jwt_auth

JWT Auth Example

This example demonstrates AutoDev on a realistic multi-task spec: building JWT-based authentication for a FastAPI service.

What AutoDev will build

Given the spec in spec.md, AutoDev should produce a plan with 5–6 tasks and implement:

jwt_auth/
├── models.py          # User, Token, TokenPair pydantic models + in-memory store
├── jwt_utils.py       # create_access_token, create_refresh_token, decode_token
├── routes/
│   ├── __init__.py
│   ├── auth.py        # /auth/register, /auth/login, /auth/refresh
│   └── users.py       # GET /users/me (protected)
├── dependencies.py    # get_current_user FastAPI dependency
├── main.py            # FastAPI app assembly
└── tests/
    ├── test_models.py
    ├── test_jwt_utils.py
    └── test_routes.py

How to run

# From this directory
 autodev init
 autodev plan "$(cat spec.md)"
 autodev execute

Expected plan output

After autodev plan, you should see a table like:

Phase  Task    Title                    Files
1      1.1     User models + store      models.py
1      1.2     JWT utilities            jwt_utils.py
2      2.1     Auth routes              routes/auth.py
2      2.2     User dependency          dependencies.py
2      2.3     Protected routes         routes/users.py, main.py
3      3.1     Test suite               tests/

The exact task breakdown may differ — the architect and plan tournament will refine the structure based on the spec.

Tournament behavior

This example is a good candidate for the plan tournament because:

• The spec has multiple interacting components (models, JWT, routes, dependencies)
• The architect's initial draft often misses the refresh token flow or the dependency injection pattern
• The tournament's critic reliably catches these gaps

With default settings (3 judges, max 15 rounds), the plan tournament typically converges in 3–5 rounds for this spec.

Sample tournament output

Tournament passes
Pass  Winner  Scores              Valid judges  Elapsed (s)
1     B       A=1, AB=2, B=3      3             12.4
2     AB      A=2, AB=4, B=0      3             11.8
3     AB      A=3, AB=3, B=0      3             10.2   ← tie → incumbent wins
Tournament complete. passes=3 final_winner=AB

In this example, the tournament converged after 3 passes with the synthesized version (AB) as the winner — a common outcome when the architect's draft (A) and the revision (B) each have complementary strengths.