46f14c621e
* test(3583): failing-first coverage for one percent per write state update-progress computes plan throughput (summaries/plans) for stdout and the body Progress bar, while the same write re-derives frontmatter progress.percent as min(planFraction, phaseFraction). Neither consults the other, so mid-phase the file contradicts itself and state json disagrees with the verb that just wrote it. These tests fail on that: equality across stdout, body bar, frontmatter and state json on fixtures where the two fractions differ, plus a derivation-parity test that fails if completedPhases is ever derived by summary parity instead of verification-passed status. Also updates three pre-existing tests that pinned stdout to the plan-throughput value (50->0, 50->0, 100->0). Those fixtures have summarized-but-unverified phases, so the old expectations encoded the bug; changing them IS the fix, as the issue states explicitly. * fix(3583): one percent per write — route the verb through the shared computation RED proven at 7dbbb2d2: 9 failures — the new cross-surface equality tests, the withhold test, and the pre-existing tests whose expectations encoded the bug. state update-progress computed plan throughput (summaries/plans) for stdout and the body Progress bar, while the SAME write re-derived frontmatter progress.percent as min(planFraction, phaseFraction) through a separate path. Neither consulted the other, so on any project where plan throughput ran ahead of phase completion — the normal mid-phase state — the file contradicted itself and state json disagreed with the verb that had just written it. Exit 0, no signal. This is not a dispute about which metric is right. The min cap is deliberate (#3242 Bug B) and is untouched; the fix aligns the printed and body values WITH it. Verified by diff: computeProgressPercent's definition and cmdStateSync are both unmodified. The verb now takes its percent from buildStateFrontmatter — the single owner of the isPhaseComplete-based completedPhases count and the ROADMAP-union totalPhases logic that the frontmatter sync later uses inside the same read-modify-write. Both calls hit the same disk-scan cache against the same on-disk state, so they cannot disagree. Reusing that owner, rather than re-deriving completedPhases locally, is the point: a second almost-identical derivation is the very defect class being fixed, and a parity test now fails if anyone swaps it for summary parity. The first cut fell back to plan throughput when the shared computation withheld. That reintroduced the defect in a rarer case — stdout would print a number the frontmatter deliberately did not contain — so it is gone. The verb now withholds in the same shape as its existing #3217 and #3233 guards. That path is reachable, not theoretical: a bare vX.Y token in ROADMAP prose with no versioned heading leaves the milestone unbounded while both existing guards see a COMPLETE scope. Covered by a test that also asserts state json omits the percent, proving it is the same withhold rather than a divergent local computation. Three pre-existing tests pinned stdout to plan throughput (50->0, 50->0, 100->0); their fixtures have summarized-but-unverified phases, so those expectations encoded the bug. Updating them is the fix, as the issue states. Fixes #3583 * fix(3583): source the reported counts from the same milestone window as the percent The adversarial pass found the first cut left the SAME defect one field over. cmdStateUpdateProgress still reported completed/total from the top-of-function scan, which calls listMilestonePhaseDirs with NO versionOverride — the auto-derived current milestone — while percent now came from buildStateFrontmatter, whose scan scopes by versionOverride: storedMilestone. getMilestonePhaseFilter shows those can select different milestone windows, and #3017's own comment warns about exactly that mis-bind. So a single JSON object could report a percent inconsistent with its own counts: the self-contradiction this issue was filed to close, relocated rather than removed. Counts now come from the same buildStateFrontmatter result as the percent. Proven on a real divergent-milestone fixture where a preamble phase leaks into the auto-derived scan but is excluded from the stored-milestone-scoped one: with the fix stashed the verb emits {percent:0, completed:1, total:2}; with it applied, {percent:0, completed:1, total:1}. The guard scan remains, gating only the #3217/#3233 withholds. Also corrected a comment that overstated caching. Only the phase/plan disk scan is shared between the two buildStateFrontmatter calls; getMilestoneInfo re-reads and re-parses ROADMAP.md and readGitHeadSha spawns a bounded git rev-parse, and both now run twice per invocation. Threading a precomputed frontmatter through the write seam to avoid it was rejected: that seam is the shared ADR-3408 §8.3 composition with three other callers and heavily-documented invariants, and this is not the change to renegotiate it. The comment now says what is and is not cached instead of implying the second call is free. Standards: six new assertions matched raw STATE.md body text the code under test had just produced — the pattern CONTRIBUTING bans by name. They now extract the body Progress field with the repo's own field extractor and assert the parsed percent, so the check survives rewording of the rendered bar. The acceptance criterion still verifies the bar; only what it asserts on moved. Also trimmed ~50 lines of narration around a ~15-line change into a named helper, and fixed a stale test comment that still claimed 100% next to assertions expecting 0%. * chore(3583): add changeset fragment * chore(3583): backfill changeset PR number (#3634) --------- Co-authored-by: sim <sim@local>
GSD Core
Git. Ship. Done.
English · Português · 简体中文 · 日本語 · 한국어
A light-weight meta-prompting, context engineering, and spec-driven development system for Claude Code, OpenCode, Antigravity CLI, Kimi CLI, Kilo, Codex, Copilot, Cursor, Windsurf, and more.
What is GSD Core
GSD Core is a context-engineering and spec-driven development framework that drives AI coding agents (Claude Code, Codex, Antigravity CLI, Kimi CLI, Copilot, Cursor, and more) through a disciplined phase loop. It solves context rot — the quality degradation that accumulates as an AI fills its context window — by running all heavy research, planning, and execution work in fresh-context subagents while keeping your main session lean.
How it works
Each milestone repeats the same five-step loop, one phase at a time:
- Discuss — capture implementation decisions before anything is planned
- Plan — research, decompose, and verify the plan fits a fresh context window
- Execute — run plans in parallel waves; each executor starts with a clean 200k-token context
- Verify — walk through what was built; diagnose and fix before declaring done
- Ship — create the PR, archive the phase, repeat for the next one
Quickstart
npx @opengsd/gsd-core@latest
The installer prompts for your runtime (Claude Code, OpenCode, Antigravity CLI, Kimi CLI, Kilo, Codex, Copilot, Cursor, Windsurf, and more) and whether to install globally or locally. The installer is required for cross-runtime compatibility — do not copy files from agents/ or commands/ directly.
On another runtime or without Node.js? See Install on your runtime.
Once installed, start a new project or onboard an existing repo:
/gsd-new-project # greenfield project
/gsd-onboard # existing codebase
New here? Follow Your first project for a guided walkthrough from install to first shipped phase, or Onboarding an existing codebase for brownfield setup.
Documentation
What's new in 1.7.0 → docs/whats-new-1.7.0.md
Tutorials — learning by doing:
How-to guides — task-focused recipes:
Reference — authoritative facts:
Explanation — concepts and design decisions:
Full index: docs/README.md. Other languages: 日本語 · 한국어 · Português · 简体中文.
Why it works
Most AI-coding setups fail at scale because context bloat silently degrades output quality, there is no shared memory between sessions, and nothing verifies that code actually works. GSD Core solves all three: heavy work runs in fresh subagents, structured artifacts like STATE.md and CONTEXT.md survive session boundaries, and the verify step walks through what was built and generates fix plans before a phase is declared done. See docs/explanation/context-engineering.md for the full reasoning.
Troubleshooting? See docs/how-to/recover-and-troubleshoot.md.
Community
| Project | Platform |
|---|---|
| gsd-opencode | Original OpenCode port |
| Discord | Community support |
Star History
License
MIT License. See LICENSE for details.
Claude Code is powerful. GSD Core makes it reliable.