forked from trent_larson/crowd-funder-for-time-pwa
feat: Add documentation meta-rule system with educational focus
- Create meta_documentation.mdc for comprehensive doc workflows - Add meta_rule_usage_guide.md for practical meta-rule usage - Enhance existing markdown rules with educational standards - Transform docs from technical reference to educational resources Emphasizes human competence over technical description, provides systematic workflows for all documentation tasks.
This commit is contained in:
@@ -86,6 +86,7 @@ Rules for creating and maintaining documentation.
|
||||
- **`markdown_templates.mdc`** - Document templates and examples
|
||||
- **`markdown_workflow.mdc`** - Markdown validation and workflow
|
||||
- **`documentation.mdc`** - Documentation generation principles
|
||||
- **`meta_rule_usage_guide.md`** - How to use meta-rules in practice
|
||||
|
||||
### **`templates/`** - Templates and Examples
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -98,6 +99,7 @@ Template files and examples for various documentation types.
|
||||
High-level meta-rules that bundle related sub-rules for specific workflows.
|
||||
|
||||
- **`meta_core_always_on.mdc`** - Core rules that apply to every single prompt
|
||||
- **`meta_documentation.mdc`** - Documentation writing and education workflow
|
||||
- **`meta_feature_planning.mdc`** - Feature planning workflow bundling
|
||||
- **`meta_bug_diagnosis.mdc`** - Bug investigation workflow bundling
|
||||
- **`meta_bug_fixing.mdc`** - Bug fix implementation workflow bundling
|
||||
@@ -111,6 +113,8 @@ High-level meta-rules that bundle related sub-rules for specific workflows.
|
||||
3. **Context-Specific**: Use rules from appropriate subdirectories based on
|
||||
your task
|
||||
4. **Meta-Rules**: Use workflow-specific meta-rules for specialized tasks
|
||||
- **Documentation**: Use `meta_documentation.mdc` for all documentation work
|
||||
- **Getting Started**: See `docs/meta_rule_usage_guide.md` for comprehensive usage instructions
|
||||
5. **Cross-References**: All files contain updated cross-references to
|
||||
reflect the new structure
|
||||
6. **Validation**: All files pass markdown validation and maintain
|
||||
@@ -125,6 +129,7 @@ High-level meta-rules that bundle related sub-rules for specific workflows.
|
||||
5. **Consistent cross-references** - All file links updated and working
|
||||
6. **Workflow bundling** - Meta-rules provide high-level workflow guidance
|
||||
7. **Feedback integration** - Built-in feedback mechanisms for continuous improvement
|
||||
8. **Educational focus** - Documentation emphasizes human competence over technical description
|
||||
|
||||
## File Naming Convention
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -19,15 +19,12 @@
|
||||
## Purpose
|
||||
|
||||
- **Purpose fit**: Prioritizes human competence and collaboration while
|
||||
|
||||
delivering reproducible artifacts.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Output Contract**: This directive **adds universal constraints** for any
|
||||
|
||||
technical topic while **inheriting** the Base Context contract sections.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Toggles honored**: Uses the same toggle semantics; defaults above can be
|
||||
|
||||
overridden by the caller.
|
||||
|
||||
## Core Directive
|
||||
@@ -41,15 +38,12 @@ evidence-backed steps**.
|
||||
### 1. Time & Date Standards
|
||||
|
||||
- Use **absolute dates** in **UTC** (e.g., `2025-08-21T14:22Z`) — avoid
|
||||
|
||||
"today/yesterday".
|
||||
|
||||
- Include at least **one diagram** (Mermaid preferred). Choose the most
|
||||
|
||||
fitting type:
|
||||
|
||||
- `sequenceDiagram` (protocols/flows), `flowchart`, `stateDiagram`,
|
||||
|
||||
`gantt` (timelines), or `classDiagram` (schemas).
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Evidence Requirements
|
||||
@@ -57,11 +51,9 @@ evidence-backed steps**.
|
||||
- **Reproducible Steps**: Every claim must have copy-paste commands
|
||||
|
||||
- **Verifiable Outputs**: Include expected results, status codes, or
|
||||
|
||||
error messages
|
||||
|
||||
- **Cite evidence** for *Works/Doesn't* items (timestamps, filenames,
|
||||
|
||||
line numbers, IDs/status codes, or logs).
|
||||
|
||||
## Required Sections
|
||||
@@ -70,23 +62,18 @@ Follow this exact order **after** the Base Contract's **Objective → Result
|
||||
→ Use/Run** headers:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Artifacts & Links** - Repos/PRs, design docs, datasets/HARs/pcaps,
|
||||
|
||||
scripts/tools, dashboards.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Environment & Preconditions** - OS/runtime, versions/build IDs,
|
||||
|
||||
services/endpoints/URLs, credentials/auth mode.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Architecture / Process Overview** - Short prose + **one diagram**
|
||||
|
||||
selected from the list above.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Interfaces & Contracts** - Choose one: API-based (endpoint table),
|
||||
|
||||
Data/Files (I/O contract), or Systems/Hardware (interfaces).
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Repro: End-to-End Procedure** - Minimal copy-paste steps with
|
||||
|
||||
code/commands and **expected outputs**.
|
||||
6. **What Works (with Evidence)** - Each item: **Time (UTC)** •
|
||||
**Artifact/Req IDs** • **Status/Result** • **Where to verify**.
|
||||
@@ -102,15 +89,12 @@ Follow this exact order **after** the Base Contract's **Objective → Result
|
||||
### Do
|
||||
|
||||
- **Do** quantify progress only against a defined scope with acceptance
|
||||
|
||||
criteria.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Do** include minimal sample payloads/headers or I/O schemas; redact
|
||||
|
||||
sensitive values.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Do** keep commentary lean; if timeboxed, move depth to **Deferred
|
||||
|
||||
for depth**.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Do** use specific, actionable language that guides implementation.
|
||||
@@ -118,15 +102,12 @@ Follow this exact order **after** the Base Contract's **Objective → Result
|
||||
### Don't
|
||||
|
||||
- **Don't** use marketing language or meta narration ("Perfect!",
|
||||
|
||||
"tool called", "new chat").
|
||||
|
||||
- **Don't** include IDE-specific chatter or internal rules unrelated to
|
||||
|
||||
the task.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Don't** assume reader knowledge; provide context for all technical
|
||||
|
||||
decisions.
|
||||
|
||||
## Model Implementation Checklist
|
||||
@@ -182,17 +163,14 @@ Before publishing, verify:
|
||||
### Competence Hooks
|
||||
|
||||
- **Why this works**: Structured approach ensures completeness and
|
||||
|
||||
reproducibility
|
||||
|
||||
- **Common pitfalls**: Skipping evidence requirements, vague language
|
||||
|
||||
- **Next skill unlock**: Practice creating Mermaid diagrams for different
|
||||
|
||||
use cases
|
||||
|
||||
- **Teach-back**: Explain how you would validate this guide's
|
||||
|
||||
reproducibility
|
||||
|
||||
### Collaboration Hooks
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -10,6 +10,9 @@ This file combines core markdown formatting standards with automation
|
||||
guidelines. AI agents must follow these rules DURING content generation,
|
||||
not apply them after the fact.
|
||||
|
||||
**Primary Focus**: Create educational content that increases human
|
||||
competence, not just technical descriptions.
|
||||
|
||||
## AI Generation Guidelines
|
||||
|
||||
### **MANDATORY**: Follow These Rules While Writing
|
||||
@@ -21,6 +24,8 @@ When generating markdown content, you MUST:
|
||||
code blocks
|
||||
3. **Structure**: Use proper heading hierarchy and document templates
|
||||
4. **Formatting**: Apply consistent formatting patterns immediately
|
||||
5. **Educational Value**: Focus on increasing reader competence and
|
||||
understanding
|
||||
|
||||
### **DO NOT**: Generate content that violates these rules
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -28,6 +33,8 @@ When generating markdown content, you MUST:
|
||||
- ❌ Create content without proper blank line spacing
|
||||
- ❌ Use inconsistent formatting patterns
|
||||
- ❌ Assume post-processing will fix violations
|
||||
- ❌ Focus only on technical details without educational context
|
||||
- ❌ Assume reader has extensive prior knowledge
|
||||
|
||||
### **DO**: Generate compliant content from the start
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -35,6 +42,9 @@ When generating markdown content, you MUST:
|
||||
- ✅ Add blank lines around all structural elements
|
||||
- ✅ Use established templates and patterns
|
||||
- ✅ Apply formatting standards immediately
|
||||
- ✅ Explain concepts before implementation details
|
||||
- ✅ Provide context and motivation for technical choices
|
||||
- ✅ Include examples that illustrate key concepts
|
||||
|
||||
## Core Formatting Standards
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -99,6 +109,24 @@ When generating markdown content, you MUST:
|
||||
- **Indentation**: 2 spaces for nested items
|
||||
- **Blank lines**: Surround lists with blank lines
|
||||
|
||||
## Educational Content Standards
|
||||
|
||||
### **Content Structure for Learning**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Concept First**: Explain what something is before how to use it
|
||||
- **Context Matters**: Explain why and when to use a feature
|
||||
- **Progressive Disclosure**: Start simple, add complexity gradually
|
||||
- **Real Examples**: Use concrete, relatable scenarios
|
||||
- **Common Questions**: Anticipate and answer reader questions
|
||||
|
||||
### **Writing for Understanding**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Conversational Tone**: Write as if explaining to a colleague
|
||||
- **Active Voice**: "You can do this" not "This can be done"
|
||||
- **Question Format**: "What happens when..." to engage thinking
|
||||
- **Analogies**: Use familiar concepts to explain complex ideas
|
||||
- **Limitations**: Clearly state what solutions don't do
|
||||
|
||||
## Code Block Standards
|
||||
|
||||
### Inline Code
|
||||
@@ -146,6 +174,8 @@ When generating markdown content, you MUST:
|
||||
- [ ] **Headings**: Use ATX-style with proper hierarchy (H1 for title only)
|
||||
- [ ] **Lists**: Use consistent markers (- for unordered, 1. for ordered)
|
||||
- [ ] **Code**: Specify language for fenced blocks, use backticks for inline
|
||||
- [ ] **Educational Focus**: Plan content structure for learning progression
|
||||
- [ ] **Audience Consideration**: Identify target reader knowledge level
|
||||
|
||||
### After Generating Markdown Content
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -153,6 +183,8 @@ When generating markdown content, you MUST:
|
||||
- [ ] **Auto-fix**: Use `npm run markdown:fix` if any issues found
|
||||
- [ ] **Review**: Confirm content follows established templates and patterns
|
||||
- [ ] **Cross-reference**: Link to related documentation and templates
|
||||
- [ ] **Educational Review**: Verify content increases reader competence
|
||||
- [ ] **Example Validation**: Ensure examples illustrate key concepts clearly
|
||||
|
||||
### Quality Assurance
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -160,11 +192,14 @@ When generating markdown content, you MUST:
|
||||
- [ ] **Consistency**: Formatting matches existing documentation style
|
||||
- [ ] **Completeness**: All required sections and information included
|
||||
- [ ] **Accuracy**: Technical details are correct and up-to-date
|
||||
- [ ] **Educational Value**: Content increases reader understanding and competence
|
||||
- [ ] **Context Clarity**: Reader understands when and why to use the information
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**See also**:
|
||||
|
||||
- `.cursor/rules/meta_documentation.mdc` for comprehensive documentation workflow
|
||||
- `.cursor/rules/docs/markdown_templates.mdc` for document templates
|
||||
- `.cursor/rules/docs/markdown_workflow.mdc` for validation workflows
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -2,6 +2,9 @@
|
||||
|
||||
> **Agent role**: Reference this file for document templates, structure,
|
||||
> and examples when creating new documentation.
|
||||
>
|
||||
> **Focus**: Create educational content that increases human competence,
|
||||
> not just technical descriptions.
|
||||
|
||||
## Document Templates
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -18,10 +21,16 @@
|
||||
|
||||
Brief description of the document's purpose and scope.
|
||||
|
||||
**Educational Goal**: What will the reader learn and how will it increase
|
||||
their competence?
|
||||
|
||||
## Current State
|
||||
|
||||
Description of current situation or problem.
|
||||
|
||||
**Why This Matters**: Explain the business value and user benefit of
|
||||
addressing this situation.
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Plan
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Foundation
|
||||
@@ -29,12 +38,18 @@ Description of current situation or problem.
|
||||
- [ ] Task 1
|
||||
- [ ] Task 2
|
||||
|
||||
**Learning Context**: What concepts should the reader understand before
|
||||
proceeding with implementation?
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Review and approve plan**
|
||||
2. **Begin implementation**
|
||||
3. **Test and validate**
|
||||
|
||||
**Continued Learning**: Where can the reader go next to deepen their
|
||||
understanding?
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**Status**: Ready for implementation
|
||||
@@ -57,6 +72,9 @@ Description of current situation or problem.
|
||||
|
||||
Brief description of the technical specification.
|
||||
|
||||
**Business Context**: Why is this specification needed and what problem
|
||||
does it solve for users?
|
||||
|
||||
## Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Functional Requirements
|
||||
@@ -75,6 +93,9 @@ Brief description of the technical specification.
|
||||
|
||||
Description of the technical architecture.
|
||||
|
||||
**Design Rationale**: Why was this architecture chosen over alternatives?
|
||||
What are the trade-offs and benefits?
|
||||
|
||||
### Data Models
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
@@ -98,6 +119,79 @@ interface APIResponse<T> {
|
||||
## Testing Strategy
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Unit tests
|
||||
|
||||
**Learning from Testing**: What insights does testing provide about the
|
||||
system's behavior and design?
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Educational Documentation Template
|
||||
|
||||
### **Concept Explanation Template**
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## What is [Concept Name]?
|
||||
|
||||
Brief, clear definition of the concept.
|
||||
|
||||
## Why Does [Concept Name] Matter?
|
||||
|
||||
Explain the business value and user benefit.
|
||||
|
||||
## How Does [Concept Name] Work?
|
||||
|
||||
High-level explanation of the mechanism.
|
||||
|
||||
## When Would You Use [Concept Name]?
|
||||
|
||||
Real-world scenarios and use cases.
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Misconceptions
|
||||
|
||||
Address typical misunderstandings.
|
||||
|
||||
## Examples
|
||||
|
||||
Concrete examples that illustrate the concept.
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
Where to learn more about related concepts.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### **Tutorial Template**
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## Learning Objective
|
||||
|
||||
What the reader will accomplish by the end.
|
||||
|
||||
## Prerequisites
|
||||
|
||||
What the reader should know before starting.
|
||||
|
||||
## Step-by-Step Guide
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Step 1**: What to do and why
|
||||
2. **Step 2**: What to do and why
|
||||
3. **Step 3**: What to do and why
|
||||
|
||||
## Verification
|
||||
|
||||
How to confirm the tutorial was successful.
|
||||
|
||||
## Troubleshooting
|
||||
|
||||
Common issues and how to resolve them.
|
||||
|
||||
## What You've Learned
|
||||
|
||||
Summary of key concepts and skills.
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
Where to apply this knowledge next.
|
||||
```
|
||||
- [ ] Integration tests
|
||||
- [ ] E2E tests
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -209,6 +303,7 @@ Standard implementation plans follow Phase 1 (Foundation), Phase 2
|
||||
|
||||
**See also**:
|
||||
|
||||
- `.cursor/rules/meta_documentation.mdc` for comprehensive documentation workflow
|
||||
- `.cursor/rules/docs/markdown_core.mdc` for core formatting standards
|
||||
- `.cursor/rules/docs/markdown_workflow.mdc` for validation workflows
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
237
.cursor/rules/meta_documentation.mdc
Normal file
237
.cursor/rules/meta_documentation.mdc
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,237 @@
|
||||
# Meta-Rule: Documentation Writing & Education
|
||||
|
||||
**Author**: Matthew Raymer
|
||||
**Date**: 2025-08-21
|
||||
**Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Documentation writing and education workflow
|
||||
|
||||
## Purpose
|
||||
|
||||
This meta-rule bundles documentation-related rules to create comprehensive,
|
||||
educational documentation that increases human competence rather than just
|
||||
providing technical descriptions.
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
**Use this meta-rule when**:
|
||||
- Writing new documentation
|
||||
- Updating existing documentation
|
||||
- Creating technical guides
|
||||
- Writing migration documentation
|
||||
- Creating architectural documentation
|
||||
- Writing user guides or tutorials
|
||||
|
||||
## Bundled Rules
|
||||
|
||||
### **Core Documentation Standards**
|
||||
|
||||
- **`docs/markdown_core.mdc`** - Core markdown formatting and automation
|
||||
- **`docs/markdown_templates.mdc`** - Document templates and structure
|
||||
- **`docs/markdown_workflow.mdc`** - Documentation validation workflows
|
||||
|
||||
### **Documentation Principles**
|
||||
|
||||
- **`core/base_context.mdc`** - Human competence first principles
|
||||
- **`core/less_complex.mdc`** - Minimalist solution guidelines
|
||||
- **`development/software_development.mdc`** - Development documentation standards
|
||||
|
||||
### **Context-Specific Rules**
|
||||
|
||||
- **`app/timesafari.mdc`** - TimeSafari application context
|
||||
- **`app/timesafari_development.mdc`** - Development documentation patterns
|
||||
- **`architecture/architectural_patterns.mdc`** - Architecture documentation
|
||||
|
||||
## Core Documentation Philosophy
|
||||
|
||||
### **Education Over Technical Description**
|
||||
|
||||
**Primary Goal**: Increase human competence and understanding
|
||||
**Secondary Goal**: Provide accurate technical information
|
||||
**Approach**: Explain the "why" before the "how"
|
||||
|
||||
### **Human Competence Principles**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Context First**: Explain the problem before the solution
|
||||
2. **Learning Path**: Structure content for progressive understanding
|
||||
3. **Real Examples**: Use concrete, relatable examples
|
||||
4. **Common Pitfalls**: Warn about typical mistakes and misconceptions
|
||||
5. **Decision Context**: Explain why certain choices were made
|
||||
|
||||
### **Documentation Hierarchy**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Conceptual Understanding** - What is this and why does it matter?
|
||||
2. **Context and Motivation** - When and why would you use this?
|
||||
3. **Technical Implementation** - How do you implement it?
|
||||
4. **Examples and Patterns** - What does it look like in practice?
|
||||
5. **Troubleshooting** - What can go wrong and how to fix it?
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Guidelines
|
||||
|
||||
### **Document Structure**
|
||||
|
||||
**Mandatory Sections**:
|
||||
- **Overview**: Clear purpose and scope with educational context
|
||||
- **Why This Matters**: Business value and user benefit explanation
|
||||
- **Core Concepts**: Fundamental understanding before implementation
|
||||
- **Implementation**: Step-by-step technical guidance
|
||||
- **Examples**: Real-world usage patterns
|
||||
- **Common Issues**: Troubleshooting and prevention
|
||||
- **Next Steps**: Where to go from here
|
||||
|
||||
**Optional Sections**:
|
||||
- **Background**: Historical context and evolution
|
||||
- **Alternatives**: Other approaches and trade-offs
|
||||
- **Advanced Topics**: Deep dive into complex scenarios
|
||||
- **References**: Additional learning resources
|
||||
|
||||
### **Writing Style**
|
||||
|
||||
**Educational Approach**:
|
||||
- **Conversational tone**: Write as if explaining to a colleague
|
||||
- **Progressive disclosure**: Start simple, add complexity gradually
|
||||
- **Active voice**: "You can do this" not "This can be done"
|
||||
- **Question format**: "What happens when..." to engage thinking
|
||||
- **Analogies**: Use familiar concepts to explain complex ideas
|
||||
|
||||
**Technical Accuracy**:
|
||||
- **Precise language**: Use exact technical terms consistently
|
||||
- **Code examples**: Working, tested code snippets
|
||||
- **Version information**: Specify applicable versions and platforms
|
||||
- **Limitations**: Clearly state what the solution doesn't do
|
||||
|
||||
### **Content Quality Standards**
|
||||
|
||||
**Educational Value**:
|
||||
- [ ] **Concept clarity**: Reader understands the fundamental idea
|
||||
- [ ] **Context relevance**: Reader knows when to apply the knowledge
|
||||
- [ ] **Practical application**: Reader can implement the solution
|
||||
- [ ] **Problem prevention**: Reader avoids common mistakes
|
||||
- [ ] **Next steps**: Reader knows where to continue learning
|
||||
|
||||
**Technical Accuracy**:
|
||||
- [ ] **Fact verification**: All technical details are correct
|
||||
- [ ] **Code validation**: Examples compile and run correctly
|
||||
- [ ] **Version compatibility**: Platform and version requirements clear
|
||||
- [ ] **Security consideration**: Security implications addressed
|
||||
- [ ] **Performance notes**: Performance characteristics documented
|
||||
|
||||
## Document Types and Templates
|
||||
|
||||
### **Technical Guides**
|
||||
|
||||
**Focus**: Implementation and technical details
|
||||
**Structure**: Problem → Solution → Implementation → Examples
|
||||
**Education**: Explain the "why" behind technical choices
|
||||
|
||||
### **Migration Documentation**
|
||||
|
||||
**Focus**: Process and workflow guidance
|
||||
**Structure**: Context → Preparation → Steps → Validation → Troubleshooting
|
||||
**Education**: Help users understand migration benefits and risks
|
||||
|
||||
### **Architecture Documentation**
|
||||
|
||||
**Focus**: System design and decision rationale
|
||||
**Structure**: Problem → Constraints → Alternatives → Decision → Implementation
|
||||
**Education**: Explain design trade-offs and decision factors
|
||||
|
||||
### **User Guides**
|
||||
|
||||
**Focus**: Task completion and user empowerment
|
||||
**Structure**: Goal → Prerequisites → Steps → Verification → Next Steps
|
||||
**Education**: Help users understand the system's capabilities
|
||||
|
||||
## Quality Assurance
|
||||
|
||||
### **Review Checklist**
|
||||
|
||||
**Educational Quality**:
|
||||
- [ ] **Clear learning objective**: What will the reader learn?
|
||||
- [ ] **Appropriate complexity**: Matches target audience knowledge
|
||||
- [ ] **Progressive disclosure**: Information builds logically
|
||||
- [ ] **Practical examples**: Real-world scenarios and use cases
|
||||
- [ ] **Common questions**: Anticipates and answers reader questions
|
||||
|
||||
**Technical Quality**:
|
||||
- [ ] **Accuracy**: All technical details verified
|
||||
- [ ] **Completeness**: Covers all necessary information
|
||||
- [ ] **Consistency**: Terminology and formatting consistent
|
||||
- [ ] **Currency**: Information is up-to-date
|
||||
- [ ] **Accessibility**: Clear for target audience
|
||||
|
||||
### **Validation Workflows**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Content Review**: Subject matter expert review
|
||||
2. **Educational Review**: Learning effectiveness assessment
|
||||
3. **Technical Review**: Accuracy and completeness validation
|
||||
4. **User Testing**: Real user comprehension testing
|
||||
5. **Continuous Improvement**: Regular updates based on feedback
|
||||
|
||||
## Success Metrics
|
||||
|
||||
### **Educational Effectiveness**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Comprehension**: Users understand the concepts
|
||||
- **Application**: Users can implement the solutions
|
||||
- **Confidence**: Users feel capable and empowered
|
||||
- **Efficiency**: Users complete tasks faster
|
||||
- **Satisfaction**: Users find documentation helpful
|
||||
|
||||
### **Technical Quality**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Accuracy**: Zero technical errors
|
||||
- **Completeness**: All necessary information included
|
||||
- **Consistency**: Uniform style and format
|
||||
- **Maintainability**: Easy to update and extend
|
||||
- **Accessibility**: Clear for target audience
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Pitfalls
|
||||
|
||||
### **Educational Mistakes**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Assumption overload**: Assuming too much prior knowledge
|
||||
- **Information dump**: Overwhelming with details
|
||||
- **Context missing**: Not explaining why something matters
|
||||
- **Example poverty**: Insufficient practical examples
|
||||
- **Feedback missing**: No way to verify understanding
|
||||
|
||||
### **Technical Mistakes**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Outdated information**: Not keeping content current
|
||||
- **Incomplete coverage**: Missing important details
|
||||
- **Inconsistent terminology**: Using different terms for same concepts
|
||||
- **Poor examples**: Non-working or confusing code
|
||||
- **Missing validation**: No way to verify correctness
|
||||
|
||||
## Feedback and Improvement
|
||||
|
||||
### **Continuous Learning**
|
||||
|
||||
- **User feedback**: Collect and analyze user comments
|
||||
- **Usage metrics**: Track document usage and effectiveness
|
||||
- **Review cycles**: Regular content review and updates
|
||||
- **Community input**: Engage users in documentation improvement
|
||||
- **Best practices**: Stay current with documentation standards
|
||||
|
||||
### **Quality Metrics**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Readability scores**: Measure content clarity
|
||||
- **User satisfaction**: Survey-based quality assessment
|
||||
- **Task completion**: Success rate of documented procedures
|
||||
- **Support reduction**: Decrease in help requests
|
||||
- **Knowledge retention**: Long-term user understanding
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**See also**:
|
||||
|
||||
- `.cursor/rules/docs/markdown_core.mdc` for core formatting standards
|
||||
- `.cursor/rules/docs/markdown_templates.mdc` for document templates
|
||||
- `.cursor/rules/docs/markdown_workflow.mdc` for validation workflows
|
||||
- `.cursor/rules/docs/meta_rule_usage_guide.md` for how to use meta-rules
|
||||
- `.cursor/rules/core/base_context.mdc` for human competence principles
|
||||
|
||||
**Status**: Active documentation meta-rule
|
||||
**Priority**: High
|
||||
**Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference
|
||||
**Dependencies**: All bundled sub-rules
|
||||
**Stakeholders**: Documentation team, Development team, Users
|
||||
272
doc/meta_rule_usage_guide.md
Normal file
272
doc/meta_rule_usage_guide.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,272 @@
|
||||
# Meta-Rule Usage Guide: How to Use Meta-Rules in Practice
|
||||
|
||||
**Author**: Matthew Raymer
|
||||
**Date**: 2025-08-21
|
||||
**Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Comprehensive meta-rule usage guide
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
This guide explains how to use the TimeSafari meta-rule system in practice.
|
||||
Meta-rules are high-level rule bundles that provide workflow-specific guidance
|
||||
for different types of tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
**Educational Goal**: Help developers understand when and how to apply
|
||||
meta-rules to maximize their effectiveness and avoid common mistakes.
|
||||
|
||||
## Why Meta-Rules Matter
|
||||
|
||||
**Meta-rules solve the problem of rule overload** by bundling related rules
|
||||
into logical workflows. Instead of manually selecting 10+ individual rules,
|
||||
you apply 1-3 meta-rules that automatically include everything you need.
|
||||
|
||||
### **Benefits of Using Meta-Rules**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Faster Setup**: No need to manually select individual rules
|
||||
- **Better Coverage**: Ensures you don't miss important rules
|
||||
- **Workflow Consistency**: Standardized approaches across the team
|
||||
- **Learning Efficiency**: Learn workflows, not individual rules
|
||||
- **Quality Assurance**: Built-in validation and feedback mechanisms
|
||||
|
||||
## Meta-Rule Selection Strategy
|
||||
|
||||
### **Step 1: Always Start with Core Always-On**
|
||||
|
||||
**Every single interaction** starts with:
|
||||
```
|
||||
meta_core_always_on.mdc
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This provides the foundation: human competence principles, time standards,
|
||||
version control, and application context.
|
||||
|
||||
### **Step 2: Identify Your Primary Task Type**
|
||||
|
||||
Choose the meta-rule that matches your main objective:
|
||||
|
||||
| **Task Type** | **Primary Meta-Rule** | **When to Use** |
|
||||
|---------------|------------------------|------------------|
|
||||
| **Research/Investigation** | `meta_research.mdc` | Bug diagnosis, feasibility research, code analysis |
|
||||
| **Feature Planning** | `meta_feature_planning.mdc` | New feature design, requirements analysis |
|
||||
| **Feature Implementation** | `meta_feature_implementation.mdc` | Building features, coding, testing |
|
||||
| **Bug Diagnosis** | `meta_bug_diagnosis.mdc` | Investigating issues, root cause analysis |
|
||||
| **Bug Fixing** | `meta_bug_fixing.mdc` | Implementing fixes, validation |
|
||||
| **Documentation** | `meta_documentation.mdc` | Writing docs, creating guides, tutorials |
|
||||
|
||||
### **Step 3: Add Context-Specific Meta-Rules (Optional)**
|
||||
|
||||
For complex tasks, you might combine multiple meta-rules:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
meta_core_always_on + meta_research + meta_bug_diagnosis
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Practical Usage Examples
|
||||
|
||||
### **Example 1: Bug Investigation**
|
||||
|
||||
**Scenario**: User reports that the contact list isn't loading properly
|
||||
|
||||
**Meta-Rule Selection**:
|
||||
```
|
||||
meta_core_always_on + meta_research + meta_bug_diagnosis
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**What This Gives You**:
|
||||
- **Core Always-On**: Human competence focus, time standards, context
|
||||
- **Research**: Systematic investigation methodology, evidence collection
|
||||
- **Bug Diagnosis**: Defect analysis framework, root cause identification
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflow**:
|
||||
1. Apply core always-on for foundation
|
||||
2. Use research meta-rule for systematic investigation
|
||||
3. Apply bug diagnosis for defect analysis
|
||||
4. Follow the bundled workflow automatically
|
||||
|
||||
### **Example 2: Feature Development**
|
||||
|
||||
**Scenario**: Building a new contact search feature
|
||||
|
||||
**Meta-Rule Selection**:
|
||||
```
|
||||
meta_core_always_on + meta_feature_planning + meta_feature_implementation
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**What This Gives You**:
|
||||
- **Core Always-On**: Foundation principles and context
|
||||
- **Feature Planning**: Requirements analysis, architecture planning
|
||||
- **Feature Implementation**: Development workflow, testing strategy
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflow**:
|
||||
1. Start with core always-on
|
||||
2. Use feature planning for design and requirements
|
||||
3. Switch to feature implementation for coding and testing
|
||||
|
||||
### **Example 3: Documentation Creation**
|
||||
|
||||
**Scenario**: Writing a migration guide for the new database system
|
||||
|
||||
**Meta-Rule Selection**:
|
||||
```
|
||||
meta_core_always_on + meta_documentation
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**What This Gives You**:
|
||||
- **Core Always-On**: Foundation and context
|
||||
- **Documentation**: Educational focus, templates, quality standards
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflow**:
|
||||
1. Apply core always-on for foundation
|
||||
2. Use documentation meta-rule for educational content creation
|
||||
3. Follow educational templates and quality standards
|
||||
|
||||
## Meta-Rule Application Process
|
||||
|
||||
### **1. Load the Meta-Rule**
|
||||
|
||||
When you start a task, explicitly state which meta-rules you're applying:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
"I'm applying meta_core_always_on + meta_research for this bug investigation."
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### **2. Follow the Bundled Workflow**
|
||||
|
||||
Each meta-rule provides a complete workflow. Follow it step-by-step:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Research Meta-Rule**: Investigation → Evidence → Analysis → Conclusion
|
||||
- **Feature Planning**: Requirements → Architecture → Strategy → Validation
|
||||
- **Bug Diagnosis**: Problem → Evidence → Root Cause → Solution
|
||||
|
||||
### **3. Use the Bundled Rules**
|
||||
|
||||
Meta-rules automatically include all necessary sub-rules. You don't need to
|
||||
manually select individual rules - they're already bundled.
|
||||
|
||||
### **4. Validate Against Success Criteria**
|
||||
|
||||
Each meta-rule includes success criteria. Use these to validate your work:
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] **Educational Quality**: Content increases human competence
|
||||
- [ ] **Technical Quality**: All technical details are accurate
|
||||
- [ ] **Workflow Completion**: All required steps completed
|
||||
- [ ] **Quality Standards**: Meets defined quality criteria
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Meta-Rule Combinations
|
||||
|
||||
### **Research + Diagnosis**
|
||||
```
|
||||
meta_core_always_on + meta_research + meta_bug_diagnosis
|
||||
```
|
||||
**Use for**: Complex bug investigations requiring systematic analysis
|
||||
|
||||
### **Planning + Implementation**
|
||||
```
|
||||
meta_core_always_on + meta_feature_planning + meta_feature_implementation
|
||||
```
|
||||
**Use for**: End-to-end feature development from concept to deployment
|
||||
|
||||
### **Research + Planning**
|
||||
```
|
||||
meta_core_always_on + meta_research + meta_feature_planning
|
||||
```
|
||||
**Use for**: Feasibility research and solution design
|
||||
|
||||
### **Documentation + Context**
|
||||
```
|
||||
meta_core_always_on + meta_documentation + [context-specific]
|
||||
```
|
||||
**Use for**: Creating comprehensive, educational documentation
|
||||
|
||||
## Best Practices
|
||||
|
||||
### **✅ Do These Things**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Always start with core always-on** - it's the foundation
|
||||
- **Choose the primary meta-rule** that matches your main task
|
||||
- **Follow the bundled workflow** step-by-step
|
||||
- **Use success criteria** to validate your work
|
||||
- **Collect feedback** on meta-rule effectiveness
|
||||
|
||||
### **❌ Avoid These Mistakes**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Don't skip core always-on** - you'll lose the foundation
|
||||
- **Don't apply too many meta-rules** - stick to 2-3 maximum
|
||||
- **Don't ignore the bundled workflow** - follow it systematically
|
||||
- **Don't forget validation** - use the success criteria
|
||||
- **Don't skip feedback collection** - it improves the system
|
||||
|
||||
## Troubleshooting Common Issues
|
||||
|
||||
### **Problem**: Meta-rules seem to conflict
|
||||
|
||||
**Solution**: Meta-rules are designed to work together. If you see conflicts,
|
||||
you're probably applying too many. Stick to 2-3 meta-rules maximum.
|
||||
|
||||
### **Problem**: I don't know which meta-rule to use
|
||||
|
||||
**Solution**: Start with your primary task type. If you're investigating a bug,
|
||||
use research + bug diagnosis. If you're building a feature, use feature
|
||||
planning + implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
### **Problem**: The meta-rule workflow seems too complex
|
||||
|
||||
**Solution**: Meta-rules bundle complexity into manageable workflows. Follow
|
||||
the steps one at a time. The complexity is already organized for you.
|
||||
|
||||
### **Problem**: I'm not seeing the expected behavior
|
||||
|
||||
**Solution**: Ensure you're following the meta-rule workflow step-by-step.
|
||||
Meta-rules provide guidance, but you still need to execute the workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
## Feedback and Improvement
|
||||
|
||||
### **Rate Your Experience**
|
||||
|
||||
After using a meta-rule, provide feedback:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Effectiveness**: How well did the meta-rule work? (1-5 scale)
|
||||
- **Time Saved**: How much time did it save you?
|
||||
- **Quality Improvement**: Did it improve your work quality?
|
||||
- **Recommendation**: Would you recommend it to others?
|
||||
|
||||
### **Continuous Improvement**
|
||||
|
||||
Meta-rules evolve based on feedback:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Usage patterns** - How teams use the rules
|
||||
- **Effectiveness ratings** - What works and what doesn't
|
||||
- **Integration feedback** - How well rules work together
|
||||
- **Quality metrics** - Impact on work quality
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Reference
|
||||
|
||||
### **Meta-Rule Selection Matrix**
|
||||
|
||||
| **Task** | **Primary** | **Secondary** | **Tertiary** |
|
||||
|----------|-------------|---------------|---------------|
|
||||
| **Bug Investigation** | `meta_research` | `meta_bug_diagnosis` | - |
|
||||
| **Feature Development** | `meta_feature_planning` | `meta_feature_implementation` | - |
|
||||
| **Documentation** | `meta_documentation` | - | - |
|
||||
| **Complex Research** | `meta_research` | `meta_bug_diagnosis` | `meta_feature_planning` |
|
||||
|
||||
### **Always Remember**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Start with core always-on** - foundation for everything
|
||||
2. **Choose your primary meta-rule** - matches your main task
|
||||
3. **Follow the bundled workflow** - step-by-step execution
|
||||
4. **Validate against success criteria** - ensure quality
|
||||
5. **Provide feedback** - help improve the system
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**See also**:
|
||||
|
||||
- `.cursor/rules/meta_rule_architecture.md` for meta-rule structure overview
|
||||
- `.cursor/rules/meta_core_always_on.mdc` for foundation rules
|
||||
- `.cursor/rules/README.md` for complete rule organization
|
||||
|
||||
**Status**: Active usage guide
|
||||
**Priority**: High
|
||||
**Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference
|
||||
**Dependencies**: All meta-rules
|
||||
**Stakeholders**: Development team, Documentation team
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user