Before starting: Create report file plans/reports/{skill}-{date}-{slug}.md

After each file/section reviewed: Append findings to report immediately — never hold in memory

Return to main agent: Summary only (per SYNC:subagent-return-contract) with Full report: path

Main agent: Reads report file only when resolving specific blockers

Why: Context cutoff mid-execution loses ALL in-memory findings. Each disk write survives compaction. Partial results are better than no results.

Report naming: plans/reports/{skill-name}-{YYMMDD}-{HHmm}-{slug}.md

Sub-Agent Return Contract — When this skill spawns a sub-agent, the sub-agent MUST return ONLY this structure. Main agent reads only this summary — NEVER requests full sub-agent output inline.
## Sub-Agent Result: [skill-name]

Status: ✅ PASS | ⚠️ PARTIAL | ❌ FAIL
Confidence: [0-100]%

### Findings (Critical/High only — max 10 bullets)

- [severity] [file:line] [finding]

### Actions Taken

- [file changed] [what changed]

### Blockers (if any)

- [blocker description]

Full report: plans/reports/[skill-name]-[date]-[slug].md
Main agent reads Full report file ONLY when: (a) resolving a specific blocker, or (b) building a fix plan. Sub-agent writes full report incrementally (per SYNC:incremental-persistence) — not held in memory.

Context budget — the return payload is a SUMMARY, not a transcript: ≤10 finding bullets, no raw file contents / full diffs / verbatim logs inline, no re-pasted source. Everything beyond the summary lives in the Full report on disk. A sub-agent that would exceed the summary shape MUST write the detail to its report and return only the pointer — the orchestrator's context is the scarce resource the whole map-reduce protects.

MUST ATTENTION apply critical + sequential thinking — every claim needs appropriate traced evidence (file:line for repo/code claims; source URL or artifact section for research, product, content, and docs claims); confidence >80% to act, <60% DO NOT recommend. Anti-hallucination: never present guess as fact, admit uncertainty freely, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence.

MUST ATTENTION apply AI mistake prevention — verify generated content against evidence, trace downstream references before deleting or renaming, verify all affected outputs, re-read files after context loss, and surface ambiguity before acting.

MANDATORY Parent workflow rows do not replace child phase tracking; expand phases and link the parent when nested.
MANDATORY Orchestrators pre-expand child skill phases before invocation; use [N.M] $skill-name — phase prefixes and one-in_progress discipline.

Closing Reminders

IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — Protocols in force (concise digest of the SYNC/shared blocks this skill carries; each line is a signpost to its canonical body above):

AI Mistake Prevention: verify generated content against evidence, trace downstream references, verify all affected outputs, re-read after context loss, surface ambiguity.
Nested Task Creation: Expand child phases, link parent when nested, one in_progress at a time.
Critical Thinking: Traced file:line proof per claim, confidence >80% to act.
Incremental Persistence: Write findings to plans/reports/ per file — never hold in memory.
Sub-Agent Return Contract: Sub-agents return summary only; full detail to report on disk.
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks using task tracking BEFORE starting — one task per step
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION run all five purpose-specific why-review gates: after refine, after spec [mode=tests], after domain-analysis, after plan-validate, and after story; FAIL blocks the next artifact step, WARN requires user acknowledgment
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION spec [mode=draft] authors the §1-7 Feature Spec (provisional) right after refine, then spec [mode=tests] and review-artifact --type=spec-tests run before the PBI is drafted (idea → draft Feature Spec → specs → from those specs to PBI); both spec [mode=draft] and spec [mode=tests] are SINGLE-PBI DEEP MODE ONLY (never per opportunity in discovery mode)
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION pbi-challenge must be run by a reviewer different from the drafter
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION dor-gate must pass (PASS or WARN) before pbi-mockup is finalized
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION write each artifact immediately — never batch output across steps
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION docs-update runs after prioritize and before workflow-end to sync specs, feature docs, and TDD/spec dashboards
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add a final watzup summary: PBI title, DoR result, any blocking items, recommended next step

[TASK-PLANNING] Before acting, analyze task scope and systematically break it into small todo tasks and sub-tasks using task tracking.

[IMPORTANT] Analyze how big the task is and break it into many small todo tasks systematically before starting — this is very important.

Hookless Prompt Protocol Mirror (Auto-Synced)

Source: .claude/.ck.json + .claude/skills/shared/sync-inline-versions.md (:full blocks) + .claude/scripts/lib/hookless-prompt-protocol.cjs

[WORKFLOW-EXECUTION-PROTOCOL] [BLOCKING] Workflow Execution Protocol — MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST CRITICAL. Do not skip for any reason.

Generic portability boundary: Reusable skills and protocol text stay project-neutral; project-specific conventions are discovered from docs/project-config.json and docs/project-reference/. Apply shared AI-SDD from shared/sdd-artifact-contract.md. Read docs/project-config.json and docs/project-reference/docs-index-reference.md, then open the project reference docs named there. For spec, test-case, behavior-change, public-contract, or docs/specs/ work, route through the local spec docs named by the docs index: feature-spec-reference.md, spec-system-reference.md, spec-principles.md, and workflow-spec-test-code-cycle-reference.md when specs/tests/code must stay synchronized. If either file or a required reference doc is missing or stale, auto-run $project-init (or the narrow lower-level route such as $project-config, $docs-init, $scan-all, or $scan --target=<key>) before ordinary project-specific work. Any supported AI tool may execute when this shared context and local docs are available.

DETECT: If the prompt starts with an explicit slash skill/workflow command, execute it directly. Otherwise match the prompt against the workflow catalog and skill list.
ANALYZE: Choose the best option: execute directly, invoke a skill, activate a standard workflow, or compose a custom step combination.
AUTO-SELECT: Pick the best option yourself. Do not ask the user to choose between direct execution, skill, standard workflow, or custom workflow.
ACTIVATE: For a selected workflow, call $start-workflow <workflowId>; for a selected skill, invoke that skill; for a custom workflow, sequence custom steps directly; for direct execution, proceed with the task.
CREATE TASKS: task tracking for ALL workflow/skill/custom steps before execution when the selected path has multiple steps.
EXECUTE: Advance per the Workflow Step Advancement & Parallel Phases rule in your context instructions — model-driven; a sub-agent completion advances a step identically to an inline call; a parallel-phase group is an all-return barrier (advance only after ALL members return, never serialize it)

Shared AI-SDD Protocol Markers

Source: .claude/skills/shared/sync-inline-versions.md

SYNC:ai-sdd-artifact-contract

AI-SDD Artifact Contract — Shared spec-driven development rules stay portable and source-owned.

Keep reusable AI-SDD principles in .claude; put repository-specific paths, commands, owners, products, and formats in project config/reference docs.

Preserve cycle: spec -> plan -> tasks -> implement -> verify -> update spec/docs.

Trace every requirement or invariant through decision, task, TC/test, source evidence, and docs/spec update.

Treat code-to-spec extraction as reference-only until accepted by the canonical spec owner.

Any supported AI tool may plan, implement, review, or verify with synced context; using multiple tools is optional.

Update .claude source first, then sync generated mirrors; do not manually edit .agents, .codex, or AGENTS.md. — why: mirrors are generated artifacts; hand-edits are overwritten on the next sync

If docs/project-config.json, root instruction files, or a required project-reference doc is missing or stale, auto-run $project-init or the narrow lower-level route before ordinary project-specific work.

Active reference: shared/sdd-artifact-contract.md in the active skills root.

SYNC:ai-sdd-artifact-contract:reminder

MANDATORY Apply shared/sdd-artifact-contract.md; keep reusable AI-SDD in .claude and local rules in project docs.
MANDATORY Code-to-spec extraction is reference-only until canonical acceptance; any supported AI tool may execute with synced context.
MANDATORY Update .claude source before syncing generated mirrors; do not manually edit .agents, .codex, or AGENTS.md.
MANDATORY Missing or stale project config, root instruction files, or required reference docs route project-specific work through $project-init or the narrow setup route automatically. [TASK-PLANNING] [MANDATORY] BEFORE executing any workflow or skill step, create/update task tracking for all planned steps, then keep it synchronized as each step starts/completes.

[LESSON-LEARNED-REMINDER] [BLOCKING] Task Planning & Continuous Improvement — MANDATORY. Do not skip.

Break work into small tasks (task tracking) before starting. Add final task: "Analyze AI mistakes & lessons learned".

Extract lessons — ROOT CAUSE ONLY, not symptom fixes:

Name the FAILURE MODE (reasoning/assumption failure), not symptom — "assumed API existed without reading source" not "used wrong enum value".
Generality test: does this failure mode apply to ≥3 contexts/codebases? If not, abstract one level up.
Write as a universal rule — strip project-specific names/paths/classes. Useful on any codebase.
Consolidate: multiple mistakes sharing one failure mode → ONE lesson.
Recurrence gate: "Would this recur in future session WITHOUT this reminder?" — No → skip $learn.
Auto-fix gate: "Could $code-review/$code-simplifier/$security-review/$lint catch this?" — Yes → improve review skill instead.
BOTH gates pass → ask user to run $learn. [CRITICAL-THINKING-MINDSET] Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination principle: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination. AI Attention principle (Primacy-Recency): Put the 3 most critical rules at both top and bottom of long prompts/protocols so instruction adherence survives long context windows. Goal-driven execution: Define success criteria first, loop until verified, and stop only when observable checks pass. Tests verify intent: Tests must protect business rules/invariants and fail when the protected intent breaks, not only mirror current behavior.

Common AI Mistake Prevention (System Lessons)

Re-read files after context compaction. Edit requires prior Read in same context; compaction wipes read state. Re-read before editing.
Grep for old terms after bulk replacements. AI over-trusts find/replace completeness. Grep full repo after bulk edits for missed refs in docs/configs/catalogs.
Check downstream references before deleting. Deletions cascade doc/code staleness. Map referencing files before removal.
After memory loss, check existing state before creating new. Compaction wipes prior-work memory. Query current state to resume — never blindly duplicate.
Verify AI-generated content against actual code. AI hallucinates APIs, class names, method signatures. Grep to confirm existence before documenting/referencing.
Trace full dependency chain after edits. Changing a definition misses downstream consumers. Trace the full chain.
When renaming, grep ALL consumer file types. Some file types silently ignore missing refs (no compile error). Search code, templates, configs, generated files.
Trace ALL code paths when verifying correctness. Code existing ≠ code executing. Trace early exits, error branches, conditional skips — not just happy path.
Update docs that embed canonical data when source changes. Docs inlining derived data (workflows, schemas, configs) go stale silently. Update all embedding docs alongside source.
Verify sub-agent results after context recovery. Background agents may finish while parent compacted — grep-verify output, don't trust assumed completion.
Cross-check full target list against sub-agent assignments. Parallel sub-agents by category miss boundary items. Reconcile union of assignments against target list before proceeding.
Sub-agents inherit knowledge only from their agent .md definition — use custom agent types, not built-in Explore. Tool adoption = permission + knowledge + enforcement (numbered workflow step).
Persist sub-agent findings incrementally, not as a final batch. Long sub-agents hit cutoffs before final write — findings lost. Instruct append-per-section to report file.
When debugging, ask "whose responsibility?" before fixing. Trace caller (wrong data) vs callee (wrong handling). Fix at responsible layer — never patch symptom site.
Grep ALL removed names after extraction/refactoring. Primary file "done" ≠ secondary files clean. Grep entire scope for every removed symbol before declaring complete.
Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing. Pattern-matching as "wrong" skips context. Before changing any constant/limit/flag: read comments, git blame, surrounding code.
Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first. One build green ≠ all green. Multi-stack changes (backend/frontend/tests/docs) require verifying EVERY output.
Evaluate fit before copying a nearby pattern. Closest example ≠ matching preconditions — verify the new context shares the same constraints, base classes, scope, lifetime.
Holistic-first debugging — resist nearest-attention trap. Don't dive into first plausible cause. List EVERY precondition (config, env vars, paths, DB, endpoints, creds, versions, DI, data). Verify each against evidence (grep/query — not reasoning). Ask "what would falsify this?" — if nothing, it's not a hypothesis. Most expensive failure: going deeper in "obvious" layer while bug sits in layer never questioned.
Surgical changes — apply the diff test (context-aware). Two modes: (1) Bug fix → every line traces to the bug; no restyling; orphan cleanup only for imports YOUR changes made unused. (2) Review/enhancement → implement improvements AND announce as "Enhancement beyond main request: [what]". Never silently scope-creep. Diff test: "Would this line exist if I wasn't asked to do X?" — if no, delete or announce.
Surface ambiguity before coding — don't pick silently. Multiple valid interpretations → present each with effort: "[Request] could mean (1) [N h], (2) [N h]. Which matters?" List scope/format/volume/constraints assumptions first. If simpler path exists, say so. Never silently pick.
[MANDATORY FIRST ACTION] ALWAYS activate a suitable skill or workflow BEFORE responding. Match task against workflow catalog + skill list; invoke via skill invocation or $start-workflow <workflowId>. NEVER answer or write code before checking. Skip = protocol violation.
Why-Review adversarial mindset — apply when reviewing any plan, decision, or design. Default SKEPTIC not VALIDATOR: steel-man a rejected alternative, invert each stated reason ("what does it sacrifice?"), stress-test top 2-3 assumptions, run pre-mortem ("ships, fails in 3 months — what breaks?"), surface 1-2 alternatives author missed. Section presence ≠ quality; quality = causal reasoning + concrete mitigations + evidence, not "it's better" or "monitor closely".
Front-load report-write in sub-agent prompts for large reviews. Many-file sub-agents hit budget before final write — findings lost. Design prompts so: (1) report-write is first explicit deliverable, (2) append per-file/section (not batched), (3) scope bounded so reads don't exhaust budget. Truncated mid-sentence with no report file → spawn narrower scope, don't retry same prompt.
After context compaction, re-verify all prior phase outcomes before continuing. Summaries describe intent, not environment state (git index, filesystem, processes). On resume, FIRST audit: git status, re-read modified files, verify filesystem. Every "completed" claim is an untested hypothesis until evidence confirms.
OOM/memory: check row count before row size. Triage: (1) Unbounded query — no DB filter for trigger? Push filter to DB; eliminates OOM. (2) Large rows? Projection reduces proportionally. Row reduction > projection in ROI.
Keep domain concepts out of generic/shared/infrastructure layers. Reusable layer (shared library, framework, infra module) must reference NO consumer-specific domain concept — tenant/customer/product IDs, business entities, feature rules. Leak compiles + runs → passes review silently while coupling the "reusable" layer to one consumer. Keep shared type domain-free; push domain fields/logic down into the consumer via subclass/composition. — why: a layer coupled to one consumer's domain is no longer reusable.

Agent Skills: workflow-idea-to-pbi

Install this agent skill to your local

Skill Files