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>
170 lines
4.3 KiB
Markdown
170 lines
4.3 KiB
Markdown
# Research Summary Template
|
|
|
|
Template for `.planning/research/SUMMARY.md` — executive summary of project research with roadmap implications.
|
|
|
|
<template>
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# Project Research Summary
|
|
|
|
**Project:** [name from PROJECT.md]
|
|
**Domain:** [inferred domain type]
|
|
**Researched:** [date]
|
|
**Confidence:** [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]
|
|
|
|
## Executive Summary
|
|
|
|
[2-3 paragraph overview of research findings]
|
|
|
|
- What type of product this is and how experts build it
|
|
- The recommended approach based on research
|
|
- Key risks and how to mitigate them
|
|
|
|
## Key Findings
|
|
|
|
### Recommended Stack
|
|
|
|
[Summary from STACK.md — 1-2 paragraphs]
|
|
|
|
**Core technologies:**
|
|
- [Technology]: [purpose] — [why recommended]
|
|
- [Technology]: [purpose] — [why recommended]
|
|
- [Technology]: [purpose] — [why recommended]
|
|
|
|
### Expected Features
|
|
|
|
[Summary from FEATURES.md]
|
|
|
|
**Must have (table stakes):**
|
|
- [Feature] — users expect this
|
|
- [Feature] — users expect this
|
|
|
|
**Should have (competitive):**
|
|
- [Feature] — differentiator
|
|
- [Feature] — differentiator
|
|
|
|
**Defer (v2+):**
|
|
- [Feature] — not essential for launch
|
|
|
|
### Architecture Approach
|
|
|
|
[Summary from ARCHITECTURE.md — 1 paragraph]
|
|
|
|
**Major components:**
|
|
1. [Component] — [responsibility]
|
|
2. [Component] — [responsibility]
|
|
3. [Component] — [responsibility]
|
|
|
|
### Critical Pitfalls
|
|
|
|
[Top 3-5 from PITFALLS.md]
|
|
|
|
1. **[Pitfall]** — [how to avoid]
|
|
2. **[Pitfall]** — [how to avoid]
|
|
3. **[Pitfall]** — [how to avoid]
|
|
|
|
## Implications for Roadmap
|
|
|
|
Based on research, suggested phase structure:
|
|
|
|
### Phase 1: [Name]
|
|
**Rationale:** [why this comes first based on research]
|
|
**Delivers:** [what this phase produces]
|
|
**Addresses:** [features from FEATURES.md]
|
|
**Avoids:** [pitfall from PITFALLS.md]
|
|
|
|
### Phase 2: [Name]
|
|
**Rationale:** [why this order]
|
|
**Delivers:** [what this phase produces]
|
|
**Uses:** [stack elements from STACK.md]
|
|
**Implements:** [architecture component]
|
|
|
|
### Phase 3: [Name]
|
|
**Rationale:** [why this order]
|
|
**Delivers:** [what this phase produces]
|
|
|
|
[Continue for suggested phases...]
|
|
|
|
### Phase Ordering Rationale
|
|
|
|
- [Why this order based on dependencies discovered]
|
|
- [Why this grouping based on architecture patterns]
|
|
- [How this avoids pitfalls from research]
|
|
|
|
### Research Flags
|
|
|
|
Phases likely needing deeper research during planning:
|
|
- **Phase [X]:** [reason — e.g., "complex integration, needs API research"]
|
|
- **Phase [Y]:** [reason — e.g., "niche domain, sparse documentation"]
|
|
|
|
Phases with standard patterns (skip research-phase):
|
|
- **Phase [X]:** [reason — e.g., "well-documented, established patterns"]
|
|
|
|
## Confidence Assessment
|
|
|
|
| Area | Confidence | Notes |
|
|
|------|------------|-------|
|
|
| Stack | [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] | [reason] |
|
|
| Features | [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] | [reason] |
|
|
| Architecture | [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] | [reason] |
|
|
| Pitfalls | [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] | [reason] |
|
|
|
|
**Overall confidence:** [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]
|
|
|
|
### Gaps to Address
|
|
|
|
[Any areas where research was inconclusive or needs validation during implementation]
|
|
|
|
- [Gap]: [how to handle during planning/execution]
|
|
- [Gap]: [how to handle during planning/execution]
|
|
|
|
## Sources
|
|
|
|
### Primary (HIGH confidence)
|
|
- [Context7 library ID] — [topics]
|
|
- [Official docs URL] — [what was checked]
|
|
|
|
### Secondary (MEDIUM confidence)
|
|
- [Source] — [finding]
|
|
|
|
### Tertiary (LOW confidence)
|
|
- [Source] — [finding, needs validation]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
*Research completed: [date]*
|
|
*Ready for roadmap: yes*
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
</template>
|
|
|
|
<guidelines>
|
|
|
|
**Executive Summary:**
|
|
- Write for someone who will only read this section
|
|
- Include the key recommendation and main risk
|
|
- 2-3 paragraphs maximum
|
|
|
|
**Key Findings:**
|
|
- Summarize, don't duplicate full documents
|
|
- Link to detailed docs (STACK.md, FEATURES.md, etc.)
|
|
- Focus on what matters for roadmap decisions
|
|
|
|
**Implications for Roadmap:**
|
|
- This is the most important section
|
|
- Directly informs roadmap creation
|
|
- Be explicit about phase suggestions and rationale
|
|
- Include research flags for each suggested phase
|
|
|
|
**Confidence Assessment:**
|
|
- Be honest about uncertainty
|
|
- Note gaps that need resolution during planning
|
|
- HIGH = verified with official sources
|
|
- MEDIUM = community consensus, multiple sources agree
|
|
- LOW = single source or inference
|
|
|
|
**Integration with roadmap creation:**
|
|
- This file is loaded as context during roadmap creation
|
|
- Phase suggestions here become starting point for roadmap
|
|
- Research flags inform phase planning
|
|
|
|
</guidelines>
|