Skip to content

Unify task workflows and rename productionalize command#3

Merged
jsegov merged 1 commit intomainfrom
misc-improvements
Jan 11, 2026
Merged

Unify task workflows and rename productionalize command#3
jsegov merged 1 commit intomainfrom
misc-improvements

Conversation

@jsegov
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

@jsegov jsegov commented Jan 11, 2026

Summary

  • Rename /productionalize to /production-readiness-review for clearer naming
  • Unify task output format: production-reporter now generates TASKS.md instead of fix-prompts.md
  • Enhance /implement-next-task to support both feature planning (TASK-XXX) and production readiness (FINDING-XXX) workflows
  • Add MIT license
  • Rename plugin to "ShipSpec Claude Code Plugin" in README

Test plan

  • Run /production-readiness-review and verify it generates TASKS.md with FINDING-XXX format
  • Run /implement-next-task on a production readiness context and verify workflow detection
  • Run /implement-next-task on a feature planning context and verify it still works
  • Verify argument validation shows helpful error when no argument provided

🤖 Generated with Claude Code


Note

Production readiness workflow changes

  • Renames command to /production-readiness-review and updates output to generate production-report.md plus unified TASKS.md (replaces fix-prompts.md)
  • Updates production-reporter to document findings in production-report.md and emit structured remediation tasks in TASKS.md

Task execution improvements

  • Enhances /implement-next-task to detect workflow type (feature vs production), handle FINDING-XXX and TASK-XXX, add argument validation, dependency handling, and edge-case checks

Docs and housekeeping

  • Renames plugin to "ShipSpec Claude Code Plugin" in README.md
  • Adds LICENSE (MIT)

Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit 382633d. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.

- Rename /productionalize to /production-readiness-review for clarity
- Change production-reporter output from fix-prompts.md to TASKS.md format
- Update implement-next-task to support both TASK-XXX and FINDING-XXX IDs
- Add argument validation and workflow detection to implement-next-task
- Add MIT license
- Rename plugin to "ShipSpec Claude Code Plugin" in README

This enables using /implement-next-task for both feature development
and production remediation workflows with a consistent task format.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@claude
Copy link
Copy Markdown

claude bot commented Jan 11, 2026

Code review

No issues found. Checked for bugs and CLAUDE.md compliance.

@jsegov jsegov merged commit 36961a2 into main Jan 11, 2026
2 checks passed
@jsegov jsegov deleted the misc-improvements branch January 11, 2026 20:29

- If `PRD.md` and `SDD.md` exist → **Feature Planning** workflow (uses TASK-XXX IDs)
- If `production-report.md` exists → **Production Readiness** workflow (uses FINDING-XXX IDs)
- If neither → Error: "Directory exists but contains no recognized planning artifacts. Expected either PRD.md/SDD.md (feature planning) or production-report.md (production readiness)."
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Workflow detection lacks inline priority for overlapping artifacts

Medium Severity

The workflow detection rules at lines 49-51 are written as independent conditions without handling the overlap case where both feature planning artifacts (PRD.md/SDD.md) and production readiness artifacts (production-report.md) exist in the same directory. The bash script on lines 45-46 outputs both FEATURE_PLANNING and PRODUCTION_READINESS when all files exist. The priority rule at lines 231-232 clarifies that production readiness should take precedence, but this edge case handling is separated from the main detection logic, which could cause an agent to select the wrong workflow type, resulting in incorrect task ID format (TASK-XXX vs FINDING-XXX).

Additional Locations (1)

Fix in Cursor Fix in Web

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant