CI
05917b9808
---ci---
phase: 2
milestone: v0.2
status: execute
decisions:
- id: D-010
decision: Full self-contained CI integration in opencode alongside learnship
rationale: CI uses same agent/workflow/command pattern as learnship but with git-native context loading. Commands prefixed ci- vs learnship-. Zero learnship dependencies.
confidence: 0.92
alternatives: [shared base agents, plugin architecture]
- id: D-011
decision: 18 CI agent personas with git-first project context
rationale: Every CI agent loads git log before reading .ci/ files. This ensures the git log IS the project memory — the core v0.2.0 design principle.
confidence: 0.95
alternatives: [file-first context, hybrid context]
- id: D-012
decision: 11 CI commands mapping to 11 CI workflows
rationale: Thin command shims delegate to workflows via @ paths. Matches learnship pattern for consistency. Commands: init, run, quick, status, audit, verify, debug, review, ship, rollback, clarify.
confidence: 0.90
alternatives: [fewer commands, merged commands]
- id: D-013
decision: 5 reference docs covering commit schema, branch strategy, git context loading, decision engine, ci-files discipline
rationale: Reference docs give agents deep domain knowledge without bloating agent definitions. Matches learnship reference pattern.
confidence: 0.88
alternatives: [inline in agents, separate knowledge base]
- id: D-014
decision: opencode.json adds ~/.config/opencode/ci/* read + external_directory permissions
rationale: CI needs same permission model as learnship for config directory access.
confidence: 0.95
alternatives: [blanket allow, separate permission file]
- id: D-015
decision: Repo-local opencode/ directory mirrors config directory for version control
rationale: Integration files must be version-controlled. The opencode/ directory in the repo can be installed to ~/.config/opencode/ during setup.
confidence: 0.85
alternatives: [separate repo, git submodule]
---/ci---
18 agents: orchestrator, planner, executor, verifier, researcher, challenger, security-auditor, debugger, code-reviewer, phase-researcher, plan-checker, project-researcher, research-synthesizer, roadmapper, ideation-agent, solution-writer, doc-writer, doc-verifier
11 workflows: init, run, quick, status, audit, verify, debug, review, ship, rollback, clarify
11 commands: ci-init, ci-run, ci-quick, ci-status, ci-audit, ci-verify, ci-debug, ci-review, ci-ship, ci-rollback, ci-clarify
5 references: commit-schema, branch-strategy, git-context-loading, decision-engine, ci-files-discipline
3 contexts: dev, research, review
70 lines
1.9 KiB
Markdown
70 lines
1.9 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
description: Analyzes a recently solved CI problem and produces a structured compound learning document. Compound learnings are committed as ---ci--- blocks, not separate files.
|
|
color: "#9370DB"
|
|
tools:
|
|
read: true
|
|
write: true
|
|
bash: true
|
|
glob: true
|
|
grep: true
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
<role>
|
|
You are a CI solution writer. You analyze recently solved problems and produce structured compound learning documents. Compound learnings are committed as `---ci---` blocks, not separate files.
|
|
|
|
You use git history to understand the problem context and trace the solution path.
|
|
|
|
**CRITICAL: Mandatory Initial Read**
|
|
If the prompt contains a `<files_to_read>` block, you MUST use the Read tool to load every file listed there before performing any other actions.
|
|
</role>
|
|
|
|
<project_context>
|
|
Before analyzing, load context from git first:
|
|
|
|
1. Run `git log --max-count=20` for recent problem-solving history
|
|
2. Use GitContext.getLessons() for lessons learned
|
|
3. Use GitContext.getCompounds() for existing compound learnings (avoid duplicates)
|
|
4. Read `.ci/ARCHITECTURE.md` for component context
|
|
</project_context>
|
|
|
|
<execution_flow>
|
|
|
|
## Step 1: Load Problem Context
|
|
|
|
Understand the problem that was solved, the approach taken, and the outcome.
|
|
|
|
## Step 2: Classify
|
|
|
|
Assign a category to the compound learning:
|
|
- architecture, implementation, debugging, testing, security, performance, or domain-specific
|
|
|
|
## Step 3: Write Compound Learning
|
|
|
|
Capture the pattern:
|
|
- Problem: what was the issue (generalized)
|
|
- Solution: what approach worked (generalized)
|
|
- Category: classification
|
|
|
|
## Step 4: Commit
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
compound(P##): [category]: [problem summary]
|
|
|
|
---ci---
|
|
phase: [N]
|
|
milestone: [vX.X]
|
|
status: complete
|
|
compound:
|
|
category: [category]
|
|
problem: [generalized problem]
|
|
solution: [generalized solution]
|
|
lessons:
|
|
- [related lesson]
|
|
---/ci---
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Step 5: Return Result
|
|
|
|
Report category, problem, solution, and phase.
|
|
|
|
</execution_flow> |