pjandro/OmniRoute
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/diegosouzapw/OmniRoute.git synced 2026-07-26 09:52:11 +03:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

refactor: remove agent skill documentation files and streamline maintenance workflows

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
diegosouzapw
2026-05-29 05:15:39 -03:00
parent 1f5c215cc0
commit ebae877aa3
31 changed files with 5 additions and 8062 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

52
.agents/skills/capture-release-evidences/SKILL.md
View File

@@ -1,52 +0,0 @@
---
name: capture-release-evidences-cx
description: Automatically run a browser-automation agent to visually validate all new UI features from the current release and capture evidence WebP recordings of the changes.
---
# Capture Release Evidences Workflow
Use this workflow to automatically drive a browser-automation agent to explore the newly deployed or locally running application and record evidence of the UI changes introduced in the latest release.
> **Tool mapping note (v3.8):** The `browser_subagent` tool referenced below is specific to an earlier agent runtime. In Claude Code, substitute with the available browser MCP tools (e.g. `mcp__claude-in-chrome__*`) for navigation/screenshots, plus the `Write` tool for saving artifacts. The high-level steps remain the same regardless of the browser-automation surface in use.
## Prerequisites
- OmniRoute must be actively running and accessible (e.g. locally at `http://localhost:20128` or on the Local VPS at `http://192.168.0.15:20128`).
- The user must provide the target URL to be tested, or default to `http://192.168.0.15:20128`.
## Workflow Steps
### 1. Identify Target Features
Review the `CHANGELOG.md` for the latest version to map out the new UI elements. For example:
- **CLI Tools Settings**
- **New Provider/Model Listings (e.g., Gemini 3.1, Qoder PAT)**
- **New Feature Modals**
### 2. Run the Browser Subagent
For each identified feature, invoke the `browser_subagent` using the `default_api:browser_subagent` tool.
**Important Task Guidelines for the Subagent:**
- `TaskName`: Give it a clear name like "Validate CLIProxyAPI Tool Tab".
- `TaskSummary`: "Navigate to the CLI Tools tab and verify the new Integration settings."
- `Task`: Provide unambiguous instructions for the subagent, such as: "Navigate to http://192.168.0.15:20128/dashboard. Click on the 'Settings' or 'CLI Tools' nav link. Scroll down to find the CLIProxyAPI integration card. Hover over it to trigger UI state. Verify the components render correctly and exit."
- `RecordingName`: Ensure it describes the feature (e.g. `v3_4_5_cli_proxy_api`). This is required and strictly automatically saved as a WebP artifacts video by the system.
_(Note: The `browser_subagent` automatically creates a WebP recording named by the `RecordingName` parameter. No additional tools for screenshots are needed.)_
### 3. Generate Report Artifact
After the `browser_subagent` finishes its sessions, generate a final Markdown artifact (using `Write` and `IsArtifact=true`) to present the recordings inline to the user using the `![caption](/absolute/path/to/media.webp)` syntax.
### Example Invocation
\```json
{
"TaskName": "Validating Qoder PAT Configuration UI",
"TaskSummary": "Validates the Qoder provider configuration modal",
"Task": "Go to http://192.168.0.15:20128/dashboard. Click on the 'Providers' tab. Find 'Qoder' in the list. Click 'Add Token' or 'Configure'. Type 'test_token' and submit. Return when done.",
"RecordingName": "qoder_pat_ui_validation"
}
\```

45
.agents/skills/deploy-vps-local/SKILL.md
View File

@@ -1,45 +0,0 @@
---
name: deploy-vps-local-cx
description: Deploy the latest OmniRoute code to the Local VPS (192.168.0.15)
---
# Deploy to Local VPS Workflow
Deploy OmniRoute to the Local VPS using `npm pack + scp` + PM2.
## Codex Execution Notes
- Treat `// turbo` / `// turbo-all` as instructions to use `multi_tool_use.parallel` only for independent commands. Do not parallelize dependent build, copy, install, restart, and verification steps.
- Report each remote result explicitly before finishing.
**Local VPS:** `192.168.0.15`
**Process manager:** PM2 (`omniroute`)
**Port:** `20128`
## Steps
### 1. Build + pack locally
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute && rm -f omniroute-*.tgz && rm -rf .next/cache app/.next/cache && npm run build:cli && rm -rf app/logs app/coverage app/.git app/.app-build-backup* && npm pack --ignore-scripts
```
### 2. Copy to Local VPS and install
// turbo-all
```bash
scp omniroute-*.tgz root@192.168.0.15:/tmp/
```
```bash
ssh root@192.168.0.15 "npm install -g /tmp/omniroute-*.tgz --ignore-scripts && cd /usr/lib/node_modules/omniroute/app && npm rebuild better-sqlite3 && pm2 delete omniroute 2>/dev/null; pm2 start /root/.omniroute/ecosystem.config.cjs --update-env && pm2 save && echo '✅ Local done'"
```
### 3. Verify the deployment
```bash
curl -s -o /dev/null -w 'LOCAL HTTP %{http_code}\n' http://192.168.0.15:20128/
```

513
.agents/skills/generate-release/SKILL.md
View File

@@ -1,513 +0,0 @@
---
name: generate-release-cx
description: Create a new release, bump version up to the .999 patch threshold, generate a complete CHANGELOG (with PR co-authors + every commit since the last tag), and manage Pull Requests
---
# Generate Release Workflow
Bump version, build a **complete CHANGELOG** from every commit since the last tag (with PR back-reference and contributor attribution), commit, open a **PR to main** and wait for user confirmation before tagging, publishing, and deploying.
## Codex Execution Notes
- Treat `// turbo` / `// turbo-all` as instructions to use `multi_tool_use.parallel` for independent reads, checks, and GitHub calls.
- When the workflow says `notify_user` or `BlockedOnUser: true`, present the report/status in the final response and stop. Do not continue into the next phase until the user explicitly approves.
> **VERSION RULE: Always use PATCH bumps (3.x.y → 3.x.y+1)**
> NEVER use `npm version minor` or `npm version major`.
> Always use: `npm version patch --no-git-tag-version`
> The threshold rule: when `y` reaches 1000, bump to `3.(x+1).0` — e.g. `3.8.999` → `3.9.0`.
> **🔴 INTEGRATION BRANCH RULE**: The `release/vX.Y.Z` branch is the **integration target** for the entire release cycle. Bug fixes and feature implementations land here **via per-issue PRs from short-lived `fix/<ISSUE>-<short>` or `feat/<ISSUE>-<short>` worktrees** (see `/resolve-issues`, `/implement-features`). Contributor PRs from `/review-prs` likewise merge into this branch. The release branch is then merged to `main` via a single release PR at the end of the cycle.
---
## ⚠️ Four-Phase Flow
```
Phase 0 → security audit (npm + CodeQL + Dependabot)
Phase 1 → bump → full quality gate → changelog from commits → commit → push → open PR
↕ 🛑 STOP (BlockedOnUser: true): notify user, wait for PR merge
Phase 2 → deploy main to Local VPS for homologation
↕ 🛑 STOP (BlockedOnUser: true): notify user, wait for OK
Phase 3 → tag → GitHub release → Docker → npm → Akamai
Phase 4 → monitor CI pipelines and validate artifacts
```
**NEVER push directly to main or create tags before the user confirms the PR.**
---
## Phase 0: Security Verification (MANDATORY)
// turbo
```bash
# 1. Local dependency audit
npm audit --production --audit-level=high
# 2. GitHub CodeQL alerts (open + high severity)
gh api '/repos/diegosouzapw/OmniRoute/code-scanning/alerts?state=open&severity=high' \
--jq '.[] | {rule: .rule.id, path: .most_recent_instance.location.path, msg: .most_recent_instance.message.text}' \
2>/dev/null || echo "(no CodeQL access or no alerts)"
# 3. Dependabot alerts (open + high/critical)
gh api '/repos/diegosouzapw/OmniRoute/dependabot/alerts?state=open' \
--jq '.[] | select(.security_advisory.severity == "high" or .security_advisory.severity == "critical") | {pkg: .dependency.package.name, sev: .security_advisory.severity, summary: .security_advisory.summary}' \
2>/dev/null || echo "(no Dependabot access or no alerts)"
```
Fix or justify (with `vulnerability-scanner` skill, or dismissal comment per Hard Rule #14) any `high`/`critical` findings before proceeding.
---
## Phase 1: Pre-Merge
### 1. Create or confirm release branch
```bash
# First release on a new minor (e.g. starting 3.9.0):
git checkout -b release/v3.9.0
# Continuing current cycle:
git branch --show-current
```
### 2. Determine and sync version
```bash
grep '"version"' package.json
```
> **🔴 BRANCH-VERSION PARITY GATE** — auto-checked before any work:
// turbo
```bash
BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current)
BRANCH_VER=${BRANCH#release/v}
PKG_VER=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
if [[ "$BRANCH" != release/v* ]]; then
echo "❌ Not on a release/v* branch (current: $BRANCH). Aborting."; exit 1
fi
echo "Branch target: $BRANCH_VER"
echo "package.json: $PKG_VER"
```
> **⚠️ ATOMIC COMMIT RULE** — bump and feature/fix code MUST land in the same commit so that `git show vX.Y.Z` always contains both. NEVER commit features first and bump in a separate commit.
```bash
npm version patch --no-git-tag-version
```
### 3. Regenerate lock file (REQUIRED after version bump)
```bash
npm install
```
Skipping causes `@swc/helpers` lock mismatch and CI failures.
### 4. Build CHANGELOG from EVERY commit since the last tag
> **🎯 Goal**: produce a complete CHANGELOG section following the format of PR #2617 — emoji-grouped sections, PR back-reference, and `— thanks @user` attribution. Nothing must slip through.
> **🔴 NO MIXUPS RULE**: do not mix backlog of the previous version. The new section must contain ONLY commits whose merge/landing happened after the previous tag.
#### 4a. Collect raw commit log since last tag
// turbo
```bash
LAST_TAG=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0)
NEW_VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
TODAY=$(date -u +%F)
echo "Range: $LAST_TAG..HEAD → v$NEW_VERSION ($TODAY)"
# Full commit list (oneline)
git log --no-merges "$LAST_TAG..HEAD" --pretty=format:'%h %s' > /tmp/release_commits.txt
wc -l /tmp/release_commits.txt
# Merge commits (preserve PR numbers + authors)
git log --merges "$LAST_TAG..HEAD" --pretty=format:'%h %s%n author=%an <%ae>' > /tmp/release_merges.txt
# Per-commit detailed list (PR refs, co-authors, body)
git log "$LAST_TAG..HEAD" --pretty=format:'---%n%h | %s%n author=%an <%ae>%n body=%b' > /tmp/release_detailed.txt
```
#### 4b. Enrich with PR metadata + co-authors
For each commit referencing a PR (e.g. `(#2617)` or merge commit `Merge pull request #N`), fetch the PR author and any additional contributors. Use `multi_tool_use.parallel` to fan out the `gh pr view` calls.
// turbo
```bash
# Extract all PR numbers referenced in the range
grep -oE '#[0-9]+' /tmp/release_commits.txt | sort -u > /tmp/release_prs.txt
echo "PRs in range:"; cat /tmp/release_prs.txt
# Fetch author + co-author info for every PR
> /tmp/release_pr_meta.json
while read -r PR; do
N=${PR#\#}
gh pr view "$N" --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute \
--json number,title,author,mergeCommit,body \
>> /tmp/release_pr_meta.json 2>/dev/null || echo "(skip $PR — not found)"
echo "" >> /tmp/release_pr_meta.json
done < /tmp/release_prs.txt
```
#### 4c. Assemble the new CHANGELOG section
Using `/tmp/release_commits.txt` + `/tmp/release_pr_meta.json` + `/tmp/release_detailed.txt`, build a new entry that:
1. **Covers every commit** — read the full list and group by Conventional Commit type. A commit is "covered" iff it appears (or is intentionally rolled-up) in the new section.
2. **Groups using these section headers (model from PR #2617)**:
- `### ✨ New Features` — `feat(*)`
- `### 🔧 Bug Fixes` — `fix(*)`
- `### 📝 Maintenance` — `chore(*)`, `refactor(*)`, `docs(*)`, `test(*)`, `ci(*)`, `build(*)`
- `### 🔒 Security` — security-flagged commits (only if any)
3. **Entry format**:
```
- **type(scope):** human-friendly description — extra context if useful. ([#PR](https://github.com/diegosouzapw/OmniRoute/pull/PR) — thanks @author / @coauthor1 / @coauthor2)
```
- When **no PR** is referenced (direct commit on release branch): `(thanks @author)`.
- When the PR closed an external contributor's PR via cherry-pick or re-implementation, attribute BOTH the original author AND the implementer: `thanks @originalAuthor / @diegosouzapw`.
- **Co-authors** must be extracted from the merge commit body (`Co-Authored-By:` lines that pre-date Hard Rule #16) and from PR participants who supplied commits.
4. **Coverage check** — after drafting, diff the section against `/tmp/release_commits.txt`. Any unlisted commit must either be explicitly added or consolidated under a roll-up bullet (e.g. "various lint and test alignments"). Do NOT silently drop commits.
Place the new section in `CHANGELOG.md` right below `## [Unreleased]`, separated by `---`:
```markdown
## [Unreleased]
---
## [3.9.0] — 2026-05-27
### ✨ New Features
- **feat(scope):** description ([#1234](https://github.com/diegosouzapw/OmniRoute/pull/1234) — thanks @author)
- ...
### 🔧 Bug Fixes
- **fix(scope):** description ([#1235](https://github.com/diegosouzapw/OmniRoute/pull/1235) — thanks @author / @diegosouzapw)
- ...
### 📝 Maintenance
- **chore(scope):** description (thanks @diegosouzapw)
- ...
### 🏆 Hall of Contributors
A special thanks to everyone who contributed code, reviews, and tests for this release:
@user1, @user2, @user3
---
## [3.8.999] — 2026-05-20
```
> **🔴 HALL OF CONTRIBUTORS RULE**: After drafting all section bullets, parse every `@username` mention from the bullets (PR authors AND co-authors), deduplicate, sort, and append them as a `### 🏆 Hall of Contributors` block at the end of the new release section (before the trailing `---`).
#### 4d. Coverage assertion
// turbo
```bash
NEW_VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
# Count commits in range
COMMITS=$(wc -l < /tmp/release_commits.txt)
# Count bullets under the new section
BULLETS=$(awk "/^## \\[$NEW_VERSION\\]/{flag=1;next} /^## \\[/{flag=0} flag" CHANGELOG.md | grep -c '^- ')
echo "Commits in range: $COMMITS"
echo "Changelog bullets: $BULLETS"
if [ "$BULLETS" -lt $(( COMMITS / 3 )) ]; then
echo "⚠️ Bullet count looks low (< commits/3). Re-review /tmp/release_commits.txt for missed entries."
fi
```
> If a commit cannot be matched to a bullet, EITHER add it or explicitly justify the omission in this session before continuing.
### 5. Sync versioned files ⚠️ MANDATORY
> **CI will fail** if `docs/reference/openapi.yaml` version ≠ `package.json` version (`check:docs-sync` enforces this).
// turbo
```bash
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
sed -i "s/ version: .*/ version: $VERSION/" docs/reference/openapi.yaml
echo "✓ openapi.yaml → $VERSION"
for dir in electron open-sse; do
if [ -d "$dir" ] && [ -f "$dir/package.json" ]; then
(cd "$dir" && npm version "$VERSION" --no-git-tag-version --allow-same-version > /dev/null)
echo "✓ $dir/package.json → $VERSION"
fi
done
# Re-run install so workspace lockfile picks up the bumps
npm install
```
### 6. Sync README.md and i18n docs
There is **no `/update-docs` workflow** (deprecated in v3.8). Updates must happen manually OR via parallel agents.
**Recommended automation** — fan out via `multi_tool_use.parallel`:
1. Apply the substantive change to `README.md` first (feature table row + "What's new in vX.Y.Z" section).
2. Capture the diff: `git diff README.md > /tmp/readme.patch`.
3. Dispatch 5-10 parallel sub-tasks, each handling a slice of the 40 `docs/i18n/*/README.md`, translating the diff into the target language.
4. Update `docs/<AREA>.md` if architecture/counts changed (e.g. `docs/frameworks/MCP-SERVER.md` when MCP tools change).
5. Validate: `npm run check:docs-sync && npm run check:docs-all`.
### 7. Full quality gate (MANDATORY — replaces the old `npm test`)
> **Precedent**: the v3.8.2 cycle landed with 49 broken tests because only `npm test` was running. Lint + typecheck + cycles caught zero of those regressions.
// turbo
```bash
set -e
npm run lint
npm run typecheck:core
npm run check:cycles
npm run check:docs-all
npm test
```
All five must pass before opening the PR. If any fail, fix and re-run.
### 8. Stage, commit, and push (atomic — bump + features + changelog + i18n in ONE commit)
// turbo-all
```bash
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
git add -A
git commit -m "chore(release): v$VERSION — $(date -u +%F)"
git push origin "release/v$VERSION"
```
> **NEVER** include `Co-Authored-By:` trailers in the release commit (Hard Rule #16). Co-author attribution lives inside the CHANGELOG entries and the Hall of Contributors block.
### 9. Open PR to main
// turbo
```bash
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
# Extract the exact changelog entry for this version
awk "/^## \\[$VERSION\\]/{flag=1; print; next} /^---/{if(flag) {flag=0; exit}} flag" CHANGELOG.md > /tmp/changelog_body.txt
# Append PR-only metadata (test status + reviewer instructions)
{
echo ""
echo "---"
echo ""
echo "### Quality Gate"
echo "- lint: pass"
echo "- typecheck:core: pass"
echo "- check:cycles: pass"
echo "- check:docs-all: pass"
echo "- tests: pass"
echo ""
echo "### Coverage of commits since previous tag"
LAST_TAG=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0 HEAD~1 2>/dev/null || echo "(no previous tag)")
COMMITS=$(git rev-list --no-merges "$LAST_TAG..HEAD" | wc -l)
echo "- Range: \`$LAST_TAG..HEAD\`"
echo "- Commits inspected: $COMMITS"
echo ""
echo "### ⚠️ After merging: run Phase 2 (Local VPS homologation) before tagging."
} >> /tmp/changelog_body.txt
gh pr create \
--repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute \
--base main \
--head "release/v$VERSION" \
--title "Release v$VERSION" \
--body-file /tmp/changelog_body.txt
```
### 10. 🛑 STOP — Notify user & await PR confirmation (`BlockedOnUser: true`)
Present in the final response and stop. Do not continue to Phase 2 until the user explicitly approves.
Provide:
- PR URL
- Summary of changes (top 5 from CHANGELOG)
- Quality gate results
- List of files changed (`git diff --stat $LAST_TAG..HEAD`)
- Coverage count vs commits-in-range
**DO NOT proceed to Phase 2 until the user confirms the PR looks good and merges it.**
---
## Phase 2: Post-Merge Validation (Local VPS)
> Run only AFTER the user has merged the PR into `main` and all CI jobs pass.
### 11. Deploy `main` to the Local VPS
Delegate to the `deploy-vps-local-cx` skill (single source of truth for the deploy procedure — do NOT duplicate SCP/SSH commands here):
```
/deploy-vps-local-cx
```
The skill handles: checkout `main`, `npm pack`, scp to `192.168.0.15`, install, pm2 restart, and HTTP probe.
### 12. 🛑 STOP — Notify user & await final OK (`BlockedOnUser: true`)
Inform the user that `main` is running on `192.168.0.15:20128`. Provide a smoke-test checklist:
- [ ] `GET /` returns 200
- [ ] Dashboard login works (`/dashboard`)
- [ ] `/v1/chat/completions` with default provider returns a stream
- [ ] No critical errors in `pm2 logs omniroute --lines 100`
- [ ] Any release-specific UI features are reachable
Wait for user **OK** before Phase 3.
---
## Phase 3: Official Launch
> Run only AFTER the user gives the final OK from Phase 2.
### 13. Create git tag and GitHub Release
// turbo
```bash
git checkout main
git pull origin main
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
# Extract release notes section from CHANGELOG
NOTES=$(awk "/^## \\[$VERSION\\]/{flag=1; next} /^---/{if(flag) {flag=0; exit}} flag" CHANGELOG.md | sed -e 's/^[[:space:]]*//' -e 's/[[:space:]]*$//')
[ -z "$NOTES" ] && NOTES="OmniRoute v$VERSION Release"
git tag -a "v$VERSION" -m "Release v$VERSION"
git push origin "v$VERSION"
gh release create "v$VERSION" \
--repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute \
--title "v$VERSION" \
--notes "$NOTES" \
--target main \
|| gh release edit "v$VERSION" \
--repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute \
--title "v$VERSION" \
--notes "$NOTES"
```
### 14. 🐳 Trigger / verify Docker Hub build
> **CRITICAL**: Docker Hub and npm MUST publish the same version.
```bash
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
gh run list --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute --workflow docker-publish.yml --limit 3
gh run watch --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute
```
### 15. Publish to npm (usually CI)
`prepublishOnly` runs `npm run build:cli`. Manual fallback:
```bash
npm publish
npm info omniroute version # verify
```
### 16. Deploy to Akamai VPS (Production)
Delegate to the `deploy-vps-akamai-cx` skill if present, or run the inline equivalent of `deploy-vps-local-cx` against `69.164.221.35`. Do NOT duplicate the procedure here.
### 17. Rollback playbook (use only if Phase 3 fails after tag push)
If a fatal regression surfaces after the tag is pushed:
```bash
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
PREV=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0 "v$VERSION^")
# 1. Mark GitHub release as pre-release (do not delete history)
gh release edit "v$VERSION" --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute --prerelease
# 2. Re-deploy previous version to Akamai
git checkout "$PREV" && /deploy-vps-akamai-cx
# 3. Deprecate the broken npm version
npm deprecate "omniroute@$VERSION" "broken release — use $PREV"
# 4. Open follow-up issue and start a new patch cycle from main
```
---
## Phase 4: Release Monitoring & Artifact Validation
> Actively monitor the CI pipelines until all artifacts succeed. If any fail, stop and fix before continuing.
### 18. Monitor CI pipelines
Verify successful completion of:
1. **Docker Hub Publish**
2. **Electron Build**
3. **npm Registry Publish**
```bash
gh run list --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute --workflow docker-publish.yml --limit 1
gh run list --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute --workflow electron-release.yml --limit 1
gh run watch <RUN_ID>
npm info omniroute version
```
### 19. Handle failures
```bash
gh run view <RUN_ID> --log-failed
# Fix on main, then re-trigger:
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
gh workflow run <workflow.yml> --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute --ref "v$VERSION"
```
### 20. Preserve release branch
Branch is kept for historical purposes. Do not delete.
---
## Notes
- Ensure CHANGELOG, README and `docs/*` are current BEFORE this workflow — run `npm run check:docs-all` first.
- The `prepublishOnly` script runs `npm run build:cli` automatically during `npm publish`.
- After npm publish, verify with `npm info omniroute version`.
- Lock file sync errors are caused by skipping `npm install` after version bump.
- Use `gh auth switch -u diegosouzapw` if `git push` fails with the wrong account.
- Deploy procedures live in dedicated skills (`deploy-vps-local-cx`, `deploy-vps-akamai-cx` if present) — never inline the SCP/SSH commands here, to avoid drift.
## Known CI Pitfalls
| CI failure | Cause | Fix |
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| `[docs-sync] FAIL - OpenAPI version differs from package.json` | Skipped step 5 — `docs/reference/openapi.yaml` version not updated | Run step 5 (`sed -i ...`) and commit |
| `[docs-sync] FAIL - CHANGELOG.md first section must be "## [Unreleased]"` | `## [Unreleased]` missing or not at top of CHANGELOG | Add `## [Unreleased]\n\n---\n` before the first versioned `## [x.y.z]` |
| Electron Linux `.deb` build fails (`FpmTarget` error) | `fpm` Ruby gem not installed on `ubuntu-latest` runner | Already fixed in `electron-release.yml` (`gem install fpm` step) |
| Docker Hub `502 error writing layer blob` | Transient Docker Hub network error during ARM64 push | Re-run the Docker publish workflow; no code change needed |
| Coverage gate fails (statements/lines < 75% or branches < 70%) | Production code changed without tests | Add tests, re-run `npm run test:coverage` (see CLAUDE.md hard rule #9) |

899
.agents/skills/implement-features/SKILL.md
View File

@@ -1,899 +0,0 @@
---
name: implement-features-cx
description: Analyze open feature request issues, implement viable ones on dedicated branches, and respond to authors
---
# /implement-features — Feature Request Harvest, Research & Implementation Workflow
## Overview
A **5-phase** workflow that systematically harvests feature requests from GitHub issues, creates structured idea files, researches solutions across the internet and Git repositories, presents a consolidated report for user approval, then generates detailed implementation plans and executes them.
## Codex Execution Notes
- Treat `// turbo` / `// turbo-all` as instructions to use `multi_tool_use.parallel` for independent reads, checks, and GitHub calls.
- Approval gates (Phase 3 and Phase 4 → 5) are hard stops. Present the report/plan in the final response and do not move to implementation phases until the user explicitly approves.
- Keep harvest/research bounded enough to produce the approval report quickly; do not start implementation while still in report phases.
- The trust-but-verify audit in Phase 5.2 is mandatory before any commit — full lint + typecheck + cycles + build + coverage, plus a real `git diff` review for out-of-scope changes.
- Phase 1.7 stale-reclaim (15-day rule) is opt-in per run: only execute when the user asks for a "reclaim pass" or when the harvest report explicitly flags eligible IN FLIGHT / NEEDS DETAIL items.
**Output directory structure:**
```
_ideia/
├── viable/ # ✅ Approved, awaiting implementation
│ ├── 1046-native-playground.md
│ └── 1046-native-playground.requirements.md
├── implemented/ # ✅ Implemented but release PR not yet merged to main (transient)
│ └── 1046-native-playground.md
├── need_details/ # ❓ Issue OPEN — awaiting author clarification (permanent archive)
│ └── 1015-warp-terminal-mitm.md
├── defer/ # ⏭️ Issue CLOSED — good idea, deferred for future cycles (permanent)
│ └── 1041-smart-auto-combos.md
├── notfit/ # ❌ Issue CLOSED — out of scope (permanent)
│ └── 945-telegram-integration.md
├── exists/ # 🔁 Issue CLOSED — feature already shipped (permanent, kept separate from notfit)
│ └── 812-rate-limit-dashboard.md
└── in_flight/ # 🚧 Issue OPEN — third-party PR already addresses it (permanent until reclaim or merge)
└── 988-batch-export.md
_tasks/features-vX.Y.Z/ # Implementation plans (per-release)
└── 1046-native-playground.plan.md
```
> **LIFECYCLE RULE:**
> - `viable/` files are **MOVED** to `implemented/` once code lands on the release branch.
> - `implemented/` files are **DELETED** only after the release PR is merged to `main`.
> - All other buckets — `need_details/`, `defer/`, `notfit/`, `exists/`, `in_flight/` — are **permanent archives**. Even when the upstream issue is CLOSED, the local file stays. Future cycles can revisit any of them (Phase 1.7 stale-reclaim turns `in_flight/` and `need_details/` back into VIABLE after 15 days of upstream inactivity).
> - This preserves recovery context if implementation fails partially AND lets us re-evaluate old decisions when the project matures.
> **BRANCH RULE**: All implementation work MUST happen on the current `release/vX.Y.Z` branch. Never create separate `feat/` branches. If no release branch exists yet, delegate creation to `/generate-release` (see Phase 1.2) — do NOT reimplement bump logic here.
> **LANGUAGE RULE** (per `feedback_reply_language` memory): GitHub comments MUST match the language of the original issue body. Detect language by sampling the issue body + first 2 comments. Default to English when uncertain. All comment templates below are in English — translate to the detected language before posting. Internal docs, plan files, and idea files stay in English regardless.
---
## Phase 1 — Harvest: Collect & Catalog Feature Ideas
### 1.1 Identify the Repository
// turbo
- Run: `git -C <project_root> remote get-url origin` to extract owner/repo.
### 1.2 Ensure Release Branch Exists
Before doing any work, ensure you are on the current release branch:
```bash
git branch --show-current
```
**Decision tree:**
- If already on a `release/vX.Y.Z` branch → continue working there.
- If on `main` or any other branch → **delegate to `/generate-release`** by invoking its Phase 1 (steps 1–5: detect current version, bump, create branch, install). Do NOT reimplement the bump formula here — `/generate-release` owns the canonical version policy (patch bumps allowed up to `.999`; minor bump only when patch reaches `999`).
> **Why delegate?** Duplicating the bump formula caused divergence in the past. `/generate-release` is the single source of truth for version arithmetic and now allows patches up to `.999` before bumping minor.
### 1.3 Fetch ALL Open Feature Requests
// turbo-all
**⚠️ CRITICAL**: The JSON output of `gh issue list` can be truncated by the tool, silently hiding issues. You MUST use the two-step approach below.
**Step 1 — Get Issue numbers only** (small output, never truncated):
```bash
# Fetch issues with feature/enhancement labels
gh issue list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open -l "enhancement" --limit 500 --json number --jq '.[].number'
# Also check for [Feature] in title (common pattern when no labels are set)
gh issue list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open --limit 500 --json number,title --jq '.[] | select(.title | test("\\[Feature\\]|\\[feature\\]|feature request"; "i")) | .number'
```
- Merge both lists, deduplicate. Count and confirm the total.
- If the count hits the `--limit 500` ceiling, raise the limit and re-run — never proceed with a truncated set.
**Step 2 — Fetch full metadata for each Issue** (one call per issue):
```bash
gh issue view <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json number,title,labels,body,comments,createdAt,author,assignees
```
- Read the **entire body** — including description, use cases, screenshots, mockups, and any embedded images.
- Read **ALL comments** — community discussion, agreements, restrictions, owner responses, and linked PRs.
- **Images**: If the body or comments contain image URLs (`![...](...)` or `https://...png/jpg/gif`), **download and analyze them with the Read tool** (Claude can read PNG/JPG/GIF directly). Mockups and wireframes are often the most informative artifact — do NOT just "note" them, actually inspect their content and incorporate findings into the refined description.
- **Detect issue language** from body + first 2 comments and record it in the idea file front-matter (`reply_lang: pt-BR | en | es | ...`). This will drive comment translation in Phases 2.5 and 5.
- You may batch these into parallel calls (up to 4 at a time).
- Sort by oldest first (FIFO).
### 1.4 Create Idea Files (initially in `_ideia/` root)
For each feature request, create a structured idea file in `<project_root>/_ideia/`:
**Filename convention**: `<NUMBER>-<kebab-case-short-title>.md`
Example: `1046-native-playground.md`, `1041-smart-auto-combos.md`
#### 1.4a — If the idea file does NOT exist yet, create it:
```markdown
---
reply_lang: <detected-lang, e.g. pt-BR | en | es>
---
# Feature: <Title from Issue>
> GitHub Issue: #<NUMBER> — opened by @<author> on <date>
> Status: 📋 Cataloged | Priority: TBD
## 📝 Original Request
<Paste the FULL issue body here, preserving all formatting, images, and code blocks>
## 💬 Community Discussion
<Summarize ALL comments chronologically, noting who said what and any decisions or objections raised>
### Participants
- @<author> — Original requester
- @<commenter1> — <brief role/opinion>
- ...
### Key Points
- <bullet list of the most important discussion points>
- <agreements reached>
- <objections raised>
## 🖼️ Mockup / Image Analysis
<For each image embedded in the issue, summarize what it depicts: UI layout, data flow, architecture diagram, etc. Cite source URL.>
## 🎯 Refined Feature Description
<YOUR interpretation and enrichment of the feature request. Expand on what was asked, fill in logical gaps, provide concrete examples of how it would work. This section should be MORE detailed and clearer than the original request.>
### What it solves
- <problem 1>
- <problem 2>
### How it should work (high level)
1. <step 1>
2. <step 2>
3. ...
### Affected areas
- <list of codebase areas, modules, files likely affected>
## 📎 Attachments & References
- <any image URLs, mockup links, or external references from the issue>
## 🔗 Related Ideas
- <links to related \_ideia/ files if any overlap found>
```
#### 1.4b — If the idea file ALREADY exists, update it:
- Append new comments from the issue to the **Community Discussion** section.
- Update the **Refined Feature Description** if new information changes the understanding.
- Add any new **Related Ideas** cross-references found.
- Re-detect `reply_lang` only if the issue language clearly changed (uncommon).
- **Do NOT overwrite** existing content — append and enrich it.
### 1.5 Cross-Reference & Deduplication
After processing all issues:
- Scan all `_ideia/*.md` files for overlapping features.
- If two features are substantially the same, add `🔗 Related Ideas` cross-references to both.
- If one is a strict subset of another, note it in the smaller file: `> ℹ️ This feature is a subset of #<OTHER_NUMBER>. Consider implementing together.`
### 1.6 Detect In-Flight Work (avoid duplicate effort)
For each issue number, check whether an open PR or branch already targets it:
```bash
# Open PRs that link the issue
gh pr list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open --search "linked:#<NUMBER>" --json number,title,headRefName,updatedAt,author
# Local branches that mention the issue number
git branch -a | grep -E "(^|/)(feat|fix|refactor)/.*-?<NUMBER>(-|$)" || true
```
If a PR or branch already exists:
- Mark the idea file with `> ⚠️ In-flight: PR #<PR_NUMBER> by @<author> / branch <name> (last activity <date>)` near the top.
- **Skip Phase 2 research and Phase 4 planning** for this feature — the implementation is already in motion.
- In the Phase 3 report, list it under a separate "🚧 Already in progress" bucket; do NOT count it as VIABLE for implementation.
- The idea file will be moved to `_ideia/in_flight/` in Phase 2.5.2 (it stays there permanently, but Phase 1.7 may reclaim it later).
### 1.7 Stale Reclaim (15-day rule)
Some issues sit in `in_flight/` or `need_details/` forever — third-party PRs go cold, authors disappear, the world moves on. This phase reclaims them when they go quiet.
**Trigger conditions** (run for each issue currently in `_ideia/in_flight/` or `_ideia/need_details/`):
```bash
# For IN FLIGHT — last activity on the linked PR (commit OR comment)
gh pr view <PR_NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json updatedAt,commits,comments \
--jq '[.updatedAt, (.commits[-1].committedDate // ""), (.comments[-1].createdAt // "")] | max'
# For NEEDS DETAIL — last activity from the issue author (any comment by them)
gh issue view <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json comments,author \
--jq '.author.login as $a | [.comments[] | select(.author.login == $a) | .createdAt] | max // (.createdAt)'
```
Compute the gap in days between the timestamp above and today.
**Reclaim rule:**
| Bucket | Trigger | Action |
| --------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 🚧 IN FLIGHT | ≥15 days since last PR activity (commit OR comment by PR author) | Post **intent-to-take-over comment** (template below), wait **48h**, then reclaim if no response |
| ❓ NEEDS DETAIL | ≥15 days since last comment by the issue author | Post **gentle nudge** (template below), wait **48h**, then reclaim as VIABLE if no response |
**Intent-to-take-over comment (🚧 IN FLIGHT path)** — translate to `reply_lang`:
```markdown
Hi @<pr_author> and @<issue_author>! 👋
This PR (#<PR>) addressing issue #<NUMBER> hasn't had updates in <N> days. We'd love to ship this feature in our next release.
**Plan:** if there are no updates in the next **48 hours**, our team will take over the work and merge it as part of `release/vX.Y.Z`. The original PR will be referenced and authorship preserved in the commit trailer.
If you're still working on it, just drop a comment here and we'll hold off. Thanks for the contribution either way! 🙏
```
**Gentle nudge (❓ NEEDS DETAIL path)** — translate to `reply_lang`:
```markdown
Hi @<author>! 👋
It's been <N> days since we asked for more details on this feature request. We'd still love to move forward.
**Plan:** if we don't hear back in the next **48 hours**, we'll proceed with our best interpretation of the original request and add it to our backlog for implementation. We'll tag you on the implementation PR so you can review before it ships.
If you still want to provide the details, just reply here — we'll wait. 🙏
```
**Reclaim execution** (only after the 48h grace period, with no new author/PR-author activity):
1. Move the idea file to `_ideia/viable/` (preserve any prior content + add a `> ♻️ Reclaimed on <date> after 15-day inactivity` banner near the top).
2. If it was IN FLIGHT and a research file does not yet exist, run Phase 2 (Research) for it now.
3. Otherwise create the requirements file based on the existing content + a quick research pass.
4. Add a `viable_origin: stale_reclaim` line to the front-matter so the Phase 3 report can flag it.
5. In Phase 5 (commit / PR), include a commit trailer crediting the original PR author if applicable:
```
Originally-proposed-by: @<pr_author> in #<original_pr_number>
```
(This is NOT `Co-Authored-By` — hard rule #16 still applies. It is a free-form trailer that preserves credit without GitHub re-attributing the commit.)
> **Why 15 days + 48h grace?** Long enough that the original contributor has truly moved on; short enough that the feature still ships in the same release cycle. Grace period is documented in `feedback_issue_triage_independence` so we don't default to "trust prior triage" — we verify the silence is real.
---
## Phase 2 — Research: Find Solutions & Build Requirements
For each cataloged idea that is **viable** (aligns with the project's goals) AND not already in flight (per 1.6):
### 2.1 Viability Pre-Check
Before investing in research, quickly assess:
- [ ] Does this feature align with the project's goals and architecture?
- [ ] Is it technically feasible with the current codebase?
- [ ] Does it duplicate existing functionality?
- [ ] Would it introduce breaking changes or security risks?
- [ ] Is there enough detail to understand what's needed?
**Verdict options:**
| Verdict | When | Action |
| --------------------- | ------------------------------------- | --------------------------- |
| ✅ **VIABLE** | Good idea, enough context | Proceed to Research |
| ❓ **NEEDS DETAIL** | Good idea, insufficient spec | Skip research, ask author |
| ⏭️ **DEFER** | Good idea, too complex for this cycle | Catalog only, skip research |
| ❌ **NOT FIT** | Doesn't fit the project | Explain why |
| 🔁 **ALREADY EXISTS** | Feature already implemented | Point to existing feature |
| 🚧 **IN FLIGHT** | PR/branch already exists (from 1.6) | Skip — track only |
### 2.2 Internet Research (for VIABLE features)
For each viable feature, perform systematic research with an **early-stopping criterion**:
> **Stop as soon as EITHER condition is met:**
> - 3 reference implementations show a consistent pattern, OR
> - 1 high-quality repo (≥1k stars, updated within the last 12 months) already solves the problem cleanly.
>
> Cap at 10 repos total. Do NOT exhaustively browse — depth over breadth.
**Step 1 — Web search for similar implementations:**
```
WebSearch("how to implement <feature description> in <tech stack>")
WebSearch("<feature keyword> implementation nextjs typescript 2025 2026")
WebSearch("<feature keyword> open source library npm")
```
**Step 2 — Find reference Git repositories:**
```
WebSearch("site:github.com <feature keyword> <tech stack> stars:>100")
WebSearch("github <feature keyword> implementation recently updated 2026")
```
- Sort by most recently updated.
- For each repository (until stop criterion hit):
- Note the repo URL, star count, last commit date
- Read its README and relevant source files via `WebFetch`
- Extract the architectural approach, patterns used, and key code snippets
**Step 3 — Read API docs and standards:**
If the feature involves an external API, protocol, or standard:
- Find and read the official documentation
- Note version requirements, authentication patterns, rate limits
### 2.3 Create Requirements File
For each researched feature, create a requirements file alongside its idea file:
**Filename**: `<NUMBER>-<kebab-case-short-title>.requirements.md`
```markdown
# Requirements: <Feature Title>
> Feature Idea: [#<NUMBER>](./<NUMBER>-<kebab-case-short-title>.md)
> Research Date: <YYYY-MM-DD>
> Verdict: ✅ VIABLE
## 🔍 Research Summary
<Brief summary of what was found during research>
## 📚 Reference Implementations
| # | Repository | Stars | Last Updated | Approach | Relevance |
| --- | ---------------- | ----- | ------------ | -------- | ------------ |
| 1 | [repo/name](url) | ⭐ N | YYYY-MM-DD | <brief> | High/Med/Low |
| 2 | ... | | | | |
### Key Patterns Found
- <pattern 1 with code snippet or link>
- <pattern 2>
## 📐 Proposed Solution Architecture
### Approach
<Describe the chosen approach based on research findings>
### New Files
| File | Purpose |
| --------------------- | ------------- |
| `path/to/new/file.ts` | <description> |
### Modified Files
| File | Changes |
| -------------------------- | -------------- |
| `path/to/existing/file.ts` | <what changes> |
### Database Changes
- <migrations needed, if any>
### API Changes
- <new/modified endpoints, if any>
### UI Changes
- <new/modified pages/components, if any>
## ⚙️ Implementation Effort
- **Estimated complexity**: Low / Medium / High / Very High
- **Estimated files changed**: ~N
- **Dependencies needed**: <new npm packages, if any>
- **Breaking changes**: Yes/No — <details>
- **i18n impact**: <number of new translation keys>
- **Test coverage needed**: <brief description>
## ⚠️ Open Questions
- <question 1>
- <question 2>
## 🔗 External References
- <documentation URLs>
- <API references>
```
---
## Phase 2.5 — Organize: Sort Files into Category Directories
> **⚠️ This phase only moves files. It does NOT post comments or close issues.** All GitHub-visible actions are deferred to Phase 3.2 (after human approval).
### 2.5.1 Create Directory Structure
// turbo
```bash
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/viable
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/implemented
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/need_details
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/defer
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/notfit
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/exists
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/in_flight
```
> **Permanent archives**: `need_details/`, `defer/`, `notfit/`, `exists/`, `in_flight/`. Even after the upstream issue is closed, the local file stays — future cycles may revisit.
### 2.5.2 Move Idea Files to Category Subdirectories
After classification, move EVERY idea file to its correct subdirectory (still local-only — no GitHub side-effects):
```bash
# ✅ VIABLE — move idea + requirements files
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/viable/
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.requirements.md _ideia/viable/
# ❓ NEEDS DETAIL — viable but waiting for author response (issue stays OPEN)
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/need_details/
# ⏭️ DEFER — issue will be CLOSED but file is kept permanently for future re-evaluation
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/defer/
# ❌ NOT FIT — issue will be CLOSED but file is kept permanently
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/notfit/
# 🔁 ALREADY EXISTS — issue will be CLOSED but file is kept permanently (separate bucket from NOT FIT)
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/exists/
# 🚧 IN FLIGHT — issue stays OPEN, third-party PR is handling it; file kept permanently for Phase 1.7 stale-reclaim
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/in_flight/
```
No idea files should remain in `_ideia/` root after this step.
---
## Phase 3 — Report: Present Findings & Get Human Approval
### 3.1 🛑 MANDATORY STOP — Present Consolidated Report
After completing Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 2.5, **STOP and present the following report** in the chat. **No comments have been posted to GitHub yet** — that happens in 3.2 after approval.
Present a structured report containing:
#### 3.1a — Feature Summary Table
| # | Issue | Title | Verdict | Local Location | Planned GitHub Action |
| --- | ----- | ----- | ----------------- | ----------------------- | -------------------------------------- |
| 1 | #N | Title | ✅ VIABLE | `_ideia/viable/` | Comment + keep OPEN |
| 2 | #N | Title | ⏭️ DEFER | `_ideia/defer/` | Comment + CLOSE |
| 3 | #N | Title | ❌ NOT FIT | `_ideia/notfit/` | Comment + CLOSE |
| 4 | #N | Title | 🔁 EXISTS | `_ideia/exists/` | Comment with location + CLOSE |
| 5 | #N | Title | ❓ NEEDS DETAIL | `_ideia/need_details/` | Comment with questions + keep OPEN |
| 6 | #N | Title | 🚧 IN FLIGHT | `_ideia/in_flight/` | None — PR #M handles it |
| 7 | #N | Title | ♻️ RECLAIMED | `_ideia/viable/` | Intent comment posted in Phase 1.7 |
#### 3.1b — Viable Features Detail
For each VIABLE feature, provide a brief paragraph:
- What was found during research (with stop reason: "3-pattern consistency" or "dominant repo")
- The proposed approach
- Key risks or unknowns
- Which reference repositories were most useful
#### 3.1c — Issues Requiring Author Feedback
For features marked ❓ NEEDS DETAIL, list:
- What specific information is missing
- What examples or repository references would help
- Detected `reply_lang` for the question post
#### 3.1d — Ask for User Confirmation
End the report with:
> **Ready to proceed?**
>
> Approving will (a) post comments on GitHub in the detected language of each issue and (b) close DEFER / NOT FIT / EXISTS issues. VIABLE and NEEDS DETAIL stay open.
>
> - Reply **"sim"** / **"yes"** to post all comments AND generate implementation plans for all VIABLE features.
> - Reply **"only comments"** to post comments without generating plans yet.
> - Reply with specific issue numbers to scope the action.
> - Reply **"não"** / **"no"** to stop without touching GitHub.
### 3.2 Post GitHub Comments & Close Issues (only after approval)
> **⚠️ Do NOT execute this step without explicit user approval from 3.1d.**
For each issue, translate the appropriate template below into the `reply_lang` recorded in its idea file front-matter, then post. The English templates are reference only — never post the English version verbatim to a non-English issue.
---
#### For 🔁 ALREADY EXISTS — Comment + CLOSE issue
The feature already exists in the system. Explain WHERE it is and HOW to use it.
```markdown
Hi @<author>! Thanks for the suggestion! 🙏
Great news — this functionality **already exists** in OmniRoute:
**📍 Where to find it:** <exact dashboard path or settings location>
**🔧 How to use it:**
1. <step 1>
2. <step 2>
3. <step 3>
If you have any trouble finding or using it, feel free to ask in a Discussion. We're always happy to help!
Closing this as the feature is already available. 🎉
```
```bash
gh issue close <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --comment "<translated comment>"
```
---
#### For ⏭️ DEFER — Comment + CLOSE issue
Thank the user, explain the idea was cataloged, and that we'll study it before implementing.
```markdown
Hi @<author>! Thanks for this thoughtful feature request! 🙏
We really appreciate the detailed proposal. We've **cataloged your idea** and it's now part of our improvement backlog.
Due to the **significant architectural impact** of this feature, we'll need to conduct thorough use-case studies and architectural analysis before we start development. This ensures we build it right and don't introduce regressions.
**What happens next:**
- Your idea is saved in our internal feature backlog
- We'll conduct architecture studies when this area is prioritized
If you want to track progress, please **subscribe to the repository releases** — every implemented feature is announced in the CHANGELOG.
Thank you for contributing to OmniRoute's roadmap! 🚀
```
```bash
gh issue close <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --comment "<translated comment>"
```
---
#### For ❌ NOT FIT — Comment + CLOSE issue
Politely explain why the feature doesn't fit the project scope.
```markdown
Hi @<author>! Thanks for the suggestion! 🙏
After careful analysis, we've determined that this feature **falls outside OmniRoute's core scope** as a proxy/router.
**Reason:** <explain why — e.g., "Telegram integration belongs in the application/orchestrator layer that consumes OmniRoute's API, not inside the router itself.">
**Alternative:** <suggest an alternative approach if possible>
We appreciate you thinking of ways to improve OmniRoute! If you'd like to discuss this further, feel free to open a Discussion. 🙏
```
```bash
gh issue close <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --comment "<translated comment>"
```
---
#### For ❓ NEEDS DETAIL — Comment (keep OPEN)
Ask for the specific missing details needed.
```markdown
Hi @<author>! Thanks for the feature request — it's an interesting idea and we'd love to explore it further. 🙏
To move forward, we need a few more details:
1. <specific question 1>
2. <specific question 2>
3. <specific question 3>
If you know of any **open-source projects or repositories** that implement something similar, please share links — it would help us design the best solution.
Looking forward to your response! 🚀
```
---
#### For ✅ VIABLE — Comment (keep OPEN)
Thank the user, confirm we've cataloged their idea, and explain that progress is tracked in releases.
```markdown
Hi @<author>! Thanks for the great feature suggestion! 🙏
We've analyzed your request and it aligns well with OmniRoute's roadmap. We've **cataloged this feature** and it's in our implementation backlog.
**Status:** 📋 Cataloged for future implementation
This issue will be **closed automatically by the merge commit** when the feature ships. To follow along, you can subscribe to repository releases or watch this issue.
Thank you for helping improve OmniRoute! 🚀
```
**⚠️ Do NOT close viable issues — they remain OPEN until the implementation PR closes them via commit message.**
---
## Phase 4 — Plan: Generate Implementation Plans (after user says "yes")
> **⚠️ Do NOT enter this phase without explicit user approval from Phase 3.**
### 4.1 Pre-Plan Context Load (mandatory)
Before writing ANY plan, read:
1. `docs/architecture/REPOSITORY_MAP.md` — to know which directory owns what.
2. `docs/architecture/CODEBASE_DOCUMENTATION.md` — for the engineering reference.
3. The matching "Adding a New X" scenario from `CLAUDE.md` (provider, API route, DB module, MCP tool, A2A skill, cloud agent, embedded service, guardrail, eval, skill, webhook event).
4. Any docs linked from the requirements file's "External References" section.
This ensures plans cite real paths and follow the established add-a-X recipe, instead of inventing structure.
### 4.2 Create Task Directory
```bash
mkdir -p <project_root>/_tasks/features-vX.Y.Z/
```
### 4.3 Generate One Implementation Plan Per Feature
For each VIABLE feature approved by the user, create:
**Filename**: `_tasks/features-vX.Y.Z/<NUMBER>-<kebab-case-title>.plan.md`
```markdown
# Implementation Plan: <Feature Title>
> Issue: #<NUMBER>
> Idea: [\_ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-title.md](../../_ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-title.md)
> Requirements: [\_ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-title.requirements.md](../../_ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-title.requirements.md)
> Branch: `release/vX.Y.Z`
> Matching CLAUDE.md recipe: <e.g. "Adding a New Provider">
## Overview
<Brief description of what will be built>
## Pre-Implementation Checklist
- [ ] Read all related source files listed below
- [ ] Confirm no conflicts with in-flight PRs (re-run Phase 1.6 lookup)
- [ ] Verify database migration numbering (next free integer in `src/lib/db/migrations/`)
## Implementation Steps
### Step 1: <Title>
**Files:**
- `path/to/file.ts` — <what to change>
**Details:**
<Detailed description of the change, including code patterns to follow, function signatures, etc.>
### Step 2: <Title>
...
### Step N: Tests (MANDATORY per CLAUDE.md hard rule #8)
**New test files:**
- `tests/unit/<test-file>.test.mjs` — <what to test>
**Test cases:**
- [ ] <test case 1>
- [ ] <test case 2>
- [ ] Coverage check: confirm overall coverage stays ≥75% statements/lines/functions, ≥70% branches (hard rule #9)
### Step N+1: i18n
**Translation keys to add:**
- `<namespace>.<key>` — "<English value>"
### Step N+2: Documentation
- [ ] Update CHANGELOG.md (current release section)
- [ ] Update relevant docs/ files
- [ ] If touching error responses, follow `docs/security/ERROR_SANITIZATION.md`
- [ ] If touching upstream credentials, follow `docs/security/PUBLIC_CREDS.md`
## Verification Plan (Trust-but-Verify — mandatory before declaring done)
1. `git status` + `git diff --stat` — review every changed file; flag anything outside the plan's declared scope
2. `npm run lint` — 0 new errors
3. `npm run typecheck:core` — clean
4. `npm run typecheck:noimplicit:core` — clean
5. `npm run check:cycles` — no new circular deps
6. `npm run build` — must pass
7. `npm run test:coverage` — coverage gate respected
8. `npm run check-docs-sync` (via pre-commit hook) — passes
9. Manual UI verification if the feature touches frontend (start dev server, exercise golden path + 1 edge case)
## Commit Plan
```
feat: <description> (#<NUMBER>)
```
```
### 4.4 Present Plans for Final Approval
Present a summary of all generated plans:
> **Implementation plans generated:**
>
> | # | Feature | Plan File | Steps | Effort | CLAUDE.md recipe |
> | --- | ------- | ---------------------------------------- | ------- | ------ | ---------------------- |
> | 1 | <title> | `_tasks/features-vX.Y.Z/N-title.plan.md` | N steps | Medium | Adding a New Provider |
>
> Reply **"sim"** / **"yes"** to begin implementation of all features.
> Reply with specific issue numbers to implement only certain ones.
---
## Phase 5 — Execute: Implement the Plans (after user says "yes")
> **⚠️ Do NOT enter this phase without explicit user approval from Phase 4.**
### 5.1 Implement Each Feature
For each approved plan, execute it step by step:
1. **Follow the plan** — implement exactly as specified in the `.plan.md` file
2. **Mark progress** — flip checkboxes to `[x]` in the plan as each step completes
### 5.2 Trust-but-Verify Audit (mandatory before commit)
> Aligned with `~/.claude/CLAUDE.md` global rule: never trust a subagent's summary alone.
Run the full audit checklist from the plan's "Verification Plan" section AND inspect the diff yourself:
```bash
git status
git diff --stat
git diff # full diff, scan for out-of-scope changes
npm run lint
npm run typecheck:core
npm run typecheck:noimplicit:core
npm run check:cycles
npm run build
npm run test:coverage
```
**Block-on-failure checklist:**
- [ ] No files changed outside the plan's declared scope (or scope expansion explicitly justified)
- [ ] No deleted symbols/routes/files without a documented replacement (grep to confirm)
- [ ] No weakened or removed test assertions (only additions or alignments with real behavior)
- [ ] Coverage gate green (75/75/75/70)
- [ ] All commands above exit 0
- [ ] If UI was touched: manual smoke test passed and noted
If any item fails, **fix root cause** before committing. Do NOT bypass with `--no-verify` (hard rule #10).
### 5.3 Commit (one feature, one commit)
```bash
git add <only files in the plan>
git commit -m "feat: <description> (#<NUMBER>)"
```
> **No `Co-Authored-By` trailers** (hard rule #16). Commits go solely under `diegosouzapw`.
Then move (do NOT delete yet) the idea file to `_ideia/implemented/`:
```bash
mv _ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-<title>.md _ideia/implemented/
mv _ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-<title>.requirements.md _ideia/implemented/ 2>/dev/null || true
```
> **Why move, not delete?** If the release PR is reverted or rebased, we still have the context. The file is deleted only after the PR merges to `main` (see 5.6).
Continue to the next feature on the same branch — do NOT switch branches between features.
### 5.4 Respond to Authors
For each implemented feature, post a final close-comment **translated into the issue's `reply_lang`**:
```markdown
✅ **Implemented in `release/vX.Y.Z`!**
Hi @<author>! Great news — your feature request has been implemented! 🎉
**What was done:**
- <bullet list of what was built>
**How to try it (after the release PR merges):**
```bash
git fetch origin && git checkout main && git pull
npm install && npm run dev
```
This will be included in the upcoming **vX.Y.Z** release. Feel free to reopen if you spot any issues! 🚀
```
```bash
gh issue close <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --comment "<translated comment>"
```
### 5.5 Finalize the Release Branch
After implementing all approved features:
1. **Update CHANGELOG.md** on the release branch with all new feature entries
2. Push: `git push origin release/vX.Y.Z`
3. Hand off to `/generate-release` for the "Tests → Commit → Push → PR to main" stage. Refer to it **by stage name**, not step number, so this command does not break if `/generate-release` renumbers steps.
### 5.6 Post-Merge Cleanup (only after release PR merges to main)
Once the release PR is merged:
```bash
# Now safe to delete — commit history + CHANGELOG are the source of truth
rm _ideia/implemented/<NUMBER>-*.md
```
> If running this command before the merge: STOP at 5.5 and skip 5.6. Re-enter the workflow later just for the cleanup.
### 5.7 Final Summary Report
Present a final summary report to the user:
| Issue | Title | Verdict | Action | Commit |
| ----- | ----- | ---------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------- | --------- |
| #N | Title | ✅ Implemented | Issue closed, idea file in `_ideia/implemented/` (until merge) | `abc1234` |
| #N | Title | ♻️ Reclaimed | Was IN FLIGHT / NEEDS DETAIL, reclaimed after 15d → implemented | `abc1234` |
| #N | Title | ⏭️ Deferred | Issue closed + permanent archive in `_ideia/defer/` | — |
| #N | Title | ❌ Not Fit | Issue closed + permanent archive in `_ideia/notfit/` | — |
| #N | Title | 🔁 Exists | Issue closed + permanent archive in `_ideia/exists/` | — |
| #N | Title | ❓ Needs Detail | Issue OPEN, archive in `_ideia/need_details/` | — |
| #N | Title | 🚧 In Flight | Issue OPEN, archive in `_ideia/in_flight/`, tracked by PR #M | — |
Include:
- Total features harvested
- Total ideas archived per bucket (`need_details/` / `defer/` / `notfit/` / `exists/` / `in_flight/`)
- Total features implemented (idea files in `_ideia/implemented/`, awaiting post-merge cleanup)
- Total reclaimed via Phase 1.7 (stale 15-day rule)
- Total issues closed
- Total issues left open (NEEDS DETAIL + VIABLE-pending + IN FLIGHT)
- Audit results: lint / typecheck / cycles / build / coverage (pass-count per phase)
- Languages used in posted comments (e.g. "3× pt-BR, 5× en, 1× es")

51
.agents/skills/issue-triage/SKILL.md
View File

@@ -1,51 +0,0 @@
---
name: issue-triage-cx
description: How to respond to GitHub issues with insufficient information
---
# Issue Triage Workflow
Respond to GitHub issues that need more information before they can be investigated.
## Steps
### 1. Identify issues needing triage
```bash
gh issue list --state open --limit 20
```
### 2. Evaluate each issue
Check if the issue has:
- Clear reproduction steps
- Environment details (OS, Node.js version, OmniRoute version)
- Error logs/screenshots
- Expected vs actual behavior
### 3. Respond with triage template
For issues missing information:
```markdown
Thank you for reporting this issue! To help us investigate, please provide:
1. **OmniRoute version**: (`omniroute --version`)
2. **Node.js version**: (`node --version`)
3. **Operating system**: (e.g., Ubuntu 24.04, macOS 15, Windows 11)
4. **Installation method**: (npm, Docker, source)
5. **Steps to reproduce**: (exact commands/actions that trigger the issue)
6. **Error logs**: (paste relevant logs from the console)
7. **Expected behavior**: (what should happen)
This will help us debug and resolve your issue faster. 🙏
```
### 4. Label the issue
Add appropriate labels: `needs-info`, `bug`, `enhancement`, `question`, etc.
```bash
gh issue edit <NUMBER> --add-label "needs-info"
```

269
.agents/skills/resolve-issues/SKILL.md
View File

@@ -1,269 +0,0 @@
---
name: resolve-issues-cx
description: Fetch all open GitHub issues, analyze bugs, resolve up to 30 per batch via per-issue worktrees + PRs into the release branch, triage the rest, wait for user validation
---
# /resolve-issues — Automated Issue Resolution Workflow
## Overview
This workflow fetches all open issues from the project's GitHub repository, classifies them, analyzes bugs, proposes a resolution plan, waits for user validation, and ONLY THEN implements fixes. The current `release/vX.Y.Z` branch is the integration target — each individual fix is implemented on its own short-lived `fix/<issue>-<short>` branch inside its own git worktree, merged into the release branch via PR, then the worktree and local branch are deleted. The release branch is later merged to `main` via `/generate-release`.
## Codex Execution Notes
- Treat `// turbo` / `// turbo-all` as instructions to use `multi_tool_use.parallel` for independent reads, checks, and GitHub calls.
- The initial report/plan is a hard stop. Do not edit code, close issues, or commit until the user explicitly approves the report.
- Keep classification and bug analysis bounded enough to produce the user-facing report before deep implementation work.
- One worktree per fix — never reuse a worktree for two different issues, even sequentially in the same session.
> **BRANCH RULE**: The current `release/vX.Y.Z` branch is the integration target. Each fix MUST live on its own `fix/<ISSUE>-<short>` branch cut from the release branch, inside its own worktree under `.worktrees/`. After the per-issue PR is merged into the release branch, the worktree and local branch are deleted. Never commit fixes directly to the release branch. If no release branch exists yet, create one first using `/generate-release` Phase 1 steps 1–5.
> **⛔ PR PROHIBITION**: If a fix is associated with a contributor's PR, you MUST merge their PR — NEVER close it and re-implement the fix yourself. See `/review-prs` workflow for the full policy. The `gh pr close` command is FORBIDDEN unless the repository owner explicitly requests it.
> **🌐 REPLY LANGUAGE**: All comments posted to issues (close messages, RESPOND comments, PR descriptions visible to the reporter) MUST match the reporter's language. When in doubt, default to **English**. The reporter's language is detected from the issue body and prior comments by that author.
## Steps
### 1. Identify the GitHub Repository
// turbo
- Run: `git -C <project_root> remote get-url origin` to extract the owner/repo
- Parse the owner and repo name from the URL
### 2. Ensure Release Branch Exists
// turbo
Before doing any work, ensure a `release/vX.Y.Z` branch exists. If you are currently on `main`, create one:
```bash
git branch --show-current
# If on main, determine next version and create the release branch
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
NEXT=$(node -p "const [a,b,c]=('$VERSION').split('.').map(Number); c>=999?a+'.'+(b+1)+'.0':a+'.'+b+'.'+(c+1)")
git checkout -b release/v$NEXT
npm version patch --no-git-tag-version
npm install
```
> Threshold: patches climb to `.999` before rolling. Example: `3.4.999` → `3.5.0`.
If already on a `release/vX.Y.Z` branch, continue working there.
### 3. Fetch All Open Issues (cap 30 per batch)
// turbo-all
**⚠️ CRITICAL**: The JSON output of `gh issue list` can be truncated by the tool, silently hiding issues. Use the two-step approach below.
**Step 3a — Get Issue numbers only** (small output, never truncated):
- Run: `gh issue list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open --limit 500 --json number --jq '.[].number'`
- Count them and remember the total.
**Step 3b — Fetch full metadata for each Issue** (parallel, validated against 3a):
- For each issue number from step 3a, run:
`gh issue view <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json number,title,labels,body,comments,createdAt,author,url`
- Batch in parallel (8–12 concurrent calls). After completion, assert `fetched_count == count_from_3a`; if mismatch, retry the missing IDs.
- Sort by oldest first (FIFO).
**Step 3c — Cap at 30 per run**:
- If more than 30 open issues qualify as bugs after step 4, ask the user which subset of up to 30 to handle now. The remainder is deferred to the next run.
### 4. Classify Each Issue
For each issue, determine its type:
- **Bug** — Has `bug` label, or body contains error messages, stack traces, "doesn't work", "broken", "crash", "error"
- **Feature Request** — Has `enhancement`/`feature` label, or body describes new functionality
- **Question** — Has `question` label, or is asking "how to" something
- **Other** — Anything else
Focus ONLY on **Bugs** for resolution. Feature requests and questions are skipped with a note in the final report.
#### 4.5. PR-Linked Check (mandatory)
For every bug, query linked PRs:
```bash
gh issue view <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json closedByPullRequestsReferences,body
```
If the issue is referenced by an **open** contributor PR (or the body links to one), do NOT plan a self-implemented fix. Mark the issue as `🤝 PR-LINKED — redirect to /review-prs` in the report and stop deeper analysis for it. **NEVER close the contributor PR.**
### 5. Deep-Read Each Bug Issue (One-by-One Analysis)
Read each bug issue thoroughly, one at a time. Each issue gets focused attention.
#### 5a. Understand the Problem
1. **Read the entire body** — Description, Steps to Reproduce, Expected/Actual Behavior, Error Logs, Screenshots
2. **Read ALL comments** — bot triage (Kilo, etc.) and owner/community responses. Look for:
- Someone already responded with a fix
- Community member confirmed it is resolved
- Bot duplicate flag. **DO NOT blindly trust bot labels (e.g., `kilo-duplicate`).** Re-verify independently from current source + web research.
3. **Identify the claimed error** — exact error message, status code, provider/model, OS, Node version.
#### 5b. Check Information Sufficiency
Verify the issue contains:
- [ ] Clear description of the problem
- [ ] Steps to reproduce OR error logs
- [ ] Provider/model/version information
- [ ] Expected vs actual behavior
**If ANY item is missing → auto-classify as `📝 RESPOND — Needs Info` and skip 5d.** Do not attempt root-cause analysis on under-specified issues.
#### 5c. Determine Issue Disposition
| Disposition | When to Apply | Action |
| ---------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------- |
| **✅ CLOSE — Already Fixed** | Owner responded with fix + no user follow-up, OR community confirmed fix | Close with comment citing which version fixed it |
| **✅ CLOSE — Duplicate** | You have independently verified the issue is a duplicate (do NOT rely solely on bot flags) + user provides no new info | Close referencing the original issue |
| **✅ CLOSE — Stale** | We requested logs/info > 7 days ago with no reply | Close thanking the user, invite to reopen if needed |
| **📝 RESPOND — Needs Info** | Issue is real but missing critical reproduction details (also triggered by 5b) | Comment asking for specifics per `/issue-triage` |
| **📝 RESPOND — User Config** | Error is caused by unsupported env (Node version, wrong model path, missing API enablement) | Comment explaining the user-side fix |
| **🤝 PR-LINKED** | An open contributor PR already targets this issue (from step 4.5) | Redirect to `/review-prs`; do not re-implement |
| **🔧 FIX — Code Change** | Root cause is confirmed in the codebase | Research, propose solution in report, wait for approval |
#### 5d. For "FIX — Code Change" Issues
Before coding, perform deep source analysis:
1. **Search the codebase** — grep for error strings, function names, affected files
2. **Search the web** — upstream API changes, SDK updates, breaking changes
3. **Read the full source file** — don't rely on grep snippets
4. **Verify the root cause** is in our code, not user misconfiguration
5. **Formulate a proposed solution** — exact files/lines/logic
6. **Create an Implementation Plan file** at `_tasks/fixes-vX.Y.Z/<ISSUE>-<short-description>.plan.md` (`vX.Y.Z` = current release branch version). Create the directory first: `mkdir -p _tasks/fixes-vX.Y.Z`. The plan contains: Overview, Reproduction Steps, Regression Test Outline, Implementation Steps (files/changes), Rollout Notes.
7. **DO NOT modify the codebase yet** — wait for user approval.
#### 5e. For "RESPOND" Issues
Post a substantive comment that:
- Acknowledges the specific error reported
- Explains the likely root cause
- Provides concrete steps (version upgrade, env var fix, model path correction)
- Asks for follow-up info if needed
**No generic templates.** Every comment references the user's specific error and environment, and is written in the reporter's language (English default).
### 6. Generate Report & Wait for Validation
Present a summary report. For FIX bugs, explicitly explain the proposed solution (files to change + logic) and confirm it will land via per-issue worktree → PR → release branch after approval. Include the reporter's detected language per row so the user can verify.
| Issue | Title | Status | Reply Lang | Proposed Action / Version |
| ----- | ----- | -------------- | ---------- | ------------------------------------------ |
| #N | Title | ✅ Close | en | Already fixed / duplicate (explain why) |
| #N | Title | 🔧 Propose | pt-BR | Code fix plan summary + worktree branch |
| #N | Title | 📝 Respond | en | Guidance comment to be posted |
| #N | Title | ❓ Needs Info | en | Triage comment to be posted |
| #N | Title | 🤝 PR-Linked | en | Redirect to /review-prs (PR #M) |
| #N | Title | ⏭️ Skip | — | Feature request / not a bug |
> **⚠️ IMPORTANT**: Do NOT implement code changes, commit, push, or close issues at this step.
> Wait for the user to review the proposed fixes and respond with **OK** before proceeding.
- If the user says **OK** → Proceed to step 7
- If the user requests changes → Adjust and re-present the report
- If the user rejects → Revert any accidental changes and stop
### 7. Implement Fixes via Per-Issue Worktrees + PRs (only after user approval)
For each approved FIX issue (up to 30 per batch), repeat the following sequence. Issues can be processed sequentially or in parallel (one worktree each — never two fixes in the same worktree).
#### 7.1. Spin up an isolated worktree on a fresh fix branch
```bash
ISSUE=<NUMBER>
SHORT=<short-kebab-desc>
RELEASE_BRANCH=$(git -C <project_root> branch --show-current) # release/vX.Y.Z
WT_DIR=".worktrees/fix-${ISSUE}-${SHORT}"
BRANCH="fix/${ISSUE}-${SHORT}"
git fetch origin "$RELEASE_BRANCH"
git worktree add "$WT_DIR" -b "$BRANCH" "origin/$RELEASE_BRANCH"
cd "$WT_DIR"
```
#### 7.2. Write the regression test first (TDD)
- Author a unit/integration test that reproduces the bug. **It must fail on the unfixed code.** Run it and confirm the failure.
- Hard rule #8: any production change must ship with tests in the same PR. The regression test is non-negotiable.
#### 7.3. Implement the fix
- Apply the approved plan from `_tasks/fixes-vX.Y.Z/<ISSUE>-<short>.plan.md`.
- Keep the diff scoped to this issue. No drive-by refactors.
#### 7.4. Run the test suite
- `npm run test:all` (or the appropriate suite for the touched area; the regression test MUST be included).
- All tests must pass before commit. Also run the relevant `lint` / `typecheck` per CLAUDE.md trust-but-verify checklist.
#### 7.5. Update CHANGELOG.md and commit (single commit, same diff)
- Add the new bug-fix entry under the current `vX.Y.Z` section of CHANGELOG.md.
- CHANGELOG entry + code + test go in **one** commit on the fix branch:
```bash
git add <changed files> CHANGELOG.md
git commit -m "fix: <description> (#${ISSUE})"
```
#### 7.6. Push and open a PR into the release branch
```bash
git push -u origin "$BRANCH"
gh pr create \
--base "$RELEASE_BRANCH" \
--head "$BRANCH" \
--title "fix: <description> (#${ISSUE})" \
--body "Closes #${ISSUE}\n\n<short summary, plan link, regression test reference>"
```
#### 7.7. Merge the PR into the release branch
- Wait for CI green, then merge with the project's default merge strategy.
- The PR title becomes the release-branch commit.
#### 7.8. Clean up worktree and local branch
```bash
cd <project_root>
git worktree remove "$WT_DIR"
git branch -D "$BRANCH"
```
#### 7.9. Close the issue with a localized comment
Match the reporter's language (English default). Template:
> **EN**: Thanks for reporting! Fixed in `release/vX.Y.Z` (already merged into the active development branch — feel free to pull and test it now). It will ship in the next release (vX.Y.Z).
>
> **pt-BR**: Obrigado pelo report! Corrigido em `release/vX.Y.Z` (já mergeado na branch de desenvolvimento atual — pode dar pull e testar). Vai sair na próxima release (vX.Y.Z).
```bash
gh issue close "$ISSUE" --repo <owner>/<repo> --comment "<localized message above>"
```
#### 7.10. Close non-FIX dispositions
After all FIX issues are merged:
- `Duplicate`: close referencing the original issue (localized).
- `Stale`: close thanking the user and inviting reopen (localized).
- `RESPOND — Needs Info` / `RESPOND — User Config`: post the substantive comment from 5e (localized).
- `PR-LINKED`: leave the issue open; comment redirecting to the contributor PR if not already linked.
#### 7.11. Hand off to release flow (optional)
If a release PR to `main` is desired now, run `/generate-release` Phase 1 steps 7–10 (tests → commit version bump → push → open PR to main → wait for user).
If NO fixes were committed, skip 7.7–7.11 and just conclude the workflow.

274
.agents/skills/review-discussions/SKILL.md
View File

@@ -1,274 +0,0 @@
---
name: review-discussions-cx
description: Read all open GitHub Discussions, summarize them, respond to pending ones, create issues from actionable feature requests, and triage stale threads for closure
---
# /review-discussions — GitHub Discussions Review & Response Workflow
## Overview
This workflow reads all open GitHub Discussions, generates a categorized summary, identifies which ones need a response, drafts and posts replies, optionally creates issues from actionable feature requests, and triages stale threads for closure.
**Modern tooling (replaces deprecated `browser_subagent` flow):**
- Reads use `gh api graphql` — one query returns 50 discussions with full bodies, comments, replies, IDs, and `updatedAt`.
- Writes (post comment, create issue, close discussion) use `gh api graphql` mutations or `gh issue create`.
- Pace at ~1s between writes to avoid abuse-detection throttling.
- `WebFetch` is acceptable only for read-only HTML scraping when GraphQL is unavailable — never for write actions.
## Codex Execution Notes
- Treat `// turbo` / `// turbo-all` as instructions to use `multi_tool_use.parallel` for independent reads (e.g., parallel `gh issue list` dedup searches across multiple FRs) — never for write actions.
- The summary report is a hard stop. Do not post discussion replies, create issues, or close discussions until the user explicitly approves each phase.
- Use the `apply_patch` tool to write reply bodies to `/tmp/reply-<num>.md` before invoking `gh api graphql -F body=@/tmp/reply-<num>.md` if the body contains tricky shell-escape characters.
- Stop after step 4 (summary), step 6 (issue creation), and step 8 (stale triage). Three explicit consents per run.
// turbo-all
## Steps
### 1. Identify the GitHub Repository
- Run: `git -C <project_root> remote get-url origin` to extract `owner/repo`.
- Parse owner and repo name from the URL (https or ssh form).
### 2. Fetch All Open Discussions (single GraphQL query)
Single `gh api graphql` call — return everything needed for triage. Critical fields: `id` (node ID, **not** the visible `number`), `number`, `title`, `url`, `createdAt`, `updatedAt`, `author.login`, `category.name`, `body`, `answerChosenAt`, plus nested `comments(first: 50) { totalCount, nodes { id, author.login, body, createdAt, replies(first: 20) { nodes { author.login, body, createdAt } } } }`.
Persist the raw JSON to `/tmp/discussions-<repo>-<date>.json` so re-runs in the same session avoid a re-fetch. Build an `id → number` map for the post phase — the GraphQL `addDiscussionComment` mutation requires the node ID, not the number.
Capture **image attachments** present in body or comments (`<img src="...">` or markdown `![...](...)`). Surface their count in the per-discussion summary (e.g., `📷 3 screenshots`) so the user can decide if visual context matters before approving a draft.
### 3. Summarize All Discussions
For each discussion, extract:
- **Title** and **#Number**
- **Author** (GitHub username)
- **Category** (Announcements, General, Ideas, Q&A, Show and tell)
- **Created** + **Last updated** (ISO date)
- **Summary** of original post (1-2 sentences)
- **Comment count** + **last commenter** + **last comment date** — determine these by **chronological `createdAt`**, not iteration order. Comments and their nested replies must be merged into a single sorted timeline before picking the latest event (otherwise a recent top-level reply gets shadowed by an older nested reply of an earlier comment, and the discussion is misclassified).
- **Maintainer involvement**: whether the repo owner already replied, and how many times
- **Pending action** — derived state, see categories below
- **Attachments**: count of screenshots / videos / pastebin links
- **Detected language** of the reporter (for reply-language matching)
### 4. Present Summary Report to User
Group by **pending action**, not by category, so the human sees triage buckets at a glance:
| State | Meaning |
| ----------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| ⚠️ Needs first response | Zero comments, or all comments are from non-maintainers |
| 🔄 Follow-up pending | Maintainer replied, but reporter or third party added a new comment maintainer has not addressed |
| 🕒 Stale (>15d) | Maintainer was last to comment, no activity for 15+ days — candidate for soft-close or reporter-ping (see step 8)|
| ✅ Answered | Maintainer already replied AND last commenter is the maintainer AND age < 15d |
| 🏁 Resolved | `answerChosenAt` is set |
Within each bucket, present a table:
| # | Category | Title | Author | Updated | Notes |
| --- | -------- | ------------------ | ------ | ------- | ---------------------- |
| #N | Q&A | short title (60ch) | @user | YYYY-MM-DD | 📷2 · 🐛bug · 💡FR |
Tag rows with content hints when detected: `🐛bug` (`[BUG]` / `error` / stacktrace in body), `💡FR` (`feature request` / `add support for`), `❓support` (config/usage question), `🙏thanks` (short ack-only follow-up).
### 5. Draft & Post Responses
#### Reply templates by intent
Pick the template that matches the discussion intent — do NOT use a single generic format.
**A. Bug confirmed** — ack + root cause + tracking + workaround
```
Hey @user! Confirmed -- {root cause in one sentence}. I traced it to `path/to/file.ts:line`.
{Why it happens: 2-4 sentences of technical detail}
I have opened {issue #N} to track the fix. Workaround until it ships: {concrete steps}. Will update here when the patch lands.
```
**B. Feature Request** — ack + status + scope + commit
```
Hey @user! {Status: "Already exists" / "Tracked in #N" / "Reasonable, opening an issue"}.
{If already exists: pointer to dashboard page or doc}
{If tracked: link to umbrella, summarize order/priority}
{If new: open issue + post link back}
{Optional: short technical note on feasibility / trade-offs}
```
**C. Support / config question** — direct answer + reference + offer to dig deeper
```
Hey @user! {One-sentence answer}.
Steps:
1. ...
2. ...
3. ...
Reference: `docs/<path>.md`. If it still fails after that, paste {specific thing} and I will trace it.
```
**D. Thank-you / short follow-up** — 1-2 sentences
```
Glad it helps, @user! {Concrete next marker — when patch ships / when to expect next update}.
```
**E. Stale / closing** — see step 8
#### Posting via gh (replaces deprecated browser flow)
```bash
gh api graphql -f query='
mutation($id: ID!, $body: String!) {
addDiscussionComment(input: {discussionId: $id, body: $body}) {
comment { id url }
}
}' -f id="$NODE_ID" -f body="$BODY"
```
For **threaded replies** (recommended when responding to a specific comment in a long thread), add `replyToId: $parentCommentId` to the input.
**Output hygiene** (still applies even via API — the comment renders in GitHub UI):
- ASCII-safe punctuation: regular hyphens `-`, `->` for arrows
- Markdown OK: `**bold**`, fenced code blocks, `[text](url)` links
- No bare error messages with stack traces from internal logs — sanitize
- Match reporter's language (pt-BR reporter → pt-BR reply; ru reporter → ru reply); default to English when uncertain
**Pacing**: `sleep 1` between mutations. GitHub abuse-detection trips around 10/sec for the same actor.
**Verification**: capture the returned `comment.url` from each mutation. Failed posts (returncode != 0 or `errors` in response) get logged separately and retried once after a 5s pause.
### 6. Create Issues from Actionable Feature Requests
For discussions that contain concrete, actionable feature requests:
1. **Deduplicate FIRST** — before drafting, search existing issues:
```bash
gh issue list --repo $OWNER/$REPO --search "<keywords from FR>" --state open --json number,title,labels
```
If a matching issue (or umbrella) already exists, reuse it — never create a duplicate. Post a comment in the discussion linking to the existing issue.
2. **Ask the user which to create** — even after dedup, the human approves the final list.
3. **Create the issue** with `gh issue create`:
```bash
gh issue create --repo $OWNER/$REPO \
--title "[feature] <short imperative>" \
--label enhancement \
--body @/tmp/issue-body.md
```
Body template:
```markdown
## Feature Request
**Source:** Discussion #N by @author
## Problem
What limitation the user hit (in their words, paraphrased)
## Proposed Solution
How it could work
### Implementation Ideas
- File paths likely to touch
- Related modules / patterns already in the codebase
### Current Workarounds
What users can do today
## Additional Context
- Discussion: #N
- Related issues/PRs: #X, #Y
- Upstream references: link to similar implementations in `_references/` if applicable
```
4. **Generate task file in `_ideia/`** when the feature needs deeper investigation before implementation:
```
_ideia/<short-kebab-slug>.md
```
Contains: problem statement, current OmniRoute state, how upstream (`_references/9router`, `_references/CLIProxyAPI`, etc.) handles it, proposed implementation levels (short/medium/long term), acceptance criteria.
5. **Link back to discussion** with the real URL:
```
Follow-up @reporter — I've opened issue #N to track this. {1-line summary of what the issue covers}.
```
### 7. Final Report
| Discussion | Action Taken |
| ---------- | ------------------------------------------------------------- |
| #N — Title | Responded (bug confirmed, tracking #M) |
| #N — Title | Responded + created issue #M + task file `_ideia/X.md` |
| #N — Title | Responded (support answered with workaround) |
| #N — Title | Responded to follow-up comment |
| #N — Title | Closed (stale 15+d, no reply from reporter) |
| #N — Title | Ping sent (stale 15+d, will close in 7d if no response) |
Include totals: comments posted, issues created, discussions closed, discussions pinged. Capture median response time for the batch.
### 8. Stale Discussion Triage (auto-close candidates)
Identify discussions matching **all** of:
- `updatedAt > 15 days ago`
- Maintainer already replied at least once
- Last commenter is the maintainer (the ball is on the reporter's side)
- `answerChosenAt` is null (not formally resolved)
- Category in `{Q&A, General}` — skip `Ideas` / `Show and tell` / `Announcements` (those serve as community references and shouldn't be closed)
- `comments.totalCount >= 2` — there was actual conversation, not a drive-by post
- No label named `keep-open` (escape hatch)
For each candidate, present to the user with a recommended action:
| Action | When |
| --------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Soft-close** | Default — maintainer answered concretely and reporter went silent |
| **Ping reporter** | Maintainer asked for more info (log dump, screenshot) and never got it |
| **Keep open** | Conversation is mid-debug and closing would lose context — operator override |
**Soft-close mutation:**
```bash
gh api graphql -f query='
mutation($id: ID!) {
closeDiscussion(input: {discussionId: $id, reason: RESOLVED}) {
discussion { id closed }
}
}' -f id="$NODE_ID"
```
Valid `reason` values: `RESOLVED`, `OUTDATED`, `DUPLICATE`. Default to `OUTDATED` for "no response" closures, `RESOLVED` for answered-but-not-confirmed.
Before closing, post a closing comment:
```
Closing for inactivity -- feel free to reopen if you still hit this, or open a fresh issue with a current log. Thanks!
```
**Ping flow** (alternative):
```
@reporter -- still happening on the latest version? Otherwise I'll close this in 7 days for inactivity.
```
Persist the ping in `_cache/discussions-pinged-<date>.json` so the next run knows to close discussions that were pinged 7+ days ago without a reply.
## Notes
- This workflow is **interactive** — always present the summary and wait for user approval before posting responses, creating issues, or closing discussions.
- Three explicit consents per run: reply scope (after step 4), issue creation list (in step 6), stale-close list (in step 8).
- For discussions in non-English languages (`pt-BR`, `ru`, `zh`, `es`), respond in the same language as the original post. Default to English when uncertain.
- Always reference specific dashboard paths, config options, doc files, or code locations (`file:line`) when explaining existing features — never wave hands.
- When a discussion reveals a bug, separate it from feature requests in the report. Bugs need a tracking issue + workaround; FRs need scoping.
- Before recommending a workaround that mentions a file/flag/setting, verify it exists in the **current** codebase (the previous turn's memory may be stale).
- Trust-but-verify: after a batch post, spot-check 2-3 random `comment.url` returns to confirm the comments rendered cleanly (no Unicode mojibake, no broken markdown).
## Anti-patterns to avoid
- ❌ Posting via `browser_subagent` clicks — slow, flaky, and obsolete since `gh api graphql` mutations exist.
- ❌ N+1 fetches (one per discussion) — use one GraphQL query for all 50.
- ❌ Creating an issue without checking for an existing umbrella / similar one first.
- ❌ Generic "thanks, I'll look into it!" responses — every reply must reference a file, doc, or concrete action.
- ❌ Closing a stale discussion without posting a closing comment first.
- ❌ Skipping the user approval gate ("turbo-all" never bypasses interactive consent for writes).

268
.agents/skills/review-prs/SKILL.md
View File

@@ -1,268 +0,0 @@
---
name: review-prs-cx
description: Analyze open Pull Requests from the project's GitHub repository, generate a critical report, and optionally implement approved changes
---
# /review-prs — PR Review & Analysis Workflow
## ⛔ ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION — Read Before Anything Else
> **NEVER close a contributor's PR if you intend to use ANY of their code, ideas, or fixes.**
>
> **NEVER manually integrate contributor code into a release branch and then close their PR.**
>
> These actions are **STRICTLY FORBIDDEN** under all circumstances:
>
> 1. ❌ Closing a PR and cherry-picking/copying its code into a release branch
> 2. ❌ Closing a PR "because of conflicts" and re-implementing the same fix yourself
> 3. ❌ Closing a PR and committing a "similar" solution inspired by it
> 4. ❌ Using `gh pr close` on any PR whose content was or will be used
>
> **Why**: Closing a PR after taking the contributor's work means they get ZERO credit on GitHub — no "Merged" badge, no contribution graph entry, no public record. This is effectively stealing their contribution. An audit found this happened to **37 PRs** in the past.
>
> **The ONLY acceptable flow**: Resolve conflicts IN the contributor's branch, push fixes TO their branch, then merge THEIR PR via `gh pr merge`. See Step 7 and Step 8 for the exact procedure.
>
> **When to close a PR**: ONLY when the user (repository owner) explicitly requests it, OR when the PR is clearly spam/malicious, OR when the author themselves asks to close it. In ALL other cases, leave it open.
## Overview
This workflow fetches all open PRs from the project's GitHub repository, performs a critical analysis of each one, generates a detailed report, and waits for user approval before proceeding with implementation. **All improvements are committed on the current release branch** (`release/vX.Y.Z`).
> **BRANCH RULE**: PRs are ALWAYS merged into the current `release/vX.Y.Z` branch, NEVER directly into `main`. The release branch acts as a staging area — only after all PRs are integrated and tests pass does the release branch get merged into `main` via the `/generate-release` workflow.
## Codex Execution Notes
The source Claude command uses `// turbo` and `// turbo-all` as execution hints. In Codex, treat them explicitly as follows:
- `// turbo`: batch independent local reads and small `gh`/`git` calls with `multi_tool_use.parallel`.
- `// turbo-all`: fan out independent per-PR/per-issue calls in practical batches, usually up to 4 GitHub calls at a time.
- Do not expand Step 4 into exhaustive CI-log debugging before Step 6. Fetch numbers, metadata, diffs/review comments, quick merge/conflict status, and only inspect extra logs when they directly affect the verdict.
- Step 6 is a hard stop. In Codex, present the report in the final response and wait for the user before Step 7/8.
- Do not checkout PR branches, edit files, post PR comments, close PRs, merge, cherry-pick, or run broad fix/test loops until the user explicitly approves the report.
- If `gh pr diff` is too large, record the limit and use `gh pr view --json files` plus `git fetch refs/pull/...` with `git diff --stat` / `git diff --name-status`; only read targeted hunks needed for confirmed findings.
## Steps
### 1. Identify the GitHub Repository
- Read `package.json` to get the repository URL, or use the git remote origin URL
// turbo
- Run: `git -C <project_root> remote get-url origin` to extract the owner/repo
### 2. Ensure Release Branch Exists
// turbo
Before doing any work, ensure you are on the current release branch:
```bash
# Check current branch
git branch --show-current
# If on main, determine next version and create the release branch
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
# Bump patch: e.g. 3.3.11 → 3.3.12
NEXT=$(node -p "const [a,b,c]=('$VERSION').split('.').map(Number); c>=999?a+'.'+(b+1)+'.0':a+'.'+b+'.'+(c+1)")
git checkout -b release/v$NEXT
npm version patch --no-git-tag-version
npm install
```
If already on a `release/vX.Y.Z` branch, continue working there.
### 3. Fetch Open Pull Requests
// turbo-all
**⚠️ CRITICAL**: The JSON output of `gh pr list` can be truncated by the tool, silently hiding PRs. You MUST use the two-step approach below to guarantee **all** PRs are fetched.
**Step 3a — Get PR numbers only** (small output, never truncated):
- Run: `gh pr list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open --limit 500 --json number --jq '.[].number'`
- This outputs one PR number per line. Count them and confirm total.
**Step 3b — Fetch full metadata for each PR** (one call per PR):
- For each PR number from step 3a, run:
`gh pr view <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json number,title,author,headRefName,baseRefName,body,createdAt,additions,deletions,files`
- You may batch these into parallel calls (up to 4 at a time).
**Step 3c — Fetch diffs for each PR** (one call per PR, saved to /tmp):
- For each PR number, run:
`gh pr diff <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> > /tmp/pr<NUMBER>.diff`
- Then read each diff file with the appropriate file-read tool (`Read` in Claude Code; equivalent in your agent runtime).
- For each open PR, collect:
- PR number, title, author, branch, number of commits, date
- PR description/body
- Files changed (diff)
- Existing review comments (from bots or humans)
**Verification**: Confirm the count of PRs analyzed matches the count from step 3a before proceeding.
### 3.5 Redirect PR Base Branches to Release Branch
// turbo-all
**⚠️ CRITICAL**: Contributors typically open PRs targeting `main`. Before analyzing or merging, redirect ALL open PRs to target the current release branch instead.
```bash
# Get the current release branch name
RELEASE_BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current) # e.g. release/v3.5.4
# For each open PR that targets main, change its base to the release branch
for PR_NUM in $(gh pr list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open --json number,baseRefName --jq '.[] | select(.baseRefName == "main") | .number'); do
echo "Redirecting PR #$PR_NUM → $RELEASE_BRANCH"
gh pr edit "$PR_NUM" --repo <owner>/<repo> --base "$RELEASE_BRANCH"
done
```
This ensures:
1. PRs merge into the release branch, not directly into `main`
2. Merge conflict detection is accurate against the release branch
3. The release branch accumulates all changes before the final merge to `main`
4. If the release branch doesn't exist on remote yet, push it first: `git push origin $RELEASE_BRANCH`
### 4. Analyze Each PR — For each open PR, perform the following analysis:
#### 4a. Feature Assessment
- **Does it make sense?** Evaluate if the feature fills a real gap or solves a valid problem
- **Alignment** — Check if it aligns with the project's architecture and roadmap
- **Complexity** — Assess if the scope is reasonable or if it should be split
#### 4b. Code Quality Review
- Check for code duplication
- Evaluate error handling patterns (consistent with existing codebase?)
- Check naming conventions and code style
- Verify TypeScript types (any `any` usage, missing types?)
#### 4c. Security Review
- Check for missing authentication/authorization on new endpoints
- Check for injection vulnerabilities (URL params, SQL, XSS)
- Verify input validation on all user-controlled data
- Check for hardcoded secrets or credentials
#### 4d. Architecture Review
- Does the change follow existing patterns?
- Are there any breaking changes to public APIs?
- Is the database schema affected? Migration needed?
- Impact on performance (N+1 queries, missing indexes?)
#### 4e. Test Coverage
- Does the PR include tests?
- Are edge cases covered?
- Would existing tests break?
#### 4f. Cross-Layer (Global) Analysis
Perform a **global impact assessment** to verify whether the PR changes are complete across all layers of the application:
- **Backend → Frontend check**: If the PR adds or modifies backend-only resources (new endpoints, services, data models), evaluate whether corresponding frontend changes are missing:
- Does a new endpoint require a new screen/page in the dashboard?
- Should there be a new action button, menu item, or navigation link?
- Are there new data fields that should be displayed or editable in the UI?
- Does a new feature need a toggle, configuration panel, or status indicator?
- **Frontend → Backend check**: If the PR adds frontend elements, verify the backend support exists:
- Are the required API endpoints implemented?
- Is the data model sufficient for the new UI components?
- **Cross-cutting concerns**: Check shared layers (types, DTOs, validation schemas, routes, middleware) for completeness
- **Document gaps** — If missing layers are detected, list them as **IMPORTANT** issues in the report with concrete suggestions for what should be added
### 5. Generate Report — Create a markdown report for each PR including:
- **PR Summary** — What it does, files affected, commit count
- **Improvements/Benefits** — Numbered list with impact level (HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW)
- **Risks & Issues** — Categorized as CRITICAL / IMPORTANT / MINOR
- **Scoring Table** — Rate across: Feature Relevance, Code Quality, Security, Robustness, Tests
- **Verdict** — Ready to merge? With mandatory vs optional fixes
- **Next Steps** — What will happen if approved
### 6. Present to User
- Show the report in the final response and stop. Mark this as a blocking checkpoint awaiting explicit user approval before continuing.
- Wait for user decision:
- **Approved** → Proceed to step 7
- **Approved with changes** → Implement the fixes and corrections before merging
- **Rejected** → Close the PR or leave a review comment
### 7. Pre-Merge Fixes & CI Green-Lighting (if approved)
> **⚠️ Fixes and Conflict Resolutions MUST be pushed back to the PR branch before merging.** We want the PR itself to be green and fully valid before it integrates.
- **Sync latest fixes & Resolve Conflicts:** Merge the current `release` branch into the PR branch. If there are merge conflicts, you MUST resolve them inside the author's PR branch. NEVER resolve conflicts by closing their PR and doing the work in a separate branch, as this steals credit from the original author.
- **Implement improvements:** Apply the required fixes identified in the analysis directly on the PR branch (e.g., adding missing API routes, fixing SSRF, applying comments from other agents).
- **Pushing changes to PR branches:**
```bash
# Checkout the PR locally
gh pr checkout <NUMBER>
# Apply fixes, commit your changes
git commit -m "chore: apply review suggestions and missing layers"
# Attempt to push directly to the PR branch
git push
```
- **Fallback (ONLY for external forks without maintainer edit access):**
Using `cherry-pick` instead of fixing the contributor's PR directly is a **LAST RESORT**. You MUST ALWAYS attempt to `git push` your fixes to their branch first.
**ONLY if `git push` explicitly fails with a permission/access error** (meaning the contributor unchecked "Allow edits from maintainers" or it's a locked fork), you may use `git cherry-pick` to bring their changes into the release branch and fix the issues locally.
Even then, ensure you preserve the contributor's authorship (`git commit --author="Contributor Name <email>"` if creating new commits).
Once you have integrated their work into the release branch, **DO NOT close their PR**. Leave it open so the contributor retains credit. Under NO CIRCUMSTANCES should you use `gh pr close`.
- Run the project's test suite locally to verify nothing breaks:
// turbo
- Run: `npm test` or equivalent test command
### 8. Merge into Release Branch (NEVER CLOSE!)
> **⚠️ CRITICAL**: NEVER use `gh pr close` for a PR whose idea or code was accepted. Closing a PR in a contributor's face after taking their idea—or closing it just because it had conflicts—is unacceptable.
> You MUST ALWAYS resolve conflicts and apply fixes ON THE AUTHOR'S PR BRANCH (unless explicitly locked from edits), and then merge the PR using GitHub so the contributor gets the official "Merged" badge and proper credit on their profile. **Do not use cherry-pick just because it is "easier" than resolving conflicts on their branch.**
Even if the PR had severe conflicts or required significant architectural adjustments, you MUST:
1. Resolve any conflicts and apply the fixes directly to their PR branch (as detailed in step 7) or use cherry-picking into the release branch.
2. If you managed to fix their branch, merge it into the release branch using the GitHub CLI:
`gh pr merge <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --squash --body "Integrated into release/vX.Y.Z"`
3. If you had to use cherry-picking because you couldn't push to their branch, DO NOT close the PR. GitHub will sometimes auto-detect the cherry-picked commits and mark it as Merged. If it doesn't, leave it open. The repository owner will handle it. NEVER run `gh pr close`.
In ALL cases:
- Post a **thank-you comment** on the PR via the GitHub API before or immediately after merging.
- The message should:
- Thank the author by name/username for their contribution.
- Explain what was adjusted or improved (if we pushed fixes to their branch or cherry-picked).
- Note it will be included in the upcoming release.
- Be friendly, professional, and encouraging.
> **⚠️ MANDATORY CHANGELOG CREDIT**: When cherry-picking is used (because the PR branch couldn't be pushed to or `gh pr merge` failed), the contributor does NOT get the automatic GitHub "Merged" badge. In this case, you MUST compensate by adding an explicit entry to `CHANGELOG.md` in the `[Unreleased]` section with `(#PR_NUMBER — thanks @username)` format. This ensures the contributor gets public credit in the release notes even if GitHub doesn't auto-detect the cherry-pick. This is NOT optional — skipping it effectively erases the contributor's work from the release record.
### 9. Sync Local Release Branch
After merging PRs, sync the local release branch to include the new changes:
```bash
git fetch origin
git pull origin release/vX.Y.Z
```
### 10. Continue or Finalize
After processing all approved PRs:
- If more PRs remain, go back to step 7
- When all PRs are processed, **update CHANGELOG.md** on the release branch with all new entries
- Run **test coverage** to verify the gate (≥75% statements/lines/functions, ≥70% branches — measured ~82%):
```bash
npm run test:coverage
```
- Fix any test regressions introduced by merged PRs
- Run `/generate-release` workflow Phase 1 steps 7–10 (tests → commit → push → open PR to main → wait for user)
- The `/generate-release` workflow handles the final merge from `release/vX.Y.Z` → `main`

347
.agents/skills/version-bump/SKILL.md
View File

@@ -1,347 +0,0 @@
---
name: version-bump-cx
description: Bump version, auto-generate CHANGELOG from git commits, update all versioned files, and refresh root + docs/ documentation to reflect the current project state
---
# Version Bump Workflow
Automatically bump the project version, generate CHANGELOG entries from git history since the last tag, update every file that references the version, and refresh project documentation to reflect the current state.
## Codex Execution Notes
- Treat `// turbo` / `// turbo-all` as instructions to use `multi_tool_use.parallel` for independent reads, checks, and GitHub calls.
- Any user-approval phase is a hard stop: present the report/status in the final response and wait before committing, pushing, tagging, publishing, or deploying.
> **VERSION RULE: Always use PATCH bumps (3.x.y → 3.x.y+1)**
> NEVER use `npm version minor` or `npm version major`.
> Always use: `npm version patch --no-git-tag-version`
> The threshold rule: when `y` reaches 1000, bump to `3.(x+1).0` — e.g. `3.4.999` → `3.5.0`.
---
## Phase 1: Determine Version
### 1. Read current version and last tag
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
CURRENT_VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
LAST_TAG=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0 2>/dev/null || echo "")
CURRENT_BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current)
echo "Current version: $CURRENT_VERSION"
echo "Last tag: $LAST_TAG"
echo "Current branch: $CURRENT_BRANCH"
```
### 2. Calculate new version
Apply the patch bump rule:
- If the current patch number is `9`, the new version is `3.(minor+1).0`
- Otherwise, increment patch: `3.x.y` → `3.x.(y+1)`
If the version was ALREADY bumped (e.g. you are on a release branch and package.json already has the new version), **skip the npm version bump** and use the existing version.
### 3. Bump package.json (if needed)
// turbo
```bash
# Only if version hasn't been bumped yet
npm version patch --no-git-tag-version
```
Or for threshold (y=10):
```bash
# Manual threshold bump
VERSION="3.X.0" # compute manually
npm version "$VERSION" --no-git-tag-version
```
---
## Phase 2: Generate CHANGELOG from Git History
### 4. Collect commits since last tag
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
LAST_TAG=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0 2>/dev/null)
echo "=== Commits since $LAST_TAG ==="
git log "$LAST_TAG"..HEAD --pretty=format:"%h %s" --no-merges | head -100
echo ""
echo "=== Merge commits ==="
git log "$LAST_TAG"..HEAD --merges --pretty=format:"%h %s" | head -50
```
### 5. Classify commits and generate CHANGELOG section
Analyze each commit message and classify into categories based on the conventional-commit prefix and content:
| Category | Patterns |
| ------------------- | ------------------------------------------------ |
| ✨ New Features | `feat:`, `feat(*):` |
| 🐛 Bug Fixes | `fix:`, `fix(*):` |
| ⚠️ Breaking Changes | `BREAKING CHANGE`, `!:` suffix |
| 🛠️ Maintenance | `chore:`, `refactor:`, `perf:`, `build:` |
| 🧪 Tests | `test:`, `tests:` |
| 📝 Documentation | `docs:` |
| 🔒 Security | `security:`, CVE references, vulnerability fixes |
| 🌍 i18n | translation updates, locale changes |
For each category with entries, create a markdown section with descriptive bullet points. Use the commit messages but rewrite them to be human-readable and descriptive (not raw commit messages).
**If a commit references a PR number** (e.g. `#880`, `PR #885`), include it in the description.
### 6. Update CHANGELOG.md
Replace the `## [Unreleased]` section content with the generated entries, then add the new versioned section:
```markdown
## [Unreleased]
---
## [NEW_VERSION] — YYYY-MM-DD
### ✨ New Features
- **Feature name:** Description (#PR)
### 🐛 Bug Fixes
- **Fix name:** Description (#PR)
### 🛠️ Maintenance
- **Item:** Description
---
## [PREVIOUS_VERSION] — YYYY-MM-DD
...
```
The date must be today's date in `YYYY-MM-DD` format.
---
## Phase 3: Sync Version Across All Files
### 7. Update workspace package.json files and openapi.yaml
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
# Update docs/reference/openapi.yaml version
sed -i "s/ version: .*/ version: $VERSION/" docs/reference/openapi.yaml
echo "✓ docs/reference/openapi.yaml → $VERSION"
# Update workspace packages (open-sse, electron)
for dir in electron open-sse; do
if [ -d "$dir" ] && [ -f "$dir/package.json" ]; then
(cd "$dir" && npm version "$VERSION" --no-git-tag-version --allow-same-version > /dev/null)
echo "✓ $dir/package.json → $VERSION"
fi
done
echo "✓ All workspace packages synced to $VERSION"
```
### 8. Update llm.txt version references
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
OLD_VERSION_PATTERN='[0-9]\+\.[0-9]\+\.[0-9]\+'
# Update "Current version:" line
sed -i "s/\*\*Current version:\*\* $OLD_VERSION_PATTERN/**Current version:** $VERSION/" llm.txt
# Update "Key Features (vX.Y.Z)" header
sed -i "s/## Key Features (v$OLD_VERSION_PATTERN)/## Key Features (v$VERSION)/" llm.txt
echo "✓ llm.txt → $VERSION"
```
### 9. Regenerate lock file
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
npm install
echo "✓ Lock file regenerated"
```
---
## Phase 4: Update Root Documentation
Based on the CHANGELOG entries generated in Phase 2, review and update these root-level files if relevant changes warrant updates:
### 10. Review and update root documentation files
For each file below, read the current content and determine if the CHANGELOG entries require any updates. Only modify files where substantive changes have occurred:
| File | When to update |
| ----------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| `README.md` | New providers, major features, stats changes (test count, provider count), badges, installation instructions, feature table |
| `AGENTS.md` | Architecture changes, new modules, new commands, new providers, new services/handlers/executors |
| `CONTRIBUTING.md` | Dev workflow changes, new tooling, test infrastructure changes |
| `SECURITY.md` | Security fixes, new auth mechanisms, vulnerability disclosures |
| `llm.txt` | Provider count changes, new features, architecture changes |
**Update rules:**
- **README.md**: Update provider count, test count, feature highlights table, badges if any numbers changed. If a new provider was added, add it to the provider table. If a major feature was added, add it to the features section.
- **AGENTS.md**: If new architecture components (handlers, executors, services, DB modules) were added, update the Architecture section. If new commands were added, update the Build/Test table.
- **SECURITY.md**: Add new vulnerability fixes or security improvements to the relevant section.
- **llm.txt**: Update provider count, feature list, version references.
### 11. Review and update docs/ files (excluding i18n/)
For each file in `docs/` (excluding `docs/i18n/`), review if CHANGELOG changes affect it:
| File | When to update |
| --------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| `docs/reference/API_REFERENCE.md` | New API endpoints, changed request/response formats |
| `docs/architecture/ARCHITECTURE.md` | New modules, new services, changed data flow |
| `docs/architecture/CODEBASE_DOCUMENTATION.md` | New files, architectural changes, module reorganization |
| `docs/architecture/REPOSITORY_MAP.md` | New folders / files / one-line descriptions |
| `docs/reference/CLI-TOOLS.md` | New CLI tool integrations, config format changes |
| `docs/guides/USER_GUIDE.md` | UX changes, new dashboard pages, settings changes |
| `docs/reference/PROVIDER_REFERENCE.md` | New providers (regenerate via `scripts/gen-provider-reference.ts`) |
| `docs/frameworks/MCP-SERVER.md` | New MCP tools, changed tool signatures, scope changes |
| `docs/frameworks/A2A-SERVER.md` | New A2A skills, protocol changes |
| `docs/frameworks/AGENT_PROTOCOLS_GUIDE.md` | New external agent protocols supported |
| `docs/frameworks/CLOUD_AGENT.md` | Cloud agent additions (codex-cloud, devin, jules) or API changes |
| `docs/architecture/AUTHZ_GUIDE.md` | New route classifications, policy changes |
| `docs/security/GUARDRAILS.md` | New guardrails registered, priority/order changes |
| `docs/security/COMPLIANCE.md` | Audit log / retention / no-log policy changes |
| `docs/frameworks/SKILLS.md` | Skill framework / registry / built-in skill changes |
| `docs/frameworks/MEMORY.md` | Memory pipeline / extraction / injection / Qdrant changes |
| `docs/frameworks/EVALS.md` | Evaluation framework changes, new evaluators |
| `docs/frameworks/WEBHOOKS.md` | New webhook events, payload schema changes |
| `docs/routing/REASONING_REPLAY.md` | Reasoning capture/replay pipeline changes |
| `docs/routing/AUTO-COMBO.md` | Routing changes, new strategies, scoring weight changes |
| `docs/architecture/RESILIENCE_GUIDE.md` | Circuit breaker / cooldown / lockout behavior changes |
| `docs/security/STEALTH_GUIDE.md` | TLS / CLI fingerprint changes |
| `docs/ops/TUNNELS_GUIDE.md` | Cloudflare tunnel feature changes |
| `docs/guides/ELECTRON_GUIDE.md` | Electron build / signing / packaging changes |
| `docs/guides/TROUBLESHOOTING.md` | New known issues, resolved problems |
| `docs/ops/RELEASE_CHECKLIST.md` | Process changes |
| `docs/ops/COVERAGE_PLAN.md` | Coverage gate adjustments, target metrics |
| `docs/reference/openapi.yaml` | Already updated in step 7 |
**Only update files where the CHANGELOG entries directly affect the documented content.** Do NOT update files just to bump a version number — only when the documented behavior, features, or architecture has actually changed.
---
## Phase 5: Verify
### 12. Run lint check
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
npm run lint
```
### 13. Run tests
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
npm test
```
### 14. Verify version sync across all files
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
echo "Expected version: $VERSION"
echo ""
echo "--- package.json ---"
grep '"version"' package.json | head -1
echo "--- open-sse/package.json ---"
grep '"version"' open-sse/package.json | head -1
echo "--- electron/package.json ---"
[ -f electron/package.json ] && grep '"version"' electron/package.json | head -1
echo "--- docs/reference/openapi.yaml ---"
grep " version:" docs/reference/openapi.yaml | head -1
echo "--- llm.txt ---"
grep "Current version:" llm.txt
echo "--- CHANGELOG.md (first versioned entry) ---"
grep "^## \[" CHANGELOG.md | head -2
```
### 15. 🛑 STOP — Present Summary to User
**STOP** and present a summary to the user including:
- Old version → New version
- CHANGELOG entries generated
- Files modified
- Test results
- Any documentation updates made
**Wait for the user to confirm before committing.**
---
## Phase 6: Commit (only after user approval)
### 16. Stage and commit
// turbo-all
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
git add -A
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
git commit -m "chore(release): bump to v$VERSION — changelog, docs, version sync"
```
---
## Notes
- This workflow does **NOT** create tags, releases, or deploy. Use `/generate-release` for the full release cycle after this.
- This workflow does **NOT** update `docs/i18n/` translations. Translation updates are handled manually or via release tooling — there is no `/update-i18n` workflow shipped in this repo.
- The CHANGELOG generation is based on git commits since the last tag. If there are no new commits, the workflow should inform the user and stop.
- Always verify the generated CHANGELOG entries make sense — raw commit messages may need rewriting for clarity.
- If the version was already bumped (e.g. you're on a `release/vX.Y.Z` branch), skip the `npm version` step and use the existing version.
## Version Touchpoints Checklist
| File | Field/Pattern |
| ----------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------- |
| `package.json` | `"version": "X.Y.Z"` |
| `open-sse/package.json` | `"version": "X.Y.Z"` |
| `electron/package.json` | `"version": "X.Y.Z"` |
| `docs/reference/openapi.yaml` | `version: X.Y.Z` |
| `llm.txt` | `**Current version:** X.Y.Z` and `## Key Features (vX.Y.Z)` |
| `CHANGELOG.md` | `## [X.Y.Z] — YYYY-MM-DD` |

51
.agents/workflows/capture-release-evidences-ag.md
View File

@@ -1,51 +0,0 @@
---
description: Automatically run a browser-automation agent to visually validate all new UI features from the current release and capture evidence WebP recordings of the changes.
---
# Capture Release Evidences Workflow
Use this workflow to automatically drive a browser-automation agent to explore the newly deployed or locally running application and record evidence of the UI changes introduced in the latest release.
> **Tool mapping note (v3.8):** The `browser_subagent` tool referenced below is specific to an earlier agent runtime. In Claude Code, substitute with the available browser MCP tools (e.g. `mcp__claude-in-chrome__*`) for navigation/screenshots, plus the `Write` tool for saving artifacts. The high-level steps remain the same regardless of the browser-automation surface in use.
## Prerequisites
- OmniRoute must be actively running and accessible (e.g. locally at `http://localhost:20128` or on the Local VPS at `http://192.168.0.15:20128`).
- The user must provide the target URL to be tested, or default to `http://192.168.0.15:20128`.
## Workflow Steps
### 1. Identify Target Features
Review the `CHANGELOG.md` for the latest version to map out the new UI elements. For example:
- **CLI Tools Settings**
- **New Provider/Model Listings (e.g., Gemini 3.1, Qoder PAT)**
- **New Feature Modals**
### 2. Run the Browser Subagent
For each identified feature, invoke the `browser_subagent` using the `default_api:browser_subagent` tool.
**Important Task Guidelines for the Subagent:**
- `TaskName`: Give it a clear name like "Validate CLIProxyAPI Tool Tab".
- `TaskSummary`: "Navigate to the CLI Tools tab and verify the new Integration settings."
- `Task`: Provide unambiguous instructions for the subagent, such as: "Navigate to http://192.168.0.15:20128/dashboard. Click on the 'Settings' or 'CLI Tools' nav link. Scroll down to find the CLIProxyAPI integration card. Hover over it to trigger UI state. Verify the components render correctly and exit."
- `RecordingName`: Ensure it describes the feature (e.g. `v3_4_5_cli_proxy_api`). This is required and strictly automatically saved as a WebP artifacts video by the system.
_(Note: The `browser_subagent` automatically creates a WebP recording named by the `RecordingName` parameter. No additional tools for screenshots are needed.)_
### 3. Generate Report Artifact
After the `browser_subagent` finishes its sessions, generate a final Markdown artifact (using `Write` and `IsArtifact=true`) to present the recordings inline to the user using the `![caption](/absolute/path/to/media.webp)` syntax.
### Example Invocation
\```json
{
"TaskName": "Validating Qoder PAT Configuration UI",
"TaskSummary": "Validates the Qoder provider configuration modal",
"Task": "Go to http://192.168.0.15:20128/dashboard. Click on the 'Providers' tab. Find 'Qoder' in the list. Click 'Add Token' or 'Configure'. Type 'test_token' and submit. Return when done.",
"RecordingName": "qoder_pat_ui_validation"
}
\```

39
.agents/workflows/deploy-vps-local-ag.md
View File

@@ -1,39 +0,0 @@
---
description: Deploy the latest OmniRoute code to the Local VPS (192.168.0.15)
---
# Deploy to Local VPS Workflow
Deploy OmniRoute to the Local VPS using `npm pack + scp` + PM2.
**Local VPS:** `192.168.0.15`
**Process manager:** PM2 (`omniroute`)
**Port:** `20128`
## Steps
### 1. Build + pack locally
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute && rm -f omniroute-*.tgz && rm -rf .next/cache app/.next/cache && npm run build:cli && rm -rf app/logs app/coverage app/.git app/.app-build-backup* && npm pack --ignore-scripts
```
### 2. Copy to Local VPS and install
// turbo-all
```bash
scp omniroute-*.tgz root@192.168.0.15:/tmp/
```
```bash
ssh root@192.168.0.15 "npm install -g /tmp/omniroute-*.tgz --ignore-scripts && cd /usr/lib/node_modules/omniroute/app && npm rebuild better-sqlite3 && pm2 delete omniroute 2>/dev/null; pm2 start /root/.omniroute/ecosystem.config.cjs --update-env && pm2 save && echo '✅ Local done'"
```
### 3. Verify the deployment
```bash
curl -s -o /dev/null -w 'LOCAL HTTP %{http_code}\n' http://192.168.0.15:20128/
```

424
.agents/workflows/generate-release-ag.md
View File

@@ -1,424 +0,0 @@
---
description: Create a new release, bump version up to the .999 patch threshold, generate a complete CHANGELOG (with PR co-authors + every commit since the last tag), and manage Pull Requests
---
# Generate Release Workflow
Bump version, build a **complete CHANGELOG** from every commit since the last tag (with PR back-reference and contributor attribution), commit, open a **PR to main** and wait for user confirmation before tagging, publishing, and deploying.
> **VERSION RULE: Always use PATCH bumps (3.x.y → 3.x.y+1)**
> NEVER use `npm version minor` or `npm version major`.
> Always use: `npm version patch --no-git-tag-version`
> The threshold rule: when `y` reaches 1000, bump to `3.(x+1).0` — e.g. `3.8.999` → `3.9.0`.
> **🔴 INTEGRATION BRANCH RULE**: The `release/vX.Y.Z` branch is the **integration target** for the entire release cycle. Bug fixes and feature implementations land here **via per-issue PRs from short-lived `fix/<ISSUE>-<short>` or `feat/<ISSUE>-<short>` worktrees** (see `/resolve-issues`, `/implement-features`). Contributor PRs from `/review-prs` likewise merge into this branch. The release branch is then merged to `main` via a single release PR at the end of the cycle.
---
## ⚠️ Four-Phase Flow
```
Phase 0 → security audit (npm + CodeQL + Dependabot)
Phase 1 → bump → full quality gate → changelog from commits → commit → push → open PR
↕ 🛑 STOP: notify user, wait for PR merge
Phase 2 → deploy main to Local VPS for homologation
↕ 🛑 STOP: notify user, wait for OK
Phase 3 → tag → GitHub release → Docker → npm → Akamai
Phase 4 → monitor CI pipelines and validate artifacts
```
**NEVER push directly to main or create tags before the user confirms the PR.**
---
## Phase 0: Security Verification (MANDATORY)
```bash
# 1. Local dependency audit
npm audit --production --audit-level=high
# 2. GitHub CodeQL alerts (open + high severity)
gh api '/repos/diegosouzapw/OmniRoute/code-scanning/alerts?state=open&severity=high' \
--jq '.[] | {rule: .rule.id, path: .most_recent_instance.location.path, msg: .most_recent_instance.message.text}' \
2>/dev/null || echo "(no CodeQL access or no alerts)"
# 3. Dependabot alerts (open + high/critical)
gh api '/repos/diegosouzapw/OmniRoute/dependabot/alerts?state=open' \
--jq '.[] | select(.security_advisory.severity == "high" or .security_advisory.severity == "critical") | {pkg: .dependency.package.name, sev: .security_advisory.severity, summary: .security_advisory.summary}' \
2>/dev/null || echo "(no Dependabot access or no alerts)"
```
Fix or justify (per Hard Rule #14) any `high`/`critical` findings before proceeding.
---
## Phase 1: Pre-Merge
### 1. Create or confirm release branch
```bash
# First release on a new minor (e.g. starting 3.9.0):
git checkout -b release/v3.9.0
# Continuing current cycle:
git branch --show-current
```
### 2. Determine and sync version
```bash
grep '"version"' package.json
```
> **🔴 BRANCH-VERSION PARITY GATE**:
```bash
BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current)
BRANCH_VER=${BRANCH#release/v}
PKG_VER=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
if [[ "$BRANCH" != release/v* ]]; then
echo "❌ Not on a release/v* branch (current: $BRANCH). Aborting."; exit 1
fi
echo "Branch target: $BRANCH_VER"
echo "package.json: $PKG_VER"
```
> **⚠️ ATOMIC COMMIT RULE** — bump and feature/fix code MUST land in the same commit so that `git show vX.Y.Z` always contains both. NEVER commit features first and bump in a separate commit.
```bash
npm version patch --no-git-tag-version
```
### 3. Regenerate lock file (REQUIRED after version bump)
```bash
npm install
```
### 4. Build CHANGELOG from EVERY commit since the last tag
> **🎯 Goal**: produce a complete CHANGELOG section — emoji-grouped sections, PR back-reference, and `— thanks @user` attribution. Nothing must slip through.
> **🔴 NO MIXUPS RULE**: do not mix backlog of the previous version. The new section must contain ONLY commits whose merge/landing happened after the previous tag.
#### 4a. Collect raw commit log since last tag
```bash
LAST_TAG=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0)
NEW_VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
TODAY=$(date -u +%F)
echo "Range: $LAST_TAG..HEAD → v$NEW_VERSION ($TODAY)"
git log --no-merges "$LAST_TAG..HEAD" --pretty=format:'%h %s' > /tmp/release_commits.txt
wc -l /tmp/release_commits.txt
git log --merges "$LAST_TAG..HEAD" --pretty=format:'%h %s%n author=%an <%ae>' > /tmp/release_merges.txt
git log "$LAST_TAG..HEAD" --pretty=format:'---%n%h | %s%n author=%an <%ae>%n body=%b' > /tmp/release_detailed.txt
```
#### 4b. Enrich with PR metadata + co-authors
```bash
grep -oE '#[0-9]+' /tmp/release_commits.txt | sort -u > /tmp/release_prs.txt
> /tmp/release_pr_meta.json
while read -r PR; do
N=${PR#\#}
gh pr view "$N" --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute \
--json number,title,author,mergeCommit,body \
>> /tmp/release_pr_meta.json 2>/dev/null || echo "(skip $PR — not found)"
echo "" >> /tmp/release_pr_meta.json
done < /tmp/release_prs.txt
```
#### 4c. Assemble the new CHANGELOG section
Using `/tmp/release_commits.txt` + `/tmp/release_pr_meta.json` + `/tmp/release_detailed.txt`, build a new entry that:
1. **Covers every commit** — read the full list and group by Conventional Commit type. A commit is "covered" iff it appears (or is intentionally rolled-up) in the new section.
2. **Groups using these section headers**:
- `### ✨ New Features` — `feat(*)`
- `### 🔧 Bug Fixes` — `fix(*)`
- `### 📝 Maintenance` — `chore(*)`, `refactor(*)`, `docs(*)`, `test(*)`, `ci(*)`, `build(*)`
- `### 🔒 Security` — security-flagged commits (only if any)
3. **Entry format**:
```
- **type(scope):** human-friendly description — extra context if useful. ([#PR](https://github.com/diegosouzapw/OmniRoute/pull/PR) — thanks @author / @coauthor1 / @coauthor2)
```
- No PR referenced (direct commit on release branch): `(thanks @author)`.
- PR closed an external contributor's PR via cherry-pick or re-implementation: attribute BOTH (`thanks @originalAuthor / @diegosouzapw`).
- **Co-authors** extracted from merge commit body and from PR participants who supplied commits.
4. **Coverage check** — diff the section against `/tmp/release_commits.txt`. Any unlisted commit must either be explicitly added or consolidated under a roll-up bullet. Do NOT silently drop commits.
Layout in `CHANGELOG.md` (right below `## [Unreleased]`):
```markdown
## [Unreleased]
---
## [3.9.0] — 2026-05-27
### ✨ New Features
- **feat(scope):** description ([#1234](https://github.com/diegosouzapw/OmniRoute/pull/1234) — thanks @author)
### 🔧 Bug Fixes
- **fix(scope):** description ([#1235](https://github.com/diegosouzapw/OmniRoute/pull/1235) — thanks @author / @diegosouzapw)
### 📝 Maintenance
- **chore(scope):** description (thanks @diegosouzapw)
---
## [3.8.999] — 2026-05-20
```
#### 4d. Coverage assertion
```bash
NEW_VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
COMMITS=$(wc -l < /tmp/release_commits.txt)
BULLETS=$(awk "/^## \\[$NEW_VERSION\\]/{flag=1;next} /^## \\[/{flag=0} flag" CHANGELOG.md | grep -c '^- ')
echo "Commits in range: $COMMITS"
echo "Changelog bullets: $BULLETS"
if [ "$BULLETS" -lt $(( COMMITS / 3 )) ]; then
echo "⚠️ Bullet count looks low (< commits/3). Re-review /tmp/release_commits.txt for missed entries."
fi
```
### 5. Sync versioned files ⚠️ MANDATORY
```bash
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
sed -i "s/ version: .*/ version: $VERSION/" docs/reference/openapi.yaml
echo "✓ openapi.yaml → $VERSION"
for dir in electron open-sse; do
if [ -d "$dir" ] && [ -f "$dir/package.json" ]; then
(cd "$dir" && npm version "$VERSION" --no-git-tag-version --allow-same-version > /dev/null)
echo "✓ $dir/package.json → $VERSION"
fi
done
npm install
```
### 6. Sync README.md and i18n docs
No `/update-docs` workflow exists (deprecated in v3.8). Apply manually OR via parallel agents:
1. Apply the substantive change to `README.md` first (feature table row + "What's new in vX.Y.Z" section).
2. Capture the diff: `git diff README.md > /tmp/readme.patch`.
3. Dispatch 5-10 parallel agents, each handling a slice of the 40 `docs/i18n/*/README.md`, translating the diff into the target language.
4. Update `docs/<AREA>.md` if architecture/counts changed.
5. Validate: `npm run check:docs-sync && npm run check:docs-all`.
### 7. Full quality gate (MANDATORY — replaces the old `npm test`)
> **Precedent**: v3.8.2 landed with 49 broken tests because only `npm test` was running. Lint + typecheck + cycles caught zero of those regressions.
```bash
set -e
npm run lint
npm run typecheck:core
npm run check:cycles
npm run check:docs-all
npm test
```
All five must pass before opening the PR.
### 8. Stage, commit, and push (atomic — bump + features + changelog + i18n in ONE commit)
```bash
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
git add -A
git commit -m "chore(release): v$VERSION — $(date -u +%F)"
git push origin "release/v$VERSION"
```
> **NEVER** include `Co-Authored-By:` trailers in the release commit (Hard Rule #16). Attribution lives inside the CHANGELOG entries.
### 9. Open PR to main
```bash
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
awk "/^## \\[$VERSION\\]/{flag=1; print; next} /^---/{if(flag) {flag=0; exit}} flag" CHANGELOG.md > /tmp/changelog_body.txt
{
echo ""
echo "---"
echo ""
echo "### Quality Gate"
echo "- lint: pass"
echo "- typecheck:core: pass"
echo "- check:cycles: pass"
echo "- check:docs-all: pass"
echo "- tests: pass"
echo ""
echo "### Coverage of commits since previous tag"
LAST_TAG=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0 HEAD~1 2>/dev/null || echo "(no previous tag)")
COMMITS=$(git rev-list --no-merges "$LAST_TAG..HEAD" | wc -l)
echo "- Range: \`$LAST_TAG..HEAD\`"
echo "- Commits inspected: $COMMITS"
echo ""
echo "### ⚠️ After merging: run Phase 2 (Local VPS homologation) before tagging."
} >> /tmp/changelog_body.txt
gh pr create \
--repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute \
--base main \
--head "release/v$VERSION" \
--title "Release v$VERSION" \
--body-file /tmp/changelog_body.txt
```
### 10. 🛑 STOP — Notify user & await PR confirmation
Present the report and stop. Provide:
- PR URL
- Summary of changes (top 5 from CHANGELOG)
- Quality gate results
- `git diff --stat $LAST_TAG..HEAD`
- Coverage count vs commits-in-range
**DO NOT proceed to Phase 2 until the user confirms.**
---
## Phase 2: Post-Merge Validation (Local VPS)
> Run only AFTER the user has merged the PR into `main` and all CI jobs pass.
### 11. Deploy `main` to the Local VPS
Delegate to the `deploy-vps-local-ag` workflow (single source of truth — do NOT inline SCP/SSH here):
```
/deploy-vps-local-ag
```
### 12. 🛑 STOP — Notify user & await final OK
Provide smoke-test checklist:
- [ ] `GET /` returns 200
- [ ] Dashboard login works (`/dashboard`)
- [ ] `/v1/chat/completions` with default provider returns a stream
- [ ] No critical errors in `pm2 logs omniroute --lines 100`
- [ ] Any release-specific UI features are reachable
Wait for user **OK** before Phase 3.
---
## Phase 3: Official Launch
### 13. Create git tag and GitHub Release
```bash
git checkout main
git pull origin main
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
NOTES=$(awk "/^## \\[$VERSION\\]/{flag=1; next} /^---/{if(flag) {flag=0; exit}} flag" CHANGELOG.md | sed -e 's/^[[:space:]]*//' -e 's/[[:space:]]*$//')
[ -z "$NOTES" ] && NOTES="OmniRoute v$VERSION Release"
git tag -a "v$VERSION" -m "Release v$VERSION"
git push origin "v$VERSION"
gh release create "v$VERSION" \
--repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute \
--title "v$VERSION" \
--notes "$NOTES" \
--target main \
|| gh release edit "v$VERSION" \
--repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute \
--title "v$VERSION" \
--notes "$NOTES"
```
### 14. 🐳 Trigger / verify Docker Hub build
```bash
gh run list --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute --workflow docker-publish.yml --limit 3
gh run watch --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute
```
### 15. Publish to npm (usually CI)
```bash
npm publish
npm info omniroute version
```
### 16. Deploy to Akamai VPS (Production)
Delegate to `deploy-vps-akamai-ag` workflow if available, or run the inline equivalent of `deploy-vps-local-ag` against `69.164.221.35`. Do NOT duplicate the procedure here.
### 17. Rollback playbook (use only if Phase 3 fails after tag push)
```bash
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
PREV=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0 "v$VERSION^")
gh release edit "v$VERSION" --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute --prerelease
git checkout "$PREV" && /deploy-vps-akamai-ag
npm deprecate "omniroute@$VERSION" "broken release — use $PREV"
```
---
## Phase 4: Release Monitoring & Artifact Validation
### 18. Monitor CI pipelines
```bash
gh run list --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute --workflow docker-publish.yml --limit 1
gh run list --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute --workflow electron-release.yml --limit 1
gh run watch <RUN_ID>
npm info omniroute version
```
### 19. Handle failures
```bash
gh run view <RUN_ID> --log-failed
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
gh workflow run <workflow.yml> --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute --ref "v$VERSION"
```
### 20. Preserve release branch
Branch is kept for historical purposes. Do not delete.
---
## Notes
- Ensure CHANGELOG, README and `docs/*` are current BEFORE this workflow — run `npm run check:docs-all` first.
- The `prepublishOnly` script runs `npm run build:cli` automatically during `npm publish`.
- After npm publish, verify with `npm info omniroute version`.
- Lock file sync errors are caused by skipping `npm install` after version bump.
- Use `gh auth switch -u diegosouzapw` if `git push` fails with the wrong account.
- Deploy procedures live in dedicated workflows (`deploy-vps-local-ag`, `deploy-vps-akamai-ag` if present). Never inline SCP/SSH commands here.
## Known CI Pitfalls
| CI failure | Cause | Fix |
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| `[docs-sync] FAIL - OpenAPI version differs from package.json` | Skipped step 5 — `docs/reference/openapi.yaml` version not updated | Run step 5 (`sed -i ...`) and commit |
| `[docs-sync] FAIL - CHANGELOG.md first section must be "## [Unreleased]"` | `## [Unreleased]` missing or not at top of CHANGELOG | Add `## [Unreleased]\n\n---\n` before the first versioned `## [x.y.z]` |
| Electron Linux `.deb` build fails (`FpmTarget` error) | `fpm` Ruby gem not installed on `ubuntu-latest` runner | Already fixed in `electron-release.yml` (`gem install fpm` step) |
| Docker Hub `502 error writing layer blob` | Transient Docker Hub network error during ARM64 push | Re-run the Docker publish workflow; no code change needed |
| Coverage gate fails (statements/lines < 75% or branches < 70%) | Production code changed without tests | Add tests, re-run `npm run test:coverage` (see CLAUDE.md hard rule #9) |

890
.agents/workflows/implement-features-ag.md
View File

@@ -1,890 +0,0 @@
---
description: Analyze open feature request issues, implement viable ones on dedicated branches, and respond to authors
---
# /implement-features — Feature Request Harvest, Research & Implementation Workflow
## Overview
A **5-phase** workflow that systematically harvests feature requests from GitHub issues, creates structured idea files, researches solutions across the internet and Git repositories, presents a consolidated report for user approval, then generates detailed implementation plans and executes them.
**Output directory structure:**
```
_ideia/
├── viable/ # ✅ Approved, awaiting implementation
│ ├── 1046-native-playground.md
│ └── 1046-native-playground.requirements.md
├── implemented/ # ✅ Implemented but release PR not yet merged to main (transient)
│ └── 1046-native-playground.md
├── need_details/ # ❓ Issue OPEN — awaiting author clarification (permanent archive)
│ └── 1015-warp-terminal-mitm.md
├── defer/ # ⏭️ Issue CLOSED — good idea, deferred for future cycles (permanent)
│ └── 1041-smart-auto-combos.md
├── notfit/ # ❌ Issue CLOSED — out of scope (permanent)
│ └── 945-telegram-integration.md
├── exists/ # 🔁 Issue CLOSED — feature already shipped (permanent, kept separate from notfit)
│ └── 812-rate-limit-dashboard.md
└── in_flight/ # 🚧 Issue OPEN — third-party PR already addresses it (permanent until reclaim or merge)
└── 988-batch-export.md
_tasks/features-vX.Y.Z/ # Implementation plans (per-release)
└── 1046-native-playground.plan.md
```
> **LIFECYCLE RULE:**
> - `viable/` files are **MOVED** to `implemented/` once code lands on the release branch.
> - `implemented/` files are **DELETED** only after the release PR is merged to `main`.
> - All other buckets — `need_details/`, `defer/`, `notfit/`, `exists/`, `in_flight/` — are **permanent archives**. Even when the upstream issue is CLOSED, the local file stays. Future cycles can revisit any of them (Phase 1.7 stale-reclaim turns `in_flight/` and `need_details/` back into VIABLE after 15 days of upstream inactivity).
> - This preserves recovery context if implementation fails partially AND lets us re-evaluate old decisions when the project matures.
> **BRANCH RULE**: All implementation work MUST happen on the current `release/vX.Y.Z` branch. Never create separate `feat/` branches. If no release branch exists yet, delegate creation to `/generate-release` (see Phase 1.2) — do NOT reimplement bump logic here.
> **LANGUAGE RULE** (per `feedback_reply_language` memory): GitHub comments MUST match the language of the original issue body. Detect language by sampling the issue body + first 2 comments. Default to English when uncertain. All comment templates below are in English — translate to the detected language before posting. Internal docs, plan files, and idea files stay in English regardless.
---
## Phase 1 — Harvest: Collect & Catalog Feature Ideas
### 1.1 Identify the Repository
// turbo
- Run: `git -C <project_root> remote get-url origin` to extract owner/repo.
### 1.2 Ensure Release Branch Exists
Before doing any work, ensure you are on the current release branch:
```bash
git branch --show-current
```
**Decision tree:**
- If already on a `release/vX.Y.Z` branch → continue working there.
- If on `main` or any other branch → **delegate to `/generate-release`** by invoking its Phase 1 (steps 1–5: detect current version, bump, create branch, install). Do NOT reimplement the bump formula here — `/generate-release` owns the canonical version policy (patch bumps allowed up to `.999`; minor bump only when patch reaches `999`).
> **Why delegate?** Duplicating the bump formula caused divergence in the past. `/generate-release` is the single source of truth for version arithmetic and now allows patches up to `.999` before bumping minor.
### 1.3 Fetch ALL Open Feature Requests
// turbo-all
**⚠️ CRITICAL**: The JSON output of `gh issue list` can be truncated by the tool, silently hiding issues. You MUST use the two-step approach below.
**Step 1 — Get Issue numbers only** (small output, never truncated):
```bash
# Fetch issues with feature/enhancement labels
gh issue list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open -l "enhancement" --limit 500 --json number --jq '.[].number'
# Also check for [Feature] in title (common pattern when no labels are set)
gh issue list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open --limit 500 --json number,title --jq '.[] | select(.title | test("\\[Feature\\]|\\[feature\\]|feature request"; "i")) | .number'
```
- Merge both lists, deduplicate. Count and confirm the total.
- If the count hits the `--limit 500` ceiling, raise the limit and re-run — never proceed with a truncated set.
**Step 2 — Fetch full metadata for each Issue** (one call per issue):
```bash
gh issue view <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json number,title,labels,body,comments,createdAt,author,assignees
```
- Read the **entire body** — including description, use cases, screenshots, mockups, and any embedded images.
- Read **ALL comments** — community discussion, agreements, restrictions, owner responses, and linked PRs.
- **Images**: If the body or comments contain image URLs (`![...](...)` or `https://...png/jpg/gif`), **download and analyze them with the Read tool** (Claude can read PNG/JPG/GIF directly). Mockups and wireframes are often the most informative artifact — do NOT just "note" them, actually inspect their content and incorporate findings into the refined description.
- **Detect issue language** from body + first 2 comments and record it in the idea file front-matter (`reply_lang: pt-BR | en | es | ...`). This will drive comment translation in Phases 2.5 and 5.
- You may batch these into parallel calls (up to 4 at a time).
- Sort by oldest first (FIFO).
### 1.4 Create Idea Files (initially in `_ideia/` root)
For each feature request, create a structured idea file in `<project_root>/_ideia/`:
**Filename convention**: `<NUMBER>-<kebab-case-short-title>.md`
Example: `1046-native-playground.md`, `1041-smart-auto-combos.md`
#### 1.4a — If the idea file does NOT exist yet, create it:
```markdown
---
reply_lang: <detected-lang, e.g. pt-BR | en | es>
---
# Feature: <Title from Issue>
> GitHub Issue: #<NUMBER> — opened by @<author> on <date>
> Status: 📋 Cataloged | Priority: TBD
## 📝 Original Request
<Paste the FULL issue body here, preserving all formatting, images, and code blocks>
## 💬 Community Discussion
<Summarize ALL comments chronologically, noting who said what and any decisions or objections raised>
### Participants
- @<author> — Original requester
- @<commenter1> — <brief role/opinion>
- ...
### Key Points
- <bullet list of the most important discussion points>
- <agreements reached>
- <objections raised>
## 🖼️ Mockup / Image Analysis
<For each image embedded in the issue, summarize what it depicts: UI layout, data flow, architecture diagram, etc. Cite source URL.>
## 🎯 Refined Feature Description
<YOUR interpretation and enrichment of the feature request. Expand on what was asked, fill in logical gaps, provide concrete examples of how it would work. This section should be MORE detailed and clearer than the original request.>
### What it solves
- <problem 1>
- <problem 2>
### How it should work (high level)
1. <step 1>
2. <step 2>
3. ...
### Affected areas
- <list of codebase areas, modules, files likely affected>
## 📎 Attachments & References
- <any image URLs, mockup links, or external references from the issue>
## 🔗 Related Ideas
- <links to related \_ideia/ files if any overlap found>
```
#### 1.4b — If the idea file ALREADY exists, update it:
- Append new comments from the issue to the **Community Discussion** section.
- Update the **Refined Feature Description** if new information changes the understanding.
- Add any new **Related Ideas** cross-references found.
- Re-detect `reply_lang` only if the issue language clearly changed (uncommon).
- **Do NOT overwrite** existing content — append and enrich it.
### 1.5 Cross-Reference & Deduplication
After processing all issues:
- Scan all `_ideia/*.md` files for overlapping features.
- If two features are substantially the same, add `🔗 Related Ideas` cross-references to both.
- If one is a strict subset of another, note it in the smaller file: `> ℹ️ This feature is a subset of #<OTHER_NUMBER>. Consider implementing together.`
### 1.6 Detect In-Flight Work (avoid duplicate effort)
For each issue number, check whether an open PR or branch already targets it:
```bash
# Open PRs that link the issue
gh pr list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open --search "linked:#<NUMBER>" --json number,title,headRefName,updatedAt,author
# Local branches that mention the issue number
git branch -a | grep -E "(^|/)(feat|fix|refactor)/.*-?<NUMBER>(-|$)" || true
```
If a PR or branch already exists:
- Mark the idea file with `> ⚠️ In-flight: PR #<PR_NUMBER> by @<author> / branch <name> (last activity <date>)` near the top.
- **Skip Phase 2 research and Phase 4 planning** for this feature — the implementation is already in motion.
- In the Phase 3 report, list it under a separate "🚧 Already in progress" bucket; do NOT count it as VIABLE for implementation.
- The idea file will be moved to `_ideia/in_flight/` in Phase 2.5.2 (it stays there permanently, but Phase 1.7 may reclaim it later).
### 1.7 Stale Reclaim (15-day rule)
Some issues sit in `in_flight/` or `need_details/` forever — third-party PRs go cold, authors disappear, the world moves on. This phase reclaims them when they go quiet.
**Trigger conditions** (run for each issue currently in `_ideia/in_flight/` or `_ideia/need_details/`):
```bash
# For IN FLIGHT — last activity on the linked PR (commit OR comment)
gh pr view <PR_NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json updatedAt,commits,comments \
--jq '[.updatedAt, (.commits[-1].committedDate // ""), (.comments[-1].createdAt // "")] | max'
# For NEEDS DETAIL — last activity from the issue author (any comment by them)
gh issue view <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json comments,author \
--jq '.author.login as $a | [.comments[] | select(.author.login == $a) | .createdAt] | max // (.createdAt)'
```
Compute the gap in days between the timestamp above and today.
**Reclaim rule:**
| Bucket | Trigger | Action |
| --------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 🚧 IN FLIGHT | ≥15 days since last PR activity (commit OR comment by PR author) | Post **intent-to-take-over comment** (template below), wait **48h**, then reclaim if no response |
| ❓ NEEDS DETAIL | ≥15 days since last comment by the issue author | Post **gentle nudge** (template below), wait **48h**, then reclaim as VIABLE if no response |
**Intent-to-take-over comment (🚧 IN FLIGHT path)** — translate to `reply_lang`:
```markdown
Hi @<pr_author> and @<issue_author>! 👋
This PR (#<PR>) addressing issue #<NUMBER> hasn't had updates in <N> days. We'd love to ship this feature in our next release.
**Plan:** if there are no updates in the next **48 hours**, our team will take over the work and merge it as part of `release/vX.Y.Z`. The original PR will be referenced and authorship preserved in the commit trailer.
If you're still working on it, just drop a comment here and we'll hold off. Thanks for the contribution either way! 🙏
```
**Gentle nudge (❓ NEEDS DETAIL path)** — translate to `reply_lang`:
```markdown
Hi @<author>! 👋
It's been <N> days since we asked for more details on this feature request. We'd still love to move forward.
**Plan:** if we don't hear back in the next **48 hours**, we'll proceed with our best interpretation of the original request and add it to our backlog for implementation. We'll tag you on the implementation PR so you can review before it ships.
If you still want to provide the details, just reply here — we'll wait. 🙏
```
**Reclaim execution** (only after the 48h grace period, with no new author/PR-author activity):
1. Move the idea file to `_ideia/viable/` (preserve any prior content + add a `> ♻️ Reclaimed on <date> after 15-day inactivity` banner near the top).
2. If it was IN FLIGHT and a research file does not yet exist, run Phase 2 (Research) for it now.
3. Otherwise create the requirements file based on the existing content + a quick research pass.
4. Add a `viable_origin: stale_reclaim` line to the front-matter so the Phase 3 report can flag it.
5. In Phase 5 (commit / PR), include a commit trailer crediting the original PR author if applicable:
```
Originally-proposed-by: @<pr_author> in #<original_pr_number>
```
(This is NOT `Co-Authored-By` — hard rule #16 still applies. It is a free-form trailer that preserves credit without GitHub re-attributing the commit.)
> **Why 15 days + 48h grace?** Long enough that the original contributor has truly moved on; short enough that the feature still ships in the same release cycle. Grace period is documented in `feedback_issue_triage_independence` so we don't default to "trust prior triage" — we verify the silence is real.
---
## Phase 2 — Research: Find Solutions & Build Requirements
For each cataloged idea that is **viable** (aligns with the project's goals) AND not already in flight (per 1.6):
### 2.1 Viability Pre-Check
Before investing in research, quickly assess:
- [ ] Does this feature align with the project's goals and architecture?
- [ ] Is it technically feasible with the current codebase?
- [ ] Does it duplicate existing functionality?
- [ ] Would it introduce breaking changes or security risks?
- [ ] Is there enough detail to understand what's needed?
**Verdict options:**
| Verdict | When | Action |
| --------------------- | ------------------------------------- | --------------------------- |
| ✅ **VIABLE** | Good idea, enough context | Proceed to Research |
| ❓ **NEEDS DETAIL** | Good idea, insufficient spec | Skip research, ask author |
| ⏭️ **DEFER** | Good idea, too complex for this cycle | Catalog only, skip research |
| ❌ **NOT FIT** | Doesn't fit the project | Explain why |
| 🔁 **ALREADY EXISTS** | Feature already implemented | Point to existing feature |
| 🚧 **IN FLIGHT** | PR/branch already exists (from 1.6) | Skip — track only |
### 2.2 Internet Research (for VIABLE features)
For each viable feature, perform systematic research with an **early-stopping criterion**:
> **Stop as soon as EITHER condition is met:**
> - 3 reference implementations show a consistent pattern, OR
> - 1 high-quality repo (≥1k stars, updated within the last 12 months) already solves the problem cleanly.
>
> Cap at 10 repos total. Do NOT exhaustively browse — depth over breadth.
**Step 1 — Web search for similar implementations:**
```
WebSearch("how to implement <feature description> in <tech stack>")
WebSearch("<feature keyword> implementation nextjs typescript 2025 2026")
WebSearch("<feature keyword> open source library npm")
```
**Step 2 — Find reference Git repositories:**
```
WebSearch("site:github.com <feature keyword> <tech stack> stars:>100")
WebSearch("github <feature keyword> implementation recently updated 2026")
```
- Sort by most recently updated.
- For each repository (until stop criterion hit):
- Note the repo URL, star count, last commit date
- Read its README and relevant source files via `WebFetch`
- Extract the architectural approach, patterns used, and key code snippets
**Step 3 — Read API docs and standards:**
If the feature involves an external API, protocol, or standard:
- Find and read the official documentation
- Note version requirements, authentication patterns, rate limits
### 2.3 Create Requirements File
For each researched feature, create a requirements file alongside its idea file:
**Filename**: `<NUMBER>-<kebab-case-short-title>.requirements.md`
```markdown
# Requirements: <Feature Title>
> Feature Idea: [#<NUMBER>](./<NUMBER>-<kebab-case-short-title>.md)
> Research Date: <YYYY-MM-DD>
> Verdict: ✅ VIABLE
## 🔍 Research Summary
<Brief summary of what was found during research>
## 📚 Reference Implementations
| # | Repository | Stars | Last Updated | Approach | Relevance |
| --- | ---------------- | ----- | ------------ | -------- | ------------ |
| 1 | [repo/name](url) | ⭐ N | YYYY-MM-DD | <brief> | High/Med/Low |
| 2 | ... | | | | |
### Key Patterns Found
- <pattern 1 with code snippet or link>
- <pattern 2>
## 📐 Proposed Solution Architecture
### Approach
<Describe the chosen approach based on research findings>
### New Files
| File | Purpose |
| --------------------- | ------------- |
| `path/to/new/file.ts` | <description> |
### Modified Files
| File | Changes |
| -------------------------- | -------------- |
| `path/to/existing/file.ts` | <what changes> |
### Database Changes
- <migrations needed, if any>
### API Changes
- <new/modified endpoints, if any>
### UI Changes
- <new/modified pages/components, if any>
## ⚙️ Implementation Effort
- **Estimated complexity**: Low / Medium / High / Very High
- **Estimated files changed**: ~N
- **Dependencies needed**: <new npm packages, if any>
- **Breaking changes**: Yes/No — <details>
- **i18n impact**: <number of new translation keys>
- **Test coverage needed**: <brief description>
## ⚠️ Open Questions
- <question 1>
- <question 2>
## 🔗 External References
- <documentation URLs>
- <API references>
```
---
## Phase 2.5 — Organize: Sort Files into Category Directories
> **⚠️ This phase only moves files. It does NOT post comments or close issues.** All GitHub-visible actions are deferred to Phase 3.2 (after human approval).
### 2.5.1 Create Directory Structure
// turbo
```bash
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/viable
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/implemented
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/need_details
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/defer
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/notfit
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/exists
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/in_flight
```
> **Permanent archives**: `need_details/`, `defer/`, `notfit/`, `exists/`, `in_flight/`. Even after the upstream issue is closed, the local file stays — future cycles may revisit.
### 2.5.2 Move Idea Files to Category Subdirectories
After classification, move EVERY idea file to its correct subdirectory (still local-only — no GitHub side-effects):
```bash
# ✅ VIABLE — move idea + requirements files
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/viable/
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.requirements.md _ideia/viable/
# ❓ NEEDS DETAIL — viable but waiting for author response (issue stays OPEN)
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/need_details/
# ⏭️ DEFER — issue will be CLOSED but file is kept permanently for future re-evaluation
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/defer/
# ❌ NOT FIT — issue will be CLOSED but file is kept permanently
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/notfit/
# 🔁 ALREADY EXISTS — issue will be CLOSED but file is kept permanently (separate bucket from NOT FIT)
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/exists/
# 🚧 IN FLIGHT — issue stays OPEN, third-party PR is handling it; file kept permanently for Phase 1.7 stale-reclaim
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/in_flight/
```
No idea files should remain in `_ideia/` root after this step.
---
## Phase 3 — Report: Present Findings & Get Human Approval
### 3.1 🛑 MANDATORY STOP — Present Consolidated Report
After completing Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 2.5, **STOP and present the following report** in the chat. **No comments have been posted to GitHub yet** — that happens in 3.2 after approval.
Present a structured report containing:
#### 3.1a — Feature Summary Table
| # | Issue | Title | Verdict | Local Location | Planned GitHub Action |
| --- | ----- | ----- | ----------------- | ----------------------- | -------------------------------------- |
| 1 | #N | Title | ✅ VIABLE | `_ideia/viable/` | Comment + keep OPEN |
| 2 | #N | Title | ⏭️ DEFER | `_ideia/defer/` | Comment + CLOSE |
| 3 | #N | Title | ❌ NOT FIT | `_ideia/notfit/` | Comment + CLOSE |
| 4 | #N | Title | 🔁 EXISTS | `_ideia/exists/` | Comment with location + CLOSE |
| 5 | #N | Title | ❓ NEEDS DETAIL | `_ideia/need_details/` | Comment with questions + keep OPEN |
| 6 | #N | Title | 🚧 IN FLIGHT | `_ideia/in_flight/` | None — PR #M handles it |
| 7 | #N | Title | ♻️ RECLAIMED | `_ideia/viable/` | Intent comment posted in Phase 1.7 |
#### 3.1b — Viable Features Detail
For each VIABLE feature, provide a brief paragraph:
- What was found during research (with stop reason: "3-pattern consistency" or "dominant repo")
- The proposed approach
- Key risks or unknowns
- Which reference repositories were most useful
#### 3.1c — Issues Requiring Author Feedback
For features marked ❓ NEEDS DETAIL, list:
- What specific information is missing
- What examples or repository references would help
- Detected `reply_lang` for the question post
#### 3.1d — Ask for User Confirmation
End the report with:
> **Ready to proceed?**
>
> Approving will (a) post comments on GitHub in the detected language of each issue and (b) close DEFER / NOT FIT / EXISTS issues. VIABLE and NEEDS DETAIL stay open.
>
> - Reply **"sim"** / **"yes"** to post all comments AND generate implementation plans for all VIABLE features.
> - Reply **"only comments"** to post comments without generating plans yet.
> - Reply with specific issue numbers to scope the action.
> - Reply **"não"** / **"no"** to stop without touching GitHub.
### 3.2 Post GitHub Comments & Close Issues (only after approval)
> **⚠️ Do NOT execute this step without explicit user approval from 3.1d.**
For each issue, translate the appropriate template below into the `reply_lang` recorded in its idea file front-matter, then post. The English templates are reference only — never post the English version verbatim to a non-English issue.
---
#### For 🔁 ALREADY EXISTS — Comment + CLOSE issue
The feature already exists in the system. Explain WHERE it is and HOW to use it.
```markdown
Hi @<author>! Thanks for the suggestion! 🙏
Great news — this functionality **already exists** in OmniRoute:
**📍 Where to find it:** <exact dashboard path or settings location>
**🔧 How to use it:**
1. <step 1>
2. <step 2>
3. <step 3>
If you have any trouble finding or using it, feel free to ask in a Discussion. We're always happy to help!
Closing this as the feature is already available. 🎉
```
```bash
gh issue close <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --comment "<translated comment>"
```
---
#### For ⏭️ DEFER — Comment + CLOSE issue
Thank the user, explain the idea was cataloged, and that we'll study it before implementing.
```markdown
Hi @<author>! Thanks for this thoughtful feature request! 🙏
We really appreciate the detailed proposal. We've **cataloged your idea** and it's now part of our improvement backlog.
Due to the **significant architectural impact** of this feature, we'll need to conduct thorough use-case studies and architectural analysis before we start development. This ensures we build it right and don't introduce regressions.
**What happens next:**
- Your idea is saved in our internal feature backlog
- We'll conduct architecture studies when this area is prioritized
If you want to track progress, please **subscribe to the repository releases** — every implemented feature is announced in the CHANGELOG.
Thank you for contributing to OmniRoute's roadmap! 🚀
```
```bash
gh issue close <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --comment "<translated comment>"
```
---
#### For ❌ NOT FIT — Comment + CLOSE issue
Politely explain why the feature doesn't fit the project scope.
```markdown
Hi @<author>! Thanks for the suggestion! 🙏
After careful analysis, we've determined that this feature **falls outside OmniRoute's core scope** as a proxy/router.
**Reason:** <explain why — e.g., "Telegram integration belongs in the application/orchestrator layer that consumes OmniRoute's API, not inside the router itself.">
**Alternative:** <suggest an alternative approach if possible>
We appreciate you thinking of ways to improve OmniRoute! If you'd like to discuss this further, feel free to open a Discussion. 🙏
```
```bash
gh issue close <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --comment "<translated comment>"
```
---
#### For ❓ NEEDS DETAIL — Comment (keep OPEN)
Ask for the specific missing details needed.
```markdown
Hi @<author>! Thanks for the feature request — it's an interesting idea and we'd love to explore it further. 🙏
To move forward, we need a few more details:
1. <specific question 1>
2. <specific question 2>
3. <specific question 3>
If you know of any **open-source projects or repositories** that implement something similar, please share links — it would help us design the best solution.
Looking forward to your response! 🚀
```
---
#### For ✅ VIABLE — Comment (keep OPEN)
Thank the user, confirm we've cataloged their idea, and explain that progress is tracked in releases.
```markdown
Hi @<author>! Thanks for the great feature suggestion! 🙏
We've analyzed your request and it aligns well with OmniRoute's roadmap. We've **cataloged this feature** and it's in our implementation backlog.
**Status:** 📋 Cataloged for future implementation
This issue will be **closed automatically by the merge commit** when the feature ships. To follow along, you can subscribe to repository releases or watch this issue.
Thank you for helping improve OmniRoute! 🚀
```
**⚠️ Do NOT close viable issues — they remain OPEN until the implementation PR closes them via commit message.**
---
## Phase 4 — Plan: Generate Implementation Plans (after user says "yes")
> **⚠️ Do NOT enter this phase without explicit user approval from Phase 3.**
### 4.1 Pre-Plan Context Load (mandatory)
Before writing ANY plan, read:
1. `docs/architecture/REPOSITORY_MAP.md` — to know which directory owns what.
2. `docs/architecture/CODEBASE_DOCUMENTATION.md` — for the engineering reference.
3. The matching "Adding a New X" scenario from `CLAUDE.md` (provider, API route, DB module, MCP tool, A2A skill, cloud agent, embedded service, guardrail, eval, skill, webhook event).
4. Any docs linked from the requirements file's "External References" section.
This ensures plans cite real paths and follow the established add-a-X recipe, instead of inventing structure.
### 4.2 Create Task Directory
```bash
mkdir -p <project_root>/_tasks/features-vX.Y.Z/
```
### 4.3 Generate One Implementation Plan Per Feature
For each VIABLE feature approved by the user, create:
**Filename**: `_tasks/features-vX.Y.Z/<NUMBER>-<kebab-case-title>.plan.md`
```markdown
# Implementation Plan: <Feature Title>
> Issue: #<NUMBER>
> Idea: [\_ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-title.md](../../_ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-title.md)
> Requirements: [\_ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-title.requirements.md](../../_ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-title.requirements.md)
> Branch: `release/vX.Y.Z`
> Matching CLAUDE.md recipe: <e.g. "Adding a New Provider">
## Overview
<Brief description of what will be built>
## Pre-Implementation Checklist
- [ ] Read all related source files listed below
- [ ] Confirm no conflicts with in-flight PRs (re-run Phase 1.6 lookup)
- [ ] Verify database migration numbering (next free integer in `src/lib/db/migrations/`)
## Implementation Steps
### Step 1: <Title>
**Files:**
- `path/to/file.ts` — <what to change>
**Details:**
<Detailed description of the change, including code patterns to follow, function signatures, etc.>
### Step 2: <Title>
...
### Step N: Tests (MANDATORY per CLAUDE.md hard rule #8)
**New test files:**
- `tests/unit/<test-file>.test.mjs` — <what to test>
**Test cases:**
- [ ] <test case 1>
- [ ] <test case 2>
- [ ] Coverage check: confirm overall coverage stays ≥75% statements/lines/functions, ≥70% branches (hard rule #9)
### Step N+1: i18n
**Translation keys to add:**
- `<namespace>.<key>` — "<English value>"
### Step N+2: Documentation
- [ ] Update CHANGELOG.md (current release section)
- [ ] Update relevant docs/ files
- [ ] If touching error responses, follow `docs/security/ERROR_SANITIZATION.md`
- [ ] If touching upstream credentials, follow `docs/security/PUBLIC_CREDS.md`
## Verification Plan (Trust-but-Verify — mandatory before declaring done)
1. `git status` + `git diff --stat` — review every changed file; flag anything outside the plan's declared scope
2. `npm run lint` — 0 new errors
3. `npm run typecheck:core` — clean
4. `npm run typecheck:noimplicit:core` — clean
5. `npm run check:cycles` — no new circular deps
6. `npm run build` — must pass
7. `npm run test:coverage` — coverage gate respected
8. `npm run check-docs-sync` (via pre-commit hook) — passes
9. Manual UI verification if the feature touches frontend (start dev server, exercise golden path + 1 edge case)
## Commit Plan
```
feat: <description> (#<NUMBER>)
```
```
### 4.4 Present Plans for Final Approval
Present a summary of all generated plans:
> **Implementation plans generated:**
>
> | # | Feature | Plan File | Steps | Effort | CLAUDE.md recipe |
> | --- | ------- | ---------------------------------------- | ------- | ------ | ---------------------- |
> | 1 | <title> | `_tasks/features-vX.Y.Z/N-title.plan.md` | N steps | Medium | Adding a New Provider |
>
> Reply **"sim"** / **"yes"** to begin implementation of all features.
> Reply with specific issue numbers to implement only certain ones.
---
## Phase 5 — Execute: Implement the Plans (after user says "yes")
> **⚠️ Do NOT enter this phase without explicit user approval from Phase 4.**
### 5.1 Implement Each Feature
For each approved plan, execute it step by step:
1. **Follow the plan** — implement exactly as specified in the `.plan.md` file
2. **Mark progress** — flip checkboxes to `[x]` in the plan as each step completes
### 5.2 Trust-but-Verify Audit (mandatory before commit)
> Aligned with `~/.claude/CLAUDE.md` global rule: never trust a subagent's summary alone.
Run the full audit checklist from the plan's "Verification Plan" section AND inspect the diff yourself:
```bash
git status
git diff --stat
git diff # full diff, scan for out-of-scope changes
npm run lint
npm run typecheck:core
npm run typecheck:noimplicit:core
npm run check:cycles
npm run build
npm run test:coverage
```
**Block-on-failure checklist:**
- [ ] No files changed outside the plan's declared scope (or scope expansion explicitly justified)
- [ ] No deleted symbols/routes/files without a documented replacement (grep to confirm)
- [ ] No weakened or removed test assertions (only additions or alignments with real behavior)
- [ ] Coverage gate green (75/75/75/70)
- [ ] All commands above exit 0
- [ ] If UI was touched: manual smoke test passed and noted
If any item fails, **fix root cause** before committing. Do NOT bypass with `--no-verify` (hard rule #10).
### 5.3 Commit (one feature, one commit)
```bash
git add <only files in the plan>
git commit -m "feat: <description> (#<NUMBER>)"
```
> **No `Co-Authored-By` trailers** (hard rule #16). Commits go solely under `diegosouzapw`.
Then move (do NOT delete yet) the idea file to `_ideia/implemented/`:
```bash
mv _ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-<title>.md _ideia/implemented/
mv _ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-<title>.requirements.md _ideia/implemented/ 2>/dev/null || true
```
> **Why move, not delete?** If the release PR is reverted or rebased, we still have the context. The file is deleted only after the PR merges to `main` (see 5.6).
Continue to the next feature on the same branch — do NOT switch branches between features.
### 5.4 Respond to Authors
For each implemented feature, post a final close-comment **translated into the issue's `reply_lang`**:
```markdown
✅ **Implemented in `release/vX.Y.Z`!**
Hi @<author>! Great news — your feature request has been implemented! 🎉
**What was done:**
- <bullet list of what was built>
**How to try it (after the release PR merges):**
```bash
git fetch origin && git checkout main && git pull
npm install && npm run dev
```
This will be included in the upcoming **vX.Y.Z** release. Feel free to reopen if you spot any issues! 🚀
```
```bash
gh issue close <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --comment "<translated comment>"
```
### 5.5 Finalize the Release Branch
After implementing all approved features:
1. **Update CHANGELOG.md** on the release branch with all new feature entries
2. Push: `git push origin release/vX.Y.Z`
3. Hand off to `/generate-release` for the "Tests → Commit → Push → PR to main" stage. Refer to it **by stage name**, not step number, so this command does not break if `/generate-release` renumbers steps.
### 5.6 Post-Merge Cleanup (only after release PR merges to main)
Once the release PR is merged:
```bash
# Now safe to delete — commit history + CHANGELOG are the source of truth
rm _ideia/implemented/<NUMBER>-*.md
```
> If running this command before the merge: STOP at 5.5 and skip 5.6. Re-enter the workflow later just for the cleanup.
### 5.7 Final Summary Report
Present a final summary report to the user:
| Issue | Title | Verdict | Action | Commit |
| ----- | ----- | ---------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------- | --------- |
| #N | Title | ✅ Implemented | Issue closed, idea file in `_ideia/implemented/` (until merge) | `abc1234` |
| #N | Title | ♻️ Reclaimed | Was IN FLIGHT / NEEDS DETAIL, reclaimed after 15d → implemented | `abc1234` |
| #N | Title | ⏭️ Deferred | Issue closed + permanent archive in `_ideia/defer/` | — |
| #N | Title | ❌ Not Fit | Issue closed + permanent archive in `_ideia/notfit/` | — |
| #N | Title | 🔁 Exists | Issue closed + permanent archive in `_ideia/exists/` | — |
| #N | Title | ❓ Needs Detail | Issue OPEN, archive in `_ideia/need_details/` | — |
| #N | Title | 🚧 In Flight | Issue OPEN, archive in `_ideia/in_flight/`, tracked by PR #M | — |
Include:
- Total features harvested
- Total ideas archived per bucket (`need_details/` / `defer/` / `notfit/` / `exists/` / `in_flight/`)
- Total features implemented (idea files in `_ideia/implemented/`, awaiting post-merge cleanup)
- Total reclaimed via Phase 1.7 (stale 15-day rule)
- Total issues closed
- Total issues left open (NEEDS DETAIL + VIABLE-pending + IN FLIGHT)
- Audit results: lint / typecheck / cycles / build / coverage (pass-count per phase)
- Languages used in posted comments (e.g. "3× pt-BR, 5× en, 1× es")

50
.agents/workflows/issue-triage-ag.md
View File

@@ -1,50 +0,0 @@
---
description: How to respond to GitHub issues with insufficient information
---
# Issue Triage Workflow
Respond to GitHub issues that need more information before they can be investigated.
## Steps
### 1. Identify issues needing triage
```bash
gh issue list --state open --limit 20
```
### 2. Evaluate each issue
Check if the issue has:
- Clear reproduction steps
- Environment details (OS, Node.js version, OmniRoute version)
- Error logs/screenshots
- Expected vs actual behavior
### 3. Respond with triage template
For issues missing information:
```markdown
Thank you for reporting this issue! To help us investigate, please provide:
1. **OmniRoute version**: (`omniroute --version`)
2. **Node.js version**: (`node --version`)
3. **Operating system**: (e.g., Ubuntu 24.04, macOS 15, Windows 11)
4. **Installation method**: (npm, Docker, source)
5. **Steps to reproduce**: (exact commands/actions that trigger the issue)
6. **Error logs**: (paste relevant logs from the console)
7. **Expected behavior**: (what should happen)
This will help us debug and resolve your issue faster. 🙏
```
### 4. Label the issue
Add appropriate labels: `needs-info`, `bug`, `enhancement`, `question`, etc.
```bash
gh issue edit <NUMBER> --add-label "needs-info"
```

261
.agents/workflows/resolve-issues-ag.md
View File

@@ -1,261 +0,0 @@
---
description: Fetch all open GitHub issues, analyze bugs, resolve up to 30 per batch via per-issue worktrees + PRs into the release branch, triage the rest, wait for user validation
---
# /resolve-issues — Automated Issue Resolution Workflow
## Overview
This workflow fetches all open issues from the project's GitHub repository, classifies them, analyzes bugs, proposes a resolution plan, waits for user validation, and ONLY THEN implements fixes. The current `release/vX.Y.Z` branch is the integration target — each individual fix is implemented on its own short-lived `fix/<issue>-<short>` branch inside its own git worktree, merged into the release branch via PR, then the worktree and local branch are deleted. The release branch is later merged to `main` via `/generate-release`.
> **BRANCH RULE**: The current `release/vX.Y.Z` branch is the integration target. Each fix MUST live on its own `fix/<ISSUE>-<short>` branch cut from the release branch, inside its own worktree under `.worktrees/`. After the per-issue PR is merged into the release branch, the worktree and local branch are deleted. Never commit fixes directly to the release branch. If no release branch exists yet, create one first using `/generate-release` Phase 1 steps 1–5.
> **⛔ PR PROHIBITION**: If a fix is associated with a contributor's PR, you MUST merge their PR — NEVER close it and re-implement the fix yourself. See `/review-prs` workflow for the full policy. The `gh pr close` command is FORBIDDEN unless the repository owner explicitly requests it.
> **🌐 REPLY LANGUAGE**: All comments posted to issues (close messages, RESPOND comments, PR descriptions visible to the reporter) MUST match the reporter's language. When in doubt, default to **English**. The reporter's language is detected from the issue body and prior comments by that author.
## Steps
### 1. Identify the GitHub Repository
// turbo
- Run: `git -C <project_root> remote get-url origin` to extract the owner/repo
- Parse the owner and repo name from the URL
### 2. Ensure Release Branch Exists
// turbo
Before doing any work, ensure a `release/vX.Y.Z` branch exists. If you are currently on `main`, create one:
```bash
git branch --show-current
# If on main, determine next version and create the release branch
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
NEXT=$(node -p "const [a,b,c]=('$VERSION').split('.').map(Number); c>=999?a+'.'+(b+1)+'.0':a+'.'+b+'.'+(c+1)")
git checkout -b release/v$NEXT
npm version patch --no-git-tag-version
npm install
```
> Threshold: patches climb to `.999` before rolling. Example: `3.4.999` → `3.5.0`.
If already on a `release/vX.Y.Z` branch, continue working there.
### 3. Fetch All Open Issues (cap 30 per batch)
// turbo-all
**⚠️ CRITICAL**: The JSON output of `gh issue list` can be truncated by the tool, silently hiding issues. Use the two-step approach below.
**Step 3a — Get Issue numbers only** (small output, never truncated):
- Run: `gh issue list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open --limit 500 --json number --jq '.[].number'`
- Count them and remember the total.
**Step 3b — Fetch full metadata for each Issue** (parallel, validated against 3a):
- For each issue number from step 3a, run:
`gh issue view <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json number,title,labels,body,comments,createdAt,author,url`
- Batch in parallel (8–12 concurrent calls). After completion, assert `fetched_count == count_from_3a`; if mismatch, retry the missing IDs.
- Sort by oldest first (FIFO).
**Step 3c — Cap at 30 per run**:
- If more than 30 open issues qualify as bugs after step 4, ask the user which subset of up to 30 to handle now. The remainder is deferred to the next run.
### 4. Classify Each Issue
For each issue, determine its type:
- **Bug** — Has `bug` label, or body contains error messages, stack traces, "doesn't work", "broken", "crash", "error"
- **Feature Request** — Has `enhancement`/`feature` label, or body describes new functionality
- **Question** — Has `question` label, or is asking "how to" something
- **Other** — Anything else
Focus ONLY on **Bugs** for resolution. Feature requests and questions are skipped with a note in the final report.
#### 4.5. PR-Linked Check (mandatory)
For every bug, query linked PRs:
```bash
gh issue view <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json closedByPullRequestsReferences,body
```
If the issue is referenced by an **open** contributor PR (or the body links to one), do NOT plan a self-implemented fix. Mark the issue as `🤝 PR-LINKED — redirect to /review-prs` in the report and stop deeper analysis for it. **NEVER close the contributor PR.**
### 5. Deep-Read Each Bug Issue (One-by-One Analysis)
Read each bug issue thoroughly, one at a time. Each issue gets focused attention.
#### 5a. Understand the Problem
1. **Read the entire body** — Description, Steps to Reproduce, Expected/Actual Behavior, Error Logs, Screenshots
2. **Read ALL comments** — bot triage (Kilo, etc.) and owner/community responses. Look for:
- Someone already responded with a fix
- Community member confirmed it is resolved
- Bot duplicate flag. **DO NOT blindly trust bot labels (e.g., `kilo-duplicate`).** Re-verify independently from current source + web research.
3. **Identify the claimed error** — exact error message, status code, provider/model, OS, Node version.
#### 5b. Check Information Sufficiency
Verify the issue contains:
- [ ] Clear description of the problem
- [ ] Steps to reproduce OR error logs
- [ ] Provider/model/version information
- [ ] Expected vs actual behavior
**If ANY item is missing → auto-classify as `📝 RESPOND — Needs Info` and skip 5d.** Do not attempt root-cause analysis on under-specified issues.
#### 5c. Determine Issue Disposition
| Disposition | When to Apply | Action |
| ---------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------- |
| **✅ CLOSE — Already Fixed** | Owner responded with fix + no user follow-up, OR community confirmed fix | Close with comment citing which version fixed it |
| **✅ CLOSE — Duplicate** | You have independently verified the issue is a duplicate (do NOT rely solely on bot flags) + user provides no new info | Close referencing the original issue |
| **✅ CLOSE — Stale** | We requested logs/info > 7 days ago with no reply | Close thanking the user, invite to reopen if needed |
| **📝 RESPOND — Needs Info** | Issue is real but missing critical reproduction details (also triggered by 5b) | Comment asking for specifics per `/issue-triage` |
| **📝 RESPOND — User Config** | Error is caused by unsupported env (Node version, wrong model path, missing API enablement) | Comment explaining the user-side fix |
| **🤝 PR-LINKED** | An open contributor PR already targets this issue (from step 4.5) | Redirect to `/review-prs`; do not re-implement |
| **🔧 FIX — Code Change** | Root cause is confirmed in the codebase | Research, propose solution in report, wait for approval |
#### 5d. For "FIX — Code Change" Issues
Before coding, perform deep source analysis:
1. **Search the codebase** — grep for error strings, function names, affected files
2. **Search the web** — upstream API changes, SDK updates, breaking changes
3. **Read the full source file** — don't rely on grep snippets
4. **Verify the root cause** is in our code, not user misconfiguration
5. **Formulate a proposed solution** — exact files/lines/logic
6. **Create an Implementation Plan file** at `_tasks/fixes-vX.Y.Z/<ISSUE>-<short-description>.plan.md` (`vX.Y.Z` = current release branch version). Create the directory first: `mkdir -p _tasks/fixes-vX.Y.Z`. The plan contains: Overview, Reproduction Steps, Regression Test Outline, Implementation Steps (files/changes), Rollout Notes.
7. **DO NOT modify the codebase yet** — wait for user approval.
#### 5e. For "RESPOND" Issues
Post a substantive comment that:
- Acknowledges the specific error reported
- Explains the likely root cause
- Provides concrete steps (version upgrade, env var fix, model path correction)
- Asks for follow-up info if needed
**No generic templates.** Every comment references the user's specific error and environment, and is written in the reporter's language (English default).
### 6. Generate Report & Wait for Validation
Present a summary report. For FIX bugs, explicitly explain the proposed solution (files to change + logic) and confirm it will land via per-issue worktree → PR → release branch after approval. Include the reporter's detected language per row so the user can verify.
| Issue | Title | Status | Reply Lang | Proposed Action / Version |
| ----- | ----- | -------------- | ---------- | ------------------------------------------ |
| #N | Title | ✅ Close | en | Already fixed / duplicate (explain why) |
| #N | Title | 🔧 Propose | pt-BR | Code fix plan summary + worktree branch |
| #N | Title | 📝 Respond | en | Guidance comment to be posted |
| #N | Title | ❓ Needs Info | en | Triage comment to be posted |
| #N | Title | 🤝 PR-Linked | en | Redirect to /review-prs (PR #M) |
| #N | Title | ⏭️ Skip | — | Feature request / not a bug |
> **⚠️ IMPORTANT**: Do NOT implement code changes, commit, push, or close issues at this step.
> Wait for the user to review the proposed fixes and respond with **OK** before proceeding.
- If the user says **OK** → Proceed to step 7
- If the user requests changes → Adjust and re-present the report
- If the user rejects → Revert any accidental changes and stop
### 7. Implement Fixes via Per-Issue Worktrees + PRs (only after user approval)
For each approved FIX issue (up to 30 per batch), repeat the following sequence. Issues can be processed sequentially or in parallel (one worktree each — never two fixes in the same worktree).
#### 7.1. Spin up an isolated worktree on a fresh fix branch
```bash
ISSUE=<NUMBER>
SHORT=<short-kebab-desc>
RELEASE_BRANCH=$(git -C <project_root> branch --show-current) # release/vX.Y.Z
WT_DIR=".worktrees/fix-${ISSUE}-${SHORT}"
BRANCH="fix/${ISSUE}-${SHORT}"
git fetch origin "$RELEASE_BRANCH"
git worktree add "$WT_DIR" -b "$BRANCH" "origin/$RELEASE_BRANCH"
cd "$WT_DIR"
```
#### 7.2. Write the regression test first (TDD)
- Author a unit/integration test that reproduces the bug. **It must fail on the unfixed code.** Run it and confirm the failure.
- Hard rule #8: any production change must ship with tests in the same PR. The regression test is non-negotiable.
#### 7.3. Implement the fix
- Apply the approved plan from `_tasks/fixes-vX.Y.Z/<ISSUE>-<short>.plan.md`.
- Keep the diff scoped to this issue. No drive-by refactors.
#### 7.4. Run the test suite
- `npm run test:all` (or the appropriate suite for the touched area; the regression test MUST be included).
- All tests must pass before commit. Also run the relevant `lint` / `typecheck` per CLAUDE.md trust-but-verify checklist.
#### 7.5. Update CHANGELOG.md and commit (single commit, same diff)
- Add the new bug-fix entry under the current `vX.Y.Z` section of CHANGELOG.md.
- CHANGELOG entry + code + test go in **one** commit on the fix branch:
```bash
git add <changed files> CHANGELOG.md
git commit -m "fix: <description> (#${ISSUE})"
```
#### 7.6. Push and open a PR into the release branch
```bash
git push -u origin "$BRANCH"
gh pr create \
--base "$RELEASE_BRANCH" \
--head "$BRANCH" \
--title "fix: <description> (#${ISSUE})" \
--body "Closes #${ISSUE}\n\n<short summary, plan link, regression test reference>"
```
#### 7.7. Merge the PR into the release branch
- Wait for CI green, then merge with the project's default merge strategy.
- The PR title becomes the release-branch commit.
#### 7.8. Clean up worktree and local branch
```bash
cd <project_root>
git worktree remove "$WT_DIR"
git branch -D "$BRANCH"
```
#### 7.9. Close the issue with a localized comment
Match the reporter's language (English default). Template:
> **EN**: Thanks for reporting! Fixed in `release/vX.Y.Z` (already merged into the active development branch — feel free to pull and test it now). It will ship in the next release (vX.Y.Z).
>
> **pt-BR**: Obrigado pelo report! Corrigido em `release/vX.Y.Z` (já mergeado na branch de desenvolvimento atual — pode dar pull e testar). Vai sair na próxima release (vX.Y.Z).
```bash
gh issue close "$ISSUE" --repo <owner>/<repo> --comment "<localized message above>"
```
#### 7.10. Close non-FIX dispositions
After all FIX issues are merged:
- `Duplicate`: close referencing the original issue (localized).
- `Stale`: close thanking the user and inviting reopen (localized).
- `RESPOND — Needs Info` / `RESPOND — User Config`: post the substantive comment from 5e (localized).
- `PR-LINKED`: leave the issue open; comment redirecting to the contributor PR if not already linked.
#### 7.11. Hand off to release flow (optional)
If a release PR to `main` is desired now, run `/generate-release` Phase 1 steps 7–10 (tests → commit version bump → push → open PR to main → wait for user).
If NO fixes were committed, skip 7.7–7.11 and just conclude the workflow.

266
.agents/workflows/review-discussions-ag.md
View File

@@ -1,266 +0,0 @@
---
description: Read all open GitHub Discussions, summarize them, respond to pending ones, create issues from actionable feature requests, and triage stale threads for closure
---
# /review-discussions — GitHub Discussions Review & Response Workflow
## Overview
This workflow reads all open GitHub Discussions, generates a categorized summary, identifies which ones need a response, drafts and posts replies, optionally creates issues from actionable feature requests, and triages stale threads for closure.
**Modern tooling (replaces deprecated `browser_subagent` flow):**
- Reads use `gh api graphql` — one query returns 50 discussions with full bodies, comments, replies, IDs, and `updatedAt`.
- Writes (post comment, create issue, close discussion) use `gh api graphql` mutations or `gh issue create`.
- Pace at ~1s between writes to avoid abuse-detection throttling.
- `WebFetch` is acceptable only for read-only HTML scraping when GraphQL is unavailable — never for write actions.
// turbo-all
## Steps
### 1. Identify the GitHub Repository
- Run: `git -C <project_root> remote get-url origin` to extract `owner/repo`.
- Parse owner and repo name from the URL (https or ssh form).
### 2. Fetch All Open Discussions (single GraphQL query)
Single `gh api graphql` call — return everything needed for triage. Critical fields: `id` (node ID, **not** the visible `number`), `number`, `title`, `url`, `createdAt`, `updatedAt`, `author.login`, `category.name`, `body`, `answerChosenAt`, plus nested `comments(first: 50) { totalCount, nodes { id, author.login, body, createdAt, replies(first: 20) { nodes { author.login, body, createdAt } } } }`.
Persist the raw JSON to `/tmp/discussions-<repo>-<date>.json` so re-runs in the same session avoid a re-fetch. Build an `id → number` map for the post phase — the GraphQL `addDiscussionComment` mutation requires the node ID, not the number.
Capture **image attachments** present in body or comments (`<img src="...">` or markdown `![...](...)`). Surface their count in the per-discussion summary (e.g., `📷 3 screenshots`) so the user can decide if visual context matters before approving a draft.
### 3. Summarize All Discussions
For each discussion, extract:
- **Title** and **#Number**
- **Author** (GitHub username)
- **Category** (Announcements, General, Ideas, Q&A, Show and tell)
- **Created** + **Last updated** (ISO date)
- **Summary** of original post (1-2 sentences)
- **Comment count** + **last commenter** + **last comment date** — determine these by **chronological `createdAt`**, not iteration order. Comments and their nested replies must be merged into a single sorted timeline before picking the latest event (otherwise a recent top-level reply gets shadowed by an older nested reply of an earlier comment, and the discussion is misclassified).
- **Maintainer involvement**: whether the repo owner already replied, and how many times
- **Pending action** — derived state, see categories below
- **Attachments**: count of screenshots / videos / pastebin links
- **Detected language** of the reporter (for reply-language matching)
### 4. Present Summary Report to User
Group by **pending action**, not by category, so the human sees triage buckets at a glance:
| State | Meaning |
| ----------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| ⚠️ Needs first response | Zero comments, or all comments are from non-maintainers |
| 🔄 Follow-up pending | Maintainer replied, but reporter or third party added a new comment maintainer has not addressed |
| 🕒 Stale (>15d) | Maintainer was last to comment, no activity for 15+ days — candidate for soft-close or reporter-ping (see step 8)|
| ✅ Answered | Maintainer already replied AND last commenter is the maintainer AND age < 15d |
| 🏁 Resolved | `answerChosenAt` is set |
Within each bucket, present a table:
| # | Category | Title | Author | Updated | Notes |
| --- | -------- | ------------------ | ------ | ------- | ---------------------- |
| #N | Q&A | short title (60ch) | @user | YYYY-MM-DD | 📷2 · 🐛bug · 💡FR |
Tag rows with content hints when detected: `🐛bug` (`[BUG]` / `error` / stacktrace in body), `💡FR` (`feature request` / `add support for`), `❓support` (config/usage question), `🙏thanks` (short ack-only follow-up).
### 5. Draft & Post Responses
#### Reply templates by intent
Pick the template that matches the discussion intent — do NOT use a single generic format.
**A. Bug confirmed** — ack + root cause + tracking + workaround
```
Hey @user! Confirmed -- {root cause in one sentence}. I traced it to `path/to/file.ts:line`.
{Why it happens: 2-4 sentences of technical detail}
I have opened {issue #N} to track the fix. Workaround until it ships: {concrete steps}. Will update here when the patch lands.
```
**B. Feature Request** — ack + status + scope + commit
```
Hey @user! {Status: "Already exists" / "Tracked in #N" / "Reasonable, opening an issue"}.
{If already exists: pointer to dashboard page or doc}
{If tracked: link to umbrella, summarize order/priority}
{If new: open issue + post link back}
{Optional: short technical note on feasibility / trade-offs}
```
**C. Support / config question** — direct answer + reference + offer to dig deeper
```
Hey @user! {One-sentence answer}.
Steps:
1. ...
2. ...
3. ...
Reference: `docs/<path>.md`. If it still fails after that, paste {specific thing} and I will trace it.
```
**D. Thank-you / short follow-up** — 1-2 sentences
```
Glad it helps, @user! {Concrete next marker — when patch ships / when to expect next update}.
```
**E. Stale / closing** — see step 8
#### Posting via gh (replaces deprecated browser flow)
```bash
gh api graphql -f query='
mutation($id: ID!, $body: String!) {
addDiscussionComment(input: {discussionId: $id, body: $body}) {
comment { id url }
}
}' -f id="$NODE_ID" -f body="$BODY"
```
For **threaded replies** (recommended when responding to a specific comment in a long thread), add `replyToId: $parentCommentId` to the input.
**Output hygiene** (still applies even via API — the comment renders in GitHub UI):
- ASCII-safe punctuation: regular hyphens `-`, `->` for arrows
- Markdown OK: `**bold**`, fenced code blocks, `[text](url)` links
- No bare error messages with stack traces from internal logs — sanitize
- Match reporter's language (pt-BR reporter → pt-BR reply; ru reporter → ru reply); default to English when uncertain
**Pacing**: `sleep 1` between mutations. GitHub abuse-detection trips around 10/sec for the same actor.
**Verification**: capture the returned `comment.url` from each mutation. Failed posts (returncode != 0 or `errors` in response) get logged separately and retried once after a 5s pause.
### 6. Create Issues from Actionable Feature Requests
For discussions that contain concrete, actionable feature requests:
1. **Deduplicate FIRST** — before drafting, search existing issues:
```bash
gh issue list --repo $OWNER/$REPO --search "<keywords from FR>" --state open --json number,title,labels
```
If a matching issue (or umbrella) already exists, reuse it — never create a duplicate. Post a comment in the discussion linking to the existing issue.
2. **Ask the user which to create** — even after dedup, the human approves the final list.
3. **Create the issue** with `gh issue create`:
```bash
gh issue create --repo $OWNER/$REPO \
--title "[feature] <short imperative>" \
--label enhancement \
--body @/tmp/issue-body.md
```
Body template:
```markdown
## Feature Request
**Source:** Discussion #N by @author
## Problem
What limitation the user hit (in their words, paraphrased)
## Proposed Solution
How it could work
### Implementation Ideas
- File paths likely to touch
- Related modules / patterns already in the codebase
### Current Workarounds
What users can do today
## Additional Context
- Discussion: #N
- Related issues/PRs: #X, #Y
- Upstream references: link to similar implementations in `_references/` if applicable
```
4. **Generate task file in `_ideia/`** when the feature needs deeper investigation before implementation:
```
_ideia/<short-kebab-slug>.md
```
Contains: problem statement, current OmniRoute state, how upstream (`_references/9router`, `_references/CLIProxyAPI`, etc.) handles it, proposed implementation levels (short/medium/long term), acceptance criteria.
5. **Link back to discussion** with the real URL:
```
Follow-up @reporter — I've opened issue #N to track this. {1-line summary of what the issue covers}.
```
### 7. Final Report
| Discussion | Action Taken |
| ---------- | ------------------------------------------------------------- |
| #N — Title | Responded (bug confirmed, tracking #M) |
| #N — Title | Responded + created issue #M + task file `_ideia/X.md` |
| #N — Title | Responded (support answered with workaround) |
| #N — Title | Responded to follow-up comment |
| #N — Title | Closed (stale 15+d, no reply from reporter) |
| #N — Title | Ping sent (stale 15+d, will close in 7d if no response) |
Include totals: comments posted, issues created, discussions closed, discussions pinged. Capture median response time for the batch.
### 8. Stale Discussion Triage (auto-close candidates)
Identify discussions matching **all** of:
- `updatedAt > 15 days ago`
- Maintainer already replied at least once
- Last commenter is the maintainer (the ball is on the reporter's side)
- `answerChosenAt` is null (not formally resolved)
- Category in `{Q&A, General}` — skip `Ideas` / `Show and tell` / `Announcements` (those serve as community references and shouldn't be closed)
- `comments.totalCount >= 2` — there was actual conversation, not a drive-by post
- No label named `keep-open` (escape hatch)
For each candidate, present to the user with a recommended action:
| Action | When |
| --------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Soft-close** | Default — maintainer answered concretely and reporter went silent |
| **Ping reporter** | Maintainer asked for more info (log dump, screenshot) and never got it |
| **Keep open** | Conversation is mid-debug and closing would lose context — operator override |
**Soft-close mutation:**
```bash
gh api graphql -f query='
mutation($id: ID!) {
closeDiscussion(input: {discussionId: $id, reason: RESOLVED}) {
discussion { id closed }
}
}' -f id="$NODE_ID"
```
Valid `reason` values: `RESOLVED`, `OUTDATED`, `DUPLICATE`. Default to `OUTDATED` for "no response" closures, `RESOLVED` for answered-but-not-confirmed.
Before closing, post a closing comment:
```
Closing for inactivity -- feel free to reopen if you still hit this, or open a fresh issue with a current log. Thanks!
```
**Ping flow** (alternative):
```
@reporter -- still happening on the latest version? Otherwise I'll close this in 7 days for inactivity.
```
Persist the ping in `_cache/discussions-pinged-<date>.json` so the next run knows to close discussions that were pinged 7+ days ago without a reply.
## Notes
- This workflow is **interactive** — always present the summary and wait for user approval before posting responses, creating issues, or closing discussions.
- Gather batched approval — separate consents for "reply scope", "create issues for?", "close stale?". Stale handling is a distinct consent from reply posting.
- For discussions in non-English languages (`pt-BR`, `ru`, `zh`, `es`), respond in the same language as the original post. Default to English when uncertain.
- Always reference specific dashboard paths, config options, doc files, or code locations (`file:line`) when explaining existing features — never wave hands.
- When a discussion reveals a bug, separate it from feature requests in the report. Bugs need a tracking issue + workaround; FRs need scoping.
- Before recommending a workaround that mentions a file/flag/setting, verify it exists in the **current** codebase (the previous turn's memory may be stale).
- Trust-but-verify: after a batch post, spot-check 2-3 random `comment.url` returns in the browser to confirm the comments rendered cleanly (no Unicode mojibake, no broken markdown).
## Anti-patterns to avoid
- ❌ Posting via `browser_subagent` clicks — slow, flaky, and obsolete since `gh api graphql` mutations exist.
- ❌ N+1 fetches (one per discussion) — use one GraphQL query for all 50.
- ❌ Creating an issue without checking for an existing umbrella / similar one first.
- ❌ Generic "thanks, I'll look into it!" responses — every reply must reference a file, doc, or concrete action.
- ❌ Closing a stale discussion without posting a closing comment first.
- ❌ Skipping the user approval gate ("turbo-all" never bypasses interactive consent for writes).

256
.agents/workflows/review-prs-ag.md
View File

@@ -1,256 +0,0 @@
---
description: Analyze open Pull Requests from the project's GitHub repository, generate a critical report, and optionally implement approved changes
---
# /review-prs — PR Review & Analysis Workflow
## ⛔ ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION — Read Before Anything Else
> **NEVER close a contributor's PR if you intend to use ANY of their code, ideas, or fixes.**
>
> **NEVER manually integrate contributor code into a release branch and then close their PR.**
>
> These actions are **STRICTLY FORBIDDEN** under all circumstances:
>
> 1. ❌ Closing a PR and cherry-picking/copying its code into a release branch
> 2. ❌ Closing a PR "because of conflicts" and re-implementing the same fix yourself
> 3. ❌ Closing a PR and committing a "similar" solution inspired by it
> 4. ❌ Using `gh pr close` on any PR whose content was or will be used
>
> **Why**: Closing a PR after taking the contributor's work means they get ZERO credit on GitHub — no "Merged" badge, no contribution graph entry, no public record. This is effectively stealing their contribution. An audit found this happened to **37 PRs** in the past.
>
> **The ONLY acceptable flow**: Resolve conflicts IN the contributor's branch, push fixes TO their branch, then merge THEIR PR via `gh pr merge`. See Step 7 and Step 8 for the exact procedure.
>
> **When to close a PR**: ONLY when the user (repository owner) explicitly requests it, OR when the PR is clearly spam/malicious, OR when the author themselves asks to close it. In ALL other cases, leave it open.
## Overview
This workflow fetches all open PRs from the project's GitHub repository, performs a critical analysis of each one, generates a detailed report, and waits for user approval before proceeding with implementation. **All improvements are committed on the current release branch** (`release/vX.Y.Z`).
> **BRANCH RULE**: PRs are ALWAYS merged into the current `release/vX.Y.Z` branch, NEVER directly into `main`. The release branch acts as a staging area — only after all PRs are integrated and tests pass does the release branch get merged into `main` via the `/generate-release` workflow.
## Steps
### 1. Identify the GitHub Repository
- Read `package.json` to get the repository URL, or use the git remote origin URL
// turbo
- Run: `git -C <project_root> remote get-url origin` to extract the owner/repo
### 2. Ensure Release Branch Exists
// turbo
Before doing any work, ensure you are on the current release branch:
```bash
# Check current branch
git branch --show-current
# If on main, determine next version and create the release branch
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
# Bump patch: e.g. 3.3.11 → 3.3.12
NEXT=$(node -p "const [a,b,c]=('$VERSION').split('.').map(Number); c>=999?a+'.'+(b+1)+'.0':a+'.'+b+'.'+(c+1)")
git checkout -b release/v$NEXT
npm version patch --no-git-tag-version
npm install
```
If already on a `release/vX.Y.Z` branch, continue working there.
### 3. Fetch Open Pull Requests
// turbo-all
**⚠️ CRITICAL**: The JSON output of `gh pr list` can be truncated by the tool, silently hiding PRs. You MUST use the two-step approach below to guarantee **all** PRs are fetched.
**Step 3a — Get PR numbers only** (small output, never truncated):
- Run: `gh pr list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open --limit 500 --json number --jq '.[].number'`
- This outputs one PR number per line. Count them and confirm total.
**Step 3b — Fetch full metadata for each PR** (one call per PR):
- For each PR number from step 3a, run:
`gh pr view <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json number,title,author,headRefName,baseRefName,body,createdAt,additions,deletions,files`
- You may batch these into parallel calls (up to 4 at a time).
**Step 3c — Fetch diffs for each PR** (one call per PR, saved to /tmp):
- For each PR number, run:
`gh pr diff <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> > /tmp/pr<NUMBER>.diff`
- Then read each diff file with the appropriate file-read tool (`Read` in Claude Code; equivalent in your agent runtime).
- For each open PR, collect:
- PR number, title, author, branch, number of commits, date
- PR description/body
- Files changed (diff)
- Existing review comments (from bots or humans)
**Verification**: Confirm the count of PRs analyzed matches the count from step 3a before proceeding.
### 3.5 Redirect PR Base Branches to Release Branch
// turbo-all
**⚠️ CRITICAL**: Contributors typically open PRs targeting `main`. Before analyzing or merging, redirect ALL open PRs to target the current release branch instead.
```bash
# Get the current release branch name
RELEASE_BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current) # e.g. release/v3.5.4
# For each open PR that targets main, change its base to the release branch
for PR_NUM in $(gh pr list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open --json number,baseRefName --jq '.[] | select(.baseRefName == "main") | .number'); do
echo "Redirecting PR #$PR_NUM → $RELEASE_BRANCH"
gh pr edit "$PR_NUM" --repo <owner>/<repo> --base "$RELEASE_BRANCH"
done
```
This ensures:
1. PRs merge into the release branch, not directly into `main`
2. Merge conflict detection is accurate against the release branch
3. The release branch accumulates all changes before the final merge to `main`
4. If the release branch doesn't exist on remote yet, push it first: `git push origin $RELEASE_BRANCH`
### 4. Analyze Each PR — For each open PR, perform the following analysis:
#### 4a. Feature Assessment
- **Does it make sense?** Evaluate if the feature fills a real gap or solves a valid problem
- **Alignment** — Check if it aligns with the project's architecture and roadmap
- **Complexity** — Assess if the scope is reasonable or if it should be split
#### 4b. Code Quality Review
- Check for code duplication
- Evaluate error handling patterns (consistent with existing codebase?)
- Check naming conventions and code style
- Verify TypeScript types (any `any` usage, missing types?)
#### 4c. Security Review
- Check for missing authentication/authorization on new endpoints
- Check for injection vulnerabilities (URL params, SQL, XSS)
- Verify input validation on all user-controlled data
- Check for hardcoded secrets or credentials
#### 4d. Architecture Review
- Does the change follow existing patterns?
- Are there any breaking changes to public APIs?
- Is the database schema affected? Migration needed?
- Impact on performance (N+1 queries, missing indexes?)
#### 4e. Test Coverage
- Does the PR include tests?
- Are edge cases covered?
- Would existing tests break?
#### 4f. Cross-Layer (Global) Analysis
Perform a **global impact assessment** to verify whether the PR changes are complete across all layers of the application:
- **Backend → Frontend check**: If the PR adds or modifies backend-only resources (new endpoints, services, data models), evaluate whether corresponding frontend changes are missing:
- Does a new endpoint require a new screen/page in the dashboard?
- Should there be a new action button, menu item, or navigation link?
- Are there new data fields that should be displayed or editable in the UI?
- Does a new feature need a toggle, configuration panel, or status indicator?
- **Frontend → Backend check**: If the PR adds frontend elements, verify the backend support exists:
- Are the required API endpoints implemented?
- Is the data model sufficient for the new UI components?
- **Cross-cutting concerns**: Check shared layers (types, DTOs, validation schemas, routes, middleware) for completeness
- **Document gaps** — If missing layers are detected, list them as **IMPORTANT** issues in the report with concrete suggestions for what should be added
### 5. Generate Report — Create a markdown report for each PR including:
- **PR Summary** — What it does, files affected, commit count
- **Improvements/Benefits** — Numbered list with impact level (HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW)
- **Risks & Issues** — Categorized as CRITICAL / IMPORTANT / MINOR
- **Scoring Table** — Rate across: Feature Relevance, Code Quality, Security, Robustness, Tests
- **Verdict** — Ready to merge? With mandatory vs optional fixes
- **Next Steps** — What will happen if approved
### 6. Present to User
- Show the report in the final response and stop. Mark this as a blocking checkpoint awaiting explicit user approval.
- Wait for user decision:
- **Approved** → Proceed to step 7
- **Approved with changes** → Implement the fixes and corrections before merging
- **Rejected** → Close the PR or leave a review comment
### 7. Pre-Merge Fixes & CI Green-Lighting (if approved)
> **⚠️ Fixes and Conflict Resolutions MUST be pushed back to the PR branch before merging.** We want the PR itself to be green and fully valid before it integrates.
- **Sync latest fixes & Resolve Conflicts:** Merge the current `release` branch into the PR branch. If there are merge conflicts, you MUST resolve them inside the author's PR branch. NEVER resolve conflicts by closing their PR and doing the work in a separate branch, as this steals credit from the original author.
- **Implement improvements:** Apply the required fixes identified in the analysis directly on the PR branch (e.g., adding missing API routes, fixing SSRF, applying comments from other agents).
- **Pushing changes to PR branches:**
```bash
# Checkout the PR locally
gh pr checkout <NUMBER>
# Apply fixes, commit your changes
git commit -m "chore: apply review suggestions and missing layers"
# Attempt to push directly to the PR branch
git push
```
- **Fallback (ONLY for external forks without maintainer edit access):**
Using `cherry-pick` instead of fixing the contributor's PR directly is a **LAST RESORT**. You MUST ALWAYS attempt to `git push` your fixes to their branch first.
**ONLY if `git push` explicitly fails with a permission/access error** (meaning the contributor unchecked "Allow edits from maintainers" or it's a locked fork), you may use `git cherry-pick` to bring their changes into the release branch and fix the issues locally.
Even then, ensure you preserve the contributor's authorship (`git commit --author="Contributor Name <email>"` if creating new commits).
Once you have integrated their work into the release branch, **DO NOT close their PR**. Leave it open so the contributor retains credit. Under NO CIRCUMSTANCES should you use `gh pr close`.
- Run the project's test suite locally to verify nothing breaks:
// turbo
- Run: `npm test` or equivalent test command
### 8. Merge into Release Branch (NEVER CLOSE!)
> **⚠️ CRITICAL**: NEVER use `gh pr close` for a PR whose idea or code was accepted. Closing a PR in a contributor's face after taking their idea—or closing it just because it had conflicts—is unacceptable.
> You MUST ALWAYS resolve conflicts and apply fixes ON THE AUTHOR'S PR BRANCH (unless explicitly locked from edits), and then merge the PR using GitHub so the contributor gets the official "Merged" badge and proper credit on their profile. **Do not use cherry-pick just because it is "easier" than resolving conflicts on their branch.**
Even if the PR had severe conflicts or required significant architectural adjustments, you MUST:
1. Resolve any conflicts and apply the fixes directly to their PR branch (as detailed in step 7) or use cherry-picking into the release branch.
2. If you managed to fix their branch, merge it into the release branch using the GitHub CLI:
`gh pr merge <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --squash --body "Integrated into release/vX.Y.Z"`
3. If you had to use cherry-picking because you couldn't push to their branch, DO NOT close the PR. GitHub will sometimes auto-detect the cherry-picked commits and mark it as Merged. If it doesn't, leave it open. The repository owner will handle it. NEVER run `gh pr close`.
In ALL cases:
- Post a **thank-you comment** on the PR via the GitHub API before or immediately after merging.
- The message should:
- Thank the author by name/username for their contribution.
- Explain what was adjusted or improved (if we pushed fixes to their branch or cherry-picked).
- Note it will be included in the upcoming release.
- Be friendly, professional, and encouraging.
> **⚠️ MANDATORY CHANGELOG CREDIT**: When cherry-picking is used (because the PR branch couldn't be pushed to or `gh pr merge` failed), the contributor does NOT get the automatic GitHub "Merged" badge. In this case, you MUST compensate by adding an explicit entry to `CHANGELOG.md` in the `[Unreleased]` section with `(#PR_NUMBER — thanks @username)` format. This ensures the contributor gets public credit in the release notes even if GitHub doesn't auto-detect the cherry-pick. This is NOT optional — skipping it effectively erases the contributor's work from the release record.
### 9. Sync Local Release Branch
After merging PRs, sync the local release branch to include the new changes:
```bash
git fetch origin
git pull origin release/vX.Y.Z
```
### 10. Continue or Finalize
After processing all approved PRs:
- If more PRs remain, go back to step 7
- When all PRs are processed, **update CHANGELOG.md** on the release branch with all new entries
- Run **test coverage** to verify the gate (≥75% statements/lines/functions, ≥70% branches — measured ~82%):
```bash
npm run test:coverage
```
- Fix any test regressions introduced by merged PRs
- Run `/generate-release` workflow Phase 1 steps 7–10 (tests → commit → push → open PR to main → wait for user)
- The `/generate-release` workflow handles the final merge from `release/vX.Y.Z` → `main`

341
.agents/workflows/version-bump-ag.md
View File

@@ -1,341 +0,0 @@
---
description: Bump version, auto-generate CHANGELOG from git commits, update all versioned files, and refresh root + docs/ documentation to reflect the current project state
---
# Version Bump Workflow
Automatically bump the project version, generate CHANGELOG entries from git history since the last tag, update every file that references the version, and refresh project documentation to reflect the current state.
> **VERSION RULE: Always use PATCH bumps (3.x.y → 3.x.y+1)**
> NEVER use `npm version minor` or `npm version major`.
> Always use: `npm version patch --no-git-tag-version`
> The threshold rule: when `y` reaches 1000, bump to `3.(x+1).0` — e.g. `3.4.999` → `3.5.0`.
---
## Phase 1: Determine Version
### 1. Read current version and last tag
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
CURRENT_VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
LAST_TAG=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0 2>/dev/null || echo "")
CURRENT_BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current)
echo "Current version: $CURRENT_VERSION"
echo "Last tag: $LAST_TAG"
echo "Current branch: $CURRENT_BRANCH"
```
### 2. Calculate new version
Apply the patch bump rule:
- If the current patch number is `9`, the new version is `3.(minor+1).0`
- Otherwise, increment patch: `3.x.y` → `3.x.(y+1)`
If the version was ALREADY bumped (e.g. you are on a release branch and package.json already has the new version), **skip the npm version bump** and use the existing version.
### 3. Bump package.json (if needed)
// turbo
```bash
# Only if version hasn't been bumped yet
npm version patch --no-git-tag-version
```
Or for threshold (y=10):
```bash
# Manual threshold bump
VERSION="3.X.0" # compute manually
npm version "$VERSION" --no-git-tag-version
```
---
## Phase 2: Generate CHANGELOG from Git History
### 4. Collect commits since last tag
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
LAST_TAG=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0 2>/dev/null)
echo "=== Commits since $LAST_TAG ==="
git log "$LAST_TAG"..HEAD --pretty=format:"%h %s" --no-merges | head -100
echo ""
echo "=== Merge commits ==="
git log "$LAST_TAG"..HEAD --merges --pretty=format:"%h %s" | head -50
```
### 5. Classify commits and generate CHANGELOG section
Analyze each commit message and classify into categories based on the conventional-commit prefix and content:
| Category | Patterns |
| ------------------- | ------------------------------------------------ |
| ✨ New Features | `feat:`, `feat(*):` |
| 🐛 Bug Fixes | `fix:`, `fix(*):` |
| ⚠️ Breaking Changes | `BREAKING CHANGE`, `!:` suffix |
| 🛠️ Maintenance | `chore:`, `refactor:`, `perf:`, `build:` |
| 🧪 Tests | `test:`, `tests:` |
| 📝 Documentation | `docs:` |
| 🔒 Security | `security:`, CVE references, vulnerability fixes |
| 🌍 i18n | translation updates, locale changes |
For each category with entries, create a markdown section with descriptive bullet points. Use the commit messages but rewrite them to be human-readable and descriptive (not raw commit messages).
**If a commit references a PR number** (e.g. `#880`, `PR #885`), include it in the description.
### 6. Update CHANGELOG.md
Replace the `## [Unreleased]` section content with the generated entries, then add the new versioned section:
```markdown
## [Unreleased]
---
## [NEW_VERSION] — YYYY-MM-DD
### ✨ New Features
- **Feature name:** Description (#PR)
### 🐛 Bug Fixes
- **Fix name:** Description (#PR)
### 🛠️ Maintenance
- **Item:** Description
---
## [PREVIOUS_VERSION] — YYYY-MM-DD
...
```
The date must be today's date in `YYYY-MM-DD` format.
---
## Phase 3: Sync Version Across All Files
### 7. Update workspace package.json files and openapi.yaml
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
# Update docs/reference/openapi.yaml version
sed -i "s/ version: .*/ version: $VERSION/" docs/reference/openapi.yaml
echo "✓ docs/reference/openapi.yaml → $VERSION"
# Update workspace packages (open-sse, electron)
for dir in electron open-sse; do
if [ -d "$dir" ] && [ -f "$dir/package.json" ]; then
(cd "$dir" && npm version "$VERSION" --no-git-tag-version --allow-same-version > /dev/null)
echo "✓ $dir/package.json → $VERSION"
fi
done
echo "✓ All workspace packages synced to $VERSION"
```
### 8. Update llm.txt version references
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
OLD_VERSION_PATTERN='[0-9]\+\.[0-9]\+\.[0-9]\+'
# Update "Current version:" line
sed -i "s/\*\*Current version:\*\* $OLD_VERSION_PATTERN/**Current version:** $VERSION/" llm.txt
# Update "Key Features (vX.Y.Z)" header
sed -i "s/## Key Features (v$OLD_VERSION_PATTERN)/## Key Features (v$VERSION)/" llm.txt
echo "✓ llm.txt → $VERSION"
```
### 9. Regenerate lock file
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
npm install
echo "✓ Lock file regenerated"
```
---
## Phase 4: Update Root Documentation
Based on the CHANGELOG entries generated in Phase 2, review and update these root-level files if relevant changes warrant updates:
### 10. Review and update root documentation files
For each file below, read the current content and determine if the CHANGELOG entries require any updates. Only modify files where substantive changes have occurred:
| File | When to update |
| ----------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| `README.md` | New providers, major features, stats changes (test count, provider count), badges, installation instructions, feature table |
| `AGENTS.md` | Architecture changes, new modules, new commands, new providers, new services/handlers/executors |
| `CONTRIBUTING.md` | Dev workflow changes, new tooling, test infrastructure changes |
| `SECURITY.md` | Security fixes, new auth mechanisms, vulnerability disclosures |
| `llm.txt` | Provider count changes, new features, architecture changes |
**Update rules:**
- **README.md**: Update provider count, test count, feature highlights table, badges if any numbers changed. If a new provider was added, add it to the provider table. If a major feature was added, add it to the features section.
- **AGENTS.md**: If new architecture components (handlers, executors, services, DB modules) were added, update the Architecture section. If new commands were added, update the Build/Test table.
- **SECURITY.md**: Add new vulnerability fixes or security improvements to the relevant section.
- **llm.txt**: Update provider count, feature list, version references.
### 11. Review and update docs/ files (excluding i18n/)
For each file in `docs/` (excluding `docs/i18n/`), review if CHANGELOG changes affect it:
| File | When to update |
| --------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| `docs/reference/API_REFERENCE.md` | New API endpoints, changed request/response formats |
| `docs/architecture/ARCHITECTURE.md` | New modules, new services, changed data flow |
| `docs/architecture/CODEBASE_DOCUMENTATION.md` | New files, architectural changes, module reorganization |
| `docs/architecture/REPOSITORY_MAP.md` | New folders / files / one-line descriptions |
| `docs/reference/CLI-TOOLS.md` | New CLI tool integrations, config format changes |
| `docs/guides/USER_GUIDE.md` | UX changes, new dashboard pages, settings changes |
| `docs/reference/PROVIDER_REFERENCE.md` | New providers (regenerate via `scripts/gen-provider-reference.ts`) |
| `docs/frameworks/MCP-SERVER.md` | New MCP tools, changed tool signatures, scope changes |
| `docs/frameworks/A2A-SERVER.md` | New A2A skills, protocol changes |
| `docs/frameworks/AGENT_PROTOCOLS_GUIDE.md` | New external agent protocols supported |
| `docs/frameworks/CLOUD_AGENT.md` | Cloud agent additions (codex-cloud, devin, jules) or API changes |
| `docs/architecture/AUTHZ_GUIDE.md` | New route classifications, policy changes |
| `docs/security/GUARDRAILS.md` | New guardrails registered, priority/order changes |
| `docs/security/COMPLIANCE.md` | Audit log / retention / no-log policy changes |
| `docs/frameworks/SKILLS.md` | Skill framework / registry / built-in skill changes |
| `docs/frameworks/MEMORY.md` | Memory pipeline / extraction / injection / Qdrant changes |
| `docs/frameworks/EVALS.md` | Evaluation framework changes, new evaluators |
| `docs/frameworks/WEBHOOKS.md` | New webhook events, payload schema changes |
| `docs/routing/REASONING_REPLAY.md` | Reasoning capture/replay pipeline changes |
| `docs/routing/AUTO-COMBO.md` | Routing changes, new strategies, scoring weight changes |
| `docs/architecture/RESILIENCE_GUIDE.md` | Circuit breaker / cooldown / lockout behavior changes |
| `docs/security/STEALTH_GUIDE.md` | TLS / CLI fingerprint changes |
| `docs/ops/TUNNELS_GUIDE.md` | Cloudflare tunnel feature changes |
| `docs/guides/ELECTRON_GUIDE.md` | Electron build / signing / packaging changes |
| `docs/guides/TROUBLESHOOTING.md` | New known issues, resolved problems |
| `docs/ops/RELEASE_CHECKLIST.md` | Process changes |
| `docs/ops/COVERAGE_PLAN.md` | Coverage gate adjustments, target metrics |
| `docs/reference/openapi.yaml` | Already updated in step 7 |
**Only update files where the CHANGELOG entries directly affect the documented content.** Do NOT update files just to bump a version number — only when the documented behavior, features, or architecture has actually changed.
---
## Phase 5: Verify
### 12. Run lint check
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
npm run lint
```
### 13. Run tests
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
npm test
```
### 14. Verify version sync across all files
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
echo "Expected version: $VERSION"
echo ""
echo "--- package.json ---"
grep '"version"' package.json | head -1
echo "--- open-sse/package.json ---"
grep '"version"' open-sse/package.json | head -1
echo "--- electron/package.json ---"
[ -f electron/package.json ] && grep '"version"' electron/package.json | head -1
echo "--- docs/reference/openapi.yaml ---"
grep " version:" docs/reference/openapi.yaml | head -1
echo "--- llm.txt ---"
grep "Current version:" llm.txt
echo "--- CHANGELOG.md (first versioned entry) ---"
grep "^## \[" CHANGELOG.md | head -2
```
### 15. 🛑 STOP — Present Summary to User
**STOP** and present a summary to the user including:
- Old version → New version
- CHANGELOG entries generated
- Files modified
- Test results
- Any documentation updates made
**Wait for the user to confirm before committing.**
---
## Phase 6: Commit (only after user approval)
### 16. Stage and commit
// turbo-all
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
git add -A
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
git commit -m "chore(release): bump to v$VERSION — changelog, docs, version sync"
```
---
## Notes
- This workflow does **NOT** create tags, releases, or deploy. Use `/generate-release` for the full release cycle after this.
- This workflow does **NOT** update `docs/i18n/` translations. Translation updates are handled manually or via release tooling — there is no `/update-i18n` workflow shipped in this repo.
- The CHANGELOG generation is based on git commits since the last tag. If there are no new commits, the workflow should inform the user and stop.
- Always verify the generated CHANGELOG entries make sense — raw commit messages may need rewriting for clarity.
- If the version was already bumped (e.g. you're on a `release/vX.Y.Z` branch), skip the `npm version` step and use the existing version.
## Version Touchpoints Checklist
| File | Field/Pattern |
| ----------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------- |
| `package.json` | `"version": "X.Y.Z"` |
| `open-sse/package.json` | `"version": "X.Y.Z"` |
| `electron/package.json` | `"version": "X.Y.Z"` |
| `docs/reference/openapi.yaml` | `version: X.Y.Z` |
| `llm.txt` | `**Current version:** X.Y.Z` and `## Key Features (vX.Y.Z)` |
| `CHANGELOG.md` | `## [X.Y.Z] — YYYY-MM-DD` |

51
.claude/commands/capture-release-evidences-cc.md
View File

@@ -1,51 +0,0 @@
---
description: Automatically run a browser-automation agent to visually validate all new UI features from the current release and capture evidence WebP recordings of the changes.
---
# Capture Release Evidences Workflow
Use this workflow to automatically drive a browser-automation agent to explore the newly deployed or locally running application and record evidence of the UI changes introduced in the latest release.
> **Tool mapping note (v3.8):** This workflow references a `browser_subagent` tool that was specific to an earlier agent runtime. In Claude Code, substitute with the available browser MCP tools (e.g. `mcp__claude-in-chrome__*`) for navigation/screenshots, plus the `Write` tool for saving artifacts. The high-level steps below remain the same regardless of which browser-automation surface is used.
## Prerequisites
- OmniRoute must be actively running and accessible (e.g. locally at `http://localhost:20128` or on the Local VPS at `http://192.168.0.15:20128`).
- The user must provide the target URL to be tested, or default to `http://192.168.0.15:20128`.
## Workflow Steps
### 1. Identify Target Features
Review the `CHANGELOG.md` for the latest version to map out the new UI elements. For example:
- **CLI Tools Settings**
- **New Provider/Model Listings (e.g., Gemini 3.1, Qoder PAT)**
- **New Feature Modals**
### 2. Run the Browser Subagent
For each identified feature, invoke the `browser_subagent` using the `default_api:browser_subagent` tool.
**Important Task Guidelines for the Subagent:**
- `TaskName`: Give it a clear name like "Validate CLIProxyAPI Tool Tab".
- `TaskSummary`: "Navigate to the CLI Tools tab and verify the new Integration settings."
- `Task`: Provide unambiguous instructions for the subagent, such as: "Navigate to http://192.168.0.15:20128/dashboard. Click on the 'Settings' or 'CLI Tools' nav link. Scroll down to find the CLIProxyAPI integration card. Hover over it to trigger UI state. Verify the components render correctly and exit."
- `RecordingName`: Ensure it describes the feature (e.g. `v3_4_5_cli_proxy_api`). This is required and strictly automatically saved as a WebP artifacts video by the system.
_(Note: The `browser_subagent` automatically creates a WebP recording named by the `RecordingName` parameter. No additional tools for screenshots are needed.)_
### 3. Generate Report Artifact
After the `browser_subagent` finishes its sessions, generate a final Markdown artifact (using `Write` and `IsArtifact=true`) to present the recordings inline to the user using the `![caption](/absolute/path/to/media.webp)` syntax.
### Example Invocation
\```json
{
"TaskName": "Validating Qoder PAT Configuration UI",
"TaskSummary": "Validates the Qoder provider configuration modal",
"Task": "Go to http://192.168.0.15:20128/dashboard. Click on the 'Providers' tab. Find 'Qoder' in the list. Click 'Add Token' or 'Configure'. Type 'test_token' and submit. Return when done.",
"RecordingName": "qoder_pat_ui_validation"
}
\```

39
.claude/commands/deploy-vps-akamai-cc.md
View File

@@ -1,39 +0,0 @@
---
description: Deploy the latest OmniRoute code to the Akamai VPS (69.164.221.35)
---
# Deploy to Akamai VPS Workflow
Deploy OmniRoute to the Akamai VPS using `npm pack + scp` + PM2.
**Akamai VPS:** `69.164.221.35`
**Process manager:** PM2 (`omniroute`)
**Port:** `20128`
## Steps
### 1. Build + pack locally
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute && rm -f omniroute-*.tgz && rm -rf .next/cache app/.next/cache && npm run build:cli && rm -rf app/logs app/coverage app/.git app/.app-build-backup* && npm pack --ignore-scripts
```
### 2. Copy to Akamai VPS and install
// turbo-all
```bash
scp omniroute-*.tgz root@69.164.221.35:/tmp/
```
```bash
ssh root@69.164.221.35 "npm install -g /tmp/omniroute-*.tgz --ignore-scripts && cd /usr/lib/node_modules/omniroute/app && npm rebuild better-sqlite3 && pm2 delete omniroute 2>/dev/null; pm2 start /root/.omniroute/ecosystem.config.cjs --update-env && pm2 save && echo '✅ Akamai done'"
```
### 3. Verify the deployment
```bash
curl -s -o /dev/null -w 'AKAMAI HTTP %{http_code}\n' http://69.164.221.35:20128/
```

49
.claude/commands/deploy-vps-both-cc.md
View File

@@ -1,49 +0,0 @@
---
description: Deploy the latest OmniRoute code to BOTH the Akamai VPS and the Local VPS
---
# Deploy to VPS (Both) Workflow
Deploy OmniRoute to the production VPSs using `npm pack + scp` + PM2.
**Akamai VPS:** `69.164.221.35`
**Local VPS:** `192.168.0.15`
**Process manager:** PM2 (`omniroute`)
**Port:** `20128`
**PM2 entry:** `/usr/lib/node_modules/omniroute/app/server.js`
> [!IMPORTANT]
> The npm registry rejects packages > 100MB, so deployment uses **npm pack + scp**.
## Steps
### 1. Build + pack locally
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute && rm -f omniroute-*.tgz && rm -rf .next/cache app/.next/cache && npm run build:cli && rm -rf app/logs app/coverage app/.git app/.app-build-backup* && npm pack --ignore-scripts
```
### 2. Copy to both VPS and install
// turbo-all
```bash
scp omniroute-*.tgz root@69.164.221.35:/tmp/ && scp omniroute-*.tgz root@192.168.0.15:/tmp/
```
```bash
ssh root@69.164.221.35 "npm install -g /tmp/omniroute-*.tgz --ignore-scripts && cd /usr/lib/node_modules/omniroute/app && npm rebuild better-sqlite3 && pm2 delete omniroute 2>/dev/null; pm2 start /root/.omniroute/ecosystem.config.cjs --update-env && pm2 save && echo '✅ Akamai done'"
```
```bash
ssh root@192.168.0.15 "npm install -g /tmp/omniroute-*.tgz --ignore-scripts && cd /usr/lib/node_modules/omniroute/app && npm rebuild better-sqlite3 && pm2 delete omniroute 2>/dev/null; pm2 start /root/.omniroute/ecosystem.config.cjs --update-env && pm2 save && echo '✅ Local done'"
```
### 3. Verify the deployment
```bash
curl -s -o /dev/null -w 'AKAMAI HTTP %{http_code}\n' http://69.164.221.35:20128/
curl -s -o /dev/null -w 'LOCAL HTTP %{http_code}\n' http://192.168.0.15:20128/
```

39
.claude/commands/deploy-vps-local-cc.md
View File

@@ -1,39 +0,0 @@
---
description: Deploy the latest OmniRoute code to the Local VPS (192.168.0.15)
---
# Deploy to Local VPS Workflow
Deploy OmniRoute to the Local VPS using `npm pack + scp` + PM2.
**Local VPS:** `192.168.0.15`
**Process manager:** PM2 (`omniroute`)
**Port:** `20128`
## Steps
### 1. Build + pack locally
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute && rm -f omniroute-*.tgz && rm -rf .next/cache app/.next/cache && npm run build:cli && rm -rf app/logs app/coverage app/.git app/.app-build-backup* && npm pack --ignore-scripts
```
### 2. Copy to Local VPS and install
// turbo-all
```bash
scp omniroute-*.tgz root@192.168.0.15:/tmp/
```
```bash
ssh root@192.168.0.15 "npm install -g /tmp/omniroute-*.tgz --ignore-scripts && cd /usr/lib/node_modules/omniroute/app && npm rebuild better-sqlite3 && pm2 delete omniroute 2>/dev/null; pm2 start /root/.omniroute/ecosystem.config.cjs --update-env && pm2 save && echo '✅ Local done'"
```
### 3. Verify the deployment
```bash
curl -s -o /dev/null -w 'LOCAL HTTP %{http_code}\n' http://192.168.0.15:20128/
```

510
.claude/commands/generate-release-cc.md
View File

@@ -1,510 +0,0 @@
---
description: Create a new release, bump version up to the .999 patch threshold, generate a complete CHANGELOG (with PR co-authors + every commit since the last tag), and manage Pull Requests
---
# Generate Release Workflow
Bump version, build a **complete CHANGELOG** from every commit since the last tag (with PR back-reference and contributor attribution), commit, open a **PR to main** and wait for user confirmation before tagging, publishing, and deploying.
> **VERSION RULE: Always use PATCH bumps (3.x.y → 3.x.y+1)**
> NEVER use `npm version minor` or `npm version major`.
> Always use: `npm version patch --no-git-tag-version`
> The threshold rule: when `y` reaches 1000, bump to `3.(x+1).0` — e.g. `3.8.999` → `3.9.0`.
> **🔴 INTEGRATION BRANCH RULE**: The `release/vX.Y.Z` branch is the **integration target** for the entire release cycle. Bug fixes and feature implementations land here **via per-issue PRs from short-lived `fix/<ISSUE>-<short>` or `feat/<ISSUE>-<short>` worktrees** (see `/resolve-issues`, `/implement-features`). Contributor PRs from `/review-prs` likewise merge into this branch. The release branch is then merged to `main` via a single release PR at the end of the cycle.
---
## ⚠️ Four-Phase Flow
```
Phase 0 → security audit (npm + CodeQL + Dependabot)
Phase 1 → bump → full quality gate → changelog from commits → commit → push → open PR
↕ 🛑 STOP: notify user, wait for PR merge
Phase 2 → deploy main to Local VPS for homologation
↕ 🛑 STOP: notify user, wait for OK
Phase 3 → tag → GitHub release → Docker → npm → Akamai
Phase 4 → monitor CI pipelines and validate artifacts
```
**NEVER push directly to main or create tags before the user confirms the PR.**
---
## Phase 0: Security Verification (MANDATORY)
Before creating the release, ensure the codebase and supply chain are clean.
```bash
# 1. Local dependency audit
npm audit --production --audit-level=high
# 2. GitHub CodeQL alerts (open + high severity)
gh api '/repos/diegosouzapw/OmniRoute/code-scanning/alerts?state=open&severity=high' \
--jq '.[] | {rule: .rule.id, path: .most_recent_instance.location.path, msg: .most_recent_instance.message.text}' \
2>/dev/null || echo "(no CodeQL access or no alerts)"
# 3. Dependabot alerts (open + high/critical)
gh api '/repos/diegosouzapw/OmniRoute/dependabot/alerts?state=open' \
--jq '.[] | select(.security_advisory.severity == "high" or .security_advisory.severity == "critical") | {pkg: .dependency.package.name, sev: .security_advisory.severity, summary: .security_advisory.summary}' \
2>/dev/null || echo "(no Dependabot access or no alerts)"
```
Fix or justify (with `vulnerability-scanner` skill or dismissal comment per Hard Rule #14) any `high`/`critical` findings before proceeding.
---
## Phase 1: Pre-Merge
### 1. Create or confirm release branch
```bash
# If first release on this minor (e.g. starting 3.9.0):
git checkout -b release/v3.9.0
# If continuing the current cycle, just verify:
git branch --show-current
```
### 2. Determine and sync version
```bash
grep '"version"' package.json
```
> **🔴 BRANCH-VERSION PARITY GATE** — auto-checked before any work:
// turbo
```bash
BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current)
BRANCH_VER=${BRANCH#release/v}
PKG_VER=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
if [[ "$BRANCH" != release/v* ]]; then
echo "❌ Not on a release/v* branch (current: $BRANCH). Aborting."; exit 1
fi
# Allow first-bump scenario (branch declares a not-yet-bumped target)
echo "Branch target: $BRANCH_VER"
echo "package.json: $PKG_VER"
```
> **⚠️ ATOMIC COMMIT RULE** — bump and feature/fix code MUST land in the same commit so that `git show vX.Y.Z` always contains both.
>
> **CORRECT order**: bump → (or already-staged changes) → single commit.
> **NEVER**: commit features first, then bump in a separate commit.
```bash
npm version patch --no-git-tag-version
```
### 3. Regenerate lock file (REQUIRED after version bump)
```bash
npm install
```
Skipping this causes `@swc/helpers` lock mismatch and CI failures.
### 4. Build CHANGELOG from EVERY commit since the last tag
> **🎯 Goal**: produce a complete CHANGELOG section following the format of PR #2617 — emoji-grouped sections, PR back-reference, and `— thanks @user` attribution. Nothing must slip through.
> **🔴 NO MIXUPS RULE**: do not mix backlog of the previous version. The new section must contain ONLY commits whose merge/landing happened after the previous tag.
#### 4a. Collect raw commit log since last tag
// turbo
```bash
LAST_TAG=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0)
NEW_VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
TODAY=$(date -u +%F)
echo "Range: $LAST_TAG..HEAD → v$NEW_VERSION ($TODAY)"
# Full commit list (oneline)
git log --no-merges "$LAST_TAG..HEAD" --pretty=format:'%h %s' > /tmp/release_commits.txt
wc -l /tmp/release_commits.txt
# Merge commits (preserve PR numbers + authors)
git log --merges "$LAST_TAG..HEAD" --pretty=format:'%h %s%n author=%an <%ae>' > /tmp/release_merges.txt
# Per-commit detailed list (PR refs, co-authors, body)
git log "$LAST_TAG..HEAD" --pretty=format:'---%n%h | %s%n author=%an <%ae>%n body=%b' > /tmp/release_detailed.txt
```
#### 4b. Enrich with PR metadata + co-authors
For each commit referencing a PR (e.g. `(#2617)` or merge commit `Merge pull request #N`), fetch the PR author and any additional contributors so the entry follows the model below.
// turbo
```bash
# Extract all PR numbers referenced in the range
grep -oE '#[0-9]+' /tmp/release_commits.txt | sort -u > /tmp/release_prs.txt
echo "PRs in range:"; cat /tmp/release_prs.txt
# Fetch author + co-author info for every PR
> /tmp/release_pr_meta.json
while read -r PR; do
N=${PR#\#}
gh pr view "$N" --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute \
--json number,title,author,mergeCommit,body \
>> /tmp/release_pr_meta.json 2>/dev/null || echo "(skip $PR — not found)"
echo "" >> /tmp/release_pr_meta.json
done < /tmp/release_prs.txt
```
#### 4c. Assemble the new CHANGELOG section
Using `/tmp/release_commits.txt` + `/tmp/release_pr_meta.json` + `/tmp/release_detailed.txt`, build a new entry that:
1. **Covers every commit** — read the full list and group by Conventional Commit type. A commit is "covered" iff it appears (or is intentionally rolled-up) in the new section.
2. **Groups using these section headers (model from PR #2617)**:
- `### ✨ New Features` — `feat(*)`
- `### 🔧 Bug Fixes` — `fix(*)`
- `### 📝 Maintenance` — `chore(*)`, `refactor(*)`, `docs(*)`, `test(*)`, `ci(*)`, `build(*)`
- `### 🔒 Security` — security-flagged commits (only if any)
3. **Entry format**:
```
- **type(scope):** human-friendly description — extra context if useful. ([#PR](https://github.com/diegosouzapw/OmniRoute/pull/PR) — thanks @author / @coauthor1 / @coauthor2)
```
- When **no PR** is referenced (direct commit on release branch): `(thanks @author)`.
- When the PR closed an external contributor's PR via cherry-pick or re-implementation, attribute BOTH the original author AND the implementer: `thanks @originalAuthor / @diegosouzapw`.
- **Co-authors** must be extracted from the merge commit body (`Co-Authored-By:` lines that pre-date Hard Rule #16) and from PR participants who supplied commits.
4. **Coverage check** — after drafting, diff the section against `/tmp/release_commits.txt`. Any unlisted commit must either be explicitly added or consolidated under a roll-up bullet (e.g. "various lint and test alignments"). Do NOT silently drop commits.
Place the new section in `CHANGELOG.md` right below `## [Unreleased]`, separated by `---`:
```markdown
## [Unreleased]
---
## [3.9.0] — 2026-05-27
### ✨ New Features
- **feat(scope):** description ([#1234](https://github.com/diegosouzapw/OmniRoute/pull/1234) — thanks @author)
- ...
### 🔧 Bug Fixes
- **fix(scope):** description ([#1235](https://github.com/diegosouzapw/OmniRoute/pull/1235) — thanks @author / @diegosouzapw)
- ...
### 📝 Maintenance
- **chore(scope):** description (thanks @diegosouzapw)
- ...
---
## [3.8.999] — 2026-05-20
```
#### 4d. Coverage assertion
// turbo
```bash
NEW_VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
# Count commits in range
COMMITS=$(wc -l < /tmp/release_commits.txt)
# Count bullets under the new section
BULLETS=$(awk "/^## \\[$NEW_VERSION\\]/{flag=1;next} /^## \\[/{flag=0} flag" CHANGELOG.md | grep -c '^- ')
echo "Commits in range: $COMMITS"
echo "Changelog bullets: $BULLETS"
if [ "$BULLETS" -lt $(( COMMITS / 3 )) ]; then
echo "⚠️ Bullet count looks low (< commits/3). Re-review /tmp/release_commits.txt for missed entries."
fi
```
> If a commit cannot be matched to a bullet, EITHER add it or explicitly justify the omission in this session before continuing.
### 5. Sync versioned files ⚠️ MANDATORY
> **CI will fail** if `docs/reference/openapi.yaml` version ≠ `package.json` version (`check:docs-sync` enforces this).
// turbo
```bash
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
sed -i "s/ version: .*/ version: $VERSION/" docs/reference/openapi.yaml
echo "✓ openapi.yaml → $VERSION"
for dir in electron open-sse; do
if [ -d "$dir" ] && [ -f "$dir/package.json" ]; then
(cd "$dir" && npm version "$VERSION" --no-git-tag-version --allow-same-version > /dev/null)
echo "✓ $dir/package.json → $VERSION"
fi
done
# Re-run install so workspace lockfile picks up the bumps
npm install
```
### 6. Sync README.md and i18n docs
There is **no `/update-docs` slash command** (deprecated in v3.8). Updates must happen manually OR via parallel subagents.
**Recommended automation** — dispatch parallel agents to apply the same diff across the 40 translations (see `superpowers:dispatching-parallel-agents`):
1. Apply the substantive change to `README.md` first (feature table row + "What's new in vX.Y.Z" section).
2. Capture the diff: `git diff README.md > /tmp/readme.patch`.
3. Dispatch 5-10 parallel agents, each handling a slice of the 40 `docs/i18n/*/README.md`, translating the diff into the target language.
4. Update `docs/<AREA>.md` if architecture/counts changed (e.g. `docs/frameworks/MCP-SERVER.md` when MCP tools change).
5. Validate: `npm run check:docs-sync && npm run check:docs-all`.
### 7. Full quality gate (MANDATORY — replaces the old `npm test`)
> **Precedent**: the v3.8.2 cycle landed with 49 broken tests because only `npm test` was running. Lint + typecheck + cycles caught zero of those regressions.
// turbo
```bash
set -e
npm run lint
npm run typecheck:core
npm run check:cycles
npm run check:docs-all
npm test
```
All five must pass before opening the PR. If any fail, fix and re-run.
### 8. Stage, commit, and push (atomic — bump + features + changelog + i18n in ONE commit)
// turbo
```bash
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
git add -A
git commit -m "chore(release): v$VERSION — $(date -u +%F)"
git push origin "release/v$VERSION"
```
> **NEVER** include `Co-Authored-By:` trailers in the release commit (Hard Rule #16). Co-author attribution lives inside the CHANGELOG entries.
### 9. Open PR to main
// turbo
```bash
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
# Extract the exact changelog entry for this version
awk "/^## \\[$VERSION\\]/{flag=1; print; next} /^---/{if(flag) {flag=0; exit}} flag" CHANGELOG.md > /tmp/changelog_body.txt
# Append PR-only metadata (test status + reviewer instructions)
{
echo ""
echo "---"
echo ""
echo "### Quality Gate"
echo "- lint: pass"
echo "- typecheck:core: pass"
echo "- check:cycles: pass"
echo "- check:docs-all: pass"
echo "- tests: pass"
echo ""
echo "### Coverage of commits since previous tag"
LAST_TAG=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0 HEAD~1 2>/dev/null || echo "(no previous tag)")
COMMITS=$(git rev-list --no-merges "$LAST_TAG..HEAD" | wc -l)
echo "- Range: \`$LAST_TAG..HEAD\`"
echo "- Commits inspected: $COMMITS"
echo ""
echo "### ⚠️ After merging: run Phase 2 (Local VPS homologation) before tagging."
} >> /tmp/changelog_body.txt
gh pr create \
--repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute \
--base main \
--head "release/v$VERSION" \
--title "Release v$VERSION" \
--body-file /tmp/changelog_body.txt
```
### 10. 🛑 STOP — Notify user & await PR confirmation
Present in the final response and stop. Do not continue to Phase 2 until the user explicitly approves.
Provide:
- PR URL
- Summary of changes (top 5 from CHANGELOG)
- Quality gate results
- List of files changed (`git diff --stat $LAST_TAG..HEAD`)
- Coverage count vs commits-in-range
**DO NOT proceed to Phase 2 until the user confirms the PR looks good and merges it.**
---
## Phase 2: Post-Merge Validation (Local VPS)
> Run only AFTER the user has merged the PR into `main` and all CI jobs pass.
### 11. Deploy `main` to the Local VPS
Delegate to the `deploy-vps-local-cc` skill (single source of truth for the deploy procedure — do NOT duplicate the SCP/SSH commands here):
```
/deploy-vps-local-cc
```
The skill handles: checkout `main`, `npm pack`, scp to `192.168.0.15`, install, pm2 restart, and HTTP probe.
### 12. 🛑 STOP — Notify user & await final OK
Inform the user that `main` is running on `192.168.0.15:20128`. Provide a smoke-test checklist:
- [ ] `GET /` returns 200
- [ ] Dashboard login works (`/dashboard`)
- [ ] `/v1/chat/completions` with default provider returns a stream
- [ ] No critical errors in `pm2 logs omniroute --lines 100`
- [ ] Any release-specific UI features are reachable
Wait for user **OK** before Phase 3.
---
## Phase 3: Official Launch
> Run only AFTER the user gives the final OK from Phase 2.
### 13. Create git tag and GitHub Release
// turbo
```bash
git checkout main
git pull origin main
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
# Extract release notes section from CHANGELOG
NOTES=$(awk "/^## \\[$VERSION\\]/{flag=1; next} /^---/{if(flag) {flag=0; exit}} flag" CHANGELOG.md | sed -e 's/^[[:space:]]*//' -e 's/[[:space:]]*$//')
[ -z "$NOTES" ] && NOTES="OmniRoute v$VERSION Release"
git tag -a "v$VERSION" -m "Release v$VERSION"
git push origin "v$VERSION"
gh release create "v$VERSION" \
--repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute \
--title "v$VERSION" \
--notes "$NOTES" \
--target main \
|| gh release edit "v$VERSION" \
--repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute \
--title "v$VERSION" \
--notes "$NOTES"
```
### 14. 🐳 Trigger / verify Docker Hub build
> **CRITICAL**: Docker Hub and npm MUST publish the same version.
```bash
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
gh run list --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute --workflow docker-publish.yml --limit 3
gh run watch --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute
```
### 15. Publish to npm (usually CI)
`prepublishOnly` runs `npm run build:cli`. Manual fallback:
```bash
npm publish
npm info omniroute version # verify
```
### 16. Deploy to Akamai VPS (Production)
Delegate to the `deploy-vps-akamai-cc` skill:
```
/deploy-vps-akamai-cc
```
The skill handles: build, pack, scp to `69.164.221.35`, install, pm2 restart, HTTP probe.
### 17. Rollback playbook (use only if Phase 3 fails after tag push)
If a fatal regression surfaces after the tag is pushed:
```bash
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
PREV=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0 "v$VERSION^")
# 1. Mark GitHub release as pre-release (do not delete history)
gh release edit "v$VERSION" --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute --prerelease
# 2. Re-deploy previous version to Akamai
git checkout "$PREV" && /deploy-vps-akamai-cc
# 3. Deprecate the broken npm version
npm deprecate "omniroute@$VERSION" "broken release — use $PREV"
# 4. Open follow-up issue and start a new patch cycle from main
```
---
## Phase 4: Release Monitoring & Artifact Validation
> Actively monitor the CI pipelines until all artifacts succeed. If any fail, stop and fix before continuing.
### 18. Monitor CI pipelines
Verify successful completion of:
1. **Docker Hub Publish**
2. **Electron Build**
3. **npm Registry Publish**
```bash
gh run list --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute --workflow docker-publish.yml --limit 1
gh run list --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute --workflow electron-release.yml --limit 1
gh run watch <RUN_ID>
npm info omniroute version
```
### 19. Handle failures
```bash
gh run view <RUN_ID> --log-failed
# Fix on main, then re-trigger:
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
gh workflow run <workflow.yml> --repo diegosouzapw/OmniRoute --ref "v$VERSION"
```
### 20. Preserve release branch
Branch is kept for historical purposes. Do not delete.
---
## Notes
- Ensure CHANGELOG, README and `docs/*` are current BEFORE this workflow — run `npm run check:docs-all` first.
- The `prepublishOnly` script runs `npm run build:cli` automatically during `npm publish`.
- After npm publish, verify with `npm info omniroute version`.
- Lock file sync errors are caused by skipping `npm install` after version bump.
- Use `gh auth switch -u diegosouzapw` if `git push` fails with the wrong account.
- Deploy procedures live in dedicated skills (`deploy-vps-local-cc`, `deploy-vps-akamai-cc`, `deploy-vps-both-cc`) — never inline the SCP/SSH commands here, to avoid drift.
## Known CI Pitfalls
| CI failure | Cause | Fix |
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| `[docs-sync] FAIL - OpenAPI version differs from package.json` | Skipped step 5 — `docs/reference/openapi.yaml` version not updated | Run step 5 (`sed -i ...`) and commit |
| `[docs-sync] FAIL - CHANGELOG.md first section must be "## [Unreleased]"` | `## [Unreleased]` missing or not at top of CHANGELOG | Add `## [Unreleased]\n\n---\n` before the first versioned `## [x.y.z]` |
| Electron Linux `.deb` build fails (`FpmTarget` error) | `fpm` Ruby gem not installed on `ubuntu-latest` runner | Already fixed in `electron-release.yml` (`gem install fpm` step) |
| Docker Hub `502 error writing layer blob` | Transient Docker Hub network error during ARM64 push | Re-run the Docker publish workflow; no code change needed |
| Coverage gate fails (statements/lines < 75% or branches < 70%) | Production code changed without tests | Add tests, re-run `npm run test:coverage` (see CLAUDE.md hard rule #9) |

902
.claude/commands/implement-features-cc.md
View File

@@ -1,902 +0,0 @@
---
description: Analyze open feature request issues, implement viable ones on dedicated branches, and respond to authors
---
# /implement-features — Feature Request Harvest, Research & Implementation Workflow
## Overview
A **5-phase** workflow that systematically harvests feature requests from GitHub issues, creates structured idea files, researches solutions across the internet and Git repositories, presents a consolidated report for user approval, then generates detailed implementation plans and executes them.
**Output directory structure:**
```
_ideia/
├── viable/ # ✅ Approved, awaiting implementation
│ ├── 1046-native-playground.md
│ └── 1046-native-playground.requirements.md
├── implemented/ # ✅ Implemented but release PR not yet merged to main (transient)
│ └── 1046-native-playground.md
├── need_details/ # ❓ Issue OPEN — awaiting author clarification (permanent archive)
│ └── 1015-warp-terminal-mitm.md
├── defer/ # ⏭️ Issue CLOSED — good idea, deferred for future cycles (permanent)
│ └── 1041-smart-auto-combos.md
├── notfit/ # ❌ Issue CLOSED — out of scope (permanent)
│ └── 945-telegram-integration.md
├── exists/ # 🔁 Issue CLOSED — feature already shipped (permanent, kept separate from notfit)
│ └── 812-rate-limit-dashboard.md
└── in_flight/ # 🚧 Issue OPEN — third-party PR already addresses it (permanent until reclaim or merge)
└── 988-batch-export.md
_tasks/features-vX.Y.Z/ # Implementation plans (per-release)
└── 1046-native-playground.plan.md
```
> **LIFECYCLE RULE:**
> - `viable/` files are **MOVED** to `implemented/` once code lands on the release branch.
> - `implemented/` files are **DELETED** only after the release PR is merged to `main`.
> - All other buckets — `need_details/`, `defer/`, `notfit/`, `exists/`, `in_flight/` — are **permanent archives**. Even when the upstream issue is CLOSED, the local file stays. Future cycles can revisit any of them (Phase 1.7 stale-reclaim turns `in_flight/` and `need_details/` back into VIABLE after 15 days of upstream inactivity).
> - This preserves recovery context if implementation fails partially AND lets us re-evaluate old decisions when the project matures.
> **BRANCH RULE**: All implementation work MUST happen on the current `release/vX.Y.Z` branch. Never create separate `feat/` branches. If no release branch exists yet, delegate creation to `/generate-release` (see Phase 1.2) — do NOT reimplement bump logic here.
> **LANGUAGE RULE** (per `feedback_reply_language` memory): GitHub comments MUST match the language of the original issue body. Detect language by sampling the issue body + first 2 comments. Default to English when uncertain. All comment templates below are in English — translate to the detected language before posting. Internal docs, plan files, and idea files stay in English regardless.
---
## Phase 1 — Harvest: Collect & Catalog Feature Ideas
### 1.1 Identify the Repository
// turbo
- Run: `git -C <project_root> remote get-url origin` to extract owner/repo.
### 1.2 Ensure Release Branch Exists
Before doing any work, ensure you are on the current release branch:
```bash
git branch --show-current
```
**Decision tree:**
- If already on a `release/vX.Y.Z` branch → continue working there.
- If on `main` or any other branch → **delegate to `/generate-release`** by invoking its Phase 1 (steps 1–5: detect current version, bump, create branch, install). Do NOT reimplement the bump formula here — `/generate-release` owns the canonical version policy (patch bumps allowed up to `.999`; minor bump only when patch reaches `999`).
> **Why delegate?** Duplicating the bump formula caused divergence in the past. `/generate-release` is the single source of truth for version arithmetic and now allows patches up to `.999` before bumping minor.
### 1.3 Fetch ALL Open Feature Requests
// turbo-all
**⚠️ CRITICAL**: The JSON output of `gh issue list` can be truncated by the tool, silently hiding issues. You MUST use the two-step approach below.
**Step 1 — Get Issue numbers only** (small output, never truncated):
```bash
# Fetch issues with feature/enhancement labels
gh issue list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open -l "enhancement" --limit 500 --json number --jq '.[].number'
# Also check for [Feature] in title (common pattern when no labels are set)
gh issue list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open --limit 500 --json number,title --jq '.[] | select(.title | test("\\[Feature\\]|\\[feature\\]|feature request"; "i")) | .number'
```
- Merge both lists, deduplicate. Count and confirm the total.
- If the count hits the `--limit 500` ceiling, raise the limit and re-run — never proceed with a truncated set.
**Step 2 — Fetch full metadata for each Issue** (one call per issue):
```bash
gh issue view <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json number,title,labels,body,comments,createdAt,author,assignees
```
- Read the **entire body** — including description, use cases, screenshots, mockups, and any embedded images.
- Read **ALL comments** — community discussion, agreements, restrictions, owner responses, and linked PRs.
- **Images**: If the body or comments contain image URLs (`![...](...)` or `https://...png/jpg/gif`), **download and analyze them with the Read tool** (Claude can read PNG/JPG/GIF directly). Mockups and wireframes are often the most informative artifact — do NOT just "note" them, actually inspect their content and incorporate findings into the refined description.
- **Detect issue language** from body + first 2 comments and record it in the idea file front-matter (`reply_lang: pt-BR | en | es | ...`). This will drive comment translation in Phases 2.5 and 5.
- You may batch these into parallel calls (up to 4 at a time).
- Sort by oldest first (FIFO).
### 1.4 Create Idea Files (initially in `_ideia/` root)
For each feature request, create a structured idea file in `<project_root>/_ideia/`:
**Filename convention**: `<NUMBER>-<kebab-case-short-title>.md`
Example: `1046-native-playground.md`, `1041-smart-auto-combos.md`
#### 1.4a — If the idea file does NOT exist yet, create it:
```markdown
---
reply_lang: <detected-lang, e.g. pt-BR | en | es>
---
# Feature: <Title from Issue>
> GitHub Issue: #<NUMBER> — opened by @<author> on <date>
> Status: 📋 Cataloged | Priority: TBD
## 📝 Original Request
<Paste the FULL issue body here, preserving all formatting, images, and code blocks>
## 💬 Community Discussion
<Summarize ALL comments chronologically, noting who said what and any decisions or objections raised>
### Participants
- @<author> — Original requester
- @<commenter1> — <brief role/opinion>
- ...
### Key Points
- <bullet list of the most important discussion points>
- <agreements reached>
- <objections raised>
## 🖼️ Mockup / Image Analysis
<For each image embedded in the issue, summarize what it depicts: UI layout, data flow, architecture diagram, etc. Cite source URL.>
## 🎯 Refined Feature Description
<YOUR interpretation and enrichment of the feature request. Expand on what was asked, fill in logical gaps, provide concrete examples of how it would work. This section should be MORE detailed and clearer than the original request.>
### What it solves
- <problem 1>
- <problem 2>
### How it should work (high level)
1. <step 1>
2. <step 2>
3. ...
### Affected areas
- <list of codebase areas, modules, files likely affected>
## 📎 Attachments & References
- <any image URLs, mockup links, or external references from the issue>
## 🔗 Related Ideas
- <links to related \_ideia/ files if any overlap found>
```
#### 1.4b — If the idea file ALREADY exists, update it:
- Append new comments from the issue to the **Community Discussion** section.
- Update the **Refined Feature Description** if new information changes the understanding.
- Add any new **Related Ideas** cross-references found.
- Re-detect `reply_lang` only if the issue language clearly changed (uncommon).
- **Do NOT overwrite** existing content — append and enrich it.
### 1.5 Cross-Reference & Deduplication
After processing all issues:
- Scan all `_ideia/*.md` files for overlapping features.
- If two features are substantially the same, add `🔗 Related Ideas` cross-references to both.
- If one is a strict subset of another, note it in the smaller file: `> ℹ️ This feature is a subset of #<OTHER_NUMBER>. Consider implementing together.`
### 1.6 Detect In-Flight Work (avoid duplicate effort)
For each issue number, check whether an open PR or branch already targets it:
```bash
# Open PRs that link the issue
gh pr list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open --search "linked:#<NUMBER>" --json number,title,headRefName,updatedAt,author
# Local branches that mention the issue number
git branch -a | grep -E "(^|/)(feat|fix|refactor)/.*-?<NUMBER>(-|$)" || true
```
If a PR or branch already exists:
- Mark the idea file with `> ⚠️ In-flight: PR #<PR_NUMBER> by @<author> / branch <name> (last activity <date>)` near the top.
- **Skip Phase 2 research and Phase 4 planning** for this feature — the implementation is already in motion.
- In the Phase 3 report, list it under a separate "🚧 Already in progress" bucket; do NOT count it as VIABLE for implementation.
- The idea file will be moved to `_ideia/in_flight/` in Phase 2.5.2 (it stays there permanently, but Phase 1.7 may reclaim it later).
### 1.7 Stale Reclaim (15-day rule)
Some issues sit in `in_flight/` or `need_details/` forever — third-party PRs go cold, authors disappear, the world moves on. This phase reclaims them when they go quiet.
**Trigger conditions** (run for each issue currently in `_ideia/in_flight/` or `_ideia/need_details/`):
```bash
# For IN FLIGHT — last activity on the linked PR (commit OR comment)
gh pr view <PR_NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json updatedAt,commits,comments \
--jq '[.updatedAt, (.commits[-1].committedDate // ""), (.comments[-1].createdAt // "")] | max'
# For NEEDS DETAIL — last activity from the issue author (any comment by them)
gh issue view <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json comments,author \
--jq '.author.login as $a | [.comments[] | select(.author.login == $a) | .createdAt] | max // (.createdAt)'
```
Compute the gap in days between the timestamp above and today.
**Reclaim rule:**
| Bucket | Trigger | Action |
| --------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 🚧 IN FLIGHT | ≥15 days since last PR activity (commit OR comment by PR author) | Post **intent-to-take-over comment** (template below), wait **48h**, then reclaim if no response |
| ❓ NEEDS DETAIL | ≥15 days since last comment by the issue author | Post **gentle nudge** (template below), wait **48h**, then reclaim as VIABLE if no response |
**Intent-to-take-over comment (🚧 IN FLIGHT path)** — translate to `reply_lang`:
```markdown
Hi @<pr_author> and @<issue_author>! 👋
This PR (#<PR>) addressing issue #<NUMBER> hasn't had updates in <N> days. We'd love to ship this feature in our next release.
**Plan:** if there are no updates in the next **48 hours**, our team will take over the work and merge it as part of `release/vX.Y.Z`. The original PR will be referenced and authorship preserved in the commit trailer.
If you're still working on it, just drop a comment here and we'll hold off. Thanks for the contribution either way! 🙏
```
**Gentle nudge (❓ NEEDS DETAIL path)** — translate to `reply_lang`:
```markdown
Hi @<author>! 👋
It's been <N> days since we asked for more details on this feature request. We'd still love to move forward.
**Plan:** if we don't hear back in the next **48 hours**, we'll proceed with our best interpretation of the original request and add it to our backlog for implementation. We'll tag you on the implementation PR so you can review before it ships.
If you still want to provide the details, just reply here — we'll wait. 🙏
```
**Reclaim execution** (only after the 48h grace period, with no new author/PR-author activity):
1. Move the idea file to `_ideia/viable/` (preserve any prior content + add a `> ♻️ Reclaimed on <date> after 15-day inactivity` banner near the top).
2. If it was IN FLIGHT and a research file does not yet exist, run Phase 2 (Research) for it now.
3. Otherwise create the requirements file based on the existing content + a quick research pass.
4. Add a `viable_origin: stale_reclaim` line to the front-matter so the Phase 3 report can flag it.
5. In Phase 5 (commit / PR), include a commit trailer crediting the original PR author if applicable:
```
Originally-proposed-by: @<pr_author> in #<original_pr_number>
```
(This is NOT `Co-Authored-By` — hard rule #16 still applies. It is a free-form trailer that preserves credit without GitHub re-attributing the commit.)
> **Why 15 days + 48h grace?** Long enough that the original contributor has truly moved on; short enough that the feature still ships in the same release cycle. Grace period is documented in `feedback_issue_triage_independence` so we don't default to "trust prior triage" — we verify the silence is real.
---
## Phase 2 — Research: Find Solutions & Build Requirements
For each cataloged idea that is **viable** (aligns with the project's goals) AND not already in flight (per 1.6):
### 2.1 Viability Pre-Check
Before investing in research, quickly assess:
- [ ] Does this feature align with the project's goals and architecture?
- [ ] Is it technically feasible with the current codebase?
- [ ] Does it duplicate existing functionality?
- [ ] Would it introduce breaking changes or security risks?
- [ ] Is there enough detail to understand what's needed?
**Verdict options:**
| Verdict | When | Action |
| --------------------- | ------------------------------------- | --------------------------- |
| ✅ **VIABLE** | Good idea, enough context | Proceed to Research |
| ❓ **NEEDS DETAIL** | Good idea, insufficient spec | Skip research, ask author |
| ⏭️ **DEFER** | Good idea, too complex for this cycle | Catalog only, skip research |
| ❌ **NOT FIT** | Doesn't fit the project | Explain why |
| 🔁 **ALREADY EXISTS** | Feature already implemented | Point to existing feature |
| 🚧 **IN FLIGHT** | PR/branch already exists (from 1.6) | Skip — track only |
### 2.2 Internet Research (for VIABLE features)
For each viable feature, perform systematic research with an **early-stopping criterion**:
> **Stop as soon as EITHER condition is met:**
> - 3 reference implementations show a consistent pattern, OR
> - 1 high-quality repo (≥1k stars, updated within the last 12 months) already solves the problem cleanly.
>
> Cap at 10 repos total. Do NOT exhaustively browse — depth over breadth.
**Step 1 — Web search for similar implementations:**
```
WebSearch("how to implement <feature description> in <tech stack>")
WebSearch("<feature keyword> implementation nextjs typescript 2025 2026")
WebSearch("<feature keyword> open source library npm")
```
**Step 2 — Find reference Git repositories:**
```
WebSearch("site:github.com <feature keyword> <tech stack> stars:>100")
WebSearch("github <feature keyword> implementation recently updated 2026")
```
- Sort by most recently updated.
- For each repository (until stop criterion hit):
- Note the repo URL, star count, last commit date
- Read its README and relevant source files via `WebFetch`
- Extract the architectural approach, patterns used, and key code snippets
**Step 3 — Read API docs and standards:**
If the feature involves an external API, protocol, or standard:
- Find and read the official documentation
- Note version requirements, authentication patterns, rate limits
### 2.3 Create Requirements File
For each researched feature, create a requirements file alongside its idea file:
**Filename**: `<NUMBER>-<kebab-case-short-title>.requirements.md`
```markdown
# Requirements: <Feature Title>
> Feature Idea: [#<NUMBER>](./<NUMBER>-<kebab-case-short-title>.md)
> Research Date: <YYYY-MM-DD>
> Verdict: ✅ VIABLE
## 🔍 Research Summary
<Brief summary of what was found during research>
## 📚 Reference Implementations
| # | Repository | Stars | Last Updated | Approach | Relevance |
| --- | ---------------- | ----- | ------------ | -------- | ------------ |
| 1 | [repo/name](url) | ⭐ N | YYYY-MM-DD | <brief> | High/Med/Low |
| 2 | ... | | | | |
### Key Patterns Found
- <pattern 1 with code snippet or link>
- <pattern 2>
## 📐 Proposed Solution Architecture
### Approach
<Describe the chosen approach based on research findings>
### New Files
| File | Purpose |
| --------------------- | ------------- |
| `path/to/new/file.ts` | <description> |
### Modified Files
| File | Changes |
| -------------------------- | -------------- |
| `path/to/existing/file.ts` | <what changes> |
### Database Changes
- <migrations needed, if any>
### API Changes
- <new/modified endpoints, if any>
### UI Changes
- <new/modified pages/components, if any>
## ⚙️ Implementation Effort
- **Estimated complexity**: Low / Medium / High / Very High
- **Estimated files changed**: ~N
- **Dependencies needed**: <new npm packages, if any>
- **Breaking changes**: Yes/No — <details>
- **i18n impact**: <number of new translation keys>
- **Test coverage needed**: <brief description>
## ⚠️ Open Questions
- <question 1>
- <question 2>
## 🔗 External References
- <documentation URLs>
- <API references>
```
---
## Phase 2.5 — Organize: Sort Files into Category Directories
> **⚠️ This phase only moves files. It does NOT post comments or close issues.** All GitHub-visible actions are deferred to Phase 3.2 (after human approval).
### 2.5.1 Create Directory Structure
// turbo
```bash
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/viable
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/implemented
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/need_details
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/defer
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/notfit
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/exists
mkdir -p <project_root>/_ideia/in_flight
```
> **Permanent archives**: `need_details/`, `defer/`, `notfit/`, `exists/`, `in_flight/`. Even after the upstream issue is closed, the local file stays — future cycles may revisit.
### 2.5.2 Move Idea Files to Category Subdirectories
After classification, move EVERY idea file to its correct subdirectory (still local-only — no GitHub side-effects):
```bash
# ✅ VIABLE — move idea + requirements files
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/viable/
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.requirements.md _ideia/viable/
# ❓ NEEDS DETAIL — viable but waiting for author response (issue stays OPEN)
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/need_details/
# ⏭️ DEFER — issue will be CLOSED but file is kept permanently for future re-evaluation
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/defer/
# ❌ NOT FIT — issue will be CLOSED but file is kept permanently
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/notfit/
# 🔁 ALREADY EXISTS — issue will be CLOSED but file is kept permanently (separate bucket from NOT FIT)
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/exists/
# 🚧 IN FLIGHT — issue stays OPEN, third-party PR is handling it; file kept permanently for Phase 1.7 stale-reclaim
mv _ideia/<NUMBER>-*.md _ideia/in_flight/
```
No idea files should remain in `_ideia/` root after this step.
---
## Phase 3 — Report: Present Findings & Get Human Approval
### 3.1 🛑 MANDATORY STOP — Present Consolidated Report
After completing Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 2.5, **STOP and present the following report** in the chat. **No comments have been posted to GitHub yet** — that happens in 3.2 after approval.
Present a structured report containing:
#### 3.1a — Feature Summary Table
| # | Issue | Title | Verdict | Local Location | Planned GitHub Action |
| --- | ----- | ----- | ----------------- | ----------------------- | -------------------------------------- |
| 1 | #N | Title | ✅ VIABLE | `_ideia/viable/` | Comment + keep OPEN |
| 2 | #N | Title | ⏭️ DEFER | `_ideia/defer/` | Comment + CLOSE |
| 3 | #N | Title | ❌ NOT FIT | `_ideia/notfit/` | Comment + CLOSE |
| 4 | #N | Title | 🔁 EXISTS | `_ideia/exists/` | Comment with location + CLOSE |
| 5 | #N | Title | ❓ NEEDS DETAIL | `_ideia/need_details/` | Comment with questions + keep OPEN |
| 6 | #N | Title | 🚧 IN FLIGHT | `_ideia/in_flight/` | None — PR #M handles it |
| 7 | #N | Title | ♻️ RECLAIMED | `_ideia/viable/` | Intent comment posted in Phase 1.7 |
#### 3.1b — Viable Features Detail
For each VIABLE feature, provide a brief paragraph:
- What was found during research (with stop reason: "3-pattern consistency" or "dominant repo")
- The proposed approach
- Key risks or unknowns
- Which reference repositories were most useful
#### 3.1c — Issues Requiring Author Feedback
For features marked ❓ NEEDS DETAIL, list:
- What specific information is missing
- What examples or repository references would help
- Detected `reply_lang` for the question post
#### 3.1d — Ask for User Confirmation
End the report with:
> **Ready to proceed?**
>
> Approving will (a) post comments on GitHub in the detected language of each issue and (b) close DEFER / NOT FIT / EXISTS issues. VIABLE and NEEDS DETAIL stay open.
>
> - Reply **"sim"** / **"yes"** to post all comments AND generate implementation plans for all VIABLE features.
> - Reply **"only comments"** to post comments without generating plans yet.
> - Reply with specific issue numbers to scope the action.
> - Reply **"não"** / **"no"** to stop without touching GitHub.
### 3.2 Post GitHub Comments & Close Issues (only after approval)
> **⚠️ Do NOT execute this step without explicit user approval from 3.1d.**
For each issue, translate the appropriate template below into the `reply_lang` recorded in its idea file front-matter, then post. The English templates are reference only — never post the English version verbatim to a non-English issue.
---
#### For 🔁 ALREADY EXISTS — Comment + CLOSE issue
The feature already exists in the system. Explain WHERE it is and HOW to use it.
```markdown
Hi @<author>! Thanks for the suggestion! 🙏
Great news — this functionality **already exists** in OmniRoute:
**📍 Where to find it:** <exact dashboard path or settings location>
**🔧 How to use it:**
1. <step 1>
2. <step 2>
3. <step 3>
If you have any trouble finding or using it, feel free to ask in a Discussion. We're always happy to help!
Closing this as the feature is already available. 🎉
```
```bash
gh issue close <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --comment "<translated comment>"
```
---
#### For ⏭️ DEFER — Comment + CLOSE issue
Thank the user, explain the idea was cataloged, and that we'll study it before implementing.
```markdown
Hi @<author>! Thanks for this thoughtful feature request! 🙏
We really appreciate the detailed proposal. We've **cataloged your idea** and it's now part of our improvement backlog.
Due to the **significant architectural impact** of this feature, we'll need to conduct thorough use-case studies and architectural analysis before we start development. This ensures we build it right and don't introduce regressions.
**What happens next:**
- Your idea is saved in our internal feature backlog
- We'll conduct architecture studies when this area is prioritized
If you want to track progress, please **subscribe to the repository releases** — every implemented feature is announced in the CHANGELOG.
Thank you for contributing to OmniRoute's roadmap! 🚀
```
```bash
gh issue close <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --comment "<translated comment>"
```
---
#### For ❌ NOT FIT — Comment + CLOSE issue (soft-archive)
Politely explain the current limitation, but make clear the idea is **archived, not discarded**. If the situation changes (provider opens a public API, scope shifts, etc.), we revisit and tag the author.
```markdown
Hi @<author>! Thanks for the suggestion! 🙏
After researching, we've determined this feature isn't viable right now:
**Reason:** <explain why — e.g., "CodeBuddy has no public API; YepApi is fronted by Cloudflare bot detection that we won't evade.">
**Alternative:** <suggest an alternative if one exists, otherwise omit this line>
That said, **we've saved your suggestion** to our internal archive rather than discarding it. If circumstances change (a public API is released, the provider opens up, our scope shifts, etc.), we'll revisit it and tag you here.
Closing for now, but the idea isn't lost — we'll let you know if things change. 🙏
```
```bash
gh issue close <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --comment "<translated comment>"
```
---
#### For ❓ NEEDS DETAIL — Comment (keep OPEN)
Ask for the specific missing details needed.
```markdown
Hi @<author>! Thanks for the feature request — it's an interesting idea and we'd love to explore it further. 🙏
To move forward, we need a few more details:
1. <specific question 1>
2. <specific question 2>
3. <specific question 3>
If you know of any **open-source projects or repositories** that implement something similar, please share links — it would help us design the best solution.
Looking forward to your response! 🚀
```
---
#### For ✅ VIABLE — Comment + CLOSE issue (cataloged for future implementation)
When we **know how to implement** the feature, we accept + catalog + close the issue right away (to keep the open-issue list focused on items still awaiting input). A separate post-implementation comment will reopen the conversation later when code ships. Include a 1-2 sentence summary of what we plan to build so the author knows we understood the request.
```markdown
Hi @<author>! Thanks for the great feature suggestion! 🙏
We've analyzed your request — it aligns with OmniRoute's roadmap and we have a clear implementation path:
> <one to two sentence summary of what we plan to build>
We've **cataloged it internally** and it will be picked up in an upcoming release.
**Status:** ✅ Accepted — cataloged for future implementation
We'll respond here and tag you once the implementation lands so you can test it before it ships.
Closing for now to keep our open-issue list focused on items still awaiting input. The feature is tracked in our internal backlog and won't be forgotten.
Thank you for helping improve OmniRoute! 🚀
```
```bash
gh issue close <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --comment "<translated comment>"
```
**⚠️ Important**: The VIABLE comment **CLOSES** the issue. When implementation ships later, Phase 5.4 will REOPEN the issue, post the implementation comment, and CLOSE it again. The author still gets the @-mention notification.
---
## Phase 4 — Plan: Generate Implementation Plans (after user says "yes")
> **⚠️ Do NOT enter this phase without explicit user approval from Phase 3.**
### 4.1 Pre-Plan Context Load (mandatory)
Before writing ANY plan, read:
1. `docs/architecture/REPOSITORY_MAP.md` — to know which directory owns what.
2. `docs/architecture/CODEBASE_DOCUMENTATION.md` — for the engineering reference.
3. The matching "Adding a New X" scenario from `CLAUDE.md` (provider, API route, DB module, MCP tool, A2A skill, cloud agent, embedded service, guardrail, eval, skill, webhook event).
4. Any docs linked from the requirements file's "External References" section.
This ensures plans cite real paths and follow the established add-a-X recipe, instead of inventing structure.
### 4.2 Create Task Directory
```bash
mkdir -p <project_root>/_tasks/features-vX.Y.Z/
```
### 4.3 Generate One Implementation Plan Per Feature
For each VIABLE feature approved by the user, create:
**Filename**: `_tasks/features-vX.Y.Z/<NUMBER>-<kebab-case-title>.plan.md`
```markdown
# Implementation Plan: <Feature Title>
> Issue: #<NUMBER>
> Idea: [\_ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-title.md](../../_ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-title.md)
> Requirements: [\_ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-title.requirements.md](../../_ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-title.requirements.md)
> Branch: `release/vX.Y.Z`
> Matching CLAUDE.md recipe: <e.g. "Adding a New Provider">
## Overview
<Brief description of what will be built>
## Pre-Implementation Checklist
- [ ] Read all related source files listed below
- [ ] Confirm no conflicts with in-flight PRs (re-run Phase 1.6 lookup)
- [ ] Verify database migration numbering (next free integer in `src/lib/db/migrations/`)
## Implementation Steps
### Step 1: <Title>
**Files:**
- `path/to/file.ts` — <what to change>
**Details:**
<Detailed description of the change, including code patterns to follow, function signatures, etc.>
### Step 2: <Title>
...
### Step N: Tests (MANDATORY per CLAUDE.md hard rule #8)
**New test files:**
- `tests/unit/<test-file>.test.mjs` — <what to test>
**Test cases:**
- [ ] <test case 1>
- [ ] <test case 2>
- [ ] Coverage check: confirm overall coverage stays ≥75% statements/lines/functions, ≥70% branches (hard rule #9)
### Step N+1: i18n
**Translation keys to add:**
- `<namespace>.<key>` — "<English value>"
### Step N+2: Documentation
- [ ] Update CHANGELOG.md (current release section)
- [ ] Update relevant docs/ files
- [ ] If touching error responses, follow `docs/security/ERROR_SANITIZATION.md`
- [ ] If touching upstream credentials, follow `docs/security/PUBLIC_CREDS.md`
## Verification Plan (Trust-but-Verify — mandatory before declaring done)
1. `git status` + `git diff --stat` — review every changed file; flag anything outside the plan's declared scope
2. `npm run lint` — 0 new errors
3. `npm run typecheck:core` — clean
4. `npm run typecheck:noimplicit:core` — clean
5. `npm run check:cycles` — no new circular deps
6. `npm run build` — must pass
7. `npm run test:coverage` — coverage gate respected
8. `npm run check-docs-sync` (via pre-commit hook) — passes
9. Manual UI verification if the feature touches frontend (start dev server, exercise golden path + 1 edge case)
## Commit Plan
```
feat: <description> (#<NUMBER>)
```
```
### 4.4 Present Plans for Final Approval
Present a summary of all generated plans:
> **Implementation plans generated:**
>
> | # | Feature | Plan File | Steps | Effort | CLAUDE.md recipe |
> | --- | ------- | ---------------------------------------- | ------- | ------ | ---------------------- |
> | 1 | <title> | `_tasks/features-vX.Y.Z/N-title.plan.md` | N steps | Medium | Adding a New Provider |
>
> Reply **"sim"** / **"yes"** to begin implementation of all features.
> Reply with specific issue numbers to implement only certain ones.
---
## Phase 5 — Execute: Implement the Plans (after user says "yes")
> **⚠️ Do NOT enter this phase without explicit user approval from Phase 4.**
### 5.1 Implement Each Feature
For each approved plan, execute it step by step:
1. **Follow the plan** — implement exactly as specified in the `.plan.md` file
2. **Mark progress** — flip checkboxes to `[x]` in the plan as each step completes
### 5.2 Trust-but-Verify Audit (mandatory before commit)
> Aligned with `~/.claude/CLAUDE.md` global rule: never trust a subagent's summary alone.
Run the full audit checklist from the plan's "Verification Plan" section AND inspect the diff yourself:
```bash
git status
git diff --stat
git diff # full diff, scan for out-of-scope changes
npm run lint
npm run typecheck:core
npm run typecheck:noimplicit:core
npm run check:cycles
npm run build
npm run test:coverage
```
**Block-on-failure checklist:**
- [ ] No files changed outside the plan's declared scope (or scope expansion explicitly justified)
- [ ] No deleted symbols/routes/files without a documented replacement (grep to confirm)
- [ ] No weakened or removed test assertions (only additions or alignments with real behavior)
- [ ] Coverage gate green (75/75/75/70)
- [ ] All commands above exit 0
- [ ] If UI was touched: manual smoke test passed and noted
If any item fails, **fix root cause** before committing. Do NOT bypass with `--no-verify` (hard rule #10).
### 5.3 Commit (one feature, one commit)
```bash
git add <only files in the plan>
git commit -m "feat: <description> (#<NUMBER>)"
```
> **No `Co-Authored-By` trailers** (hard rule #16). Commits go solely under `diegosouzapw`.
Then move (do NOT delete yet) the idea file to `_ideia/implemented/`:
```bash
mv _ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-<title>.md _ideia/implemented/
mv _ideia/viable/<NUMBER>-<title>.requirements.md _ideia/implemented/ 2>/dev/null || true
```
> **Why move, not delete?** If the release PR is reverted or rebased, we still have the context. The file is deleted only after the PR merges to `main` (see 5.6).
Continue to the next feature on the same branch — do NOT switch branches between features.
### 5.4 Respond to Authors
For each implemented feature, post a final close-comment **translated into the issue's `reply_lang`**:
```markdown
✅ **Implemented in `release/vX.Y.Z`!**
Hi @<author>! Great news — your feature request has been implemented! 🎉
**What was done:**
- <bullet list of what was built>
**How to try it (after the release PR merges):**
```bash
git fetch origin && git checkout main && git pull
npm install && npm run dev
```
This will be included in the upcoming **vX.Y.Z** release. Feel free to reopen if you spot any issues! 🚀
```
```bash
gh issue close <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --comment "<translated comment>"
```
### 5.5 Finalize the Release Branch
After implementing all approved features:
1. **Update CHANGELOG.md** on the release branch with all new feature entries
2. Push: `git push origin release/vX.Y.Z`
3. Hand off to `/generate-release` for the "Tests → Commit → Push → PR to main" stage. Refer to it **by stage name**, not step number, so this command does not break if `/generate-release` renumbers steps.
### 5.6 Post-Merge Cleanup (only after release PR merges to main)
Once the release PR is merged:
```bash
# Now safe to delete — commit history + CHANGELOG are the source of truth
rm _ideia/implemented/<NUMBER>-*.md
```
> If running this command before the merge: STOP at 5.5 and skip 5.6. Re-enter the workflow later just for the cleanup.
### 5.7 Final Summary Report
Present a final summary report to the user:
| Issue | Title | Verdict | Action | Commit |
| ----- | ----- | ---------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------- | --------- |
| #N | Title | ✅ Implemented | Issue closed, idea file in `_ideia/implemented/` (until merge) | `abc1234` |
| #N | Title | ♻️ Reclaimed | Was IN FLIGHT / NEEDS DETAIL, reclaimed after 15d → implemented | `abc1234` |
| #N | Title | ⏭️ Deferred | Issue closed + permanent archive in `_ideia/defer/` | — |
| #N | Title | ❌ Not Fit | Issue closed + permanent archive in `_ideia/notfit/` | — |
| #N | Title | 🔁 Exists | Issue closed + permanent archive in `_ideia/exists/` | — |
| #N | Title | ❓ Needs Detail | Issue OPEN, archive in `_ideia/need_details/` | — |
| #N | Title | 🚧 In Flight | Issue OPEN, archive in `_ideia/in_flight/`, tracked by PR #M | — |
Include:
- Total features harvested
- Total ideas archived per bucket (`need_details/` / `defer/` / `notfit/` / `exists/` / `in_flight/`)
- Total features implemented (idea files in `_ideia/implemented/`, awaiting post-merge cleanup)
- Total reclaimed via Phase 1.7 (stale 15-day rule)
- Total issues closed
- Total issues left open (NEEDS DETAIL + VIABLE-pending + IN FLIGHT)
- Audit results: lint / typecheck / cycles / build / coverage (pass-count per phase)
- Languages used in posted comments (e.g. "3× pt-BR, 5× en, 1× es")

50
.claude/commands/issue-triage-cc.md
View File

@@ -1,50 +0,0 @@
---
description: How to respond to GitHub issues with insufficient information
---
# Issue Triage Workflow
Respond to GitHub issues that need more information before they can be investigated.
## Steps
### 1. Identify issues needing triage
```bash
gh issue list --state open --limit 20
```
### 2. Evaluate each issue
Check if the issue has:
- Clear reproduction steps
- Environment details (OS, Node.js version, OmniRoute version)
- Error logs/screenshots
- Expected vs actual behavior
### 3. Respond with triage template
For issues missing information:
```markdown
Thank you for reporting this issue! To help us investigate, please provide:
1. **OmniRoute version**: (`omniroute --version`)
2. **Node.js version**: (`node --version`)
3. **Operating system**: (e.g., Ubuntu 24.04, macOS 15, Windows 11)
4. **Installation method**: (npm, Docker, source)
5. **Steps to reproduce**: (exact commands/actions that trigger the issue)
6. **Error logs**: (paste relevant logs from the console)
7. **Expected behavior**: (what should happen)
This will help us debug and resolve your issue faster. 🙏
```
### 4. Label the issue
Add appropriate labels: `needs-info`, `bug`, `enhancement`, `question`, etc.
```bash
gh issue edit <NUMBER> --add-label "needs-info"
```

262
.claude/commands/resolve-issues-cc.md
View File

@@ -1,262 +0,0 @@
---
description: Fetch all open GitHub issues, analyze bugs, resolve up to 30 per batch via per-issue worktrees + PRs into the release branch, triage the rest, wait for user validation
allowed-tools: Bash, Read, Edit, Write, Grep, Glob, WebFetch, WebSearch, AskUserQuestion, Agent
---
# /resolve-issues — Automated Issue Resolution Workflow
## Overview
This workflow fetches all open issues from the project's GitHub repository, classifies them, analyzes bugs, proposes a resolution plan, waits for user validation, and ONLY THEN implements fixes. The current `release/vX.Y.Z` branch is the integration target — each individual fix is implemented on its own short-lived `fix/<issue>-<short>` branch inside its own git worktree, merged into the release branch via PR, then the worktree and local branch are deleted. The release branch is later merged to `main` via `/generate-release`.
> **BRANCH RULE**: The current `release/vX.Y.Z` branch is the integration target. Each fix MUST live on its own `fix/<ISSUE>-<short>` branch cut from the release branch, inside its own worktree under `.worktrees/`. After the per-issue PR is merged into the release branch, the worktree and local branch are deleted. Never commit fixes directly to the release branch. If no release branch exists yet, create one first using `/generate-release` Phase 1 steps 1–5.
> **⛔ PR PROHIBITION**: If a fix is associated with a contributor's PR, you MUST merge their PR — NEVER close it and re-implement the fix yourself. See `/review-prs` workflow for the full policy. The `gh pr close` command is FORBIDDEN unless the repository owner explicitly requests it.
> **🌐 REPLY LANGUAGE**: All comments posted to issues (close messages, RESPOND comments, PR descriptions visible to the reporter) MUST match the reporter's language. When in doubt, default to **English**. The reporter's language is detected from the issue body and prior comments by that author.
## Steps
### 1. Identify the GitHub Repository
// turbo
- Run: `git -C <project_root> remote get-url origin` to extract the owner/repo
- Parse the owner and repo name from the URL
### 2. Ensure Release Branch Exists
// turbo
Before doing any work, ensure a `release/vX.Y.Z` branch exists. If you are currently on `main`, create one:
```bash
git branch --show-current
# If on main, determine next version and create the release branch
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
NEXT=$(node -p "const [a,b,c]=('$VERSION').split('.').map(Number); c>=999?a+'.'+(b+1)+'.0':a+'.'+b+'.'+(c+1)")
git checkout -b release/v$NEXT
npm version patch --no-git-tag-version
npm install
```
> Threshold: patches climb to `.999` before rolling. Example: `3.4.999` → `3.5.0`.
If already on a `release/vX.Y.Z` branch, continue working there.
### 3. Fetch All Open Issues (cap 30 per batch)
// turbo-all
**⚠️ CRITICAL**: The JSON output of `gh issue list` can be truncated by the tool, silently hiding issues. Use the two-step approach below.
**Step 3a — Get Issue numbers only** (small output, never truncated):
- Run: `gh issue list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open --limit 500 --json number --jq '.[].number'`
- Count them and remember the total.
**Step 3b — Fetch full metadata for each Issue** (parallel, validated against 3a):
- For each issue number from step 3a, run:
`gh issue view <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json number,title,labels,body,comments,createdAt,author,url`
- Batch in parallel (8–12 concurrent calls). After completion, assert `fetched_count == count_from_3a`; if mismatch, retry the missing IDs.
- Sort by oldest first (FIFO).
**Step 3c — Cap at 30 per run**:
- If more than 30 open issues qualify as bugs after step 4, ask the user (via AskUserQuestion) which subset of up to 30 to handle now. The remainder is deferred to the next run.
### 4. Classify Each Issue
For each issue, determine its type:
- **Bug** — Has `bug` label, or body contains error messages, stack traces, "doesn't work", "broken", "crash", "error"
- **Feature Request** — Has `enhancement`/`feature` label, or body describes new functionality
- **Question** — Has `question` label, or is asking "how to" something
- **Other** — Anything else
Focus ONLY on **Bugs** for resolution. Feature requests and questions are skipped with a note in the final report.
#### 4.5. PR-Linked Check (mandatory)
For every bug, query linked PRs:
```bash
gh issue view <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json closedByPullRequestsReferences,body
```
If the issue is referenced by an **open** contributor PR (or the body links to one), do NOT plan a self-implemented fix. Mark the issue as `🤝 PR-LINKED — redirect to /review-prs` in the report and stop deeper analysis for it. **NEVER close the contributor PR.**
### 5. Deep-Read Each Bug Issue (One-by-One Analysis)
Read each bug issue thoroughly, one at a time. Each issue gets focused attention.
#### 5a. Understand the Problem
1. **Read the entire body** — Description, Steps to Reproduce, Expected/Actual Behavior, Error Logs, Screenshots
2. **Read ALL comments** — bot triage (Kilo, etc.) and owner/community responses. Look for:
- Someone already responded with a fix
- Community member confirmed it is resolved
- Bot duplicate flag. **DO NOT blindly trust bot labels (e.g., `kilo-duplicate`).** Re-verify independently from current source + web research.
3. **Identify the claimed error** — exact error message, status code, provider/model, OS, Node version.
#### 5b. Check Information Sufficiency
Verify the issue contains:
- [ ] Clear description of the problem
- [ ] Steps to reproduce OR error logs
- [ ] Provider/model/version information
- [ ] Expected vs actual behavior
**If ANY item is missing → auto-classify as `📝 RESPOND — Needs Info` and skip 5d.** Do not attempt root-cause analysis on under-specified issues.
#### 5c. Determine Issue Disposition
| Disposition | When to Apply | Action |
| ---------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------- |
| **✅ CLOSE — Already Fixed** | Owner responded with fix + no user follow-up, OR community confirmed fix | Close with comment citing which version fixed it |
| **✅ CLOSE — Duplicate** | You have independently verified the issue is a duplicate (do NOT rely solely on bot flags) + user provides no new info | Close referencing the original issue |
| **✅ CLOSE — Stale** | We requested logs/info > 7 days ago with no reply | Close thanking the user, invite to reopen if needed |
| **📝 RESPOND — Needs Info** | Issue is real but missing critical reproduction details (also triggered by 5b) | Comment asking for specifics per `/issue-triage` |
| **📝 RESPOND — User Config** | Error is caused by unsupported env (Node version, wrong model path, missing API enablement) | Comment explaining the user-side fix |
| **🤝 PR-LINKED** | An open contributor PR already targets this issue (from step 4.5) | Redirect to `/review-prs`; do not re-implement |
| **🔧 FIX — Code Change** | Root cause is confirmed in the codebase | Research, propose solution in report, wait for approval |
#### 5d. For "FIX — Code Change" Issues
Before coding, perform deep source analysis:
1. **Search the codebase** — `grep`/`Grep` for error strings, function names, affected files
2. **Search the web** — upstream API changes, SDK updates, breaking changes
3. **Read the full source file** — don't rely on grep snippets
4. **Verify the root cause** is in our code, not user misconfiguration
5. **Formulate a proposed solution** — exact files/lines/logic
6. **Create an Implementation Plan file** at `_tasks/fixes-vX.Y.Z/<ISSUE>-<short-description>.plan.md` (`vX.Y.Z` = current release branch version). Create the directory first: `mkdir -p _tasks/fixes-vX.Y.Z`. The plan contains: Overview, Reproduction Steps, Regression Test Outline, Implementation Steps (files/changes), Rollout Notes.
7. **DO NOT modify the codebase yet** — wait for user approval.
#### 5e. For "RESPOND" Issues
Post a substantive comment that:
- Acknowledges the specific error reported
- Explains the likely root cause
- Provides concrete steps (version upgrade, env var fix, model path correction)
- Asks for follow-up info if needed
**No generic templates.** Every comment references the user's specific error and environment, and is written in the reporter's language (English default).
### 6. Generate Report & Wait for Validation
Present a summary report. For FIX bugs, explicitly explain the proposed solution (files to change + logic) and confirm it will land via per-issue worktree → PR → release branch after approval. Include the reporter's detected language per row so the user can verify.
| Issue | Title | Status | Reply Lang | Proposed Action / Version |
| ----- | ----- | -------------- | ---------- | ------------------------------------------ |
| #N | Title | ✅ Close | en | Already fixed / duplicate (explain why) |
| #N | Title | 🔧 Propose | pt-BR | Code fix plan summary + worktree branch |
| #N | Title | 📝 Respond | en | Guidance comment to be posted |
| #N | Title | ❓ Needs Info | en | Triage comment to be posted |
| #N | Title | 🤝 PR-Linked | en | Redirect to /review-prs (PR #M) |
| #N | Title | ⏭️ Skip | — | Feature request / not a bug |
> **⚠️ IMPORTANT**: Do NOT implement code changes, commit, push, or close issues at this step.
> Wait for the user to review the proposed fixes and respond with **OK** before proceeding.
- If the user says **OK** → Proceed to step 7
- If the user requests changes → Adjust and re-present the report
- If the user rejects → Revert any accidental changes and stop
### 7. Implement Fixes via Per-Issue Worktrees + PRs (only after user approval)
For each approved FIX issue (up to 30 per batch), repeat the following sequence. Issues can be processed sequentially or in parallel (one worktree each — never two fixes in the same worktree).
#### 7.1. Spin up an isolated worktree on a fresh fix branch
```bash
ISSUE=<NUMBER>
SHORT=<short-kebab-desc>
RELEASE_BRANCH=$(git -C <project_root> branch --show-current) # release/vX.Y.Z
WT_DIR=".worktrees/fix-${ISSUE}-${SHORT}"
BRANCH="fix/${ISSUE}-${SHORT}"
git fetch origin "$RELEASE_BRANCH"
git worktree add "$WT_DIR" -b "$BRANCH" "origin/$RELEASE_BRANCH"
cd "$WT_DIR"
```
#### 7.2. Write the regression test first (TDD)
- Author a unit/integration test that reproduces the bug. **It must fail on the unfixed code.** Run it and confirm the failure.
- Hard rule #8: any production change must ship with tests in the same PR. The regression test is non-negotiable.
#### 7.3. Implement the fix
- Apply the approved plan from `_tasks/fixes-vX.Y.Z/<ISSUE>-<short>.plan.md`.
- Keep the diff scoped to this issue. No drive-by refactors.
#### 7.4. Run the test suite
- `npm run test:all` (or the appropriate suite for the touched area; the regression test MUST be included).
- All tests must pass before commit. Also run the relevant `lint` / `typecheck` per CLAUDE.md trust-but-verify checklist.
#### 7.5. Update CHANGELOG.md and commit (single commit, same diff)
- Add the new bug-fix entry under the current `vX.Y.Z` section of CHANGELOG.md.
- CHANGELOG entry + code + test go in **one** commit on the fix branch:
```bash
git add <changed files> CHANGELOG.md
git commit -m "fix: <description> (#${ISSUE})"
```
#### 7.6. Push and open a PR into the release branch
```bash
git push -u origin "$BRANCH"
gh pr create \
--base "$RELEASE_BRANCH" \
--head "$BRANCH" \
--title "fix: <description> (#${ISSUE})" \
--body "Closes #${ISSUE}\n\n<short summary, plan link, regression test reference>"
```
#### 7.7. Merge the PR into the release branch
- Wait for CI green, then merge with the project's default merge strategy.
- The PR title becomes the release-branch commit.
#### 7.8. Clean up worktree and local branch
```bash
cd <project_root>
git worktree remove "$WT_DIR"
git branch -D "$BRANCH"
```
#### 7.9. Close the issue with a localized comment
Match the reporter's language (English default). Template:
> **EN**: Thanks for reporting! Fixed in `release/vX.Y.Z` (already merged into the active development branch — feel free to pull and test it now). It will ship in the next release (vX.Y.Z).
>
> **pt-BR**: Obrigado pelo report! Corrigido em `release/vX.Y.Z` (já mergeado na branch de desenvolvimento atual — pode dar pull e testar). Vai sair na próxima release (vX.Y.Z).
```bash
gh issue close "$ISSUE" --repo <owner>/<repo> --comment "<localized message above>"
```
#### 7.10. Close non-FIX dispositions
After all FIX issues are merged:
- `Duplicate`: close referencing the original issue (localized).
- `Stale`: close thanking the user and inviting reopen (localized).
- `RESPOND — Needs Info` / `RESPOND — User Config`: post the substantive comment from 5e (localized).
- `PR-LINKED`: leave the issue open; comment redirecting to the contributor PR if not already linked.
#### 7.11. Hand off to release flow (optional)
If a release PR to `main` is desired now, run `/generate-release` Phase 1 steps 7–10 (tests → commit version bump → push → open PR to main → wait for user).
If NO fixes were committed, skip 7.7–7.11 and just conclude the workflow.

267
.claude/commands/review-discussions-cc.md
View File

@@ -1,267 +0,0 @@
---
description: Read all open GitHub Discussions, summarize them, respond to pending ones, create issues from actionable feature requests, and triage stale threads for closure
---
# /review-discussions — GitHub Discussions Review & Response Workflow
## Overview
This workflow reads all open GitHub Discussions, generates a categorized summary, identifies which ones need a response, drafts and posts replies, optionally creates issues from actionable feature requests, and triages stale threads for closure.
**Modern tooling (replaces deprecated `browser_subagent` flow):**
- Reads use `gh api graphql` — one query returns 50 discussions with full bodies, comments, replies, IDs, and `updatedAt`.
- Writes (post comment, create issue, close discussion) use `gh api graphql` mutations or `gh issue create`.
- Pace at ~1s between writes to avoid abuse-detection throttling.
- `WebFetch` is acceptable only for read-only HTML scraping when GraphQL is unavailable — never for write actions.
// turbo-all
## Steps
### 1. Identify the GitHub Repository
- Run: `git -C <project_root> remote get-url origin` to extract `owner/repo`.
- Parse owner and repo name from the URL (https or ssh form).
### 2. Fetch All Open Discussions (single GraphQL query)
Single `gh api graphql` call — return everything needed for triage. Critical fields: `id` (node ID, **not** the visible `number`), `number`, `title`, `url`, `createdAt`, `updatedAt`, `author.login`, `category.name`, `body`, `answerChosenAt`, plus nested `comments(first: 50) { totalCount, nodes { id, author.login, body, createdAt, replies(first: 20) { nodes { author.login, body, createdAt } } } }`.
Persist the raw JSON to `/tmp/discussions-<repo>-<date>.json` so re-runs in the same session avoid a re-fetch. Build an `id → number` map for the post phase — the GraphQL `addDiscussionComment` mutation requires the node ID, not the number.
Capture **image attachments** present in body or comments (`<img src="...">` or markdown `![...](...)`). Surface their count in the per-discussion summary (e.g., `📷 3 screenshots`) so the user can decide if visual context matters before approving a draft.
### 3. Summarize All Discussions
For each discussion, extract:
- **Title** and **#Number**
- **Author** (GitHub username)
- **Category** (Announcements, General, Ideas, Q&A, Show and tell)
- **Created** + **Last updated** (ISO date)
- **Summary** of original post (1-2 sentences)
- **Comment count** + **last commenter** + **last comment date** — determine these by **chronological `createdAt`**, not iteration order. Comments and their nested replies must be merged into a single sorted timeline before picking the latest event (otherwise a recent top-level reply gets shadowed by an older nested reply of an earlier comment, and the discussion is misclassified).
- **Maintainer involvement**: whether the repo owner already replied, and how many times
- **Pending action** — derived state, see categories below
- **Attachments**: count of screenshots / videos / pastebin links
- **Detected language** of the reporter (for reply-language matching)
### 4. Present Summary Report to User
Group by **pending action**, not by category, so the human sees triage buckets at a glance:
| State | Meaning |
| ----------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| ⚠️ Needs first response | Zero comments, or all comments are from non-maintainers |
| 🔄 Follow-up pending | Maintainer replied, but reporter or third party added a new comment maintainer has not addressed |
| 🕒 Stale (>15d) | Maintainer was last to comment, no activity for 15+ days — candidate for soft-close or reporter-ping (see step 8)|
| ✅ Answered | Maintainer already replied AND last commenter is the maintainer AND age < 15d |
| 🏁 Resolved | `answerChosenAt` is set |
Within each bucket, present a table:
| # | Category | Title | Author | Updated | Notes |
| --- | -------- | ------------------ | ------ | ------- | ---------------------- |
| #N | Q&A | short title (60ch) | @user | YYYY-MM-DD | 📷2 · 🐛bug · 💡FR |
Tag rows with content hints when detected: `🐛bug` (`[BUG]` / `error` / stacktrace in body), `💡FR` (`feature request` / `add support for`), `❓support` (config/usage question), `🙏thanks` (short ack-only follow-up).
### 5. Draft & Post Responses
#### Reply templates by intent
Pick the template that matches the discussion intent — do NOT use a single generic format.
**A. Bug confirmed** — ack + root cause + tracking + workaround
```
Hey @user! Confirmed -- {root cause in one sentence}. I traced it to `path/to/file.ts:line`.
{Why it happens: 2-4 sentences of technical detail}
I have opened {issue #N} to track the fix. Workaround until it ships: {concrete steps}. Will update here when the patch lands.
```
**B. Feature Request** — ack + status + scope + commit
```
Hey @user! {Status: "Already exists" / "Tracked in #N" / "Reasonable, opening an issue"}.
{If already exists: pointer to dashboard page or doc}
{If tracked: link to umbrella, summarize order/priority}
{If new: open issue + post link back}
{Optional: short technical note on feasibility / trade-offs}
```
**C. Support / config question** — direct answer + reference + offer to dig deeper
```
Hey @user! {One-sentence answer}.
Steps:
1. ...
2. ...
3. ...
Reference: `docs/<path>.md`. If it still fails after that, paste {specific thing} and I will trace it.
```
**D. Thank-you / short follow-up** — 1-2 sentences
```
Glad it helps, @user! {Concrete next marker — when patch ships / when to expect next update}.
```
**E. Stale / closing** — see step 8
#### Posting via gh (replaces deprecated browser flow)
```bash
gh api graphql -f query='
mutation($id: ID!, $body: String!) {
addDiscussionComment(input: {discussionId: $id, body: $body}) {
comment { id url }
}
}' -f id="$NODE_ID" -f body="$BODY"
```
For **threaded replies** (recommended when responding to a specific comment in a long thread), add `replyToId: $parentCommentId` to the input.
**Output hygiene** (still applies even via API — the comment renders in GitHub UI):
- ASCII-safe punctuation: regular hyphens `-`, `->` for arrows
- Markdown OK: `**bold**`, fenced code blocks, `[text](url)` links
- No bare error messages with stack traces from internal logs — sanitize
- Match reporter's language (pt-BR reporter → pt-BR reply; ru reporter → ru reply); default to English when uncertain
**Pacing**: `sleep 1` between mutations. GitHub abuse-detection trips around 10/sec for the same actor.
**Verification**: capture the returned `comment.url` from each mutation. Failed posts (returncode != 0 or `errors` in response) get logged separately and retried once after a 5s pause.
### 6. Create Issues from Actionable Feature Requests
For discussions that contain concrete, actionable feature requests:
1. **Deduplicate FIRST** — before drafting, search existing issues:
```bash
gh issue list --repo $OWNER/$REPO --search "<keywords from FR>" --state open --json number,title,labels
```
If a matching issue (or umbrella) already exists, reuse it — never create a duplicate. Post a comment in the discussion linking to the existing issue.
2. **Ask the user which to create** — even after dedup, the human approves the final list.
3. **Create the issue** with `gh issue create`:
```bash
gh issue create --repo $OWNER/$REPO \
--title "[feature] <short imperative>" \
--label enhancement \
--body @/tmp/issue-body.md
```
Body template:
```markdown
## Feature Request
**Source:** Discussion #N by @author
## Problem
What limitation the user hit (in their words, paraphrased)
## Proposed Solution
How it could work
### Implementation Ideas
- File paths likely to touch (use `Grep` if needed to confirm)
- Related modules / patterns already in the codebase
### Current Workarounds
What users can do today
## Additional Context
- Discussion: #N
- Related issues/PRs: #X, #Y
- Upstream references: link to similar implementations in `_references/` if applicable
```
4. **Generate task file in `_ideia/`** when the feature needs deeper investigation before implementation:
```
_ideia/<short-kebab-slug>.md
```
Contains: problem statement, current OmniRoute state, how upstream (`_references/9router`, `_references/CLIProxyAPI`, etc.) handles it, proposed implementation levels (short/medium/long term), acceptance criteria.
5. **Link back to discussion** with the real URL:
```
Follow-up @reporter — I've opened issue #N to track this. {1-line summary of what the issue covers}.
```
### 7. Final Report
| Discussion | Action Taken |
| ---------- | ------------------------------------------------------------- |
| #N — Title | Responded (bug confirmed, tracking #M) |
| #N — Title | Responded + created issue #M + task file `_ideia/X.md` |
| #N — Title | Responded (support answered with workaround) |
| #N — Title | Responded to follow-up comment |
| #N — Title | Closed (stale 15+d, no reply from reporter) |
| #N — Title | Ping sent (stale 15+d, will close in 7d if no response) |
Include totals: comments posted, issues created, discussions closed, discussions pinged. Capture median response time for the batch.
### 8. Stale Discussion Triage (auto-close candidates)
Identify discussions matching **all** of:
- `updatedAt > 15 days ago`
- Maintainer already replied at least once
- Last commenter is the maintainer (the ball is on the reporter's side)
- `answerChosenAt` is null (not formally resolved)
- Category in `{Q&A, General}` — skip `Ideas` / `Show and tell` / `Announcements` (those serve as community references and shouldn't be closed)
- `comments.totalCount >= 2` — there was actual conversation, not a drive-by post
- No label named `keep-open` (escape hatch)
For each candidate, present to the user with a recommended action:
| Action | When |
| --------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Soft-close** | Default — maintainer answered concretely and reporter went silent |
| **Ping reporter** | Maintainer asked for more info (log dump, screenshot) and never got it |
| **Keep open** | Conversation is mid-debug and closing would lose context — operator override |
**Soft-close mutation:**
```bash
gh api graphql -f query='
mutation($id: ID!) {
closeDiscussion(input: {discussionId: $id, reason: RESOLVED}) {
discussion { id closed }
}
}' -f id="$NODE_ID"
```
Valid `reason` values: `RESOLVED`, `OUTDATED`, `DUPLICATE`. Default to `OUTDATED` for "no response" closures, `RESOLVED` for answered-but-not-confirmed.
Before closing, post a closing comment:
```
Closing for inactivity -- feel free to reopen if you still hit this, or open a fresh issue with a current log. Thanks!
```
**Ping flow** (alternative):
```
@reporter -- still happening on the latest version? Otherwise I'll close this in 7 days for inactivity.
```
Persist the ping in `_cache/discussions-pinged-<date>.json` so the next run knows to close discussions that were pinged 7+ days ago without a reply.
## Notes
- This workflow is **interactive** — always present the summary and wait for user approval before posting responses, creating issues, or closing discussions.
- Use `AskUserQuestion` to gather batched approval — separate questions for "reply scope", "create issues for?", "close stale?". Stale handling is a separate consent from reply posting.
- For discussions in non-English languages (`pt-BR`, `ru`, `zh`, `es`), respond in the same language as the original post. Default to English when uncertain.
- Always reference specific dashboard paths, config options, doc files, or code locations (`file:line`) when explaining existing features — never wave hands.
- When a discussion reveals a bug, separate it from feature requests in the report. Bugs need a tracking issue + workaround; FRs need scoping.
- Before recommending a workaround that mentions a file/flag/setting, verify it exists in the **current** codebase (the previous turn's memory may be stale).
- Trust-but-verify: after a batch post, spot-check 2-3 random `comment.url` returns in the browser to confirm the comments rendered cleanly (no Unicode mojibake, no broken markdown).
- **Secure-by-default guidance** ([tldrsec/awesome-secure-defaults](https://github.com/tldrsec/awesome-secure-defaults)): when responses recommend security-relevant code (auth, crypto, SSRF, XSS sanitization), prefer well-tested libraries (Helmet.js, DOMPurify, Google Tink, ssrf-req-filter, safe-regex) over hand-rolled solutions.
## Anti-patterns to avoid
- ❌ Posting via `browser_subagent` clicks — slow, flaky, and obsolete since `gh api graphql` mutations exist.
- ❌ N+1 fetches (one per discussion) — use one GraphQL query for all 50.
- ❌ Creating an issue without checking for an existing umbrella / similar one first.
- ❌ Generic "thanks, I'll look into it!" responses — every reply must reference a file, doc, or concrete action.
- ❌ Closing a stale discussion without posting a closing comment first.
- ❌ Skipping the user approval gate ("turbo-all" never bypasses interactive consent for writes).

256
.claude/commands/review-prs-cc.md
View File

@@ -1,256 +0,0 @@
---
description: Analyze open Pull Requests from the project's GitHub repository, generate a critical report, and optionally implement approved changes
---
# /review-prs — PR Review & Analysis Workflow
## ⛔ ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION — Read Before Anything Else
> **NEVER close a contributor's PR if you intend to use ANY of their code, ideas, or fixes.**
>
> **NEVER manually integrate contributor code into a release branch and then close their PR.**
>
> These actions are **STRICTLY FORBIDDEN** under all circumstances:
>
> 1. ❌ Closing a PR and cherry-picking/copying its code into a release branch
> 2. ❌ Closing a PR "because of conflicts" and re-implementing the same fix yourself
> 3. ❌ Closing a PR and committing a "similar" solution inspired by it
> 4. ❌ Using `gh pr close` on any PR whose content was or will be used
>
> **Why**: Closing a PR after taking the contributor's work means they get ZERO credit on GitHub — no "Merged" badge, no contribution graph entry, no public record. This is effectively stealing their contribution. An audit found this happened to **37 PRs** in the past.
>
> **The ONLY acceptable flow**: Resolve conflicts IN the contributor's branch, push fixes TO their branch, then merge THEIR PR via `gh pr merge`. See Step 7 and Step 8 for the exact procedure.
>
> **When to close a PR**: ONLY when the user (repository owner) explicitly requests it, OR when the PR is clearly spam/malicious, OR when the author themselves asks to close it. In ALL other cases, leave it open.
## Overview
This workflow fetches all open PRs from the project's GitHub repository, performs a critical analysis of each one, generates a detailed report, and waits for user approval before proceeding with implementation. **All improvements are committed on the current release branch** (`release/vX.Y.Z`).
> **BRANCH RULE**: PRs are ALWAYS merged into the current `release/vX.Y.Z` branch, NEVER directly into `main`. The release branch acts as a staging area — only after all PRs are integrated and tests pass does the release branch get merged into `main` via the `/generate-release` workflow.
## Steps
### 1. Identify the GitHub Repository
- Read `package.json` to get the repository URL, or use the git remote origin URL
// turbo
- Run: `git -C <project_root> remote get-url origin` to extract the owner/repo
### 2. Ensure Release Branch Exists
// turbo
Before doing any work, ensure you are on the current release branch:
```bash
# Check current branch
git branch --show-current
# If on main, determine next version and create the release branch
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
# Bump patch: e.g. 3.3.11 → 3.3.12
NEXT=$(node -p "const [a,b,c]=('$VERSION').split('.').map(Number); c>=999?a+'.'+(b+1)+'.0':a+'.'+b+'.'+(c+1)")
git checkout -b release/v$NEXT
npm version patch --no-git-tag-version
npm install
```
If already on a `release/vX.Y.Z` branch, continue working there.
### 3. Fetch Open Pull Requests
// turbo-all
**⚠️ CRITICAL**: The JSON output of `gh pr list` can be truncated by the tool, silently hiding PRs. You MUST use the two-step approach below to guarantee **all** PRs are fetched.
**Step 3a — Get PR numbers only** (small output, never truncated):
- Run: `gh pr list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open --limit 500 --json number --jq '.[].number'`
- This outputs one PR number per line. Count them and confirm total.
**Step 3b — Fetch full metadata for each PR** (one call per PR):
- For each PR number from step 3a, run:
`gh pr view <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json number,title,author,headRefName,baseRefName,body,createdAt,additions,deletions,files`
- You may batch these into parallel calls (up to 4 at a time).
**Step 3c — Fetch diffs for each PR** (one call per PR, saved to /tmp):
- For each PR number, run:
`gh pr diff <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> > /tmp/pr<NUMBER>.diff`
- Then read each diff file with the `Read` tool.
- For each open PR, collect:
- PR number, title, author, branch, number of commits, date
- PR description/body
- Files changed (diff)
- Existing review comments (from bots or humans)
**Verification**: Confirm the count of PRs analyzed matches the count from step 3a before proceeding.
### 3.5 Redirect PR Base Branches to Release Branch
// turbo-all
**⚠️ CRITICAL**: Contributors typically open PRs targeting `main`. Before analyzing or merging, redirect ALL open PRs to target the current release branch instead.
```bash
# Get the current release branch name
RELEASE_BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current) # e.g. release/v3.5.4
# For each open PR that targets main, change its base to the release branch
for PR_NUM in $(gh pr list --repo <owner>/<repo> --state open --json number,baseRefName --jq '.[] | select(.baseRefName == "main") | .number'); do
echo "Redirecting PR #$PR_NUM → $RELEASE_BRANCH"
gh pr edit "$PR_NUM" --repo <owner>/<repo> --base "$RELEASE_BRANCH"
done
```
This ensures:
1. PRs merge into the release branch, not directly into `main`
2. Merge conflict detection is accurate against the release branch
3. The release branch accumulates all changes before the final merge to `main`
4. If the release branch doesn't exist on remote yet, push it first: `git push origin $RELEASE_BRANCH`
### 4. Analyze Each PR — For each open PR, perform the following analysis:
#### 4a. Feature Assessment
- **Does it make sense?** Evaluate if the feature fills a real gap or solves a valid problem
- **Alignment** — Check if it aligns with the project's architecture and roadmap
- **Complexity** — Assess if the scope is reasonable or if it should be split
#### 4b. Code Quality Review
- Check for code duplication
- Evaluate error handling patterns (consistent with existing codebase?)
- Check naming conventions and code style
- Verify TypeScript types (any `any` usage, missing types?)
#### 4c. Security Review
- Check for missing authentication/authorization on new endpoints
- Check for injection vulnerabilities (URL params, SQL, XSS)
- Verify input validation on all user-controlled data
- Check for hardcoded secrets or credentials
#### 4d. Architecture Review
- Does the change follow existing patterns?
- Are there any breaking changes to public APIs?
- Is the database schema affected? Migration needed?
- Impact on performance (N+1 queries, missing indexes?)
#### 4e. Test Coverage
- Does the PR include tests?
- Are edge cases covered?
- Would existing tests break?
#### 4f. Cross-Layer (Global) Analysis
Perform a **global impact assessment** to verify whether the PR changes are complete across all layers of the application:
- **Backend → Frontend check**: If the PR adds or modifies backend-only resources (new endpoints, services, data models), evaluate whether corresponding frontend changes are missing:
- Does a new endpoint require a new screen/page in the dashboard?
- Should there be a new action button, menu item, or navigation link?
- Are there new data fields that should be displayed or editable in the UI?
- Does a new feature need a toggle, configuration panel, or status indicator?
- **Frontend → Backend check**: If the PR adds frontend elements, verify the backend support exists:
- Are the required API endpoints implemented?
- Is the data model sufficient for the new UI components?
- **Cross-cutting concerns**: Check shared layers (types, DTOs, validation schemas, routes, middleware) for completeness
- **Document gaps** — If missing layers are detected, list them as **IMPORTANT** issues in the report with concrete suggestions for what should be added
### 5. Generate Report — Create a markdown report for each PR including:
- **PR Summary** — What it does, files affected, commit count
- **Improvements/Benefits** — Numbered list with impact level (HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW)
- **Risks & Issues** — Categorized as CRITICAL / IMPORTANT / MINOR
- **Scoring Table** — Rate across: Feature Relevance, Code Quality, Security, Robustness, Tests
- **Verdict** — Ready to merge? With mandatory vs optional fixes
- **Next Steps** — What will happen if approved
### 6. Present to User
- Show the report in the final response and stop. This is a mandatory checkpoint awaiting explicit user approval before continuing.
- Wait for user decision:
- **Approved** → Proceed to step 7
- **Approved with changes** → Implement the fixes and corrections before merging
- **Rejected** → Close the PR or leave a review comment
### 7. Pre-Merge Fixes & CI Green-Lighting (if approved)
> **⚠️ Fixes and Conflict Resolutions MUST be pushed back to the PR branch before merging.** We want the PR itself to be green and fully valid before it integrates.
- **Sync latest fixes & Resolve Conflicts:** Merge the current `release` branch into the PR branch. If there are merge conflicts, you MUST resolve them inside the author's PR branch. NEVER resolve conflicts by closing their PR and doing the work in a separate branch, as this steals credit from the original author.
- **Implement improvements:** Apply the required fixes identified in the analysis directly on the PR branch (e.g., adding missing API routes, fixing SSRF, applying comments from other agents).
- **Pushing changes to PR branches:**
```bash
# Checkout the PR locally
gh pr checkout <NUMBER>
# Apply fixes, commit your changes
git commit -m "chore: apply review suggestions and missing layers"
# Attempt to push directly to the PR branch
git push
```
- **Fallback (ONLY for external forks without maintainer edit access):**
Using `cherry-pick` instead of fixing the contributor's PR directly is a **LAST RESORT**. You MUST ALWAYS attempt to `git push` your fixes to their branch first.
**ONLY if `git push` explicitly fails with a permission/access error** (meaning the contributor unchecked "Allow edits from maintainers" or it's a locked fork), you may use `git cherry-pick` to bring their changes into the release branch and fix the issues locally.
Even then, ensure you preserve the contributor's authorship (`git commit --author="Contributor Name <email>"` if creating new commits).
Once you have integrated their work into the release branch, **DO NOT close their PR**. Leave it open so the contributor retains credit. Under NO CIRCUMSTANCES should you use `gh pr close`.
- Run the project's test suite locally to verify nothing breaks:
// turbo
- Run: `npm test` or equivalent test command
### 8. Merge into Release Branch (NEVER CLOSE!)
> **⚠️ CRITICAL**: NEVER use `gh pr close` for a PR whose idea or code was accepted. Closing a PR in a contributor's face after taking their idea—or closing it just because it had conflicts—is unacceptable.
> You MUST ALWAYS resolve conflicts and apply fixes ON THE AUTHOR'S PR BRANCH (unless explicitly locked from edits), and then merge the PR using GitHub so the contributor gets the official "Merged" badge and proper credit on their profile. **Do not use cherry-pick just because it is "easier" than resolving conflicts on their branch.**
Even if the PR had severe conflicts or required significant architectural adjustments, you MUST:
1. Resolve any conflicts and apply the fixes directly to their PR branch (as detailed in step 7) or use cherry-picking into the release branch.
2. If you managed to fix their branch, merge it into the release branch using the GitHub CLI:
`gh pr merge <NUMBER> --repo <owner>/<repo> --squash --body "Integrated into release/vX.Y.Z"`
3. If you had to use cherry-picking because you couldn't push to their branch, DO NOT close the PR. GitHub will sometimes auto-detect the cherry-picked commits and mark it as Merged. If it doesn't, leave it open. The repository owner will handle it. NEVER run `gh pr close`.
In ALL cases:
- Post a **thank-you comment** on the PR via the GitHub API before or immediately after merging.
- The message should:
- Thank the author by name/username for their contribution.
- Explain what was adjusted or improved (if we pushed fixes to their branch or cherry-picked).
- Note it will be included in the upcoming release.
- Be friendly, professional, and encouraging.
> **⚠️ MANDATORY CHANGELOG CREDIT**: When cherry-picking is used (because the PR branch couldn't be pushed to or `gh pr merge` failed), the contributor does NOT get the automatic GitHub "Merged" badge. In this case, you MUST compensate by adding an explicit entry to `CHANGELOG.md` in the `[Unreleased]` section with `(#PR_NUMBER — thanks @username)` format. This ensures the contributor gets public credit in the release notes even if GitHub doesn't auto-detect the cherry-pick. This is NOT optional — skipping it effectively erases the contributor's work from the release record.
### 9. Sync Local Release Branch
After merging PRs, sync the local release branch to include the new changes:
```bash
git fetch origin
git pull origin release/vX.Y.Z
```
### 10. Continue or Finalize
After processing all approved PRs:
- If more PRs remain, go back to step 7
- When all PRs are processed, **update CHANGELOG.md** on the release branch with all new entries
- Run **test coverage** to verify the gate (≥75% statements/lines/functions, ≥70% branches — measured ~82%):
```bash
npm run test:coverage
```
- Fix any test regressions introduced by merged PRs
- Run `/generate-release` workflow Phase 1 steps 7–10 (tests → commit → push → open PR to main → wait for user)
- The `/generate-release` workflow handles the final merge from `release/vX.Y.Z` → `main`

341
.claude/commands/version-bump-cc.md
View File

@@ -1,341 +0,0 @@
---
description: Bump version, auto-generate CHANGELOG from git commits, update all versioned files, and refresh root + docs/ documentation to reflect the current project state
---
# Version Bump Workflow
Automatically bump the project version, generate CHANGELOG entries from git history since the last tag, update every file that references the version, and refresh project documentation to reflect the current state.
> **VERSION RULE: Always use PATCH bumps (3.x.y → 3.x.y+1)**
> NEVER use `npm version minor` or `npm version major`.
> Always use: `npm version patch --no-git-tag-version`
> The threshold rule: when `y` reaches 1000, bump to `3.(x+1).0` — e.g. `3.4.999` → `3.5.0`.
---
## Phase 1: Determine Version
### 1. Read current version and last tag
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
CURRENT_VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
LAST_TAG=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0 2>/dev/null || echo "")
CURRENT_BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current)
echo "Current version: $CURRENT_VERSION"
echo "Last tag: $LAST_TAG"
echo "Current branch: $CURRENT_BRANCH"
```
### 2. Calculate new version
Apply the patch bump rule:
- If the current patch number is `9`, the new version is `3.(minor+1).0`
- Otherwise, increment patch: `3.x.y` → `3.x.(y+1)`
If the version was ALREADY bumped (e.g. you are on a release branch and package.json already has the new version), **skip the npm version bump** and use the existing version.
### 3. Bump package.json (if needed)
// turbo
```bash
# Only if version hasn't been bumped yet
npm version patch --no-git-tag-version
```
Or for threshold (y=10):
```bash
# Manual threshold bump
VERSION="3.X.0" # compute manually
npm version "$VERSION" --no-git-tag-version
```
---
## Phase 2: Generate CHANGELOG from Git History
### 4. Collect commits since last tag
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
LAST_TAG=$(git describe --tags --abbrev=0 2>/dev/null)
echo "=== Commits since $LAST_TAG ==="
git log "$LAST_TAG"..HEAD --pretty=format:"%h %s" --no-merges | head -100
echo ""
echo "=== Merge commits ==="
git log "$LAST_TAG"..HEAD --merges --pretty=format:"%h %s" | head -50
```
### 5. Classify commits and generate CHANGELOG section
Analyze each commit message and classify into categories based on the conventional-commit prefix and content:
| Category | Patterns |
| ------------------- | ------------------------------------------------ |
| ✨ New Features | `feat:`, `feat(*):` |
| 🐛 Bug Fixes | `fix:`, `fix(*):` |
| ⚠️ Breaking Changes | `BREAKING CHANGE`, `!:` suffix |
| 🛠️ Maintenance | `chore:`, `refactor:`, `perf:`, `build:` |
| 🧪 Tests | `test:`, `tests:` |
| 📝 Documentation | `docs:` |
| 🔒 Security | `security:`, CVE references, vulnerability fixes |
| 🌍 i18n | translation updates, locale changes |
For each category with entries, create a markdown section with descriptive bullet points. Use the commit messages but rewrite them to be human-readable and descriptive (not raw commit messages).
**If a commit references a PR number** (e.g. `#880`, `PR #885`), include it in the description.
### 6. Update CHANGELOG.md
Replace the `## [Unreleased]` section content with the generated entries, then add the new versioned section:
```markdown
## [Unreleased]
---
## [NEW_VERSION] — YYYY-MM-DD
### ✨ New Features
- **Feature name:** Description (#PR)
### 🐛 Bug Fixes
- **Fix name:** Description (#PR)
### 🛠️ Maintenance
- **Item:** Description
---
## [PREVIOUS_VERSION] — YYYY-MM-DD
...
```
The date must be today's date in `YYYY-MM-DD` format.
---
## Phase 3: Sync Version Across All Files
### 7. Update workspace package.json files and openapi.yaml
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
# Update docs/reference/openapi.yaml version
sed -i "s/ version: .*/ version: $VERSION/" docs/reference/openapi.yaml
echo "✓ docs/reference/openapi.yaml → $VERSION"
# Update workspace packages (open-sse, electron)
for dir in electron open-sse; do
if [ -d "$dir" ] && [ -f "$dir/package.json" ]; then
(cd "$dir" && npm version "$VERSION" --no-git-tag-version --allow-same-version > /dev/null)
echo "✓ $dir/package.json → $VERSION"
fi
done
echo "✓ All workspace packages synced to $VERSION"
```
### 8. Update llm.txt version references
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
OLD_VERSION_PATTERN='[0-9]\+\.[0-9]\+\.[0-9]\+'
# Update "Current version:" line
sed -i "s/\*\*Current version:\*\* $OLD_VERSION_PATTERN/**Current version:** $VERSION/" llm.txt
# Update "Key Features (vX.Y.Z)" header
sed -i "s/## Key Features (v$OLD_VERSION_PATTERN)/## Key Features (v$VERSION)/" llm.txt
echo "✓ llm.txt → $VERSION"
```
### 9. Regenerate lock file
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
npm install
echo "✓ Lock file regenerated"
```
---
## Phase 4: Update Root Documentation
Based on the CHANGELOG entries generated in Phase 2, review and update these root-level files if relevant changes warrant updates:
### 10. Review and update root documentation files
For each file below, read the current content and determine if the CHANGELOG entries require any updates. Only modify files where substantive changes have occurred:
| File | When to update |
| ----------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| `README.md` | New providers, major features, stats changes (test count, provider count), badges, installation instructions, feature table |
| `AGENTS.md` | Architecture changes, new modules, new commands, new providers, new services/handlers/executors |
| `CONTRIBUTING.md` | Dev workflow changes, new tooling, test infrastructure changes |
| `SECURITY.md` | Security fixes, new auth mechanisms, vulnerability disclosures |
| `llm.txt` | Provider count changes, new features, architecture changes |
**Update rules:**
- **README.md**: Update provider count, test count, feature highlights table, badges if any numbers changed. If a new provider was added, add it to the provider table. If a major feature was added, add it to the features section.
- **AGENTS.md**: If new architecture components (handlers, executors, services, DB modules) were added, update the Architecture section. If new commands were added, update the Build/Test table.
- **SECURITY.md**: Add new vulnerability fixes or security improvements to the relevant section.
- **llm.txt**: Update provider count, feature list, version references.
### 11. Review and update docs/ files (excluding i18n/)
For each file in `docs/` (excluding `docs/i18n/`), review if CHANGELOG changes affect it:
| File | When to update |
| --------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| `docs/reference/API_REFERENCE.md` | New API endpoints, changed request/response formats |
| `docs/architecture/ARCHITECTURE.md` | New modules, new services, changed data flow |
| `docs/architecture/CODEBASE_DOCUMENTATION.md` | New files, architectural changes, module reorganization |
| `docs/architecture/REPOSITORY_MAP.md` | New folders / files / one-line descriptions |
| `docs/reference/CLI-TOOLS.md` | New CLI tool integrations, config format changes |
| `docs/guides/USER_GUIDE.md` | UX changes, new dashboard pages, settings changes |
| `docs/reference/PROVIDER_REFERENCE.md` | New providers (regenerate via `scripts/gen-provider-reference.ts`) |
| `docs/frameworks/MCP-SERVER.md` | New MCP tools, changed tool signatures, scope changes |
| `docs/frameworks/A2A-SERVER.md` | New A2A skills, protocol changes |
| `docs/frameworks/AGENT_PROTOCOLS_GUIDE.md` | New external agent protocols supported |
| `docs/frameworks/CLOUD_AGENT.md` | Cloud agent additions (codex-cloud, devin, jules) or API changes |
| `docs/architecture/AUTHZ_GUIDE.md` | New route classifications, policy changes |
| `docs/security/GUARDRAILS.md` | New guardrails registered, priority/order changes |
| `docs/security/COMPLIANCE.md` | Audit log / retention / no-log policy changes |
| `docs/frameworks/SKILLS.md` | Skill framework / registry / built-in skill changes |
| `docs/frameworks/MEMORY.md` | Memory pipeline / extraction / injection / Qdrant changes |
| `docs/frameworks/EVALS.md` | Evaluation framework changes, new evaluators |
| `docs/frameworks/WEBHOOKS.md` | New webhook events, payload schema changes |
| `docs/routing/REASONING_REPLAY.md` | Reasoning capture/replay pipeline changes |
| `docs/routing/AUTO-COMBO.md` | Routing changes, new strategies, scoring weight changes |
| `docs/architecture/RESILIENCE_GUIDE.md` | Circuit breaker / cooldown / lockout behavior changes |
| `docs/security/STEALTH_GUIDE.md` | TLS / CLI fingerprint changes |
| `docs/ops/TUNNELS_GUIDE.md` | Cloudflare tunnel feature changes |
| `docs/guides/ELECTRON_GUIDE.md` | Electron build / signing / packaging changes |
| `docs/guides/TROUBLESHOOTING.md` | New known issues, resolved problems |
| `docs/ops/RELEASE_CHECKLIST.md` | Process changes |
| `docs/ops/COVERAGE_PLAN.md` | Coverage gate adjustments, target metrics |
| `docs/reference/openapi.yaml` | Already updated in step 7 |
**Only update files where the CHANGELOG entries directly affect the documented content.** Do NOT update files just to bump a version number — only when the documented behavior, features, or architecture has actually changed.
---
## Phase 5: Verify
### 12. Run lint check
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
npm run lint
```
### 13. Run tests
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
npm test
```
### 14. Verify version sync across all files
// turbo
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
echo "Expected version: $VERSION"
echo ""
echo "--- package.json ---"
grep '"version"' package.json | head -1
echo "--- open-sse/package.json ---"
grep '"version"' open-sse/package.json | head -1
echo "--- electron/package.json ---"
[ -f electron/package.json ] && grep '"version"' electron/package.json | head -1
echo "--- docs/reference/openapi.yaml ---"
grep " version:" docs/reference/openapi.yaml | head -1
echo "--- llm.txt ---"
grep "Current version:" llm.txt
echo "--- CHANGELOG.md (first versioned entry) ---"
grep "^## \[" CHANGELOG.md | head -2
```
### 15. 🛑 STOP — Present Summary to User
**STOP** and present a summary to the user including:
- Old version → New version
- CHANGELOG entries generated
- Files modified
- Test results
- Any documentation updates made
**Wait for the user to confirm before committing.**
---
## Phase 6: Commit (only after user approval)
### 16. Stage and commit
// turbo-all
```bash
cd /home/diegosouzapw/dev/proxys/OmniRoute
git add -A
VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
git commit -m "chore(release): bump to v$VERSION — changelog, docs, version sync"
```
---
## Notes
- This workflow does **NOT** create tags, releases, or deploy. Use `/generate-release` for the full release cycle after this.
- This workflow does **NOT** update `docs/i18n/` translations. Translation updates are handled manually or via release tooling — the `/update-i18n` command does not currently exist as a Claude Code slash command.
- The CHANGELOG generation is based on git commits since the last tag. If there are no new commits, the workflow should inform the user and stop.
- Always verify the generated CHANGELOG entries make sense — raw commit messages may need rewriting for clarity.
- If the version was already bumped (e.g. you're on a `release/vX.Y.Z` branch), skip the `npm version` step and use the existing version.
## Version Touchpoints Checklist
| File | Field/Pattern |
| ----------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------- |
| `package.json` | `"version": "X.Y.Z"` |
| `open-sse/package.json` | `"version": "X.Y.Z"` |
| `electron/package.json` | `"version": "X.Y.Z"` |
| `docs/reference/openapi.yaml` | `version: X.Y.Z` |
| `llm.txt` | `**Current version:** X.Y.Z` and `## Key Features (vX.Y.Z)` |
| `CHANGELOG.md` | `## [X.Y.Z] — YYYY-MM-DD` |

BIN
.codegraph/codegraph.db
View File

Binary file not shown.

5
.gitignore vendored
View File

@@ -185,3 +185,8 @@ scripts/i18n/_pending-keys.json
# Fumadocs generated source
.source/
# AI agent local settings and configs
.agents/
.antigravitycli/
.claude/