e201cde73c
* docs(#3186): record the disk-strict completion decision in ADR-3180 7.4 The maintainer decided #2957 on 2026-08-08: disk state is authoritative and a ROADMAP checkbox is a human annotation with no machine authority. Section 7.4 still carried the OPEN QUESTION and was marked blocked, so the contract said one thing and the tracker another. Recorded per section 7's own rule - a behavior not stated there is not decided, and amending a rule is an ADR amendment rather than a code change with a comment. The decision comment names Phase 4's PR as the carrier of this edit and makes it an acceptance criterion that the text be in the tree before implementation begins, so this lands first, alone, ahead of any code. Also clears the stale blocked-on-2957 row in the guard roster. * refactor(#3186): one shared phase-completion predicate, disk-strict isPhaseComplete in verification.cts becomes the single owner. It calls readVerificationStatus UNCONDITIONALLY - plan count is not a precondition - so a zero-plan phase with a passing VERIFICATION.md is complete. That is #3168: init gated the read on a plan count and synthesized a not_required sentinel, so phase.complete succeeded while init.manager reported incomplete for the same phase. The guard, built and run before scope was fixed per Amendment 3, found 9 re-derivations where the ADR named 3. Four were unnamed, including one in the prompt layer: mvp-phase.md ORed a ticked checkbox with disk status, which under disk-strict is the divergence itself. Per the #2957 decision, a ticked ROADMAP checkbox is a human annotation with no machine authority. The overrides in roadmap analyze and init manager are deleted rather than generalized; the user's checkbox stays in ROADMAP.md, only its authority goes. scanPhasePlans.completed and buildWorkstreamInventory are deliberately NOT folded - they answer 'are all plans summarized', which is a different question, and folding them would either over-report completion or invert the dependency direction between Phase 1's owner and this one. Verified on the remote runner. * fix(#3186): close seven review findings and record the missing-verdict rule The isolated review reproduced a write-path regression I introduced: migrating cmdRoadmapUpdatePlanProgress dropped its summaryCount>=planCount gate, so a phase with a fresh passing verification plus a newly-added unsummarized plan reported complete AND wrote a checkbox into ROADMAP.md while phase complete refused. The owner stays right per 7.4 - plan count is not a completion precondition - so the gate is restored at the write site as an explicit composition, mirroring the separate 2648 unexecuted-plan gate cmdPhaseComplete already carries. The spec axis was right that my 0.x-split reasoning was too permissive. The 2957 decision names buildStateFrontmatter as one of the three that must converge, and buildWorkstreamInventory combined a summaries-met local with verification data to decide the same verdict - Decision 4(c)'s named bypass, and it reproduced 3168 in a third surface. Both now route through the owner. The raw scanPhasePlans helper stays: it answers are-plans-summarized, which genuinely is a different question. Maintainer decision recorded in 7.4: a missing verdict is not a passing one, so an absent VERIFICATION.md means not complete everywhere. That retires 2645's verifier-disabled tolerance and inverts its Goodhart incentive - deleting the evidence now lowers completion instead of raising it. Guard hardened: block-form count gates and algebraic restatements are caught, and the header now discloses its remaining limits instead of overclaiming. Verified on the remote runner. * fix(#3186): route state sync through the owner and catch bare completed reads The matrix found 52 failures. 51 were fixtures asserting the old semantics: a phase with plans and summaries but no VERIFICATION.md used to count complete and correctly no longer does. Each fixture now carries a passing verification where that is what the test was actually about, rather than having its assertion weakened. The 52nd was a real 10th re-derivation the guard could not see. cmdStateSync destructured scanPhasePlans().completed directly - a bare field read, not a comparison - and used it as a completion verdict, so state sync and state json disagreed on completed_phases for identical disk state. Routed through the owner. Guard gains shape (d): any read of .completed off a scanPhasePlans() result outside plan-scan.cts, in chained, destructured and indirect forms, function scoped with no line window. It cannot tell a summaries-met read from a completion read - that is data flow - so it flags every one and requires a written-reason exemption, which is the same discipline shapes a-c already use. The blind spot is disclosed in the header rather than overclaimed. The emitted-attribution failure was also mine, not pre-existing: the mvp-phase.md checkbox-OR removal moves emitted bytes, acknowledged in tests/emitted-drift-acks. Verified on the remote runner. * test(#3186): give the nested-plans sync fixture a passing verification Last 3 matrix failures were one failure echoing up two describe levels. Phase 01-alpha had plans and summaries but no VERIFICATION.md, so under disk-strict completed stayed 0 and no Progress change was emitted - correct new behavior, not a regression. Added the passing verification rather than dropping the Progress expectation, so the test still covers what #3257 is about: that a nested plans/ layout is counted and not undercounted. Probe against the built lib confirms Progress: 0% -> 50% alongside Total Plans in Phase: 0 -> 3. * chore(#3186): backfill changeset PR number pr:0 placeholder replaced with the real number now that #3306 exists. --------- Co-authored-by: sim <sim@local>
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.