177 lines
6.8 KiB
Markdown
177 lines
6.8 KiB
Markdown
# Skill Test Spec: /quick-design
|
|
|
|
## Skill Summary
|
|
|
|
`/quick-design` produces a lightweight design spec for features too small to
|
|
warrant a full 8-section GDD. The target scope is under 4 hours of design time
|
|
for a single-system feature. Instead of the full 8-section GDD format, the
|
|
quick-design spec uses a streamlined 3-section format: Overview, Rules, and
|
|
Acceptance Criteria.
|
|
|
|
The skill has no director gates — adding gate overhead would defeat the purpose
|
|
of a lightweight design tool. The skill asks "May I write" before writing the
|
|
design note to `design/quick-notes/[name].md`. If the feature scope is too large
|
|
for a quick-design, the skill redirects to `/design-system` instead.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 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 ≥2 phase headings
|
|
- [ ] Contains verdict keywords: CREATED, BLOCKED, REDIRECTED
|
|
- [ ] Contains "May I write" collaborative protocol language (for quick-note file)
|
|
- [ ] Has a next-step handoff at the end
|
|
- [ ] Explicitly notes: no director gates (lightweight skill by design)
|
|
- [ ] Mentions scope check: redirects to `/design-system` if scope exceeds sub-4h threshold
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Director Gate Checks
|
|
|
|
No director gates — this skill spawns no director gate agents. The lightweight
|
|
nature of quick-design means director gate overhead is intentionally absent.
|
|
Full GDD review is not needed for sub-4-hour single-system features.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Test Cases
|
|
|
|
### Case 1: Happy Path — Small UI change produces a 3-section spec
|
|
|
|
**Fixture:**
|
|
- No existing quick-note for the target feature
|
|
- Feature is clearly scoped: a single UI element change with no cross-system impact
|
|
|
|
**Input:** `/quick-design [feature-name]`
|
|
|
|
**Expected behavior:**
|
|
1. Skill asks scoping questions: what system, what change, what is the acceptance signal
|
|
2. Skill determines scope is within the sub-4h threshold
|
|
3. Skill drafts a 3-section spec: Overview, Rules, Acceptance Criteria
|
|
4. Draft is shown to user
|
|
5. "May I write `design/quick-notes/[name].md`?" is asked
|
|
6. File is written after approval
|
|
|
|
**Assertions:**
|
|
- [ ] Spec contains exactly 3 sections: Overview, Rules, Acceptance Criteria
|
|
- [ ] Draft is shown to user before "May I write" ask
|
|
- [ ] "May I write `design/quick-notes/[name].md`?" is asked before writing
|
|
- [ ] File is written to the correct path: `design/quick-notes/[name].md`
|
|
- [ ] Verdict is CREATED after successful write
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Case 2: Failure Path — Scope check fails; redirected to /design-system
|
|
|
|
**Fixture:**
|
|
- Feature described spans multiple systems or would take more than 4 hours of design time
|
|
(e.g., "redesign the entire combat system" or "new progression mechanic affecting all classes")
|
|
|
|
**Input:** `/quick-design [large-feature]`
|
|
|
|
**Expected behavior:**
|
|
1. Skill asks scoping questions
|
|
2. Skill determines scope exceeds the sub-4h / single-system threshold
|
|
3. Skill outputs: "This feature is too large for a quick-design. Use `/design-system [name]` for a full GDD."
|
|
4. Skill does NOT write a quick-note file
|
|
5. Verdict is REDIRECTED
|
|
|
|
**Assertions:**
|
|
- [ ] Skill detects the scope excess and stops before drafting
|
|
- [ ] Message explicitly names `/design-system` as the correct alternative
|
|
- [ ] No quick-note file is written
|
|
- [ ] Verdict is REDIRECTED (not CREATED or BLOCKED)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Case 3: Edge Case — File already exists; offered to update
|
|
|
|
**Fixture:**
|
|
- `design/quick-notes/[name].md` already exists from a previous session
|
|
|
|
**Input:** `/quick-design [name]`
|
|
|
|
**Expected behavior:**
|
|
1. Skill detects existing quick-note file and reads its current content
|
|
2. Skill asks: "[name].md already exists. Update it, or create a new version?"
|
|
3. User selects update
|
|
4. Skill shows the existing spec and asks which section to revise
|
|
5. Updated spec is shown, "May I write?" asked, file updated after approval
|
|
|
|
**Assertions:**
|
|
- [ ] Skill detects and reads the existing file before offering to update
|
|
- [ ] User is offered update or create-new options — not auto-overwritten
|
|
- [ ] Only the revised section is updated (or the whole spec if user chooses full rewrite)
|
|
- [ ] "May I write" is asked before overwriting the existing file
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Case 4: Edge Case — No argument provided
|
|
|
|
**Fixture:**
|
|
- `design/quick-notes/` directory may or may not exist
|
|
|
|
**Input:** `/quick-design` (no argument)
|
|
|
|
**Expected behavior:**
|
|
1. Skill detects no argument is provided
|
|
2. Skill outputs a usage error: "No feature name specified. Usage: /quick-design [feature-name]"
|
|
3. Skill provides an example: `/quick-design pause-menu-settings`
|
|
4. No file is created
|
|
|
|
**Assertions:**
|
|
- [ ] Skill outputs a usage error when no argument is given
|
|
- [ ] A usage example is shown with the correct format
|
|
- [ ] No quick-note file is written
|
|
- [ ] Skill does NOT silently pick a feature name or default to any action
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Case 5: Director Gate — No gate spawned; explicitly noted for sub-4h features
|
|
|
|
**Fixture:**
|
|
- Feature is within scope for quick-design
|
|
- `production/session-state/review-mode.txt` exists with `full`
|
|
|
|
**Input:** `/quick-design [feature-name]`
|
|
|
|
**Expected behavior:**
|
|
1. Skill asks scoping questions and determines scope is within threshold
|
|
2. Skill does NOT read `production/session-state/review-mode.txt`
|
|
3. Skill does NOT spawn any director gate agent
|
|
4. Spec is drafted, "May I write" asked, file written after approval
|
|
5. Output explicitly notes: "No director gate review — quick-design is for sub-4h features"
|
|
|
|
**Assertions:**
|
|
- [ ] No director gate agents are spawned (no CD-, TD-, PR-, AD- prefixed gates)
|
|
- [ ] Skill does NOT read `production/session-state/review-mode.txt`
|
|
- [ ] Output contains a note explaining why no gate review is needed
|
|
- [ ] Review mode has no effect on this skill's behavior
|
|
- [ ] Full GDD review path (`/design-system`) is mentioned as the alternative for larger features
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Protocol Compliance
|
|
|
|
- [ ] Scope check runs before drafting (redirects to `/design-system` if scope too large)
|
|
- [ ] 3-section format used (Overview, Rules, Acceptance Criteria) — NOT the 8-section GDD format
|
|
- [ ] Draft shown to user before "May I write" ask
|
|
- [ ] "May I write `design/quick-notes/[name].md`?" asked before writing
|
|
- [ ] No director gates — no review-mode.txt read
|
|
- [ ] Ends with next-step handoff (e.g., proceed to implementation or `/dev-story`)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Coverage Notes
|
|
|
|
- The scope threshold heuristic (sub-4h, single-system) is a judgment call —
|
|
the skill's internal check is the authoritative definition and is not
|
|
independently tested by counting hours.
|
|
- The `design/quick-notes/` directory is created automatically if it does not
|
|
exist — this filesystem behavior is not independently tested here.
|
|
- Integration with the story pipeline (can a quick-design generate a story
|
|
directly?) is out of scope for this spec — quick-designs are standalone.
|