cms.c2sgmbh/.claude/commands/gsd/new-project.md
Martin Porwoll 77f70876f4 chore: add Claude Code config, prompts, and tenant setup scripts
- Add .claude/ configuration (agents, commands, hooks, get-shit-done workflows)
- Add prompts/ directory with development planning documents
- Add scripts/setup-tenants/ with tenant configuration
- Add docs/screenshots/
- Remove obsolete phase2.2-corrections-report.md
- Update pnpm-lock.yaml
- Update detect-secrets.sh to ignore setup.sh (env var usage, not secrets)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-01-18 10:18:05 +00:00

896 lines
25 KiB
Markdown

---
name: gsd:new-project
description: Initialize a new project with deep context gathering and PROJECT.md
allowed-tools:
- Read
- Bash
- Write
- Task
- AskUserQuestion
---
<objective>
Initialize a new project through unified flow: questioning → research (optional) → requirements → roadmap.
This is the most leveraged moment in any project. Deep questioning here means better plans, better execution, better outcomes. One command takes you from idea to ready-for-planning.
**Creates:**
- `.planning/PROJECT.md` — project context
- `.planning/config.json` — workflow preferences
- `.planning/research/` — domain research (optional)
- `.planning/REQUIREMENTS.md` — scoped requirements
- `.planning/ROADMAP.md` — phase structure
- `.planning/STATE.md` — project memory
**After this command:** Run `/gsd:plan-phase 1` to start execution.
</objective>
<execution_context>
@/home/payload/payload-cms/.claude/get-shit-done/references/questioning.md
@/home/payload/payload-cms/.claude/get-shit-done/references/ui-brand.md
@/home/payload/payload-cms/.claude/get-shit-done/templates/project.md
@/home/payload/payload-cms/.claude/get-shit-done/templates/requirements.md
</execution_context>
<process>
## Phase 1: Setup
**MANDATORY FIRST STEP — Execute these checks before ANY user interaction:**
1. **Abort if project exists:**
```bash
[ -f .planning/PROJECT.md ] && echo "ERROR: Project already initialized. Use /gsd:progress" && exit 1
```
2. **Initialize git repo in THIS directory** (required even if inside a parent repo):
```bash
if [ -d .git ] || [ -f .git ]; then
echo "Git repo exists in current directory"
else
git init
echo "Initialized new git repo"
fi
```
3. **Detect existing code (brownfield detection):**
```bash
CODE_FILES=$(find . -name "*.ts" -o -name "*.js" -o -name "*.py" -o -name "*.go" -o -name "*.rs" -o -name "*.swift" -o -name "*.java" 2>/dev/null | grep -v node_modules | grep -v .git | head -20)
HAS_PACKAGE=$([ -f package.json ] || [ -f requirements.txt ] || [ -f Cargo.toml ] || [ -f go.mod ] || [ -f Package.swift ] && echo "yes")
HAS_CODEBASE_MAP=$([ -d .planning/codebase ] && echo "yes")
```
**You MUST run all bash commands above using the Bash tool before proceeding.**
## Phase 2: Brownfield Offer
**If existing code detected and .planning/codebase/ doesn't exist:**
Check the results from setup step:
- If `CODE_FILES` is non-empty OR `HAS_PACKAGE` is "yes"
- AND `HAS_CODEBASE_MAP` is NOT "yes"
Use AskUserQuestion:
- header: "Existing Code"
- question: "I detected existing code in this directory. Would you like to map the codebase first?"
- options:
- "Map codebase first" — Run /gsd:map-codebase to understand existing architecture (Recommended)
- "Skip mapping" — Proceed with project initialization
**If "Map codebase first":**
```
Run `/gsd:map-codebase` first, then return to `/gsd:new-project`
```
Exit command.
**If "Skip mapping":** Continue to Phase 3.
**If no existing code detected OR codebase already mapped:** Continue to Phase 3.
## Phase 3: Deep Questioning
**Display stage banner:**
```
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
GSD ► QUESTIONING
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
```
**Open the conversation:**
Ask inline (freeform, NOT AskUserQuestion):
"What do you want to build?"
Wait for their response. This gives you the context needed to ask intelligent follow-up questions.
**Follow the thread:**
Based on what they said, ask follow-up questions that dig into their response. Use AskUserQuestion with options that probe what they mentioned — interpretations, clarifications, concrete examples.
Keep following threads. Each answer opens new threads to explore. Ask about:
- What excited them
- What problem sparked this
- What they mean by vague terms
- What it would actually look like
- What's already decided
Consult `questioning.md` for techniques:
- Challenge vagueness
- Make abstract concrete
- Surface assumptions
- Find edges
- Reveal motivation
**Check context (background, not out loud):**
As you go, mentally check the context checklist from `questioning.md`. If gaps remain, weave questions naturally. Don't suddenly switch to checklist mode.
**Decision gate:**
When you could write a clear PROJECT.md, use AskUserQuestion:
- header: "Ready?"
- question: "I think I understand what you're after. Ready to create PROJECT.md?"
- options:
- "Create PROJECT.md" — Let's move forward
- "Keep exploring" — I want to share more / ask me more
If "Keep exploring" — ask what they want to add, or identify gaps and probe naturally.
Loop until "Create PROJECT.md" selected.
## Phase 4: Write PROJECT.md
Synthesize all context into `.planning/PROJECT.md` using the template from `templates/project.md`.
**For greenfield projects:**
Initialize requirements as hypotheses:
```markdown
## Requirements
### Validated
(None yet — ship to validate)
### Active
- [ ] [Requirement 1]
- [ ] [Requirement 2]
- [ ] [Requirement 3]
### Out of Scope
- [Exclusion 1] — [why]
- [Exclusion 2] — [why]
```
All Active requirements are hypotheses until shipped and validated.
**For brownfield projects (codebase map exists):**
Infer Validated requirements from existing code:
1. Read `.planning/codebase/ARCHITECTURE.md` and `STACK.md`
2. Identify what the codebase already does
3. These become the initial Validated set
```markdown
## Requirements
### Validated
- ✓ [Existing capability 1] — existing
- ✓ [Existing capability 2] — existing
- ✓ [Existing capability 3] — existing
### Active
- [ ] [New requirement 1]
- [ ] [New requirement 2]
### Out of Scope
- [Exclusion 1] — [why]
```
**Key Decisions:**
Initialize with any decisions made during questioning:
```markdown
## Key Decisions
| Decision | Rationale | Outcome |
|----------|-----------|---------|
| [Choice from questioning] | [Why] | — Pending |
```
**Last updated footer:**
```markdown
---
*Last updated: [date] after initialization*
```
Do not compress. Capture everything gathered.
**Commit PROJECT.md:**
```bash
mkdir -p .planning
git add .planning/PROJECT.md
git commit -m "$(cat <<'EOF'
docs: initialize project
[One-liner from PROJECT.md What This Is section]
EOF
)"
```
## Phase 5: Workflow Preferences
Ask all workflow preferences in a single AskUserQuestion call (3 questions):
```
questions: [
{
header: "Mode",
question: "How do you want to work?",
multiSelect: false,
options: [
{ label: "YOLO (Recommended)", description: "Auto-approve, just execute" },
{ label: "Interactive", description: "Confirm at each step" }
]
},
{
header: "Depth",
question: "How thorough should planning be?",
multiSelect: false,
options: [
{ label: "Quick", description: "Ship fast (3-5 phases, 1-3 plans each)" },
{ label: "Standard", description: "Balanced scope and speed (5-8 phases, 3-5 plans each)" },
{ label: "Comprehensive", description: "Thorough coverage (8-12 phases, 5-10 plans each)" }
]
},
{
header: "Execution",
question: "Run plans in parallel?",
multiSelect: false,
options: [
{ label: "Parallel (Recommended)", description: "Independent plans run simultaneously" },
{ label: "Sequential", description: "One plan at a time" }
]
}
]
```
Create `.planning/config.json` with chosen mode, depth, and parallelization.
**Commit config.json:**
```bash
git add .planning/config.json
git commit -m "$(cat <<'EOF'
chore: add project config
Mode: [chosen mode]
Depth: [chosen depth]
Parallelization: [enabled/disabled]
EOF
)"
```
## Phase 6: Research Decision
Use AskUserQuestion:
- header: "Research"
- question: "Research the domain ecosystem before defining requirements?"
- options:
- "Research first (Recommended)" — Discover standard stacks, expected features, architecture patterns
- "Skip research" — I know this domain well, go straight to requirements
**If "Research first":**
Display stage banner:
```
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
GSD ► RESEARCHING
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Researching [domain] ecosystem...
```
Create research directory:
```bash
mkdir -p .planning/research
```
**Determine milestone context:**
Check if this is greenfield or subsequent milestone:
- If no "Validated" requirements in PROJECT.md → Greenfield (building from scratch)
- If "Validated" requirements exist → Subsequent milestone (adding to existing app)
Display spawning indicator:
```
◆ Spawning 4 researchers in parallel...
→ Stack research
→ Features research
→ Architecture research
→ Pitfalls research
```
Spawn 4 parallel gsd-project-researcher agents with rich context:
```
Task(prompt="
<research_type>
Project Research — Stack dimension for [domain].
</research_type>
<milestone_context>
[greenfield OR subsequent]
Greenfield: Research the standard stack for building [domain] from scratch.
Subsequent: Research what's needed to add [target features] to an existing [domain] app. Don't re-research the existing system.
</milestone_context>
<question>
What's the standard 2025 stack for [domain]?
</question>
<project_context>
[PROJECT.md summary - core value, constraints, what they're building]
</project_context>
<downstream_consumer>
Your STACK.md feeds into roadmap creation. Be prescriptive:
- Specific libraries with versions
- Clear rationale for each choice
- What NOT to use and why
</downstream_consumer>
<quality_gate>
- [ ] Versions are current (verify with Context7/official docs, not training data)
- [ ] Rationale explains WHY, not just WHAT
- [ ] Confidence levels assigned to each recommendation
</quality_gate>
<output>
Write to: .planning/research/STACK.md
Use template: /home/payload/payload-cms/.claude/get-shit-done/templates/research-project/STACK.md
</output>
", subagent_type="gsd-project-researcher", description="Stack research")
Task(prompt="
<research_type>
Project Research — Features dimension for [domain].
</research_type>
<milestone_context>
[greenfield OR subsequent]
Greenfield: What features do [domain] products have? What's table stakes vs differentiating?
Subsequent: How do [target features] typically work? What's expected behavior?
</milestone_context>
<question>
What features do [domain] products have? What's table stakes vs differentiating?
</question>
<project_context>
[PROJECT.md summary]
</project_context>
<downstream_consumer>
Your FEATURES.md feeds into requirements definition. Categorize clearly:
- Table stakes (must have or users leave)
- Differentiators (competitive advantage)
- Anti-features (things to deliberately NOT build)
</downstream_consumer>
<quality_gate>
- [ ] Categories are clear (table stakes vs differentiators vs anti-features)
- [ ] Complexity noted for each feature
- [ ] Dependencies between features identified
</quality_gate>
<output>
Write to: .planning/research/FEATURES.md
Use template: /home/payload/payload-cms/.claude/get-shit-done/templates/research-project/FEATURES.md
</output>
", subagent_type="gsd-project-researcher", description="Features research")
Task(prompt="
<research_type>
Project Research — Architecture dimension for [domain].
</research_type>
<milestone_context>
[greenfield OR subsequent]
Greenfield: How are [domain] systems typically structured? What are major components?
Subsequent: How do [target features] integrate with existing [domain] architecture?
</milestone_context>
<question>
How are [domain] systems typically structured? What are major components?
</question>
<project_context>
[PROJECT.md summary]
</project_context>
<downstream_consumer>
Your ARCHITECTURE.md informs phase structure in roadmap. Include:
- Component boundaries (what talks to what)
- Data flow (how information moves)
- Suggested build order (dependencies between components)
</downstream_consumer>
<quality_gate>
- [ ] Components clearly defined with boundaries
- [ ] Data flow direction explicit
- [ ] Build order implications noted
</quality_gate>
<output>
Write to: .planning/research/ARCHITECTURE.md
Use template: /home/payload/payload-cms/.claude/get-shit-done/templates/research-project/ARCHITECTURE.md
</output>
", subagent_type="gsd-project-researcher", description="Architecture research")
Task(prompt="
<research_type>
Project Research — Pitfalls dimension for [domain].
</research_type>
<milestone_context>
[greenfield OR subsequent]
Greenfield: What do [domain] projects commonly get wrong? Critical mistakes?
Subsequent: What are common mistakes when adding [target features] to [domain]?
</milestone_context>
<question>
What do [domain] projects commonly get wrong? Critical mistakes?
</question>
<project_context>
[PROJECT.md summary]
</project_context>
<downstream_consumer>
Your PITFALLS.md prevents mistakes in roadmap/planning. For each pitfall:
- Warning signs (how to detect early)
- Prevention strategy (how to avoid)
- Which phase should address it
</downstream_consumer>
<quality_gate>
- [ ] Pitfalls are specific to this domain (not generic advice)
- [ ] Prevention strategies are actionable
- [ ] Phase mapping included where relevant
</quality_gate>
<output>
Write to: .planning/research/PITFALLS.md
Use template: /home/payload/payload-cms/.claude/get-shit-done/templates/research-project/PITFALLS.md
</output>
", subagent_type="gsd-project-researcher", description="Pitfalls research")
```
After all 4 agents complete, spawn synthesizer to create SUMMARY.md:
```
Task(prompt="
<task>
Synthesize research outputs into SUMMARY.md.
</task>
<research_files>
Read these files:
- .planning/research/STACK.md
- .planning/research/FEATURES.md
- .planning/research/ARCHITECTURE.md
- .planning/research/PITFALLS.md
</research_files>
<output>
Write to: .planning/research/SUMMARY.md
Use template: /home/payload/payload-cms/.claude/get-shit-done/templates/research-project/SUMMARY.md
Commit after writing.
</output>
", subagent_type="gsd-research-synthesizer", description="Synthesize research")
```
Display research complete banner and key findings:
```
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
GSD ► RESEARCH COMPLETE ✓
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
## Key Findings
**Stack:** [from SUMMARY.md]
**Table Stakes:** [from SUMMARY.md]
**Watch Out For:** [from SUMMARY.md]
Files: `.planning/research/`
```
**If "Skip research":** Continue to Phase 7.
## Phase 7: Define Requirements
Display stage banner:
```
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
GSD ► DEFINING REQUIREMENTS
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
```
**Load context:**
Read PROJECT.md and extract:
- Core value (the ONE thing that must work)
- Stated constraints (budget, timeline, tech limitations)
- Any explicit scope boundaries
**If research exists:** Read research/FEATURES.md and extract feature categories.
**Present features by category:**
```
Here are the features for [domain]:
## Authentication
**Table stakes:**
- Sign up with email/password
- Email verification
- Password reset
- Session management
**Differentiators:**
- Magic link login
- OAuth (Google, GitHub)
- 2FA
**Research notes:** [any relevant notes]
---
## [Next Category]
...
```
**If no research:** Gather requirements through conversation instead.
Ask: "What are the main things users need to be able to do?"
For each capability mentioned:
- Ask clarifying questions to make it specific
- Probe for related capabilities
- Group into categories
**Scope each category:**
For each category, use AskUserQuestion:
- header: "[Category name]"
- question: "Which [category] features are in v1?"
- multiSelect: true
- options:
- "[Feature 1]" — [brief description]
- "[Feature 2]" — [brief description]
- "[Feature 3]" — [brief description]
- "None for v1" — Defer entire category
Track responses:
- Selected features → v1 requirements
- Unselected table stakes → v2 (users expect these)
- Unselected differentiators → out of scope
**Identify gaps:**
Use AskUserQuestion:
- header: "Additions"
- question: "Any requirements research missed? (Features specific to your vision)"
- options:
- "No, research covered it" — Proceed
- "Yes, let me add some" — Capture additions
**Validate core value:**
Cross-check requirements against Core Value from PROJECT.md. If gaps detected, surface them.
**Generate REQUIREMENTS.md:**
Create `.planning/REQUIREMENTS.md` with:
- v1 Requirements grouped by category (checkboxes, REQ-IDs)
- v2 Requirements (deferred)
- Out of Scope (explicit exclusions with reasoning)
- Traceability section (empty, filled by roadmap)
**REQ-ID format:** `[CATEGORY]-[NUMBER]` (AUTH-01, CONTENT-02)
**Requirement quality criteria:**
Good requirements are:
- **Specific and testable:** "User can reset password via email link" (not "Handle password reset")
- **User-centric:** "User can X" (not "System does Y")
- **Atomic:** One capability per requirement (not "User can login and manage profile")
- **Independent:** Minimal dependencies on other requirements
Reject vague requirements. Push for specificity:
- "Handle authentication" → "User can log in with email/password and stay logged in across sessions"
- "Support sharing" → "User can share post via link that opens in recipient's browser"
**Present full requirements list:**
Show every requirement (not counts) for user confirmation:
```
## v1 Requirements
### Authentication
- [ ] **AUTH-01**: User can create account with email/password
- [ ] **AUTH-02**: User can log in and stay logged in across sessions
- [ ] **AUTH-03**: User can log out from any page
### Content
- [ ] **CONT-01**: User can create posts with text
- [ ] **CONT-02**: User can edit their own posts
[... full list ...]
---
Does this capture what you're building? (yes / adjust)
```
If "adjust": Return to scoping.
**Commit requirements:**
```bash
git add .planning/REQUIREMENTS.md
git commit -m "$(cat <<'EOF'
docs: define v1 requirements
[X] requirements across [N] categories
[Y] requirements deferred to v2
EOF
)"
```
## Phase 8: Create Roadmap
Display stage banner:
```
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
GSD ► CREATING ROADMAP
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
◆ Spawning roadmapper...
```
Spawn gsd-roadmapper agent with context:
```
Task(prompt="
<planning_context>
**Project:**
@.planning/PROJECT.md
**Requirements:**
@.planning/REQUIREMENTS.md
**Research (if exists):**
@.planning/research/SUMMARY.md
**Config:**
@.planning/config.json
</planning_context>
<instructions>
Create roadmap:
1. Derive phases from requirements (don't impose structure)
2. Map every v1 requirement to exactly one phase
3. Derive 2-5 success criteria per phase (observable user behaviors)
4. Validate 100% coverage
5. Write files immediately (ROADMAP.md, STATE.md, update REQUIREMENTS.md traceability)
6. Return ROADMAP CREATED with summary
Write files first, then return. This ensures artifacts persist even if context is lost.
</instructions>
", subagent_type="gsd-roadmapper", description="Create roadmap")
```
**Handle roadmapper return:**
**If `## ROADMAP BLOCKED`:**
- Present blocker information
- Work with user to resolve
- Re-spawn when resolved
**If `## ROADMAP CREATED`:**
Read the created ROADMAP.md and present it nicely inline:
```
---
## Proposed Roadmap
**[N] phases** | **[X] requirements mapped** | All v1 requirements covered ✓
| # | Phase | Goal | Requirements | Success Criteria |
|---|-------|------|--------------|------------------|
| 1 | [Name] | [Goal] | [REQ-IDs] | [count] |
| 2 | [Name] | [Goal] | [REQ-IDs] | [count] |
| 3 | [Name] | [Goal] | [REQ-IDs] | [count] |
...
### Phase Details
**Phase 1: [Name]**
Goal: [goal]
Requirements: [REQ-IDs]
Success criteria:
1. [criterion]
2. [criterion]
3. [criterion]
**Phase 2: [Name]**
Goal: [goal]
Requirements: [REQ-IDs]
Success criteria:
1. [criterion]
2. [criterion]
[... continue for all phases ...]
---
```
**CRITICAL: Ask for approval before committing:**
Use AskUserQuestion:
- header: "Roadmap"
- question: "Does this roadmap structure work for you?"
- options:
- "Approve" — Commit and continue
- "Adjust phases" — Tell me what to change
- "Review full file" — Show raw ROADMAP.md
**If "Approve":** Continue to commit.
**If "Adjust phases":**
- Get user's adjustment notes
- Re-spawn roadmapper with revision context:
```
Task(prompt="
<revision>
User feedback on roadmap:
[user's notes]
Current ROADMAP.md: @.planning/ROADMAP.md
Update the roadmap based on feedback. Edit files in place.
Return ROADMAP REVISED with changes made.
</revision>
", subagent_type="gsd-roadmapper", description="Revise roadmap")
```
- Present revised roadmap
- Loop until user approves
**If "Review full file":** Display raw `cat .planning/ROADMAP.md`, then re-ask.
**Commit roadmap (after approval):**
```bash
git add .planning/ROADMAP.md .planning/STATE.md .planning/REQUIREMENTS.md
git commit -m "$(cat <<'EOF'
docs: create roadmap ([N] phases)
Phases:
1. [phase-name]: [requirements covered]
2. [phase-name]: [requirements covered]
...
All v1 requirements mapped to phases.
EOF
)"
```
## Phase 10: Done
Present completion with next steps:
```
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
GSD ► PROJECT INITIALIZED ✓
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
**[Project Name]**
| Artifact | Location |
|----------------|-----------------------------|
| Project | `.planning/PROJECT.md` |
| Config | `.planning/config.json` |
| Research | `.planning/research/` |
| Requirements | `.planning/REQUIREMENTS.md` |
| Roadmap | `.planning/ROADMAP.md` |
**[N] phases** | **[X] requirements** | Ready to build ✓
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
## ▶ Next Up
**Phase 1: [Phase Name]** — [Goal from ROADMAP.md]
`/gsd:discuss-phase 1` — gather context and clarify approach
<sub>`/clear` first → fresh context window</sub>
---
**Also available:**
- `/gsd:plan-phase 1` — skip discussion, plan directly
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
```
</process>
<output>
- `.planning/PROJECT.md`
- `.planning/config.json`
- `.planning/research/` (if research selected)
- `STACK.md`
- `FEATURES.md`
- `ARCHITECTURE.md`
- `PITFALLS.md`
- `SUMMARY.md`
- `.planning/REQUIREMENTS.md`
- `.planning/ROADMAP.md`
- `.planning/STATE.md`
</output>
<success_criteria>
- [ ] .planning/ directory created
- [ ] Git repo initialized
- [ ] Brownfield detection completed
- [ ] Deep questioning completed (threads followed, not rushed)
- [ ] PROJECT.md captures full context → **committed**
- [ ] config.json has workflow mode, depth, parallelization → **committed**
- [ ] Research completed (if selected) — 4 parallel agents spawned → **committed**
- [ ] Requirements gathered (from research or conversation)
- [ ] User scoped each category (v1/v2/out of scope)
- [ ] REQUIREMENTS.md created with REQ-IDs → **committed**
- [ ] gsd-roadmapper spawned with context
- [ ] Roadmap files written immediately (not draft)
- [ ] User feedback incorporated (if any)
- [ ] ROADMAP.md created with phases, requirement mappings, success criteria
- [ ] STATE.md initialized
- [ ] REQUIREMENTS.md traceability updated
- [ ] User knows next step is `/gsd:discuss-phase 1`
**Atomic commits:** Each phase commits its artifacts immediately. If context is lost, artifacts persist.
</success_criteria>