添加 claude code game studios 到项目
This commit is contained in:
panw
209
CCGS Skill Testing Framework/skills/readiness/story-done.md
Normal file
209
CCGS Skill Testing Framework/skills/readiness/story-done.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,209 @@
|
||||
# Skill Test Spec: /story-done
|
||||
|
||||
## Skill Summary
|
||||
|
||||
`/story-done` closes the loop between design and implementation. Run at the
|
||||
end of implementing a story, it reads the story file and verifies each
|
||||
acceptance criterion against the implementation. It checks for GDD and ADR
|
||||
deviations, prompts a code review, updates the story status to `Complete`,
|
||||
logs any tech debt, and surfaces the next ready story from the sprint. It
|
||||
produces a COMPLETE / COMPLETE WITH NOTES / BLOCKED verdict and writes to
|
||||
the story file and optionally to `docs/tech-debt-register.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Static Assertions (Structural)
|
||||
|
||||
Verified automatically by `/skill-test static` — no fixture needed.
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Has required frontmatter fields: `name`, `description`, `argument-hint`, `user-invocable`, `allowed-tools`
|
||||
- [ ] Has ≥5 phase headings (complex skill warranting `context: fork` if applicable)
|
||||
- [ ] Contains verdict keywords: COMPLETE, BLOCKED
|
||||
- [ ] Contains "May I write" collaborative protocol language (writes to story file and tech-debt register)
|
||||
- [ ] Has a next-step handoff (surfaces next story from sprint)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Test Cases
|
||||
|
||||
### Case 1: Happy Path — All acceptance criteria met, no deviations
|
||||
|
||||
**Fixture:**
|
||||
- Story file at `production/epics/core/story-light-pickup.md` with:
|
||||
- 3 acceptance criteria, all implemented as described
|
||||
- `TR-ID: TR-light-001` referencing a GDD requirement
|
||||
- `ADR: docs/architecture/adr-003-inventory.md` (Accepted)
|
||||
- `Status: In Progress`
|
||||
- Implementation files listed in story exist in `src/`
|
||||
- GDD requirement text at TR-light-001 matches how the feature was implemented
|
||||
- ADR guidance was followed (no deviations)
|
||||
|
||||
**Input:** `/story-done production/epics/core/story-light-pickup.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Expected behavior:**
|
||||
1. Skill reads the story file and extracts all key fields
|
||||
2. Skill reads the GDD requirement fresh from `tr-registry.yaml` (not from story's quoted text)
|
||||
3. Skill reads the referenced ADR to understand implementation constraints
|
||||
4. Skill evaluates each acceptance criterion (auto where possible, manual prompt where not)
|
||||
5. Skill checks for GDD requirement deviations
|
||||
6. Skill checks for ADR guideline deviations
|
||||
7. Skill prompts user: "Please provide the code review outcome for this story"
|
||||
8. Skill presents COMPLETE verdict
|
||||
9. Skill asks "May I update story Status to Complete and add Completion Notes?"
|
||||
10. If yes: skill updates the story file
|
||||
11. Skill surfaces the next `Ready for Dev` story from the sprint
|
||||
|
||||
**Assertions:**
|
||||
- [ ] Skill reads `docs/architecture/tr-registry.yaml` for TR-ID requirement text (not just story)
|
||||
- [ ] Skill reads the referenced ADR file (not just the story reference)
|
||||
- [ ] Each acceptance criterion is listed with VERIFIED / DEFERRED / FAILED status
|
||||
- [ ] Skill prompts the user for code review outcome (does not skip this step)
|
||||
- [ ] Verdict is COMPLETE when all criteria are verified and no deviations exist
|
||||
- [ ] Skill asks "May I write" before updating the story file
|
||||
- [ ] Skill does NOT auto-update story status without user confirmation
|
||||
- [ ] After completion, skill surfaces the next ready story from `production/sprints/`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Case 2: Blocked Path — Acceptance criterion cannot be verified
|
||||
|
||||
**Fixture:**
|
||||
- Story file has an acceptance criterion: "Player sees correct animation on pickup"
|
||||
- No automated test for this criterion exists
|
||||
- Manual verification has not been performed
|
||||
- All other criteria are met
|
||||
|
||||
**Input:** `/story-done production/epics/core/story-light-pickup.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Expected behavior:**
|
||||
1. Skill processes all acceptance criteria
|
||||
2. Reaches the animation criterion — cannot auto-verify
|
||||
3. Skill asks the user: "Acceptance criterion 'Player sees correct animation on
|
||||
pickup' cannot be auto-verified. Has this been manually tested?"
|
||||
4. If user says No: criterion is marked DEFERRED, verdict becomes COMPLETE WITH NOTES
|
||||
5. Skill records the deferred criterion in completion notes
|
||||
6. Asks "May I write updated story with deferred criterion noted?"
|
||||
|
||||
**Assertions:**
|
||||
- [ ] Skill asks the user about unverifiable criteria rather than assuming PASS
|
||||
- [ ] Deferred criteria result in COMPLETE WITH NOTES (not COMPLETE or BLOCKED)
|
||||
- [ ] The deferred criterion is explicitly named in the completion notes
|
||||
- [ ] Skill still asks "May I write" before updating the story file
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Case 3: Blocked Path — GDD deviation detected
|
||||
|
||||
**Fixture:**
|
||||
- Story TR-ID points to requirement: "Player can carry max 3 light sources"
|
||||
- Implementation in `src/` uses a variable `MAX_CARRIED_LIGHTS = 5`
|
||||
- This is a deliberate deviation from the GDD
|
||||
|
||||
**Input:** `/story-done production/epics/core/story-light-pickup.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Expected behavior:**
|
||||
1. Skill reads the GDD requirement text (max 3)
|
||||
2. Skill detects discrepancy between requirement and implementation value (5)
|
||||
3. Skill flags this as a GDD deviation and asks the user to classify it:
|
||||
- INTENTIONAL: document the deviation and reason
|
||||
- ERROR: implementation must be fixed before story can be marked Complete
|
||||
- OUT OF SCOPE: requirement changed and GDD needs updating
|
||||
4. If INTENTIONAL: skill records deviation in completion notes, verdict is COMPLETE WITH NOTES
|
||||
5. If ERROR: verdict is BLOCKED until implementation is corrected
|
||||
|
||||
**Assertions:**
|
||||
- [ ] Skill detects the mismatch between GDD requirement and implementation value
|
||||
- [ ] Skill asks the user to classify the deviation (not auto-assumes either way)
|
||||
- [ ] INTENTIONAL deviation → COMPLETE WITH NOTES (not BLOCKED)
|
||||
- [ ] ERROR deviation → BLOCKED verdict until fixed
|
||||
- [ ] Detected deviations are recorded in completion notes or tech debt register
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Case 4: Edge Case — No argument, auto-detect current story
|
||||
|
||||
**Fixture:**
|
||||
- `production/session-state/active.md` contains a reference to
|
||||
`production/epics/core/story-oxygen-drain.md` as the active story
|
||||
- That story file exists with `Status: In Progress`
|
||||
|
||||
**Input:** `/story-done` (no argument)
|
||||
|
||||
**Expected behavior:**
|
||||
1. Skill reads `production/session-state/active.md`
|
||||
2. Skill finds the active story reference
|
||||
3. Skill reads that story file and proceeds normally
|
||||
4. Output confirms which story was auto-detected
|
||||
|
||||
**Assertions:**
|
||||
- [ ] Skill reads `production/session-state/active.md` when no argument is given
|
||||
- [ ] Skill identifies and confirms the auto-detected story before proceeding
|
||||
- [ ] If no story is found in session state, skill asks the user to provide a path
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Case 5: Director Gate — LP-CODE-REVIEW behavior across review modes
|
||||
|
||||
**Fixture:**
|
||||
- Story file at `production/epics/core/story-light-pickup.md`
|
||||
- All acceptance criteria verified, no GDD deviations
|
||||
- `production/session-state/review-mode.txt` exists
|
||||
|
||||
**Case 5a — full mode:**
|
||||
- `review-mode.txt` contains `full`
|
||||
|
||||
**Input:** `/story-done production/epics/core/story-light-pickup.md` (full mode)
|
||||
|
||||
**Expected behavior:**
|
||||
1. Skill reads review mode — determines `full`
|
||||
2. After implementation verification, skill invokes LP-CODE-REVIEW gate
|
||||
3. Lead programmer reviews the implementation
|
||||
4. If LP verdict is NEEDS CHANGES → story cannot be marked Complete
|
||||
5. If LP verdict is APPROVED → skill proceeds to mark story Complete
|
||||
|
||||
**Assertions (5a):**
|
||||
- [ ] Skill reads review mode before deciding whether to invoke LP-CODE-REVIEW
|
||||
- [ ] LP-CODE-REVIEW gate is invoked in full mode after implementation check
|
||||
- [ ] An LP NEEDS CHANGES verdict prevents story from being marked Complete
|
||||
- [ ] Gate result is noted in output: "Gate: LP-CODE-REVIEW — [result]"
|
||||
- [ ] Skill still asks "May I write" before updating story status even if LP approved
|
||||
|
||||
**Case 5b — lean or solo mode:**
|
||||
- `review-mode.txt` contains `lean` or `solo`
|
||||
|
||||
**Expected behavior:**
|
||||
1. Skill reads review mode — determines `lean` or `solo`
|
||||
2. LP-CODE-REVIEW gate is SKIPPED
|
||||
3. Output notes the skip: "[LP-CODE-REVIEW] skipped — Lean/Solo mode"
|
||||
4. Story completion proceeds based on acceptance criteria check only
|
||||
|
||||
**Assertions (5b):**
|
||||
- [ ] LP-CODE-REVIEW gate does NOT spawn in lean or solo mode
|
||||
- [ ] Skip is explicitly noted in output
|
||||
- [ ] Skill still requires "May I write" approval before marking story Complete
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Protocol Compliance
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Uses "May I write" before updating the story file
|
||||
- [ ] Uses "May I write" before adding entries to `docs/tech-debt-register.md`
|
||||
- [ ] Presents complete findings (criteria check, deviation check) before asking approval
|
||||
- [ ] Ends by surfacing the next ready story from the sprint plan
|
||||
- [ ] Does not mark a story Complete if any criteria are in ERROR state
|
||||
- [ ] Does not skip the code review prompt
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Coverage Notes
|
||||
|
||||
- The full 8-phase flow of the skill is exercised across Cases 1-3; not all
|
||||
edge cases within each phase are covered.
|
||||
- Tech debt logging (deferred items written to `docs/tech-debt-register.md`)
|
||||
is mentioned in Case 2 but not the primary assertion focus; dedicated
|
||||
coverage deferred.
|
||||
- The `sprint-status.yaml` update (Phase 7 in the skill) is implied by Case 1
|
||||
but not the primary assertion; assumed to follow the same "May I write" pattern.
|
||||
- Stories with multiple TR-IDs or multiple ADRs are not explicitly tested.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user