sdlc/skills/implement/SKILL.md

---
name: implement
description: SDLC implementation stage. Gate on capability tags enforced in code by sdlc-gate (implement requires coding), confirm the target branch before writing any file, then claim a ready work package from ANALYZE_CONTENTS with a work ticket and complete its TDD todos one by one, updating the wiki after every item. A delivery package confirms its content type (API document or user-defined) before its first todo. Ends with jsc-review code-review, then always asks which delivery-document format to produce (DELIVER_{HASH} wiki page or Gitea issue comment) before an optional MAINTAIN_CONTENTS entry. Use when analysis is done and code must be written; not for planning or analysis.
---

# implement

Goal: complete the analysis page's todos one by one; **update the wiki status immediately after every completed item**.
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 implement`. The script reads the **actual** model id from the transcript, compares it against this stage's required tags (`coding`), 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. 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. **Confirm the target branch** — do this **before writing any file**:
   1. Report the current branch, whether the working tree is clean, and which of `origin/develop` / `origin/master` exist, plus the remote default branch resolved per `references/branch.md`.
   2. Ask per `jsc-ask:ask` rules which branch this work merges into; state the impact scope on every option (the answer decides the PR target and, when it collides with the current branch, forces a new working branch).
   3. Uncommitted changes in the working tree → warn first and let the user commit or back them up; never discard them.
   4. Apply `references/branch.md` to the confirmed target: source branch and target branch sharing a name means creating a new working branch instead of committing on the target; report the resulting branch name.
   5. Record the confirmed target branch on the analysis page next to the work ticket, and reuse it as the PR target in `jsc-git:pr`. Completion condition: the user has confirmed the target branch explicitly; never fall back to `develop` silently.
3. **Generate a work ticket**: format `TICKET_{yyyyMMdd}_{HHmmss}_{HASH}`. `{HASH}` = the shared wiki hash for `{owner}/{repo}`, computed by `jsc-gitea/tools/hash-id` (see `jsc-gitea:wiki`). Try to rename the current session to the ticket name (skip when the CLI does not support it).
4. Read `ANALYZE_CONTENTS` via `jsc-gitea:wiki` and list what is unfinished: plan name, HASH, work package number, count of open items. A selectable work package must satisfy all three: **unfinished, dependency-free (or all dependencies done), and not holding a work ticket**.
5. Let the user pick a work package per `jsc-ask:ask` rules (options state open-item count and estimated effort). **List delivery packages (交付 `是`) first** — the analysis page makes `WP-01` the standalone delivery package, so keep that order in the options. Write the ticket into that work package's ticket column (the zh-TW field 「工作證」) on the analysis page and save it back to the wiki. **Only after the ticket is saved successfully may you proceed.**
6. **When the package taken is a delivery/handover package, confirm its content before doing any of its todos**:
   1. Ask per `jsc-ask:ask` rules what this delivery must contain. The default options are fixed: **1. API 文件** (endpoint path, **every** input parameter, **every** output parameter) and **2. 由使用者輸入** (the user states the content themselves). State the impact scope on each. **Never assume the type, and never skip this — the answer decides what the whole package produces.**
   2. Chose API 文件 → follow `references/deliver-formats.md`: all parameters listed (not just the main ones), each with name, type, required flag, example, data source and new-versus-existing status; sample values take real sources first and are labelled `真實：{來源}` or `推論：無來源`; **an existing endpoint must mark new versus old parameters both ways** — the status column (🆕 新增 / ⚠️ 變更 / ❌ 移除 / blank for untouched) and a `diff` code block for colour. HTML `style` attributes get filtered by the wiki, so never rely on them.
   3. Chose 由使用者輸入 → produce exactly what the user described; do not force the API document layout onto it.
   4. Record the confirmed type in the analysis page's 交付型別 column and save it before starting the todos.
7. List every open item of the work package and implement them **one at a time**:
   - Follow the TDD loop: red before green, one slice at a time; rules and anti-patterns in `references/tdd.md` (refactoring belongs to the review stage).
   - After each item, flip its `[ ]` to `[x]` on the analysis page and save to the wiki before starting the next item.
8. When all items are done, call `jsc-review:code-review` and wait for the review; on failure, fix and re-review until it passes.
9. **Delivery document** — a finished work package is a delivery, so **always ask before producing it; never pick a format silently and never skip this step**:
   1. Ask per `jsc-ask:ask` rules which format to produce. The options are fixed: **a `DELIVER_{HASH}` wiki page** or **a Gitea issue comment**. State the impact scope on each (the wiki page lives beside the plan and analysis pages; the issue comment reaches whoever follows that issue).
   2. Both formats use the same structure — `templates/deliver-page.md`, in Traditional Chinese. Only the destination differs.
   3. Wiki page: write `DELIVER_{HASH}` through `jsc-gitea:wiki`, where `{HASH}` comes from `jsc-gitea/tools/hash-id` over `{owner}/{repo}` plus the work package number (for example `plugins/sdlc#WP-01`), so each work package gets its own page instead of overwriting the previous one. A new page is added to `DELIVER_CONTENTS` per `templates/deliver-contents.md`.
   4. Issue comment: confirm the issue number with the user (propose the one referenced by the work package or the PR; never guess), then post via `gitea/tools/gitea.sh api POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{n}/comments` with the body passed in as a UTF-8 file — real newlines, never a literal `\n`.
   5. Sample values follow the analysis page's 資料來源 column: `真實：{來源}` for real sources, `推論：無來源` for reasoned ones. Personal data never goes in — keep the field and format, drop the value.
   6. Completion condition: the chosen format has actually been produced, and you have reported where it landed (wiki page name, or the comment URL).
10. Ask per `jsc-ask:ask` rules whether to register this project for maintenance: append to `MAINTAIN_CONTENTS` with `templates/maintain-contents.md`. Required: repository `{owner}/{repo}`, maintenance method, start date. Optional: end date (NULL = maintain forever), last-maintained time.

## Rules

- The work ticket is a mutex: always skip work packages that already hold a ticket; never take one over.
- Never batch wiki updates across items; one item, one update.
- Sample data written into code or fixtures follows the analysis page's 資料來源 column: real data where a source exists, reasoned values labelled as inferred where none does. Never invent a value and present it as real, and never copy personal data into fixtures — keep the format, drop the identity.
- Everything the skill writes out (wiki content, commit messages, PR descriptions) stays Traditional Chinese per the STE100 rule.