Add design and implement tasks to engineering-workflow skill#4
Conversation
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 2a0acad79b
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
Completes the four-task lifecycle: design.md (light/deep dive -> ADR -> plan) -> implement.md (build against an Accepted ADR, tests + docs + manual verification in the same change) -> pr-review.md -> respond-to-pr-feedback.md. Both new tasks formalize the process already followed ad hoc for Slice 2 (ADR-0004/PLAN-0004) into an explicit procedure, rather than re-deriving it from design-decisions.md each time. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Step 5 said to "update the relevant docs/*.md subsystem doc(s) to reflect the decision" - but design.md never writes code, and subsystem docs are supposed to describe current state, not upcoming state. Narrowed to a forward-reference only (an Open Items note linking the ADR); actually describing the new current state stays implement.md's job (step 6), once the code exists. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
…pened pull_request without an explicit types: list only fires on opened, synchronize, and reopened - not ready_for_review. Combined with the reusable workflow itself skipping draft PRs, a PR opened as draft and later marked ready (with no new commit) would never get built. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
699c1a3 to
796232f
Compare
|
@codex review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Breezy! Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
1 participant
Summary
tasks/design.md: light/deep-dive process (perdesign-decisions.md) turned into a checklist — check for existing precedent, decide light vs. deep, brainstorm + confirm alternatives with the user for a deep dive, write/index the ADR, decide if a plan is warranted and write/index it. Never touches application code.tasks/implement.md: build against an already-AcceptedADR/plan — coding-standards conformance, tests written alongside the code (not after), plan kept live as work proceeds, docs updated in the same change, real manual verification for network/session/persistence-facing work, plan closed out toDone.SKILL.md's Tasks table and trigger description with the full four-task lifecycle:design.md→implement.md→pr-review.md→respond-to-pr-feedback.md.Both tasks formalize the process already followed (ad hoc) for Slice 2 (ADR-0004/PLAN-0004) — this is the same shape, just written down so it doesn't need re-deriving from
design-decisions.mdeach time.Test plan
🤖 Generated with Claude Code