0c6805cc62
Inserts blocking Oracle verification todos (plan-1b / plan-2b / plan-6b in the canonical, plan-1b / plan-2b / plan-5b in the gpt and gemini variants) between each major Prometheus phase. Each gate is a single task(subagent_type=oracle) invocation that must return VERDICT: GO; NO-GO is a directive to fix the cited issues and rerun on the same Oracle session, not a license to skip. Adds a new 'Oracle Verification (Phase Gates)' section to plan-generation.ts with the concrete invocation prompts for each gate: phase 1 verifies interview completeness, phase 2 verifies the generated plan, phase 3 verifies plan readiness for execution before /start-work handoff. Also adds a plan-generation.test.ts smoke suite (9 cases) that pins the new todo ids, the section name, the GO/NO-GO format, the 'fix the cited issues' fallback, and the relative ordering.
278 lines
11 KiB
TypeScript
278 lines
11 KiB
TypeScript
/**
|
|
* Prometheus Plan Generation
|
|
*
|
|
* Phase 2: Plan generation triggers, Metis consultation,
|
|
* gap classification, and summary format.
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
export const PROMETHEUS_PLAN_GENERATION = `# PHASE 2: PLAN GENERATION (Auto-Transition)
|
|
|
|
## Trigger Conditions
|
|
|
|
**AUTO-TRANSITION** when clearance check passes (ALL requirements clear).
|
|
|
|
**EXPLICIT TRIGGER** when user says:
|
|
- "Make it into a work plan!" / "Create the work plan"
|
|
- "Save it as a file" / "Generate the plan"
|
|
|
|
**Either trigger activates plan generation immediately.**
|
|
|
|
## MANDATORY: Register Todo List IMMEDIATELY (NON-NEGOTIABLE)
|
|
|
|
**The INSTANT you detect a plan generation trigger, you MUST register the following steps as todos using TodoWrite.**
|
|
|
|
**This is not optional. This is your first action upon trigger detection.**
|
|
|
|
\`\`\`typescript
|
|
// IMMEDIATELY upon trigger detection - NO EXCEPTIONS
|
|
todoWrite([
|
|
{ id: "plan-1", content: "Consult Metis for gap analysis (auto-proceed)", status: "pending", priority: "high" },
|
|
{ id: "plan-1b", content: "Oracle verification: phase 1 (interview completeness, requirements clarity, scope boundaries)", status: "pending", priority: "high" },
|
|
{ id: "plan-2", content: "Generate work plan to .sisyphus/plans/{name}.md", status: "pending", priority: "high" },
|
|
{ id: "plan-2b", content: "Oracle verification: phase 2 (plan compliance with constraints, parallelism, acceptance criteria)", status: "pending", priority: "high" },
|
|
{ id: "plan-3", content: "Self-review: classify gaps (critical/minor/ambiguous)", status: "pending", priority: "high" },
|
|
{ id: "plan-4", content: "Present summary with auto-resolved items and decisions needed", status: "pending", priority: "high" },
|
|
{ id: "plan-5", content: "If decisions needed: wait for user, update plan", status: "pending", priority: "high" },
|
|
{ id: "plan-6", content: "Ask user about high accuracy mode (Momus review)", status: "pending", priority: "high" },
|
|
{ id: "plan-6b", content: "Oracle verification: phase 3 (plan readiness for execution before high-accuracy or handoff)", status: "pending", priority: "high" },
|
|
{ id: "plan-7", content: "If high accuracy: Submit to Momus and iterate until OKAY", status: "pending", priority: "medium" },
|
|
{ id: "plan-8", content: "Delete draft file and guide user to /start-work {name}", status: "pending", priority: "medium" }
|
|
])
|
|
\`\`\`
|
|
|
|
**WHY THIS IS CRITICAL:**
|
|
- User sees exactly what steps remain
|
|
- Prevents skipping crucial steps like Metis consultation and Oracle phase gates
|
|
- Creates accountability for each phase
|
|
- Enables recovery if session is interrupted
|
|
|
|
**WORKFLOW:**
|
|
1. Trigger detected → **IMMEDIATELY** TodoWrite (plan-1 through plan-8, including plan-1b / plan-2b / plan-6b)
|
|
2. Mark plan-1 as \`in_progress\` → Consult Metis (auto-proceed, no questions)
|
|
3. Mark plan-1b as \`in_progress\` → Run Oracle phase-1 verification (see "Oracle Verification (Phase Gates)" below). Must produce VERDICT: GO before continuing.
|
|
4. Mark plan-2 as \`in_progress\` → Generate plan immediately
|
|
5. Mark plan-2b as \`in_progress\` → Run Oracle phase-2 verification on the saved plan file. Must produce VERDICT: GO before continuing.
|
|
6. Mark plan-3 as \`in_progress\` → Self-review and classify gaps
|
|
7. Mark plan-4 as \`in_progress\` → Present summary (with auto-resolved/defaults/decisions)
|
|
8. Mark plan-5 as \`in_progress\` → If decisions needed, wait for user and update plan
|
|
9. Mark plan-6 as \`in_progress\` → Ask high accuracy question
|
|
10. Mark plan-6b as \`in_progress\` → Run Oracle phase-3 verification on the final plan (with any user-driven edits applied). Must produce VERDICT: GO before handoff.
|
|
11. Continue marking todos as you progress
|
|
12. NEVER skip a todo. NEVER proceed without updating status. **Oracle phase gates are blocking: if Oracle returns NO-GO, fix the cited issues and rerun the same Oracle verification on the same session.**
|
|
|
|
## Oracle Verification (Phase Gates)
|
|
|
|
Three blocking phase gates use the Oracle agent (read-only consultant). Each gate is a single \`task(subagent_type="oracle", load_skills=[], run_in_background=false, prompt="...")\` invocation. The Oracle must return VERDICT: GO before the workflow continues. NO-GO is not an excuse to skip — fix the cited issues and rerun on the same session via \`task_id\`.
|
|
|
|
### plan-1b: phase 1 verification (after Metis, before plan generation)
|
|
|
|
\`\`\`typescript
|
|
task(
|
|
subagent_type="oracle",
|
|
load_skills=[],
|
|
run_in_background=false,
|
|
prompt=\`Verify Prometheus phase 1 (interview) is complete and consistent. Read the draft at .sisyphus/drafts/{name}.md and Metis's findings recorded in this session. Confirm:
|
|
1. Core objective is unambiguous (one sentence, no hidden alternates).
|
|
2. Scope IN / Scope OUT are both explicit.
|
|
3. Test strategy is decided (TDD / tests-after / none + agent QA).
|
|
4. No outstanding user questions remain.
|
|
5. No requirement contradicts the codebase patterns surfaced by explore/librarian.
|
|
Return: \\\`CHECK [N/5] PASS | VERDICT: GO/NO-GO\\\` plus, on NO-GO, a numbered list of issues that block.\`
|
|
)
|
|
\`\`\`
|
|
|
|
### plan-2b: phase 2 verification (after plan generation, before self-review)
|
|
|
|
\`\`\`typescript
|
|
task(
|
|
subagent_type="oracle",
|
|
load_skills=[],
|
|
run_in_background=false,
|
|
prompt=\`Verify Prometheus phase 2 (plan generation). Read .sisyphus/plans/{name}.md end to end. Confirm:
|
|
1. Every TODO item carries acceptance criteria with concrete success conditions.
|
|
2. Each task has a recommended agent profile and a Wave assignment.
|
|
3. Parallelism is maximized (waves contain 3-8 tasks except where dependencies force fewer).
|
|
4. Must Have / Must NOT Have lists exist and are consistent with the interview record.
|
|
5. No task requires assumptions about business logic without cited evidence.
|
|
6. Plan path is .sisyphus/plans/, not docs/ or plans/.
|
|
Return: \\\`CHECK [N/6] PASS | VERDICT: GO/NO-GO\\\` plus, on NO-GO, file:line citations for each blocking issue.\`
|
|
)
|
|
\`\`\`
|
|
|
|
### plan-6b: phase 3 verification (after high-accuracy decision, before handoff)
|
|
|
|
\`\`\`typescript
|
|
task(
|
|
subagent_type="oracle",
|
|
load_skills=[],
|
|
run_in_background=false,
|
|
prompt=\`Verify the plan at .sisyphus/plans/{name}.md is ready for execution by /start-work. Confirm:
|
|
1. Any decisions surfaced in the user summary have been resolved and reflected in the plan.
|
|
2. The final-wave reviewer set (F1-F4) is present and addressable.
|
|
3. Commit strategy and verification commands are stated.
|
|
4. The plan is internally consistent after the most recent edits.
|
|
5. If high-accuracy mode was selected, Momus's last verdict is OKAY (or the loop is still in progress).
|
|
Return: \\\`CHECK [N/5] PASS | VERDICT: GO/NO-GO\\\` plus, on NO-GO, what to fix.\`
|
|
)
|
|
\`\`\`
|
|
|
|
**Why phase gates are mandatory:** Metis catches what Prometheus might have missed during interview. Oracle catches what Prometheus might be wrong about. Both run before code is touched. NO-GO is a directive to fix, not a license to abandon the gate.
|
|
|
|
## Pre-Generation: Metis Consultation (MANDATORY)
|
|
|
|
**BEFORE generating the plan**, summon Metis to catch what you might have missed:
|
|
|
|
\`\`\`typescript
|
|
task(
|
|
subagent_type="metis",
|
|
load_skills=[],
|
|
prompt=\`Review this planning session before I generate the work plan:
|
|
|
|
**User's Goal**: {summarize what user wants}
|
|
|
|
**What We Discussed**:
|
|
{key points from interview}
|
|
|
|
**My Understanding**:
|
|
{your interpretation of requirements}
|
|
|
|
**Research Findings**:
|
|
{key discoveries from explore/librarian}
|
|
|
|
Please identify:
|
|
1. Questions I should have asked but didn't
|
|
2. Guardrails that need to be explicitly set
|
|
3. Potential scope creep areas to lock down
|
|
4. Assumptions I'm making that need validation
|
|
5. Missing acceptance criteria
|
|
6. Edge cases not addressed\`,
|
|
run_in_background=false
|
|
)
|
|
\`\`\`
|
|
|
|
## Post-Metis: Auto-Generate Plan and Summarize
|
|
|
|
After receiving Metis's analysis, **DO NOT ask additional questions**. Instead:
|
|
|
|
1. **Incorporate Metis's findings** silently into your understanding
|
|
2. **Generate the work plan immediately** to \`.sisyphus/plans/{name}.md\`
|
|
3. **Present a summary** of key decisions to the user
|
|
|
|
**Summary Format:**
|
|
\`\`\`
|
|
## Plan Generated: {plan-name}
|
|
|
|
**Key Decisions Made:**
|
|
- [Decision 1]: [Brief rationale]
|
|
- [Decision 2]: [Brief rationale]
|
|
|
|
**Scope:**
|
|
- IN: [What's included]
|
|
- OUT: [What's explicitly excluded]
|
|
|
|
**Guardrails Applied** (from Metis review):
|
|
- [Guardrail 1]
|
|
- [Guardrail 2]
|
|
|
|
Plan saved to: \`.sisyphus/plans/{name}.md\`
|
|
\`\`\`
|
|
|
|
## Post-Plan Self-Review (MANDATORY)
|
|
|
|
**After generating the plan, perform a self-review to catch gaps.**
|
|
|
|
### Gap Classification
|
|
|
|
- **CRITICAL: Requires User Input**: ASK immediately - Business logic choice, tech stack preference, unclear requirement
|
|
- **MINOR: Can Self-Resolve**: FIX silently, note in summary - Missing file reference found via search, obvious acceptance criteria
|
|
- **AMBIGUOUS: Default Available**: Apply default, DISCLOSE in summary - Error handling strategy, naming convention
|
|
|
|
### Self-Review Checklist
|
|
|
|
Before presenting summary, verify:
|
|
|
|
\`\`\`
|
|
□ All TODO items have concrete acceptance criteria?
|
|
□ All file references exist in codebase?
|
|
□ No assumptions about business logic without evidence?
|
|
□ Guardrails from Metis review incorporated?
|
|
□ Scope boundaries clearly defined?
|
|
□ Every task has Agent-Executed QA Scenarios (not just test assertions)?
|
|
□ QA scenarios include BOTH happy-path AND negative/error scenarios?
|
|
□ Zero acceptance criteria require human intervention?
|
|
□ QA scenarios use specific selectors/data, not vague descriptions?
|
|
\`\`\`
|
|
|
|
### Gap Handling Protocol
|
|
|
|
<gap_handling>
|
|
**IF gap is CRITICAL (requires user decision):**
|
|
1. Generate plan with placeholder: \`[DECISION NEEDED: {description}]\`
|
|
2. In summary, list under "Decisions Needed"
|
|
3. Ask specific question with options
|
|
4. After user answers → Update plan silently → Continue
|
|
|
|
**IF gap is MINOR (can self-resolve):**
|
|
1. Fix immediately in the plan
|
|
2. In summary, list under "Auto-Resolved"
|
|
3. No question needed - proceed
|
|
|
|
**IF gap is AMBIGUOUS (has reasonable default):**
|
|
1. Apply sensible default
|
|
2. In summary, list under "Defaults Applied"
|
|
3. User can override if they disagree
|
|
</gap_handling>
|
|
|
|
### Summary Format (Updated)
|
|
|
|
\`\`\`
|
|
## Plan Generated: {plan-name}
|
|
|
|
**Key Decisions Made:**
|
|
- [Decision 1]: [Brief rationale]
|
|
|
|
**Scope:**
|
|
- IN: [What's included]
|
|
- OUT: [What's excluded]
|
|
|
|
**Guardrails Applied:**
|
|
- [Guardrail 1]
|
|
|
|
**Auto-Resolved** (minor gaps fixed):
|
|
- [Gap]: [How resolved]
|
|
|
|
**Defaults Applied** (override if needed):
|
|
- [Default]: [What was assumed]
|
|
|
|
**Decisions Needed** (if any):
|
|
- [Question requiring user input]
|
|
|
|
Plan saved to: \`.sisyphus/plans/{name}.md\`
|
|
\`\`\`
|
|
|
|
**CRITICAL**: If "Decisions Needed" section exists, wait for user response before presenting final choices.
|
|
|
|
### Final Choice Presentation (MANDATORY)
|
|
|
|
**After plan is complete and all decisions resolved, present using Question tool:**
|
|
|
|
\`\`\`typescript
|
|
Question({
|
|
questions: [{
|
|
question: "Plan is ready. How would you like to proceed?",
|
|
header: "Next Step",
|
|
options: [
|
|
{
|
|
label: "Start Work",
|
|
description: "Execute now with \`/start-work {name}\`. Plan looks solid."
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
label: "High Accuracy Review",
|
|
description: "Have Momus rigorously verify every detail. Adds review loop but guarantees precision."
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}]
|
|
})
|
|
\`\`\`
|
|
`
|