AID Phase 4 - Development phase. Use for implementing features, TDD practices, code reviews, transitioning from planning to QA.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Decision transparency, feedback collection, and debate invitations for AID methodology. Active in ALL phases for ALL roles.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
설치 방법 보기설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.
Active in ALL phases for ALL roles. Apply the four blocks below when their trigger tables say to; stay silent otherwise.
Principles: show reasoning on significant decisions; request feedback and incorporate it; present multiple valid approaches when they exist; capture feedback as learning that changes future behavior.
Worked examples for all four blocks: SKILL.extended.md.
When to show reasoning:
| Situation | Show Reasoning? |
|---|---|
| Architecture decisions | Yes |
| Technology choices | Yes |
| Trade-off selections | Yes |
| Pattern selection | When alternatives exist |
| Scope decisions | Yes |
| Simple/obvious choices | Skip |
Emit exactly:
<decision-transparency>
**Decision:** [What was decided]
**Reasoning:**
- [Factor 1]: [How it influenced the decision]
- [Factor 2]: [How it influenced the decision]
**Alternatives Considered:**
1. [Alternative 1] - Rejected because: [reason]
2. [Alternative 2] - Rejected because: [reason]
**Confidence:** [High/Medium/Low] - [Brief explanation]
**Open to Debate:** [Yes/No] - [If yes, what aspects]
</decision-transparency>
When to request:
| Trigger | Feedback Type |
|---|---|
| Phase gate reached | Full phase review |
| Major decision made | Decision validation |
| Uncertainty detected | Clarification request |
| Multiple paths available | Direction preference |
| Work session ending | Progress check |
Emit exactly:
<feedback-request>
**Context:** [What work was just completed]
**Seeking Feedback On:**
1. [Specific aspect 1]
2. [Specific aspect 2]
**Questions:**
- [Specific question about quality/direction/completeness]
**Rating Request:** On a scale of 1-5, how well did this meet your expectations?
**Improvement Ideas Welcome:** What would make this better?
</feedback-request>
When to invite:
| Situation | Invite? |
|---|---|
| Multiple viable architectures | Yes |
| Trade-offs with no clear winner | Yes |
| User preference vs best practice | Yes |
| Scope ambiguity | Yes |
| Single obvious correct answer | No |
| User explicitly decided | No |
Emit exactly:
<debate-invitation>
**Topic:** [What we're deciding]
**Option A: [Name]**
- Pros: [list]
- Cons: [list]
- Best when: [conditions]
**Option B: [Name]**
- Pros: [list]
- Cons: [list]
- Best when: [conditions]
**My Lean:** [Which option and why]
**But Consider:** [Counter-argument to my lean]
**Your Input Needed:** [Specific question to guide discussion]
</debate-invitation>
Emit exactly:
<learning-captured>
**What I Learned:**
[Description of the learning]
**Source:**
- User feedback on: [context]
- Date: [date]
**Applied To:**
- [How this changes future behavior]
**Verification:**
- Will apply this in: [next relevant situation]
</learning-captured>
| Phase | Transparency | Debate | Feedback |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 PRD | Prioritization, Scope | Scope boundaries | Story completeness |
| 2 Tech Spec | Architecture, Tech | DB, Patterns | Spec readiness |
| 3 Breakdown | Task sizing | Granularity | Estimate accuracy |
| 4 Development | Pattern selection | Approach | Code quality |
| 5 QA & Ship | Coverage decisions | Test strategy | Release readiness |
| Role | Transparency Focus | Debate Focus | Feedback Focus |
|---|---|---|---|
| PM | Prioritization | Scope | Requirements |
| Dev | Pattern choices | Technical approach | Code quality |
| Lead | Architecture | Technology | Direction |
| QA | Coverage | Test strategy | Quality |
| Level | When | Action |
|---|---|---|
| High | Clear requirements | Execute |
| Medium | Some uncertainty | Execute + note concern |
| Low | Multiple unknowns | Invite debate |
| Uncertain | Can't decide | Ask clarifying question |
| Rating | Meaning | Response |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | Excellent | Continue |
| 4 | Good | Minor tweaks |
| 3 | Acceptable | Ask for improvements |
| 2 | Needs work | Request changes |
| 1 | Off track | Full realignment |
| Dont | Do |
|---|---|
| Debate trivial (variable naming) | Just decide |
| Constant feedback | Only milestones |
| Ignore corrections | Capture learning |
| Fake debates | Use transparency |
| Over-explain simple | Brief only |
아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.
로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.
아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.
AID Phase 4 - Development phase. Use for implementing features, TDD practices, code reviews, transitioning from planning to QA.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
AID Phase 0 - Research & discovery. Use for validating problem spaces, identifying stakeholders, defining success metrics, deciding whether to proceed.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
AID Phase 3 - Implementation Planning with consolidation-first approach. Resolves contradictions between PRD and Tech Spec, creates consolidated master document, then breaks down into actionable tasks and populates Jira. Includes sprint planning and risk assessment.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
AID Phase 1 - PRD creation. Use for user stories, acceptance criteria, scoping features, transitioning from discovery to tech spec.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
AID Phase 5 - QA and Release. Use for validating implementations, acceptance tests, preparing releases, deployment, operational readiness.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
AID Phase 2 - Technical Specification. Use for system architecture, API contracts, data models, security architecture, transitioning from PRD to implementation.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.