* feat: Phase 2 caller migration — gsd-sdk query in workflows (#2122) Cherry-picked orchestration rewrites from feat/sdk-foundation (#2008, 4018fee) onto current main, resolving conflicts to keep upstream worktree guards and post-merge test gate. SDK stub registry omitted (out of Phase 2 scope per #2122). Refs: #2122 #2008 Made-with: Cursor * docs: add gsd-sdk query migration blurb Made-with: Cursor * docs(workflows): extend Phase 2 gsd-sdk query caller migration - Swap node gsd-tools.cjs for gsd-sdk query in review, plan-phase, execute-plan, ship, extract_learnings, ai-integration-phase, eval-review, next, thread - Document graphify CJS-only in gsd-planner; dual-path in CLI-TOOLS and ARCHITECTURE - Update tests: workstreams gsd-sdk path, thread frontmatter.get, workspace init.*, CRLF-safe autonomous frontmatter parse - CHANGELOG: Phase 2 caller migration scope Made-with: Cursor * docs(phase2): USER-GUIDE + remaining gsd-sdk query call sites - USER-GUIDE: dual-path CLI section; state validate/sync use full CJS path - Commands: debug (config-get+tdd), quick (security note), intel Task prompt - Agent: gsd-debug-session-manager resolve-model via jq - Workflows: milestone-summary, forensics, next, complete-milestone/verify-work (audit-open CJS notes), discuss-phase, progress, verify-phase, add/insert/remove phase, transition, manager, quick workflow; remove-phase commit without --files - Test: quick-session-management accepts frontmatter.get - CHANGELOG: Phase 2 follow-up bullet Made-with: Cursor * docs(phase2): align gsd-sdk query examples in commands and agents - init.* query names; frontmatter.get uses positional field name - state.* handlers use positional args; commit uses positional paths - CJS-only notes for from-gsd2 and graphify; learnings.query wording - CHANGELOG: Phase 2 orchestration doc pass Made-with: Cursor * docs(phase2): normalize gsd-sdk query commit to positional file paths - Strip --files from commit examples in workflows, references, commands - Keep commit-to-subrepo ... --files (separate handler) - git-planning-commit.md: document positional args - Tests: new-project commit line, state.record-session, gates CRLF, roadmap.analyze - CHANGELOG [Unreleased] Made-with: Cursor * feat(sdk): gsd-sdk query parity with gsd-tools and PR 2179 registry fixes - Route query via longest-prefix match and dotted single-token expansion; fall back to runGsdToolsQuery (same argv as node gsd-tools.cjs) for full CLI coverage. - Parse gsd-sdk query permissively so gsd-tools flags (--json, --verify, etc.) are not rejected by strict parseArgs. - resolveGsdToolsPath: honor GSD_TOOLS_PATH; prefer bundled get-shit-done copy over project .claude installs; export runGsdToolsQuery from the SDK. - Fix gsd-tools audit-open (core.output; pass object for --json JSON). - Register summary-extract as alias of summary.extract; fix audit-fix workflow to call audit-uat instead of invalid init.audit-uat (PR review). Updates QUERY-HANDLERS.md and CHANGELOG [Unreleased]. Made-with: Cursor * fix(sdk): Phase 2 scope — Trek-e review (#2179, #2122) - Remove gsd-sdk query passthrough to gsd-tools.cjs; drop GSD_TOOLS_PATH - Consolidate argv routing in resolveQueryArgv(); update USAGE and QUERY-HANDLERS - Surface @file: read failures in GSDTools.parseOutput - execute-plan: defer Task Commit Protocol to gsd-executor - stale-colon-refs: skip .planning/ and root CLAUDE.md (gitignored overlays) - CHANGELOG [Unreleased]: maintainer review and routing notes Made-with: Cursor
5.5 KiB
name, description, argument-hint, allowed-tools
| name | description | argument-hint | allowed-tools | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| gsd:research-phase | Research how to implement a phase (standalone - usually use /gsd-plan-phase instead) | [phase] |
|
Note: This is a standalone research command. For most workflows, use /gsd-plan-phase which integrates research automatically.
Use this command when:
- You want to research without planning yet
- You want to re-research after planning is complete
- You need to investigate before deciding if a phase is feasible
Orchestrator role: Parse phase, validate against roadmap, check existing research, gather context, spawn researcher agent, present results.
Why subagent: Research burns context fast (WebSearch, Context7 queries, source verification). Fresh 200k context for investigation. Main context stays lean for user interaction.
<available_agent_types> Valid GSD subagent types (use exact names — do not fall back to 'general-purpose'):
- gsd-phase-researcher — Researches technical approaches for a phase </available_agent_types>
Normalize phase input in step 1 before any directory lookups.
0. Initialize Context
INIT=$(gsd-sdk query init.phase-op "$ARGUMENTS")
if [[ "$INIT" == @file:* ]]; then INIT=$(cat "${INIT#@file:}"); fi
Extract from init JSON: phase_dir, phase_number, phase_name, phase_found, commit_docs, has_research, state_path, requirements_path, context_path, research_path.
Resolve researcher model:
RESEARCHER_MODEL=$(gsd-sdk query resolve-model gsd-phase-researcher --raw)
1. Validate Phase
PHASE_INFO=$(gsd-sdk query roadmap.get-phase "${phase_number}")
If found is false: Error and exit. If found is true: Extract phase_number, phase_name, goal from JSON.
2. Check Existing Research
ls .planning/phases/${PHASE}-*/RESEARCH.md 2>/dev/null
If exists: Offer: 1) Update research, 2) View existing, 3) Skip. Wait for response.
If doesn't exist: Continue.
3. Gather Phase Context
Use paths from INIT (do not inline file contents in orchestrator context):
requirements_pathcontext_pathstate_path
Present summary with phase description and what files the researcher will load.
4. Spawn gsd-phase-researcher Agent
Research modes: ecosystem (default), feasibility, implementation, comparison.
<research_type>
Phase Research — investigating HOW to implement a specific phase well.
</research_type>
<key_insight>
The question is NOT "which library should I use?"
The question is: "What do I not know that I don't know?"
For this phase, discover:
- What's the established architecture pattern?
- What libraries form the standard stack?
- What problems do people commonly hit?
- What's SOTA vs what Claude's training thinks is SOTA?
- What should NOT be hand-rolled?
</key_insight>
<objective>
Research implementation approach for Phase {phase_number}: {phase_name}
Mode: ecosystem
</objective>
<files_to_read>
- {requirements_path} (Requirements)
- {context_path} (Phase context from discuss-phase, if exists)
- {state_path} (Prior project decisions and blockers)
</files_to_read>
<additional_context>
**Phase description:** {phase_description}
</additional_context>
<downstream_consumer>
Your RESEARCH.md will be loaded by `/gsd-plan-phase` which uses specific sections:
- `## Standard Stack` → Plans use these libraries
- `## Architecture Patterns` → Task structure follows these
- `## Don't Hand-Roll` → Tasks NEVER build custom solutions for listed problems
- `## Common Pitfalls` → Verification steps check for these
- `## Code Examples` → Task actions reference these patterns
Be prescriptive, not exploratory. "Use X" not "Consider X or Y."
</downstream_consumer>
<quality_gate>
Before declaring complete, verify:
- [ ] All domains investigated (not just some)
- [ ] Negative claims verified with official docs
- [ ] Multiple sources for critical claims
- [ ] Confidence levels assigned honestly
- [ ] Section names match what plan-phase expects
</quality_gate>
<output>
Write to: .planning/phases/${PHASE}-{slug}/${PHASE}-RESEARCH.md
</output>
Task(
prompt=filled_prompt,
subagent_type="gsd-phase-researcher",
model="{researcher_model}",
description="Research Phase {phase}"
)
5. Handle Agent Return
## RESEARCH COMPLETE: Display summary, offer: Plan phase, Dig deeper, Review full, Done.
## CHECKPOINT REACHED: Present to user, get response, spawn continuation.
## RESEARCH INCONCLUSIVE: Show what was attempted, offer: Add context, Try different mode, Manual.
6. Spawn Continuation Agent
<objective>
Continue research for Phase {phase_number}: {phase_name}
</objective>
<prior_state>
<files_to_read>
- .planning/phases/${PHASE}-{slug}/${PHASE}-RESEARCH.md (Existing research)
</files_to_read>
</prior_state>
<checkpoint_response>
**Type:** {checkpoint_type}
**Response:** {user_response}
</checkpoint_response>
Task(
prompt=continuation_prompt,
subagent_type="gsd-phase-researcher",
model="{researcher_model}",
description="Continue research Phase {phase}"
)
<success_criteria>
- Phase validated against roadmap
- Existing research checked
- gsd-phase-researcher spawned with context
- Checkpoints handled correctly
- User knows next steps </success_criteria>