Skip to content

feat(quick-dev): one-shot route generates spec trace file#2121

Open
alexeyv wants to merge 3 commits intomainfrom
oneshot-spec-trace
Open

feat(quick-dev): one-shot route generates spec trace file#2121
alexeyv wants to merge 3 commits intomainfrom
oneshot-spec-trace

Conversation

@alexeyv
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@alexeyv alexeyv commented Mar 25, 2026

Summary

  • One-shot route now generates a lightweight spec file (spec-{slug}.md) with frontmatter, intent summary, and suggested review order — eliminating numbering gaps when quick-dev is used as the primary dev loop
  • Step-01 derives a slug and sets spec_file for both routes (not just plan-code-review)
  • Step-oneshot reuses the spec template (fill Intent + Review Order, delete the rest) instead of inlining structure, and opens the spec in VS Code like step-05 does

Test plan

  • Run quick-dev workflow with a trivial one-shot change and verify a spec-{slug}.md trace file appears in {implementation_artifacts}
  • Verify the generated file has frontmatter with status: done and route: one-shot
  • Verify Suggested Review Order links are clickable (spec-file-relative) in VS Code
  • Verify terminal output uses CWD-relative :line paths
  • npm run validate:skills passes (confirmed locally)

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

alexeyv and others added 2 commits March 24, 2026 23:01
One-shot changes now leave a lightweight spec file with frontmatter,
intent summary, and suggested review order — eliminating numbering
gaps when quick-dev is used as the primary dev loop.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
…cture

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@augmentcode
Copy link
Copy Markdown

augmentcode bot commented Mar 25, 2026

🤖 Augment PR Summary

Summary: Updates the bmad-quick-dev workflow so the one-shot route produces a lightweight spec “trace” file for review/navigation.

Changes:

  • Step 1 now derives a slug and sets spec_file for both one-shot and plan-code-review routes
  • One-shot flow generates spec-{slug}.md from spec-template.md (frontmatter + intent + suggested review order)
  • One-shot presentation opens the generated spec in VS Code and clarifies path/link conventions for terminal vs spec links

🤖 Was this summary useful? React with 👍 or 👎

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@augmentcode augmentcode bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Review completed. 3 suggestions posted.

Fix All in Augment

Comment augment review to trigger a new review at any time.

5. Route — choose exactly one:

**a) One-shot** — zero blast radius: no plausible path by which this change causes unintended consequences elsewhere. Clear intent, no architectural decisions.
1. Derive a valid kebab-case slug from the clarified intent. If the intent references a tracking identifier (story number, issue number, ticket ID), lead the slug with it (e.g. `3-2-digest-delivery`, `gh-47-fix-auth`). If `{implementation_artifacts}/spec-{slug}.md` already exists, append `-2`, `-3`, etc. Set `spec_file` = `{implementation_artifacts}/spec-{slug}.md`.
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

{slug} is used like a workflow variable in the spec-{slug}.md path, but it isn’t defined in this step’s frontmatter or workflow.md; this can violate the skill validation requirement that {...} references be defined. If this is intended as a literal placeholder for the human/agent to substitute, consider avoiding brace-form here so it won’t be treated as a variable. (Guideline: skill_validation)

Severity: medium

Fix This in Augment

🤖 Was this useful? React with 👍 or 👎, or 🚀 if it prevented an incident/outage.

Write `{spec_file}` using `./spec-template.md`. Fill only these sections — delete all others:

1. **Frontmatter** — fill `title`, `type`, `created`, `status: 'done'`. Add `route: 'one-shot'`.
2. **Title and Intent** — `# {title}` heading and `## Intent` with **Problem** and **Approach** lines. Reuse the summary you already generated for the terminal.
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The inline {title} in # {title} looks like a variable reference rather than a human-filled placeholder, which can trip variable-resolution/validation rules if title isn’t a defined runtime/config variable. If it’s meant to be literal placeholder text, consider representing it without {...} so it won’t be interpreted as a variable. (Guideline: skill_validation)

Severity: medium

Fix This in Augment

🤖 Was this useful? React with 👍 or 👎, or 🚀 if it prevented an incident/outage.

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 25, 2026

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Updated the one-shot workflow path to derive slug-based spec file names during routing and introduced a "Generate Spec Trace" phase that creates the spec file from a template. Modified the presentation phase to open the generated spec file with VS Code instead of all changed files.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
Workflow Routing & Spec Generation
src/bmm-skills/4-implementation/bmad-quick-dev/step-01-clarify-and-route.md, step-oneshot.md
Extended one-shot path to derive kebab-case slugs for spec file selection (with collision handling via -2, -3 suffixes), and introduced "Generate Spec Trace" phase that populates spec from template. Updated presentation to open only the generated spec file via code -r with fallback to path reporting, and revised conversation summary to include CWD-relative file references and navigation guidance for the spec's Suggested Review Order.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~12 minutes

Possibly related PRs

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3
✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Title check ✅ Passed The title accurately summarizes the main change: implementing spec trace file generation in the one-shot route of the quick-dev workflow.
Description check ✅ Passed The description is directly related to the changeset, covering the spec file generation, slug derivation, template reuse, and VS Code integration mentioned in the file summaries.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch oneshot-spec-trace

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
src/bmm-skills/4-implementation/bmad-quick-dev/step-01-clarify-and-route.md (1)

56-57: Consider extracting the duplicated slug derivation logic.

The slug derivation and spec_file assignment logic is identical between the one-shot route (lines 56-57) and the plan-code-review route (line 61). This duplication creates a maintenance burden if the logic needs updating.

Consider extracting this into a shared instruction block referenced by both routes, or document that changes to one must be mirrored to the other.

Also applies to: 61-61

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@src/bmm-skills/4-implementation/bmad-quick-dev/step-01-clarify-and-route.md`
around lines 56 - 57, The duplicated slug derivation and spec_file assignment
used in the one-shot route and the plan-code-review route should be extracted
into a single reusable instruction block (e.g., derive_spec_slug or
spec_slug_derivation) and invoked by both routes; update the two places to call
this shared block and remove the duplicated steps so changes to kebab-case slug
rules, tracking-id prefixing, and existing-file suffixing (`-2`, `-3`, etc.) are
made in one spot, or alternatively add a clear comment referencing the other
route to ensure both are kept in sync.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Nitpick comments:
In `@src/bmm-skills/4-implementation/bmad-quick-dev/step-01-clarify-and-route.md`:
- Around line 56-57: The duplicated slug derivation and spec_file assignment
used in the one-shot route and the plan-code-review route should be extracted
into a single reusable instruction block (e.g., derive_spec_slug or
spec_slug_derivation) and invoked by both routes; update the two places to call
this shared block and remove the duplicated steps so changes to kebab-case slug
rules, tracking-id prefixing, and existing-file suffixing (`-2`, `-3`, etc.) are
made in one spot, or alternatively add a clear comment referencing the other
route to ensure both are kept in sync.

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 9497eba0-cad7-4352-8952-fa36e29b2905

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between cfe40fc and 4acc0fd.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • src/bmm-skills/4-implementation/bmad-quick-dev/step-01-clarify-and-route.md
  • src/bmm-skills/4-implementation/bmad-quick-dev/step-oneshot.md

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant