920a5f3f06
* fix(#2589): use --raw/--pick for config/model/verify lookups, drop jq dep The reviewer/workflow config lookups resolved scalars and object fields with a `gsd_run query <cmd> … | jq … 2>/dev/null || <default>` shape. On any machine without jq (the default on Windows/Git-Bash) the jq stage fails with exit 127, the failure is swallowed by 2>/dev/null + the trailing || default, and the variable comes back EMPTY — the configured per-lane model/host/budget is silently dropped and the lane falls back to CLI defaults with no diagnostic. gsd-tools ships native flags that do the same job with no external dep: config-get <key> --raw (strips JSON quotes off a scalar) resolve-model <id> --pick model (descends an object) resolve-execution … --pick <f> (same) verification.status … --pick status Replaced every jq-piped config/model/verify lookup across review.md (×23), plan-phase.md, ship.md, debug.md (incl. the redundant boolean coercion — --raw returns true/false as bare tokens natively), autonomous.md (×2), ai-integration-phase.md (×4), and eval-review.md. The legitimate structured-JSON jq sites that parse HTTP curl responses (.choices[0], jq -rs, jq -n --rawfile) are untouched — only the jq-replaceable lookups moved to the native flags. Adds tests/fix-2589-config-get-no-jq.test.cjs: a source-invariant guard asserting no audited workflow pipes config-get/resolve-model/resolve-execution/verification.status to jq (fails-first on the pre-fix text, passes after). * test(#2589): update autonomous-converge jq assertion to --pick; regen golden fixtures Two test consequences of the workflow-doc edits in the prior commit: 1. tests/autonomous-converge.test.cjs pinned the OLD jq-dependent shape (`verification.status … | jq -r '.status//empty'`) as the canonical routing contract. The test's INTENT is correct (route human validation through canonical verification.status) but it over-specified the MECHANISM (the jq pipe). Updated the assertion to match the new native --pick status shape; the contract being guarded (canonical verification.status read before the human_needed branch) is unchanged. 2. The golden-install-parity fixtures (19 runtimes) record a content hash of every installed workflow .md; the 7 edited workflows changed those hashes. Regenerated via `npm run gen:golden` (the test's own failure message instructs this). Only the 7 edited workflow hashes changed in each fixture. * fix(#2589): declare jq a prerequisite for the lanes that still need it; repair test file Three defects in the first cut of the #2589 fix: 1. tests/autonomous-converge.test.cjs was a JavaScript syntax error. The regex literal /...2>\/dev/null .../ left the second slash unescaped, terminating the literal early and parsing `null` as regex flags: SyntaxError: Invalid regular expression flags The whole file failed to load, so every assertion in it — including the #1522 and #1526 guards — silently stopped running. Replaced with the string-compare form already used at line 202 for the sibling shell-snippet assertion. 2. lint:ci failed. tests/fix-2589-config-get-no-jq.test.cjs buckets into the capped `config` production module via its `config-get-...` effective prefix, making it a novel offender against the 2-file cap. The test is about workflow documents, not the config module, so it is renamed to fix-2589-workflow-jq-dependency.test.cjs (free prefix) rather than growing the allowlist with a module that does not actually need a 5th test file. 3. The fix deleted the repo's only jq-prerequisite declaration. review.md:244 ("install jq if missing") was the anchor plan-review-convergence.md cites by line number, and it went away with the jq pipes — while the ollama, lm_studio, llama_cpp, opencode, and agy lanes still hard-require jq to parse HTTP /v1/chat/completions responses, opencode's JSONL event stream, and agy's conversation cache. On a jq-less host those five lanes swallow exit 127 into empty output: the same silent-degradation class #2589 exists to close. detect_clis now probes jq alongside the other prerequisites and emits jq:available / jq:missing, and the five dependent lanes are treated as undetected when it is absent, with an install hint. The six lanes that do not need jq stay selectable. plan-review-convergence.md now cites the section by name instead of a line number that moves. Regression guards added to the renamed test file: review.md must keep the jq probe and must name all five dependent lanes, and no workflow may cite review.md by line number. Workflow-size baseline and the 19 install-parity goldens regenerated for the review.md / plan-review-convergence.md edits. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015TCwhbMuY37DzRMCfzTABJ * fix(#2589): decide the ship verification gate on a single verification.status read Isolated review finding (medium). Pre-fix, ship.md captured verification.status ONCE into $VERIFICATION and picked status / next_action / next_command off that cached JSON with three jq calls. --pick takes a single dot-path field, so the mechanical conversion issued three separate queries up front: three node spawns that each re-read the phase VERIFICATION.md and re-derive the commit-time vs mtime staleness comparison, on every ship — including the common passing path that never uses the two message fields. It also meant the gate's verdict and the message shown to the user were derived from three reads with no guarantee they observed the same state. The gate now reads `status` once and decides. The two message-only fields are read on the blocking path only, after PHASE_VERIFICATION_INCOMPLETE is already determined — so the passing path costs one query instead of three, and a concurrent write between reads can no longer make the gate and its message disagree, because the block/allow decision no longer depends on them. Adding a multi-field --pick to gsd-tools would have collapsed this to one query, but that changes the flag's output contract and belongs in its own change. Regression guard in tests/fix-2589-workflow-jq-dependency.test.cjs: ship.md must read verification.status exactly three times total, the block decision must follow the status read, and next_action / next_command must both appear after the blocking prose so they cannot drift back onto the passing path. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015TCwhbMuY37DzRMCfzTABJ * docs(#2589): document the jq prerequisite for the five reviewer lanes that need it /gsd-review's ollama, lm_studio, llama_cpp, opencode, and agy lanes parse JSON GSD does not produce (OpenAI-compatible /v1/chat/completions responses, OpenCode's JSONL event stream, Antigravity's conversation cache), so they require jq on PATH. Nothing in docs/ said so. Records which five lanes need it, which six do not, that reading configured models/hosts/budgets no longer requires jq at all, and what /gsd-review now does when jq is absent. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015TCwhbMuY37DzRMCfzTABJ * chore(#2589): backfill changeset pr number (#2673) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
GSD Core documentation
Documentation is organised into four quadrants: tutorials help you learn by doing, how-to guides solve specific tasks, reference states authoritative facts, and explanation explores concepts and design decisions.
Language versions: English · Português (pt-BR) · 日本語 · 简体中文
Tutorials
- Your first project — install to first shipped phase, one guaranteed path
- Onboarding an existing codebase — bring GSD Core to a brownfield repo
- Build your first capability — author a tiny declarative capability and watch it act in the loop
- Install your first capability — install a third-party capability end-to-end: consent, verify, check for updates, remove
How-to guides
- Install on your runtime — runtime-specific install steps for all 16 supported runtimes
- Install a minimal GSD and add skills later — install only the core skills, then grow the surface with profiles and
/gsd:surface - Attach a plugin-provided skill to a GSD agent — use the
global:plugin:skillentry form to load Claude Code plugin skills into agent prompts - Discuss a phase — capture implementation decisions before planning begins
- Resolve edge-coverage findings — turn the spec phase's surfaced domain-boundary edges into covered, dismissed, or backstopped spec decisions
- Resolve prohibition findings — turn the spec phase's surfaced must-NOT constraints into resolved, dismissed, or deferred spec decisions
- Plan a phase — run research, decompose work, and verify plan quality
- Execute a phase — run plans in parallel waves with fresh-context subagents
- Verify and ship — walk through completed work, diagnose failures, and create the PR
- Run phases autonomously — use autonomous mode for unattended phase execution
- Handle quick and fast tasks — use
/gsd-quickand/gsd-fastfor ad-hoc work outside the phase loop - Configure model profiles — switch between quality, balanced, and budget model tiers
- Set up cross-AI review — configure a second AI to review code produced by the primary agent
- Work in parallel with workstreams — run independent lines of work simultaneously using workstreams
- Isolate work with workspaces — use workspaces to sandbox experimental or risky changes
- Debug a failed execution — diagnose and recover from broken or incomplete phase execution
- Spike and sketch — use
/gsd-spikeand/gsd-sketchfor exploratory work before committing to a plan - Design a UI phase — use the UI phase loop for frontend and visual work
- Develop a Capability for GSD 1.5+ — add feature Capabilities, hook fragments, and registry entries
- Add or update a host's integration — set a host's documentation-sourced
runtime.hostIntegrationaxes (ADR-1239 Phase A), with theundocumentedsentinel rule - Turn a capability off (and keep it off) — disable a capability via the surface, or gate individual hooks off without removing the capability
- Drive GSD from a tracker issue — start a phase from a GitHub, Linear, or Jira issue
- Migrate from GSD 2 — upgrade an existing GSD 2 project to GSD Core
- Update GSD — re-run the installer to pick up the latest release
- Clean up get-shit-done-cc — remove leftover old-package artifacts that cause a spurious
⬆ /gsd:updateindicator after migrating to@opengsd/gsd-core - Fix the worktree base-mismatch (exit 42) error — resolve the branch-divergence condition that halts parallel phase execution
- Recover and troubleshoot — fix common problems, rebuild context, and uninstall
Reference
- Commands — every command with flags and examples
- Configuration — full config schema, model profiles, git branching strategies
- CLI tools —
gsd-tools.cjsprogrammatic API for workflows and agents - Features — complete feature index
- Inventory — installed skills and surface map
- STATE.md schema — field-by-field reference for
.planning/STATE.md - CONTEXT.md schema — field-by-field reference for
.planning/phases/<N>/CONTEXT.md - PLAN.md schema — field-by-field reference for
.planning/phases/<N>/PLAN.md - Planning artifacts — all
.planning/files and their roles - Review and verification capabilities — code review, security, and Nyquist capability ownership and hook contracts
- Capability matrix — generated catalogue of every capability's role, tier, extension points, hook kinds, and
engines.gsd - Capability manifest — the full
capability.jsonschema and validation rules gsd capabilitycommand — install / update / remove / list reference for third-party capabilities
Explanation
- Context engineering — how context rot forms and how GSD Core prevents it
- The phase loop — design rationale for the Discuss → Plan → Execute → Verify → Ship cycle
- Multi-agent orchestration — how subagents are spawned, scoped, and coordinated
- Security model — trust boundaries, permissions, and safe automation
- The capability trust model — why third-party capabilities are gated by consent + integrity + reversibility, not a sandbox
- How overlay capabilities compose — why first-party always wins and how the loader resolves precedence, conflicts, and fail-open load-failure warnings
- Architecture — system architecture, agent model, and data flow
- The Embeddable Orchestration System — one public, versioned contract for embedding GSD across many hosts
- Discuss modes — assumptions mode vs interview mode for
/gsd-discuss-phase - Context monitoring — context window monitoring hook architecture
- Issue-driven orchestration — recipe for driving GSD from a tracker issue using existing primitives
Related
- What's new in 1.7.0 — curated highlights of the 1.7.0 release
- Root README — landing page, quickstart, and documentation overview
- Changelog — release history