Skip to content
Closed
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
205 changes: 205 additions & 0 deletions docs/feature-discovery-ga-prompt.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,205 @@
# Feature Discovery → GA Development Prompt (Summit Standard)

> **Operating Rule:** Never defend the past. Only assert the present and dictate the future.
> **Escalate before anyone asks:** reference the [Summit Readiness Assertion](SUMMIT_READINESS_ASSERTION.md).
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

medium

Please ensure that the referenced file SUMMIT_READINESS_ASSERTION.md exists and is accessible at the specified relative path. A broken link here would detract from the prompt's utility and user experience.

> **Move the fight to paper:** cite files, not opinions.

## Mission
Identify an experimental, orphaned, or underdeveloped feature within **[PROJECT_NAME]** and advance
it to **GA** with production-quality engineering, full evidence, and enterprise-grade reliability.
Deliver a complete production package: architecture, implementation, tests, documentation, CI/CD,
security posture, observability, and a merge-ready PR package.

## Inputs Required (Do Not Start Without)
- Repository path / URL
- Target timeline
- Change class (`patch`, `minor`, `major`)
- Priority axis (user impact, security, reliability, or platform efficiency)
- Explicit non-goals

## Execution Constraints
- **Evidence-first output:** publish UEF before narrative conclusions.
- **Reversibility:** every decision has rollback trigger + steps.
- **Policy alignment:** no bypass of GA/Security/Evidence gates.
- **Boundary discipline:** one primary zone per change unless explicitly coupled.
- **Golden main readiness:** every milestone must be merge-safe and CI-clean.

## Phase 0 — UEF Evidence Protocol (Mandatory)
Provide raw evidence before conclusions:
- File paths + line ranges
- Git history references (commit IDs)
- Coverage artifacts and test evidence
- Issue tracker links
- Feature flags / configuration toggles
- Risk register + mitigation mapping

## Phase 1 — Discovery & Assessment
**Task:** audit the repository for candidate features.

**Search Criteria**
1. Experimental: feature flags, beta/labs/preview tags
2. Orphaned: no commits in >6 months, missing ownership
3. Underdeveloped: missing tests, incomplete flows, absent docs

**Analysis Requirements**
- Locate TODOs, feature flags, and experimental annotations
- Review git history for stale ownership and abandoned branches
- Check test coverage gaps
- Review issue tracker for blocked/postponed requests
- Assess user feedback and telemetry signals

**Deliverable:** prioritized candidates with
- Feature name + file locations
- Completion estimate (%)
- Test coverage status
- Documentation status
- Business value estimate
- Technical debt score
- Effort estimate to GA

## Phase 2 — Selection & Planning
**Selection Criteria (1–10 weighted):**
- User demand / business value
- Technical feasibility
- Strategic alignment
- Risk of breaking changes
- Dependencies / blockers

**Planning Deliverables**
1. Technical Specification
- Scope + requirements
- Architecture + integration points
- API contracts + data models
- Security/compliance considerations
- Performance targets + SLAs
2. Gap Analysis
- Missing functionality
- Test coverage gaps
- Documentation gaps
- Infra/monitoring gaps
3. Development Roadmap
- Milestones + acceptance criteria
- Timeline + resource profile
- Risk mitigation plan
- Rollback strategy

## Phase 3 — GA Implementation Standards
**Code Quality**
- Production-grade refactor
- Typed error handling and edge-case coverage
- Logging + instrumentation
- Performance profiling
- Security review

**Testing (target ≥80% for changed surfaces)**
- Unit tests
- Integration tests
- End-to-end tests
- Regression suite
- Performance/load tests
- Security tests

**Documentation**
- API documentation
- User-facing documentation
- ADRs
- Runbooks
- Migration guide (if needed)

**Infrastructure & Operations**
- CI/CD integration
- Deployment automation
- Monitoring + alerting
- SLO/SLA definitions
- Rollback procedures
- Feature-flag rollout strategy

## Phase 4 — Pre-GA Validation
**Beta Program**
- Define cohort
- Feedback collection loop
- Exit criteria
- Canary rollout model

**GA Readiness Checklist**
- Acceptance criteria met
- Test coverage achieved
- Documentation complete
- Performance benchmarks validated
- Security audit passed
- Support + incident response ready
- Stakeholder sign-off complete

## Phase 5 — Launch & Post-GA
**Launch**
- Production deployment
- Release notes
- User communication
- Real-time KPI monitoring

**Post-Launch (30 days)**
- Daily monitoring
- Weekly retrospectives
- Bug triage + hotfix path
- Optimization backlog

## MAESTRO Threat Model Alignment
For every proposed change, explicitly state:
- **MAESTRO Layers:** [Foundation, Data, Agents, Tools, Infra, Observability, Security]
- **Threats Considered:** [goal manipulation, prompt injection, tool abuse, data exfiltration]
- **Mitigations:** [policy gates, input validation, least-privilege, audit logging]

## Summit Verification Command Pack
Run and report pass/fail for the applicable set:
- `node scripts/check-boundaries.cjs`
- `pnpm lint`
- `pnpm format:check`
- `pnpm typecheck`
- `pnpm test`
- `make smoke`

If constraints prevent full execution, mark each constrained command as
**Intentionally constrained** with reason and next runnable environment.

## Required Artifacts (Per Change)
- `decision-rationale.md` (why now, confidence 0–1, alternatives)
- `rollback-plan.md` (trigger thresholds + exact actions)
- `test-plan.md` (tiers, commands, expected evidence)
- `release-notes.md` (customer-facing and operator-facing)
- `risk-register.md` (risk, likelihood, impact, mitigation, owner)

## Output Format (Strict)
1. **High-Level Summary + 7th+ Order Implications**
2. **Full Architecture** (diagrams + integration map)
3. **Implementation** (all files, no placeholders)
4. **Tests** (unit, integration, e2e, performance, security)
5. **Documentation** (README, dev guide, ops guide, API docs)
6. **CI/CD** (pipelines, quality gates, evidence artifacts)
7. **PR Package** (commit history, PR body, reviewer checklist)
8. **Future Roadmap** (post-GA enhancements)
9. **UEF Evidence Bundle**
10. **Final GA Checklist**

## PR Package Requirements
- **Commit history:** commits listed with intent and scope.
- **PR description:** what, why, how, risk, rollback, accountability window.
- **Reviewer checklist:** tests, security, compliance, docs, rollout safety.
- **Merge readiness summary:** gate status + evidence links + residual risk.
- **Post-merge validation plan:** metrics, thresholds, owners, response timing.

## Forward-Leaning Enhancement
Implement a **GA Readiness Scorecard** in CI that blocks merge unless evidence,
tests, docs, and rollback criteria meet minimum thresholds.

## Example Invocation
```text
Use this prompt to identify and GA-ify any suitable feature in [REPOSITORY_NAME].
Start with Phase 1 discovery and return a prioritized list.
Then select one feature and produce the full GA plan.

Repository: [path or URL]
Timeline: [X weeks]
Change class: [patch|minor|major]
Priority Constraints: [security-critical | user-facing | reliability-first]
Non-goals: [explicit exclusions]
```
12 changes: 9 additions & 3 deletions docs/roadmap/STATUS.json
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
{
"last_updated": "2026-02-08T00:15:00Z",
"revision_note": "Added Summit Architecture Brief reference; Summit Ops & Incident Console runbook guidance; CI/CD high-signal delta action register.",
"last_updated": "2026-03-07T02:02:29Z",
"revision_note": "Hardened GA feature discovery prompt with verification command pack and required artifact contract.",
"initiatives": [
{
"id": "adenhq-hive-subsumption-lane1",
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -205,14 +205,20 @@
"status": "completed",
"owner": "codex",
"notes": "Published Summit Architecture Brief with module boundaries, data flow, and acceptance criteria."
},
{
"id": "ga-feature-discovery-prompt",
"status": "completed",
"owner": "codex",
"notes": "Hardened prompt with explicit inputs, verification command pack, required artifacts, and merge-readiness contract."
}
],
"summary": {
"rc_ready": 8,
"partial": 2,
"incomplete": 0,
"not_started": 5,
"total": 16,
"total": 17,
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

medium

The total count in the summary is currently updated manually. To improve data consistency and reduce the potential for human error, consider implementing a mechanism to automatically calculate this value based on the number of entries in the initiatives array. This would make the roadmap status more robust.

"ga_blockers": []
}
}
Loading