6a9babda69
* chore(#2798): declare the eleven reviewer lanes as manifest data Phase 5a of epic #2782, delivering ADR-2782 D9 (roster half) and D3. - Five reviewers GSD never installs into become lane-only role:reviewer capabilities with no runtime body, no runtimeCompat and no install surface: gemini, coderabbit, ollama, lm-studio, llama-cpp. Before this they had no descriptor at all and lived as a hardcoded NON_RUNTIME_REVIEWER_SLUGS tail, which is now deleted outright. - The six hosts that are ALSO reviewers gain a reviewer body alongside their runtime body. Their runtime bodies are byte-identical to next -- verified per capability against the git blob, not asserted -- so no install behaviour moves. - KNOWN_REVIEWER_SLUGS derives from declared bodies via an exported deriveReviewerSlugs(registry). hostBehaviors.reviewerCli survives as a derived legacy alias for one release; where a capability carries both, the body wins and the slug appears once. Alias removal is Phase 7 (#2801). THE KEYSTONE: the roster is the SAME ELEVEN SLUGS as before -- antigravity, claude, coderabbit, codex, cursor, gemini, llama_cpp, lm_studio, ollama, opencode, qwen. This phase changes HOW the roster is derived, not WHO is in it, and the test asserts that literal list rather than a count. kimi-code is deliberately NOT declared here. It is net-new with no invoke_reviewers leg, so declaring it now would make it selectable but not invocable -- present in --all, selected, emitting an empty section for the whole 5a-to-5b window -- and would break Phase 1's parity assertion. It lands in 5b alongside the iteration that can run it. Legacy kimi (the Python CLI) is not a reviewer at all and gains nothing. The highest-value test is declaredManifestLanesMatchThePhase1Descriptor: it deep-compares all eleven declared bodies against REVIEWER_LANES field-by-field, including probe and invoke sub-fields. All eleven are byte-identical, key order included. The epic's premise is that the manifest and the core descriptor describe the same lane with NO translation layer, and Phase 2's review already caught one divergence that every other test missed. Two ADR corrections folded in, as Phases 1-3 each did: 1. PHASE ORDER. The ADR runs Phase 4 (federated config) before 5a and #2798 claims a dependency on 4. That is inverted and makes Phase 4 unsatisfiable: D9 assigns review.<host>_host to lane capabilities that do not exist until THIS phase creates them, and a federated config slice must live inside capabilities/<id>/capability.json. Real graph: Phase 2 -> 5a -> 4. 2. #2798's INVENTORY acceptance item is vacuous. The inventory catalogs bin/lib/*.cjs modules, not capability directories -- antigravity, opencode and qwen appear zero times in it -- and gen-inventory-manifest --check passes with the five new dirs and no edit. Also corrected a stale line in Phase 2's own ADR amendment: it recorded the slug pattern as /^[a-z][a-z0-9_-]*$/, but Phase 2's security review widened the shipped pattern to /^[a-z0-9][a-z0-9_-]*$/ to match Phase 1's exported LANE_SLUG_RE. The prose had not followed the code. Closes #2798 * fix(#2798): catalogue reviewer capabilities in the generated matrix The capability matrix rendered exactly two tables, feature and runtime, via renderTable(caps, role) filtering on c.role === role. ADR-2782 D3 added a THIRD role, so every role:"reviewer" capability was silently dropped from the first-party catalogue. The drift guard did not catch it, and could not: --check compares generated output against the committed file, and both omitted the five lanes identically, so it reported "up to date" while five shipped capabilities were invisible in the one document that is supposed to list what ships. A guard blind to an entire role is not guarding. This phase is what exposed it -- it ships the first role:"reviewer" capabilities -- so it is fixed here rather than deferred (CLAUDE.md: a defect found while working is fixed in the current change, which overrides one-concern-per-PR). Verified red-before-green: with a lane row deleted from the matrix, --check now exits 1; restored, it exits 0. Before this fix the lanes were absent entirely, so there was nothing for the guard to compare. Phase 6 (#2800) still owns enriching the matrix with lane-specific detail (slug/flag/transport columns) and the locale parity gate. This is the narrower fix: the capabilities APPEAR at all. * fix(#2798): close two hardening gaps and record three limits durably Isolated security review (5 targets, no blockers) reproduced two gaps in the new deriveReviewerSlugs. Both are unreachable through the checked-in registry -- it is generated, JSON-sourced and code-reviewed -- but the function is EXPORTED for reuse and carries no other validation, so it must not depend on its caller. - A whitespace-only slug passed the length>0 test verbatim and occupied a roster entry it could never match. Slugs are now trimmed before the emptiness test. A blank body correctly falls through to the legacy alias rather than DROPPING the lane, which would have been worse than the blank slug. - KNOWN_REVIEWER_SLUGS is computed at require() time, so an uncaught throw there breaks import for EVERY consumer rather than degrading selection. It is now guarded, yielding an empty roster on a malformed registry. That is a visible degradation, not a silent one: under D4 an explicitly requested reviewer that is unavailable is an ERROR, so /gsd:review --claude against an empty roster fails loudly. This also removes an asymmetry -- the sibling capability-trust module documents its collectors as TOTAL and wraps them for exactly this reason. Also records three findings that previously existed ONLY in squash-merged PR bodies, which is not a durable record: - ADR-2782 D5 gains an implementation note explaining why the resolved host is deliberately EXCLUDED from the disclosure signature. Rule 1 says consent binds the resolved host; the loader has no config resolver, so folding it in would make the loader and lifecycle compute different signatures for one manifest and re-prompt forever. The binding is split: signature covers the SHA-pinned manifest fields, the consent record stores the resolved host, and Phase 5b re-resolves at invocation -- which is where rule 4 already puts the check. A reader comparing rule 1 to the code would otherwise conclude it is unimplemented. - CONTEXT.md's capability-trust entry still described THREE executable surfaces. Phase 3 added the fourth and made that false; corrected here, since it is drift this epic introduced rather than Phase 6's new-glossary-term work. - stableJson documents the NaN/Infinity/undefined -> null signature collision and why it is unreachable (JSON grammar has no such literal, so JSON.parse throws first). Reachability rests entirely on the ingest path staying JSON.parse-only, so the note lives where someone would break it. * chore(#2798): backfill changeset pr number to 2837
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.