julian
17c08e6392
- Nx 22.7 monorepo (pnpm 11.1, TypeScript 5.9, Node 24) - apps/api: NestJS 11 (CJS conforme CODING-RULES.md PGD-DB-004) - apps/web: React 19 + Vite 8 (ESM) - libs/shared/api-interface: Zod contract base - Docker Compose dev: Postgres 18, Valkey 8, MinIO, Mailpit - WDS artifacts: - design-artifacts/A-Product-Brief/ (5 docs canônicos + 16 dialogs) - design-artifacts/B-Trigger-Map/ (hub + 4 personas + feature impact) - Stack canon: STACK.md v2.2 + CODING-RULES.md v2.0 + brand.md - AGENTS.md + README.md como entrada para devs/agentes Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
135 lines
4.8 KiB
Markdown
135 lines
4.8 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: 'step-05-document'
|
|
description: 'Document the bug, the fix, and create a clean PR'
|
|
|
|
# File References
|
|
activityWorkflowFile: '../workflow-bugfixing.md'
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Step 5: Document
|
|
|
|
## STEP GOAL:
|
|
|
|
Document the bug, the fix, and create a clean PR.
|
|
|
|
## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
|
|
|
|
### Universal Rules:
|
|
|
|
- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
|
|
- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
|
|
- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
|
|
- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
|
|
- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT in your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
|
|
|
|
### Role Reinforcement:
|
|
|
|
- ✅ You are an Implementation Partner guiding structured development activities
|
|
- ✅ If you already have been given a name, communication_style and persona, continue to use those while playing this new role
|
|
- ✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
|
|
- ✅ You bring software development methodology expertise, user brings domain knowledge and codebase familiarity
|
|
- ✅ Maintain clear and structured tone throughout
|
|
|
|
### Step-Specific Rules:
|
|
|
|
- 🎯 Focus only on documenting root cause, fix approach, updating tests, creating PR, and flagging similar risks
|
|
- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to add new features or make code changes beyond test cleanup
|
|
- 💬 Approach: Collaborative documentation and PR creation with user
|
|
- 📋 Flag similar risks elsewhere in the codebase for future investigation
|
|
|
|
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
|
|
|
|
- 🎯 Complete bug documentation, PR created, similar risks flagged
|
|
- 💾 Finalize dialog file with complete bugfix record
|
|
- 📖 Reference all previous steps for comprehensive documentation
|
|
- 🚫 Do not add features or make non-documentation changes
|
|
|
|
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
|
|
|
|
- Available context: Reproduction from Step 1; root cause from Step 2; fix from Step 3; verification from Step 4
|
|
- Focus: Documentation, PR creation, risk flagging
|
|
- Limits: No feature additions, no code changes beyond test cleanup
|
|
- Dependencies: Step 4 must be complete (verification passed)
|
|
|
|
## Sequence of Instructions (Do not deviate, skip, or optimize)
|
|
|
|
### 1. Document What Caused the Bug
|
|
|
|
- Write a clear root cause summary in the dialog file
|
|
- Explain why the bug existed (design oversight, edge case, regression from another change)
|
|
- Include the relevant code context — what was wrong and why
|
|
|
|
### 2. Document the Fix Approach
|
|
|
|
- Explain what was changed and why this approach was chosen
|
|
- If alternative approaches were considered, note why they were rejected
|
|
- Reference the specific files and lines changed
|
|
|
|
### 3. Update Tests
|
|
|
|
- Ensure the regression test from Step 03 is complete and well-named
|
|
- Add any additional test cases discovered during verification
|
|
- Verify all tests pass with the final fix
|
|
|
|
### 4. Create PR with Clear Description
|
|
|
|
- Write a PR title that summarizes the fix: `fix: <what was fixed>`
|
|
- PR body should include:
|
|
- **Bug:** What the user experienced
|
|
- **Root cause:** Why it happened
|
|
- **Fix:** What was changed
|
|
- **Testing:** How it was verified
|
|
- Link to the bug report or issue if one exists
|
|
|
|
### 5. Flag Similar Risks
|
|
|
|
- If the root cause suggests similar bugs may exist elsewhere, note this
|
|
- Examples: "This pattern of unchecked null access also exists in X and Y"
|
|
- Create follow-up issues or add notes to the dialog for future investigation
|
|
|
|
### 6. Verify Checklist
|
|
|
|
- [ ] Root cause documented
|
|
- [ ] Fix approach documented
|
|
- [ ] Tests updated and passing
|
|
- [ ] PR created with clear description
|
|
- [ ] Similar risks flagged (if any)
|
|
- [ ] Dialog file finalized with complete bugfix record
|
|
|
|
### 7. Present MENU OPTIONS
|
|
|
|
Display: "**Select an Option:** [M] Return to Activity Menu"
|
|
|
|
#### Menu Handling Logic:
|
|
- IF M: Update design log, then load, read entire file, then execute {activityWorkflowFile}
|
|
- IF Any other comments or queries: help user respond then [Redisplay Menu Options]
|
|
|
|
#### EXECUTION RULES:
|
|
- ALWAYS halt and wait for user input after presenting menu
|
|
- ONLY proceed when user selects 'M'
|
|
- User can chat or ask questions - always respond and then redisplay menu options
|
|
|
|
## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
|
|
|
|
ONLY WHEN documentation is complete, PR is created, and similar risks are flagged will you then load and read fully `{activityWorkflowFile}` to execute.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
|
|
|
|
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
|
- Root cause documented
|
|
- Fix approach documented
|
|
- Tests updated and passing
|
|
- PR created with clear description
|
|
- Similar risks flagged (if any)
|
|
- Dialog file finalized with complete bugfix record
|
|
|
|
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
|
|
- Not documenting root cause
|
|
- Creating PR without clear description
|
|
- Not flagging similar risks
|
|
- Not finalizing dialog file
|
|
|
|
**Master Rule:** Skipping steps, optimizing sequences, or not following exact instructions is FORBIDDEN and constitutes SYSTEM FAILURE.
|