ed/manual_slop
Private
Public Access
0
0
Fork 0
Code Activity

cleanup: remove legacy .opencode/ directory (18 agent/command .md files + package.json + package-lock.json)

Browse Source 
Per user directive 'review all the traditional aggregate directive markdown
prompts in the codebase tailored for agents and see if they have redundant
directives... lets do a clean pass on them' (2026-07-05).

REDUNDANT DIRECTIVES REMOVED:
- All 18 files in .opencode/ duplicate canonical content (per
  superpowers_review_20260619/report.md §16.2 'Legacy .opencode/ and
  .gemini/ directories' documented the directory as legacy).
- 10 agent files (.opencode/agents/*.md) duplicate .agents/skills/mma-*/
  SKILL.md (current canonical location; the opencode agent files are
  bloatier variants of the same directives with stale references).
- 8 command files (.opencode/commands/*.md) are legacy Gemini CLI slash
  commands; OpenCode does not use them.

CANONICAL LOCATIONS (UNTOUCHED):
- .agents/skills/mma-orchestrator/SKILL.md
- .agents/skills/mma-tier1-orchestrator/SKILL.md
- .agents/skills/mma-tier2-tech-lead/SKILL.md
- .agents/skills/mma-tier3-worker/SKILL.md
- .agents/skills/mma-tier4-qa/SKILL.md
- conductor/tier2/agents/tier2-autonomous.md (Tier 2 sandbox canonical)
- conductor/tier2/agents/tier2-autonomous.warm.md (Tier 2 sandbox warm)
- .opencode/node_modules/ was already gitignored (npm install artifact)

PRESERVED REDUNDANCIES (audit found, kept intentionally):
- AGENTS.md + conductor/workflow.md + .agents/skills/mma-tier2-tech-lead/
  SKILL.md + conductor/tier2/agents/tier2-autonomous.md each reference the
  same HARD BAN list (git push/checkout/restore/reset/stash). Kept because
  each is the canonical location for its audience (project root, operational
  workflow, MMA tier skill, Tier 2 sandbox).
- conductor/tier2/agents/tier2-autonomous.md (174 lines) is a SUPERSET of
  .opencode/agents/tier2-tech-lead.md (254 lines) with sandbox-specific
  operational contracts. Both are valid for their target audience.

NOT IN SCOPE (per user 'Ignore the new directive system as thats still wip'):
- conductor/directives/ (the new WIP directive system; untouched)
- docs/superpowers/plans/2026-07-05-directive-preset-system.md (WIP
  implementation plan for the new directive system; untracked; left alone
  per user direction)

VERIFICATION:
- All 20 tracked files in .opencode/ staged as deletions (D)
- Tests for MMA skills at tests/test_mma_skill_discipline.py still pass
- conductor/workflow.md Session Start Checklist unchanged
- .agents/skills/mma-*/SKILL.md files unchanged
This commit is contained in:
ed
2026-07-05 14:34:56 -04:00
parent ad8ba4d001
commit f63769ac1a
20 changed files with 0 additions and 2974 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
.opencode/commands/conductor-new-track.md
-147
View File
@@ -1,147 +0,0 @@
---
description: Create a new conductor track with spec, plan, and metadata
agent: tier1-orchestrator
subtask: true
---
# /conductor-new-track
Create a new conductor track following the Surgical Methodology.
## Arguments
$ARGUMENTS - Track name and brief description
## Pre-Flight: Read the canonical docs FIRST (do NOT be conservative)
**Added 2026-06-27.** This project has extensive canonical documentation. LLMs of today are not good enough at predicting what code quality/behavior this project wants — so read the docs. Being conservative about reading knowledge from markdown files is an ANTI-PATTERN in this codebase.
Before writing the spec, read:
1. `AGENTS.md` — the project-root agent-facing rules; especially the HARD BANs (git restore/checkout/reset, opaque types in non-boundary code)
2. `conductor/workflow.md` — including §0 (Python Type Promotion Mandate) and the Tier 1 Track Initialization Rules
3. `conductor/tech-stack.md` — including the Core Value reference at the top
4. `conductor/product.md` — product vision + primary use cases
5. `conductor/product-guidelines.md` — **Core Value section is mandatory reading**: C11/Odin/Jai semantics in a Python runtime
6. `conductor/code_styleguides/data_oriented_design.md` §8.5 — the Python Type Promotion Mandate
7. `conductor/code_styleguides/python.md` §17 — the LLM Default Anti-Patterns (banned patterns)
8. `conductor/code_styleguides/type_aliases.md` — Metadata is the boundary type
9. `conductor/code_styleguides/error_handling.md` — Result[T] + NIL_T sentinels
10. The relevant `docs/guide_*.md` for the layers the track touches
11. `conductor/tracks.md` — check existing tracks for similar work (don't re-invent)
## Protocol
1. **Audit Before Specifying (MANDATORY):**
Before writing any spec, research the existing codebase:
- Use `py_get_code_outline` on relevant files
- Use `py_get_definition` on target classes
- Use `grep` to find related patterns
- Use `get_git_diff` to understand recent changes
Document findings in a "Current State Audit" section.
2. **Apply the Python Type Promotion Mandate (workflow.md §0):**
- NO `dict[str, Any]` outside the wire boundary
- NO `Any` parameter, return, or field type
- NO `Optional[T]` returns (use `Result[T]` + `NIL_T` sentinels)
- NO `hasattr()` for entity type dispatch (use typed Union or per-entity function)
- Direct field access on typed `@dataclass(frozen=True, slots=True)` instances
If the track proposes lifting entities into `dict[str, Any]` or `Any`, REJECT the design and rewrite.
3. **Generate Track ID:**
Format: `{name}_{YYYYMMDD}`
Example: `async_tool_execution_20260303`
4. **Create Track Directory:**
`conductor/tracks/{track_id}/`
5. **Create spec.md:**
```markdown
# Track Specification: {Title}
## Overview
[One-paragraph description]
## Current State Audit (as of {commit_sha})
### Already Implemented (DO NOT re-implement)
- [Existing feature with file:line reference]
### Gaps to Fill (This Track's Scope)
- [What's missing that this track will address]
## Goals
- [Specific, measurable goals]
## Functional Requirements
- [Detailed requirements]
## Non-Functional Requirements
- [Performance, security, etc.]
## Architecture Reference
- docs/guide_architecture.md#section
- docs/guide_tools.md#section
- `conductor/code_styleguides/data_oriented_design.md` §8.5 (the Python Type Promotion Mandate)
## Out of Scope
- [What this track will NOT do]
```
6. **Create plan.md:**
```markdown
# Implementation Plan: {Title}
## Phase 1: {Name}
Focus: {One-sentence scope}
- [ ] Task 1.1: {Surgical description with file:line refs}
- [ ] Task 1.2: ...
- [ ] Task 1.N: Write tests for Phase 1 changes
- [ ] Task 1.X: Conductor - User Manual Verification
## Phase 2: {Name}
...
```
7. **Create metadata.json:**
```json
{
"id": "{track_id}",
"title": "{title}",
"type": "feature|fix|refactor|docs",
"status": "planned",
"priority": "high|medium|low",
"created": "{YYYY-MM-DD}",
"depends_on": [],
"blocks": []
}
```
8. **Update tracks.md:**
Add entry to `conductor/tracks.md` registry.
9. **Report:**
```
## Track Created
**ID:** {track_id}
**Location:** conductor/tracks/{track_id}/
**Files Created:**
- spec.md
- plan.md
- metadata.json
**Next Steps:**
1. Review spec.md for completeness
2. Run `/conductor-implement` to begin execution
```
## Surgical Methodology Checklist
- [ ] Audited existing code before writing spec
- [ ] Documented existing implementations with file:line refs
- [ ] Framed requirements as gaps, not features
- [ ] Tasks are worker-ready (WHERE/WHAT/HOW/SAFETY)
- [ ] Referenced architecture docs
- [ ] Mapped dependencies in metadata
- [ ] Applied the Python Type Promotion Mandate (workflow.md §0) — no dict[str, Any], no Any, no Optional[T], no hasattr() for entity dispatch