plugins/sdlc
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests 1 Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

fix(sdlc): 補齊稽核缺失並修掉護欄失效

Browse Source 
What：依 jsc-meta:skill-check 的稽核結果修正技能與工具——補上每個步驟的可檢核完成條件、
把留在內文的標準輸入輸出流程下放 tools/、修正查表與退碼路由造成的誤判。

Why：稽核發現這些缺失會讓技能在實際執行時走錯分支或靜默通過。
完成條件缺漏是最常被違反的一項；退碼誤判與查表錯誤則會讓良性狀況被當成失敗。

How：逐項對照 references/guidelines.md 的審核檢查清單修正，新增的工具都有
documented exit codes，並以真實執行驗證每條路徑。

Who：jsc-meta:skill-check 例行稽核（2026-08-25）。

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
jiantw83
2026-08-25 14:58:54 +08:00
co-authored by Claude Opus 5
parent 4369f7dbda
commit b78f7e8b3f
4 changed files with 70 additions and 107 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
skills/plan/SKILL.md
+9 -12
View File
@@ -13,23 +13,20 @@ All wiki reads and writes go through `jsc-gitea:wiki`.
## Steps
1. **Model gate and stage lock** (capability tags, enforced in code — never self-assessed):
1. Run `jsc-cli/tools/model-tags.sh sync` to refresh `$JSC_HOME/model-tags.tsv` from `jsc-cli/references/model-tags.md`.
2. Run `jsc-hooks/hooks/sdlc-gate.sh lock plan`. The script reads the **actual** model id from the transcript, compares it against this stage's required tags (`reasoning-max`), and locks the stage only when they match.
3. **Never claim a capability tag you have not verified with that script**, and never substitute your own judgement for its verdict. Non-zero exit = blocked: relay the script's message verbatim, stop the skill, do nothing else this turn. Do not run `unlock` to get past the gate; only the user may decide that.
4. **Report the gate result to the user every time — whether it passed or blocked.** State the stage, the required tags, the actual model id the script read from the transcript, and the verdict. A silent pass looks identical to a skipped check, and the whole point of moving this into code was that a claimed check cannot be trusted.
5. Exit 0 means the stage is locked. From now until the next stage's gate runs, the sdlc-gate hook blocks every prompt whose model stops satisfying the tags.
2. Read `PLAN_CONTENTS` via `jsc-gitea:wiki` and list the plans whose status is the literal 「未分析」 (not analyzed), with names and HASH.
3. Let the user choose per `jsc-ask:ask` rules: **extend an existing plan** (list the not-analyzed plans as options) or **create a new plan**. State the impact scope on every option.
1. **Model gate and stage lock** — run `jsc-cli/tools/model-tags.sh sync`, then `jsc-hooks/hooks/sdlc-gate.sh lock plan`. This stage requires the `reasoning-max` capability tag. Rules: `references/model-gate.md`. Completion condition: the script exited 0, and you have reported the stage, the required tag, the actual model id it read from the transcript, and the verdict.
2. Read `PLAN_CONTENTS` via `jsc-gitea:wiki` and list the plans whose status is the literal 「未分析」 (not analyzed), with names and HASH. Completion condition: you have listed every 未分析 plan with its name and HASH, or reported that none exists.
3. Let the user choose per `jsc-ask:ask` rules: **extend an existing plan** (list the not-analyzed plans as options) or **create a new plan**. State the impact scope on every option. Completion condition: the user has picked one option explicitly, and you have named the `PLAN_{HASH}` page this run writes to.
4. **Keep questioning until consensus** — rules in `references/consensus.md`, which is the single authority for both planning and analysis. Cover all three items:
- Goal: the problem to solve and the criteria for success.
- Scope: what is included, what is excluded, which repositories are involved.
- Feasibility: whether the system architecture and data sources support the goal.
**One round is never enough**: every answer must produce the next question, derived from what that answer just exposed. Consensus needs both conditions from `references/consensus.md` — no remaining unknown that would change the output, **and** the user's explicit confirmation of the summary you read back. Never fill a gap with your own assumption, and never move on to user stories while any item is still open.
5. Turn the consensus into **user stories** (the zh-TW pattern 「身為⋯⋯我想要⋯⋯以便⋯⋯」), one per line.
6. Apply `templates/plan-page.md` to create or update the plan page, and write it back via `jsc-gitea:wiki`. The page content is Traditional Chinese, exactly as the template dictates.
7. If the plan page is new, add it to `PLAN_CONTENTS` using the entry format of `templates/plan-contents.md`, with status set to the literal 「未分析」.
**One round is never enough**: every answer must produce the next question, derived from what that answer just exposed. Never fill a gap with your own assumption, and never move on to user stories while any item is still open.
Completion condition: all three items are settled under both conditions of `references/consensus.md` — no remaining unknown that would change the output, **and** the user's explicit confirmation of the summary you read back.
5. Turn the consensus into **user stories** (the zh-TW pattern 「身為⋯⋯我想要⋯⋯以便⋯⋯」), one per line. Completion condition: every consensus item is covered by at least one user story in that pattern, and no user story rests on an unanswered question.
6. Apply `templates/plan-page.md` to create or update the plan page, and write it back via `jsc-gitea:wiki`. The page content is Traditional Chinese, exactly as the template dictates. Completion condition: the page is saved on the wiki and carries every section the template dictates — goal, scope, feasibility, user stories and the consensus summary — with no placeholder left unfilled.
7. If the plan page is new, add it to `PLAN_CONTENTS` using the entry format of `templates/plan-contents.md`, with status set to the literal 「未分析」. Completion condition: `PLAN_CONTENTS` shows the plan's row with the literal 「未分析」, saved on the wiki.
## Hard limits