Files

Tom Boucher 46d9c26158 fix(agents): modular decomposition of gsd-planner.md to solve 50K char limit (#1612 )

* test: add failing tests for planner modular decomposition

- Assert gsd-planner.md is under 45K after extraction (currently ~50K)
- Assert three reference files exist (gap-closure, revision, reviews)
- Assert planner contains reference pointers to each extracted file
- Assert each reference file contains key content from the original mode

* feat(agents): modular decomposition of gsd-planner.md to fix 50K char limit

Extracts three non-standard mode sections from gsd-planner.md into dedicated
reference files loaded on-demand, and calibrates the security scanner to use
a per-file-type threshold (100K for agent source files vs 50K for user input).

Structural changes:
- Extract <gap_closure_mode> → get-shit-done/references/planner-gap-closure.md
- Extract <revision_mode> → get-shit-done/references/planner-revision.md
- Extract <reviews_mode> → get-shit-done/references/planner-reviews.md
- Add <load_mode_context> step in execution_flow (conditional lazy loading)
- gsd-planner.md: 50,112 → 45,352 chars (well under new 45K target)

Security scanner fix:
- Split agent file check: injection patterns (unchanged) + separate 100K size limit
- The 50K strict-mode limit was designed for user-supplied input, not trusted source files
- Agent files still have a size guard to catch accidental bloat

Partially addresses #1495

* fix(tests): normalize CRLF before measuring planner file size

Windows git checkouts add \r per line, inflating String.length by ~1150 chars
for a 1,400-line file. The 45K threshold test failed on windows-latest because
45,352 chars (Linux) became 46,507 chars (Windows). Apply the same CRLF
normalization pattern used in tests/reachability-check.test.cjs.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

2026-04-03 13:32:05 -04:00

1.5 KiB

Raw Blame History

Reviews Mode — Planner Reference

Triggered when orchestrator sets Mode to reviews. Replanning from scratch with REVIEWS.md feedback as additional context.

Mindset: Fresh planner with review insights — not a surgeon making patches, but an architect who has read peer critiques.

Step 1: Load REVIEWS.md

Read the reviews file from <files_to_read>. Parse:

Per-reviewer feedback (strengths, concerns, suggestions)
Consensus Summary (agreed concerns = highest priority to address)
Divergent Views (investigate, make a judgment call)

Step 2: Categorize Feedback

Group review feedback into:

Must address: HIGH severity consensus concerns
Should address: MEDIUM severity concerns from 2+ reviewers
Consider: Individual reviewer suggestions, LOW severity items

Step 3: Plan Fresh with Review Context

Create new plans following the standard planning process, but with review feedback as additional constraints:

Each HIGH severity consensus concern MUST have a task that addresses it
MEDIUM concerns should be addressed where feasible without over-engineering
Note in task actions: "Addresses review concern: {concern}" for traceability

Step 4: Return

Use standard PLANNING COMPLETE return format, adding a reviews section:

### Review Feedback Addressed

| Concern | Severity | How Addressed |
|---------|----------|---------------|
| {concern} | HIGH | Plan {N}, Task {M}: {how} |

### Review Feedback Deferred
| Concern | Reason |
|---------|--------|
| {concern} | {why — out of scope, disagree, etc.} |

1.5 KiB Raw Blame History