docs: initialize constitution v1.0.0

This commit is contained in:
Alex Selimov 2025-10-01 22:47:40 -04:00
commit ef65e38bb2
Signed by: aselimov
GPG key ID: 3DDB9C3E023F1F31
17 changed files with 2226 additions and 0 deletions

View file

@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
# [PROJECT NAME] Development Guidelines
Auto-generated from all feature plans. Last updated: [DATE]
## Active Technologies
[EXTRACTED FROM ALL PLAN.MD FILES]
## Project Structure
```
[ACTUAL STRUCTURE FROM PLANS]
```
## Commands
[ONLY COMMANDS FOR ACTIVE TECHNOLOGIES]
## Code Style
[LANGUAGE-SPECIFIC, ONLY FOR LANGUAGES IN USE]
## Recent Changes
[LAST 3 FEATURES AND WHAT THEY ADDED]
<!-- MANUAL ADDITIONS START -->
<!-- MANUAL ADDITIONS END -->

View file

@ -0,0 +1,221 @@
# Implementation Plan: [FEATURE]
**Branch**: `[###-feature-name]` | **Date**: [DATE] | **Spec**: [link]
**Input**: Feature specification from `/specs/[###-feature-name]/spec.md`
## Execution Flow (/plan command scope)
```
1. Load feature spec from Input path
→ If not found: ERROR "No feature spec at {path}"
2. Fill Technical Context (scan for NEEDS CLARIFICATION)
→ Detect Project Type from file system structure or context (web=frontend+backend, mobile=app+api)
→ Set Structure Decision based on project type
3. Fill the Constitution Check section based on the content of the constitution document.
4. Evaluate Constitution Check section below
→ If violations exist: Document in Complexity Tracking
→ If no justification possible: ERROR "Simplify approach first"
→ Update Progress Tracking: Initial Constitution Check
5. Execute Phase 0 → research.md
→ If NEEDS CLARIFICATION remain: ERROR "Resolve unknowns"
6. Execute Phase 1 → contracts, data-model.md, quickstart.md, agent-specific template file (e.g., `CLAUDE.md` for Claude Code, `.github/copilot-instructions.md` for GitHub Copilot, `GEMINI.md` for Gemini CLI, `QWEN.md` for Qwen Code or `AGENTS.md` for opencode).
7. Re-evaluate Constitution Check section
→ If new violations: Refactor design, return to Phase 1
→ Update Progress Tracking: Post-Design Constitution Check
8. Plan Phase 2 → Describe task generation approach (DO NOT create tasks.md)
9. STOP - Ready for /tasks command
```
**IMPORTANT**: The /plan command STOPS at step 7. Phases 2-4 are executed by other commands:
- Phase 2: /tasks command creates tasks.md
- Phase 3-4: Implementation execution (manual or via tools)
## Summary
[Extract from feature spec: primary requirement + technical approach from research]
## Technical Context
**Language/Version**: [e.g., Python 3.11, Swift 5.9, Rust 1.75 or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]
**Primary Dependencies**: [e.g., FastAPI, UIKit, LLVM or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]
**Storage**: [if applicable, e.g., PostgreSQL, CoreData, files or N/A]
**Testing**: [e.g., pytest, XCTest, cargo test or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]
**Target Platform**: [e.g., Linux server, iOS 15+, WASM or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]
**Project Type**: [single/web/mobile - determines source structure]
**Performance Goals**: [domain-specific, e.g., 1000 req/s, 10k lines/sec, 60 fps or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]
**Constraints**: [domain-specific, e.g., <200ms p95, <100MB memory, offline-capable or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]
**Scale/Scope**: [domain-specific, e.g., 10k users, 1M LOC, 50 screens or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]
## Constitution Check
*GATE: Must pass before Phase 0 research. Re-check after Phase 1 design.*
* **I. Clean Code**: Is the proposed code structure and design clean and maintainable?
* **II. Functional Style**: Does the design favor a functional approach where appropriate?
* **III. Descriptive Coding**: Is the naming of components and files descriptive and self-documenting?
## Project Structure
### Documentation (this feature)
```
specs/[###-feature]/
├── plan.md # This file (/plan command output)
├── research.md # Phase 0 output (/plan command)
├── data-model.md # Phase 1 output (/plan command)
├── quickstart.md # Phase 1 output (/plan command)
├── contracts/ # Phase 1 output (/plan command)
└── tasks.md # Phase 2 output (/tasks command - NOT created by /plan)
```
### Source Code (repository root)
<!--
ACTION REQUIRED: Replace the placeholder tree below with the concrete layout
for this feature. Delete unused options and expand the chosen structure with
real paths (e.g., apps/admin, packages/something). The delivered plan must
not include Option labels.
-->
```
# [REMOVE IF UNUSED] Option 1: Single project (DEFAULT)
src/
├── models/
├── services/
├── cli/
└── lib/
tests/
├── contract/
├── integration/
└── unit/
# [REMOVE IF UNUSED] Option 2: Web application (when "frontend" + "backend" detected)
backend/
├── src/
│ ├── models/
│ ├── services/
│ └── api/
└── tests/
frontend/
├── src/
│ ├── components/
│ ├── pages/
│ └── services/
└── tests/
# [REMOVE IF UNUSED] Option 3: Mobile + API (when "iOS/Android" detected)
api/
└── [same as backend above]
ios/ or android/
└── [platform-specific structure: feature modules, UI flows, platform tests]
```
**Structure Decision**: [Document the selected structure and reference the real
directories captured above]
## Phase 0: Outline & Research
1. **Extract unknowns from Technical Context** above:
- For each NEEDS CLARIFICATION → research task
- For each dependency → best practices task
- For each integration → patterns task
2. **Generate and dispatch research agents**:
```
For each unknown in Technical Context:
Task: "Research {unknown} for {feature context}"
For each technology choice:
Task: "Find best practices for {tech} in {domain}"
```
3. **Consolidate findings** in `research.md` using format:
- Decision: [what was chosen]
- Rationale: [why chosen]
- Alternatives considered: [what else evaluated]
**Output**: research.md with all NEEDS CLARIFICATION resolved
## Phase 1: Design & Contracts
*Prerequisites: research.md complete*
1. **Extract entities from feature spec**`data-model.md`:
- Entity name, fields, relationships
- Validation rules from requirements
- State transitions if applicable
2. **Generate API contracts** from functional requirements:
- For each user action → endpoint
- Use standard REST/GraphQL patterns
- Output OpenAPI/GraphQL schema to `/contracts/`
3. **Generate contract tests** from contracts:
- One test file per endpoint
- Assert request/response schemas
- Tests must fail (no implementation yet)
4. **Extract test scenarios** from user stories:
- Each story → integration test scenario
- Quickstart test = story validation steps
5. **Update agent file incrementally** (O(1) operation):
- Run `.specify/scripts/bash/update-agent-context.sh gemini`
**IMPORTANT**: Execute it exactly as specified above. Do not add or remove any arguments.
- If exists: Add only NEW tech from current plan
- Preserve manual additions between markers
- Update recent changes (keep last 3)
- Keep under 150 lines for token efficiency
- Output to repository root
**Output**: data-model.md, /contracts/*, failing tests, quickstart.md, agent-specific file
## Phase 2: Task Planning Approach
*This section describes what the /tasks command will do - DO NOT execute during /plan*
**Task Generation Strategy**:
- Load `.specify/templates/tasks-template.md` as base
- Generate tasks from Phase 1 design docs (contracts, data model, quickstart)
- Each contract → contract test task [P]
- Each entity → model creation task [P]
- Each user story → integration test task
- Implementation tasks to make tests pass
**Ordering Strategy**:
- TDD order: Tests before implementation
- Dependency order: Models before services before UI
- Mark [P] for parallel execution (independent files)
**Estimated Output**: 25-30 numbered, ordered tasks in tasks.md
**IMPORTANT**: This phase is executed by the /tasks command, NOT by /plan
## Phase 3+: Future Implementation
*These phases are beyond the scope of the /plan command*
**Phase 3**: Task execution (/tasks command creates tasks.md)
**Phase 4**: Implementation (execute tasks.md following constitutional principles)
**Phase 5**: Validation (run tests, execute quickstart.md, performance validation)
## Complexity Tracking
*Fill ONLY if Constitution Check has violations that must be justified*
| Violation | Why Needed | Simpler Alternative Rejected Because |
|-----------|------------|-------------------------------------|
| [e.g., 4th project] | [current need] | [why 3 projects insufficient] |
| [e.g., Repository pattern] | [specific problem] | [why direct DB access insufficient] |
## Progress Tracking
*This checklist is updated during execution flow*
**Phase Status**:
- [ ] Phase 0: Research complete (/plan command)
- [ ] Phase 1: Design complete (/plan command)
- [ ] Phase 2: Task planning complete (/plan command - describe approach only)
- [ ] Phase 3: Tasks generated (/tasks command)
- [ ] Phase 4: Implementation complete
- [ ] Phase 5: Validation passed
**Gate Status**:
- [ ] Initial Constitution Check: PASS
- [ ] Post-Design Constitution Check: PASS
- [ ] All NEEDS CLARIFICATION resolved
- [ ] Complexity deviations documented
---
*Based on Constitution v1.0.0 - See `/memory/constitution.md`*

View file

@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
# Feature Specification: [FEATURE NAME]
**Feature Branch**: `[###-feature-name]`
**Created**: [DATE]
**Status**: Draft
**Input**: User description: "$ARGUMENTS"
## Execution Flow (main)
```
1. Parse user description from Input
→ If empty: ERROR "No feature description provided"
2. Extract key concepts from description
→ Identify: actors, actions, data, constraints
3. For each unclear aspect:
→ Mark with [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: specific question]
4. Fill User Scenarios & Testing section
→ If no clear user flow: ERROR "Cannot determine user scenarios"
5. Generate Functional Requirements
→ Each requirement must be testable
→ Mark ambiguous requirements
6. Identify Key Entities (if data involved)
7. Run Review Checklist
→ If any [NEEDS CLARIFICATION]: WARN "Spec has uncertainties"
→ If implementation details found: ERROR "Remove tech details"
8. Return: SUCCESS (spec ready for planning)
```
---
## ⚡ Quick Guidelines
- ✅ Focus on WHAT users need and WHY
- ❌ Avoid HOW to implement (no tech stack, APIs, code structure)
- 👥 Written for business stakeholders, not developers
### Section Requirements
- **Mandatory sections**: Must be completed for every feature
- **Optional sections**: Include only when relevant to the feature
- When a section doesn't apply, remove it entirely (don't leave as "N/A")
### For AI Generation
When creating this spec from a user prompt:
1. **Mark all ambiguities**: Use [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: specific question] for any assumption you'd need to make
2. **Don't guess**: If the prompt doesn't specify something (e.g., "login system" without auth method), mark it
3. **Think like a tester**: Every vague requirement should fail the "testable and unambiguous" checklist item
4. **Common underspecified areas**:
- User types and permissions
- Data retention/deletion policies
- Performance targets and scale
- Error handling behaviors
- Integration requirements
- Security/compliance needs
---
## User Scenarios & Testing *(mandatory)*
### Primary User Story
[Describe the main user journey in plain language]
### Acceptance Scenarios
1. **Given** [initial state], **When** [action], **Then** [expected outcome]
2. **Given** [initial state], **When** [action], **Then** [expected outcome]
### Edge Cases
- What happens when [boundary condition]?
- How does system handle [error scenario]?
## Requirements *(mandatory)*
### Functional Requirements
- **FR-001**: System MUST [specific capability, e.g., "allow users to create accounts"]
- **FR-002**: System MUST [specific capability, e.g., "validate email addresses"]
- **FR-003**: Users MUST be able to [key interaction, e.g., "reset their password"]
- **FR-004**: System MUST [data requirement, e.g., "persist user preferences"]
- **FR-005**: System MUST [behavior, e.g., "log all security events"]
*Example of marking unclear requirements:*
- **FR-006**: System MUST authenticate users via [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: auth method not specified - email/password, SSO, OAuth?]
- **FR-007**: System MUST retain user data for [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: retention period not specified]
### Key Entities *(include if feature involves data)*
- **[Entity 1]**: [What it represents, key attributes without implementation]
- **[Entity 2]**: [What it represents, relationships to other entities]
---
## Review & Acceptance Checklist
*GATE: Automated checks run during main() execution*
### Content Quality
- [ ] No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs)
- [ ] Focused on user value and business needs
- [ ] Written for non-technical stakeholders
- [ ] All mandatory sections completed
### Requirement Completeness
- [ ] No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain
- [ ] Requirements are testable and unambiguous
- [ ] Success criteria are measurable
- [ ] Scope is clearly bounded
- [ ] Dependencies and assumptions identified
---
## Execution Status
*Updated by main() during processing*
- [ ] User description parsed
- [ ] Key concepts extracted
- [ ] Ambiguities marked
- [ ] User scenarios defined
- [ ] Requirements generated
- [ ] Entities identified
- [ ] Review checklist passed
---

View file

@ -0,0 +1,127 @@
# Tasks: [FEATURE NAME]
**Input**: Design documents from `/specs/[###-feature-name]/`
**Prerequisites**: plan.md (required), research.md, data-model.md, contracts/
## Execution Flow (main)
```
1. Load plan.md from feature directory
→ If not found: ERROR "No implementation plan found"
→ Extract: tech stack, libraries, structure
2. Load optional design documents:
→ data-model.md: Extract entities → model tasks
→ contracts/: Each file → contract test task
→ research.md: Extract decisions → setup tasks
3. Generate tasks by category:
→ Setup: project init, dependencies, linting
→ Tests: contract tests, integration tests
→ Core: models, services, CLI commands
→ Integration: DB, middleware, logging
→ Polish: unit tests, performance, docs
4. Apply task rules:
→ Different files = mark [P] for parallel
→ Same file = sequential (no [P])
→ Tests before implementation (TDD)
5. Number tasks sequentially (T001, T002...)
6. Generate dependency graph
7. Create parallel execution examples
8. Validate task completeness:
→ All contracts have tests?
→ All entities have models?
→ All endpoints implemented?
9. Return: SUCCESS (tasks ready for execution)
```
## Format: `[ID] [P?] Description`
- **[P]**: Can run in parallel (different files, no dependencies)
- Include exact file paths in descriptions
## Path Conventions
- **Single project**: `src/`, `tests/` at repository root
- **Web app**: `backend/src/`, `frontend/src/`
- **Mobile**: `api/src/`, `ios/src/` or `android/src/`
- Paths shown below assume single project - adjust based on plan.md structure
## Phase 3.1: Setup
- [ ] T001 Create project structure per implementation plan
- [ ] T002 Initialize [language] project with [framework] dependencies
- [ ] T003 [P] Configure linting and formatting tools
## Phase 3.2: Tests First (TDD) ⚠️ MUST COMPLETE BEFORE 3.3
**CRITICAL: These tests MUST be written and MUST FAIL before ANY implementation**
- [ ] T004 [P] Contract test POST /api/users in tests/contract/test_users_post.py
- [ ] T005 [P] Contract test GET /api/users/{id} in tests/contract/test_users_get.py
- [ ] T006 [P] Integration test user registration in tests/integration/test_registration.py
- [ ] T007 [P] Integration test auth flow in tests/integration/test_auth.py
## Phase 3.3: Core Implementation (ONLY after tests are failing)
- [ ] T008 [P] User model in src/models/user.py
- [ ] T009 [P] UserService CRUD in src/services/user_service.py
- [ ] T010 [P] CLI --create-user in src/cli/user_commands.py
- [ ] T011 POST /api/users endpoint
- [ ] T012 GET /api/users/{id} endpoint
- [ ] T013 Input validation
- [ ] T014 Error handling and logging
## Phase 3.4: Integration
- [ ] T015 Connect UserService to DB
- [ ] T016 Auth middleware
- [ ] T017 Request/response logging
- [ ] T018 CORS and security headers
## Phase 3.5: Polish
- [ ] T019 [P] Unit tests for validation in tests/unit/test_validation.py
- [ ] T020 Performance tests (<200ms)
- [ ] T021 [P] Update docs/api.md
- [ ] T022 Remove duplication
- [ ] T023 Run manual-testing.md
## Dependencies
- Tests (T004-T007) before implementation (T008-T014)
- T008 blocks T009, T015
- T016 blocks T018
- Implementation before polish (T019-T023)
## Parallel Example
```
# Launch T004-T007 together:
Task: "Contract test POST /api/users in tests/contract/test_users_post.py"
Task: "Contract test GET /api/users/{id} in tests/contract/test_users_get.py"
Task: "Integration test registration in tests/integration/test_registration.py"
Task: "Integration test auth in tests/integration/test_auth.py"
```
## Notes
- [P] tasks = different files, no dependencies
- Verify tests fail before implementing
- Commit after each task
- Avoid: vague tasks, same file conflicts
## Task Generation Rules
*Applied during main() execution*
1. **From Contracts**:
- Each contract file → contract test task [P]
- Each endpoint → implementation task
2. **From Data Model**:
- Each entity → model creation task [P]
- Relationships → service layer tasks
3. **From User Stories**:
- Each story → integration test [P]
- Quickstart scenarios → validation tasks
4. **Ordering**:
- Setup → Tests → Models → Services → Endpoints → Polish
- Dependencies block parallel execution
## Validation Checklist
*GATE: Checked by main() before returning*
- [ ] All contracts have corresponding tests
- [ ] All entities have model tasks
- [ ] All tests come before implementation
- [ ] Parallel tasks truly independent
- [ ] Each task specifies exact file path
- [ ] No task modifies same file as another [P] task