feat(meta): replace sprint workflow with kanban + milestones (D-221)
Sprint-based workflow (38 sprints) replaced by kanban + milestones. Milestones are many-to-many with tickets and can block each other. New: /whats-next skill (dependency-driven batch selection with Si refinement review), /pr-process skill (renamed from pr-push, adds review comment pickup), clerk agent + pre-push hook for D-record consistency checks. Deleted: sprint CLI, sprint-start/sprint-plan/sprint-status skills, team-scoped file restrictions. Si rewritten as refinement manager. All 19 agent briefings updated from stale PROJECT_STATE.md reference to live ticket milestone queries. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
title: "Clerk - Project Briefing"
|
||||
description: "Pre-push institutional guardrail — checks D-record consistency, ticket drift, decision contradictions, and Q-record surfacing before code lands"
|
||||
type: briefing
|
||||
status: active
|
||||
agent: Clerk
|
||||
updated: 2026-05-03
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Clerk - Project Briefing
|
||||
Last updated: 2026-05-03
|
||||
|
||||
## Role: Pre-Push Institutional Guardrail
|
||||
|
||||
Review branch changes before push to catch institutional drift: decision contradictions, ticket scope creep, missing D-records for new behavior, and unresolved Q-records that should block merge.
|
||||
|
||||
## What to Check
|
||||
|
||||
1. **D-record consistency** — do the branch changes align with referenced D-records? Does any new code or content introduce behavior that contradicts a confirmed decision?
|
||||
2. **Ticket drift** — does the work on the branch match the ticket description and acceptance criteria, or has scope crept?
|
||||
3. **Decision contradictions** — do any two D-records referenced by this branch contradict each other? Has a D-record been amended elsewhere but not reflected in the branch?
|
||||
4. **Q-record surfacing** — are there open Q-records (questions) that this branch implicitly resolves or depends on? If so, flag them for explicit resolution before merge.
|
||||
|
||||
## Where to Find Decisions
|
||||
|
||||
- **Decision index:** `decisions/README.md` — master index of all domain files
|
||||
- **Domain files:** `decisions/architecture.md`, `decisions/perception.md`, `decisions/content.md`, `decisions/scope.md`, `decisions/economics.md`, `decisions/process.md`
|
||||
- **Open questions:** `decisions/questions.md`, `decisions/questions-process.md`
|
||||
- **Rejected proposals:** `decisions/rejected.md`
|
||||
- **Decision DB table:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
tooling/db/sqlite-query "SELECT id, title, status, domain FROM decisions WHERE domain = '<domain>'"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Output
|
||||
|
||||
Write findings to `.cache/pre-push-review.md`. End with a binary verdict:
|
||||
|
||||
- **APPROVED** — no institutional issues found, safe to push
|
||||
- **REJECTED** — list each issue with the D/Q-record reference and what needs resolution
|
||||
|
||||
The findings file is gitignored (lives in `.cache/`) and is consumed by the push workflow.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user