Compare commits

..

1 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Drew Ritter
5cd1a9d5f2 chore(evals): bump submodule for Claude Haiku target 2026-06-10 16:13:55 -07:00
4 changed files with 7 additions and 11 deletions

2
evals

Submodule evals updated: ff3ee83f94...f8e5a9949f

View File

@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ You MUST create a task for each of these items and complete them in order:
3. **Ask clarifying questions** — one at a time, understand purpose/constraints/success criteria
4. **Propose 2-3 approaches** — with trade-offs and your recommendation
5. **Present design** — in sections scaled to their complexity, get user approval after each section
6. **Write design doc** — save to `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` and commit (exactly this path — not `docs/specs/`)
6. **Write design doc** — save to `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` and commit
7. **Spec self-review** — quick inline check for placeholders, contradictions, ambiguity, scope (see below)
8. **User reviews written spec** — ask user to review the spec file before proceeding
9. **Transition to implementation** — invoke writing-plans skill to create implementation plan
@@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ digraph brainstorming {
**Documentation:**
- Write the validated design (spec) to `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md`
- (An explicit user instruction overrides this default; an existing differently-named docs directory does not)
- (User preferences for spec location override this default)
- Use elements-of-style:writing-clearly-and-concisely skill if available
- Commit the design document to git

View File

@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ Load plan, review critically, execute all tasks, report when complete.
## The Process
### Step 1: Load and Review Plan
1. Read plan file, and the spec it cites in its `**Spec:**` header (plans reference requirements rather than restating them)
1. Read plan file
2. Review critically - identify any questions or concerns about the plan
3. If concerns: Raise them with your human partner before starting
4. If no concerns: Create todos for the plan items and proceed

View File

@@ -7,18 +7,16 @@ description: Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, bef
## Overview
Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the engineer has zero context for our codebase and questionable taste. Document everything they need to execute: which files to touch for each task, code, testing, docs they might need to check, how to test it. Give them the whole plan as bite-sized tasks. DRY. YAGNI. TDD. Frequent commits.
Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the engineer has zero context for our codebase and questionable taste. Document everything they need to know: which files to touch for each task, code, testing, docs they might need to check, how to test it. Give them the whole plan as bite-sized tasks. DRY. YAGNI. TDD. Frequent commits.
Assume they are a skilled developer, but know almost nothing about our toolset or problem domain. Assume they don't know good test design very well.
**Plans reference the spec; they never restate, paraphrase, or summarize it.** The spec owns the WHAT and WHY — requirements, acceptance criteria, design decisions; the plan owns the HOW — tasks, files, code, commands. Cite it by path in the header and by section where a task needs context. Reference discipline never means skipping the spec: if brainstorming produced one, it exists and the plan cites it. No Placeholders still requires repeating code and commands WITHIN the plan; copying FROM the spec is different: a step that needs a requirement's prose is under-specified — turn it into a concrete action. Snapshotting spec text into the plan hides drift, not prevents it. "Zero context" means each step is mechanically executable, not that the plan repeats the spec.
**Announce at start:** "I'm using the writing-plans skill to create the implementation plan."
**Context:** If working in an isolated worktree, it should have been created via the `superpowers:using-git-worktrees` skill at execution time.
**Save plans to:** `docs/superpowers/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<feature-name>.md`
- (An explicit user instruction overrides this default; an existing differently-named docs directory does not)
- (User preferences for plan location override this default)
## Scope Check
@@ -55,8 +53,6 @@ This structure informs the task decomposition. Each task should produce self-con
**Goal:** [One sentence describing what this builds]
**Spec:** [Path to the spec doc, e.g. `docs/superpowers/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-design.md` — requirements and design decisions live there; do not restate them here. Only if no spec doc exists (requirements arrived conversationally; brainstorming never ran): write "none — requirements:" and state them once here, not per task]
**Architecture:** [2-3 sentences about approach]
**Tech Stack:** [Key technologies/libraries]
@@ -149,7 +145,7 @@ After saving the plan, offer execution choice:
**If Subagent-Driven chosen:**
- **REQUIRED SUB-SKILL:** Use superpowers:subagent-driven-development
- Fresh subagent per task + two-stage review (review fanout scales with the change — see that skill's Proportionality rule)
- Fresh subagent per task + two-stage review
**If Inline Execution chosen:**
- **REQUIRED SUB-SKILL:** Use superpowers:executing-plans