chore: remove stale plans/ directory
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Kieran Klaassen
@@ -1,102 +0,0 @@
|
||||
# Grow Your Own Garden: Adaptive Agent Ecosystem
|
||||
|
||||
> **Issue:** https://github.com/EveryInc/compound-engineering-plugin/issues/20
|
||||
|
||||
## The Idea
|
||||
|
||||
Everyone grows their own garden, but we're all using the same process.
|
||||
|
||||
Start from a **seed** (minimal core: `/plan`, `/work`, `/review`, `/compound`). Each `/compound` loop can suggest adding agents based on what you're working on—like building up a test suite to prevent regressions, but for code review expertise.
|
||||
|
||||
## Current Problem
|
||||
|
||||
- Monolithic plugin: 24 agents, users use ~30%
|
||||
- No personalization (same agents for Rails dev and Python dev)
|
||||
- Static collection that doesn't adapt
|
||||
|
||||
## Proposed Solution
|
||||
|
||||
### The Seed (Core Plugin)
|
||||
|
||||
4 commands + minimal agents:
|
||||
|
||||
| Component | What's Included |
|
||||
|-----------|-----------------|
|
||||
| Commands | `/plan`, `/work`, `/review`, `/compound` |
|
||||
| Review Agents | security, performance, simplicity, architecture, patterns |
|
||||
| Research Agents | best-practices, framework-docs, git-history, repo-analyst |
|
||||
| Skills | compound-docs, file-todos, git-worktree |
|
||||
| MCP Servers | playwright, context7 |
|
||||
|
||||
### The Growth Loop
|
||||
|
||||
After each `/compound`:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
✅ Learning documented
|
||||
|
||||
💡 It looks like you're using Rails.
|
||||
Would you like to add the "DHH Rails Reviewer"?
|
||||
|
||||
[y] Yes [n] No [x] Never ask
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Three sources of new agents:
|
||||
1. **Predefined** - "You're using Rails, add DHH reviewer?"
|
||||
2. **Dynamic** - "You're using actor model, create an expert?"
|
||||
3. **Custom** - "Want to create an agent for this pattern?"
|
||||
|
||||
### Agent Storage
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
.claude/agents/ → Project-specific (highest priority)
|
||||
~/.claude/agents/ → User's garden
|
||||
plugin/agents/ → From installed plugins
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Phases
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Split the Plugin
|
||||
- Create `agent-library/` with framework-specific agents (Rails, Python, TypeScript, Frontend)
|
||||
- Keep `compound-engineering` as core with universal agents
|
||||
- No breaking changes—existing users unaffected
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Agent Discovery
|
||||
- `/review` discovers agents from all three locations
|
||||
- Project agents override user agents override plugin agents
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Growth via /compound
|
||||
- Detect tech stack (Gemfile, package.json, etc.)
|
||||
- Suggest relevant agents after documenting learnings
|
||||
- Install accepted agents to `~/.claude/agents/`
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Management
|
||||
- `/agents list` - See your garden
|
||||
- `/agents add <name>` - Add from library
|
||||
- `/agents disable <name>` - Temporarily disable
|
||||
|
||||
## What Goes Where
|
||||
|
||||
**Core (seed):** 11 framework-agnostic agents
|
||||
- security-sentinel, performance-oracle, code-simplicity-reviewer
|
||||
- architecture-strategist, pattern-recognition-specialist
|
||||
- 4 research agents, 2 workflow agents
|
||||
|
||||
**Agent Library:** 10 specialized agents
|
||||
- Rails: kieran-rails, dhh-rails, data-integrity (3)
|
||||
- Python: kieran-python (1)
|
||||
- TypeScript: kieran-typescript (1)
|
||||
- Frontend: julik-races, design-iterator, design-reviewer, figma-sync (4)
|
||||
- Editorial: every-style-editor (1)
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Constraint
|
||||
|
||||
Claude Code doesn't support plugin dependencies. Each plugin must be independent. Users manually install what they need, or we suggest additions via `/compound`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Acceptance Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Core plugin works standalone with universal agents
|
||||
- [ ] `/compound` suggests agents based on detected tech stack
|
||||
- [ ] Users can accept/decline suggestions
|
||||
- [ ] `/agents` command for garden management
|
||||
- [ ] No breaking changes for existing users
|
||||
@@ -1,279 +0,0 @@
|
||||
# Landing Page LaunchKit Refresh
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Review and enhance the `/docs/index.html` landing page using LaunchKit elements and Pragmatic Technical Writing style (Hunt/Thomas, Joel Spolsky). The current implementation is strong but can be refined section-by-section.
|
||||
|
||||
## Current State Assessment
|
||||
|
||||
### What's Working Well
|
||||
- Specific, outcome-focused hero headline ("12 expert opinions in 30 seconds")
|
||||
- Developer-authentic copywriting (N+1 queries, CORS, SQL injection)
|
||||
- Stats section with clear metrics (23 agents, 16 commands, 11 skills, 2 MCP servers)
|
||||
- Philosophy section with concrete story (N+1 query bug)
|
||||
- Three-step installation with actual commands
|
||||
- FAQ accordion following LaunchKit patterns
|
||||
- Categorized feature sections with code examples
|
||||
|
||||
### Missing Elements (From Best Practices Research)
|
||||
1. **Social Proof Section** - No testimonials, GitHub stars, or user metrics
|
||||
2. **Visual Demo** - No GIF/animation showing the tool in action
|
||||
3. **Arrow icons on CTAs** - 26% conversion boost from studies
|
||||
4. **Trust indicators** - Open source badge, license info
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Section-by-Section Review Plan
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Hero Section (lines 56-78)
|
||||
|
||||
**Current:**
|
||||
```html
|
||||
<h1>Your Code Reviews Just Got 12 Expert Opinions. In 30 Seconds.</h1>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Review Checklist:**
|
||||
- [ ] Headline follows Pragmatic Writing (concrete before abstract) ✅
|
||||
- [ ] Eyebrow badge is current (Version 2.6.0) - verify
|
||||
- [ ] Description paragraph under 3 sentences ✅
|
||||
- [ ] Button group has arrow icon on primary CTA
|
||||
- [ ] "Read the Docs" secondary CTA present ✅
|
||||
|
||||
**Potential Improvements:**
|
||||
- Add `→` arrow to "Install Plugin" button
|
||||
- Consider adding animated terminal GIF below buttons showing `/review` in action
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Stats Section (lines 81-104)
|
||||
|
||||
**Current:** 4 stat cards (23 agents, 16 commands, 11 skills, 2 MCP servers)
|
||||
|
||||
**Review Checklist:**
|
||||
- [ ] Numbers are accurate (verify against actual file counts)
|
||||
- [ ] Icons are appropriate for each stat
|
||||
- [ ] Hover effects working properly
|
||||
- [ ] Mobile layout (2x2 grid) is readable
|
||||
|
||||
**Potential Improvements:**
|
||||
- Add "developers using" or "reviews run" metric if available
|
||||
- Consider adding subtle animation on scroll
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Philosophy Section (lines 107-192)
|
||||
|
||||
**Current:** "Why Your Third Code Review Should Be Easier Than Your First" with N+1 query story
|
||||
|
||||
**Review Checklist:**
|
||||
- [ ] Opens with concrete story (N+1 query) ✅
|
||||
- [ ] Quote block is memorable and quotable
|
||||
- [ ] Four pillars (Plan, Delegate, Assess, Codify) are clear
|
||||
- [ ] Each pillar has: tagline, description, tool tags
|
||||
- [ ] Descriptions use "you" voice ✅
|
||||
|
||||
**Potential Improvements:**
|
||||
- Review pillar descriptions for passive voice
|
||||
- Ensure each pillar description follows PAS (Problem, Agitate, Solve) pattern
|
||||
- Check tool tags are accurate and current
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Agents Section (lines 195-423)
|
||||
|
||||
**Current:** 23 agents in 5 categories (Review, Research, Design, Workflow, Docs)
|
||||
|
||||
**Review Checklist:**
|
||||
- [ ] All 23 agents are listed (count actual files)
|
||||
- [ ] Categories are logical and scannable
|
||||
- [ ] Each card has: name, badge, description, usage code
|
||||
- [ ] Descriptions are conversational (not passive)
|
||||
- [ ] Critical badges (Security, Data) stand out
|
||||
|
||||
**Potential Improvements:**
|
||||
- Review agent descriptions against pragmatic writing checklist
|
||||
- Ensure descriptions answer "when would I use this?"
|
||||
- Add concrete scenarios to generic descriptions
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Commands Section (lines 426-561)
|
||||
|
||||
**Current:** 16 commands in 2 categories (Workflow, Utility)
|
||||
|
||||
**Review Checklist:**
|
||||
- [ ] All 16 commands are listed (count actual files)
|
||||
- [ ] Core workflow commands are highlighted
|
||||
- [ ] Descriptions are action-oriented
|
||||
- [ ] Command names match actual implementation
|
||||
|
||||
**Potential Improvements:**
|
||||
- Review command descriptions for passive voice
|
||||
- Lead with outcomes, not features
|
||||
- Add "saves you X minutes" framing where appropriate
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Skills Section (lines 564-703)
|
||||
|
||||
**Current:** 11 skills in 3 categories (Development, Content/Workflow, Image Generation)
|
||||
|
||||
**Review Checklist:**
|
||||
- [ ] All 11 skills are listed (count actual directories)
|
||||
- [ ] Featured skill (gemini-imagegen) is properly highlighted
|
||||
- [ ] API key requirement is clear
|
||||
- [ ] Skill invocation syntax is correct
|
||||
|
||||
**Potential Improvements:**
|
||||
- Review skill descriptions against pragmatic writing
|
||||
- Ensure each skill answers "what problem does this solve?"
|
||||
|
||||
### 7. MCP Servers Section (lines 706-751)
|
||||
|
||||
**Current:** 2 MCP servers (Playwright, Context7)
|
||||
|
||||
**Review Checklist:**
|
||||
- [ ] Tool lists are accurate
|
||||
- [ ] Descriptions explain WHY not just WHAT
|
||||
- [ ] Framework support list is current (100+)
|
||||
|
||||
**Potential Improvements:**
|
||||
- Add concrete example of each server in action
|
||||
- Consider before/after comparison
|
||||
|
||||
### 8. Installation Section (lines 754-798)
|
||||
|
||||
**Current:** "Three Commands. Zero Configuration." with 3 steps
|
||||
|
||||
**Review Checklist:**
|
||||
- [ ] Commands are accurate and work
|
||||
- [ ] Step 3 shows actual usage examples
|
||||
- [ ] Timeline visual (vertical line) renders correctly
|
||||
- [ ] Copy buttons work on code blocks
|
||||
|
||||
**Potential Improvements:**
|
||||
- Add copy-to-clipboard functionality if missing
|
||||
- Consider adding "What you'll see" output example
|
||||
|
||||
### 9. FAQ Section (lines 801-864)
|
||||
|
||||
**Current:** 5 questions in accordion format
|
||||
|
||||
**Review Checklist:**
|
||||
- [ ] Questions address real objections
|
||||
- [ ] Answers are conversational (use "you")
|
||||
- [ ] Accordion expand/collapse works
|
||||
- [ ] No passive voice in answers
|
||||
|
||||
**Potential Improvements:**
|
||||
- Review for weasel words ("best practices suggest")
|
||||
- Ensure answers are direct and actionable
|
||||
|
||||
### 10. CTA Section (lines 868-886)
|
||||
|
||||
**Current:** "Install Once. Compound Forever." with Install + GitHub buttons
|
||||
|
||||
**Review Checklist:**
|
||||
- [ ] Badge is eye-catching ("Free & Open Source")
|
||||
- [ ] Headline restates core value proposition
|
||||
- [ ] Primary CTA has arrow icon ✅
|
||||
- [ ] Trust line at bottom
|
||||
|
||||
**Potential Improvements:**
|
||||
- Review trust line copy
|
||||
- Consider adding social proof element
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## NEW: Social Proof Section (To Add)
|
||||
|
||||
**Position:** After Stats section, before Philosophy section
|
||||
|
||||
**Components:**
|
||||
- GitHub stars counter (dynamic or static)
|
||||
- "Trusted by X developers" metric
|
||||
- 2-3 testimonial quotes (if available)
|
||||
- Company logos (if applicable)
|
||||
|
||||
**LaunchKit Pattern:**
|
||||
```html
|
||||
<section class="social-proof-section">
|
||||
<div class="heading centered">
|
||||
<p class="paragraph m secondary">Trusted by developers at</p>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
<div class="logo-grid">
|
||||
<!-- Company logos or GitHub badge -->
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Pragmatic Writing Style Checklist (Apply to ALL Copy)
|
||||
|
||||
### The Five Laws
|
||||
1. **Concrete Before Abstract** - Story/example first, then principle
|
||||
2. **Physical Analogies** - Import metaphors readers understand
|
||||
3. **Conversational Register** - Use "you", contractions, asides
|
||||
4. **Numbered Frameworks** - Create referenceable structures
|
||||
5. **Humor as Architecture** - Mental anchors for dense content
|
||||
|
||||
### Anti-Patterns to Find and Fix
|
||||
- [ ] "It is recommended that..." → "Do this:"
|
||||
- [ ] "Best practices suggest..." → "Here's what works:"
|
||||
- [ ] Passive voice → Active voice
|
||||
- [ ] Abstract claims → Specific examples
|
||||
- [ ] Walls of text → Scannable lists
|
||||
|
||||
### Quality Checklist (Per Section)
|
||||
- [ ] Opens with concrete story or example?
|
||||
- [ ] Can reader skim headers and get the arc?
|
||||
- [ ] Uses "you" at least once?
|
||||
- [ ] Clear action reader can take?
|
||||
- [ ] Reads aloud like speech?
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Phases
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Copy Audit (No HTML Changes)
|
||||
1. Read through entire page
|
||||
2. Flag passive voice instances
|
||||
3. Flag abstract claims without examples
|
||||
4. Flag missing "you" voice
|
||||
5. Document improvements needed
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Copy Rewrites
|
||||
1. Rewrite flagged sections following pragmatic style
|
||||
2. Ensure each section passes quality checklist
|
||||
3. Maintain existing HTML structure
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Component Additions
|
||||
1. Add arrow icons to primary CTAs
|
||||
2. Add social proof section (if data available)
|
||||
3. Consider visual demo element
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Verification
|
||||
1. Validate all counts (agents, commands, skills)
|
||||
2. Test all links and buttons
|
||||
3. Verify mobile responsiveness
|
||||
4. Check accessibility
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Files to Modify
|
||||
|
||||
| File | Changes |
|
||||
|------|---------|
|
||||
| `docs/index.html` | Copy rewrites, potential new section |
|
||||
| `docs/css/style.css` | Social proof styles (if adding) |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Success Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
1. All copy passes Pragmatic Writing quality checklist
|
||||
2. No passive voice in any description
|
||||
3. Every feature section answers "why should I care?"
|
||||
4. Stats are accurate against actual file counts
|
||||
5. Page loads in <3 seconds
|
||||
6. Mobile layout is fully functional
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## References
|
||||
|
||||
- LaunchKit Template: https://launchkit.evilmartians.io/
|
||||
- Pragmatic Writing Skill: `~/.claude/skills/pragmatic-writing-skill/SKILL.md`
|
||||
- Current Landing Page: `/Users/kieranklaassen/compound-engineering-plugin/docs/index.html`
|
||||
- Style CSS: `/Users/kieranklaassen/compound-engineering-plugin/docs/css/style.css`
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user