Replaced 50+ emoji types with ASCII text markers for consistent rendering across all terminals, editors, and operating systems: - Checkmarks/status: [OK], [DONE], [SUCCESS], [PASS] - Errors/warnings: [ERROR], [FAIL], [WARNING], [CRITICAL] - Actions: [DO], [DO NOT], [REQUIRED], [OPTIONAL] - Navigation: [NEXT], [PREVIOUS], [TIP], [NOTE] - Progress: [IN PROGRESS], [PENDING], [BLOCKED] Additional changes: - Made paths cross-platform (~/ClaudeTools for Mac/Linux) - Fixed database host references to 172.16.3.30 - Updated START_HERE.md and CONTEXT_RECOVERY_PROMPT.md for multi-OS use Files updated: 58 markdown files across: - .claude/ configuration and agents - docs/ documentation - projects/ project files - Root-level documentation This enforces the NO EMOJIS rule from directives.md and ensures documentation renders correctly on all systems. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
279 lines
7.4 KiB
Markdown
279 lines
7.4 KiB
Markdown
# Code Generation Workflow - MANDATORY
|
|
|
|
## Applies To: ALL MODES
|
|
**This workflow applies to MSP Mode, Development Mode, and Normal Mode.**
|
|
|
|
All modes use agents extensively to preserve context space. Code generation follows the same quality standards regardless of mode.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Critical Rule: NO CODE BYPASSES REVIEW
|
|
|
|
**All code generated by the Coding Agent MUST be reviewed by the Code Review Agent before being presented to the user or deployed to production.**
|
|
|
|
This is non-negotiable and applies to:
|
|
- New code implementations
|
|
- Code modifications
|
|
- Bug fixes
|
|
- Refactoring
|
|
- Script creation
|
|
- Configuration files with code logic
|
|
- Any executable code in any language
|
|
|
|
**Regardless of which mode you're in** - the quality standards are the same.
|
|
|
|
## Standard Workflow
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
User Request
|
|
↓
|
|
Main Claude (orchestrates)
|
|
↓
|
|
┌─────────────────────────────────┐
|
|
│ 1. Launch Coding Agent │
|
|
│ - Understand requirements │
|
|
│ - Research environment │
|
|
│ - Design solution │
|
|
│ - Implement completely │
|
|
│ - Return code │
|
|
└─────────────────────────────────┘
|
|
↓
|
|
┌─────────────────────────────────┐
|
|
│ 2. Launch Code Review Agent │
|
|
│ - Verify spec compliance │
|
|
│ - Check security │
|
|
│ - Verify quality │
|
|
│ - Fix minor issues │
|
|
│ - Escalate major issues │
|
|
└─────────────────────────────────┘
|
|
↓
|
|
Decision Point
|
|
↓
|
|
┌──────────────┬──────────────────┐
|
|
│ APPROVED [OK] │ REJECTED [ERROR] │
|
|
│ │ │
|
|
│ Present to │ Send back to │
|
|
│ user with │ Coding Agent │
|
|
│ review │ with detailed │
|
|
│ notes │ feedback │
|
|
└──────────────┴──────────────────┘
|
|
↓
|
|
(loop back to step 1)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Execution Pattern
|
|
|
|
### Pattern 1: Sequential Agent Chain (Typical)
|
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
// Main Claude orchestrates:
|
|
|
|
// Step 1: Code generation
|
|
const codingResult = await Task({
|
|
subagent_type: "general-purpose",
|
|
prompt: `You are the Coding Agent (see D:\ClaudeTools\.claude\agents\coding.md).
|
|
|
|
Requirements:
|
|
${userRequirements}
|
|
|
|
Environment:
|
|
${environmentContext}
|
|
|
|
Implement this completely with no shortcuts.`,
|
|
description: "Generate production code"
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
// Step 2: Code review (MANDATORY - always happens)
|
|
const reviewResult = await Task({
|
|
subagent_type: "general-purpose",
|
|
prompt: `You are the Code Review Agent (see D:\ClaudeTools\.claude\agents\code-review.md).
|
|
|
|
Review this code for production readiness:
|
|
|
|
${codingResult}
|
|
|
|
Original specification:
|
|
${userRequirements}
|
|
|
|
Approve if production-ready, or escalate with detailed notes if issues found.`,
|
|
description: "Review code for approval"
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
// Step 3: Handle review decision
|
|
if (reviewResult.status === "APPROVED") {
|
|
// Present to user with review notes
|
|
presentToUser(codingResult, reviewResult.notes);
|
|
} else if (reviewResult.status === "REQUIRES_REVISION") {
|
|
// Loop back to Coding Agent with feedback
|
|
// (repeat until approved)
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Pattern 2: Multiple Review Cycles (If Needed)
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Attempt 1:
|
|
Coding Agent → Code Review Agent → REJECTED (security issue)
|
|
↓
|
|
Attempt 2:
|
|
Coding Agent (with feedback) → Code Review Agent → REJECTED (missing edge case)
|
|
↓
|
|
Attempt 3:
|
|
Coding Agent (with feedback) → Code Review Agent → APPROVED [OK]
|
|
↓
|
|
Present to User
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**Maximum 3 cycles** - If not approved after 3 attempts, escalate to user for clarification.
|
|
|
|
## What Gets Presented to User
|
|
|
|
When code is approved:
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
## Implementation Complete [OK]
|
|
|
|
[Brief description of what was implemented]
|
|
|
|
### Code Review Status
|
|
**Reviewed by:** Code Review Agent
|
|
**Status:** APPROVED for production
|
|
**Review Notes:**
|
|
- [Strengths identified]
|
|
- [Minor fixes applied]
|
|
- [Any recommendations]
|
|
|
|
### Files Modified/Created
|
|
- `path/to/file.py` - [description]
|
|
- `path/to/test.py` - [description]
|
|
|
|
### Dependencies Added
|
|
- package==version (reason)
|
|
|
|
### Environment Requirements
|
|
- Runtime: Python 3.9+
|
|
- OS: Windows/Linux/macOS
|
|
- Permissions: [any special permissions]
|
|
|
|
### Usage
|
|
[How to use the code]
|
|
|
|
### Testing
|
|
[How to test/verify]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
[CODE BLOCKS HERE]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## What NEVER Happens
|
|
|
|
[ERROR] **NEVER** present code directly from Coding Agent to user
|
|
[ERROR] **NEVER** skip review "because it's simple"
|
|
[ERROR] **NEVER** skip review "because we're in a hurry"
|
|
[ERROR] **NEVER** skip review "because user trusts us"
|
|
[ERROR] **NEVER** present unapproved code as "draft" without review
|
|
|
|
## Exceptions: NONE
|
|
|
|
There are **no exceptions** to this workflow.
|
|
|
|
Even for:
|
|
- "Quick fixes"
|
|
- "One-liner changes"
|
|
- "Just configuration"
|
|
- "Emergency patches"
|
|
- "User explicitly asked to skip review"
|
|
|
|
**All code gets reviewed. Period.**
|
|
|
|
## Quality Gates
|
|
|
|
Code Review Agent checks:
|
|
- [OK] Specification compliance
|
|
- [OK] Security (no vulnerabilities)
|
|
- [OK] Error handling (comprehensive)
|
|
- [OK] Input validation (all inputs)
|
|
- [OK] Best practices (language-specific)
|
|
- [OK] Environment compatibility
|
|
- [OK] Performance (no obvious issues)
|
|
- [OK] Completeness (no TODOs/stubs)
|
|
|
|
**If any gate fails → REJECTED → Back to Coding Agent**
|
|
|
|
## Review Cycle Handling
|
|
|
|
### Cycle 1: Initial Review
|
|
- Coding Agent produces code
|
|
- Code Review Agent reviews
|
|
- If rejected: Detailed feedback provided
|
|
|
|
### Cycle 2: Revision
|
|
- Coding Agent fixes issues from feedback
|
|
- Code Review Agent reviews again
|
|
- If rejected: More specific feedback
|
|
|
|
### Cycle 3: Final Attempt
|
|
- Coding Agent addresses remaining issues
|
|
- Code Review Agent reviews
|
|
- If still rejected: Escalate to user
|
|
|
|
### Escalation to User
|
|
After 3 cycles without approval:
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
## Code Implementation - Requires User Input
|
|
|
|
After 3 review cycles, the code has remaining issues that need your guidance:
|
|
|
|
**Remaining Issues:**
|
|
[List of issues that couldn't be resolved]
|
|
|
|
**Options:**
|
|
1. Relax requirement: [specific requirement to relax]
|
|
2. Accept with known limitations: [what limitations]
|
|
3. Provide more context: [what's unclear]
|
|
4. Change approach: [alternative approach]
|
|
|
|
**Current Code Status:** Not approved for production
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Integration with MSP Mode
|
|
|
|
When in MSP Mode:
|
|
- Code Review Agent checks `environmental_insights` for known constraints
|
|
- Review findings logged to database for learning
|
|
- Client-specific requirements verified
|
|
- Infrastructure compatibility checked
|
|
|
|
## Monitoring & Metrics
|
|
|
|
Track (future):
|
|
- Average review cycles per implementation
|
|
- Common rejection reasons
|
|
- Time saved by catching issues pre-production
|
|
- Security vulnerabilities prevented
|
|
|
|
## Training & Improvement
|
|
|
|
- All rejections logged with reasons
|
|
- Patterns analyzed to improve Coding Agent
|
|
- Environmental insights updated from review findings
|
|
- Review criteria refined based on production issues
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Summary
|
|
|
|
**The Rule:** Coding Agent → Code Review Agent → User
|
|
|
|
**No Exceptions:** Every single time, no matter what
|
|
|
|
**Result:** Only production-ready, reviewed, secure code reaches the user
|
|
|
|
**Benefit:** Quality, security, and reliability guaranteed
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
**This workflow is immutable. Code quality is not negotiable.**
|