mirror of
https://github.com/centminmod/my-claude-code-setup.git
synced 2025-12-29 16:14:46 +00:00
initial commit
This commit is contained in:
@@ -0,0 +1,595 @@
|
||||
# Convert Complex Prompts to TodoWrite Tasklist Method
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose**: Transform verbose, context-heavy slash commands into efficient TodoWrite tasklist-based methods with parallel subagent execution for 60-70% speed improvements.
|
||||
|
||||
**Usage**: `/convert-to-todowrite-tasklist-prompt @/path/to/original-slash-command.md`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## CONVERSION EXECUTION
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 1: Read Original Prompt
|
||||
**File to Convert**: $ARGUMENT
|
||||
|
||||
First, analyze the original slash command file to understand its structure, complexity, and conversion opportunities.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 2: Apply Conversion Framework
|
||||
Transform the original prompt using the TodoWrite tasklist method with parallel subagent optimization.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 3: Generate Optimized Version
|
||||
Output the converted slash command with efficient task delegation and context management.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Argument Variable Integration
|
||||
|
||||
When converting slash commands, ensure proper argument handling for dynamic inputs:
|
||||
|
||||
### Standard Argument Variables
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## ARGUMENT HANDLING
|
||||
|
||||
**File Input**: {file_path} or {code} - The primary file(s) or code to analyze
|
||||
**Analysis Scope**: {scope} - Specific focus areas (security, performance, quality, architecture, all)
|
||||
**Output Format**: {format} - Report format (detailed, summary, action_items)
|
||||
**Target Audience**: {audience} - Intended audience (technical, executive, security_team)
|
||||
**Priority Level**: {priority} - Analysis depth (quick, standard, comprehensive)
|
||||
**Context**: {context} - Additional project context and constraints
|
||||
|
||||
### Usage Examples:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Basic usage with file input
|
||||
/comprehensive-review file_path="@src/main.py" scope="security,performance"
|
||||
|
||||
# Advanced usage with multiple parameters
|
||||
/comprehensive-review file_path="@codebase/" scope="all" format="detailed" audience="technical" priority="comprehensive" context="Production deployment review"
|
||||
|
||||
# Quick analysis with minimal scope
|
||||
/comprehensive-review file_path="@config.yaml" scope="security" format="summary" priority="quick"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Argument Integration in TodoWrite Tasks
|
||||
|
||||
**Dynamic Task Content Based on Arguments:**
|
||||
```json
|
||||
[
|
||||
{"id": "setup_analysis", "content": "Record start time and initialize analysis for {file_path}", "status": "pending", "priority": "high"},
|
||||
{"id": "security_analysis", "content": "Security Analysis of {file_path} - Focus: {scope}", "status": "pending", "priority": "high"},
|
||||
{"id": "report_generation", "content": "Generate {format} report for {audience}", "status": "pending", "priority": "high"}
|
||||
]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Conversion Analysis Framework
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 1: Identify Context Overload Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
**Context Overflow Indicators:**
|
||||
- **Massive Instructions**: >1000 lines of detailed frameworks and methodologies
|
||||
- **Upfront Mass File Loading**: Attempting to load 10+ files simultaneously with @filename syntax
|
||||
- **Verbose Framework Application**: Extended thinking sections, redundant validation loops
|
||||
- **Sequential Bottlenecks**: All analysis phases running one after another instead of parallel
|
||||
- **Redundant Content**: Multiple repeated frameworks, bias detection, steel man reasoning overengineering
|
||||
|
||||
**Success Patterns to Implement:**
|
||||
- **Task Tool Delegation**: Specialized agents for bounded analysis domains
|
||||
- **Progressive Synthesis**: Incremental building rather than simultaneous processing
|
||||
- **Parallel Execution**: Multiple subagents running simultaneously
|
||||
- **Context Recycling**: Fresh context for each analysis phase
|
||||
- **Strategic File Selection**: Phase-specific file targeting
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 2: Task Decomposition Strategy
|
||||
|
||||
**Convert Monolithic Workflows Into:**
|
||||
1. **Setup Phase**: Initialization and timestamp recording
|
||||
2. **Parallel Analysis Phases**: 2-4 specialized domains running simultaneously
|
||||
3. **Synthesis Phase**: Consolidation of parallel findings
|
||||
4. **Verification Phase**: Quality assurance and validation
|
||||
5. **Completion Phase**: Final integration and timestamp
|
||||
|
||||
**Example Decomposition:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
BEFORE (Sequential):
|
||||
Security Analysis (10 min) <20> Performance Analysis (10 min) <20> Quality Analysis (10 min) = 30 minutes
|
||||
|
||||
AFTER (Parallel Subagents):
|
||||
Phase 1: Security Subagents A,B,C (10 min parallel)
|
||||
Phase 2: Performance Subagents A,B,C (10 min parallel)
|
||||
Phase 3: Quality Subagents A,B (8 min parallel)
|
||||
Synthesis: Consolidate findings (5 min)
|
||||
Total: ~15 minutes (50% faster + better coverage)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## TodoWrite Structure for Parallel Execution
|
||||
|
||||
### Enhanced Task JSON Template with Argument Integration
|
||||
|
||||
```json
|
||||
[
|
||||
{"id": "setup_analysis", "content": "Record start time and initialize analysis for {file_path}", "status": "pending", "priority": "high"},
|
||||
|
||||
// Conditional Parallel Groups Based on {scope} Parameter
|
||||
// If scope includes "security" or "all":
|
||||
{"id": "security_auth", "content": "Security Analysis of {file_path} - Authentication & Validation (Subagent A)", "status": "pending", "priority": "high", "parallel_group": "security", "condition": "security in {scope}"},
|
||||
{"id": "security_tools", "content": "Security Analysis of {file_path} - Tool Isolation & Parameters (Subagent B)", "status": "pending", "priority": "high", "parallel_group": "security", "condition": "security in {scope}"},
|
||||
{"id": "security_protocols", "content": "Security Analysis of {file_path} - Protocols & Transport (Subagent C)", "status": "pending", "priority": "high", "parallel_group": "security", "condition": "security in {scope}"},
|
||||
|
||||
// If scope includes "performance" or "all":
|
||||
{"id": "performance_complexity", "content": "Performance Analysis of {file_path} - Algorithmic Complexity (Subagent A)", "status": "pending", "priority": "high", "parallel_group": "performance", "condition": "performance in {scope}"},
|
||||
{"id": "performance_io", "content": "Performance Analysis of {file_path} - I/O Patterns & Async (Subagent B)", "status": "pending", "priority": "high", "parallel_group": "performance", "condition": "performance in {scope}"},
|
||||
{"id": "performance_memory", "content": "Performance Analysis of {file_path} - Memory & Concurrency (Subagent C)", "status": "pending", "priority": "high", "parallel_group": "performance", "condition": "performance in {scope}"},
|
||||
|
||||
// If scope includes "quality" or "architecture" or "all":
|
||||
{"id": "quality_patterns", "content": "Quality Analysis of {file_path} - Code Patterns & SOLID (Subagent A)", "status": "pending", "priority": "high", "parallel_group": "quality", "condition": "quality in {scope}"},
|
||||
{"id": "architecture_design", "content": "Architecture Analysis of {file_path} - Modularity & Interfaces (Subagent B)", "status": "pending", "priority": "high", "parallel_group": "quality", "condition": "architecture in {scope}"},
|
||||
|
||||
// Sequential Dependencies
|
||||
{"id": "synthesis_integration", "content": "Synthesis & Integration - Consolidate findings for {file_path}", "status": "pending", "priority": "high", "depends_on": ["security", "performance", "quality"]},
|
||||
{"id": "report_generation", "content": "Generate {format} report for {audience} - Analysis of {file_path}", "status": "pending", "priority": "high"},
|
||||
{"id": "verification_parallel", "content": "Parallel verification of {file_path} analysis with multiple validation streams", "status": "pending", "priority": "high"},
|
||||
{"id": "final_integration", "content": "Final integration and completion for {file_path}", "status": "pending", "priority": "high"}
|
||||
]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Conditional Task Execution Based on Arguments
|
||||
|
||||
**Scope-Based Task Filtering:**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## CONDITIONAL EXECUTION LOGIC
|
||||
|
||||
**Full Analysis (scope="all")**:
|
||||
- Execute all security, performance, quality, and architecture tasks
|
||||
- Use comprehensive parallel subagent deployment
|
||||
|
||||
**Security-Focused (scope="security")**:
|
||||
- Execute only security_auth, security_tools, security_protocols tasks
|
||||
- Skip performance, quality, architecture parallel groups
|
||||
- Faster execution with security specialization
|
||||
|
||||
**Performance-Focused (scope="performance")**:
|
||||
- Execute only performance_complexity, performance_io, performance_memory tasks
|
||||
- Include synthesis and reporting phases
|
||||
- Targeted performance optimization focus
|
||||
|
||||
**Custom Scope (scope="security,quality")**:
|
||||
- Execute selected parallel groups based on comma-separated values
|
||||
- Flexible analysis depth based on specific needs
|
||||
|
||||
**Priority-Based Execution:**
|
||||
- priority="quick": Use single subagent per domain, reduced file scope
|
||||
- priority="standard": Use 2-3 subagents per domain (default)
|
||||
- priority="comprehensive": Use 3-4 subagents per domain, expanded file scope
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Task Delegation Execution Framework
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL: Use Task Tool Delegation Pattern (Prevents Context Overflow)**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## TASK DELEGATION FRAMEWORK
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Security Analysis (Task-Based)
|
||||
**TodoWrite**: Mark "security_analysis" as in_progress
|
||||
**Task Delegation**: Use Task tool with focused analysis:
|
||||
|
||||
Task Description: "Security Analysis of Target Codebase"
|
||||
Task Prompt: "Analyze security vulnerabilities focusing on:
|
||||
- STRIDE threat modeling for architecture
|
||||
- OWASP Top 10 assessment (adapted for context)
|
||||
- Authentication and credential management
|
||||
- Input validation and injection prevention
|
||||
- Protocol-specific security patterns
|
||||
|
||||
**CONTEXT MANAGEMENT**: Analyze only 3-5 key security files:
|
||||
- Main coordinator file (entry point security)
|
||||
- Security/validation modules (2-3 files max)
|
||||
- Key protocol handlers (1-2 files max)
|
||||
|
||||
Provide specific findings with file:line references and actionable recommendations."
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Performance Analysis (Task-Based)
|
||||
**TodoWrite**: Mark "security_analysis" completed, "performance_analysis" as in_progress
|
||||
**Task Delegation**: Use Task tool with performance focus:
|
||||
|
||||
Task Description: "Performance Analysis of Target Codebase"
|
||||
Task Prompt: "Analyze performance characteristics focusing on:
|
||||
- Algorithmic complexity (Big O analysis)
|
||||
- I/O efficiency patterns (async/await, file operations)
|
||||
- Memory management (caching, object lifecycle)
|
||||
- Concurrency bottlenecks and optimization opportunities
|
||||
|
||||
**CONTEXT MANAGEMENT**: Analyze only 3-5 key performance files:
|
||||
- Core algorithm modules (complexity focus)
|
||||
- I/O intensive modules (async/caching focus)
|
||||
- Memory management modules (lifecycle focus)
|
||||
|
||||
Identify specific bottlenecks with measured impact and optimization opportunities."
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Quality & Architecture Analysis (Task-Based)
|
||||
**TodoWrite**: Mark "performance_analysis" completed, "quality_analysis" as in_progress
|
||||
**Task Delegation**: Use Task tool with quality focus:
|
||||
|
||||
Task Description: "Quality & Architecture Analysis of Target Codebase"
|
||||
Task Prompt: "Evaluate code quality and architectural design focusing on:
|
||||
- Clean code principles (function length, naming, responsibility)
|
||||
- SOLID principles compliance and modular design
|
||||
- Architecture patterns and dependency management
|
||||
- Interface design and extensibility considerations
|
||||
|
||||
**CONTEXT MANAGEMENT**: Analyze only 3-5 representative files:
|
||||
- Core implementation patterns (2-3 files)
|
||||
- Module interfaces and boundaries (1-2 files)
|
||||
- Configuration and coordination modules (1 file)
|
||||
|
||||
Provide complexity metrics and specific refactoring recommendations with examples."
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL SUCCESS PATTERN**: Each Task operation stays within context limits by analyzing only 3-5 files maximum, using fresh context for each analysis phase.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Subagent Specialization Templates
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Domain-Based Parallel Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
**Security Domain Subagents:**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
Subagent A Focus: Authentication, validation, credential management
|
||||
Subagent B Focus: Tool isolation, parameter security, privilege boundaries
|
||||
Subagent C Focus: Protocol security, transport validation, message integrity
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Performance Domain Subagents:**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
Subagent A Focus: Algorithmic complexity, Big O analysis, data structures
|
||||
Subagent B Focus: I/O patterns, async/await, file operations, network calls
|
||||
Subagent C Focus: Memory management, caching, object lifecycle, concurrency
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality Domain Subagents:**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
Subagent A Focus: Code patterns, SOLID principles, clean code metrics
|
||||
Subagent B Focus: Architecture design, modularity, interface consistency
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. File-Based Parallel Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
**Large Codebase Distribution:**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
Subagent A: Core coordination files (mcp_server.py, mcp_core_tools.py)
|
||||
Subagent B: Business logic files (mcp_collaboration_engine.py, mcp_service_implementations.py)
|
||||
Subagent C: Infrastructure files (redis_cache.py, openrouter_client.py, conversation_manager.py)
|
||||
Subagent D: Security & utilities (security/, gemini_utils.py, monitoring.py)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Cross-Cutting Concern Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
**Thematic Parallel Analysis:**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
Subagent A: Error handling patterns across all modules
|
||||
Subagent B: Configuration management across all modules
|
||||
Subagent C: Performance bottlenecks across all modules
|
||||
Subagent D: Security patterns across all modules
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Task-Based Verification (CRITICAL)
|
||||
|
||||
**Progressive Task Verification:**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
### GEMINI VERIFICATION (Task-Based - Prevents Context Overflow)
|
||||
**TodoWrite**: Mark "gemini_verification" as in_progress
|
||||
**Task Delegation**: Use Task tool for verification:
|
||||
|
||||
Task Description: "Gemini Verification of Comprehensive Analysis"
|
||||
Task Prompt: "Apply systematic verification frameworks to evaluate the comprehensive review report accuracy.
|
||||
|
||||
**VERIFICATION APPROACH**: Use progressive analysis rather than loading all files simultaneously.
|
||||
|
||||
Focus on:
|
||||
1. **Technical Accuracy**: Cross-reference report findings with actual implementation
|
||||
2. **Transport Awareness**: Verify recommendations suit specific architecture
|
||||
3. **Framework Application**: Confirm systematic methodology application
|
||||
4. **Actionability**: Validate file:line references and concrete examples
|
||||
|
||||
**PROGRESSIVE VERIFICATION**:
|
||||
- Verify security findings accuracy through targeted code examination
|
||||
- Verify performance analysis completeness through key module review
|
||||
- Verify quality assessment validity through pattern analysis
|
||||
- Verify architectural recommendations through interface review
|
||||
|
||||
Report file to analyze: {report_file_path}
|
||||
|
||||
Provide structured verification with specific agreement/disagreement analysis."
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL**: Never use @file1 @file2 @file3... bulk loading patterns in verification
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Context Management for Task Delegation
|
||||
|
||||
### CRITICAL: Context Overflow Prevention Rules
|
||||
|
||||
**NEVER Generate These Patterns:**
|
||||
❌ `@file1 @file2 @file3 @file4 @file5...` (bulk file loading)
|
||||
❌ `Analyze all files simultaneously`
|
||||
❌ `Load entire codebase for analysis`
|
||||
|
||||
**ALWAYS Use These Patterns:**
|
||||
✅ `Task tool to analyze: [3-5 specific files max]`
|
||||
✅ `Progressive analysis through Task boundaries`
|
||||
✅ `Fresh context for each analysis phase`
|
||||
|
||||
### File Selection Strategy (Maximum 5 Files Per Task)
|
||||
|
||||
**Security Analysis Priority Files (3-5 max):**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Task tool to analyze:
|
||||
- Main coordinator file (entry point security)
|
||||
- Primary validation/security modules (2-3 files)
|
||||
- Key protocol handlers (1-2 files)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Performance Analysis Priority Files (3-5 max):**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Task tool to analyze:
|
||||
- Core algorithm modules (complexity focus)
|
||||
- I/O intensive modules (async/caching focus)
|
||||
- Memory management modules (lifecycle focus)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality Analysis Priority Files (3-5 max):**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Task tool to analyze:
|
||||
- Representative implementation patterns (2-3 files)
|
||||
- Module interfaces and boundaries (1-2 files)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Context Budget Allocation for Task Delegation
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Total Context Limit per Task: ~200k tokens
|
||||
- Task Instructions: ~10k tokens (focused, domain-specific)
|
||||
- File Analysis: ~40k tokens (3-5 files maximum)
|
||||
- Analysis Output: ~20k tokens (specialized findings)
|
||||
- Buffer/Overhead: ~10k tokens
|
||||
Total per Task: ~80k tokens (safe task execution)
|
||||
|
||||
Context Efficiency:
|
||||
- 3 Task operations: 3 × 80k = 240k total analysis capacity
|
||||
- Fresh context per Task prevents overflow accumulation
|
||||
- Progressive analysis maintains depth while respecting limits
|
||||
|
||||
CRITICAL: Never exceed 5 files per Task operation
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Synthesis Strategies for Parallel Findings
|
||||
|
||||
### Multi-Stream Consolidation
|
||||
|
||||
**Synthesis Phase Structure:**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
### PHASE: SYNTHESIS & INTEGRATION
|
||||
**TodoWrite**: Mark all parallel groups completed, "synthesis_integration" as in_progress
|
||||
|
||||
**Consolidation Process:**
|
||||
1. **Cross-Reference Security Findings**: Integrate auth + tools + protocol findings
|
||||
2. **Performance Bottleneck Mapping**: Combine complexity + I/O + memory analysis
|
||||
3. **Quality Pattern Recognition**: Merge code patterns + architecture findings
|
||||
4. **Cross-Domain Issue Identification**: Find issues spanning multiple domains
|
||||
5. **Priority Matrix Generation**: Impact vs Effort analysis across all findings
|
||||
6. **Implementation Roadmap**: Coordinate fixes across security, performance, quality
|
||||
|
||||
**Integration Requirements:**
|
||||
- Resolve contradictions between parallel streams
|
||||
- Identify reinforcing patterns across domains
|
||||
- Prioritize fixes that address multiple concerns
|
||||
- Create coherent implementation sequence
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Conflict Resolution Framework
|
||||
|
||||
**Handling Parallel Finding Conflicts:**
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
1. **Evidence Strength Assessment**: Which subagent provided stronger supporting evidence?
|
||||
2. **Domain Expertise Weight**: Security findings take precedence for security conflicts
|
||||
3. **Context Verification**: Re-examine conflicting code sections for accuracy
|
||||
4. **Synthesis Decision**: Document resolution rationale and confidence level
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quality Gates for Parallel Execution
|
||||
|
||||
### Completion Verification Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
**Before Synthesis Phase:**
|
||||
- [ ] All security subagents completed with specific file:line references
|
||||
- [ ] All performance subagents completed with measurable impact assessments
|
||||
- [ ] All quality subagents completed with concrete refactoring examples
|
||||
- [ ] No parallel streams terminated due to context overflow
|
||||
- [ ] All findings include actionable recommendations
|
||||
|
||||
**Synthesis Quality Gates:**
|
||||
- [ ] Cross-domain conflicts identified and resolved
|
||||
- [ ] Priority matrix spans all parallel finding categories
|
||||
- [ ] Implementation roadmap coordinates across all domains
|
||||
- [ ] No critical findings lost during consolidation
|
||||
- [ ] Final recommendations maintain parallel analysis depth
|
||||
|
||||
### Success Metrics
|
||||
|
||||
**Parallel Execution Effectiveness:**
|
||||
- **Speed Improvement**: Target 50-70% reduction in total analysis time
|
||||
- **Coverage Enhancement**: More detailed analysis per domain through specialization
|
||||
- **Context Efficiency**: No subagent context overflow, optimal token utilization
|
||||
- **Quality Maintenance**: Same or higher finding accuracy vs sequential analysis
|
||||
- **Actionability**: All recommendations include specific file:line references and metrics
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Conversion Application Instructions
|
||||
|
||||
### How to Apply This Framework
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 1: Analyze Original Prompt**
|
||||
- Identify context overflow patterns (massive instructions, upfront file loading)
|
||||
- Map existing workflow phases and dependencies
|
||||
- Estimate potential for parallelization (independent analysis domains)
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 2: Decompose Into Parallel Tasks**
|
||||
- Break monolithic analysis into 2-4 specialized domains
|
||||
- Create TodoWrite JSON with parallel groups and dependencies
|
||||
- Design specialized subagent prompts for each domain
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 3: Implement Context Management**
|
||||
- Distribute files strategically across subagents
|
||||
- Ensure no overlap or gaps in analysis coverage
|
||||
- Validate context budget allocation per subagent
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 4: Design Synthesis Strategy**
|
||||
- Plan consolidation approach for parallel findings
|
||||
- Create conflict resolution procedures
|
||||
- Define quality gates and completion verification
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 5: Test and Optimize**
|
||||
- Execute parallel workflow and measure performance
|
||||
- Identify bottlenecks and optimization opportunities
|
||||
- Refine subagent specialization and coordination
|
||||
|
||||
### Template Application Examples
|
||||
|
||||
**For Code Review Prompts:**
|
||||
- Security, Performance, Quality, Architecture subagents
|
||||
- File-based distribution for large codebases
|
||||
- Cross-cutting concern analysis for comprehensive coverage
|
||||
|
||||
**For Analysis Prompts:**
|
||||
- Domain expertise specialization (legal, technical, business)
|
||||
- Document section parallelization
|
||||
- Multi-perspective validation streams
|
||||
|
||||
**For Research Prompts:**
|
||||
- Topic area specialization
|
||||
- Source type parallelization (academic, industry, news)
|
||||
- Validation methodology streams
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## CONVERSION WORKFLOW EXECUTION
|
||||
|
||||
Now, apply this framework to convert the original slash command file provided in $ARGUMENT:
|
||||
|
||||
### TodoWrite Task: Conversion Process
|
||||
|
||||
```json
|
||||
[
|
||||
{"id": "read_original", "content": "Read and analyze original slash command from $ARGUMENT", "status": "pending", "priority": "high"},
|
||||
{"id": "identify_patterns", "content": "Identify context overload patterns and conversion opportunities", "status": "pending", "priority": "high"},
|
||||
{"id": "decompose_tasks", "content": "Decompose workflow into parallel TodoWrite tasks", "status": "pending", "priority": "high"},
|
||||
{"id": "design_subagents", "content": "Design specialized subagent prompts for parallel execution", "status": "pending", "priority": "high"},
|
||||
{"id": "generate_conversion", "content": "Generate optimized slash command with TodoWrite framework", "status": "pending", "priority": "high"},
|
||||
{"id": "validate_output", "content": "Validate converted prompt for context efficiency and completeness", "status": "pending", "priority": "high"},
|
||||
{"id": "overwrite_original", "content": "Overwrite original file with converted optimized version", "status": "pending", "priority": "high"}
|
||||
]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Execution Instructions
|
||||
|
||||
**Mark "read_original" as in_progress and begin analysis of $ARGUMENT**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Read the original file** and identify:
|
||||
- Total line count and instruction complexity
|
||||
- File loading patterns (@filename usage)
|
||||
- Sequential vs parallel execution opportunities
|
||||
- Context overflow risk factors
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Apply the conversion framework** systematically:
|
||||
- Break complex workflows into discrete tasks
|
||||
- Design parallel subagent execution strategies
|
||||
- Implement context management techniques
|
||||
- Create TodoWrite task structure
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Generate the optimized version** with:
|
||||
- Efficient TodoWrite task JSON
|
||||
- Parallel subagent delegation instructions
|
||||
- Context-aware file selection strategies
|
||||
- Quality gates and verification procedures
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Overwrite the original file** (mark "validate_output" completed, "overwrite_original" as in_progress):
|
||||
- Use Write tool to overwrite $ARGUMENT with the converted slash command
|
||||
- Ensure the optimized version maintains the same analytical depth while avoiding context limits
|
||||
- Include proper error handling and validation before overwriting
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Confirm completion** (mark "overwrite_original" completed):
|
||||
- Display confirmation message: "✅ Original file updated with optimized TodoWrite version"
|
||||
- Verify all 7 conversion tasks completed successfully
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## CRITICAL SUCCESS PATTERNS FOR CONVERTED PROMPTS
|
||||
|
||||
### Context Overflow Prevention Framework
|
||||
|
||||
**The conversion tool MUST generate these patterns to prevent context overflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Task Delegation Instructions**:
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
### Phase 1: Security Analysis
|
||||
**TodoWrite**: Mark "security_analysis" as in_progress
|
||||
**Task Delegation**: Use Task tool with focused analysis:
|
||||
|
||||
Task Description: "Security Analysis of Target Codebase"
|
||||
Task Prompt: "Analyze security focusing on [specific areas]
|
||||
|
||||
**CONTEXT MANAGEMENT**: Analyze only 3-5 key files:
|
||||
- [File 1] (specific purpose)
|
||||
- [File 2-3] (specific modules)
|
||||
- [File 4-5] (specific handlers)
|
||||
|
||||
Provide findings with file:line references."
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Verification Using Task Tool**:
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
### GEMINI VERIFICATION (Task-Based)
|
||||
**Task Delegation**: Use Task tool for verification:
|
||||
|
||||
Task Description: "Gemini Verification of Analysis Report"
|
||||
Task Prompt: "Verify analysis accuracy using progressive examination
|
||||
|
||||
**PROGRESSIVE VERIFICATION**:
|
||||
- Verify findings through targeted code review
|
||||
- Cross-reference specific sections progressively
|
||||
|
||||
Report file: {report_file_path}"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Explicit Context Rules**:
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
**CONTEXT MANAGEMENT RULES**:
|
||||
- Maximum 5 files per Task operation
|
||||
- Use Task tool for all analysis phases
|
||||
- Progressive analysis through Task boundaries
|
||||
- Fresh context for each Task operation
|
||||
|
||||
**AVOID**: @file1 @file2 @file3... bulk loading patterns
|
||||
**USE**: Task delegation with strategic file selection
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Success Validation Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
**Converted prompts MUST include:**
|
||||
- [ ] Task delegation instructions for each analysis phase
|
||||
- [ ] Maximum 5 files per Task operation
|
||||
- [ ] Progressive verification using Task tool
|
||||
- [ ] Explicit context management warnings
|
||||
- [ ] No bulk @filename loading patterns
|
||||
- [ ] Fresh context strategy through Task boundaries
|
||||
|
||||
This framework transforms any complex, context-heavy prompt into an efficient TaskWrite tasklist method that avoids context overflow while maintaining analytical depth and coverage, automatically updating the original file with the optimized version.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user