mirror of
https://github.com/glittercowboy/get-shit-done
synced 2026-04-25 17:25:23 +02:00
* refactor(workflows): extract discuss-phase modes/templates/advisor for progressive disclosure (closes #2551) Splits 1,347-line workflows/discuss-phase.md into a 495-line dispatcher plus per-mode files in workflows/discuss-phase/modes/ and templates in workflows/discuss-phase/templates/. Mirrors the progressive-disclosure pattern that #2361 enforced for agents. - Per-mode files: power, all, auto, chain, text, batch, analyze, default, advisor - Templates lazy-loaded at the step that produces the artifact (CONTEXT.md template at write_context, DISCUSSION-LOG.md template at git_commit, checkpoint.json schema when checkpointing) - Advisor mode gated behind `[ -f $HOME/.claude/get-shit-done/USER-PROFILE.md ]` — inverse of #2174's --advisor flag (don't pay the cost when unused) - scout_codebase phase-type→map selection table extracted to references/scout-codebase.md - New tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs enforces tiered budgets across all workflows/*.md (XL=1700 / LARGE=1500 / DEFAULT=1000) plus the explicit <500 ceiling for discuss-phase.md per #2551 - Existing tests updated to read from the new file locations after the split (functional equivalence preserved — content moved, not removed) Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(#2607): align modes/auto.md check_existing with parent (Update it, not Skip) CodeRabbit flagged drift between the parent step (which auto-selects "Update it") and modes/auto.md (which documented "Skip"). The pre-refactor file had both — line 182 said "Skip" in the overview, line 250 said "Update it" in the actual step. The step is authoritative. Fix the new mode file to match. Refs: PR #2607 review comment 3127783430 * test(#2607): harden discuss-phase regression tests after #2551 split CodeRabbit identified four test smells where the split weakened coverage: - workflow-size-budget: assertion was unreachable (entered if-block on match, then asserted occurrences === 0 — always failed). Now unconditional. - bug-2549-2550-2552: bounded-read assertion checked concatenated source, so src.includes('3') was satisfied by unrelated content in scout-codebase.md (e.g., "3-5 most relevant files"). Now reads parent only with a stricter regex. Also asserts SCOUT_REF exists. - chain-flag-plan-phase: filter(existsSync) silently skipped a missing modes/chain.md. Now fails loudly via explicit asserts. - discuss-checkpoint: same silent-filter pattern across three sources. Now asserts each required path before reading. Refs: PR #2607 review comments 3127783457, 3127783452, plus nitpicks for chain-flag-plan-phase.test.cjs:21-24 and discuss-checkpoint.test.cjs:22-27 * docs(#2607): fix INVENTORY count, context.md placeholders, scout grep portability - INVENTORY.md: subdirectory note said "50 top-level references" but the section header now says 51. Updated to 51. - templates/context.md: footer hardcoded XX-name instead of declared placeholders [X]/[Name], which would leak sample text into generated CONTEXT.md files. Now uses the declared placeholders. - references/scout-codebase.md: no-maps fallback used grep -rl with "\\|" alternation (GNU grep only — silent on BSD/macOS grep). Switched to grep -rlE with extended regex for portability. Refs: PR #2607 review comments 3127783404, 3127783448, plus nitpick for scout-codebase.md:32-40 * docs(#2607): label fenced examples + clarify overlay/advisor precedence - analyze.md / text.md / default.md: add language tags (markdown/text) to fenced example blocks to silence markdownlint MD040 warnings flagged by CodeRabbit (one fence in analyze.md, two in text.md, five in default.md). - discuss-phase.md: document overlay stacking rules in discuss_areas — fixed outer→inner order --analyze → --batch → --text, with a pointer to each overlay file for mode-specific precedence. - advisor.md: add tie-breaker rules for NON_TECHNICAL_OWNER signals — explicit technical_background overrides inferred signals; otherwise OR-aggregate; contradictory explanation_depth values resolve by most-recent-wins. Refs: PR #2607 review comments 3127783415, 3127783437, plus nitpicks for default.md:24, discuss-phase.md:345-365, and advisor.md:51-56 * fix(#2607): extract codebase_drift_gate body to keep execute-phase under XL budget PR #2605 added 80 lines to execute-phase.md (1622 -> 1702), pushing it over the XL_BUDGET=1700 line cap enforced by tests/workflow-size-budget.test.cjs (introduced by this PR). Per the test's own remediation hint and #2551's progressive-disclosure pattern, extract the codebase_drift_gate step body to get-shit-done/workflows/execute-phase/steps/codebase-drift-gate.md and leave a brief pointer in the workflow. execute-phase.md is now 1633 lines. Budget is NOT relaxed; the offending workflow is tightened. --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
150 lines
5.9 KiB
JavaScript
150 lines
5.9 KiB
JavaScript
/**
|
|
* GSD Tools Tests - discuss-phase power user mode
|
|
*
|
|
* Validates that the --power flag workflow documentation is present and
|
|
* correctly describes the bulk question generation/answering flow.
|
|
*
|
|
* Closes: #1513
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
const { test, describe } = require('node:test');
|
|
const assert = require('node:assert/strict');
|
|
const fs = require('fs');
|
|
const path = require('path');
|
|
|
|
describe('discuss-phase power user mode (#1513)', () => {
|
|
const commandPath = path.join(__dirname, '..', 'commands', 'gsd', 'discuss-phase.md');
|
|
const workflowPath = path.join(__dirname, '..', 'get-shit-done', 'workflows', 'discuss-phase.md');
|
|
const powerWorkflowPath = path.join(__dirname, '..', 'get-shit-done', 'workflows', 'discuss-phase-power.md');
|
|
|
|
describe('command file (discuss-phase.md)', () => {
|
|
test('mentions --power flag in argument-hint or description', () => {
|
|
const content = fs.readFileSync(commandPath, 'utf8');
|
|
assert.ok(
|
|
content.includes('--power'),
|
|
'commands/gsd/discuss-phase.md should document the --power flag'
|
|
);
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
test('references the power workflow file', () => {
|
|
const content = fs.readFileSync(commandPath, 'utf8');
|
|
assert.ok(
|
|
content.includes('discuss-phase-power'),
|
|
'command file should reference discuss-phase-power workflow'
|
|
);
|
|
});
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
describe('main workflow file (discuss-phase.md)', () => {
|
|
test('has power_user_mode section or references discuss-phase-power.md', () => {
|
|
// After #2551, the power dispatch lives in discuss-phase/modes/power.md and
|
|
// the parent references it via the dispatch table.
|
|
const parentContent = fs.readFileSync(workflowPath, 'utf8');
|
|
const powerModePath = path.join(__dirname, '..', 'get-shit-done', 'workflows', 'discuss-phase', 'modes', 'power.md');
|
|
const powerMode = fs.existsSync(powerModePath) ? fs.readFileSync(powerModePath, 'utf8') : '';
|
|
const content = parentContent + '\n' + powerMode;
|
|
const hasPowerSection = content.includes('power_user_mode') || content.includes('power user mode') || content.includes('modes/power.md');
|
|
const hasReference = content.includes('discuss-phase-power');
|
|
assert.ok(
|
|
hasPowerSection || hasReference,
|
|
'discuss-phase.md (or modes/power.md after #2551) should have power_user_mode section or reference discuss-phase-power.md'
|
|
);
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
test('describes --power flag routing', () => {
|
|
const content = fs.readFileSync(workflowPath, 'utf8');
|
|
assert.ok(
|
|
content.includes('--power'),
|
|
'discuss-phase.md should describe --power flag handling'
|
|
);
|
|
});
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
describe('power workflow file (discuss-phase-power.md)', () => {
|
|
test('file exists', () => {
|
|
assert.ok(
|
|
fs.existsSync(powerWorkflowPath),
|
|
'get-shit-done/workflows/discuss-phase-power.md should exist'
|
|
);
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
test('describes the generate step', () => {
|
|
const content = fs.readFileSync(powerWorkflowPath, 'utf8');
|
|
assert.ok(
|
|
content.includes('generate') || content.includes('Generate'),
|
|
'power workflow should describe generating questions'
|
|
);
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
test('describes the wait/notify step', () => {
|
|
const content = fs.readFileSync(powerWorkflowPath, 'utf8');
|
|
const hasWait = content.includes('wait') || content.includes('Wait');
|
|
const hasNotify = content.includes('notify') || content.includes('Notify') || content.includes('notif');
|
|
assert.ok(
|
|
hasWait || hasNotify,
|
|
'power workflow should describe the wait/notify step after generating files'
|
|
);
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
test('describes the refresh step', () => {
|
|
const content = fs.readFileSync(powerWorkflowPath, 'utf8');
|
|
assert.ok(
|
|
content.includes('refresh') || content.includes('Refresh'),
|
|
'power workflow should describe the refresh step for processing answers'
|
|
);
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
test('describes the finalize step', () => {
|
|
const content = fs.readFileSync(powerWorkflowPath, 'utf8');
|
|
assert.ok(
|
|
content.includes('finalize') || content.includes('Finalize'),
|
|
'power workflow should describe the finalize step for generating CONTEXT.md'
|
|
);
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
test('QUESTIONS.json structure has required fields', () => {
|
|
const content = fs.readFileSync(powerWorkflowPath, 'utf8');
|
|
assert.ok(content.includes('QUESTIONS.json'), 'should mention QUESTIONS.json file');
|
|
assert.ok(content.includes('"phase"'), 'JSON structure should include phase field');
|
|
assert.ok(content.includes('"stats"'), 'JSON structure should include stats field');
|
|
assert.ok(content.includes('"sections"'), 'JSON structure should include sections field');
|
|
assert.ok(
|
|
content.includes('"id"') && content.includes('"title"'),
|
|
'JSON structure should include question id and title fields'
|
|
);
|
|
assert.ok(
|
|
content.includes('"options"'),
|
|
'JSON structure should include options array'
|
|
);
|
|
assert.ok(
|
|
content.includes('"answer"'),
|
|
'JSON structure should include answer field'
|
|
);
|
|
assert.ok(
|
|
content.includes('"status"'),
|
|
'JSON structure should include status field'
|
|
);
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
test('describes HTML generation step', () => {
|
|
const content = fs.readFileSync(powerWorkflowPath, 'utf8');
|
|
assert.ok(
|
|
content.includes('QUESTIONS.html') || content.includes('.html'),
|
|
'power workflow should describe generating the HTML companion file'
|
|
);
|
|
assert.ok(
|
|
content.includes('HTML') || content.includes('html'),
|
|
'power workflow should mention HTML output'
|
|
);
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
test('QUESTIONS.json file naming uses padded phase number', () => {
|
|
const content = fs.readFileSync(powerWorkflowPath, 'utf8');
|
|
assert.ok(
|
|
content.includes('padded_phase') || content.includes('{padded_phase}') || content.includes('QUESTIONS.json'),
|
|
'power workflow should describe file naming with padded phase number'
|
|
);
|
|
});
|
|
});
|
|
});
|