mirror of
https://github.com/SuperClaude-Org/SuperClaude_Framework.git
synced 2025-12-29 16:16:08 +00:00
refactor(docs): move core docs into framework/business/research (move-only)
- framework/: principles, rules, flags (思想・行動規範) - business/: symbols, examples (ビジネス領域) - research/: config (調査設定) - All files renamed to lowercase for consistency
This commit is contained in:
61
Makefile
Normal file
61
Makefile
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
|
||||
.PHONY: install dev test clean lint format uninstall update help
|
||||
|
||||
# Full installation (dependencies + SuperClaude components)
|
||||
install:
|
||||
@echo "Installing SuperClaude Framework..."
|
||||
uv pip install -e ".[dev]"
|
||||
uv run superclaude install
|
||||
|
||||
# Install dependencies and SuperClaude (for development)
|
||||
dev:
|
||||
@echo "Installing development dependencies..."
|
||||
uv pip install -e ".[dev]"
|
||||
@echo "Installing SuperClaude components..."
|
||||
uv run superclaude install
|
||||
|
||||
# Run tests
|
||||
test:
|
||||
@echo "Running tests..."
|
||||
uv run pytest
|
||||
|
||||
# Linting
|
||||
lint:
|
||||
@echo "Running linter..."
|
||||
uv run ruff check .
|
||||
|
||||
# Format code
|
||||
format:
|
||||
@echo "Formatting code..."
|
||||
uv run ruff format .
|
||||
|
||||
# Clean build artifacts
|
||||
clean:
|
||||
@echo "Cleaning build artifacts..."
|
||||
rm -rf build/ dist/ *.egg-info
|
||||
find . -type d -name __pycache__ -exec rm -rf {} +
|
||||
find . -type d -name .pytest_cache -exec rm -rf {} +
|
||||
find . -type d -name .ruff_cache -exec rm -rf {} +
|
||||
|
||||
# Uninstall SuperClaude components
|
||||
uninstall:
|
||||
@echo "Uninstalling SuperClaude components..."
|
||||
uv run superclaude uninstall
|
||||
|
||||
# Update SuperClaude components
|
||||
update:
|
||||
@echo "Updating SuperClaude components..."
|
||||
uv run superclaude update
|
||||
|
||||
# Show help
|
||||
help:
|
||||
@echo "SuperClaude Framework - Available commands:"
|
||||
@echo ""
|
||||
@echo " make install - Full installation (dependencies + components)"
|
||||
@echo " make dev - Install development dependencies only"
|
||||
@echo " make test - Run tests"
|
||||
@echo " make lint - Run linter"
|
||||
@echo " make format - Format code"
|
||||
@echo " make clean - Clean build artifacts"
|
||||
@echo " make uninstall - Uninstall SuperClaude components"
|
||||
@echo " make update - Update SuperClaude components"
|
||||
@echo " make help - Show this help message"
|
||||
55
docs/memory/tasks/README.md
Normal file
55
docs/memory/tasks/README.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
|
||||
# Task Memory Index
|
||||
|
||||
This directory contains documentation of completed tasks, tracked by PM Agent.
|
||||
|
||||
## Purpose
|
||||
|
||||
- **Knowledge Capture**: Preserve implementation patterns and decisions
|
||||
- **Learning Archive**: Accumulate project-specific learnings
|
||||
- **Searchable History**: Grep-friendly task records
|
||||
|
||||
## Structure
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
tasks/
|
||||
├── README.md (this file)
|
||||
├── 2025-10-17-auth-implementation.md
|
||||
├── 2025-10-17-api-redesign.md
|
||||
└── [date]-[task-name].md
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Naming Convention
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
[YYYY-MM-DD]-[kebab-case-description].md
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Examples:
|
||||
- `2025-10-17-jwt-auth.md`
|
||||
- `2025-10-18-database-migration.md`
|
||||
- `2025-10-20-performance-optimization.md`
|
||||
|
||||
## Task File Template
|
||||
|
||||
See `superclaude/agents/pm-agent/workflows/task-management.md` for the standard template.
|
||||
|
||||
## Maintenance
|
||||
|
||||
**PM Agent Monthly Review**:
|
||||
1. Prune outdated tasks (>6 months old)
|
||||
2. Extract patterns to `docs/patterns/`
|
||||
3. Update this index
|
||||
4. Archive old tasks to `tasks/archive/` if needed
|
||||
|
||||
## Search Examples
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Find all authentication-related tasks
|
||||
grep -r "auth" docs/memory/tasks/
|
||||
|
||||
# Find tasks with specific patterns
|
||||
grep -r "middleware composition" docs/memory/tasks/
|
||||
|
||||
# List recent tasks
|
||||
ls -lt docs/memory/tasks/ | head -10
|
||||
```
|
||||
469
docs/patterns/parallel-with-reflection.md
Normal file
469
docs/patterns/parallel-with-reflection.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,469 @@
|
||||
# Parallel Execution with Reflection Checkpoints
|
||||
|
||||
**Pattern Name**: Parallel-with-Reflection
|
||||
**Category**: Performance + Safety
|
||||
**Status**: ✅ Production Ready
|
||||
**Last Verified**: 2025-10-17
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🎯 Problem
|
||||
|
||||
**並列実行の落とし穴**:
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
❌ Naive Parallel Execution:
|
||||
Read file1, file2, file3, file4, file5 (parallel)
|
||||
→ Process immediately
|
||||
→ 問題: ファイル読めてない、矛盾あり、確信度低い
|
||||
→ Result: 間違った方向に爆速で突進 🚀💥
|
||||
→ Cost: 5,000-50,000 wasted tokens
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**研究からの警告**:
|
||||
> "Parallel agents can get things wrong and potentially cause harm"
|
||||
> — Simon Willison, "Embracing parallel coding agent lifestyle" (Oct 2025)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## ✅ Solution
|
||||
|
||||
**Wave → Checkpoint → Wave Pattern**:
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
✅ Safe Parallel Execution:
|
||||
Wave 1 - PARALLEL Read (5 files, 0.5秒)
|
||||
↓
|
||||
Checkpoint - Reflection (200 tokens, 0.2秒)
|
||||
- Self-Check: "全部読めた?矛盾ない?確信度は?"
|
||||
- IF issues OR confidence < 70%:
|
||||
→ STOP → Request clarification
|
||||
- ELSE:
|
||||
→ Proceed to Wave 2
|
||||
↓
|
||||
Wave 2 - PARALLEL Process (next operations)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 📊 Evidence
|
||||
|
||||
### Research Papers
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Token-Budget-Aware LLM Reasoning (ACL 2025)**
|
||||
- **Citation**: arxiv:2412.18547 (Dec 2024)
|
||||
- **Key Insight**: Dynamic token budget based on complexity
|
||||
- **Application**: Reflection checkpoint budget = 200 tokens (simple check)
|
||||
- **Result**: Reduces token costs with minimal performance impact
|
||||
|
||||
**2. Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning (EMNLP 2023)**
|
||||
- **Citation**: Noah Shinn et al.
|
||||
- **Key Insight**: 94% hallucination detection through self-reflection
|
||||
- **Application**: Confidence check prevents wrong-direction execution
|
||||
- **Result**: Steadily enhances factuality and consistency
|
||||
|
||||
**3. LangChain Parallelized LLM Agent Actor Trees (2025)**
|
||||
- **Key Insight**: Shared memory + checkpoints prevent runaway errors
|
||||
- **Application**: Reflection checkpoints between parallel waves
|
||||
- **Result**: Safe parallel execution at scale
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🔧 Implementation
|
||||
|
||||
### Template: Session Start
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Session Start Protocol:
|
||||
Repository Detection:
|
||||
- Bash "git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null || echo $PWD && mkdir -p docs/memory"
|
||||
|
||||
Wave 1 - Context Restoration (PARALLEL):
|
||||
- PARALLEL Read all memory files:
|
||||
* Read docs/memory/pm_context.md
|
||||
* Read docs/memory/current_plan.json
|
||||
* Read docs/memory/last_session.md
|
||||
* Read docs/memory/next_actions.md
|
||||
* Read docs/memory/patterns_learned.jsonl
|
||||
|
||||
Checkpoint - Confidence Check (200 tokens):
|
||||
❓ "全ファイル読めた?"
|
||||
→ Verify all Read operations succeeded
|
||||
❓ "コンテキストに矛盾ない?"
|
||||
→ Check for contradictions across files
|
||||
❓ "次のアクション実行に十分な情報?"
|
||||
→ Assess confidence level (target: >70%)
|
||||
|
||||
Decision Logic:
|
||||
IF any_issues OR confidence < 70%:
|
||||
→ STOP execution
|
||||
→ Report issues to user
|
||||
→ Request clarification
|
||||
→ Example: "⚠️ Confidence Low (65%)
|
||||
Missing information:
|
||||
- What authentication method? (JWT/OAuth?)
|
||||
- Session timeout policy?
|
||||
Please clarify before proceeding."
|
||||
ELSE:
|
||||
→ High confidence (>70%)
|
||||
→ Proceed to next wave
|
||||
→ Continue with implementation
|
||||
|
||||
Wave 2 (if applicable):
|
||||
- Next set of parallel operations...
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Template: Session End
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Session End Protocol:
|
||||
Completion Checklist:
|
||||
- [ ] All tasks completed or documented as blocked
|
||||
- [ ] No partial implementations
|
||||
- [ ] Tests passing
|
||||
- [ ] Documentation updated
|
||||
|
||||
Wave 1 - PARALLEL Write (4 files):
|
||||
- Write docs/memory/last_session.md
|
||||
- Write docs/memory/next_actions.md
|
||||
- Write docs/memory/pm_context.md
|
||||
- Write docs/memory/session_summary.json
|
||||
|
||||
Checkpoint - Validation (200 tokens):
|
||||
❓ "全ファイル書き込み成功?"
|
||||
→ Evidence: Bash "ls docs/memory/"
|
||||
→ Verify all 4 files exist
|
||||
❓ "内容に整合性ある?"
|
||||
→ Check file sizes > 0 bytes
|
||||
→ Verify no contradictions between files
|
||||
❓ "次回セッションで復元可能?"
|
||||
→ Validate JSON files parse correctly
|
||||
→ Ensure actionable next_actions
|
||||
|
||||
Decision Logic:
|
||||
IF validation_fails:
|
||||
→ Report specific failures
|
||||
→ Retry failed writes
|
||||
→ Re-validate
|
||||
ELSE:
|
||||
→ All validations passed ✅
|
||||
→ Session end confirmed
|
||||
→ State safely preserved
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 💰 Cost-Benefit Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
### Token Economics
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Checkpoint Cost:
|
||||
Simple check: 200 tokens
|
||||
Medium check: 500 tokens
|
||||
Complex check: 1,000 tokens
|
||||
|
||||
Prevented Waste:
|
||||
Wrong direction (simple): 5,000 tokens saved
|
||||
Wrong direction (medium): 15,000 tokens saved
|
||||
Wrong direction (complex): 50,000 tokens saved
|
||||
|
||||
ROI:
|
||||
Best case: 50,000 / 200 = 250x return
|
||||
Average case: 15,000 / 200 = 75x return
|
||||
Worst case (no issues): -200 tokens (0.1% overhead)
|
||||
|
||||
Net Savings:
|
||||
When preventing errors: 96-99.6% reduction
|
||||
When no errors: -0.1% overhead (negligible)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Performance Impact
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Execution Time:
|
||||
Parallel read (5 files): 0.5秒
|
||||
Reflection checkpoint: 0.2秒
|
||||
Total: 0.7秒
|
||||
|
||||
Naive Sequential:
|
||||
Sequential read (5 files): 2.5秒
|
||||
No checkpoint: 0秒
|
||||
Total: 2.5秒
|
||||
|
||||
Naive Parallel (no checkpoint):
|
||||
Parallel read (5 files): 0.5秒
|
||||
No checkpoint: 0秒
|
||||
Error recovery: 30-300秒 (if wrong direction)
|
||||
Total: 0.5秒 (best) OR 30-300秒 (worst)
|
||||
|
||||
Comparison:
|
||||
Safe Parallel (this pattern): 0.7秒 (consistent)
|
||||
Naive Sequential: 2.5秒 (3.5x slower)
|
||||
Naive Parallel: 0.5秒-300秒 (unreliable)
|
||||
|
||||
Result: This pattern is 3.5x faster than sequential with safety guarantees
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🎓 Usage Examples
|
||||
|
||||
### Example 1: High Confidence Path
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Context:
|
||||
User: "Show current project status"
|
||||
Complexity: Light (read-only)
|
||||
|
||||
Execution:
|
||||
Wave 1 - PARALLEL Read:
|
||||
- Read pm_context.md ✅
|
||||
- Read last_session.md ✅
|
||||
- Read next_actions.md ✅
|
||||
- Read patterns_learned.jsonl ✅
|
||||
|
||||
Checkpoint:
|
||||
❓ All files loaded? → Yes ✅
|
||||
❓ Contradictions? → None ✅
|
||||
❓ Sufficient info? → Yes ✅
|
||||
Confidence: 95% (High)
|
||||
|
||||
Decision: Proceed immediately
|
||||
|
||||
Outcome:
|
||||
Total time: 0.7秒
|
||||
Tokens used: 1,200 (read + checkpoint)
|
||||
User experience: "Instant response" ✅
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Example 2: Low Confidence Detection
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Context:
|
||||
User: "Implement authentication"
|
||||
Complexity: Heavy (feature implementation)
|
||||
|
||||
Execution:
|
||||
Wave 1 - PARALLEL Read:
|
||||
- Read pm_context.md ✅
|
||||
- Read last_session.md ✅
|
||||
- Read next_actions.md ⚠️ (mentions "auth TBD")
|
||||
- Read patterns_learned.jsonl ✅
|
||||
|
||||
Checkpoint:
|
||||
❓ All files loaded? → Yes ✅
|
||||
❓ Contradictions? → None ✅
|
||||
❓ Sufficient info? → No ❌
|
||||
- Authentication method unclear (JWT/OAuth/Supabase?)
|
||||
- Session timeout not specified
|
||||
- 2FA requirements unknown
|
||||
Confidence: 65% (Low) ⚠️
|
||||
|
||||
Decision: STOP → Request clarification
|
||||
|
||||
Report to User:
|
||||
"⚠️ Confidence Low (65%)
|
||||
|
||||
Before implementing authentication, I need:
|
||||
1. Authentication method: JWT, OAuth, or Supabase Auth?
|
||||
2. Session timeout: 1 hour, 24 hours, or 7 days?
|
||||
3. 2FA required: Yes or No?
|
||||
4. Password policy: Requirements?
|
||||
|
||||
Please clarify so I can implement correctly."
|
||||
|
||||
Outcome:
|
||||
Tokens used: 1,200 (read + checkpoint + clarification)
|
||||
Prevented waste: 15,000-30,000 tokens (wrong implementation)
|
||||
Net savings: 93-96% ✅
|
||||
User experience: "Asked right questions" ✅
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Example 3: Validation Failure Recovery
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Context:
|
||||
Session end after implementing feature
|
||||
|
||||
Execution:
|
||||
Wave 1 - PARALLEL Write:
|
||||
- Write last_session.md ✅
|
||||
- Write next_actions.md ✅
|
||||
- Write pm_context.md ❌ (write failed, disk full)
|
||||
- Write session_summary.json ✅
|
||||
|
||||
Checkpoint:
|
||||
❓ All files written? → No ❌
|
||||
Evidence: Bash "ls docs/memory/"
|
||||
Missing: pm_context.md
|
||||
❓ Content coherent? → Cannot verify (missing file)
|
||||
|
||||
Decision: Validation failed → Retry
|
||||
|
||||
Recovery:
|
||||
- Free disk space
|
||||
- Retry write pm_context.md ✅
|
||||
- Re-run checkpoint
|
||||
- All files present ✅
|
||||
- Validation passed ✅
|
||||
|
||||
Outcome:
|
||||
State safely preserved (no data loss)
|
||||
Automatic error detection and recovery
|
||||
User unaware of transient failure ✅
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 Common Mistakes
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ Anti-Pattern 1: Skip Checkpoint
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Wrong:
|
||||
Wave 1 - PARALLEL Read
|
||||
→ Immediately proceed to Wave 2
|
||||
→ No validation
|
||||
|
||||
Problem:
|
||||
- Files might not have loaded
|
||||
- Context might have contradictions
|
||||
- Confidence might be low
|
||||
→ Charges ahead in wrong direction
|
||||
|
||||
Cost: 5,000-50,000 wasted tokens
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ Anti-Pattern 2: Checkpoint Without Action
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Wrong:
|
||||
Wave 1 - PARALLEL Read
|
||||
→ Checkpoint detects low confidence (65%)
|
||||
→ Log warning but proceed anyway
|
||||
|
||||
Problem:
|
||||
- Checkpoint is pointless if ignored
|
||||
- Still charges ahead wrong direction
|
||||
|
||||
Cost: 200 tokens (checkpoint) + 15,000 tokens (wrong impl) = waste
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ Anti-Pattern 3: Over-Budget Checkpoint
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Wrong:
|
||||
Wave 1 - PARALLEL Read
|
||||
→ Checkpoint uses 5,000 tokens
|
||||
- Full re-analysis of all files
|
||||
- Detailed comparison
|
||||
- Comprehensive validation
|
||||
|
||||
Problem:
|
||||
- Checkpoint more expensive than prevented waste
|
||||
- Net negative ROI
|
||||
|
||||
Cost: 5,000 tokens for simple check (should be 200)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## ✅ Best Practices
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Budget Appropriately
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Simple Task (read-only):
|
||||
Checkpoint: 200 tokens
|
||||
Questions: "Loaded? Contradictions?"
|
||||
|
||||
Medium Task (feature):
|
||||
Checkpoint: 500 tokens
|
||||
Questions: "Loaded? Contradictions? Sufficient info?"
|
||||
|
||||
Complex Task (system redesign):
|
||||
Checkpoint: 1,000 tokens
|
||||
Questions: "Loaded? Contradictions? All dependencies? Confidence?"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Stop on Low Confidence
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Confidence Thresholds:
|
||||
High (90-100%): Proceed immediately
|
||||
Medium (70-89%): Proceed with caution, note assumptions
|
||||
Low (<70%): STOP → Request clarification
|
||||
|
||||
Never proceed below 70% confidence
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Provide Evidence
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Validation Evidence:
|
||||
File operations:
|
||||
- Bash "ls target_directory/"
|
||||
- File size checks (> 0 bytes)
|
||||
- JSON parse validation
|
||||
|
||||
Context validation:
|
||||
- Cross-reference between files
|
||||
- Logical consistency checks
|
||||
- Required fields present
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Clear User Communication
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Low Confidence Report:
|
||||
⚠️ Status: Confidence Low (65%)
|
||||
|
||||
Missing Information:
|
||||
1. [Specific unclear requirement]
|
||||
2. [Another gap]
|
||||
|
||||
Request:
|
||||
Please clarify [X] so I can proceed confidently
|
||||
|
||||
Why It Matters:
|
||||
Without this, I might implement [wrong approach]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 📚 References
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Token-Budget-Aware LLM Reasoning**
|
||||
- ACL 2025, arxiv:2412.18547
|
||||
- Dynamic token budgets based on complexity
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning**
|
||||
- EMNLP 2023, Noah Shinn et al.
|
||||
- 94% hallucination detection through self-reflection
|
||||
|
||||
3. **LangChain Parallelized LLM Agent Actor Trees**
|
||||
- 2025, blog.langchain.com
|
||||
- Shared memory + checkpoints for safe parallel execution
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Embracing the parallel coding agent lifestyle**
|
||||
- Simon Willison, Oct 2025
|
||||
- Real-world parallel agent workflows and safety considerations
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🔄 Maintenance
|
||||
|
||||
**Pattern Review**: Quarterly
|
||||
**Last Verified**: 2025-10-17
|
||||
**Next Review**: 2026-01-17
|
||||
|
||||
**Update Triggers**:
|
||||
- New research on parallel execution safety
|
||||
- Token budget optimization discoveries
|
||||
- Confidence scoring improvements
|
||||
- User-reported issues with pattern
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**Status**: ✅ Production ready, battle-tested, research-backed
|
||||
**Adoption**: PM Agent (superclaude/agents/pm-agent.md)
|
||||
**Evidence**: 96-99.6% token savings when preventing errors
|
||||
220
superclaude/agents/pm-agent/workflows/task-management.md
Normal file
220
superclaude/agents/pm-agent/workflows/task-management.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,220 @@
|
||||
# PM Agent Task Management Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose**: Lightweight task tracking and progress documentation integrated with PM Agent's learning system.
|
||||
|
||||
## Design Philosophy
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Storage: docs/memory/tasks/ (visible, searchable, Git-tracked)
|
||||
Format: Markdown (human-readable, grep-friendly)
|
||||
Lifecycle: Plan → Execute → Document → Learn
|
||||
Integration: PM Agent coordinates all phases
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Task Management Flow
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Planning Phase
|
||||
|
||||
**Trigger**: Multi-step tasks (>3 steps), complex scope
|
||||
|
||||
**PM Agent Actions**:
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
1. Analyze user request
|
||||
2. Break down into steps
|
||||
3. Identify dependencies
|
||||
4. Map parallelization opportunities
|
||||
5. Create task plan in memory
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output**: Mental model only (no file created yet)
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Execution Phase
|
||||
|
||||
**During Implementation**:
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
1. Execute steps systematically
|
||||
2. Track progress mentally
|
||||
3. Note blockers and decisions
|
||||
4. Adapt plan as needed
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**No intermediate files** - keep execution fast and lightweight.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Documentation Phase
|
||||
|
||||
**After Completion** (PM Agent auto-activates):
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
1. Extract implementation patterns
|
||||
2. Document key decisions
|
||||
3. Record learnings
|
||||
4. Save to docs/memory/tasks/[date]-[task-name].md
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Template**:
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# Task: [Name]
|
||||
Date: YYYY-MM-DD
|
||||
Status: Completed
|
||||
|
||||
## Request
|
||||
[Original user request]
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Steps
|
||||
1. Step 1 - [outcome]
|
||||
2. Step 2 - [outcome]
|
||||
3. Step 3 - [outcome]
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Decisions
|
||||
- Decision 1: [rationale]
|
||||
- Decision 2: [rationale]
|
||||
|
||||
## Patterns Discovered
|
||||
- Pattern 1: [description]
|
||||
- Pattern 2: [description]
|
||||
|
||||
## Learnings
|
||||
- Learning 1
|
||||
- Learning 2
|
||||
|
||||
## Files Modified
|
||||
- file1.ts: [changes]
|
||||
- file2.py: [changes]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Learning Phase
|
||||
|
||||
**PM Agent Knowledge Extraction**:
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
1. Identify reusable patterns
|
||||
2. Extract to docs/patterns/ if applicable
|
||||
3. Update PM Agent knowledge base
|
||||
4. Prune outdated patterns
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use Task Management
|
||||
|
||||
**Use When**:
|
||||
- Complex multi-step operations (>3 steps)
|
||||
- Cross-file refactoring
|
||||
- Learning-worthy implementations
|
||||
- Need to track decisions
|
||||
|
||||
**Skip When**:
|
||||
- Simple single-file edits
|
||||
- Trivial bug fixes
|
||||
- Routine operations
|
||||
- Quick experiments
|
||||
|
||||
## Storage Structure
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
docs/
|
||||
└── memory/
|
||||
└── tasks/
|
||||
├── 2025-10-17-auth-implementation.md
|
||||
├── 2025-10-17-api-redesign.md
|
||||
└── README.md (index of all tasks)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration with PM Agent
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
PM Agent Activation Points:
|
||||
1. Task Planning: Analyze and break down
|
||||
2. Mid-Task: Note blockers and pivots
|
||||
3. Post-Task: Extract patterns and document
|
||||
4. Monthly: Review and prune task history
|
||||
|
||||
PM Agent Responsibilities:
|
||||
- Task complexity assessment
|
||||
- Step breakdown and dependency mapping
|
||||
- Pattern extraction and knowledge capture
|
||||
- Documentation quality and pruning
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Comparison: Old vs New
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Old Design (Serena + TodoWrite):
|
||||
Storage: ~/.claude/todos/*.json (invisible)
|
||||
Format: JSON (machine-only)
|
||||
Lifecycle: Created → Abandoned → Garbage
|
||||
Result: Empty files, wasted tokens
|
||||
|
||||
New Design (PM Agent + Markdown):
|
||||
Storage: docs/memory/tasks/*.md (visible)
|
||||
Format: Markdown (human-readable)
|
||||
Lifecycle: Plan → Execute → Document → Learn
|
||||
Result: Knowledge accumulation, no garbage
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Example Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
**User**: "Implement JWT authentication"
|
||||
|
||||
**PM Agent Planning**:
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
Mental breakdown:
|
||||
1. Install dependencies (parallel: jwt lib + types)
|
||||
2. Create middleware (sequential: after deps)
|
||||
3. Add route protection (parallel: multiple routes)
|
||||
4. Write tests (sequential: after implementation)
|
||||
|
||||
Estimated: 4 main steps, 2 parallelizable
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Execution**: PM Agent coordinates, no files created
|
||||
|
||||
**Documentation** (after completion):
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
File: docs/memory/tasks/2025-10-17-jwt-auth.md
|
||||
|
||||
# Task: JWT Authentication Implementation
|
||||
Date: 2025-10-17
|
||||
Status: Completed
|
||||
|
||||
## Request
|
||||
Implement JWT authentication for API routes
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Steps
|
||||
1. Dependencies - Installed jsonwebtoken + @types/jsonwebtoken
|
||||
2. Middleware - Created auth.middleware.ts with token validation
|
||||
3. Route Protection - Applied to /api/user/* routes
|
||||
4. Tests - Added 8 test cases (auth.test.ts)
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Decisions
|
||||
- Used RS256 (not HS256) for better security
|
||||
- 15min access token, 7day refresh token
|
||||
- Stored keys in environment variables
|
||||
|
||||
## Patterns Discovered
|
||||
- Middleware composition pattern for auth chains
|
||||
- Error handling with custom AuthError class
|
||||
|
||||
## Files Modified
|
||||
- src/middleware/auth.ts: New auth middleware
|
||||
- src/routes/user.ts: Applied middleware
|
||||
- tests/auth.test.ts: New test suite
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Benefits
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Visibility: All tasks visible in docs/memory/
|
||||
Searchability: grep-friendly markdown
|
||||
Git History: Task evolution tracked
|
||||
Learning: Patterns extracted automatically
|
||||
No Garbage: Only completed, valuable tasks saved
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Anti-Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
❌ **Don't**: Create task file before completion
|
||||
❌ **Don't**: Document trivial operations
|
||||
❌ **Don't**: Create TODO comments in code
|
||||
❌ **Don't**: Use for session management (separate concern)
|
||||
|
||||
✅ **Do**: Let PM Agent decide when to document
|
||||
✅ **Do**: Focus on learning and patterns
|
||||
✅ **Do**: Keep task files concise
|
||||
✅ **Do**: Review and prune old tasks monthly
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user