Template
Florian Wilde
b0c4e9e9b9
Toolchain fixes (all previously broken): - npm run lint: next lint was removed in Next 16 -> eslint with flat config - .eslintrc.json was ignored by ESLint 9 -> eslint.config.mjs - npm test / test:e2e exited 1 with no tests -> passWithNoTests - Vitest scanned tests/ and would have run Playwright specs -> scoped to src/ - Playwright targeted Mobile Safari while docs installed only chromium - reuseExistingServer silently tested a foreign server on :3000 -> E2E_PORT - 11 high-severity vulns -> npm audit fix - deny rule Read(**/.env*) also blocked .env.example -> precise patterns Stack changes: - Tailwind v3 -> v4 (CSS-first, no tailwind.config.ts, tw-animate-css) - shadcn regenerated for v4; 33 components -> 6 core, bundled radix-ui - Supabase removed entirely; data layer is now chosen per project - Vercel removed; Docker Compose self-hosting with scripts/update.sh - Better Auth + passkey plugin as the binding auth standard - ThemeProvider and Sonner mounted; dark mode and toasts now actually work Workflow system: - Sub-agents wired: /frontend, /backend, /qa delegate to .claude/agents - Checklists folded into their SKILL.md; one file per skill - Rules rewritten: DB-agnostic backend, passkey security, v4 frontend - Spec language settled as German, skill instructions English
100 lines
3.2 KiB
Markdown
100 lines
3.2 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: refine
|
|
description: Reopen an existing feature spec to improve, extend or fundamentally challenge it. Pass the feature ID.
|
|
argument-hint: "PROJ-X"
|
|
user-invocable: true
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Refine
|
|
|
|
You are a product manager reviewing a live spec. Improve it, extend it, or challenge
|
|
it — depending on what brought the user back.
|
|
|
|
## Before starting
|
|
|
|
1. Read `features/PROJ-X-*.md` — the full current state
|
|
2. Read `features/INDEX.md` — status and dependencies
|
|
3. Read `docs/PRD.md` — keep the vision in view
|
|
|
|
**No argument given:** ask which spec, listing the features from INDEX.md.
|
|
**Unknown ID:** say so and list what exists.
|
|
|
|
## Always open with this
|
|
|
|
> "Was bringt dich zurück zu dieser Spec?"
|
|
|
|
The answer decides the path.
|
|
|
|
## Three paths
|
|
|
|
### Path 1 — Something changed
|
|
*"Scope hat sich geändert", "wir haben Nutzerfeedback", "die Anforderung ist anders"*
|
|
|
|
Targeted interview on the affected areas only: what exactly changed, which user
|
|
stories and criteria are affected, which edge cases shift, whether dependencies
|
|
move, and whether Out of Scope needs updating in either direction.
|
|
|
|
### Path 2 — Implementation revealed a gap
|
|
*"Bei der Umsetzung kam raus, dass…", "an den Fall haben wir nicht gedacht"*
|
|
|
|
Tighten the spec: which scenario was missing, does it become a new acceptance
|
|
criterion or an edge case, does it invalidate an existing criterion, and are there
|
|
adjacent gaps worth closing now.
|
|
|
|
### Path 3 — Fundamental challenge
|
|
*"Ich bin nicht sicher, ob das Feature so richtig ist", "das sind vielleicht zwei Features"*
|
|
|
|
Challenge from first principles: which assumption is in doubt, is the user story
|
|
still the right framing, should this split or merge, what is the minimal version,
|
|
and what moves to Out of Scope as a result.
|
|
|
|
If it should split: create the new spec via the `/write-spec` workflow and update
|
|
`features/INDEX.md`.
|
|
|
|
## Grill Me principle
|
|
|
|
One question at a time, always with a recommendation, following the conversation
|
|
rather than a script. Read the codebase before asking anything it can answer. Stop
|
|
when the change is fully clear.
|
|
|
|
## Update the spec
|
|
|
|
Edit `features/PROJ-X-*.md`, then re-read it to verify the change landed.
|
|
|
|
**Close resolved open questions** — mark `- [x]` with the resolution:
|
|
```
|
|
- [x] Sollen wir Massenlöschen unterstützen? → Nein, verschoben auf P1 (2026-08-09)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**Log new decisions** in the Entscheidungslog with rationale and date. Decisions
|
|
made here matter most — they are reality correcting the original plan.
|
|
|
|
**Add new open questions** as `- [ ]` if anything stays unresolved.
|
|
|
|
## Update tracking
|
|
|
|
- `features/INDEX.md` if status or dependencies changed
|
|
- `docs/PRD.md` if the roadmap is affected
|
|
|
|
## Wrap up
|
|
|
|
- [ ] Opening question asked, path identified
|
|
- [ ] Interview resolved
|
|
- [ ] Spec updated and re-read to verify
|
|
- [ ] Out of Scope adjusted if boundaries moved
|
|
- [ ] Resolved questions marked `- [x]` with a note
|
|
- [ ] New decisions logged with rationale
|
|
- [ ] INDEX.md / PRD updated where affected
|
|
- [ ] User reviewed the changes
|
|
|
|
## Handoff
|
|
|
|
- Path 1 or 2 → "Spec aktualisiert. Mach mit deinem nächsten Workflow-Schritt weiter."
|
|
- Path 3 with a split → "Neue Spec für PROJ-Y angelegt. Nächster Schritt: `/architecture`."
|
|
|
|
## Commit
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
feat(PROJ-X): Refine feature specification — [reason]
|
|
```
|