Issue Analysis Command
User Input
$ARGUMENTS
You MUST consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
Outline
- •
Parse User Input:
- •Extract task description from $ARGUMENTS
- •Generate task name (2-4 words, English, hyphen-separated)
- •
Define Problem:
- •Identify current situation, problem to solve, and goals
- •
Investigate Solutions:
- •Research 2-4 approaches
- •Analyze pros/cons of each approach
- •Evaluate based on coding principles
- •
Final Selection:
- •Choose the most appropriate approach
- •Clarify rejection reasons
- •
Generate Questions:
- •Select maximum 3 unclear items only
- •Use reasonable defaults + Assumptions for the rest
- •
Write Documents (Dual Language):
- •Create
docs/work/WORK-{task-name}/analysis.ko.md(Korean - for user reference) - •Create
docs/work/WORK-{task-name}/analysis.md(English - for agent consumption) - •Use template structure below for both versions
- •Create
Key Rules
🎭 Anti-Bias Rules (CRITICAL)
Core Principle: "Be honest. Don't hide what exists, don't invent what doesn't."
- •Analyze first, conclude later: Complete analysis of all approaches before making selection
- •Write what's true: If A has 5 pros and B has 1, write exactly that
- •Acknowledge trade-offs: When rejecting an approach, state what you're giving up
- •Use neutral language: Avoid "obviously", "simply", "clearly" — use "may", "could", "might"
📝 Documentation Language
CRITICAL: You must generate TWO versions of all documents:
- •Korean version (
analysis.ko.md): For user reference - written in Korean - •English version (
analysis.md): For agent consumption - written in English
Both versions must contain identical structure and information, only the language differs.
🎯 Balanced Analysis Principles
- •Problem Definition: Include concrete scenarios rather than abstract descriptions
- •Solution Approach: Consider both user perspective and technical feasibility
- •Implementation Method: Keep core changes concise, specify new dependencies
- •Completion Criteria: Separate feature verification and technical implementation
✅ Must Do
- •Conclusion first (Executive Summary)
- •Include concrete scenarios (Problem Definition) - 1-4 cases depending on issue
- •Explain user impact (Solution Approach) - How will it be used?
- •Evaluate technical feasibility (Solution Approach) - Why is it suitable?
- •Evaluate solutions based on coding principles
- •Concise bullet points
- •NEEDS CLARIFICATION maximum 3
- •Use reasonable defaults
❌ Must Not Do
- •Verbose explanations
- •Duplicate content
- •Only abstract problem definitions (without concrete examples)
- •Excessive technical details (going into implementation level)
- •Missing user perspective (talking only about technology)
- •Solutions that conflict with coding principles
- •Infinite questions
- •Listing obvious things (e.g., React state, JSON schema)
📋 Clarification Priority
Priority: scope > security/privacy > user experience > technical details
🎯 Informed Guesses Principles
- •Make informed guesses: Use context, industry standards, and common patterns to fill gaps
- •Document assumptions: Record reasonable defaults in the Assumptions section
- •Limit clarifications: Maximum 3 [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers
Document Template
Files to create:
- •
docs/work/WORK-{task-name}/analysis.ko.md(Korean version) - •
docs/work/WORK-{task-name}/analysis.md(English version)
# [Task Name] - Analysis Result
## 🎯 Conclusion (TL;DR)
**Selected Approach**: [Approach Name]
**Key Reason**: [Why this approach was chosen - 1-2 sentences]
---
## 📋 Problem Definition
**Concrete Scenarios** (as needed):
- [Case 1: What problem occurs in what situation]
- [Case 2: Another specific situation]
**Current Problem**: [What is inconvenient or impossible]
**Goal**: [What this task aims to achieve]
---
## 📦 Scope
**Included**:
- [Scope Item 1]
- [Scope Item 2]
**Excluded**:
- [What to explicitly exclude]
---
## 🔍 Solution Investigation
### Approach 1: [Name]
**Method**:
- [How to solve - including user impact and technical method]
- [If needed: How user experiences it]
- [If needed: How to implement technically]
**Pros**:
- [Why it's good - user/technical perspective]
**Cons**:
- [Why it could be problematic]
**Side Effects/Risks** (if any):
- [What negative consequences may occur even when successful]
- [Hidden costs, maintenance burden, technical debt introduced]
### Approach 2: [Name]
**Method**:
- [Solution method]
**Pros**:
- [...]
**Cons**:
- [...]
---
## ✅ Final Selection
**Adopted**: Approach N
**Selection Reason**:
- [Why this approach is most suitable]
- [Key benefits and trade-offs]
**Trade-offs Accepted** (if any):
- [Benefit from other approaches that won't be available]
**Rejected Approaches**:
- Approach X: [Rejection reason] — Would have provided: [lost benefit]
---
## 🛠️ Implementation Method
**Core Changes**:
- [Change Item 1]
- [Change Item 2]
**New Dependencies**: [None / Name]
---
## ⚙️ Key Considerations
- **Backward Compatibility**: [How to maintain existing behavior]
- **UI Placement**: [Where to place it]
- **Special Cases**: [Edge cases to consider]
---
## 🎯 Completion Criteria
**Feature Verification**:
- [ ] [Scenario 1 verification - actual use case test]
- [ ] [Scenario 2 verification]
- [ ] [Existing feature regression test]
**Technical Implementation**:
- [ ] [Core change implementation]
- [ ] [Required config/schema updates]
- [ ] [Unit test writing]
---
## ❓ Needs Confirmation
**Current Assumptions**:
- [Assumption 1]: [Default value]
- [Assumption 2]: [Default value]
**If Needed**:
- [Items needing additional confirmation - maximum 3]
---
## 🔍 Objectivity Self-Check
- [ ] Wrote what's true (no hiding, no inventing)
- [ ] Rejected approaches' lost benefits acknowledged
- [ ] Used neutral language ("may/could", not "will/obviously")
📚 Good/Bad Examples
Problem Definition Section
❌ Bad (Abstract only):
**Current Situation**: Problem occurs when using feature A **Problem to Solve**: X is impossible **Goal**: Make Y possible
✅ Good (Concrete + Abstract):
**Concrete Scenarios**: - [Case 1: What problem occurs in specific situation] - [Case 2: Another real situation] **Current Problem**: [What is generally impossible] **Goal**: [What becomes possible with this task]
Solution Investigation Section
❌ Bad (Technical only or User only):
### Approach 1: Use API X **Method**: Call `function(param, flag: false)` **Pros**: Native support **Cons**: Complex testing
Or
### Approach 1: Add Option **User Experience**: Click checkbox → behavior changes **Pros**: Simple **Cons**: Limited
✅ Good (Balanced explanation):
### Approach 1: [Approach Name] **Method**: - [How to solve - how user experiences it and how it works technically] - If needed: Concrete usage flow (1→2→3) - If needed: Core technical method **Pros**: - [Why it's good from user/technical perspective] **Cons**: - [What limitations or trade-offs exist]
Completion Criteria Section
❌ Bad (Technical implementation only):
- [ ] Add field X to type A - [ ] Implement logic in module B - [ ] Update config file
✅ Good (Feature verification + Technical implementation):
**Feature Verification**: - [ ] [Scenario 1 verification - actual use case] - [ ] [Verify behavior when option changes] - [ ] [Existing feature regression test] **Technical Implementation**: - [ ] [Core type/interface changes] - [ ] [Logic implementation] - [ ] [Config/schema update] - [ ] [UI implementation (if needed)] - [ ] [Unit tests]
Execution
Now start the task according to the guidelines above.