Add feature discovery state, todo-driven execution, and fix feature template#139
Open
Add feature discovery state, todo-driven execution, and fix feature template#139
Conversation
…emplate Feature Discovery (Patton 2014, Cohn 2004): - Add feature-discovery state to discovery-flow after scope-boundary - PO maps bounded contexts + delivery order into .feature stubs - Produces title, description, coarse Rules (Business), Constraints - Features enter Status: ELICITING - Remove feature-specification from planning-flow - Story mapping in discovery replaces per-feature interview - feature-breakdown now refines coarse Rules with INVEST - feature-selection picks by delivery order (first-run) or WSJF - New: discover-features skill, feature-discovery knowledge - New: patton_2014 and cohn_2004 research notes - Update: wsjf.md (first-run vs subsequent selection) - Update: interview-techniques.md (story mapping replaces per-feature interview) - Delete: specify-feature skill (orphaned by planning-flow v6) Todo-Driven State Execution: - Add Todo-Driven State Execution section to AGENTS.md - Add TODO.md.template for state tracking Template fix: - Fix @id indentation in feature template (same level as Example) Flow version bumps: - discovery-flow: 4.0.0 -> 5.0.0 - planning-flow: 5.0.0 -> 6.0.0 - feature-development-flow: planning-flow ^5 -> ^6
nullhack
force-pushed
the
fix/feature-discovery-and-todo-pattern
branch
from
3de521e to
8a1c10c
Compare
…-features skill The frozen examples rule is process instruction, not feature content. It belongs in the skill that writes Example blocks, not duplicated across every .feature file.
- Rewrite feature-discovery.md: genuine analysis, not mechanical materialization - Rewrite discover-features skill: analytical steps + targeted clarification - Rewrite break-down-feature skill: adversarial analysis (pre-mortem, CIT, laddering) - Remove story-mapping process from interview-techniques.md (wrong knowledge layer) - Decouple moscow, pre-mortem, gherkin, invest, wsjf from state names - Move first-run selection from wsjf.md to select-feature skill - Fix stale bdd-features references in flowr-operations, flowr-spec
Step 9 reworded from 'Self-declare INVEST' with AGREE/DISAGREE template to 'Evaluate each Rule against INVEST criteria' — matches the tone of pre-mortem/CIT (clearly a think step, not a write step).
Same anti-pattern as break-down-feature step 9 — reworded from 'Self-declare' AGREE/DISAGREE to 'Evaluate' as a think step.
…seline - gherkin.md: @id format uses 8-char hex as example, respects stakeholder format, assigned during example writing not baselining - write-bdd-features: step 8 assigns @id only if not set, respects existing format - confirm-baseline: step 1 verifies all Examples have @id tags - template: @id examples use concrete hex values
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Three improvements to the temple8 framework:
1. Feature Discovery State (discovery-flow v5)
Problem: No state creates
.featurefile stubs. The planning-flow'sfeature-breakdownexpectsfeatures/<feature_name>.featureas input but nothing produces it. The.featuretemplate starts atStatus: ELICITINGbut no step creates files with this status.Fix: Add
feature-discoverystate to discovery-flow (afterscope-boundary, beforecomplete). The PO creates one.featurestub per delivery order step with title, description, coarse Rules (Business) bullet points, and Constraints. This is a mechanical materialization step — the stories were already identified during event storming, domain modeling, and scope boundary.2. Planning-Flow Restructuring (planning-flow v6)
Changes:
feature-specificationstate — per-feature interview replaced by story mapping in discoveryfeature-breakdownnow refines coarse Rules (Business) from discovery into full Rule blocks with INVESTfeature-selectionpicks by delivery order (first-run) or WSJF (subsequent)specify-featureskill3. Todo-Driven State Execution + Template Fix
TODO.md.templatefor state tracking@idindentation in feature template (same level asExample:)Research Added
patton_2014.md— User Story Mapping (Patton, 2014)cohn_2004.md— User Stories Applied (Cohn, 2004)Files Changed
discovery-flow.yamlfeature-discoverystateplanning-flow.yamlfeature-specification, update transitionsfeature-development-flow.yamldiscover-features/SKILL.mdfeature-discovery.mdselect-feature/SKILL.mdbreak-down-feature/SKILL.mdwsjf.mdinterview-techniques.mdspecify-feature/SKILL.mdfeature.feature.templateAGENTS.mdTODO.md.templatepatton_2014.md,cohn_2004.md