557d46984e
* docs(#2782): how-to for declaring a reviewer lane in a capability ADR-2782 shipped the Reviewer Lane capability surface in 1.9.0, but the only documentation was reference (capability-manifest.md) and rationale (ADR-2782). A capability author had no task-oriented path from "I have a review CLI" to "/gsd:review invokes it". Adds docs/how-to/ship-a-reviewer-lane.md: role selection, the spawn and openai-http worked examples, federated config ownership, the review-lane query surface as the verification step, what the install disclosure and egress-host re-verification mean for the author, and the data-only boundary with the two named CLIs that do not fit today. Also corrects the manifest reference's `invoke` row, which understated three enums against the shipped validator: promptChannel omitted `argv`, effortChannel omitted `env`, and the openai-http sub-shape plus the required-with-file-arg `outputArg` were undocumented entirely. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * docs(#2782): correct four claims found by the two orthogonal reviews Security review (1 major, 2 minor): - "a reserved slug" implied the gsd-/anthropic- namespace rule, which guards the capability id, not reviewer.slug. The slug guard is isReservedName (__proto__/constructor/prototype), a prototype-pollution barrier. Both rules are now stated and kept apart. - Added ADR-2782 D5's own caveat verbatim: disclosure and host pinning make the channel visible, pinned and revocable, not safe, and consent-at-install is a weaker gate for a standing egress channel than for a hook. - Named integrity/SHA pinning and engines.gsd as the controls that make the disclosure tamper-evident and the version range enforceable. Correctness review (1 major, 1 minor): - Claimed a name collision is "a hard failure at install". It is not. installCapability never runs validateCrossCapability; the check runs in loadRegistry, and a colliding overlay is dropped from acceptedMap with a warning while the install reports success. Documented as the quiet failure mode it is, with the symptom to look for. - The feature-only field list omitted hooks and activationKey, both of which FEATURE_FIELDS_FORBIDDEN_ON_REVIEWER rejects. Both worked examples re-validated against validateCapability() -> []. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * docs(#2782): restore Kimi Code to the cross-AI reviewer list set-up-cross-ai-review.md named eleven reviewers; twelve lanes ship. The kimi-code lane (added by #2718, declared as manifest data by #2798) was never added here — the same roster-drift class as #2781, which #2800's parity gate covers for COMMANDS.md and FEATURES.md but not for how-to prose. Also points readers at the declared-lane model rather than a static list: the roster is now generated, a capability can ship its own lane, and `gsd-tools review-lane sections` answers "what do I actually have". Verified against the twelve declared bodies in capabilities/*/capability.json. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * docs(#2782): use the invocation form the runtime descriptors actually declare The new guide used /gsd:review. Nothing in this repo produces that form. - capability-validator VALID_COMMAND_STYLES is {slash-hyphen, shell-var}; there is no colon/namespaced style in the vocabulary at all. - 18 of 19 runtime capabilities declare commandStyle "slash-hyphen", claude included; codex is "shell-var". Every artifactLayout prefix is "gsd-". - A plain-file command install never namespaces, so .claude/commands/ gsd-review.md is typed /gsd-review. - The Claude Code plugin surface would namespace on plugin.json "name", which is "gsd-core" -- so the plugin form would be /gsd-core:review. The commands/gsd/ subdirectory is cosmetic and contributes nothing to the invoked name. So /gsd:review is neither the installed form nor the plugin form. Uses /gsd-review, matching set-up-cross-ai-review.md and the 18 descriptors. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * docs(#2782): state that lane listing is not wired yet The guide could describe authoring, validating, and installing a lane but implied a publishing path that does not exist. Neither discoverability catalog can accept one: a Community Capability Registry entry requires a non-empty loopExtensionPoints plus hookKinds, and a role:"reviewer" capability is forbidden from declaring steps/contributions/gates, so both fields are unsatisfiable rather than merely unset. The EoS Registry is ADR-1239 host integrations, which a lane is not. The registry schema predates the reviewer role by 17 days (#2182 Jul 11, ADR-2782 Jul 28) and registry-schema.cjs has zero occurrences of "reviewer". Tracked for a 1.9.x point release by #2904. Says so explicitly, and tells authors NOT to file a loop extension point they do not use to get past validation -- a schema satisfiable only by lying is one that will be lied to. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * chore(#2782): backfill PR number and fix the changeset invocation form pr: 0 -> 2906. Also corrects /gsd:review -> /gsd-review in the fragment body. The fragment renders into CHANGELOG.md, which is a reader-facing docs surface and is never passed through the install-time converter -- so the colon form would ship the #2903 drift into a permanent release artifact. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * docs(#2907): propagate the invocation-form fix and restore lane order Two findings from an isolated review of the post-review delta. - docs/README.md and develop-a-capability.md still said /gsd:review in the cross-links added for the new guide. The form was corrected in the guide itself but not in the two entries pointing at it, leaving three docs making the same claim in two different forms. - set-up-cross-ai-review.md inserted Kimi Code between Antigravity and Ollama. REVIEWER_LANES is ordered by write_reviews order and kimi-code is 12th, appended after llama_cpp; the prose list mirrored declaration order before this change and now does again. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Test <test@example.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
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.