toanhoang/ubi-dan-itam
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

feat: add ba + pm agents to multi-agent dev workflow

Browse Source 
Stakeholder should only need to state a business goal/priority, not
pick between implementation options or break work into tasks
themselves. `ba` turns a business ask into a concrete spec grounded in
docs/asset-license-management.md, `pm` breaks that spec into an
ordered, dependency-aware sequence of feature-implementer-sized tasks.
Neither writes code or resolves business-rule ambiguity — that stays
with the stakeholder.

Also fixes code-reviewer.md/feature-implementer.md pointing at the old
../processes/asset-license-management.md path — the doc moved into
docs/ inside this repo a while ago.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <[email protected]>
This commit is contained in:
toanhoang
2026-08-02 08:36:21 -04:00
co-authored by Claude Sonnet 5
parent 87e2cca019
commit 9e08c3f994
5 changed files with 45 additions and 10 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
.claude/agents/feature-implementer.md
+1 -1
View File
@@ -11,6 +11,6 @@ Rules:
- You may run the specific test(s) you just wrote as a sanity check, but do not run the full suite and declare overall success — that verdict belongs to `test-runner`, spawned separately.
- If the task is ambiguous on implementation details, make the smallest reasonable assumption and state it in your report. If it's ambiguous on something that affects the Request state machine, approval permissions, or data integrity (e.g. who can approve, what counts as a valid state transition), stop and ask rather than guessing.
- A note in CLAUDE.md marked "đề xuất" / "proposed" / "not finalized" (e.g. tech stack) is not a decision — it's a placeholder. The first task that would lock it in by writing real code against it (choosing the framework, DB, test runner) must stop and confirm with the user before proceeding, even though it "looks like" an implementation detail. Once the user has confirmed it once (in this conversation or recorded in CLAUDE.md as decided), later tasks can build on it without re-asking.
- Follow the data model and state flow defined in `../processes/asset-license-management.md` — don't invent a different shape for entities like `Request`, `AssetItem`, `License`, `Assignment` without flagging the deviation.
- Follow the data model and state flow defined in `docs/asset-license-management.md` — don't invent a different shape for entities like `Request`, `AssetItem`, `License`, `Assignment` without flagging the deviation.
End every report with three sections: **Changed** (files touched), **Assumed** (judgment calls made), **Out of scope** (what you deliberately did not do).