feat(proof, ce-brainstorm, ce-plan, ce-ideate): HITL review-loop mode (#580)
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Trevin Chow
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ Present only the options that apply, keeping the total at 4 or fewer:
|
||||
- **Proceed to planning (Recommended)** - Move to `/ce:plan` for structured implementation planning. Shown only when `Resolve Before Planning` is empty.
|
||||
- **Proceed directly to work** - Skip planning and move to `/ce:work`; suited to lightweight, well-defined changes. Shown only when `Resolve Before Planning` is empty **and** scope is lightweight, success criteria are clear, scope boundaries are clear, and no meaningful technical or research questions remain (the "direct-to-work gate").
|
||||
- **Continue the brainstorm** - Answer more clarifying questions to tighten scope, edge cases, and preferences. Always shown.
|
||||
- **View & share in Proof** - Open the requirements doc in Proof to read, comment, collaborate, and share a link. Shown only when a requirements document exists **and** the direct-to-work gate is not satisfied (when both conditions collide, `Proceed directly to work` takes priority and Proof becomes reachable via free-form request).
|
||||
- **Open in Proof (web app) — review and comment to iterate with the agent** - Open the doc in Every's Proof editor, iterate with the agent via comments, or copy a link to share with others. Shown only when a requirements document exists **and** the direct-to-work gate is not satisfied (when both conditions collide, `Proceed directly to work` takes priority and Proof becomes reachable via free-form request).
|
||||
- **Done for now** - Pause; the requirements doc is saved and can be resumed later. Always shown.
|
||||
|
||||
**Surface additional document review contextually, not as a menu fixture:** When the prior document-review pass surfaced residual P0/P1 findings that the user has not addressed, mention them adjacent to the menu and offer another review pass in prose (e.g., "Document review flagged 2 P1 findings you may want to address — want me to run another pass?"). Do not add it to the option list.
|
||||
@@ -40,20 +40,25 @@ Immediately run `/ce:work` in the current session using the finalized brainstorm
|
||||
|
||||
**If user selects "Continue the brainstorm":** Return to Phase 1.3 (Collaborative Dialogue) and continue asking the user clarifying questions one at a time to further refine scope, edge cases, constraints, and preferences. Continue until the user is satisfied, then return to Phase 4. Do not show the closing summary yet.
|
||||
|
||||
**If user selects "View & share in Proof":**
|
||||
**If user selects "Open in Proof (web app) — review and comment to iterate with the agent":**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
CONTENT=$(cat docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-requirements.md)
|
||||
TITLE="Requirements: <topic title>"
|
||||
RESPONSE=$(curl -s -X POST https://www.proofeditor.ai/share/markdown \
|
||||
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
|
||||
-d "$(jq -n --arg title "$TITLE" --arg markdown "$CONTENT" --arg by "ai:compound" '{title: $title, markdown: $markdown, by: $by}')")
|
||||
PROOF_URL=$(echo "$RESPONSE" | jq -r '.tokenUrl')
|
||||
```
|
||||
Load the `proof` skill in HITL-review mode with:
|
||||
|
||||
Display the URL prominently: `View & collaborate in Proof: <PROOF_URL>`
|
||||
- **source file:** `docs/brainstorms/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-requirements.md`
|
||||
- **doc title:** `Requirements: <topic title>`
|
||||
- **identity:** `ai:compound-engineering` / `Compound Engineering`
|
||||
- **recommended next step:** `/ce:plan` (shown in the proof skill's final terminal output)
|
||||
|
||||
If the curl fails, skip silently. Then return to the Phase 4 options.
|
||||
Follow `references/hitl-review.md` in the proof skill. It uploads the doc, prompts the user for review in Proof's web UI, ingests each thread by reading it fresh and replying in-thread, applies agreed edits as tracked suggestions, and syncs the final markdown back to the source file atomically on proceed.
|
||||
|
||||
When the proof skill returns control:
|
||||
|
||||
- `status: proceeded` with `localSynced: true` → the requirements doc on disk now reflects the review. Return to the Phase 4 options and re-render the menu (the doc may have changed substantially during review, so option eligibility can shift — re-evaluate `Resolve Before Planning`, direct-to-work gate, and residual document-review findings against the updated doc).
|
||||
- `status: proceeded` with `localSynced: false` → the reviewed version lives in Proof at `docUrl` but the local copy is stale. Offer to pull the Proof doc to `localPath` using the proof skill's Pull workflow. Re-render the Phase 4 menu after the pull completes (or is declined). If the pull was declined, include a one-line note above the menu that `<localPath>` is stale vs. Proof — otherwise `Proceed to planning` / `Proceed directly to work` will silently read the pre-review copy.
|
||||
- `status: done_for_now` → the doc on disk may be stale if the user edited in Proof before leaving. Offer to pull the Proof doc to `localPath` so the local requirements file stays in sync, then return to the Phase 4 options. If the pull was declined, include the stale-local note above the menu. `done_for_now` means the user stopped the HITL loop without syncing — it does not mean they ended the whole brainstorm; they may still want to proceed to planning or continue the brainstorm.
|
||||
- `status: aborted` → fall back to the Phase 4 options without changes.
|
||||
|
||||
If the initial upload fails (network error, Proof API down), retry once after a short wait. If it still fails, tell the user the upload didn't succeed and briefly explain why, then return to the Phase 4 options — don't leave them wondering why the option did nothing.
|
||||
|
||||
**If the user asks to run another document review** (either from the contextual prompt when P0/P1 findings remain, or by free-form request):
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -45,8 +45,11 @@ When the conversation has enough material to narrow — reflect back what you've
|
||||
|
||||
**Always synthesize a summary in the chat.** Before offering any next steps, reflect back what emerged: key decisions, the direction chosen, open threads, and any assumptions made. This is the primary output of the brainstorm — the user should be able to read the summary and know what they landed on.
|
||||
|
||||
**Then offer next steps** using the platform's question tool (`AskUserQuestion` in Claude Code, `request_user_input` in Codex, `ask_user` in Gemini):
|
||||
**Then offer next steps** using the platform's question tool (`AskUserQuestion` in Claude Code, `request_user_input` in Codex, `ask_user` in Gemini). If no question tool is available, present the numbered options in chat and wait for the user's reply before proceeding.
|
||||
|
||||
**Question:** "Brainstorm wrapped. What would you like to do next?"
|
||||
|
||||
- **Create a plan** → hand off to `/ce:plan` with the decided goal and constraints
|
||||
- **Save summary to disk** → write the summary as a markdown file in the current working directory
|
||||
- **View & share in Proof** → load the `proof` skill to open the summary in Proof for reading, collaborating, and sharing a link
|
||||
- **Open in Proof (web app) — review and comment to iterate with the agent** → load the `proof` skill to open the doc in Every's Proof editor, iterate with the agent via comments, or copy a link to share with others
|
||||
- **Done** → the conversation was the value, no artifact needed
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user