takt/resources/global/en/workflows/default.yaml

# Default TAKT Workflow
# Plan -> Coder -> AI Review -> Reviewers (parallel: Architect + Security) -> Supervisor Approval
#
# Boilerplate sections (Workflow Context, User Request, Previous Response,
# Additional User Inputs, Instructions heading) are auto-injected by buildInstruction().
# Only step-specific content belongs in instruction_template.
#
# Template Variables (available in instruction_template):
#   {iteration}         - Workflow-wide turn count (total steps executed across all agents)
#   {max_iterations}    - Maximum iterations allowed for the workflow
#   {step_iteration}    - Per-step iteration count (how many times THIS step has been executed)
#   {previous_response} - Output from the previous step (only when pass_previous_response: true)
#   {report_dir}        - Report directory name (e.g., "20250126-143052-task-summary")
#
# Step-level Fields:
#   report:  - Report file(s) for the step (auto-injected as Report File/Files in Workflow Context)
#              Single: report: 00-plan.md
#              Multiple: report:
#                          - Scope: 01-coder-scope.md
#                          - Decisions: 02-coder-decisions.md

name: default
description: Standard development workflow with planning and specialized reviews

max_iterations: 30

initial_step: plan

steps:
  - name: plan
    edit: false
    agent: ../agents/default/planner.md
    report:
      name: 00-plan.md
      format: |
        ```markdown
        # Task Plan

        ## Original Request
        {User's request as-is}

        ## Analysis Results

        ### Objective
        {What needs to be achieved}

        ### Scope
        {Impact scope}

        ### Implementation Approach
        {How to proceed}

        ## Clarifications Needed (if any)
        - {Unclear points or items requiring confirmation}
        ```
    allowed_tools:
      - Read
      - Glob
      - Grep
      - Write
      - Bash
      - WebSearch
      - WebFetch
    rules:
      - condition: Requirements are clear and implementable
        next: implement
      - condition: User is asking a question (not an implementation task)
        next: COMPLETE
      - condition: Requirements unclear, insufficient info
        next: ABORT
        appendix: |
          Clarifications needed:
          - {Question 1}
          - {Question 2}
    pass_previous_response: true
    instruction_template: |
      Analyze the task and create an implementation plan.

      **Note:** If returned from implement step (Previous Response exists),
      review and revise the plan based on that feedback (replan).

      **Tasks (for implementation tasks):**
      1. Understand the requirements
      2. Identify impact scope
      3. Decide implementation approach

  - name: implement
    edit: true
    agent: ../agents/default/coder.md
    session: refresh
    report:
      - Scope: 01-coder-scope.md
      - Decisions: 02-coder-decisions.md
    allowed_tools:
      - Read
      - Glob
      - Grep
      - Edit
      - Write
      - Bash
      - WebSearch
      - WebFetch
    permission_mode: edit
    rules:
      - condition: Implementation complete
        next: ai_review
      - condition: No implementation (report only)
        next: ai_review
      - condition: Cannot proceed, insufficient info
        next: ai_review
      - condition: User input required
        next: implement
        requires_user_input: true
        interactive_only: true
    instruction_template: |
      Follow the plan from the plan step and implement.
      Refer to the plan report ({report:00-plan.md}) and proceed with implementation.
      Use only the Report Directory files shown in Workflow Context. Do not search or open reports outside that directory.

      **Scope report format (create at implementation start):**
      ```markdown
      # Change Scope Declaration

      ## Task
      {One-line task summary}

      ## Planned Changes
      | Type | File |
      |------|------|
      | Create | `src/example.ts` |
      | Modify | `src/routes.ts` |

      ## Estimated Size
      Small / Medium / Large

      ## Impact Scope
      - {Affected modules or features}
      ```

      **Decisions report format (on completion, only if decisions were made):**
      ```markdown
      # Decision Log

      ## 1. {Decision Content}
      - **Background**: {Why the decision was needed}
      - **Options Considered**: {List of options}
      - **Reason**: {Why this option was chosen}
      ```

      **Required output (include headings)**
      ## Work done
      - {summary of work performed}
      ## Changes made
      - {summary of code changes}
      ## Test results
      - {command and outcome}

      **No-implementation handling (required)**

  - name: ai_review
    edit: false
    agent: ../agents/default/ai-antipattern-reviewer.md
    pass_previous_response: true
    report:
      name: 03-ai-review.md
      format: |
        ```markdown
        # AI-Generated Code Review

        ## Result: APPROVE / REJECT

        ## Summary
        {One sentence summarizing result}

        ## Verified Items
        | Aspect | Result | Notes |
        |--------|--------|-------|
        | Assumption validity | ✅ | - |
        | API/Library existence | ✅ | - |
        | Context fit | ✅ | - |
        | Scope | ✅ | - |

        ## Issues (if REJECT)
        | # | Category | Location | Issue |
        |---|----------|----------|-------|
        | 1 | Hallucinated API | `src/file.ts:23` | Non-existent method |
        ```

        **Cognitive load reduction rules:**
        - No issues -> Summary 1 line + check table only (10 lines or less)
        - Issues found -> + Issues in table format (25 lines or less)
    allowed_tools:
      - Read
      - Glob
      - Grep
      - Write
      - WebSearch
      - WebFetch
    rules:
      - condition: No AI-specific issues
        next: reviewers
      - condition: AI-specific issues found
        next: ai_fix
    instruction_template: |
      Review the code for AI-specific issues:
      - Assumption validation
      - Plausible but wrong patterns
      - Context fit with existing codebase
      - Scope creep detection

  - name: ai_fix
    edit: true
    agent: ../agents/default/coder.md
    session: refresh
    allowed_tools:
      - Read
      - Glob
      - Grep
      - Edit
      - Write
      - Bash
      - WebSearch
      - WebFetch
    permission_mode: edit
    rules:
      - condition: AI issues fixed
        next: ai_review
      - condition: No fix needed (verified target files/spec)
        next: plan
      - condition: Cannot proceed, insufficient info
        next: plan
    instruction_template: |
      **This is AI Review iteration {step_iteration}.**

      If this is iteration 2 or later, it means your previous fixes were not actually applied.
      **Your belief that you "already fixed it" is wrong.**

      **First, acknowledge:**
      - Files you thought were "fixed" are actually not fixed
      - Your understanding of previous work is incorrect
      - You need to start from zero

      **Required actions:**
      1. Open all flagged files with Read tool (drop assumptions, verify facts)
      2. Search for problem code with grep to confirm it exists
      3. Fix confirmed problems with Edit tool
      4. Run tests to verify (`./gradlew :backend:test` etc.)
      5. Report specifically "what you checked and what you fixed"

      **Report format:**
      - ❌ "Already fixed"
      - ✅ "Checked file X at L123, found problem Y, fixed to Z"

      **Absolutely prohibited:**
      - Reporting "fixed" without opening files

      **Handling "no fix needed" (required)**
      - Do not claim "no fix needed" unless you can show the checked target file(s) for each AI Review issue
      - If an issue involves generated code or spec sync, and you cannot verify the source spec, output the tag for "Unable to proceed with fixes"
      - When "no fix needed", output the tag for "Unable to proceed with fixes" and include the reason + checked scope

      **Required output (include headings)**
      ## Files checked
      - {path:line}
      ## Searches run
      - {command and summary}
      ## Fixes applied
      - {what changed}
      ## Test results
      - {command and outcome}
      - Judging based on assumptions
      - Leaving problems that AI Reviewer REJECTED
    pass_previous_response: true

  - name: reviewers
    parallel:
      - name: arch-review
        edit: false
        agent: ../agents/default/architecture-reviewer.md
        report:
          name: 04-architect-review.md
          format: |
            ```markdown
            # Architecture Review

            ## Result: APPROVE / REJECT

            ## Summary
            {1-2 sentences summarizing result}

            ## Reviewed Perspectives
            - [x] Structure & Design
            - [x] Code Quality
            - [x] Change Scope

            ## Issues (if REJECT)
            | # | Scope | Location | Issue | Fix |
            |---|-------|----------|-------|-----|
            | 1 | In-scope | `src/file.ts:42` | Issue description | Fix method |

            Scope: "In-scope" (fixable now) / "Out-of-scope" (existing issue, non-blocking)

            ## Existing Issues (informational, non-blocking)
            - {Record of existing issues unrelated to current change}
            ```

            **Cognitive load reduction rules:**
            - APPROVE -> Summary only (5 lines or less)
            - REJECT -> Issues in table format (30 lines or less)
        allowed_tools:
          - Read
          - Glob
          - Grep
          - Write
          - WebSearch
          - WebFetch
        rules:
          - condition: approved
          - condition: needs_fix
        instruction_template: |
          Focus on **architecture and design** review. Do NOT review AI-specific issues (that's the ai_review step).

          Review the changes and provide feedback.

      - name: security-review
        edit: false
        agent: ../agents/default/security-reviewer.md
        report:
          name: 05-security-review.md
          format: |
            ```markdown
            # Security Review

            ## Result: APPROVE / REJECT

            ## Severity: None / Low / Medium / High / Critical

            ## Check Results
            | Category | Result | Notes |
            |----------|--------|-------|
            | Injection | ✅ | - |
            | Auth/Authz | ✅ | - |
            | Data Protection | ✅ | - |
            | Dependencies | ✅ | - |

            ## Vulnerabilities (if REJECT)
            | # | Severity | Type | Location | Fix |
            |---|----------|------|----------|-----|
            | 1 | High | SQLi | `src/db.ts:42` | Use parameterized query |

            ## Warnings (non-blocking)
            - {Security recommendations}
            ```

            **Cognitive load reduction rules:**
            - No issues -> Check table only (10 lines or less)
            - Warnings -> + Warnings 1-2 lines (15 lines or less)
            - Vulnerabilities -> + Table format (30 lines or less)
        allowed_tools:
          - Read
          - Glob
          - Grep
          - Write
          - WebSearch
          - WebFetch
        rules:
          - condition: approved
          - condition: needs_fix
        instruction_template: |
          Perform security review on the changes. Check for vulnerabilities including:
          - Injection attacks (SQL, Command, XSS)
          - Authentication/Authorization issues
          - Data exposure risks
          - Cryptographic weaknesses
    rules:
      - condition: all("approved")
        next: supervise
      - condition: any("needs_fix")
        next: fix

  - name: fix
    edit: true
    agent: ../agents/default/coder.md
    allowed_tools:
      - Read
      - Glob
      - Grep
      - Edit
      - Write
      - Bash
      - WebSearch
      - WebFetch
    permission_mode: edit
    rules:
      - condition: Fix complete
        next: reviewers
      - condition: Cannot proceed, insufficient info
        next: plan
    instruction_template: |
      Address the feedback from the reviewers.
      The "Original User Request" is reference information, not the latest instruction.
      Review the session conversation history and fix the issues raised by the reviewers.


      **Required output (include headings)**
      ## Work done
      - {summary of work performed}
      ## Changes made
      - {summary of code changes}
      ## Test results
      - {command and outcome}
      ## Evidence
      - {key files/grep/diff/log evidence you verified}
    pass_previous_response: true

  - name: supervise
    edit: false
    agent: ../agents/default/supervisor.md
    report:
      - Validation: 06-supervisor-validation.md
      - Summary: summary.md
    allowed_tools:
      - Read
      - Glob
      - Grep
      - Write
      - Bash
      - WebSearch
      - WebFetch
    rules:
      - condition: All checks passed
        next: COMPLETE
      - condition: Requirements unmet, tests failing, build errors
        next: plan
    instruction_template: |
      Run tests, verify the build, and perform final approval.

      **Workflow Overall Review:**
      1. Does the implementation match the plan ({report:00-plan.md})?
      2. Were all review step issues addressed?
      3. Was the original task objective achieved?

      **Review Reports:** Read all reports in Report Directory and
      check for any unaddressed improvement suggestions.

      **Validation report format:**
      ```markdown
      # Final Validation Results

      ## Result: APPROVE / REJECT

      ## Validation Summary
      | Item | Status | Verification Method |
      |------|--------|---------------------|
      | Requirements met | ✅ | Matched against requirements list |
      | Tests | ✅ | `npm test` (N passed) |
      | Build | ✅ | `npm run build` succeeded |
      | Functional check | ✅ | Main flows verified |

      ## Deliverables
      - Created: {Created files}
      - Modified: {Modified files}

      ## Incomplete Items (if REJECT)
      | # | Item | Reason |
      |---|------|--------|
      | 1 | {Item} | {Reason} |
      ```

      **Summary report format (only if APPROVE):**
      ```markdown
      # Task Completion Summary

      ## Task
      {Original request in 1-2 sentences}

      ## Result
      ✅ Complete

      ## Changes
      | Type | File | Summary |
      |------|------|---------|
      | Create | `src/file.ts` | Summary description |

      ## Review Results
      | Review | Result |
      |--------|--------|
      | Architect | ✅ APPROVE |
      | AI Review | ✅ APPROVE |
      | Security | ✅ APPROVE |
      | Supervisor | ✅ APPROVE |

      ## Verification Commands
      ```bash
      npm test
      npm run build
      ```
      ```