Review dimensions for validating agent quality - template compliance, safety, testing, and priority validation
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Teaches agents how to run a timeboxed spike - throwaway code that validates one assumption before DESIGN
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
See how to installReview the instructions the agent will receive before you install.
Throwaway code that validates exactly one assumption. Max 1 hour. Binary outcome: works or doesn't work. Code is deleted after validation; only findings persist.
| Not This | Why |
|---|---|
| Prototype | Prototypes evolve into production code. Spikes are deleted. |
| MVP | MVPs ship to users. Spikes never leave the developer's machine. |
| Walking Skeleton | Skeletons wire end-to-end architecture. Spikes test one mechanism. |
| POC | POCs demonstrate feasibility to stakeholders. Spikes answer a developer question. |
Every spike answers exactly these:
/tmp/spike_{feature_id}/ or a scratch directory. Never in src/.time.perf_counter() for timing, not time.time().#!/usr/bin/env python3
"""SPIKE: {feature} -- {one-line question being validated}
Throwaway code. Not production. Will be deleted after validation.
"""
import time
# 1. Setup (minimal, no frameworks)
# ...
# 2. Core mechanism attempt
start = time.perf_counter()
# ... the thing you're testing ...
elapsed = time.perf_counter() - start
# 3. Print findings
print(f"Mechanism: {'WORKS' if success else 'FAILS'}")
print(f"Timing: {elapsed*1000:.1f}ms (budget: {budget}ms)")
print(f"Edge cases: {edge_cases}")
Output goes to docs/feature/{feature-id}/spike/findings.md:
# Spike Findings -- {feature-id}
## Verdict: WORKS / DOESN'T WORK
## Question tested
{the one assumption being validated}
## Core mechanism
- Tested: {what was tested}
- Result: {what happened}
## Timing
- {operation}: {time}ms
- Total: {time}ms (budget: {budget}ms) -- PASS / FAIL
## Edge cases discovered
1. {edge case}: {what happened}
2. {edge case}: {what happened}
## Design implications
- {assumption that was wrong}: {correct reality}
- {approach the spike validated or invalidated}
## Spike code
Deleted. Was at /tmp/spike_{feature_id}/
If the spike reveals the problem is fundamentally different from what was assumed:
No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.
No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.
No comments yet. Be the first to write one.
Review dimensions for validating agent quality - template compliance, safety, testing, and priority validation
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Review dimensions for validating agent quality - template compliance, safety, testing, and priority validation
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Review dimensions for acceptance test quality - happy path bias, GWT compliance, business language purity, coverage completeness, walking skeleton user-centricity, priority validation, observable behavior assertions, traceability coverage, and walking skeleton boundary proof
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Detailed 5-phase workflow for creating agents - from requirements analysis through validation and iterative refinement
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
5-layer testing approach for agent validation including adversarial testing, security validation, and prompt injection resistance
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Architectural style selection decision matrices, trade-off analysis, structural enforcement rules, and combination patterns. Load when choosing or evaluating architecture styles.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.