mirror of
https://github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios.git
synced 2026-10-16 10:17:06 +00:00
DonchitosandClaude Opus 5.5
be8993bbc5
Fix release for 1.1.2: the 14 longest skills keep their later phases after a compaction, a question nobody answered is never taken as an answer, settings read the same from a subfolder, the commit check works for a project in a subfolder of a larger repository, every skill opens with a title, and the shipped allow rules no longer approve deleting a branch or writing files without asking. Details in CHANGELOG.md; upgrade steps in UPGRADING.md (v1.1.2 → v1.1.3). Refs #83 Refs #133 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0185en4t76fPn7315q4c3nko
31 lines
1.7 KiB
Markdown
31 lines
1.7 KiB
Markdown
# /story-done — Phase 5: Lead Programmer Code Review Gate
|
|
|
|
> Part of `/story-done`. `SKILL.md` names when to read this file; the settings it
|
|
> resolved and the rules under its later headings still apply here.
|
|
|
|
## Phase 5: Lead Programmer Code Review Gate
|
|
|
|
**Review mode check** — apply before spawning LP-CODE-REVIEW:
|
|
- `solo` → skip. Note: "LP-CODE-REVIEW skipped — Solo mode." Proceed to Phase 6 (completion report).
|
|
- `lean` → use `AskUserQuestion` before proceeding:
|
|
- Prompt: "Code review is skipped in lean mode. Did you run `/code-review` on the implemented files?"
|
|
- Options:
|
|
- `Yes — /code-review passed or was approved with suggestions`
|
|
- `No — skipping code review for this story`
|
|
- `No — I'll run /code-review before the sprint close-out`
|
|
- Record the answer in the completion notes (Phase 7). All three options proceed to Phase 6.
|
|
- `full` → spawn as normal.
|
|
|
|
Spawn `lead-programmer` via `Agent` using gate **LP-CODE-REVIEW** (`.claude/docs/director-gates/lp-code-review.md`).
|
|
|
|
Pass: implementation file paths, story file path, relevant GDD section, governing ADR.
|
|
|
|
Present the verdict to the user. If CONCERNS, surface them via `AskUserQuestion`:
|
|
- Options: `Revise flagged issues` / `Accept and proceed` / `Discuss further`
|
|
If REJECT, do not proceed to Phase 6 verdict until the issues are resolved.
|
|
If NOT ASSESSED, name the input the gate said was missing and never treat it as APPROVE: supply it and re-run the gate, or carry it to Phase 6, where it keeps the verdict at best NOT ASSESSED.
|
|
|
|
If the story has no implementation files yet (verdict is being run before coding is done), skip this phase and note: "LP-CODE-REVIEW skipped — no implementation files found. Run after implementation is complete."
|
|
|
|
---
|