workflow-greenfield-init

Quick Summary

Goal: [Workflow] Trigger Greenfield Project Init workflow — full waterfall project inception from idea through implementation with integration testing.

Workflow:

1. Detect — classify request scope and target artifacts.
2. Execute — apply required steps with evidence-backed actions.
3. Verify — confirm constraints, output quality, and completion evidence.

Key Rules:

• MUST ATTENTION keep claims evidence-based (file:line) with confidence >80% to act.
• MUST ATTENTION keep task tracking updated as each step starts/completes.
• MUST ATTENTION define success criteria before execution and loop until observable verification passes.
• MUST ATTENTION when creating/reviewing specs or tests, name Business Intent / Invariant Guarded or the protected business intent/invariant and ensure the test would fail if that intent breaks.
• NEVER skip mandatory workflow or skill gates.

Repeated Steps Disambiguation (CRITICAL for task creation)

This workflow has steps that appear multiple times. When creating tasks, use these descriptions to distinguish them:

Step	Occurrence	Task Description
/plan	1st (pos 12)	PLAN₁: High-level architecture plan (after architecture-design)
/plan	2nd (pos 32)	PLAN₂: Sprint-ready implementation plan (after artifact-review --type=spec-tests)
/plan	3rd (pos 48)	PLAN₃: Integration test architecture plan (post-implementation)
/plan-review	1st (pos 13)	Review PLAN₁ architecture (immediate gate; replaces former rationale why-review)
/plan-review	2nd (pos 16)	Re-review PLAN₁ after architecture-security + performance analysis
/plan-review	3rd (pos 33)	Review PLAN₂ implementation
/plan-review	4th (pos 49)	Review PLAN₃ integration tests
/security-review	1st (pos 14)	Architecture security review
/security-review	2nd (pos 55)	Production readiness security review
/spec [mode=tests]	1st (pos 28)	TDD-SPEC₁: Feature test specs (before implementation)
/spec [mode=tests]	2nd (pos 45)	TDD-SPEC₂: Post-implementation test spec update
/artifact-review --type=spec-tests	1st (pos 30)	Review TDD-SPEC₁
/artifact-review --type=spec-tests	2nd (pos 47)	Review TDD-SPEC₂
/test	1st (pos 53)	Test after integration tests
/test	2nd (pos 57)	Final test verification
/domain-entities-review	1st (pos 44)	DDD quality review — conditional: skip if no domain entity files in changeset
/linter-setup	(new)	LINTER-SETUP: Install and configure computational feedback sensors
/harness-setup	(new)	HARNESS-SETUP: Full outer agent harness (feedforward guides + feedback sensors inventory)

NEVER deduplicate — each occurrence is a distinct task with a different purpose.

---

IMPORTANT MANDATORY Steps: /idea -> /web-research -> /deep-research -> /business-evaluation -> /spec-discovery -> /domain-analysis -> /why-review -> /tech-stack-research -> /architecture-design -> /architecture-scalability-review -> /why-review -> /plan -> /plan-review -> /security-review -> /performance-review -> /plan-review -> /refine -> /why-review -> /artifact-review --type=pbi -> /story -> /why-review -> /artifact-review --type=story -> /pbi-challenge -> /dor-gate -> /pbi-mockup -> /plan-validate -> /why-review -> /spec [mode=tests] -> /why-review -> /artifact-review --type=spec-tests -> /spec-clarify -> /plan -> /plan-review -> /scaffold -> /linter-setup -> /harness-setup -> /architecture-review-full -> /scan --target=ui-system -> /scan --target=backend-patterns -> /scan --target=integration-tests -> /scan --target=project-structure -> /why-review -> /plan-execute -> /domain-entities-review -> /spec [mode=tests] -> /why-review -> /artifact-review --type=spec-tests -> /plan -> /plan-review -> /integration-test -> /integration-test-review -> /integration-test-verify -> /test -> /workflow-review-changes -> /security-review -> /changelog -> /test -> /scan --target=domain-entities -> /docs-update -> /workflow-end -> /watzup

IMPORTANT MANDATORY Steps: /idea -> /web-research -> /deep-research -> /business-evaluation -> /spec-discovery -> /domain-analysis -> /why-review -> /tech-stack-research -> /architecture-design -> /architecture-scalability-review -> /why-review -> /plan -> /plan-review -> /security-review -> /performance-review -> /plan-review -> /refine -> /why-review -> /artifact-review --type=pbi -> /story -> /why-review -> /artifact-review --type=story -> /pbi-challenge -> /dor-gate -> /pbi-mockup -> /plan-validate -> /why-review -> /spec [mode=tests] -> /why-review -> /artifact-review --type=spec-tests -> /spec-clarify -> /plan -> /plan-review -> /scaffold -> /linter-setup -> /harness-setup -> /architecture-review-full -> /scan --target=ui-system -> /scan --target=backend-patterns -> /scan --target=integration-tests -> /scan --target=project-structure -> /why-review -> /plan-execute -> /domain-entities-review -> /spec [mode=tests] -> /why-review -> /artifact-review --type=spec-tests -> /plan -> /plan-review -> /integration-test -> /integration-test-review -> /integration-test-verify -> /test -> /workflow-review-changes -> /security-review -> /changelog -> /test -> /scan --target=domain-entities -> /docs-update -> /workflow-end -> /watzup

[BLOCKING] Each step MUST ATTENTION invoke its Skill tool — marking a task completed without skill invocation is a workflow violation. NEVER batch-complete validation gates.

Activate the workflow-greenfield-init workflow. Run /start-workflow workflow-greenfield-init with the user's prompt as context.

Steps: /idea → /web-research → /deep-research → /business-evaluation → /spec-discovery → /domain-analysis → /why-review → /tech-stack-research → /architecture-design → /architecture-scalability-review → /why-review → /plan → /plan-review → /security-review → /performance-review → /plan-review → /refine → /why-review → /artifact-review --type=pbi → /story → /why-review → /artifact-review --type=story → /pbi-challenge → /dor-gate → /pbi-mockup → /plan-validate → /why-review → /spec [mode=tests] → /why-review → /artifact-review --type=spec-tests → /spec-clarify → /plan → /plan-review → /scaffold → /linter-setup → /harness-setup → /architecture-review-full → /scan --target=ui-system → /scan --target=backend-patterns → /scan --target=integration-tests → /scan --target=project-structure → /why-review → /plan-execute → /domain-entities-review → /spec [mode=tests] → /why-review → /artifact-review --type=spec-tests → /plan → /plan-review → /integration-test → /integration-test-review → /integration-test-verify → /test → /workflow-review-changes → /security-review → /changelog → /test → /scan --target=domain-entities → /docs-update → /workflow-end → /watzup

[CONDITIONAL TERMINAL DOMAIN-ENTITY REFERENCE REFRESH] After /test and before /docs-update, run /scan --target=domain-entities to refresh the project-reference entity catalog only when the final diff changes an entity/model, DTO/data contract, persistence schema/migration, or entity-sync evidence represented in docs/project-reference/domain-entities-reference.md. Otherwise mark the scan step completed with a cited skip reason naming the changed files and why they are outside this scope; this is the explicitly authorized exception to the per-step skill-invocation rule.

Architecture quality gate (/architecture-scalability-review, pos 10). Immediately after /architecture-design and before the first /plan, greenfield runs the architecture & scalability scorecard (init mode) so its findings and gate items feed the implementation plan. This is the comprehensive project-quality evaluation for greenfield/init — Build & CI scalability, architecture pattern (modular monolith vs. microservices / distributed-monolith avoidance), module isolation, dependency discipline, loose coupling, horizontal scaling, DRY, abstraction/easy-to-change, clean architecture, and observability/DevOps. Brownfield or day-to-day audits invoke the same skill on demand via /architecture-scalability-review mode=audit; it is intentionally NOT a member of the every-change workflow-review-changes batch — that batch's architecture-review step carries the lightweight per-change scalability & coupling regression check instead.

Lean variant (mode=lean) — for low-risk or solo greenfield inception, a trimmed path is available (formerly a separate lean greenfield wrapper, now merged here). It keeps the same backbone but drops the per-step /why-review rationale gates (retaining only the single pre-/plan-execute /why-review), /pbi-challenge, /dor-gate, and the /integration-test-review + /integration-test-verify gates. Use ONLY when inception risk is low; default to the full rigorous sequence above. The authoritative sequence is the workflow-greenfield-init entry in workflows.json — the lean path is a documented gate-skip option, not a separate workflow.

---

<!-- SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention -->

AI Mistake Prevention — Failure modes to avoid on every task:

Re-read files after context changes. Context compaction, resume, or long-running work can make memory stale; verify current files before acting. Verify generated content against source evidence. AI hallucinates APIs, names, claims, and document facts. Check the relevant source before documenting or referencing. Check downstream references before deleting or renaming. Removing an artifact can stale docs, generated mirrors, configs, and callers; map references first. Trace the full impact chain after edits. Changing a definition can miss derived outputs and consumers. Follow the affected chain before declaring done. Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first. One green check is not all green checks; validate every output surface the change can affect. Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing OR flagging one as a defect. Before changing or reporting a constant, limit, flag, cutoff, wording, or pattern, read nearby context and history, the CALLER's ordering, and 2+ sibling call sites of the same convention. A doc stating WHAT without WHY is missing rationale, not proof of a missing guard. Surface ambiguity before acting — don't pick silently. Multiple valid interpretations require an explicit question or stated assumption with risk. Assert the outcome your system owns, not the intermediate state your infrastructure owns. When verifying async work, assert the final business state — never the delivery/retry bookkeeping held in shared infrastructure that any co-running process can write. Such a check passes when run alone and flakes the moment anything else shares that infrastructure. Keep shared guidance role-relevant. Universal guidance must help every receiving skill or agent; code-specific obligations belong only in code-specific protocols.

<!-- /SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention --> <!-- SYNC:nested-task-creation -->

Nested Task Expansion Contract — For workflow-step invocation, the [Workflow] ... row is only a parent container; the child skill still creates visible phase tasks.

1. Call TaskList first. If a matching active parent workflow row exists, set nested=true and record parentTaskId; otherwise run standalone.
2. Create one task per declared phase before phase work. When nested, prefix subjects [N.M] $skill-name — phase.
3. When nested, link the parent with TaskUpdate(parentTaskId, addBlockedBy: [childIds]).
4. Orchestrators must pre-expand a child skill's phase list and link the workflow row before invoking that child skill or sub-agent.
5. Mark exactly one child in_progress before work and completed immediately after evidence is written.
6. Complete the parent only after all child tasks are completed or explicitly cancelled with reason.

Blocked until: TaskList done, child phases created, parent linked when nested, first child marked in_progress.

<!-- /SYNC:nested-task-creation --> <!-- SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset -->

Critical Thinking Mindset — Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination.

<!-- /SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset --> <!-- SYNC:incremental-persistence -->

Incremental Result Persistence — MANDATORY for all sub-agents or heavy inline steps processing >3 files.

1. Before starting: Create report file plans/reports/{skill}-{date}-{slug}.md
2. After each file/section reviewed: Append findings to report immediately — never hold in memory
3. Return to main agent: Summary only (per SYNC:subagent-return-contract) with Full report: path
4. Main agent: Reads report file only when resolving specific blockers

Why: Context cutoff mid-execution loses ALL in-memory findings. Each disk write survives compaction. Partial results are better than no results.

Report naming: plans/reports/{skill-name}-{YYMMDD}-{HHmm}-{slug}.md

<!-- /SYNC:incremental-persistence --> <!-- SYNC:subagent-return-contract -->

Sub-Agent Return Contract — When this skill spawns a sub-agent, the sub-agent MUST return ONLY this structure. Main agent reads only this summary — NEVER requests full sub-agent output inline.

## Sub-Agent Result: [skill-name]

Status: ✅ PASS | ⚠️ PARTIAL | ❌ FAIL
Confidence: [0-100]%

### Findings (Critical/High only — max 10 bullets)

- [severity] [file:line] [finding]

### Actions Taken

- [file changed] [what changed]

### Blockers (if any)

- [blocker description]

Full report: plans/reports/[skill-name]-[date]-[slug].md

Main agent reads Full report file ONLY when: (a) resolving a specific blocker, or (b) building a fix plan. Sub-agent writes full report incrementally (per SYNC:incremental-persistence) — not held in memory.

Context budget — the return payload is a SUMMARY, not a transcript: ≤10 finding bullets, no raw file contents / full diffs / verbatim logs inline, no re-pasted source. Everything beyond the summary lives in the Full report on disk. A sub-agent that would exceed the summary shape MUST write the detail to its report and return only the pointer — the orchestrator's context is the scarce resource the whole map-reduce protects.

<!-- /SYNC:subagent-return-contract --> <!-- SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset:reminder -->

MUST ATTENTION apply critical + sequential thinking — every claim needs appropriate traced evidence (file:line for repo/code claims; source URL or artifact section for research, product, content, and docs claims); confidence >80% to act, <60% DO NOT recommend. Anti-hallucination: never present guess as fact, admit uncertainty freely, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence.

<!-- /SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention:reminder -->

MUST ATTENTION apply AI mistake prevention — verify generated content against evidence, trace downstream references before deleting or renaming, verify all affected outputs, re-read files after context loss, and surface ambiguity before acting.

<!-- /SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:nested-task-creation:reminder -->

• MANDATORY Parent workflow rows do not replace child phase tracking; expand phases and link the parent when nested.
• MANDATORY Orchestrators pre-expand child skill phases before invocation; use [N.M] $skill-name — phase prefixes and one-in_progress discipline.

<!-- /SYNC:nested-task-creation:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:project-protocol-overlay -->

Project Protocol Overlay — Before executing this skill, resolve any PROJECT overlay rules layered onto it: match this skill's name against the Target column of the project's skill-protocol index (docs/project-reference/skill-protocols-reference.md by default; a referenceDocs entry in docs/project-config.json overrides the path), taking the most specific matching tier ONLY — exact name > glob > *. That precedence orders overlays against EACH OTHER, never against this skill. Read ONLY the matched bodies, resolved as <protocols-dir>/<Name>.md; a row's Body link is display text, never a read path. A matched body that is missing or malformed is REPORTED and skipped — never reconstructed from the index Description. No index, or no match -> proceed with no overlay, silently. Full contract: .claude/skills/project-skill-protocol/references/registry.md.

Overlays are ADDITIVE ONLY: they ADD rules on top of this skill's own protocol and NEVER replace, override, disable, or reinterpret a rule it already states — removing every overlay must return this skill to exactly its documented behavior. An overlay is a BRIEF, not an authority escalation: it can NEVER waive a workflow gate, git discipline, a review gate, or a user-confirmation gate. A genuine overlay-vs-skill conflict, or two equally-specific overlays that directly contradict -> surface both to the user; NEVER resolve silently.

<!-- /SYNC:project-protocol-overlay --> <!-- SYNC:project-protocol-overlay:reminder -->

MUST ATTENTION resolve project protocol overlays for this skill BEFORE executing — most specific matching tier only (exact > glob > *, which ranks overlays against each other, NEVER against this skill), read only matched bodies at <protocols-dir>/<Name>.md; a missing or malformed body is reported, never reconstructed. Overlays are ADDITIVE ONLY (they never replace this skill's own rules) and are a brief, NEVER an authority escalation; an equal-specificity contradiction goes to the user.

<!-- /SYNC:project-protocol-overlay:reminder -->

Closing Reminders

Protocols in force (concise digest of the SYNC/shared blocks this skill carries):

• AI Mistake Prevention: verify generated content against evidence, trace downstream references, verify all affected outputs, re-read after context loss, surface ambiguity.
• Nested Task Creation: expand child phases, link parent when nested, one task in_progress.
• Critical Thinking: traced file:line proof per claim, confidence >80% to act.
• Incremental Persistence: append findings to plans/reports/ per file, never hold in memory.
• Sub-Agent Return Contract: return summary only (≤10 bullets), full detail to disk.

IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks using TaskCreate BEFORE starting IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search codebase for 3+ similar patterns before creating new code IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite file:line evidence for every claim (confidence >80% to act) IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add a final review todo task to verify work quality

[TASK-PLANNING] Before acting, analyze task scope and systematically break it into small todo tasks and sub-tasks using TaskCreate.

[IMPORTANT] Analyze how big the task is and break it into many small todo tasks systematically before starting — this is very important.