Derive an execution roadmap from a project's vision/spec docs by first principles, then diff that fresh derivation against the existing roadmap to prove the task ORDER is correct. Use this whenever the user wants to review, validate, re-derive, or sanity-check an execution roadmap or delivery plan; asks whether the tasks/epics are "in the right order"; suspects a task is scheduled before its prerequisite (a producer-after-consumer / dependency-inversion error like "OpenAPI after the web client that consumes it", OR a cross-cutting inherited default like observability/auth/tenancy scheduled after the feature work that inherits it — a seam-after-consumer error); wants to find missing tasks, circular dependencies, or over-fragmented epics; or wants to compact a plan to raise velocity. Also trigger on "review the roadmap", "re-derive the plan from the spec", "is this the right build order", "check the dependency graph of our epics", "which task should come first". It reads the vision + spec corpus, decomposes actors → use-cases → modules → epics → typed tasks, identifies cross-cutting inherited-default seams, builds a real dependency graph with hard + soft (seam) edges (deterministic helper), breaks cycles, topologically orders, compacts, and emits a derived roadmap PLUS a delta report against the current one — it never blindly overwrites a hand-crafted roadmap.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。