docs(session): target next session at beadboard-v5a holistic audit
This commit is contained in:
ZenchantLive
parent
b0dfef8887
commit
7a3db2e1c5
1 changed files with 56 additions and 105 deletions
|
|
@ -1,129 +1,80 @@
|
|||
# Next Session: v5 Skill Validation + Full Critique
|
||||
# Next Session: Run Epic `beadboard-v5a` (Holistic v5 Audit)
|
||||
|
||||
## Objective
|
||||
|
||||
Do **not** implement new features first. Use this session to pressure-test the finished `beadboard-driver` v5 skill end-to-end, critique it hard, and produce a prioritized fix list.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Scope
|
||||
|
||||
Validate and critique all of:
|
||||
|
||||
- `skills/beadboard-driver/SKILL.md`
|
||||
- `skills/beadboard-driver/project.template.md`
|
||||
- `skills/beadboard-driver/references/*.md`
|
||||
- `skills/beadboard-driver/scripts/*.mjs`
|
||||
- `skills/beadboard-driver/scripts/lib/driver-lib.mjs`
|
||||
- `skills/beadboard-driver/tests/*.contract.test.mjs`
|
||||
- `tests/skills/beadboard-driver/*.test.ts`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Ground Rules
|
||||
|
||||
1. Treat this as an adversarial review, not a celebration.
|
||||
2. Evidence before assertions: every finding must cite command output or file evidence.
|
||||
3. Prefer identifying regressions, ambiguities, missing guarantees, and operator confusion risks.
|
||||
4. For every critique finding, include a concrete fix proposal.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Session Steps
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 1: Context Recovery
|
||||
## Start Here
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
cd /mnt/c/Users/Zenchant/codex/beadboard
|
||||
git log --oneline -12
|
||||
bd show beadboard-maf
|
||||
bd show beadboard-v5a
|
||||
bd ready
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 2: Run Full Gates (Baseline)
|
||||
You are not starting feature work first. Execute the audit epic and produce critique + remediation graph.
|
||||
|
||||
## Epic and Bead Order
|
||||
|
||||
Epic: `beadboard-v5a` — **[EPIC] BeadBoard Driver v5: Holistic Validation and Critique**
|
||||
|
||||
Execution DAG (already wired):
|
||||
|
||||
1. `beadboard-v5a.1` baseline verification run
|
||||
2. `beadboard-v5a.2` skill-local contract suite execution
|
||||
3. Parallel audit lane after baseline:
|
||||
- `beadboard-v5a.3` SKILL.md runbook dry-run
|
||||
- `beadboard-v5a.4` reference consistency audit
|
||||
- `beadboard-v5a.5` test coverage gap audit
|
||||
- `beadboard-v5a.6` failure-mode drill audit
|
||||
- `beadboard-v5a.10` frontend visual validation gate (manual)
|
||||
- `beadboard-v5a.11` communication system holistic audit
|
||||
- `beadboard-v5a.12` memory system audit
|
||||
- `beadboard-v5a.13` agent lifecycle/liveness audit
|
||||
- `beadboard-v5a.14` swarm/molecule workflow audit
|
||||
- `beadboard-v5a.15` cold-agent usability audit
|
||||
4. `beadboard-v5a.7` consolidated report (`docs/reviews/YYYY-MM-DD-beadboard-driver-v5-audit.md`)
|
||||
5. `beadboard-v5a.8` remediation epic + bead graph creation
|
||||
6. `beadboard-v5a.9` final go/no-go verdict + handoff update
|
||||
|
||||
## Required Skills For This Session
|
||||
|
||||
Use these skills explicitly:
|
||||
|
||||
1. `beadboard-driver`
|
||||
2. `verification-before-completion`
|
||||
3. `systematic-debugging` (for any failing gate/drill)
|
||||
4. `writing-skills` (critiquing SKILL.md + reference quality)
|
||||
5. `writing-plans` (when translating findings into remediation plan)
|
||||
|
||||
## Required Verification
|
||||
|
||||
At minimum, run and capture outputs:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
npm run typecheck
|
||||
npm run lint
|
||||
npm run test
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Capture exact pass/fail state and any warnings.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 3: Run Skill-Local Contract Suite Explicitly
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
node skills/beadboard-driver/tests/run-tests.mjs
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 4: Manual Runbook Dry-Run Against SKILL.md
|
||||
Also capture manual visual evidence for frontend/comms validation (`v5a.10`): screenshots + explicit human confirmation note.
|
||||
|
||||
Walk through SKILL.md steps exactly as written and verify each command exists/is actionable.
|
||||
## Bead Authoring Rule (When Creating Remediation Beads)
|
||||
|
||||
Required checks:
|
||||
Follow:
|
||||
|
||||
- Preflight commands run cleanly (or fail with useful remediation)
|
||||
- Mail delegate validation behaves as documented
|
||||
- Runbook commands use real flags (`--assignee`, slot hook flow, etc.)
|
||||
- No deprecated command surfaces remain
|
||||
- `project.md` lifecycle guidance is clear for first vs later agents
|
||||
- `docs/protocols/bead-prompting.md`
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 5: Documentation Quality Critique
|
||||
Every new remediation bead description must include:
|
||||
|
||||
Critique every major doc on:
|
||||
- `TASK CONTEXT`
|
||||
- `TASK CONTRACT` (Goal, Success Criteria, Scope, Out of Scope)
|
||||
- `IMPLEMENTATION CONSTRAINTS`
|
||||
- `VERIFICATION REQUIREMENTS`
|
||||
|
||||
- Cold-start clarity (can a new agent execute without guessing?)
|
||||
- Command accuracy (flags/surfaces real and current)
|
||||
- Consistency across docs (no contradictions)
|
||||
- Operational safety (state, mail, evidence, closeout)
|
||||
- Cognitive load (too verbose vs too vague)
|
||||
## Deliverables (Definition of Done)
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 6: Test Coverage Critique
|
||||
Session is done only when all are true:
|
||||
|
||||
Identify missing coverage, especially:
|
||||
|
||||
- Global install assumptions (`bd`, `bb/beadboard`)
|
||||
- Linux/WSL path discovery edge cases
|
||||
- Mail delegate misconfiguration and mismatch paths
|
||||
- `bb-mail-shim` lifecycle and invalid message ID behavior
|
||||
- `project.template.md` contract assumptions not exercised by tests
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 7: Produce Findings Artifact
|
||||
|
||||
Create a single markdown report under:
|
||||
|
||||
- `docs/reviews/YYYY-MM-DD-beadboard-driver-v5-audit.md`
|
||||
|
||||
Required report structure:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Executive verdict (ship-ready / conditionally-ready / not-ready)
|
||||
2. Findings by severity (Critical, High, Medium, Low)
|
||||
3. Evidence per finding (commands + file refs)
|
||||
4. Proposed fixes per finding
|
||||
5. Suggested bead breakdown for remediation
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 8: Create Remediation Beads
|
||||
|
||||
From findings, create actionable beads using:
|
||||
|
||||
- `beadboard-<new-epic>.x.x` naming format
|
||||
- explicit `Scope`, `Out of Scope`, `Success Criteria`
|
||||
- correct dependency order
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 9: Session Closeout
|
||||
|
||||
- Update bead notes with evidence summary
|
||||
- If reusable lesson emerged, create canonical memory bead; otherwise note no new memory
|
||||
- Update this file (`NEXT_SESSION_PROMPT.md`) with next concrete action
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Deliverable Definition of Done
|
||||
|
||||
This session is done only when all are true:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Gates executed with captured output.
|
||||
2. Full skill critique written to `docs/reviews/...`.
|
||||
3. Remediation bead set created with dependency graph.
|
||||
4. Clear go/no-go verdict stated with evidence.
|
||||
1. `beadboard-v5a.1` through `beadboard-v5a.15` are completed per dependency order.
|
||||
2. Consolidated audit report committed under `docs/reviews/`.
|
||||
3. Remediation epic/bead graph created and linked with correct dependencies.
|
||||
4. Go/no-go verdict written with evidence and residual risks.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue