Atlas Full Workflow
When to Use This Skill
Perfect for (complex tasks, ~5% of work):
- •Major features (6+ files affected)
- •New modules or services
- •Security-critical changes
- •Cross-platform features requiring coordination
- •Epic-level work requiring formal requirements
- •Architectural changes affecting multiple systems
- •Features requiring comprehensive testing strategy
Time estimate: 2-4 hours
Success criteria:
- •100% of acceptance criteria met
- •Zero defects in production first week
- •Complete documentation and evidence
- •Full test coverage for critical paths
- •Security audit passed (if applicable)
- •Cross-platform validation complete (if applicable)
The 9 Phases
Phase 1: Research → Deep exploration, feasibility analysis Phase 2: Story Creation → Formal requirements, acceptance criteria Phase 3: Planning → Technical design, architecture Phase 4: Adversarial Review → Security audit, edge case analysis Phase 5: Implementation → Parallel coding, incremental builds Phase 6: Testing → Comprehensive validation, all platforms Phase 7: Validation → Acceptance criteria verification Phase 8: Clean-up → Documentation, artifacts, debt log Phase 9: Deployment → Full quality gates, staged rollout
Phase 1: Research
Goal: Deep understanding of requirements, feasibility, and technical landscape.
Time allocation: 20-30 minutes
Steps:
- •
Define the problem space
- •What problem are we solving?
- •Who are the users?
- •What are the business requirements?
- •What are the technical constraints?
- •
Explore current implementation
bash# Find all related code grep -r "related_feature" src/ # Find similar patterns find src/ -name "*similar*" # Check git history for similar features git log --grep="similar feature" --oneline
- •
Research dependencies and integrations
- •What external services/APIs are involved?
- •What internal modules will be affected?
- •What platform-specific considerations exist?
- •What are the data flow implications?
- •
Identify risks and constraints
- •Technical risks (performance, compatibility, security)
- •Timeline constraints
- •Resource constraints
- •Platform limitations
- •
Evaluate alternatives
- •What are different approaches to solve this?
- •What are the trade-offs?
- •What's the recommended approach?
Research Checklist:
Problem Understanding:
- • Clear problem statement
- • User stories identified
- • Success metrics defined
- • Constraints documented
Technical Research:
- • Current implementation mapped
- • Similar patterns found
- • Dependencies identified
- • Platform considerations noted
Risk Analysis:
- • Technical risks listed
- • Security implications assessed
- • Performance implications considered
- • Migration/rollback strategy outlined
Feasibility:
- • Technically feasible
- • Timeline realistic
- • Resources available
- • No blockers identified
Research Output Template:
## Research Findings: [Feature Name] ### Problem Statement: [Clear description of what we're solving] ### Users Affected: - [User type 1]: [how they benefit] - [User type 2]: [how they benefit] ### Technical Approach: [High-level approach, alternatives considered] ### Files to Create/Modify: - /path/to/new/file.js - [purpose] - /path/to/existing/file.js - [what changes] - /path/to/test/file.test.js - [test coverage] ### Dependencies: - External: [external packages, APIs] - Internal: [internal modules, services] ### Platform Considerations: - **Platform A**: [specific notes] - **Platform B**: [specific notes] - **Platform C**: [specific notes] ### Risks: 1. [Risk 1] - Mitigation: [strategy] 2. [Risk 2] - Mitigation: [strategy] ### Success Metrics: - [Metric 1]: [target] - [Metric 2]: [target] ### Timeline Estimate: - Research: [time] - Implementation: [time] - Testing: [time] - Total: [time]
Phase 2: Story Creation
Goal: Create formal user stories with acceptance criteria and success metrics.
Time allocation: 15-20 minutes
Steps:
- •
Write user stories
- •Use standard format: "As a [user], I want [goal], so that [benefit]"
- •Break down complex features into multiple stories
- •Prioritize stories (must-have, should-have, nice-to-have)
- •
Define acceptance criteria
- •Specific, measurable, testable criteria
- •Cover happy path and edge cases
- •Include performance requirements
- •Include platform-specific criteria (if applicable)
- •
Set success metrics
- •How will we measure success?
- •What are the targets?
- •How will we collect data?
- •
Create testing scenarios
- •Manual testing checklist
- •Automated test requirements
- •Cross-platform testing plan (if applicable)
Story Template:
Use the template in resources/story-template.md for consistent formatting.
Story Validation Checklist:
- • User story follows "As a...I want...So that" format
- • Acceptance criteria are specific and testable
- • Edge cases covered
- • Platform-specific requirements included (if applicable)
- • Success metrics defined with targets
- • Testing scenarios documented
- • Dependencies identified
- • Risks documented with mitigation
Phase 3: Planning
Goal: Create detailed technical design and implementation plan.
Time allocation: 20-30 minutes
Steps:
- •
Architecture design
- •How will components interact?
- •What's the data flow?
- •Where does state live?
- •How does it integrate with existing systems?
- •
File-by-file implementation plan
- •What files to create?
- •What files to modify?
- •What changes in each file?
- •What order to implement?
- •
Data schema design
- •What new fields/structures?
- •How to migrate existing data?
- •How does synchronization handle it (if applicable)?
- •What validations needed?
- •
Testing strategy
- •Unit tests for each module
- •Integration tests for workflows
- •Platform-specific tests (if applicable)
- •Performance tests
- •
Rollout strategy
- •Phased rollout plan
- •Feature flags needed?
- •Rollback plan
- •Monitoring strategy
Planning Template:
## Implementation Plan: [Feature Name] ### Architecture #### Component Structure:
[Describe component hierarchy or architecture]
#### Data Flow:
User Action → Component → Service → State → UI Update [Detailed flow description]
#### State Management:
- **State location**: [where state lives]
- **State shape**: [schema]
- **Update methods**: [new methods needed]
### File-by-File Plan
#### New Files:
1. **/src/services/newService.js**
- Purpose: [what it does]
- Functions:
- `function1()`: [description]
- `function2()`: [description]
- Dependencies: [what it imports]
2. **/src/components/NewComponent.js**
- Purpose: [what it does]
- Props: [prop schema]
- State: [local state]
#### Modified Files:
1. **/src/existing/file.js**
- Add: [new functionality]
- Modify: [existing behavior]
#### Test Files:
1. **/tests/services/newService.test.js**
- Test coverage:
- [ ] Unit tests for all functions
- [ ] Edge cases
- [ ] Error handling
### Data Schema
#### New Fields:
```javascript
entity: {
// ... existing fields
newField: {
type: [type],
required: [boolean],
default: [default value],
validation: [validation rules]
}
}
Migration Strategy:
// How to handle existing data
const migrateOldData = (item) => {
return {
...item,
newField: item.legacyField || defaultValue
}
}
Testing Strategy
Unit Tests:
- •
newService.function1()- happy path - •
newService.function1()- error cases - •
newService.function2()- edge cases
Integration Tests:
- • Full workflow: [user action → result]
- • Error recovery
- • Network failure handling
Performance Tests:
- • Load time < [threshold]
- • Memory usage < [threshold]
- • No memory leaks
Implementation Order
Iteration 1: Core functionality
- •Create newService.js with basic functions
- •Add tests for newService
- •Add state management
- •Test integration
Iteration 2: UI integration
- •Create new components
- •Integrate with existing UI
- •Test user interactions
Iteration 3: Edge cases
- •Add error handling
- •Add loading states
- •Test all edge cases
Iteration 4: Polish
- •Performance optimization
- •Accessibility improvements
- •Documentation
- •Final testing
Rollout Strategy
Development Testing:
- •Deploy to development environment
- •Test all functionality
- •Validate performance
- •Fix any issues
Staging/Internal Testing:
- •Deploy to staging environment
- •Internal team testing
- •Gather feedback
- •Refine based on feedback
Beta/Canary Testing (if applicable):
- •Deploy to subset of users (feature flag)
- •Monitor usage metrics
- •Monitor error rates
- •Collect user feedback
Production Release:
- •Gradual rollout (if possible)
- •Monitor success metrics
- •Monitor error rates
- •Rollback plan ready
Rollback Plan
If critical issues arise:
- •Disable feature flag (immediate)
- •Or: Revert to previous deployment
- •Notify users if data affected
- •Fix issues in development
- •Re-test before re-enabling
Monitoring
Metrics to track:
- •Success rate
- •Error rate
- •Performance (load time, memory)
- •User adoption
- •User engagement
Alerts:
- •Error rate > [threshold]%
- •Performance degradation > [threshold]%
- •Crash rate increase
### Planning Validation Checklist: - [ ] Architecture clearly defined - [ ] File-by-file plan complete - [ ] Implementation order logical - [ ] Testing strategy comprehensive - [ ] Rollout strategy defined - [ ] Rollback plan ready - [ ] Monitoring plan in place --- ## Phase 4: Adversarial Review **Goal**: Security audit, edge case analysis, and critical evaluation. **Time allocation**: 15-20 minutes ### Steps: 1. **Security audit** - Use checklist in `resources/adversarial-checklist.md` - Identify vulnerabilities - Assess attack vectors - Validate data security - Check authentication/authorization 2. **Edge case analysis** - What can go wrong? - What assumptions might break? - What happens under load? - What if external dependencies fail? 3. **Performance analysis** - Memory usage implications - Network bandwidth usage - Resource utilization - Startup time impact 4. **Cross-platform compatibility** (if applicable) - Platform-specific issues? - Version compatibility? - Consistent UX across platforms? 5. **Maintainability review** - Code complexity reasonable? - Test coverage sufficient? - Documentation clear? - Technical debt acceptable? ### Adversarial Review Checklist: Use the comprehensive checklist in `resources/adversarial-checklist.md`. ### Adversarial Questions: Ask yourself tough questions: 1. **"What's the worst that could happen?"** - User loses data? - App crashes? - Security breach? - How do we prevent it? 2. **"What if this becomes popular?"** - Can it scale? - Cost implications? - Performance under load? 3. **"What if external service fails?"** - Service down? - Network offline? - API timeout? - Graceful degradation? 4. **"What if user does unexpected thing?"** - Spams button? - Enters invalid data? - Uses old app version? 5. **"What will break in 6 months?"** - Technical debt? - Deprecated APIs? - Maintenance burden? - Future compatibility? ### Red Flags: **Stop and reconsider if:** - 🚩 Security concerns unaddressed - 🚩 Performance implications unclear - 🚩 Rollback plan not feasible - 🚩 Testing strategy inadequate - 🚩 Technical debt too high - 🚩 Edge cases not handled ### Adversarial Review Output: ```markdown ## Adversarial Review: [Feature Name] ### Security Assessment: ✅ PASS / ⚠️ CONCERNS / ❌ FAIL [Details of security review] **Concerns found**: 1. [Concern 1] - Mitigation: [plan] 2. [Concern 2] - Mitigation: [plan] ### Edge Case Analysis: ✅ COVERED / ⚠️ PARTIAL / ❌ GAPS [Details of edge case analysis] **Edge cases to address**: 1. [Case 1] - Plan: [how to handle] 2. [Case 2] - Plan: [how to handle] ### Performance Assessment: ✅ GOOD / ⚠️ ACCEPTABLE / ❌ CONCERNING [Details of performance analysis] **Optimizations needed**: 1. [Optimization 1] 2. [Optimization 2] ### Maintainability: ✅ GOOD / ⚠️ ACCEPTABLE / ❌ HIGH DEBT [Details of maintainability review] **Debt to address**: 1. [Debt item 1] 2. [Debt item 2] ### Overall Verdict: ✅ PROCEED / ⚠️ PROCEED WITH CAUTION / ❌ REVISE PLAN **Blocking issues** (must fix before proceeding): 1. [Issue 1] 2. [Issue 2] **Non-blocking issues** (address during implementation): 1. [Issue 1] 2. [Issue 2]
Phase 5: Implementation
Goal: Build the feature incrementally with parallel work where possible.
Time allocation: 60-90 minutes
Steps:
- •
Set up implementation tracking
- •Break plan into tasks
- •Identify parallel vs sequential tasks
- •Track progress
- •
Implement in iterations
- •Iteration 1: Core functionality (basic feature works)
- •Iteration 2: UI integration (feature accessible to users)
- •Iteration 3: Edge cases (all scenarios handled)
- •Iteration 4: Polish (performance, UX refinements)
- •
Follow coding standards
- •Project conventions and style guide
- •Code comments for complex logic
- •No debugging logs in production code
- •Consistent formatting
- •
Incremental validation
- •Test after each iteration
- •Fix issues before moving to next iteration
- •Run linters and type checkers periodically
Implementation Strategy:
Parallel Work (can be done simultaneously):
- •Service layer implementation
- •Component development
- •Test writing
- •Documentation updates
Sequential Work (must be done in order):
- •Core service functions
- •State management integration
- •Component integration
- •Platform-specific implementations (if applicable)
- •Final polish
Implementation Checklist:
Before starting:
- • Plan reviewed and approved
- • Adversarial review passed
- • Development environment ready
- • All dependencies installed
During implementation:
- • Follow file-by-file plan from Phase 3
- • Write tests alongside code
- • Follow project conventions
- • Add comments for non-obvious logic
- • Remove debug logs
- • Run linters/type checkers periodically
After each iteration:
- • Iteration functionality works
- • Tests pass for iteration
- • Quality checks pass
- • Code reviewed by self
- • Ready for next iteration
Iteration Breakdown:
Iteration 1: Core Functionality (20-30 min) Goal: Basic feature works in isolation
- •Implement service layer
- •Add state management
- •Write unit tests
- •Verify core logic works
Iteration 2: UI Integration (20-30 min) Goal: Feature accessible to users
- •Create/modify UI components
- •Integrate with state
- •Add loading/error states
- •Test user interactions
Iteration 3: Edge Cases (15-20 min) Goal: All scenarios handled gracefully
- •Implement error handling
- •Add retry logic where appropriate
- •Handle empty/null states
- •Test all edge cases
Iteration 4: Polish (10-15 min) Goal: Performance, UX, accessibility
- •Performance optimizations
- •Accessibility improvements
- •Animation refinements
- •Final testing
- •Code cleanup
Code Quality Standards:
Function length: < 50 lines (split if longer)
File length: < 500 lines (split into modules if longer)
Cyclomatic complexity: < 10 (refactor if higher)
Comments: For non-obvious logic, not obvious code
Variable names: Descriptive, not abbreviated (unless common: id, url)
No magic numbers: Use named constants
Validation During Implementation:
Run these commands periodically:
# Linting (fast) npm run lint # Type checking (if applicable) npm run typecheck # Tests (run after each iteration) npm test # Build (before committing) npm run build
Phase 6: Testing
Goal: Comprehensive validation across all scenarios.
Time allocation: 30-45 minutes
Steps:
- •
Automated testing
bash# Unit tests npm test # Type checking (if applicable) npm run typecheck # Linting npm run lint # Build validation npm run build
- •
Manual testing - Happy path
- •Test primary user flow
- •Verify all acceptance criteria met
- •Check performance (load times, animations)
- •
Manual testing - Edge cases
- •Test all edge cases from Phase 2
- •Test error scenarios
- •Test with poor network (if applicable)
- •Test with large data sets
- •
Cross-platform testing (if applicable)
- •Test on each platform
- •Test platform-specific features
- •Verify consistent UX
- •
Regression testing
- •Verify existing features still work
- •Check for unintended side effects
- •Test related features
Testing Checklist:
Automated Tests:
- • All unit tests pass
- • All integration tests pass
- • Type checking passes (if applicable)
- • Linting passes (or only warnings)
- • Build succeeds
- • Test coverage > [target]% for new code
Manual Testing - Happy Path:
- • Primary user flow works
- • All acceptance criteria met
- • Performance acceptable
- • No errors in console
Manual Testing - Edge Cases:
- • Empty states display correctly
- • Error messages clear and helpful
- • Loading states show appropriately
- • Large data sets handled
- • Rapid user actions handled (no crashes)
Regression Testing:
- • Existing features unaffected
- • No performance degradation
- • No new errors
- • Data integrity maintained
Performance Testing:
Metrics to measure:
- •Load time (initial + subsequent)
- •Memory usage (baseline + after feature use)
- •Network usage (bandwidth, request count)
- •Resource utilization
Acceptable thresholds (customize for your project):
- •Page load: < 3 seconds
- •API response: < 1 second
- •Memory: Within reasonable bounds
- •No memory leaks
Testing Output:
## Testing Report: [Feature Name] ### Automated Tests: ✅ PASS / ❌ FAIL - Unit tests: [X/Y] passed - Integration tests: [X/Y] passed - Type checking: [Status] - Linting: [Status] - Build: [Status] - Coverage: [%] (target: [%]) ### Manual Testing - Happy Path: ✅ PASS / ❌ FAIL All acceptance criteria met. ### Manual Testing - Edge Cases: ✅ PASS / ⚠️ PARTIAL / ❌ FAIL **Passed**: - [List of edge cases tested] **Failed**: - [List of failures and fixes applied] ### Performance Testing: ✅ PASS / ⚠️ ACCEPTABLE / ❌ CONCERNING - Load time: [time] (target: < 3s) - Memory usage: [amount] - No memory leaks: [Yes/No] ### Issues Found & Fixed: 1. [Issue 1] → Fixed: [Description] 2. [Issue 2] → Fixed: [Description] ### Overall: ✅ READY FOR VALIDATION / ❌ NEEDS WORK [Summary of readiness]
Phase 7: Validation
Goal: Verify all acceptance criteria met and feature ready for deployment.
Time allocation: 15-20 minutes
Steps:
- •
Acceptance criteria review
- •Go through story from Phase 2
- •Check each criterion systematically
- •Provide evidence for each
- •
Success metrics validation
- •Can we measure the metrics?
- •Are targets realistic?
- •Is tracking implemented?
- •
Documentation review
- •User-facing documentation complete?
- •Developer documentation complete?
- •API documentation (if applicable)?
- •
Stakeholder review (if applicable)
- •Demo the feature
- •Gather feedback
- •Address concerns
Validation Checklist:
Acceptance Criteria:
- • All "Must Have" criteria met (100%)
- • Evidence provided for each criterion
- • All "Should Have" criteria met (or deferred)
Success Metrics:
- • Metrics measurable
- • Tracking implemented
- • Targets realistic
- • Baseline established (if applicable)
Documentation:
- • User guide updated (if user-facing)
- • Developer docs updated (if API changes)
- • README updated (if workflow changes)
Quality Gates:
- • All tests pass
- • Type checking passes
- • Build succeeds
- • No critical bugs
- • Performance acceptable
- • Security review passed (if applicable)
Stakeholder Approval (if applicable):
- • Feature demoed
- • Feedback gathered
- • Concerns addressed
- • Sign-off received
Validation Output:
## Validation Report: [Feature Name] ### Acceptance Criteria Validation #### Must Have ([X/Y]) ✅ [%] 1. ✅ [Criterion 1] - Evidence: [Description] 2. ✅ [Criterion 2] - Evidence: [Description] #### Should Have ([X/Y]) ✅ [%] [List of should-have criteria] **Deferred items**: [List any deferred items] ### Success Metrics Validation ✅ **Metrics implemented**: - ✅ [Metric 1] tracking - ✅ [Metric 2] tracking **Targets**: - [Metric 1]: [target] (trackable ✅) - [Metric 2]: [target] (trackable ✅) ### Documentation Review ✅ **Updated**: - ✅ User guide - ✅ Developer docs - ✅ README (if needed) ### Quality Gates ✅ - ✅ All tests pass - ✅ Type checking passes - ✅ Build succeeds - ✅ No critical bugs - ✅ Performance meets targets - ✅ Security review passed (if applicable) ### Stakeholder Review ✅ (if applicable) **Demo given to**: [Stakeholders] **Feedback**: - [Feedback item 1] - [Feedback item 2] **Sign-off**: ✅ Approved for deployment ### Overall: ✅ READY FOR DEPLOYMENT [Summary of readiness]
Phase 8: Clean-up
Goal: Documentation, artifacts, technical debt log, code cleanup.
Time allocation: 15-20 minutes
Steps:
- •
Code cleanup
- •Remove all debug logs
- •Remove commented-out code
- •Remove unused imports
- •Fix linting warnings
- •Format code consistently
- •
Documentation updates
- •Update code comments
- •Update README (if applicable)
- •Update API docs (if APIs added)
- •Update developer guides
- •
Technical debt log
- •Document any shortcuts taken
- •Document future improvements
- •Document known limitations
- •Document maintenance tasks
- •
Create artifacts
- •Screenshots for documentation
- •Architecture diagrams (if complex)
- •Performance benchmarks
- •Migration guides (if needed)
- •
Knowledge transfer
- •Team documentation
- •Handoff notes (if needed)
- •Troubleshooting guide
Clean-up Checklist:
Code Cleanup:
- • All debug logs removed
- • All commented code removed
- • All unused imports removed
- • All TODOs addressed or logged
- • Linting warnings fixed (or justified)
- • Code formatted consistently
Documentation:
- • Code comments updated
- • README updated (if applicable)
- • API docs updated (if APIs changed)
- • User guide updated (if user-facing)
- • Developer guide updated (if architecture changed)
Technical Debt Log:
- • Shortcuts documented
- • Future improvements listed
- • Known limitations documented
- • Maintenance tasks identified
- • Refactoring opportunities noted
Artifacts:
- • Screenshots captured
- • Diagrams created (if needed)
- • Performance benchmarks documented
- • Migration guides written (if needed)
Knowledge Transfer:
- • Team documentation complete
- • Handoff notes written (if needed)
- • Troubleshooting guide created
- • Common issues documented
Technical Debt Template:
## Technical Debt: [Feature Name] ### Shortcuts Taken: 1. **[Shortcut 1]** - Why: [reason] - Impact: [low/medium/high] - Recommended fix: [description] - Estimated effort: [time] ### Future Improvements: 1. **[Improvement 1]** - Benefit: [description] - Effort: [time] - Priority: [low/medium/high] ### Known Limitations: 1. **[Limitation 1]** - Description: [details] - Workaround: [if any] - Fix planned: [yes/no] ### Maintenance Tasks: 1. **[Task 1]** - Frequency: [daily/weekly/monthly] - Procedure: [description] ### Refactoring Opportunities: 1. **[Opportunity 1]** - Current: [current state] - Proposed: [better approach] - Benefit: [why refactor] - Effort: [time]
Phase 9: Deployment
Goal: Deploy via quality gates with staged rollout.
Time allocation: 15-20 minutes per stage
Steps:
- •
Pre-deployment validation
bash# Run quality gates ./scripts/quality-gates.sh # Or adapt the script from resources/quality-gates.sh
- •
Update change log Document changes in your project's change tracking system.
- •
Deploy to development/staging
- •Test thoroughly in development environment
- •Verify all functionality works
- •Check logs for errors
- •Monitor performance
- •
Deploy to production (with appropriate testing)
- •Use feature flags if available
- •Monitor closely
- •Track success metrics
- •Fix critical issues if any
- •Rollback plan ready
Deployment Checklist:
Pre-Deployment:
- • Quality gates pass
- • Change log updated
- • All tests pass (100%)
- • Type checking passes
- • Build succeeds
- • No critical bugs
- • Documentation complete
- • Rollback plan ready
Development/Staging Deployment:
- • Deployed successfully
- • Tested thoroughly
- • All functionality works
- • No errors in logs
- • Performance acceptable
Production Deployment:
- • Deployed successfully
- • Monitoring active
- • Success metrics tracked
- • Error rates normal
- • No rollback needed
Monitoring During Rollout:
Metrics to watch:
- •Error rate
- •Success metrics
- •Performance metrics
- •User feedback
Alert thresholds (customize for your project):
- •🔴 Error rate > [threshold]% → Consider rollback
- •🟡 Error rate [threshold]-[threshold]% → Investigate
- •🟢 Error rate < [threshold]% → Continue
Rollback triggers:
- •Critical bug discovered
- •Error rate exceeds threshold
- •Data integrity issues
- •Security vulnerability
Success Indicators
You've succeeded when:
- •✅ 100% of acceptance criteria met
- •✅ Zero critical defects in first week
- •✅ All success metrics targets met or exceeded
- •✅ Complete documentation and evidence
- •✅ Full test coverage for critical paths
- •✅ Security audit passed (if applicable)
- •✅ Smooth deployment (no rollbacks)
- •✅ Positive user feedback
- •✅ Technical debt documented
You should have downgraded to Standard if:
- •⚠️ Scope reduced to < 6 files
- •⚠️ Formal requirements not needed
- •⚠️ Simpler than initially estimated
Escalation Rules
When to escalate from Standard to Full:
- •Scope expanded to 6+ files
- •Security concerns emerged
- •Formal requirements needed
- •Cross-platform complexity high
- •Stakeholder sign-off required
When to consider breaking into multiple Full workflows:
- •Epic too large (> 4 hours estimated)
- •Multiple independent features
- •Phased rollout over weeks/months
Common Pitfalls
❌ Don't Do This:
- •
Skip research phase ("I know what to build")
- •Problem: Misunderstand requirements, miss edge cases
- •Solution: Always complete Phase 1 research
- •
Skip story creation ("Requirements are clear")
- •Problem: No measurable acceptance criteria, scope creep
- •Solution: Write formal stories with testable criteria
- •
Skip adversarial review ("Nothing can go wrong")
- •Problem: Security issues, edge cases missed, performance problems
- •Solution: Be paranoid, think like an attacker
- •
Implement everything at once ("I'll test after it's all done")
- •Problem: Hard to debug, hard to test, integration issues
- •Solution: Implement iteratively, test after each iteration
- •
Skip documentation ("Code is self-documenting")
- •Problem: Future developers struggle, knowledge lost
- •Solution: Document while fresh in mind
- •
Deploy to production immediately ("It works on my machine")
- •Problem: Production issues, user impact
- •Solution: Use staged rollout (dev → staging → production)
- •
Ignore technical debt ("We'll fix it later")
- •Problem: Debt accumulates, maintenance burden increases
- •Solution: Document debt, plan to address
✅ Do This Instead:
- •Complete all 9 phases (don't skip, they're fast for their value)
- •Write specific, testable acceptance criteria
- •Think adversarially (security, edge cases, performance)
- •Implement iteratively (test often, fail fast)
- •Document thoroughly (while context fresh)
- •Use staged rollout (dev → staging → production)
- •Log technical debt (make it visible, plan to address)
- •Celebrate success (you built something complex!) 🎉
Resources
- •Story template: See
resources/story-template.md - •Adversarial checklist: See
resources/adversarial-checklist.md - •Quality gates script: See
scripts/quality-gates.sh
Quick Reference
Full Workflow Commands:
# Phase 1: Research grep -r "feature" src/ git log --grep="similar" --oneline # Phase 5: Implementation npm run lint # Run linter npm test # After each iteration # Phase 6: Testing npm test npm run lint npm run build # Phase 9: Deployment ./scripts/quality-gates.sh # Or your quality gates script # Then deploy according to your project's process
Time Allocation:
| Phase | Time | Cumulative |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Research | 20-30 min | 0:30 |
| 2. Story Creation | 15-20 min | 0:50 |
| 3. Planning | 20-30 min | 1:20 |
| 4. Adversarial Review | 15-20 min | 1:40 |
| 5. Implementation | 60-90 min | 3:10 |
| 6. Testing | 30-45 min | 3:55 |
| 7. Validation | 15-20 min | 4:15 |
| 8. Clean-up | 15-20 min | 4:35 |
| 9. Deployment | 15-20 min per stage | varies |
| Total | 2-4 hours + rollout |
Decision Matrix:
| Characteristic | Use Full ✅ | Use Standard ❌ |
|---|---|---|
| Files affected | 6+ files | 2-5 files |
| Formal requirements | Yes | No |
| Security critical | Yes | No |
| Cross-platform coordination | Yes | Simple |
| Stakeholder sign-off | Required | Not required |
| Epic-level work | Yes | Task-level |
| Comprehensive testing | Required | Standard tests OK |
| Documentation | Extensive | Standard |
Summary
The Full workflow is for complex, critical features that require:
- •Formal requirements and acceptance criteria
- •Security audits and adversarial thinking
- •Comprehensive testing across all scenarios
- •Complete documentation and knowledge transfer
- •Staged rollout with monitoring
Use Full workflow when:
- •Building new modules/services
- •Security is critical
- •Cross-platform coordination needed
- •Stakeholder sign-off required
- •Epic-level features (6+ files)
Don't use Full workflow when:
- •Simple bug fixes (use Standard)
- •Style tweaks (use Iterative)
- •Trivial changes (use Quick)
When in doubt, start with Standard and escalate to Full if complexity emerges.
Remember: The Full workflow ensures 100% acceptance, zero defects, and complete evidence. It's rigorous because the stakes are high. Take the time to do it right. 🚀