mirror of
https://github.com/complexcaresolutions/cms.c2sgmbh.git
synced 2026-03-17 16:14:12 +00:00
Martin Porwoll
77f70876f4
- 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>
146 lines
4 KiB
Markdown
146 lines
4 KiB
Markdown
# Discovery Template
|
|
|
|
Template for `.planning/phases/XX-name/DISCOVERY.md` - shallow research for library/option decisions.
|
|
|
|
**Purpose:** Answer "which library/option should we use" questions during mandatory discovery in plan-phase.
|
|
|
|
For deep ecosystem research ("how do experts build this"), use `/gsd:research-phase` which produces RESEARCH.md.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## File Template
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
---
|
|
phase: XX-name
|
|
type: discovery
|
|
topic: [discovery-topic]
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
<session_initialization>
|
|
Before beginning discovery, verify today's date:
|
|
!`date +%Y-%m-%d`
|
|
|
|
Use this date when searching for "current" or "latest" information.
|
|
Example: If today is 2025-11-22, search for "2025" not "2024".
|
|
</session_initialization>
|
|
|
|
<discovery_objective>
|
|
Discover [topic] to inform [phase name] implementation.
|
|
|
|
Purpose: [What decision/implementation this enables]
|
|
Scope: [Boundaries]
|
|
Output: DISCOVERY.md with recommendation
|
|
</discovery_objective>
|
|
|
|
<discovery_scope>
|
|
<include>
|
|
- [Question to answer]
|
|
- [Area to investigate]
|
|
- [Specific comparison if needed]
|
|
</include>
|
|
|
|
<exclude>
|
|
- [Out of scope for this discovery]
|
|
- [Defer to implementation phase]
|
|
</exclude>
|
|
</discovery_scope>
|
|
|
|
<discovery_protocol>
|
|
|
|
**Source Priority:**
|
|
1. **Context7 MCP** - For library/framework documentation (current, authoritative)
|
|
2. **Official Docs** - For platform-specific or non-indexed libraries
|
|
3. **WebSearch** - For comparisons, trends, community patterns (verify all findings)
|
|
|
|
**Quality Checklist:**
|
|
Before completing discovery, verify:
|
|
- [ ] All claims have authoritative sources (Context7 or official docs)
|
|
- [ ] Negative claims ("X is not possible") verified with official documentation
|
|
- [ ] API syntax/configuration from Context7 or official docs (never WebSearch alone)
|
|
- [ ] WebSearch findings cross-checked with authoritative sources
|
|
- [ ] Recent updates/changelogs checked for breaking changes
|
|
- [ ] Alternative approaches considered (not just first solution found)
|
|
|
|
**Confidence Levels:**
|
|
- HIGH: Context7 or official docs confirm
|
|
- MEDIUM: WebSearch + Context7/official docs confirm
|
|
- LOW: WebSearch only or training knowledge only (mark for validation)
|
|
|
|
</discovery_protocol>
|
|
|
|
|
|
<output_structure>
|
|
Create `.planning/phases/XX-name/DISCOVERY.md`:
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# [Topic] Discovery
|
|
|
|
## Summary
|
|
[2-3 paragraph executive summary - what was researched, what was found, what's recommended]
|
|
|
|
## Primary Recommendation
|
|
[What to do and why - be specific and actionable]
|
|
|
|
## Alternatives Considered
|
|
[What else was evaluated and why not chosen]
|
|
|
|
## Key Findings
|
|
|
|
### [Category 1]
|
|
- [Finding with source URL and relevance to our case]
|
|
|
|
### [Category 2]
|
|
- [Finding with source URL and relevance]
|
|
|
|
## Code Examples
|
|
[Relevant implementation patterns, if applicable]
|
|
|
|
## Metadata
|
|
|
|
<metadata>
|
|
<confidence level="high|medium|low">
|
|
[Why this confidence level - based on source quality and verification]
|
|
</confidence>
|
|
|
|
<sources>
|
|
- [Primary authoritative sources used]
|
|
</sources>
|
|
|
|
<open_questions>
|
|
[What couldn't be determined or needs validation during implementation]
|
|
</open_questions>
|
|
|
|
<validation_checkpoints>
|
|
[If confidence is LOW or MEDIUM, list specific things to verify during implementation]
|
|
</validation_checkpoints>
|
|
</metadata>
|
|
```
|
|
</output_structure>
|
|
|
|
<success_criteria>
|
|
- All scope questions answered with authoritative sources
|
|
- Quality checklist items completed
|
|
- Clear primary recommendation
|
|
- Low-confidence findings marked with validation checkpoints
|
|
- Ready to inform PLAN.md creation
|
|
</success_criteria>
|
|
|
|
<guidelines>
|
|
**When to use discovery:**
|
|
- Technology choice unclear (library A vs B)
|
|
- Best practices needed for unfamiliar integration
|
|
- API/library investigation required
|
|
- Single decision pending
|
|
|
|
**When NOT to use:**
|
|
- Established patterns (CRUD, auth with known library)
|
|
- Implementation details (defer to execution)
|
|
- Questions answerable from existing project context
|
|
|
|
**When to use RESEARCH.md instead:**
|
|
- Niche/complex domains (3D, games, audio, shaders)
|
|
- Need ecosystem knowledge, not just library choice
|
|
- "How do experts build this" questions
|
|
- Use `/gsd:research-phase` for these
|
|
</guidelines>
|