Files
msd-core/commands/gsd/discuss-phase.md
Tom Boucher 18bb0149c8 feat: add workflow.discuss_mode assumptions config (#637)
Add codebase-first assumption-driven alternative to the interview-style
discuss-phase. New `workflow.discuss_mode: "assumptions"` config routes
to a separate workflow that spawns a gsd-assumptions-analyzer agent to
read 5-15 codebase files, surface assumptions with evidence, and ask
only for corrections (~2-4 interactions vs ~15-20).

- New gsd-assumptions-analyzer agent for deep codebase analysis
- New discuss-phase-assumptions.md workflow (15 steps)
- Command-level routing via dual @reference + process gate
- Identical CONTEXT.md output — downstream agents unaffected
- Existing discuss-phase.md workflow untouched (zero diff)
- Mode-aware plan-phase gate and progress display
- User documentation and integration tests
- Update agent count and list in copilot-install tests (17 → 18)

Closes #637

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-03-21 00:21:17 -04:00

4.2 KiB

name, description, argument-hint, allowed-tools
name description argument-hint allowed-tools
gsd:discuss-phase Gather phase context through adaptive questioning before planning. Use --auto to skip interactive questions (Claude picks recommended defaults). <phase> [--auto] [--batch] [--analyze] [--text]
Read
Write
Bash
Glob
Grep
AskUserQuestion
Task
mcp__context7__resolve-library-id
mcp__context7__query-docs
Extract implementation decisions that downstream agents need — researcher and planner will use CONTEXT.md to know what to investigate and what choices are locked.

How it works:

  1. Load prior context (PROJECT.md, REQUIREMENTS.md, STATE.md, prior CONTEXT.md files)
  2. Scout codebase for reusable assets and patterns
  3. Analyze phase — skip gray areas already decided in prior phases
  4. Present remaining gray areas — user selects which to discuss
  5. Deep-dive each selected area until satisfied
  6. Create CONTEXT.md with decisions that guide research and planning

Output: {phase_num}-CONTEXT.md — decisions clear enough that downstream agents can act without asking the user again

<execution_context> @/.claude/get-shit-done/workflows/discuss-phase.md @/.claude/get-shit-done/workflows/discuss-phase-assumptions.md @~/.claude/get-shit-done/templates/context.md </execution_context>

Phase number: $ARGUMENTS (required)

Context files are resolved in-workflow using init phase-op and roadmap/state tool calls.

**Mode routing:** ```bash DISCUSS_MODE=$(node "$HOME/.claude/get-shit-done/bin/gsd-tools.cjs" config-get workflow.discuss_mode 2>/dev/null || echo "discuss") ```

If DISCUSS_MODE is "assumptions": Follow the discuss-phase-assumptions.md workflow instead of the steps below. Skip all remaining steps in this process section.

If DISCUSS_MODE is "discuss" (or unset, or any other value): Continue with the steps below (current behavior).


  1. Validate phase number (error if missing or not in roadmap)
  2. Check if CONTEXT.md exists (offer update/view/skip if yes)
  3. Load prior context — Read PROJECT.md, REQUIREMENTS.md, STATE.md, and all prior CONTEXT.md files
  4. Scout codebase — Find reusable assets, patterns, and integration points
  5. Analyze phase — Check prior decisions, skip already-decided areas, generate remaining gray areas
  6. Present gray areas — Multi-select: which to discuss? Annotate with prior decisions + code context
  7. Deep-dive each area — 4 questions per area, code-informed options, Context7 for library choices
  8. Write CONTEXT.md — Sections match areas discussed + code_context section
  9. Offer next steps (research or plan)

CRITICAL: Scope guardrail

  • Phase boundary from ROADMAP.md is FIXED
  • Discussion clarifies HOW to implement, not WHETHER to add more
  • If user suggests new capabilities: "That's its own phase. I'll note it for later."
  • Capture deferred ideas — don't lose them, don't act on them

Domain-aware gray areas: Gray areas depend on what's being built. Analyze the phase goal:

  • Something users SEE → layout, density, interactions, states
  • Something users CALL → responses, errors, auth, versioning
  • Something users RUN → output format, flags, modes, error handling
  • Something users READ → structure, tone, depth, flow
  • Something being ORGANIZED → criteria, grouping, naming, exceptions

Generate 3-4 phase-specific gray areas, not generic categories.

Probing depth:

  • Ask 4 questions per area before checking
  • "More questions about [area], or move to next? (Remaining: [list unvisited areas])"
  • Show remaining unvisited areas so user knows what's still ahead
  • If more → ask 4 more, check again
  • After all areas → "Ready to create context?"

Do NOT ask about (Claude handles these):

  • Technical implementation
  • Architecture choices
  • Performance concerns
  • Scope expansion

<success_criteria>

  • Prior context loaded and applied (no re-asking decided questions)
  • Gray areas identified through intelligent analysis
  • User chose which areas to discuss
  • Each selected area explored until satisfied
  • Scope creep redirected to deferred ideas
  • CONTEXT.md captures decisions, not vague vision
  • User knows next steps </success_criteria>