ed/rook

Files

Ed_ f15d1bc866 chore(setup): initialize project with CLAUDE.md, MCP config, and conductor commands

- CLAUDE.md: full project guidance (architecture, MMA workflow, beads task lifecycle,
  code conventions, policy rules, commit guidelines)
- .mcp.json: manual-slop-tools MCP server registration (26+ dev tools)
- .claude/settings.json: Claude Code project settings
- .claude/settings.local.json: MCP server permissions
- .claude/commands/: 9 conductor slash commands (conductor-setup, conductor-status,
  conductor-implement, conductor-new-track, conductor-verify, mma-tier1 through tier4)

2026-03-01 21:30:22 -05:00

2.3 KiB

Raw Permalink Blame History

description

description
Plan new work — audit codebase, create beads tasks with proper dependencies

/conductor-new-track

Plan and create new beads tasks. This is a Tier 1 (Orchestrator) operation. The quality of the task descriptions directly determines whether Tier 3 workers can execute without confusion. Vague tasks produce vague implementations.

Prerequisites

Read CLAUDE.md for product alignment, policy rules, and architecture

Steps

1. Gather Information

Ask the user for:

Goal: what capability to add or fix
Scope: which modules are involved

2. MANDATORY: Deep Codebase Audit

Before writing a single task, audit the actual codebase:

get_tree — map the current src/rook/ structure
py_get_code_outline on every file the new work will touch
py_get_definition on relevant existing functions
Grep to find existing partial implementations
get_git_diff to understand recent changes

Output: A "Current State Audit" listing:

What already exists (file:line references)
What's missing (the actual gaps)
What's partially implemented

3. Create Beads Tasks

Each task must be specific enough for a Tier 3 Worker to execute without understanding the full architecture:

cd C:\projects\rook
bd create --title "Verb: specific thing in specific file" --description "WHERE: file:lines. WHAT: change. HOW: API/pattern. SAFETY: thread constraints if any."

Rules for task descriptions:

Reference exact locations: "In policy.py:confirm_spawn (lines X-Y)"
Specify the API: "Use subprocess.Popen with stdin=PIPE, stdout=PIPE"
Name the data structures: "Append to APPROVED_DIRS: list[str]"
Describe the change shape: "Add a new function, do not modify existing ones"
State thread safety: "Must be called from asyncio loop only"
For bugs: list specific root cause candidates with code-level reasoning

4. Wire Dependencies

bd dep add <new-id> <blocking-id>   # new task depends on blocking-id

5. Confirm

Show the user the new tasks and dependency graph before finishing.

Anti-Patterns

Task that says "implement X" without WHERE or HOW → worker guesses wrong
No line references → worker wastes tokens searching
Tasks scoped too broadly → worker fails
Not checking if something already exists → duplicate work

2.3 KiB Raw Permalink Blame History