Browse Source
			
			
			
			
				
		- Remove legacy rule files (documentation.mdc, general_development.mdc, etc.) - Implement new meta-rule system with core, app, and feature categories - Add meta-rule files for different workflows (bug diagnosis, feature planning, etc.) - Create organized directory structure: core/, app/, features/, database/, etc. - Add comprehensive README.md for rules documentation - Establish new rule architecture with always-on and workflow-specific rules This restructuring improves rule organization, enables better workflow management, and provides clearer separation of concerns for different development tasks.pull/1/head
				 61 changed files with 10221 additions and 307 deletions
			
			
		| @ -0,0 +1,306 @@ | |||||
|  | # .cursor Rules Organization | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | This directory contains all the rules and guidelines for AI assistants working | ||||
|  | with the TimeSafari project. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Directory Structure | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **`core/`** - Core Principles and Context | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Core rules that apply to all AI interactions and provide fundamental context. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`base_context.mdc`** - Human competence first principles and interaction guidelines | ||||
|  | - **`harbor_pilot_universal.mdc`** - Technical guide creation and investigation rules | ||||
|  | - **`less_complex.mdc`** - Minimalist solution principle and complexity guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **`development/`** - Development Practices and Standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Rules for software development, coding standards, and development workflows. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`software_development.mdc`** - Core development principles and evidence requirements | ||||
|  | - **`type_safety_guide.mdc`** - TypeScript type safety guidelines and best practices | ||||
|  | - **`development_guide.mdc`** - Development environment setup and standards | ||||
|  | - **`logging_standards.mdc`** - Logging implementation standards and rules | ||||
|  | - **`logging_migration.mdc`** - Migration from console.* to structured logging | ||||
|  | - **`time.mdc`** - Time handling principles and UTC standards | ||||
|  | - **`time_examples.mdc`** - Practical time implementation examples | ||||
|  | - **`time_implementation.mdc`** - Detailed time implementation guidelines | ||||
|  | - **`realistic_time_estimation.mdc`** - Time estimation framework and principles | ||||
|  | - **`planning_examples.mdc`** - Planning examples and best practices | ||||
|  | - **`complexity_assessment.mdc`** - Complexity evaluation and assessment | ||||
|  | - **`dependency_management.mdc`** - Dependency management and version control | ||||
|  | - **`asset_configuration.mdc`** - Asset configuration and build integration | ||||
|  | - **`research_diagnostic.mdc`** - Research and investigation workflows | ||||
|  | - **`investigation_report_example.mdc`** - Investigation report templates and examples | ||||
|  | - **`historical_comment_management.mdc`** - Historical comment transformation rules | ||||
|  | - **`historical_comment_patterns.mdc`** - Comment transformation patterns and examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **`architecture/`** - Architecture and Design Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Rules for architectural decisions, patterns, and system design. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`build_architecture_guard.mdc`** - Build system protection and change levels | ||||
|  | - **`build_validation.mdc`** - Build validation procedures and testing | ||||
|  | - **`build_testing.mdc`** - Build testing requirements and feedback collection | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **`app/`** - Application-Specific Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Rules specific to the TimeSafari application and its architecture. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`timesafari.mdc`** - Core application context and principles | ||||
|  | - **`timesafari_platforms.mdc`** - Platform-specific implementation guidelines | ||||
|  | - **`timesafari_development.mdc`** - TimeSafari development workflow | ||||
|  | - **`architectural_decision_record.mdc`** - ADR creation and management | ||||
|  | - **`architectural_implementation.mdc`** - Architecture implementation guidelines | ||||
|  | - **`architectural_patterns.mdc`** - Architectural patterns and examples | ||||
|  | - **`architectural_examples.mdc`** - Architecture examples and testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **`database/`** - Database and Data Management | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Rules for database operations, migrations, and data handling. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`absurd-sql.mdc`** - Absurd SQL implementation and worker thread setup | ||||
|  | - **`legacy_dexie.mdc`** - Legacy Dexie migration guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **`workflow/`** - Process and Workflow Management | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Rules for development workflows, version control, and process management. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`version_control.mdc`** - Version control principles and commit guidelines | ||||
|  | - **`version_sync.mdc`** - Version synchronization and changelog management | ||||
|  | - **`commit_messages.mdc`** - Commit message format and conventions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **`features/** - Feature-Specific Implementations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Rules for implementing specific features across platforms. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`camera-implementation.mdc`** - Camera feature implementation overview | ||||
|  | - **`camera_technical.mdc`** - Technical camera implementation details | ||||
|  | - **`camera_platforms.mdc`** - Platform-specific camera implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **`docs/`** - Documentation Standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Rules for creating and maintaining documentation. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`markdown_core.mdc`** - Core markdown formatting standards | ||||
|  | - **`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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Template files and examples for various documentation types. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`adr_template.mdc`** - Architectural Decision Record template | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Meta-Rules** - Workflow Bundling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 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 | ||||
|  | - **`meta_feature_implementation.mdc`** - Feature implementation workflow bundling | ||||
|  | - **`meta_research.mdc`** - Investigation and research workflow bundling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Workflow State Management** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | The project uses a sophisticated workflow state management system to ensure systematic development processes and maintain code quality across all phases of development. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### **Workflow State System** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | The workflow state is managed through `.cursor/rules/.workflow_state.json` and enforces different modes with specific constraints. The system automatically tracks workflow progression and maintains a complete history of mode transitions. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Available Modes**: | ||||
|  | - **`diagnosis`** - Investigation and analysis phase (read-only) | ||||
|  | - **`fixing`** - Implementation and bug fixing phase (full access) | ||||
|  | - **`planning`** - Design and architecture phase (design only) | ||||
|  | - **`research`** - Investigation and research phase (investigation only) | ||||
|  | - **`documentation`** - Documentation writing phase (writing only) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Mode Constraints**: | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "diagnosis": { | ||||
|  |     "mode": "read_only", | ||||
|  |     "forbidden": ["modify", "create", "build", "commit"], | ||||
|  |     "allowed": ["read", "search", "analyze", "document"] | ||||
|  |   }, | ||||
|  |   "fixing": { | ||||
|  |     "mode": "implementation", | ||||
|  |     "forbidden": [], | ||||
|  |     "allowed": ["modify", "create", "build", "commit", "test"] | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Workflow History Tracking**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | The system automatically maintains a `workflowHistory` array that records all mode transitions and meta-rule invocations: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "workflowHistory": [ | ||||
|  |     { | ||||
|  |       "mode": "research", | ||||
|  |       "invoked": "meta_core_always_on.mdc", | ||||
|  |       "timestamp": "2025-08-25T02:14:37Z" | ||||
|  |     }, | ||||
|  |     { | ||||
|  |       "mode": "diagnosis", | ||||
|  |       "invoked": "meta_bug_diagnosis.mdc",  | ||||
|  |       "timestamp": "2025-08-25T02:14:37Z" | ||||
|  |     } | ||||
|  |   ] | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **History Entry Format**: | ||||
|  | - **`mode`**: The workflow mode that was activated | ||||
|  | - **`invoked`**: The specific meta-rule that triggered the mode change | ||||
|  | - **`timestamp`**: UTC timestamp when the mode transition occurred | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **History Purpose**: | ||||
|  | - **Workflow Continuity**: Track progression through development phases | ||||
|  | - **Meta-Rule Usage**: Monitor which rules are invoked and when | ||||
|  | - **Temporal Context**: Maintain chronological order of workflow changes | ||||
|  | - **State Persistence**: Preserve workflow history across development sessions | ||||
|  | - **Debugging Support**: Help diagnose workflow state issues | ||||
|  | - **Process Analysis**: Understand development patterns and meta-rule effectiveness | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### **Commit Override System** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | The workflow includes a flexible commit override mechanism that allows commits on demand while maintaining workflow integrity: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "overrides": { | ||||
|  |     "commit": { | ||||
|  |       "allowed": true, | ||||
|  |       "requires_override": true, | ||||
|  |       "override_reason": "user_requested" | ||||
|  |     } | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Override Benefits**: | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Investigation Commits**: Document findings during diagnosis phases | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Work-in-Progress**: Commit partial solutions during complex investigations | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Emergency Fixes**: Commit critical fixes without mode transitions | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Flexible Workflow**: Maintain systematic approach while accommodating real needs | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Override Limitations**: | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Does NOT bypass**: Version control rules, commit message standards, or security requirements | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Does NOT bypass**: Code quality standards, testing requirements, or documentation requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### **Workflow Enforcement** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | The system automatically enforces workflow constraints through the core always-on rules: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Before Every Interaction**: | ||||
|  | 1. **Read current workflow state** from `.cursor/rules/.workflow_state.json` | ||||
|  | 2. **Identify current mode** and its constraints | ||||
|  | 3. **Validate user request** against current mode constraints | ||||
|  | 4. **Enforce constraints** before generating response | ||||
|  | 5. **Guide model behavior** based on current mode | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Mode-Specific Enforcement**: | ||||
|  | - **Diagnosis Mode**: Blocks modification, creation, building, and commits | ||||
|  | - **Fixing Mode**: Allows full implementation and testing capabilities | ||||
|  | - **Planning Mode**: Focuses on design and architecture, blocks implementation | ||||
|  | - **Research Mode**: Enables investigation and analysis, blocks modification | ||||
|  | - **Documentation Mode**: Allows writing and editing, blocks implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### **Workflow Transitions** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | To change workflow modes, invoke the appropriate meta-rule: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | # Switch to bug fixing mode | ||||
|  | @meta_bug_fixing.mdc | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Switch to feature planning mode   | ||||
|  | @meta_feature_planning.mdc | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Switch to documentation mode | ||||
|  | @meta_documentation.mdc | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Transition Requirements**: | ||||
|  | - **Mode Changes**: Require explicit meta-rule invocation | ||||
|  | - **State Updates**: Automatically update workflow state file | ||||
|  | - **Constraint Enforcement**: Immediately apply new mode constraints | ||||
|  | - **History Tracking**: Automatically maintained in `workflowHistory` array | ||||
|  | - **Timestamp Recording**: Each transition recorded with UTC timestamp | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### **Integration with Development Process** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | The workflow system integrates seamlessly with existing development practices: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Version Control**: | ||||
|  | - All commits must follow TimeSafari commit message standards | ||||
|  | - Security audit checklists are enforced regardless of workflow mode | ||||
|  | - Documentation updates are required for substantial changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Quality Assurance**: | ||||
|  | - Code quality standards (PEP8, TypeScript, etc.) are always enforced | ||||
|  | - Testing requirements apply to all implementation work | ||||
|  | - Documentation standards are maintained across all phases | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Build System**: | ||||
|  | - Build Architecture Guard protects critical build files | ||||
|  | - Platform-specific build processes respect workflow constraints | ||||
|  | - Asset generation follows established patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Migration Context**: | ||||
|  | - Database migration work respects investigation vs. implementation phases | ||||
|  | - Component migration progress is tracked through workflow states | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Usage Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Always-On Rules**: Start with `meta_core_always_on.mdc` for every | ||||
|  |    single prompt | ||||
|  | 2. **Core Rules**: Always apply rules from `core/` directory | ||||
|  | 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 | ||||
|  |    consistent formatting | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Benefits of New Organization | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Logical grouping** - Related rules are now co-located | ||||
|  | 2. **Easier navigation** - Developers can quickly find relevant rules | ||||
|  | 3. **Better maintainability** - Clear separation of concerns | ||||
|  | 4. **Scalable structure** - Easy to add new rules in appropriate categories | ||||
|  | 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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Lowercase with underscores**: `file_name.mdc` | ||||
|  | - **Descriptive names**: Names clearly indicate the rule's purpose | ||||
|  | - **Consistent extensions**: All files use `.mdc` extension | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Maintenance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Cross-references**: Update when moving files between directories | ||||
|  | - **Markdown validation**: Run `npm run markdown:check` after any changes | ||||
|  | - **Organization**: Keep related rules in appropriate subdirectories | ||||
|  | - **Documentation**: Update this README when adding new rules or directories | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active organization structure | ||||
|  | **Last Updated**: 2025-08-21 | ||||
|  | **Maintainer**: Development team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,192 @@ | |||||
|  | # Meta-Rule: Core Always-On Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-21 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Core rules for every prompt | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | This meta-rule bundles the core rules that should be applied to **every single | ||||
|  | prompt** because they define fundamental behaviors, principles, and context | ||||
|  | that are essential for all AI interactions. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## When to Use | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **ALWAYS** - These rules apply to every single prompt, regardless of the task | ||||
|  | or context. They form the foundation for all AI assistant behavior. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Bundled Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Core Human Competence Principles** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`core/base_context.mdc`** - Human competence first principles, interaction | ||||
|  |   guidelines, and output contract requirements | ||||
|  | - **`core/less_complex.mdc`** - Minimalist solution principle and complexity | ||||
|  |   guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Time & Context Standards** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`development/time.mdc`** - Time handling principles and UTC standards | ||||
|  | - **`development/time_examples.mdc`** - Practical time implementation examples | ||||
|  | - **`development/time_implementation.mdc`** - Detailed time implementation | ||||
|  |   guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Version Control & Process** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`workflow/version_control.mdc`** - Version control principles and commit | ||||
|  |   guidelines | ||||
|  | - **`workflow/commit_messages.mdc`** - Commit message format and conventions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Application Context** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`app/timesafari.mdc`** - Core TimeSafari application context and | ||||
|  |   development principles | ||||
|  | - **`app/timesafari_development.mdc`** - TimeSafari-specific development | ||||
|  |   workflow and quality standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Why These Rules Are Always-On | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Base Context** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Human Competence First**: Every interaction must increase human competence | ||||
|  | - **Output Contract**: All responses must follow the required structure | ||||
|  | - **Competence Hooks**: Learning and collaboration must be built into every response | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Time Standards** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **UTC Consistency**: All timestamps must use UTC for system operations | ||||
|  | - **Evidence Collection**: Time context is essential for debugging and investigation | ||||
|  | - **Cross-Platform**: Time handling affects all platforms and features | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Version Control** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Commit Standards**: Every code change must follow commit message conventions | ||||
|  | - **Process Consistency**: Version control affects all development work | ||||
|  | - **Team Collaboration**: Commit standards enable effective team communication | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Application Context** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform Awareness**: Every task must consider web/mobile/desktop platforms | ||||
|  | - **Architecture Principles**: All work must follow TimeSafari patterns | ||||
|  | - **Development Standards**: Quality and testing requirements apply to all work | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Application Priority | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Primary (Apply First)** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Base Context** - Human competence and output contract | ||||
|  | 2. **Time Standards** - UTC and timestamp requirements | ||||
|  | 3. **Application Context** - TimeSafari principles and platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Secondary (Apply as Needed)** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Version Control** - When making code changes | ||||
|  | 2. **Complexity Guidelines** - When evaluating solution approaches | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration with Other Meta-Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Feature Planning** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Base context ensures human competence focus | ||||
|  | - Time standards inform planning and estimation | ||||
|  | - Application context drives platform considerations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Bug Diagnosis** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Base context ensures systematic investigation | ||||
|  | - Time standards enable proper evidence collection | ||||
|  | - Application context provides system understanding | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Bug Fixing** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Base context ensures quality implementation | ||||
|  | - Time standards maintain logging consistency | ||||
|  | - Application context guides testing strategy | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Feature Implementation** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Base context ensures proper development approach | ||||
|  | - Time standards maintain system consistency | ||||
|  | - Application context drives architecture decisions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Success Criteria | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Base context applied** to every single prompt | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Time standards followed** for all timestamps and logging | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Version control standards** applied to all code changes | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Application context considered** for all platform work | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Human competence focus** maintained in all interactions | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Output contract structure** followed in all responses | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Common Pitfalls | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Don't skip base context** - loses human competence focus | ||||
|  | - **Don't ignore time standards** - creates inconsistent timestamps | ||||
|  | - **Don't forget application context** - misses platform considerations | ||||
|  | - **Don't skip version control** - creates inconsistent commit history | ||||
|  | - **Don't lose competence focus** - reduces learning value | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Feedback & Improvement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Rule Effectiveness Ratings (1-5 scale)** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Base Context**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Time Standards**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Version Control**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Application Context**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Always-On Effectiveness** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Consistency**: Are these rules applied consistently across all prompts? | ||||
|  | - **Value**: Do these rules add value to every interaction? | ||||
|  | - **Overhead**: Are these rules too burdensome for simple tasks? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Integration Feedback** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **With Other Meta-Rules**: How well do these integrate with workflow rules? | ||||
|  | - **Context Switching**: Do these rules help or hinder context switching? | ||||
|  | - **Learning Curve**: Are these rules easy for new users to understand? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Overall Experience** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Quality Improvement**: Do these rules improve response quality? | ||||
|  | - **Efficiency**: Do these rules make interactions more efficient? | ||||
|  | - **Recommendation**: Would you recommend keeping these always-on? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Every Prompt | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Base Context**: Ensure human competence principles are active | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Time Standards**: Verify UTC and timestamp requirements are clear | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Application Context**: Confirm TimeSafari context is loaded | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Version Control**: Prepare commit standards if code changes are needed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Response Creation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Output Contract**: Follow required response structure | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Competence Hooks**: Include learning and collaboration elements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Time Consistency**: Apply UTC standards for all time references | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Awareness**: Consider all target platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Response Creation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Validation**: Verify all always-on rules were applied | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Quality Check**: Ensure response meets competence standards | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Context Review**: Confirm application context was properly considered | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Feedback Collection**: Note any issues with always-on application | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_feature_planning.mdc` for workflow-specific rules | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_bug_diagnosis.mdc` for investigation workflows | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_bug_fixing.mdc` for fix implementation | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_feature_implementation.mdc` for feature development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active core always-on meta-rule | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Critical (applies to every prompt) | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: All bundled sub-rules | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: All AI interactions, Development team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,193 @@ | |||||
|  | # TimeSafari Cross-Platform Architecture Guide | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-19 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Architecture guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 1. Platform Support Matrix | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | | Feature | Web (PWA) | Capacitor (Mobile) | Electron (Desktop) | | ||||
|  | |---------|-----------|--------------------|-------------------| | ||||
|  | | QR Code Scanning | WebInlineQRScanner | @capacitor-mlkit/barcode-scanning | | ||||
|  |   Not Implemented | | ||||
|  | | Deep Linking | URL Parameters | App URL Open Events | Not Implemented | | ||||
|  | | File System | Limited (Browser API) | Capacitor Filesystem | Electron fs | | ||||
|  | | Camera Access | MediaDevices API | Capacitor Camera | Not Implemented | | ||||
|  | | Platform Detection | Web APIs | Capacitor.isNativePlatform() | process.env | ||||
|  |   checks | | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 2. Project Structure | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Core Directories | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | src/ | ||||
|  | ├── components/     # Vue components | ||||
|  | ├── services/       # Platform services and business logic | ||||
|  | ├── views/          # Page components | ||||
|  | ├── router/         # Vue router configuration | ||||
|  | ├── types/          # TypeScript type definitions | ||||
|  | ├── utils/          # Utility functions | ||||
|  | ├── lib/            # Core libraries | ||||
|  | ├── platforms/      # Platform-specific implementations | ||||
|  | ├── electron/       # Electron-specific code | ||||
|  | ├── constants/      # Application constants | ||||
|  | ├── db/             # Database related code | ||||
|  | ├── interfaces/     # TypeScript interfaces | ||||
|  | └── assets/         # Static assets | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Entry Points | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `main.ts` → Base entry | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `main.common.ts` → Shared init | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `main.capacitor.ts` → Mobile entry | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `main.electron.ts` → Electron entry | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `main.web.ts` → Web entry | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 3. Service Architecture | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Service Organization | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```tree | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | services/ | ||||
|  | ├── QRScanner/ | ||||
|  | │   ├── WebInlineQRScanner.ts | ||||
|  | │   └── interfaces.ts | ||||
|  | ├── platforms/ | ||||
|  | │   ├── WebPlatformService.ts | ||||
|  | │   ├── CapacitorPlatformService.ts | ||||
|  | │   └── ElectronPlatformService.ts | ||||
|  | └── factory/ | ||||
|  |     └── PlatformServiceFactory.ts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Factory Pattern | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Use a **singleton factory** to select platform services via | ||||
|  | `process.env.VITE_PLATFORM`. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 4. Feature Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### QR Code Scanning | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Define `QRScannerService` interface. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Implement platform-specific classes (`WebInlineQRScanner`, Capacitor, | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   etc). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Provide `addListener` and `onStream` hooks for composability. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Deep Linking | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - URL format: `timesafari://<route>[/<param>][?query=value]` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Web: `router.beforeEach` → parse query | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Capacitor: `App.addListener("appUrlOpen", …)` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 5. Build Process | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `vite.config.common.mts` → shared config | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Platform configs: `vite.config.web.mts`, `.capacitor.mts`, | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `.electron.mts` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use `process.env.VITE_PLATFORM` for conditional loading. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npm run build:web | ||||
|  | npm run build:capacitor | ||||
|  | npm run build:electron | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 6. Testing Strategy | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Unit Tests**: Jest for business logic and utilities | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **E2E Tests**: Playwright for critical user journeys | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform Tests**: Test platform-specific implementations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Integration Tests**: Test service interactions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 7. Key Principles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Platform Independence | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Abstract platform differences** behind interfaces | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Use factory pattern** for service selection | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Maintain consistent APIs** across platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Graceful degradation** when features unavailable | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Code Organization | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Single responsibility** for each service | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Interface segregation** for platform services | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Dependency injection** via mixins | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Composition over inheritance** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/app/architectural_implementation.mdc` for | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   detailed implementation details | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/app/architectural_patterns.mdc` for architectural patterns and | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active architecture guidelines | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Critical | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: timesafari.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Architecture team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Have relevant ADRs been updated/linked? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Did I add competence hooks or prompts for the team? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Was human interaction (sync/review/demo) scheduled? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Architectural Decisions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Decision Context**: Understand the architectural challenge to be addressed | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Stakeholder Identification**: Identify all decision makers and affected parties | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Research**: Research alternatives and gather evidence | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Impact Assessment**: Assess impact on existing architecture | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Architectural Decisions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Context Documentation**: Document the context and forces at play | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Decision Recording**: Record the decision and rationale clearly | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Consequences Analysis**: Analyze positive, negative, and neutral consequences | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Alternatives Documentation**: Document alternatives considered and why rejected | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Architectural Decisions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **ADR Creation**: Create or update Architectural Decision Record | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Team Communication**: Communicate decision to all stakeholders | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Implementation Planning**: Plan implementation of the architectural decision | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Update**: Update relevant architectural documentation | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,246 @@ | |||||
|  | # Time Safari Architecture — Examples and Testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for architectural examples and | ||||
|  |   testing patterns when working with TimeSafari architecture. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Error Handling Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Global Error Handler | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // main.ts | ||||
|  | app.config.errorHandler = (err, instance, info) => { | ||||
|  |   const componentName = instance?.$options?.name || 'Unknown'; | ||||
|  |   logger.error(`[${componentName}] Vue error`, err, info); | ||||
|  | }; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | window.addEventListener('unhandledrejection', (event) => { | ||||
|  |   logger.error('[Global] Unhandled promise rejection', event.reason); | ||||
|  | }); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Platform-Specific Error Wrapping | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // services/platforms/CapacitorPlatformService.ts | ||||
|  | export class CapacitorPlatformService { | ||||
|  |   async getFileContents(path: string): Promise<string> { | ||||
|  |     try { | ||||
|  |       const result = await Filesystem.readFile({ | ||||
|  |         path: path, | ||||
|  |         encoding: 'utf8' | ||||
|  |       }); | ||||
|  |       return result.data; | ||||
|  |     } catch (error) { | ||||
|  |       logger.error('[Capacitor API Error] Failed to read file', error, path); | ||||
|  |       throw new Error(`Failed to read file: ${path}`); | ||||
|  |     } | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Testing Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Platform-Specific Test Skipping | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // tests/QRScanner.test.ts | ||||
|  | describe('QRScanner Service', () => { | ||||
|  |   test('should start scanning on web', async () => { | ||||
|  |     test.skip(process.env.VITE_PLATFORM !== 'web', 'Web-only test'); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |     const scanner = new WebInlineQRScanner(); | ||||
|  |     await scanner.startScanning(); | ||||
|  |     // Assert scanning started | ||||
|  |   }); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   test('should start scanning on mobile', async () => { | ||||
|  |     test.skip(process.env.VITE_PLATFORM !== 'capacitor', 'Mobile-only test'); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |     const scanner = new CapacitorQRScanner(); | ||||
|  |     await scanner.startScanning(); | ||||
|  |     // Assert scanning started | ||||
|  |   }); | ||||
|  | }); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Mock Service Testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // tests/mocks/QRScannerMock.ts | ||||
|  | export class QRScannerMock implements QRScannerService { | ||||
|  |   private isScanning = false; | ||||
|  |   private listeners: Map<string, Function[]> = new Map(); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   async startScanning(): Promise<void> { | ||||
|  |     this.isScanning = true; | ||||
|  |     this.emit('scanningStarted'); | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   async stopScanning(): Promise<void> { | ||||
|  |     this.isScanning = false; | ||||
|  |     this.emit('scanningStopped'); | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   addListener(event: string, callback: Function): void { | ||||
|  |     if (!this.listeners.has(event)) { | ||||
|  |       this.listeners.set(event, []); | ||||
|  |     } | ||||
|  |     this.listeners.get(event)!.push(callback); | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   removeListener(event: string, callback: Function): void { | ||||
|  |     const callbacks = this.listeners.get(event); | ||||
|  |     if (callbacks) { | ||||
|  |       const index = callbacks.indexOf(callback); | ||||
|  |       if (index > -1) { | ||||
|  |         callbacks.splice(index, 1); | ||||
|  |       } | ||||
|  |     } | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   private emit(event: string, ...args: any[]): void { | ||||
|  |     const callbacks = this.listeners.get(event); | ||||
|  |     if (callbacks) { | ||||
|  |       callbacks.forEach(callback => callback(...args)); | ||||
|  |     } | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   getScanningState(): boolean { | ||||
|  |     return this.isScanning; | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Service Composition | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // services/QRScannerService.ts | ||||
|  | export class QRScannerService { | ||||
|  |   constructor( | ||||
|  |     private platformService: PlatformService, | ||||
|  |     private notificationService: NotificationService | ||||
|  |   ) {} | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   async startScanning(): Promise<void> { | ||||
|  |     try { | ||||
|  |       await this.platformService.startCamera(); | ||||
|  |       this.notificationService.show('Camera started'); | ||||
|  |     } catch (error) { | ||||
|  |       this.notificationService.showError('Failed to start camera'); | ||||
|  |       throw error; | ||||
|  |     } | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Component Integration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // components/QRScannerDialog.vue | ||||
|  | export default class QRScannerDialog extends Vue { | ||||
|  |   @Inject() private qrScannerService!: QRScannerService; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   async mounted() { | ||||
|  |     try { | ||||
|  |       await this.qrScannerService.startScanning(); | ||||
|  |     } catch (error) { | ||||
|  |       this.$notify.error('Failed to start scanner'); | ||||
|  |     } | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   beforeDestroy() { | ||||
|  |     this.qrScannerService.stopScanning(); | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Best Practices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Service Design | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Keep services focused and single-purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use dependency injection for service composition | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Implement proper error handling and logging | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Provide clear interfaces and contracts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Testing Strategy | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Test platform-specific behavior separately | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use mocks for external dependencies | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Test error conditions and edge cases | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Validate service contracts and interfaces | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Error Handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Log errors with appropriate context | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Provide user-friendly error messages | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Implement graceful degradation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Handle platform-specific error scenarios | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/app/architectural_decision_record.mdc` for | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   core architecture principles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/app/architectural_implementation.mdc` for | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   implementation details | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/app/architectural_patterns.mdc` for core patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active examples and testing guide | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Medium | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: architectural_patterns.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Testing team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Architectural Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Pattern Selection**: Choose appropriate architectural pattern for the use | ||||
|  |   case | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Service Design**: Plan service structure and dependencies | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Strategy**: Plan testing approach for the example | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Error Handling**: Plan error handling and logging strategy | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Architectural Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Service Implementation**: Implement focused, single-purpose services | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Dependency Injection**: Use proper dependency injection patterns | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Error Handling**: Implement proper error handling and logging | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Interface Design**: Provide clear interfaces and contracts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Architectural Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Execution**: Test platform-specific behavior separately | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Service Validation**: Validate service contracts and interfaces | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Error Testing**: Test error conditions and edge cases | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Update architectural examples documentation | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,139 @@ | |||||
|  | # Time Safari Architecture — Implementation Details | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for detailed implementation details when | ||||
|  |   working with TimeSafari architecture implementation. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Error Handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Global Vue error handler → logs with component name. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Platform-specific wrappers log API errors with platform prefix | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   (`[Capacitor API Error]`, etc). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use structured logging (not `console.log`). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Best Practices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Keep platform code **isolated** in `platforms/`. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Always define a **shared interface** first. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use feature detection, not platform detection, when possible. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Dependency injection for services → improves testability. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Maintain **Competence Hooks** in PRs (2–3 prompts for dev | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   discussion). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Dependency Management | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Key deps: `@capacitor/core`, `electron`, `vue`. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use conditional `import()` for platform-specific libs. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Security Considerations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Permissions**: Always check + request gracefully. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Storage**: Secure storage for sensitive data; encrypt when possible. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Audits**: Schedule quarterly security reviews. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## ADR Process | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - All major architecture choices → log in `doc/adr/`. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use ADR template with Context, Decision, Consequences, Status. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Link related ADRs in PR descriptions. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > 🔗 **Human Hook:** When proposing a new ADR, schedule a 30-min | ||||
|  | > design sync for discussion, not just async review. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Collaboration Hooks | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **QR features**: Sync with Security before merging → permissions & | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   privacy. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **New platform builds**: Demo in team meeting → confirm UX | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   differences. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Critical ADRs**: Present in guild or architecture review. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Testing Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Unit tests** for services. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Playwright** for Web + Capacitor: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - `playwright.config-local.ts` includes web + Pixel 5. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Electron tests**: add `spectron` or Playwright-Electron. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Mark tests with platform tags: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   ```ts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   test.skip(!process.env.MOBILE_TEST, "Mobile-only test"); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > 🔗 **Human Hook:** Before merging new tests, hold a short sync (≤15 | ||||
|  | > min) with QA to align on coverage and flaky test risks. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Self-Check | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Does this feature implement a shared interface? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Are fallbacks + errors handled gracefully? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Have relevant ADRs been updated/linked? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Did I add competence hooks or prompts for the team? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Was human interaction (sync/review/demo) scheduled? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/app/architectural_decision_record.mdc` for | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   core architecture principles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/app/architectural_patterns.mdc` for architectural patterns and | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active implementation guidelines | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: architectural_decision_record.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Architecture team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Architectural Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Interface Review**: Verify feature implements shared interface | ||||
|  | - [ ] **ADR Review**: Check if ADR is required for major changes | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Security Assessment**: Assess security implications for QR features | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Planning**: Plan platform-specific implementation details | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Architectural Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Interface Implementation**: Implement shared interfaces consistently | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Error Handling**: Implement graceful fallbacks and error handling | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Strategy**: Plan unit tests for services and E2E tests | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Human Interaction**: Schedule syncs/reviews/demos as needed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Architectural Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Interface Validation**: Verify shared interfaces are properly implemented | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Execution**: Run unit tests and platform-specific tests | ||||
|  | - [ ] **ADR Updates**: Update relevant ADRs and link in PR descriptions | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Team Communication**: Share implementation results with team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,214 @@ | |||||
|  | # Time Safari Architecture — Patterns and Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for architectural patterns and | ||||
|  | > examples when working with TimeSafari architecture design. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Architectural Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Factory Pattern Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | // PlatformServiceFactory.ts | ||||
|  | export class PlatformServiceFactory { | ||||
|  |   private static instance: PlatformServiceFactory; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   static getInstance(): PlatformServiceFactory { | ||||
|  |     if (!PlatformServiceFactory.instance) { | ||||
|  |       PlatformServiceFactory.instance = new PlatformServiceFactory(); | ||||
|  |     } | ||||
|  |     return PlatformServiceFactory.instance; | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   getQRScannerService(): QRScannerService { | ||||
|  |     const platform = process.env.VITE_PLATFORM; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |     switch (platform) { | ||||
|  |       case 'web': | ||||
|  |         return new WebInlineQRScanner(); | ||||
|  |       case 'capacitor': | ||||
|  |         return new CapacitorQRScanner(); | ||||
|  |       case 'electron': | ||||
|  |         return new ElectronQRScanner(); | ||||
|  |       default: | ||||
|  |         throw new Error(`Unsupported platform: ${platform}`); | ||||
|  |     } | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Service Interface Definition | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | // interfaces/QRScannerService.ts | ||||
|  | export interface QRScannerService { | ||||
|  |   startScanning(): Promise<void>; | ||||
|  |   stopScanning(): Promise<void>; | ||||
|  |   addListener(event: string, callback: Function): void; | ||||
|  |   removeListener(event: string, callback: Function): void; | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Platform-Specific Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | // services/QRScanner/WebInlineQRScanner.ts | ||||
|  | export class WebInlineQRScanner implements QRScannerService { | ||||
|  |   private listeners: Map<string, Function[]> = new Map(); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   async startScanning(): Promise<void> { | ||||
|  |     // Web-specific implementation | ||||
|  |     const stream = await navigator.mediaDevices.getUserMedia({ video: true }); | ||||
|  |     // Process video stream for QR codes | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   async stopScanning(): Promise<void> { | ||||
|  |     // Stop video stream | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   addListener(event: string, callback: Function): void { | ||||
|  |     if (!this.listeners.has(event)) { | ||||
|  |       this.listeners.set(event, []); | ||||
|  |     } | ||||
|  |     this.listeners.get(event)!.push(callback); | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   removeListener(event: string, callback: Function): void { | ||||
|  |     const callbacks = this.listeners.get(event); | ||||
|  |     if (callbacks) { | ||||
|  |       const index = callbacks.indexOf(callback); | ||||
|  |       if (index > -1) { | ||||
|  |         callbacks.splice(index, 1); | ||||
|  |       } | ||||
|  |     } | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Deep Linking Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### URL Format | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | timesafari://<route>[/<param>][?query=value] | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Web Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | // router/index.ts | ||||
|  | router.beforeEach((to, from, next) => { | ||||
|  |   // Parse deep link parameters | ||||
|  |   if (to.query.deepLink) { | ||||
|  |     const deepLink = to.query.deepLink as string; | ||||
|  |     // Process deep link | ||||
|  |     handleDeepLink(deepLink); | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  |   next(); | ||||
|  | }); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | function handleDeepLink(deepLink: string) { | ||||
|  |   // Parse and route deep link | ||||
|  |   const url = new URL(deepLink); | ||||
|  |   const route = url.pathname; | ||||
|  |   const params = url.searchParams; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   // Navigate to appropriate route | ||||
|  |   router.push({ name: route, query: Object.fromEntries(params) }); | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Capacitor Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | // main.capacitor.ts | ||||
|  | import { App } from '@capacitor/app'; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | App.addListener('appUrlOpen', (data) => { | ||||
|  |   const url = data.url; | ||||
|  |   // Parse deep link and navigate | ||||
|  |   handleDeepLink(url); | ||||
|  | }); | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Platform Detection | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Feature Detection vs Platform Detection | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | // ✅ Good: Feature detection | ||||
|  | function hasCameraAccess(): boolean { | ||||
|  |   return 'mediaDevices' in navigator && | ||||
|  |          'getUserMedia' in navigator.mediaDevices; | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ❌ Bad: Platform detection | ||||
|  | function isWeb(): boolean { | ||||
|  |   return process.env.VITE_PLATFORM === 'web'; | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Conditional Imports | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | // services/platforms/index.ts | ||||
|  | export async function getPlatformService() { | ||||
|  |   const platform = process.env.VITE_PLATFORM; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   switch (platform) { | ||||
|  |     case 'capacitor': | ||||
|  |       const { CapacitorPlatformService } = | ||||
|  |         await import('./CapacitorPlatformService'); | ||||
|  |       return new CapacitorPlatformService(); | ||||
|  |     case 'electron': | ||||
|  |       const { ElectronPlatformService } = | ||||
|  |         await import('./ElectronPlatformService'); | ||||
|  |       return new ElectronPlatformService(); | ||||
|  |     default: | ||||
|  |       const { WebPlatformService } = | ||||
|  |         await import('./WebPlatformService'); | ||||
|  |       return new WebPlatformService(); | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/app/architectural_decision_record.mdc` for core | ||||
|  |   architecture principles | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/app/architectural_implementation.mdc` for | ||||
|  |   implementation details | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/app/architectural_examples.mdc` for examples and | ||||
|  |   testing patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active patterns and examples | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Medium | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: architectural_decision_record.mdc, | ||||
|  |   architectural_implementation.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Architecture team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Architectural Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Pattern Selection**: Choose appropriate architectural pattern for the use | ||||
|  |   case | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Analysis**: Identify platform-specific requirements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Service Planning**: Plan service structure and dependencies | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Strategy**: Plan testing approach for the pattern | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Architectural Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Pattern Implementation**: Implement chosen architectural pattern | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Abstraction**: Use platform abstraction layers appropriately | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Service Composition**: Compose services using dependency injection | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Interface Design**: Provide clear interfaces and contracts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Architectural Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Pattern Validation**: Verify pattern is implemented correctly | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Testing**: Test across all target platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Service Testing**: Test service composition and dependencies | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Update architectural patterns documentation | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,173 @@ | |||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | alwaysApply: false | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | # Time Safari Context | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-19 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Core application context | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Project Overview | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Time Safari is an application designed to foster community building through | ||||
|  | gifts, gratitude, and collaborative projects. The app makes it easy and | ||||
|  | intuitive for users of any age and capability to recognize contributions, | ||||
|  | build trust networks, and organize collective action. It is built on services | ||||
|  | that preserve privacy and data sovereignty. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Core Goals | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Connect**: Make it easy, rewarding, and non-threatening for people to | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    connect with others who have similar interests, and to initiate activities | ||||
|  |    together. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Reveal**: Widely advertise the great support and rewards that are being | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    given and accepted freely, especially non-monetary ones, showing the impact | ||||
|  |    gifts make in people's lives. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Technical Foundation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Architecture | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Privacy-preserving claims architecture** via endorser.ch | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs)**: User identities based on | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   public/private key pairs stored on devices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Cryptographic Verification**: All claims and confirmations are | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   cryptographically signed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **User-Controlled Visibility**: Users explicitly control who can see their | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   identifiers and data | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Cross-Platform**: Web (PWA), Mobile (Capacitor), Desktop (Electron) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Current Database State | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Database**: SQLite via Absurd SQL (browser) and native SQLite | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   (mobile/desktop) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Legacy Support**: IndexedDB (Dexie) for backward compatibility | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Status**: Modern database architecture fully implemented | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Core Technologies | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Frontend**: Vue 3 + TypeScript + vue-facing-decorator | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Styling**: TailwindCSS | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Build**: Vite with platform-specific configs | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Testing**: Playwright E2E, Jest unit tests | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Database**: SQLite (Absurd SQL in browser), IndexedDB (legacy) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **State**: Pinia stores | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform Services**: Abstracted behind interfaces with factory pattern | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Development Principles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Code Organization | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform Services**: Abstract platform-specific code behind interfaces | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Service Factory**: Use `PlatformServiceFactory` for platform selection | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Type Safety**: Strict TypeScript, no `any` types, use type guards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Modern Architecture**: Use current platform service patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Architecture Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Dependency Injection**: Services injected via mixins and factory pattern | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Interface Segregation**: Small, focused interfaces over large ones | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Composition over Inheritance**: Prefer mixins and composition | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Single Responsibility**: Each component/service has one clear purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Testing Strategy | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **E2E**: Playwright for critical user journeys | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Unit**: Jest with F.I.R.S.T. principles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform Coverage**: Web + Capacitor (Pixel 5) in CI | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Quality Assurance**: Comprehensive testing and validation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Current Development Focus | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Active Development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Feature Development**: Build new functionality using modern platform | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   services | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Performance Optimization**: Improve app performance and user experience | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform Enhancement**: Leverage platform-specific capabilities | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Code Quality**: Maintain high standards and best practices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Development Metrics | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Code Quality**: High standards maintained across all platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Performance**: Optimized for all target devices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Testing**: Comprehensive coverage maintained | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **User Experience**: Focus on intuitive, accessible interfaces | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/app/timesafari_platforms.mdc` for platform-specific details | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/app/timesafari_development.mdc` for | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   development workflow details | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active application context | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Critical | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: None | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Product team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Dependencies**: Vue 3, TypeScript, SQLite, Capacitor, Electron | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Stakeholders**: Development team, Product team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before TimeSafari Development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Application Context**: Understand TimeSafari's community-building purpose | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Analysis**: Identify target platforms (web, mobile, desktop) | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Architecture Review**: Review current platform service patterns | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Strategy**: Plan testing approach for all platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During TimeSafari Development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Services**: Use abstracted platform services via interfaces | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Type Safety**: Implement strict TypeScript with type guards | ||||
|  | - **Modern Architecture**: Follow current platform service patterns | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Performance Focus**: Ensure performance on all target devices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After TimeSafari Development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Cross-Platform Testing**: Test functionality across all platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Performance Validation**: Verify performance meets requirements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Quality**: Ensure high standards maintained | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Update**: Update relevant documentation | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,174 @@ | |||||
|  | # Time Safari Development — Workflow and Processes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for development workflow details when | ||||
|  |   working with TimeSafari development processes. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Development Workflow | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Build Commands | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Web (development) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npm run build:web | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Mobile | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npm run build:capacitor | ||||
|  | npm run build:native | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Desktop | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npm run build:electron | ||||
|  | npm run build:electron:appimage | ||||
|  | npm run build:electron:deb | ||||
|  | npm run build:electron:dmg | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Testing Commands | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Web E2E | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npm run test:web | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Mobile | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npm run test:mobile | ||||
|  | npm run test:android | ||||
|  | npm run test:ios | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Type checking | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npm run type-check | ||||
|  | npm run lint-fix | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Development Principles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Code Organization | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform Services**: Abstract platform-specific code behind interfaces | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Service Factory**: Use `PlatformServiceFactory` for platform selection | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Type Safety**: Strict TypeScript, no `any` types, use type guards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Modern Architecture**: Use current platform service patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Architecture Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Dependency Injection**: Services injected via mixins and factory pattern | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Interface Segregation**: Small, focused interfaces over large ones | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Composition over Inheritance**: Prefer mixins and composition | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Single Responsibility**: Each component/service has one clear purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Testing Strategy | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **E2E**: Playwright for critical user journeys | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Unit**: Jest with F.I.R.S.T. principles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform Coverage**: Web + Capacitor (Pixel 5) in CI | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Quality Assurance**: Comprehensive testing and validation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Current Development Focus | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Active Development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Feature Development**: Build new functionality using modern platform | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   services | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Performance Optimization**: Improve app performance and user experience | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform Enhancement**: Leverage platform-specific capabilities | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Code Quality**: Maintain high standards and best practices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Development Metrics | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Code Quality**: High standards maintained across all platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Performance**: Optimized for all target devices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Testing**: Comprehensive coverage maintained | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **User Experience**: Focus on intuitive, accessible interfaces | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Development Environment | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Required Tools | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Node.js**: LTS version with npm | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Git**: Version control with proper branching strategy | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **IDE**: VS Code with recommended extensions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform Tools**: Android Studio, Xcode (for mobile development) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Environment Setup | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Clone Repository**: `git clone <repository-url>` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Install Dependencies**: `npm install` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Environment Variables**: Copy `.env.example` to `.env.local` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Platform Setup**: Follow platform-specific setup guides | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Quality Assurance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Linting**: ESLint with TypeScript rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Formatting**: Prettier for consistent code style | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Type Checking**: TypeScript strict mode enabled | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Testing**: Comprehensive test coverage requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/app/timesafari.mdc` for core application context | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/app/timesafari_platforms.mdc` for platform-specific details | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active development workflow | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: timesafari.mdc, timesafari_platforms.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, DevOps team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before TimeSafari Development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Environment Setup**: Verify development environment is ready | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Tools**: Ensure platform-specific tools are available | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Dependencies**: Check all required dependencies are installed | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Environment Variables**: Configure local environment variables | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During TimeSafari Development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Services**: Use modern platform service patterns | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Quality**: Follow ESLint and TypeScript strict rules | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing**: Implement comprehensive testing strategy | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Performance**: Optimize for all target platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After TimeSafari Development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Quality Checks**: Run linting, formatting, and type checking | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing**: Execute comprehensive tests across platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Performance Validation**: Verify performance meets requirements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Update development documentation | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,167 @@ | |||||
|  | # Time Safari Platforms — Platform-Specific Considerations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for platform-specific details when working | ||||
|  |   with TimeSafari development across different platforms. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Platform-Specific Considerations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Web (PWA) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **QR Scanning**: WebInlineQRScanner | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Deep Linking**: URL parameters | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **File System**: Limited browser APIs | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Build**: `npm run build:web` (development build) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Mobile (Capacitor) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **QR Scanning**: @capacitor-mlkit/barcode-scanning | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Deep Linking**: App URL open events | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **File System**: Capacitor Filesystem | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Build**: `npm run build:capacitor` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Desktop (Electron) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **File System**: Node.js fs | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Build**: `npm run build:electron` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Distribution**: AppImage, DEB, DMG packages | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Platform Compatibility Requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Cross-Platform Features | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Core functionality** must work identically across all platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform-specific enhancements** should be additive, not required | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Fallback behavior** must be graceful when platform features unavailable | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Platform-Specific Capabilities | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Web**: Browser APIs, PWA features, responsive design | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Mobile**: Native device features, offline capability, app store compliance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Desktop**: File system access, system integration, native performance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Build and Distribution | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Build Commands | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Web (development) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npm run build:web | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Mobile | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npm run build:capacitor | ||||
|  | npm run build:native | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Desktop | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npm run build:electron | ||||
|  | npm run build:electron:appimage | ||||
|  | npm run build:electron:deb | ||||
|  | npm run build:electron:dmg | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Testing Commands | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Web E2E | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npm run test:web | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Mobile | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npm run test:mobile | ||||
|  | npm run test:android | ||||
|  | npm run test:ios | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Type checking | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npm run type-check | ||||
|  | npm run lint-fix | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Key Constraints | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Privacy First**: User identifiers remain private except when explicitly | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    shared | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Platform Compatibility**: Features must work across all target platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Performance**: Must remain performant on older/simpler devices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Modern Architecture**: New features should use current platform services | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 5. **Offline Capability**: Key functionality should work offline when feasible | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Use Cases to Support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Community Building**: Tools for finding others with shared interests | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Project Coordination**: Easy proposal and collaboration on projects | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Reputation Building**: Showcasing contributions and reliability | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Governance**: Facilitating decision-making and collective governance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Resources | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Testing**: `docs/migration-testing/` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Architecture**: `docs/architecture-decisions.md` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Build Context**: `docs/build-modernization-context.md` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/app/timesafari.mdc` for core application context | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/app/timesafari_development.mdc` for | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   development workflow details | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active platform guidelines | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: timesafari.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Platform teams | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Platform Development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Analysis**: Identify all target platforms (web, mobile, desktop) | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Feature Requirements**: Understand feature requirements across platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Constraints**: Review platform-specific limitations and capabilities | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Strategy**: Plan testing approach for all target platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Platform Development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Cross-Platform Implementation**: Implement features across all platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Services**: Use current platform services for new features | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Performance Optimization**: Ensure performance on older/simpler devices | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Offline Capability**: Implement offline functionality where feasible | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Platform Development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Cross-Platform Testing**: Test functionality across all target platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Performance Validation**: Verify performance meets requirements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Update**: Update platform-specific documentation | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Team Communication**: Share platform implementation results with team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,75 @@ | |||||
|  | # Architecture Rules Directory | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-20 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Architecture protection guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Overview | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | This directory contains MDC (Model Directive Configuration) rules that protect | ||||
|  | critical architectural components of the TimeSafari project. These rules ensure | ||||
|  | that changes to system architecture follow proper review, testing, and | ||||
|  | documentation procedures. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Available Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Build Architecture Guard (`build_architecture_guard.mdc`) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Protects the multi-platform build system including: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Vite configuration files | ||||
|  | - Build scripts and automation | ||||
|  | - Platform-specific configurations (iOS, Android, Electron, Web) | ||||
|  | - Docker and deployment infrastructure | ||||
|  | - CI/CD pipeline components | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **When to use**: Any time you're modifying build scripts, configuration files, | ||||
|  | or deployment processes. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Authorization levels**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Level 1**: Minor changes (review required) | ||||
|  | - **Level 2**: Moderate changes (testing required) | ||||
|  | - **Level 3**: Major changes (ADR required) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Usage Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### For Developers | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Check the rule**: Before making architectural changes, review the relevant | ||||
|  |    rule | ||||
|  | 2. **Follow the process**: Use the appropriate authorization level | ||||
|  | 3. **Complete validation**: Run through the required checklist | ||||
|  | 4. **Update documentation**: Keep BUILDING.md and related docs current | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### For Reviewers | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Verify authorization**: Ensure changes match the required level | ||||
|  | 2. **Check testing**: Confirm appropriate testing has been completed | ||||
|  | 3. **Validate documentation**: Ensure BUILDING.md reflects changes | ||||
|  | 4. **Assess risk**: Consider impact on other platforms and systems | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration with Other Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Version Control**: Works with `workflow/version_control.mdc` | ||||
|  | - **Research & Diagnostic**: Supports `research_diagnostic.mdc` for | ||||
|  |   investigations | ||||
|  | - **Software Development**: Aligns with development best practices | ||||
|  | - **Markdown Automation**: Integrates with `docs/markdown-automation.mdc` for | ||||
|  |   consistent documentation formatting | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Emergency Procedures | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | If architectural changes cause system failures: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Immediate rollback** to last known working state | ||||
|  | 2. **Document the failure** with full error details | ||||
|  | 3. **Investigate root cause** using diagnostic workflows | ||||
|  | 4. **Update procedures** to prevent future failures | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active architecture protection | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Critical | ||||
|  | **Maintainer**: Development team | ||||
|  | **Next Review**: 2025-09-20 | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,186 @@ | |||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Build Architecture Guard Directive | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-22 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Build system protection guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Protect the TimeSafari building architecture from unauthorized changes that | ||||
|  | could break the multi-platform build pipeline, deployment processes, or | ||||
|  | development workflow. This directive ensures all build system modifications | ||||
|  | follow proper review, testing, and documentation procedures. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Note**: Recent Android build system enhancements (2025-08-22) include | ||||
|  |   sophisticated asset validation, platform-specific API routing, and automatic | ||||
|  |   resource regeneration. These features require enhanced testing and validation | ||||
|  |   procedures. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Protected Architecture Components | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Core Build Infrastructure | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Vite Configuration Files**: `vite.config.*.mts` files | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Build Scripts**: All scripts in `scripts/` directory | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Package Scripts**: `package.json` build-related scripts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform Configs**: `capacitor.config.ts`, `electron/`, `android/`, | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `ios/` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Docker Configuration**: `Dockerfile`, `docker-compose.yml` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Environment Files**: `.env.*`, `.nvmrc`, `.node-version` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Android-Specific Build Validation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Asset Validation Scripts**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `validate_android_assets()` function and resource checking | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Resource Generation**: `capacitor-assets` integration and verification | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform-Specific IP Handling**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Android emulator vs physical device API routing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Build Mode Validation**: Development/test/production mode handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Resource Fallback Logic**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Automatic regeneration of missing Android resources | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Critical Build Dependencies | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Build Tools**: Vite, Capacitor, Electron, Android SDK, Xcode | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Asset Management**: `capacitor-assets.config.json`, asset scripts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Testing Infrastructure**: Playwright, Jest, mobile test scripts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **CI/CD Pipeline**: GitHub Actions, build validation scripts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Service Worker Assembly**: `sw_scripts/`, `sw_combine.js`, WASM copy steps | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Change Authorization Requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Level 1: Minor Changes (Requires Review) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Documentation updates to `BUILDING.md` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Non-breaking script improvements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Test additions or improvements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Asset configuration updates | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Process**: Code review + basic testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Level 2: Moderate Changes (Requires Testing) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - New build script additions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Environment variable changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Dependency version updates | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Platform-specific optimizations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Build script argument parsing**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   New flag handling (--api-ip, --auto-run, --deploy) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform-specific environment overrides**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Android API server IP customization | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Asset regeneration logic**: Automatic fallback for missing Android resources | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Process**: Code review + platform testing + documentation update | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Level 3: Major Changes (Requires ADR) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Build system architecture changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - New platform support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Breaking changes to build scripts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Major dependency migrations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Process**: ADR creation + comprehensive testing + team review | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Prohibited Actions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### ❌ Never Allow Without ADR | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Delete or rename** core build scripts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Modify** `package.json` build script names | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Change** Vite configuration structure | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Remove** platform-specific build targets | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Alter** Docker build process | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Modify** CI/CD pipeline without testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### ❌ Never Allow Without Testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Update** build dependencies | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Change** environment configurations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Modify** asset generation scripts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Alter** test infrastructure | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Update** platform SDK versions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/architecture/build_validation.mdc` for | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   detailed validation procedures | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/architecture/build_testing.mdc` for testing requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active build protection guidelines | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Critical | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: None | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, DevOps team, Build team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing vigilance | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: All build system components | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, DevOps, Platform owners | ||||
|  | **Next Review**: 2025-09-22 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Build Changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Change Level**: Determine if change is L1, L2, or L3 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Impact Assessment**: Assess impact on build system architecture | ||||
|  | - [ ] **ADR Requirement**: Check if ADR is required for major changes | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Planning**: Plan appropriate testing for change level | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Build Changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Guard Compliance**: Ensure changes comply with build architecture guard | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Document changes according to level requirements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing**: Execute appropriate testing for change level | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Review Process**: Follow required review process for change level | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Build Changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Validation**: Verify build system still functions correctly | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Update**: Update relevant documentation | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Team Communication**: Communicate changes to affected teams | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Monitoring**: Monitor for any build system issues | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,248 @@ | |||||
|  | # Build Testing — Requirements and Emergency Procedures | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for testing requirements and | ||||
|  |   emergency procedures when working with build architecture changes. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Emergency Procedures | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Build System Broken | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Immediate**: Revert to last known working commit | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Investigation**: Create issue with full error details | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Testing**: Verify all platforms work after revert | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Documentation**: Update `BUILDING.md` with failure notes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Platform-Specific Failure | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Isolate**: Identify which platform is affected | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Test Others**: Verify other platforms still work | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Rollback**: Revert platform-specific changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Investigation**: Debug in isolated environment | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Rollback Playbook | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Immediate Rollback | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. `git revert` or `git reset --hard <prev>`; restore prior `scripts/` or config | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    files | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. Rebuild affected targets; verify old behavior returns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. Post-mortem notes → update this guard and `BUILDING.md` if gaps found | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Rollback Verification | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Web**: `npm run build:web:dev` and `npm run build:web:prod` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Mobile**: `npm run build:android:test` and `npm run build:ios:test` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Desktop**: `npm run build:electron:dev` and packaging commands | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Clean**: Run relevant `clean:*` scripts and verify re-build works | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Android-Specific Rollback Verification | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Asset Generation**: `npm run build:android --assets` - | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   verify resources regenerate | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **API Routing**: Test both `--dev` and `--dev --api-ip <custom>` modes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Resource Validation**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Check `android/app/src/main/res/` for all required assets | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Build Modes**: Verify development, test, and production modes all work | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Resource Fallback**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Confirm missing resources trigger automatic regeneration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration Points | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### With Version Control | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Branch Protection**: Require reviews for build script changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Commit Messages**: Must reference ADR for major changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Testing**: All build changes must pass CI/CD pipeline | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### With Documentation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **BUILDING.md**: Must be updated for any script changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **README.md**: Must reflect new build requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **CHANGELOG.md**: Must document breaking build changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### With Testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Pre-commit**: Run basic build validation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **CI/CD**: Full platform build testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Manual Testing**: Human verification of critical paths | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Competence Hooks | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Why This Works | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Prevents Build Failures**: Catches issues before they reach production | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Maintains Consistency**: Ensures all platforms build identically | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Reduces Debugging Time**: Prevents build system regressions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Common Pitfalls | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Silent Failures**: Changes that work on one platform but break others | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Dependency Conflicts**: Updates that create version incompatibilities | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Documentation Drift**: Build scripts that don't match documentation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Next Skill Unlock | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Learn to test build changes across all platforms simultaneously | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Teach-back | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - "What three platforms must I test before committing a build script change?" | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Collaboration Hooks | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Team Review Requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform Owners**: iOS, Android, Electron, Web specialists | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **DevOps**: CI/CD pipeline maintainers | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **QA**: Testing infrastructure owners | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Discussion Prompts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - "Which platforms will be affected by this build change?" | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - "How can we test this change without breaking existing builds?" | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - "What's our rollback plan if this change fails?" | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Self-Check (Before Allowing Changes) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Authorization Level**: Is this change appropriate for the level? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Plan**: Is there a comprehensive testing strategy? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Will BUILDING.md be updated? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Rollback**: Is there a safe rollback mechanism? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Team Review**: Have appropriate stakeholders been consulted? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **CI/CD**: Will this pass the build pipeline? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Continuous Improvement & Feedback | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Feedback Collection | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | The Build Architecture Guard system includes feedback mechanisms to continuously | ||||
|  |   improve its effectiveness: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **User Feedback**: Script includes feedback prompts for guard improvements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Pattern Analysis**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Monitor which file patterns trigger false positives/negatives | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Documentation Gaps**: Track which changes lack proper documentation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Testing Effectiveness**: Measure how often guard catches actual issues | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Feedback Integration Process | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Collect Feedback**: Monitor guard execution logs and user reports | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Analyze Patterns**: Identify common false positives or missed patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Update Rules**: Modify `build_architecture_guard.mdc` based on feedback | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Enhance Script**: Update `build-arch-guard.sh` with new validations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 5. **Test Changes**: Verify guard improvements don't introduce new issues | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 6. **Document Updates**: Update guard documentation with new patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Feedback Categories | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **False Positives**: Files flagged as sensitive that shouldn't be | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **False Negatives**: Sensitive files that weren't caught | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Missing Patterns**: New file types that should be protected | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Overly Strict**: Patterns that are too restrictive | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Documentation Gaps**: Missing guidance for specific change types | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Testing Improvements**: Better validation procedures | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Feedback Reporting | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | When reporting guard issues, include: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **File patterns** that triggered false positives/negatives | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Build system changes** that weren't properly caught | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Documentation gaps** in current guard rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Testing procedures** that could be improved | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **User experience** issues with guard enforcement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/architecture/build_architecture_guard.mdc` for | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   core protection guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/architecture/build_validation.mdc` for validation procedures | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active testing requirements | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: build_architecture_guard.mdc, build_validation.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, DevOps team, Build team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Build Testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Test Planning**: Plan comprehensive testing strategy for build changes | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Coverage**: Identify all platforms that need testing | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Risk Assessment**: Assess testing risks and mitigation strategies | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Resource Planning**: Plan testing resources and time requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Build Testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Test Execution**: Execute planned tests across all platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Issue Tracking**: Track and document any issues found | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Feedback Collection**: Collect feedback on testing effectiveness | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Document testing procedures and results | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Build Testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Result Analysis**: Analyze testing results and identify patterns | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Feedback Integration**: Integrate feedback into testing procedures | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Process Improvement**: Update testing procedures based on feedback | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Team Communication**: Share testing results and improvements with team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,224 @@ | |||||
|  | # Build Validation — Procedures and Requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for | ||||
|  |   detailed validation procedures when working with build architecture changes. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Required Validation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Any Build System Change | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Impact Assessment**: Which platforms are affected? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Plan**: How will this be tested across platforms? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Rollback Plan**: How can this be reverted if it breaks? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Will `BUILDING.md` need updates? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Dependencies**: Are all required tools available? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Build System Change | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Web Platform**: Does `npm run build:web:dev` work? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Mobile Platforms**: Do iOS/Android builds succeed? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Desktop Platform**: Does Electron build and run? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Tests Pass**: Do all build-related tests pass? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Updated**: Is `BUILDING.md` current? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Specific Test Commands (Minimum Required) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Web Platform | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Development**: `npm run build:web:dev` - serve and load app | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Production**: `npm run build:web:prod` - verify SW and WASM present | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Mobile Platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Android**: `npm run build:android:test` or `:prod` - confirm assets copied | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **iOS**: `npm run build:ios:test` or `:prod` - verify build succeeds | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Android Platform (Enhanced) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Development Mode**: `npm run build:android --dev` - | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   verify 10.0.2.2 API routing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Custom IP Mode**: `npm run build:android --dev --api-ip 192.168.1.100` - | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   verify custom IP | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Asset Validation**: `npm run build:android --assets` - | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   verify resource generation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Deploy Mode**: `npm run build:android --deploy` - verify device deployment | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Desktop Platform | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Electron**: `npm run build:electron:dev` and packaging for target OS | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Verify**: Single-instance behavior and app boot | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Auto-run (if affected) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Test Mode**: `npm run auto-run:test` and platform variants | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Production Mode**: `npm run auto-run:prod` and platform variants | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Clean and Rebuild | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Run relevant `clean:*` scripts and ensure re-build works | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Risk Matrix & Required Validation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Environment Handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Trigger**: Change to `.env.*` loading / variable names | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Validation**: Prove `dev/test/prod` builds; show environment echo in logs | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Script Flow | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Trigger**: Reorder steps (prebuild → build → package), new flags | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Validation**: Dry-run + normal run, show exit codes & timing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Platform Packaging | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Trigger**: Electron NSIS/DMG/AppImage, Android/iOS bundle | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Validation**: Produce installer/artifact and open it; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   verify single-instance, | ||||
|  |   icons, signing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Service Worker / WASM | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Trigger**: `sw_combine.js`, WASM copy path | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Validation**: Verify combined SW exists and is injected; page loads offline; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   WASM present | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Docker | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Trigger**: New base image, build args | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Validation**: Build image locally; run container; list produced `/dist` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Android Asset Management | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Trigger**: Changes to `validate_android_assets()` function or resource paths | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Validation**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Run `npm run build:android --assets` and verify all mipmap/drawable resources | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Risk**: Missing splash screens or app icons causing build failures | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Android API Routing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Trigger**: Changes to Android-specific API server IP logic | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Validation**: Test both emulator (10.0.2.2) and custom IP modes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Risk**: API connectivity failures on different device types | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Signing/Notarization | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Trigger**: Cert path/profiles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Validation**: Show signing logs + verify on target OS | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## PR Template (Paste into Description) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Level**: L1 / L2 / L3 + justification | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Files & platforms touched**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Risk triggers & mitigations**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Commands run (paste logs)**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Artifacts (names + sha256)**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Docs updated (sections/links)**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Rollback steps verified**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **CI**: Jobs passing and artifacts uploaded | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## ADR Trigger List | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Raise an ADR when you propose any of: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **New build stage** or reorder of canonical stages | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Replacement of packager** / packaging format | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **New environment model** or secure secret handling scheme | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **New service worker assembly** strategy or cache policy | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **New Docker base** or multi-stage pipeline | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Relocation of build outputs** or directory conventions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **New Android build modes** or argument parsing logic | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Changes to asset validation** or resource generation strategy | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Modifications to platform-specific API routing** ( | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Android emulator vs physical) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **New Android deployment strategies** or device management | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **ADR must include**: | ||||
|  |   motivation, alternatives, risks, validation plan, rollback, | ||||
|  |   doc diffs. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/architecture/build_architecture_guard.mdc` for | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   core protection guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/architecture/build_testing.mdc` for testing requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active validation procedures | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: build_architecture_guard.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, DevOps team, Build team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Build Changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Level Assessment**: Determine build validation level (L1/L2/L3) | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Analysis**: Identify all platforms affected by changes | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Risk Assessment**: Identify risk triggers and mitigation strategies | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Rollback Planning**: Plan rollback steps for build failures | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Build Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Validation Commands**: Run appropriate validation commands for level | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Testing**: Test changes across all affected platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Risk Mitigation**: Implement identified risk mitigation strategies | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Document all commands run and their outputs | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Build Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Artifact Validation**: Verify build artifacts are correct and accessible | ||||
|  | - [ ] **CI Verification**: Ensure CI jobs pass and artifacts are uploaded | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Update**: Update relevant documentation sections | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Team Communication**: Share build validation results with team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,217 @@ | |||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | alwaysApply: false | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "coaching_level": "standard", | ||||
|  |   "socratic_max_questions": 7, | ||||
|  |   "verbosity": "normal", | ||||
|  |   "timebox_minutes": null, | ||||
|  |   "format_enforcement": "strict" | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Base Context — Human Competence First | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-19 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Core interaction guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | All interactions must *increase the human's competence over time* while | ||||
|  | completing the task efficiently. The model may handle menial work and memory | ||||
|  | extension, but must also promote learning, autonomy, and healthy work habits. | ||||
|  | The model should also **encourage human interaction and collaboration** rather | ||||
|  | than replacing it — outputs should be designed to **facilitate human discussion, | ||||
|  | decision-making, and creativity**, not to atomize tasks into isolated, purely | ||||
|  | machine-driven steps. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Principles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. Competence over convenience: finish the task *and* leave the human more | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    capable next time. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. Mentorship, not lectures: be concise, concrete, and immediately applicable. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. Transparency: show assumptions, limits, and uncertainty; cite when | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    non-obvious. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. Optional scaffolding: include small, skimmable learning hooks that do not | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    bloat output. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 5. Time respect: default to **lean output**; offer opt-in depth via toggles. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 6. Psychological safety: encourage, never condescend; no medical/clinical | ||||
|  |    advice. No censorship! | ||||
|  | 7. Reusability: structure outputs so they can be saved, searched, reused, and | ||||
|  |    repurposed. | ||||
|  | 8. **Collaborative Bias**: Favor solutions that invite human review, | ||||
|  |    discussion, and iteration. When in doubt, ask "Who should this be shown | ||||
|  |    to?" or "Which human input would improve this?" | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Toggle Definitions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### coaching_level | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Determines the depth of learning support: `light` (short hooks), | ||||
|  | `standard` (balanced), `deep` (detailed). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### socratic_max_questions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | The number of clarifying questions the model may ask before proceeding. | ||||
|  | If >0, questions should be targeted, minimal, and followed by reasonable | ||||
|  | assumptions if unanswered. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### verbosity | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 'terse' (just a sentence), `concise` (minimum commentary), `normal` | ||||
|  | (balanced explanation), or other project-defined levels. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### timebox_minutes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | *integer or null* — When set to a positive integer (e.g., `5`), this acts | ||||
|  | as a **time budget** guiding the model to prioritize delivering the most | ||||
|  | essential parts of the task within that constraint. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Behavior when set: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Prioritize Core Output** — Deliver the minimum viable solution or | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    result first. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Limit Commentary** — Competence Hooks and Collaboration Hooks must be | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    shorter than normal. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Signal Skipped Depth** — Omitted details should be listed under | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    *Deferred for depth*. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Order by Value** — Start with blocking or high-value items, then | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    proceed to nice-to-haves if budget allows. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | If `null`, there is no timebox — the model can produce full-depth | ||||
|  | responses. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### format_enforcement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | `strict` (reject outputs with format drift) or `relaxed` (minor deviations | ||||
|  | acceptable). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Modes (select or combine) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Doer**: produce the artifact fast, minimal commentary. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Mentor**: add short "why/how" notes + next-step pointers. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Socratic**: ask up to N targeted questions when requirements are | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   ambiguous. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Pair-Programmer/Pair-Writer**: explain tradeoffs as you implement. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Facilitator**: structure output to be reviewable, commentable, and | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   ready for group discussion. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Default: Doer + short Mentor notes. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Competence & Collaboration Levers (keep lightweight) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - "Why this works" (≤3 bullets) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - "Common pitfalls" (≤3 bullets) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - "Next skill unlock" (1 tiny action or reading) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - "Teach-back" (1 sentence prompt the human can answer to self-check) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - "Discussion prompts" (≤2 short questions for peers/stakeholders) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Output Contract (apply to every deliverable) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Clear **Objective** (1 line) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Result** (artifact/code/answer) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Use/Run** (how to apply/test) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Competence Hooks** (the 4 learning levers above, kept terse) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Collaboration Hooks** (discussion prompts or group review steps) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Assumptions & Limits** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **References** (if used; links or titles) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Do-Not | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - No filler, hedging, or moralizing. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - No medical/mental-health advice; keep "healthy habits" to general work | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   practices. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - No invented facts; mark uncertainty plainly. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - No censorship. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Avoid outputs that bypass human review when such review is valuable. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Related Rulesets | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **software_development.mdc**: For software-specific development practices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **research_diagnostic.mdc**: For investigation and research workflows | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Responding | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Toggle Review**: Check coaching_level, socratic_max_questions, verbosity, | ||||
|  |   timebox_minutes | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Mode Selection**: Choose appropriate mode(s) for the task | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Scope Understanding**: Clarify requirements and constraints | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Context Analysis**: Review relevant rulesets and dependencies | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Response Creation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Output Contract**: Include all required sections (Objective, Result, | ||||
|  |   Use/Run, etc.) | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Competence Hooks**: Add at least one learning lever (≤120 words total) | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Collaboration Hooks**: Include discussion prompts or review steps | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Toggle Compliance**: Respect verbosity, timebox, and format settings | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Response Creation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Self-Check**: Verify all checklist items are completed | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Format Validation**: Ensure output follows required structure | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Content Review**: Confirm no disallowed content included | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Quality Assessment**: Verify response meets human competence goals | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Self-Check (model, before responding) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Task done *and* at least one competence lever included (≤120 words | ||||
|  |   total) | ||||
|  | - [ ] At least one collaboration/discussion hook present | ||||
|  | - [ ] Output follows the **Output Contract** sections | ||||
|  | - [ ] Toggles respected; verbosity remains concise | ||||
|  | - [ ] Uncertainties/assumptions surfaced | ||||
|  | - [ ] No disallowed content | ||||
|  | - [ ] Uncertainties/assumptions surfaced. | ||||
|  | - [ ] No disallowed content. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active core guidelines | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Critical | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: None (base ruleset) | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: All AI interactions | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,202 @@ | |||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "coaching_level": "standard", | ||||
|  |   "socratic_max_questions": 2, | ||||
|  |   "verbosity": "concise", | ||||
|  |   "timebox_minutes": 10, | ||||
|  |   "format_enforcement": "strict" | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Harbor Pilot Universal — Technical Guide Standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: When creating technical guides, reference documents, or | ||||
|  | > implementation plans, apply these universal directives to ensure consistent | ||||
|  | > quality and structure. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Produce a **developer-grade, reproducible guide** for any technical topic | ||||
|  | that onboards a competent practitioner **without meta narration** and **with | ||||
|  | evidence-backed steps**. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Required Elements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 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**. | ||||
|  | 7. **What Doesn't (Evidence & Hypotheses)** - Each failure: locus, | ||||
|  |    evidence snippet; short hypothesis and **next probe**. | ||||
|  | 8. **Risks, Limits, Assumptions** - SLOs/limits, rate/size caps, | ||||
|  |    security boundaries, retries/backoff/idempotency patterns. | ||||
|  | 9. **Next Steps (Owner • Exit Criteria • Target Date)** - Actionable, | ||||
|  |    assigned, and time-bound. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Quality Standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 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. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Creating Technical Guides | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Scope Definition**: Clearly define problem, audience, and scope | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence Collection**: Gather specific timestamps, file references, and logs | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Diagram Planning**: Plan appropriate diagram type for the technical process | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Template Selection**: Choose relevant sections from required sections list | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Guide Creation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence Integration**: Include UTC timestamps and verifiable evidence | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Diagram Creation**: Create Mermaid diagram that illustrates the process | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Repro Steps**: Write copy-paste ready commands with expected outputs | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Section Completion**: Fill in all required sections completely | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Guide Creation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Validation**: Run through the validation checklist below | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence Review**: Verify all claims have supporting evidence | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Repro Testing**: Test reproduction steps to ensure they work | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Peer Review**: Share with technical leads for feedback | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Validation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Before publishing, verify: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Diagram included** and properly formatted (Mermaid syntax valid) | ||||
|  | - [ ] If API-based, **Auth** and **Key Headers/Params** are listed for | ||||
|  |   each endpoint | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Environment section** includes all required dependencies and | ||||
|  |   versions | ||||
|  | - [ ] Every Works/Doesn't item has **UTC timestamp**, **status/result**, | ||||
|  |   and **verifiable evidence** | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Repro steps** are copy-paste ready with expected outputs | ||||
|  | - [ ] Base **Output Contract** sections satisfied | ||||
|  |   (Objective/Result/Use/Run/Competence/Collaboration/Assumptions/References) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration Points | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Base Context Integration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Apply historical comment management rules (see | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `.cursor/rules/development/historical_comment_management.mdc`) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Apply realistic time estimation rules (see | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `.cursor/rules/development/realistic_time_estimation.mdc`) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Reviewers**: Technical leads, subject matter experts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Stakeholders**: Development teams, DevOps, QA teams | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🚢 ACTIVE — General ruleset extending *Base Context — Human | ||||
|  | Competence First* | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Critical | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: base_context.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: All AI interactions, Development teams | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Example Diagram Template | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```mermaid | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | <one suitable diagram: sequenceDiagram | flowchart | stateDiagram | gantt | | ||||
|  | classDiagram> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Note**: Replace the placeholder with an actual diagram that illustrates | ||||
|  | the technical process, architecture, or workflow being documented. | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,99 @@ | |||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | alwaysApply: false | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Minimalist Solution Principle (Cursor MDC) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | role: Engineering assistant optimizing for least-complex changes | ||||
|  | focus: Deliver the smallest viable diff that fully resolves the current | ||||
|  | bug/feature. Defer generalization unless justified with evidence. | ||||
|  | language: Match repository languages and conventions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Default to the least complex solution.** Fix the problem directly | ||||
|  |    where it occurs; avoid new layers, indirection, or patterns unless | ||||
|  |    strictly necessary. | ||||
|  | 2. **Keep scope tight.** Implement only what is needed to satisfy the | ||||
|  |    acceptance criteria and tests for *this* issue. | ||||
|  | 3. **Avoid speculative abstractions.** Use the **Rule of Three**: | ||||
|  |    don't extract helpers/patterns until the third concrete usage proves | ||||
|  |    the shape. | ||||
|  | 4. **No drive-by refactors.** Do not rename, reorder, or reformat | ||||
|  |    unrelated code in the same change set. | ||||
|  | 5. **Minimize surface area.** Prefer local changes over cross-cutting | ||||
|  |    rewires; avoid new public APIs unless essential. | ||||
|  | 6. **Be dependency-frugal.** Do not add packages or services for | ||||
|  |    single, simple needs unless there's a compelling, documented reason. | ||||
|  | 7. **Targeted tests only.** Add the smallest set of tests that prove | ||||
|  |    the fix and guard against regression; don't rewrite suites. | ||||
|  | 8. **Document the "why enough."** Include a one-paragraph note | ||||
|  |    explaining why this minimal solution is sufficient *now*. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Future-Proofing Requires Evidence + Discussion | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Any added complexity "for the future" **must** include: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - A referenced discussion/ADR (or issue link) summarizing the decision. | ||||
|  | - **Substantial evidence**, e.g.: | ||||
|  |   - Recurring incidents or tickets that this prevents (list IDs). | ||||
|  |   - Benchmarks or profiling showing a real bottleneck. | ||||
|  |   - Concrete upcoming requirements with dates/owners, not hypotheticals. | ||||
|  |   - Risk assessment comparing maintenance cost vs. expected benefit. | ||||
|  | - A clear trade-off table showing why minimal won't suffice. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | If this evidence is not available, **ship the minimal fix** and open a | ||||
|  | follow-up discussion item. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## PR / Change Checklist (enforced by reviewer + model) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Smallest diff that fully fixes the issue (attach `git diff --stat` | ||||
|  |   if useful). | ||||
|  | - [ ] No unrelated refactors or formatting. | ||||
|  | - [ ] No new dependencies, or justification + ADR link provided. | ||||
|  | - [ ] Abstractions only if ≥3 call sites or strong evidence says | ||||
|  |   otherwise (cite). | ||||
|  | - [ ] Targeted tests proving the fix/regression guard. | ||||
|  | - [ ] Short "Why this is enough now" note in the PR description. | ||||
|  | - [ ] Optional: "Future Work (non-blocking)" section listing deferred | ||||
|  |   ideas. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Assistant Output Contract | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | When proposing a change, provide: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Minimal Plan**: 3–6 bullet steps scoped to the immediate fix. | ||||
|  | 2. **Patch Sketch**: Focused diffs/snippets touching only necessary | ||||
|  |    files. | ||||
|  | 3. **Risk & Rollback**: One paragraph each on risk, quick rollback, | ||||
|  |    and test points. | ||||
|  | 4. **(If proposing complexity)**: Link/inline ADR summary + evidence + | ||||
|  |    trade-offs; otherwise default to minimal. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   One paragraph each on risk, quick rollback, and test points. | ||||
|  | 5. **(If proposing complexity)**: Link/inline ADR summary + evidence + | ||||
|  |    trade-offs; otherwise default to minimal. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Proposing Changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Problem Analysis**: Clearly understand the specific issue scope | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence Review**: Gather evidence that justifies the change | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Complexity Assessment**: Evaluate if change requires added complexity | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Alternative Research**: Consider simpler solutions first | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Change Design | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Minimal Scope**: Design solution that addresses only the current issue | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence Integration**: Include specific evidence for any complexity | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Dependency Review**: Minimize new dependencies and packages | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Strategy**: Plan minimal tests that prove the fix | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Change Design | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Self-Review**: Verify solution follows minimalist principles | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence Validation**: Confirm all claims have supporting evidence | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Complexity Justification**: Document why minimal approach suffices | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Future Work Planning**: Identify deferred improvements for later | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,273 @@ | |||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | globs: **/db/databaseUtil.ts, **/interfaces/absurd-sql.d.ts, | ||||
|  |   **/src/registerSQLWorker.js, **/ | ||||
|  | services/AbsurdSqlDatabaseService.ts | ||||
|  | alwaysApply: false | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Absurd SQL - Cursor Development Guide | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-19 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Database development guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Project Overview | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Absurd SQL is a backend implementation for sql.js that enables persistent | ||||
|  | SQLite databases in the browser by using IndexedDB as a block storage system. | ||||
|  | This guide provides rules and best practices for developing with this project | ||||
|  | in Cursor. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Project Structure | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | absurd-sql/ | ||||
|  | ├── src/               # Source code | ||||
|  | ├── dist/             # Built files | ||||
|  | ├── package.json      # Dependencies and scripts | ||||
|  | ├── rollup.config.js  # Build configuration | ||||
|  | └── jest.config.js    # Test configuration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Development Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 1. Worker Thread Requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - All SQL operations MUST be performed in a worker thread | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Main thread should only handle worker initialization and communication | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Never block the main thread with database operations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 2. Code Organization | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Keep worker code in separate files (e.g., `*.worker.js`) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use ES modules for imports/exports | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Follow the project's existing module structure | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 3. Required Headers | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | When developing locally or deploying, ensure these headers are set: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Cross-Origin-Opener-Policy: same-origin | ||||
|  | Cross-Origin-Embedder-Policy: require-corp | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 4. Browser Compatibility | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Primary target: Modern browsers with SharedArrayBuffer support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Fallback mode: Safari (with limitations) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Always test in both modes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 5. Database Configuration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Recommended database settings: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```sql | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | PRAGMA journal_mode=MEMORY; | ||||
|  | PRAGMA page_size=8192;  -- Optional, but recommended | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 6. Development Workflow | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. Install dependencies: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    ```bash | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    yarn add @jlongster/sql.js absurd-sql | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. Development commands: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - `yarn build` - Build the project | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - `yarn jest` - Run tests | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - `yarn serve` - Start development server | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 7. Testing Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Write tests for both SharedArrayBuffer and fallback modes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use Jest for testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Include performance benchmarks for critical operations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 8. Performance Considerations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use bulk operations when possible | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Monitor read/write performance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Consider using transactions for multiple operations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Avoid unnecessary database connections | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 9. Error Handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Implement proper error handling for: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - Worker initialization failures | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - Database connection issues | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - Concurrent access conflicts (in fallback mode) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - Storage quota exceeded scenarios | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 10. Security Best Practices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Never expose database operations directly to the client | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Validate all SQL queries | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Implement proper access controls | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Handle sensitive data appropriately | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 11. Code Style | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Follow ESLint configuration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use async/await for asynchronous operations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Document complex database operations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Include comments for non-obvious optimizations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 12. Debugging | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use `jest-debug` for debugging tests | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Monitor IndexedDB usage in browser dev tools | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Check worker communication in console | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use performance monitoring tools | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Common Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Worker Initialization | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```javascript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // Main thread | ||||
|  | import { initBackend } from 'absurd-sql/dist/indexeddb-main-thread'; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | function init() { | ||||
|  |   let worker = new Worker(new URL('./index.worker.js', import.meta.url)); | ||||
|  |   initBackend(worker); | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Database Setup | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```javascript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // Worker thread | ||||
|  | import initSqlJs from '@jlongster/sql.js'; | ||||
|  | import { SQLiteFS } from 'absurd-sql'; | ||||
|  | import IndexedDBBackend from 'absurd-sql/dist/indexeddb-backend'; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | async function setupDatabase() { | ||||
|  |   let SQL = await initSqlJs({ locateFile: file => file }); | ||||
|  |   let sqlFS = new SQLiteFS(SQL.FS, new IndexedDBBackend()); | ||||
|  |   SQL.register_for_idb(sqlFS); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   SQL.FS.mkdir('/sql'); | ||||
|  |   SQL.FS.mount(sqlFS, {}, '/sql'); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   return new SQL.Database('/sql/db.sqlite', { filename: true }); | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Troubleshooting | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Common Issues | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. SharedArrayBuffer not available | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Check COOP/COEP headers | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Verify browser support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Test fallback mode | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. Worker initialization failures | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Check file paths | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Verify module imports | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Check browser console for errors | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. Performance issues | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Monitor IndexedDB usage | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Check for unnecessary operations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Verify transaction usage | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Resources | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [Project Demo](https://priceless-keller-d097e5.netlify.app/) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [Example Project](https://github.com/jlongster/absurd-example-project) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [Blog Post](https://jlongster.com/future-sql-web) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [SQL.js Documentation](https://github.com/sql-js/sql.js/) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active database development guidelines | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: Absurd SQL, SQL.js, IndexedDB | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Database team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [Project Demo](https://priceless-keller-d097e5.netlify.app/) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [Example Project](https://github.com/jlongster/absurd-example-project) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [Blog Post](https://jlongster.com/future-sql-web) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [SQL.js Documentation](https://github.com/sql-js/sql.js/) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Absurd SQL Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Browser Support**: Verify SharedArrayBuffer and COOP/COEP support | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Worker Setup**: Plan worker thread initialization and communication | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Database Planning**: Plan database schema and initialization | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Performance Planning**: Plan performance monitoring and optimization | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Absurd SQL Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Worker Initialization**: Set up worker threads with proper communication | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Database Setup**: Initialize SQLite database with IndexedDB backend | ||||
|  | - [ ] **File System**: Configure SQLiteFS with proper mounting | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Error Handling**: Implement proper error handling for worker failures | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Absurd SQL Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Cross-Browser Testing**: Test across different browsers and devices | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Performance Validation**: Monitor IndexedDB usage and performance | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Worker Validation**: Verify worker communication and database operations | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Update Absurd SQL implementation documentation | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,62 @@ | |||||
|  | # Legacy Dexie Database — Migration Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file when working with legacy Dexie | ||||
|  | > database code or migration patterns. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Overview | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | All references in the codebase to Dexie apply only to migration from | ||||
|  | IndexedDb to Absurd SQL. Dexie is no longer used for new development. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Migration Status | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Legacy Code**: Existing Dexie implementations being migrated | ||||
|  | - **Target**: Absurd SQL with IndexedDB backend | ||||
|  | - **Timeline**: Gradual migration as features are updated | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Key Principles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **No New Dexie**: All new database operations use Absurd SQL | ||||
|  | - **Migration Path**: Legacy code should be migrated when updated | ||||
|  | - **Backward Compatibility**: Maintain existing functionality during | ||||
|  |   migration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration Points | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Apply these rules when updating database-related code | ||||
|  | - Use during feature development and refactoring | ||||
|  | - Include in database architecture decisions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Legacy migration guidelines | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Low | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: absurd-sql.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Database team, Development team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | All references in the codebase to Dexie apply only to migration from IndexedDb | ||||
|  | to Sqlite and will be deprecated in future versions. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Legacy Dexie Work | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Migration Analysis**: Identify legacy Dexie code that needs migration | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Target Planning**: Plan migration to Absurd SQL with IndexedDB backend | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Backward Compatibility**: Plan to maintain existing functionality | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Strategy**: Plan testing approach for migration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Legacy Dexie Migration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **No New Dexie**: Ensure no new Dexie code is introduced | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Migration Implementation**: Implement migration to Absurd SQL | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Functionality Preservation**: Maintain existing functionality during migration | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Error Handling**: Implement proper error handling for migration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Legacy Dexie Migration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Functionality Testing**: Verify all functionality still works correctly | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Performance Validation**: Ensure performance meets or exceeds legacy | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Update**: Update database documentation | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Legacy Cleanup**: Remove deprecated Dexie code | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,105 @@ | |||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | description: when doing anything with capacitor assets | ||||
|  | alwaysApply: false | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Asset Configuration Directive | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-19 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Asset management guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | *Scope: Assets Only (icons, splashes, image pipelines) — not overall build | ||||
|  | orchestration* | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Intent | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Version **asset configuration files** (optionally dev-time generated). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Do not** version platform asset outputs (Android/iOS/Electron); generate | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   them **at build-time** with standard tools. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Keep existing per-platform build scripts unchanged. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Source of Truth | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Preferred (Capacitor default):** `resources/` as the single master source. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Alternative:** `assets/` is acceptable **only** if `capacitor-assets` is | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   explicitly configured to read from it. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Never** maintain both `resources/` and `assets/` as parallel sources. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Migrate and delete the redundant folder. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Config Files | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Live under: `config/assets/` (committed). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Examples: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - `config/assets/capacitor-assets.config.json` (or the path the tool | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |     expects) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - `config/assets/android.assets.json` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - `config/assets/ios.assets.json` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - `config/assets/common.assets.yaml` (optional shared layer) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Dev-time generation allowed** for these configs; **build-time | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   generation is forbidden**. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Build-Time Behavior | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Build generates platform assets (not configs) using the standard chain: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npm run build:capacitor        # web build via Vite (.mts) | ||||
|  | npx cap sync | ||||
|  | npx capacitor-assets generate  # produces platform assets; not committed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # then platform-specific build steps | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active asset management directive | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Medium | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: capacitor-assets toolchain | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Build team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   npx capacitor-assets generate  # produces platform assets; not committed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # then platform-specific build steps | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Asset Configuration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Source Review**: Identify current asset source location (`resources/` or | ||||
|  |   `assets/`) | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Tool Assessment**: Verify capacitor-assets toolchain is available | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Config Planning**: Plan configuration file structure and location | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Analysis**: Understand asset requirements for all target platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Asset Configuration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Source Consolidation**: Ensure single source of truth (prefer `resources/`) | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Config Creation**: Create platform-specific asset configuration files | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Tool Integration**: Configure capacitor-assets to read from correct source | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Build Integration**: Integrate asset generation into build pipeline | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Asset Configuration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Build Testing**: Verify assets generate correctly at build time | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Validation**: Test asset generation across all platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Update build documentation with asset generation steps | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Team Communication**: Communicate asset workflow changes to team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,177 @@ | |||||
|  | # Complexity Assessment — Evaluation Frameworks | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for | ||||
|  |   complexity evaluation frameworks when assessing project complexity. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 📊 Complexity Assessment Framework | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Technical Complexity Factors** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### **Code Changes** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Simple**: Text, styling, configuration updates | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Medium**: New components, refactoring existing code | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Complex**: Architecture changes, new patterns, integrations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Unknown**: New technologies, APIs, or approaches | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### **Platform Impact** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Single platform**: Web-only or mobile-only changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Two platforms**: Web + mobile or web + desktop | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Three platforms**: Web + mobile + desktop | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Cross-platform consistency**: Ensuring behavior matches across all platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### **Testing Requirements** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Basic**: Unit tests for new functionality | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Comprehensive**: Integration tests, cross-platform testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **User acceptance**: User testing, feedback integration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Performance**: Load testing, optimization validation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Dependency Complexity** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### **Internal Dependencies** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Low**: Self-contained changes, no other components affected | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Medium**: Changes affect related components or services | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **High**: Changes affect core architecture or multiple systems | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Critical**: Changes affect data models or core business logic | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### **External Dependencies** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **None**: No external services or APIs involved | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Low**: Simple API calls or service integrations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Medium**: Complex integrations with external systems | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **High**: Third-party platform dependencies or complex APIs | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### **Infrastructure Dependencies** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **None**: No infrastructure changes required | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Low**: Configuration updates or environment changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Medium**: New services or infrastructure components | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **High**: Platform migrations or major infrastructure changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 🔍 Complexity Evaluation Process | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Step 1: Technical Assessment** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Identify scope of changes** - what files/components are affected | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Assess platform impact** - which platforms need updates | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Evaluate testing needs** - what testing is required | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Consider performance impact** - will this affect performance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Step 2: Dependency Mapping** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Map internal dependencies** - what other components are affected | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Identify external dependencies** - what external services are involved | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Assess infrastructure needs** - what infrastructure changes are required | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Evaluate risk factors** - what could go wrong | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Step 3: Complexity Classification** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Assign complexity levels** to each factor | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Identify highest complexity** areas that need attention | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Plan mitigation strategies** for high-complexity areas | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Set realistic expectations** based on complexity assessment | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 📋 Complexity Assessment Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Technical scope identified and mapped | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Platform impact assessed across all targets | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Testing requirements defined and planned | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Internal dependencies mapped and evaluated | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] External dependencies identified and assessed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Infrastructure requirements evaluated | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Risk factors identified and mitigation planned | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Complexity levels assigned to all factors | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Realistic expectations set based on assessment | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 🎯 Complexity Reduction Strategies | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Scope Reduction** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Break large features into smaller, manageable pieces | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Focus on core functionality first, add polish later | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Consider phased rollout to reduce initial complexity | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Dependency Management** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Minimize external dependencies when possible | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use abstraction layers to isolate complex integrations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Plan for dependency failures and fallbacks | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Testing Strategy** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Start with basic testing and expand coverage | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use automated testing to reduce manual testing complexity | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Plan for iterative testing and feedback cycles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## **See also** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/development/realistic_time_estimation.mdc` for the core principles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/development/planning_examples.mdc` for planning examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Complexity Assessment | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Problem Scope**: Clearly define the problem to be assessed | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Stakeholder Identification**: Identify all parties affected by complexity | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Context Analysis**: Understand technical and business context | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Assessment Criteria**: Define what factors determine complexity | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Complexity Assessment | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Technical Mapping**: Map technical scope and platform impact | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Dependency Analysis**: Identify internal and external dependencies | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Risk Evaluation**: Assess infrastructure needs and risk factors | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Complexity Classification**: Assign complexity levels to all factors | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Complexity Assessment | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Mitigation Planning**: Plan strategies for high-complexity areas | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Expectation Setting**: Set realistic expectations based on assessment | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Document assessment process and findings | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Stakeholder Communication**: Share results and recommendations | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,177 @@ | |||||
|  | # Dependency Management — Best Practices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for dependency management strategies and | ||||
|  |   best practices when working with software projects. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Dependency Management Best Practices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Pre-build Validation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Check Critical Dependencies**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Validate essential tools before executing build | ||||
|  |   scripts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Use npx for Local Dependencies**: Prefer `npx tsx` over direct `tsx` to | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   avoid PATH issues | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Environment Consistency**: Ensure all team members have identical dependency | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   versions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Common Pitfalls | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Missing npm install**: Team members cloning without running `npm install` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **PATH Issues**: Direct command execution vs. npm script execution differences | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Version Mismatches**: Different Node.js/npm versions across team members | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Validation Strategies | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Dependency Check Scripts**: Implement pre-build validation for critical | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   dependencies | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Environment Requirements**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Document and enforce minimum Node.js/npm versions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Onboarding Checklist**: Standardize team member setup procedures | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Error Messages and Guidance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Specific Error Context**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Provide clear guidance when dependency issues occur | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Actionable Solutions**: Direct users to specific commands (`npm install`, | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `npm run check:dependencies`) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Environment Diagnostics**: Implement comprehensive environment validation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   tools | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Build Script Enhancements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Early Validation**: Check dependencies before starting build processes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Graceful Degradation**: Continue builds when possible but warn about issues | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Helpful Tips**: Remind users about dependency management best practices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Environment Setup Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Required Tools | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Node.js**: Minimum version requirements and LTS recommendations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **npm**: Version compatibility and global package management | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform-specific tools**: Android SDK, Xcode, etc. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Environment Variables | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **NODE_ENV**: Development, testing, production environments | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **PATH**: Ensure tools are accessible from command line | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform-specific**: Android SDK paths, Xcode command line tools | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Validation Commands | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Check Node.js version | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | node --version | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Check npm version | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npm --version | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Check global packages | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npm list -g --depth=0 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Validate platform tools | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | npx capacitor doctor | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Dependency Troubleshooting | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Common Issues | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Permission Errors**: Use `sudo` sparingly, prefer `npm config set prefix` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Version Conflicts**: Use `npm ls` to identify dependency conflicts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Cache Issues**: Clear npm cache with `npm cache clean --force` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Lock File Issues**: Delete `package-lock.json` and `node_modules`, | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   then reinstall | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Resolution Strategies | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Dependency Audit**: Run `npm audit` to identify security issues | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Version Pinning**: Use exact versions for critical dependencies | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Peer Dependency Management**: Ensure compatible versions across packages | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform-specific Dependencies**: Handle different requirements per platform | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Best Practices for Teams | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Onboarding | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Environment Setup Script**: Automated setup for new team members | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Version Locking**: Use `package-lock.json` and `yarn.lock` consistently | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Documentation**: Clear setup instructions with troubleshooting steps | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Maintenance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Regular Updates**: Schedule dependency updates and security patches | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Testing**: Validate changes don't break existing functionality | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Rollback Plan**: Maintain ability to revert to previous working versions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  |   `.cursor/rules/development/software_development.mdc` for core development principles. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active dependency management guidelines | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Medium | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: software_development.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, DevOps team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Dependency Changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Current State Review**: Check current dependency versions and status | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Impact Analysis**: Assess impact of dependency changes on codebase | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Compatibility Check**: Verify compatibility with existing code | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Security Review**: Review security implications of dependency changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Dependency Management | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Version Selection**: Choose appropriate dependency versions | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing**: Test with new dependency versions | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Update dependency documentation | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Team Communication**: Communicate changes to team members | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Dependency Changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Comprehensive Testing**: Test all functionality with new dependencies | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Update**: Update all relevant documentation | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Deployment Planning**: Plan and execute deployment strategy | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Monitoring**: Monitor for issues after deployment | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,33 @@ | |||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | globs: **/src/**/* | ||||
|  | alwaysApply: false | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | ✅ use system date command to timestamp all interactions with accurate date and | ||||
|  |   time | ||||
|  | ✅ python script files must always have a blank line at their end | ||||
|  | ✅ remove whitespace at the end of lines | ||||
|  | ✅ use npm run lint-fix to check for warnings | ||||
|  | ✅ do not use npm run dev let me handle running and supplying feedback | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Development Work | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **System Date Check**: Use system date command for accurate timestamps | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Environment Setup**: Verify development environment is ready | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Linting Setup**: Ensure npm run lint-fix is available | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Standards**: Review project coding standards and requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Timestamp Usage**: Include accurate timestamps in all interactions | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Quality**: Use npm run lint-fix to check for warnings | ||||
|  | - [ ] **File Standards**: Ensure Python files have blank line at end | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Whitespace**: Remove trailing whitespace from all lines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Linting Check**: Run npm run lint-fix to verify code quality | ||||
|  | - [ ] **File Validation**: Confirm Python files end with blank line | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Whitespace Review**: Verify no trailing whitespace remains | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Update relevant documentation with changes | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,119 @@ | |||||
|  | # Historical Comment Management — Code Clarity Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: When encountering historical comments about removed | ||||
|  | > methods, deprecated patterns, or architectural changes, apply these | ||||
|  | > guidelines to maintain code clarity and developer guidance. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Overview | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Historical comments should either be **removed entirely** or **transformed | ||||
|  | into actionable guidance** for future developers. Avoid keeping comments | ||||
|  | that merely state what was removed without explaining why or what to do | ||||
|  | instead. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Decision Framework | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### When to Remove Comments | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Obsolete Information**: Comment describes functionality that no | ||||
|  |   longer exists | ||||
|  | - **Outdated Context**: Comment refers to old patterns that are no | ||||
|  |   longer relevant | ||||
|  | - **No Actionable Value**: Comment doesn't help future developers | ||||
|  |   make decisions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### When to Transform Comments | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Migration Guidance**: Future developers might need to understand | ||||
|  |   the evolution | ||||
|  | - **Alternative Approaches**: The comment can guide future | ||||
|  |   implementation choices | ||||
|  | - **Historical Context**: Understanding the change helps with | ||||
|  |   current decisions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Transformation Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 1. **Removed Method** → **Alternative Approach** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | // Before: Historical comment | ||||
|  | // turnOffNotifyingFlags method removed - notification state is now | ||||
|  | // managed by NotificationSection component | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // After: Actionable guidance | ||||
|  | // Note: Notification state management has been migrated to | ||||
|  | // NotificationSection component | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 2. **Deprecated Pattern** → **Current Best Practice** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | // Before: Historical comment | ||||
|  | // Database access has been migrated from direct IndexedDB calls to | ||||
|  | // PlatformServiceMixin | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // After: Actionable guidance | ||||
|  | // This provides better platform abstraction and consistent error | ||||
|  | // handling across web/mobile/desktop | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // When adding new database operations, use this.$getContact(), | ||||
|  | // this.$saveSettings(), etc. | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Best Practices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 1. **Use Actionable Language**: Guide future decisions, not just | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | document history | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 2. **Provide Alternatives**: Always suggest what to use instead | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 3. **Update Related Docs**: If removing from code, consider | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | adding to documentation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 4. **Keep Context**: Include enough information to understand | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | why the change was made | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration Points | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Apply these rules when reviewing code changes | ||||
|  | - Use during code cleanup and refactoring | ||||
|  | - Include in code review checklists | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/development/historical_comment_patterns.mdc` for detailed | ||||
|  |   transformation examples and patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active comment management guidelines | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Medium | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: None | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Code reviewers | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Comment Review | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Analysis**: Review code for historical or outdated comments | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Context Understanding**: Understand the current state of the codebase | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Pattern Identification**: Identify comments that need transformation or removal | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Planning**: Plan where to move important historical context | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Comment Management | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Transformation**: Convert historical comments to actionable guidance | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Alternative Provision**: Suggest current best practices and alternatives | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Context Preservation**: Maintain enough information to understand changes | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Update**: Move important context to appropriate documentation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Comment Management | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Review**: Ensure transformed comments provide actionable value | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Sync**: Verify related documentation is updated | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Team Communication**: Share comment transformation patterns with team | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Process Integration**: Include comment management in code review checklists | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,139 @@ | |||||
|  | # Historical Comment Patterns — Transformation Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for specific patterns and | ||||
|  |   examples when transforming historical comments into actionable guidance. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 🔄 Transformation Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 1. From Removal Notice to Migration Note | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ❌ REMOVE THIS | ||||
|  | // turnOffNotifyingFlags method removed -  | ||||
|  |   notification state is now managed by NotificationSection component | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ✅ TRANSFORM TO THIS | ||||
|  | // Note: Notification state management has been migrated to NotificationSection | ||||
|  |   component | ||||
|  | // which handles its own lifecycle and persistence via PlatformServiceMixin | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 2. From Deprecation Notice to Implementation Guide | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ❌ REMOVE THIS | ||||
|  | // This will be handled by the NewComponent now | ||||
|  | // No need to call oldMethod() as it's no longer needed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ✅ TRANSFORM TO THIS | ||||
|  | // Note: This functionality has been migrated to NewComponent | ||||
|  | // which provides better separation of concerns and testability | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 3. From Historical Note to Architectural Context | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ❌ REMOVE THIS | ||||
|  | // Old approach: used direct database calls | ||||
|  | // New approach: uses service layer | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ✅ TRANSFORM TO THIS | ||||
|  | // Note: Database access has been abstracted through service layer | ||||
|  | // for better testability and platform independence | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 🚫 Anti-Patterns to Remove | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Comments that only state what was removed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Comments that don't explain the current approach | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Comments that reference non-existent methods | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Comments that are self-evident from the code | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Comments that don't help future decision-making | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 📚 Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Good Historical Comment (Keep & Transform) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // Note: Database access has been migrated from direct IndexedDB calls to | ||||
|  |   PlatformServiceMixin | ||||
|  | // This provides better platform abstraction and  | ||||
|  |   consistent error handling across web/mobile/desktop | ||||
|  | // When adding new database operations, use this.$getContact(), | ||||
|  |   this.$saveSettings(), etc. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Bad Historical Comment (Remove) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // Old method getContactFromDB() removed - now handled by PlatformServiceMixin | ||||
|  | // No need to call the old method anymore | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 🎯 When to Use Each Pattern | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Migration Notes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use when functionality has moved to a different component/service | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Explain the new location and why it's better | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Provide guidance on how to use the new approach | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Implementation Guides | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use when patterns have changed significantly | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Explain the architectural benefits | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Show how to implement the new pattern | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Architectural Context | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use when the change represents a system-wide improvement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Explain the reasoning behind the change | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Help future developers understand the evolution | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: `.cursor/rules/development/historical_comment_management.mdc` for | ||||
|  |   the core decision framework and best practices. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Comment Review | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Analysis**: Review code for historical or outdated comments | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Pattern Identification**: Identify comments that need transformation or removal | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Context Understanding**: Understand the current state of the codebase | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Transformation Planning**: Plan how to transform or remove comments | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Comment Transformation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Pattern Selection**: Choose appropriate transformation pattern | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Content Creation**: Create actionable guidance for future developers | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Alternative Provision**: Suggest current best practices and approaches | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Context Preservation**: Maintain enough information to understand changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Comment Transformation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Review**: Ensure transformed comments provide actionable value | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Pattern Documentation**: Document transformation patterns for team use | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Team Communication**: Share comment transformation patterns with team | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Process Integration**: Include comment patterns in code review checklists | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,178 @@ | |||||
|  | # Investigation Report Example | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-19 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Investigation methodology example | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Investigation — Registration Dialog Test Flakiness | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Objective | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Identify root cause of flaky tests related to registration dialogs in contact | ||||
|  | import scenarios. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## System Map | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - User action → ContactInputForm → ContactsView.addContact() → | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   handleRegistrationPrompt() | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - setTimeout(1000ms) → Modal dialog → User response → Registration API call | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Test execution → Wait for dialog → Assert dialog content → Click response | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   button | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Findings (Evidence) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **1-second timeout causes flakiness** — evidence: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `src/views/ContactsView.vue:971-1000`; setTimeout(..., 1000) in | ||||
|  |   handleRegistrationPrompt() | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Import flow bypasses dialogs** — evidence: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `src/views/ContactImportView.vue:500-520`; importContacts() calls | ||||
|  |   $insertContact() directly, no handleRegistrationPrompt() | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Dialog only appears in direct add flow** — evidence: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `src/views/ContactsView.vue:774-800`; addContact() calls | ||||
|  |   handleRegistrationPrompt() after database insert | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Hypotheses & Failure Modes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - H1: 1-second timeout makes dialog appearance unpredictable; would fail when | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   tests run faster than 1000ms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - H2: Test environment timing differs from development; watch for CI vs local | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   test differences | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Corrections | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Updated: "Multiple dialogs interfere with imports" → "Import flow never | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   triggers dialogs - they only appear in direct contact addition" | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Updated: "Complex batch registration needed" → "Simple timeout removal and | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   test mode flag sufficient" | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Diagnostics (Next Checks) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Repro on CI environment vs local | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Measure actual dialog appearance timing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Test with setTimeout removed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Verify import flow doesn't call handleRegistrationPrompt | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Risks & Scope | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Impacted: Contact addition tests, registration workflow tests; Data: None; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Users: Test suite reliability | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Decision / Next Steps | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Owner: Development Team; By: 2025-01-28 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Action: Remove 1-second timeout + add test mode flag; Exit criteria: Tests | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   pass consistently | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## References | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `src/views/ContactsView.vue:971-1000` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `src/views/ContactImportView.vue:500-520` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `src/views/ContactsView.vue:774-800` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Competence Hooks | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Why this works: Code path tracing revealed separate execution flows, | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   evidence disproved initial assumptions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Common pitfalls: Assuming related functionality without tracing execution | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   paths, over-engineering solutions to imaginary problems | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Next skill: Learn to trace code execution before proposing architectural | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Teach-back: "What evidence shows that contact imports bypass registration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   dialogs?" | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Key Learning Points | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Evidence-First Approach | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | This investigation demonstrates the importance of: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Tracing actual code execution** rather than making assumptions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Citing specific evidence** with file:line references | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Validating problem scope** before proposing solutions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Considering simpler alternatives** before complex architectural changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Code Path Tracing Value | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | By tracing the execution paths, we discovered: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Import flow and direct add flow are completely separate | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - The "multiple dialog interference" problem didn't exist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - A simple timeout removal would solve the actual issue | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Prevention of Over-Engineering | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | The investigation prevented: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Unnecessary database schema changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Complex batch registration systems | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Migration scripts for non-existent problems | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Architectural changes based on assumptions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active investigation methodology | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: software_development.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, QA team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Investigation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Problem Definition**: Clearly define the problem to investigate | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Scope Definition**: Determine investigation scope and boundaries | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Methodology Planning**: Plan investigation approach and methods | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Resource Assessment**: Identify required resources and tools | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Investigation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence Collection**: Gather relevant evidence and data systematically | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Path Tracing**: Map execution flow for software investigations | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Analysis**: Analyze evidence using appropriate methods | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Document investigation process and findings | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Investigation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Synthesis**: Synthesize findings into actionable insights | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Report Creation**: Create comprehensive investigation report | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Recommendations**: Provide clear, actionable recommendations | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Team Communication**: Share findings and next steps with team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,358 @@ | |||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | alwaysApply: false | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Logging Migration — Patterns and Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for specific migration patterns and | ||||
|  |   examples when converting console.* calls to logger usage. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Migration — Auto‑Rewrites (Apply Every Time) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Exact Transforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `console.debug(...)` → `logger.debug(...)` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `console.log(...)` → `logger.log(...)` (or `logger.info(...)` when | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   clearly stateful) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `console.info(...)` → `logger.info(...)` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `console.warn(...)` → `logger.warn(...)` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `console.error(...)` → `logger.error(...)` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Multi-arg Handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - First arg becomes `message` (stringify safely if non-string). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Remaining args map 1:1 to `...args`: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `console.info(msg, a, b)` → `logger.info(String(msg), a, b)` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Sole `Error` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `console.error(err)` → `logger.error(err.message, err)` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Object-wrapping Cleanup | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Replace `{{ userId, meta }}` wrappers with separate args: | ||||
|  | `logger.info('User signed in', userId, meta)` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Level Guidelines with Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### DEBUG Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | logger.debug('[HomeView] reloadFeedOnChange() called'); | ||||
|  | logger.debug('[HomeView] Current filter settings', | ||||
|  |   settings.filterFeedByVisible, | ||||
|  |   settings.filterFeedByNearby, | ||||
|  |   settings.searchBoxes?.length ?? 0); | ||||
|  | logger.debug('[FeedFilters] Toggling nearby filter', | ||||
|  |   this.isNearby, this.settingChanged, this.activeDid); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Avoid**: Vague messages (`'Processing data'`). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### INFO Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | logger.info('[StartView] Component mounted', process.env.VITE_PLATFORM); | ||||
|  | logger.info('[StartView] User selected new seed generation'); | ||||
|  | logger.info('[SearchAreaView] Search box stored', | ||||
|  |   searchBox.name, searchBox.bbox); | ||||
|  | logger.info('[ContactQRScanShowView] Contact registration OK', | ||||
|  |   contact.did); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Avoid**: Diagnostic details that belong in `debug`. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### WARN Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | logger.warn('[ContactQRScanShowView] Invalid scan result – no value', | ||||
|  |   resultType); | ||||
|  | logger.warn('[ContactQRScanShowView] Invalid QR format – no JWT in URL'); | ||||
|  | logger.warn('[ContactQRScanShowView] JWT missing "own" field'); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Avoid**: Hard failures (those are `error`). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### ERROR Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | logger.error('[HomeView Settings] initializeIdentity() failed', err); | ||||
|  | logger.error('[StartView] Failed to load initialization data', error); | ||||
|  | logger.error('[ContactQRScanShowView] Error processing contact QR', | ||||
|  |   error, rawValue); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Avoid**: Expected user cancels (use `info`/`debug`). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Context Hygiene Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Component Context | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | const log = logger.withContext('UserService'); | ||||
|  | log.info('User created', userId); | ||||
|  | log.error('Failed to create user', error); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | If not using `withContext`, prefix message with `[ComponentName]`. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Emoji Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Recommended set for visual scanning: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Start/finish: 🚀 / ✅ | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Retry/loop: 🔄 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - External call: 📡 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Data/metrics: 📊 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Inspection: 🔍 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Quick Before/After | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Before** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | console.log('User signed in', user.id, meta); | ||||
|  | console.error('Failed to update profile', err); | ||||
|  | console.info('Filter toggled', this.hasVisibleDid); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **After** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | import { logger } from '@/utils/logger'; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | logger.info('User signed in', user.id, meta); | ||||
|  | logger.error('Failed to update profile', err); | ||||
|  | logger.debug('[FeedFilters] Filter toggled', this.hasVisibleDid); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Checklist (for every PR) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] No `console.*` (or properly pragma'd in the allowed locations) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Correct import path for `logger` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Rest-parameter call shape (`message, ...args`) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Right level chosen (debug/info/warn/error) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] No secrets / oversized payloads / throwaway context objects | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Component context provided (scoped logger or `[Component]` prefix) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  |   `.cursor/rules/development/logging_standards.mdc` for the core standards and rules. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Logging Migration — Patterns and Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for specific migration patterns and | ||||
|  |   examples when converting console.* calls to logger usage. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Migration — Auto‑Rewrites (Apply Every Time) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Exact Transforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `console.debug(...)` → `logger.debug(...)` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `console.log(...)` → `logger.log(...)` (or `logger.info(...)` when | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   clearly stateful) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `console.info(...)` → `logger.info(...)` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `console.warn(...)` → `logger.warn(...)` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `console.error(...)` → `logger.error(...)` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Multi-arg Handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - First arg becomes `message` (stringify safely if non-string). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Remaining args map 1:1 to `...args`: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `console.info(msg, a, b)` → `logger.info(String(msg), a, b)` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Sole `Error` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `console.error(err)` → `logger.error(err.message, err)` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Object-wrapping Cleanup | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Replace `{{ userId, meta }}` wrappers with separate args: | ||||
|  | `logger.info('User signed in', userId, meta)` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Level Guidelines with Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### DEBUG Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | logger.debug('[HomeView] reloadFeedOnChange() called'); | ||||
|  | logger.debug('[HomeView] Current filter settings', | ||||
|  |   settings.filterFeedByVisible, | ||||
|  |   settings.filterFeedByNearby, | ||||
|  |   settings.searchBoxes?.length ?? 0); | ||||
|  | logger.debug('[FeedFilters] Toggling nearby filter', | ||||
|  |   this.isNearby, this.settingChanged, this.activeDid); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Avoid**: Vague messages (`'Processing data'`). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### INFO Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | logger.info('[StartView] Component mounted', process.env.VITE_PLATFORM); | ||||
|  | logger.info('[StartView] User selected new seed generation'); | ||||
|  | logger.info('[SearchAreaView] Search box stored', | ||||
|  |   searchBox.name, searchBox.bbox); | ||||
|  | logger.info('[ContactQRScanShowView] Contact registration OK', | ||||
|  |   contact.did); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Avoid**: Diagnostic details that belong in `debug`. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### WARN Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | logger.warn('[ContactQRScanShowView] Invalid scan result – no value', | ||||
|  |   resultType); | ||||
|  | logger.warn('[ContactQRScanShowView] Invalid QR format – no JWT in URL'); | ||||
|  | logger.warn('[ContactQRScanShowView] JWT missing "own" field'); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Avoid**: Hard failures (those are `error`). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### ERROR Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | logger.error('[HomeView Settings] initializeIdentity() failed', err); | ||||
|  | logger.error('[StartView] Failed to load initialization data', error); | ||||
|  | logger.error('[ContactQRScanShowView] Error processing contact QR', | ||||
|  |   error, rawValue); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Avoid**: Expected user cancels (use `info`/`debug`). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Context Hygiene Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Component Context | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | const log = logger.withContext('UserService'); | ||||
|  | log.info('User created', userId); | ||||
|  | log.error('Failed to create user', error); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | If not using `withContext`, prefix message with `[ComponentName]`. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Emoji Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Recommended set for visual scanning: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Start/finish: 🚀 / ✅ | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Retry/loop: 🔄 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - External call: 📡 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Data/metrics: 📊 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Inspection: 🔍 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Quick Before/After | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Before** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | console.log('User signed in', user.id, meta); | ||||
|  | console.error('Failed to update profile', err); | ||||
|  | console.info('Filter toggled', this.hasVisibleDid); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **After** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | import { logger } from '@/utils/logger'; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | logger.info('User signed in', user.id, meta); | ||||
|  | logger.error('Failed to update profile', err); | ||||
|  | logger.debug('[FeedFilters] Filter toggled', this.hasVisibleDid); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Checklist (for every PR) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] No `console.*` (or properly pragma'd in the allowed locations) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Correct import path for `logger` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Rest-parameter call shape (`message, ...args`) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Right level chosen (debug/info/warn/error) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] No secrets / oversized payloads / throwaway context objects | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Component context provided (scoped logger or `[Component]` prefix) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  |   `.cursor/rules/development/logging_standards.mdc` for the core standards and rules. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Logging Migration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Review**: Identify all `console.*` calls in the codebase | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Logger Import**: Verify logger utility is available and accessible | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Context Planning**: Plan component context for each logging call | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Level Assessment**: Determine appropriate log levels for each call | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Logging Migration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Import Replacement**: Replace `console.*` with `logger.*` calls | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Context Addition**: Add component context using scoped logger or prefix | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Level Selection**: Choose appropriate log level (debug/info/warn/error) | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Parameter Format**: Use rest-parameter call shape (`message, ...args`) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Logging Migration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Console Check**: Ensure no `console.*` methods remain (unless pragma'd) | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Context Validation**: Verify all logging calls have proper context | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Level Review**: Confirm log levels are appropriate for each situation | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing**: Test logging functionality across all platforms | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,176 @@ | |||||
|  | # Agent Contract — TimeSafari Logging (Unified, MANDATORY) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-19 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Mandatory logging standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Overview | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | This document defines unified logging standards for the TimeSafari project, | ||||
|  | ensuring consistent, rest-parameter logging style using the project logger. | ||||
|  | No `console.*` methods are allowed in production code. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Scope and Goals | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Scope**: Applies to all diffs and generated code in this workspace unless | ||||
|  | explicitly exempted below. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Goal**: One consistent, rest-parameter logging style using the project | ||||
|  | logger; no `console.*` in production code. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Non‑Negotiables (DO THIS) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - You **MUST** use the project logger; **DO NOT** use any `console.*` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   methods. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Import exactly as: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - `import { logger } from '@/utils/logger'` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - If `@` alias is unavailable, compute the correct relative path (do not | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |     fail). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Call signatures use **rest parameters**: `logger.info(message, ...args)` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Prefer primitives/IDs and small objects in `...args`; **never build a | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   throwaway object** just to "wrap context". | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Production defaults: Web = `warn+`, Electron = `error`, Dev/Capacitor = | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `info+` (override via `VITE_LOG_LEVEL`). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Database persistence**: `info|warn|error` are persisted; `debug` is not. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Use `logger.toDb(msg, level?)` for DB-only. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Available Logger API (Authoritative) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `logger.debug(message, ...args)` — verbose internals, timings, input/output | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   shapes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `logger.log(message, ...args)` — synonym of `info` for general info | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `logger.info(message, ...args)` — lifecycle, state changes, success paths | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `logger.warn(message, ...args)` — recoverable issues, retries, degraded mode | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `logger.error(message, ...args)` — failures, thrown exceptions, aborts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `logger.toDb(message, level?)` — DB-only entry (default level = `info`) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `logger.toConsoleAndDb(message, isError)` — console + DB (use sparingly) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `logger.withContext(componentName)` — returns a scoped logger | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Level Guidelines (Use These Heuristics) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### DEBUG | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Use for method entry/exit, computed values, filters, loops, retries, and | ||||
|  | external call payload sizes. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### INFO | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Use for user-visible lifecycle and completed operations. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### WARN | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Use for recoverable issues, fallbacks, unexpected-but-handled conditions. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### ERROR | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Use for unrecoverable failures, data integrity issues, and thrown | ||||
|  | exceptions. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Context Hygiene (Consistent, Minimal, Helpful) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Component context**: Prefer scoped logger. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Emojis**: Optional and minimal for visual scanning. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Sensitive data**: Never log secrets (tokens, keys, passwords) or | ||||
|  |   payloads >10KB. Prefer IDs over objects; redact/hash when needed. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## DB Logging Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `debug` **never** persists automatically. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `info|warn|error` persist automatically. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - For DB-only events (no console), call `logger.toDb('Message', | ||||
|  |   'info'|'warn'|'error')`. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Exceptions (Tightly Scoped) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Allowed paths (still prefer logger): | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `**/*.test.*`, `**/*.spec.*` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `scripts/dev/**`, `scripts/migrate/**` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | To intentionally keep `console.*`, add a pragma on the previous line: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // cursor:allow-console reason="short justification" | ||||
|  | console.log('temporary output'); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## CI & Diff Enforcement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Do not introduce `console.*` anywhere outside allowed, pragma'd spots. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - If an import is missing, insert it and resolve alias/relative path | ||||
|  |   correctly. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Enforce rest-parameter call shape in reviews; replace object-wrapped | ||||
|  |   context. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Ensure environment log level rules remain intact (`VITE_LOG_LEVEL` | ||||
|  |   respected). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  |   `.cursor/rules/development/logging_migration.mdc` for migration patterns and examples. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active and enforced | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Critical | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: TimeSafari logger utility | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Code review team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Adding Logging | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Logger Import**: Import logger as `import { logger } from | ||||
|  |   '@/utils/logger'` | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Log Level Selection**: Determine appropriate log level | ||||
|  |   (debug/info/warn/error) | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Context Planning**: Plan what context information to include | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Sensitive Data Review**: Identify any sensitive data that needs redaction | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Logging Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Rest Parameters**: Use `logger.info(message, ...args)` format, not object | ||||
|  |   wrapping | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Context Addition**: Include relevant IDs, primitives, or small objects in | ||||
|  |   args | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Level Appropriateness**: Use correct log level for the situation | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Scoped Logger**: Use `logger.withContext(componentName)` for | ||||
|  |   component-specific logging | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Logging Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Console Check**: Ensure no `console.*` methods are used (unless in | ||||
|  |   allowed paths) | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Performance Review**: Verify logging doesn't impact performance | ||||
|  | - [ ] **DB Persistence**: Use `logger.toDb()` for database-only logging if needed | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Environment Compliance**: Respect `VITE_LOG_LEVEL` environment | ||||
|  |   variable | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,160 @@ | |||||
|  | # Planning Examples — No Time Estimates | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for detailed planning examples and | ||||
|  |   anti-patterns when creating project plans. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 🎯 Example Planning (No Time Estimates) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Example 1: Simple Feature** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Phase 1: Core implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Basic functionality | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Single platform support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Unit tests | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Phase 2: Platform expansion | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Multi-platform support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Integration tests | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Phase 3: Polish | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - User testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Edge case handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Example 2: Complex Cross-Platform Feature** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Phase 1: Foundation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Architecture design | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Core service implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Basic web platform support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Phase 2: Platform Integration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Mobile platform support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Desktop platform support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Cross-platform consistency | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Phase 3: Testing & Polish | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Comprehensive testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Error handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - User experience refinement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 🚫 Anti-Patterns to Avoid | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"This should take X days"** - Red flag for time estimation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"Just a few hours"** - Ignores complexity and testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"Similar to X"** - Without considering differences | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"Quick fix"** - Nothing is ever quick in software | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"No testing needed"** - Testing always takes effort | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## ✅ Best Practices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **When Planning:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Break down everything** - no work is too small to plan | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Consider all platforms** - web, mobile, desktop differences | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Include testing strategy** - unit, integration, and user testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Account for unknowns** - there are always surprises | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 5. **Focus on dependencies** - what blocks what | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **When Presenting Plans:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Show the phases** - explain the logical progression | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Highlight dependencies** - what could block progress | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Define milestones** - clear success criteria | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Identify risks** - what could go wrong | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 5. **Suggest alternatives** - ways to reduce scope or complexity | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 🔄 Continuous Improvement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Track Progress** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Record planned vs. actual phases completed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Identify what took longer than expected | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Learn from complexity misjudgments | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Adjust planning process based on experience | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Learn from Experience** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Underestimated complexity**: Increase complexity categories | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Missed dependencies**: Improve dependency mapping | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform surprises**: Better platform research upfront | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 🎯 Integration with Harbor Pilot | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | This rule works in conjunction with: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Project Planning**: Focuses on phases and milestones | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Resource Allocation**: Based on complexity, not time | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Risk Management**: Identifies blockers and dependencies | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Stakeholder Communication**: Sets progress-based expectations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: `.cursor/rules/development/realistic_time_estimation.mdc` for | ||||
|  |   the core principles and framework. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Planning | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Requirements Review**: Understand all requirements completely | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Stakeholder Input**: Gather input from all stakeholders | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Complexity Assessment**: Evaluate technical and business complexity | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Analysis**: Consider requirements across all target platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Planning | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Phase Definition**: Define clear phases and milestones | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Dependency Mapping**: Map dependencies between tasks | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Risk Identification**: Identify potential risks and challenges | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Strategy**: Plan comprehensive testing approach | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Planning | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Stakeholder Review**: Review plan with stakeholders | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Document plan clearly with phases and milestones | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Team Communication**: Communicate plan to team | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Progress Tracking**: Set up monitoring and tracking mechanisms | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,128 @@ | |||||
|  | # Realistic Time Estimation — Development Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: **DO NOT MAKE TIME ESTIMATES**. Instead, use phases, | ||||
|  | > milestones, and complexity levels. Time estimates are consistently wrong | ||||
|  | > and create unrealistic expectations. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Development time estimates are consistently wrong and create unrealistic | ||||
|  | expectations. This rule ensures we focus on phases, milestones, and | ||||
|  | complexity rather than trying to predict specific timeframes. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Critical Rule | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **NEVER provide specific time estimates** (hours, days, weeks) for | ||||
|  | development tasks. Instead, use: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Complexity levels** (Low, Medium, High, Critical) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Phases and milestones** with clear acceptance criteria | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform-specific considerations** (Web, Mobile, Desktop) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Testing requirements** and validation steps | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Planning Framework | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Complexity Assessment | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Low**: Simple changes, existing patterns, minimal testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Medium**: New features, moderate testing, some integration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **High**: Complex features, extensive testing, multiple platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Critical**: Core architecture changes, full regression testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Platform Categories | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Web**: Browser compatibility, responsive design, accessibility | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Mobile**: Native APIs, platform-specific testing, deployment | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Desktop**: Electron integration, system APIs, distribution | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Testing Strategy | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Unit tests**: Core functionality validation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Integration tests**: Component interaction testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **E2E tests**: User workflow validation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform tests**: Cross-platform compatibility | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Process Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Planning Phase | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Scope Definition**: Clear requirements and acceptance criteria | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Complexity Assessment**: Evaluate technical and business complexity | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Phase Breakdown**: Divide into logical, testable phases | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Milestone Definition**: Define success criteria for each phase | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Execution Phase | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Phase 1**: Foundation and core implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Phase 2**: Feature completion and integration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Phase 3**: Testing, refinement, and documentation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Phase 4**: Deployment and validation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Validation Phase | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Acceptance Testing**: Verify against defined criteria | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Platform Testing**: Validate across target platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Performance Testing**: Ensure performance requirements met | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Documentation**: Update relevant documentation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Remember | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Your first estimate is wrong. Your second estimate is probably still | ||||
|  | wrong. Focus on progress, not deadlines.** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/development/planning_examples.mdc` for detailed planning examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/development/complexity_assessment.mdc` for complexity evaluation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active development guidelines | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: None | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Project managers | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Time Estimation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Requirements Analysis**: Understand all requirements and acceptance criteria | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Complexity Assessment**: Evaluate technical and business complexity | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Review**: Identify requirements across all target platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Stakeholder Input**: Gather input from all affected parties | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Time Estimation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Phase Breakdown**: Divide work into logical, testable phases | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Complexity Classification**: Assign complexity levels (Low/Medium/High/Critical) | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Considerations**: Account for platform-specific requirements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Strategy**: Plan comprehensive testing approach | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Time Estimation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Milestone Definition**: Define success criteria for each phase | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Progress Tracking**: Set up monitoring and tracking mechanisms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Document estimation process and assumptions | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Stakeholder Communication**: Share estimation approach and progress focus | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,262 @@ | |||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | description: Use this workflow when doing **pre-implementation research, defect | ||||
|  |   investigations with uncertain repros, or clarifying system architecture and | ||||
|  |   behaviors**. | ||||
|  | alwaysApply: false | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "coaching_level": "light", | ||||
|  |   "socratic_max_questions": 2, | ||||
|  |   "verbosity": "concise", | ||||
|  |   "timebox_minutes": null, | ||||
|  |   "format_enforcement": "strict" | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Research & Diagnostic Workflow (R&D) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Provide a **repeatable, evidence-first** workflow to investigate features and | ||||
|  | defects **before coding**. Outputs are concise reports, hypotheses, and next | ||||
|  | steps—**not** code changes. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## When to Use | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Pre-implementation research for new features | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Defect investigations (repros uncertain, user-specific failures) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Architecture/behavior clarifications (e.g., auth flows, merges, migrations) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Enhanced with Software Development Ruleset | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | When investigating software issues, also apply: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Code Path Tracing**: Required for technical investigations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Evidence Validation**: Ensure claims are code-backed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Solution Complexity Assessment**: Justify architectural changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Output Contract (strict) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1) **Objective** — 1–2 lines | ||||
|  | 2) **System Map (if helpful)** — short diagram or bullet flow (≤8 bullets) | ||||
|  | 3) **Findings (Evidence-linked)** — bullets; each with file/function refs | ||||
|  | 4) **Hypotheses & Failure Modes** — short list, each testable | ||||
|  | 5) **Corrections** — explicit deltas from earlier assumptions (if any) | ||||
|  | 6) **Diagnostics** — what to check next (logs, DB, env, repro steps) | ||||
|  | 7) **Risks & Scope** — what could break; affected components | ||||
|  | 8) **Decision/Next Steps** — what we'll do, who's involved, by when | ||||
|  | 9) **References** — code paths, ADRs, docs | ||||
|  | 10) **Competence & Collaboration Hooks** — brief, skimmable | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > Keep total length lean. Prefer links and bullets over prose. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Quickstart Template | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Copy/paste and fill: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```md | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Investigation — <short title> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Objective | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | <one or two lines> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## System Map | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - <module> → <function> → <downstream> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - <data path> → <db table> → <api> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Findings (Evidence) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - <claim> —  | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   evidence: `src/path/file.ts:function` (lines X–Y); log snippet/trace id | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - <claim> — evidence: `...` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Hypotheses & Failure Modes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - H1: <hypothesis>; would fail when <condition> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - H2: <hypothesis>; watch for <signal> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Corrections | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Updated: <old statement> → <new statement with evidence> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Diagnostics (Next Checks) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Repro on <platform/version> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Inspect <table/store> for <record> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Capture <log/trace> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Risks & Scope | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Impacted: <areas/components>; Data: <tables/keys>; Users: <segments> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Decision / Next Steps | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Owner: <name>; By: <date> (YYYY-MM-DD) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Action: <spike/bugfix/ADR>; Exit criteria: <binary checks> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## References | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `src/...` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ADR: `docs/adr/xxxx-yy-zz-something.md` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Design: `docs/...` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Competence Hooks | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Why this works: <≤3 bullets> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Common pitfalls: <≤3 bullets> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Next skill: <≤1 item> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Teach-back: "<one question>" | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Evidence Quality Bar | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Cite the source** (file:func, line range if possible). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Prefer primary evidence** (code, logs) over inference. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Disambiguate platform** (Web/Capacitor/Electron) and **state** (migration, | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   auth). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Note uncertainty** explicitly. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Code Path Tracing (Required for Software Investigations) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Before proposing solutions, trace the actual execution path: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Entry Points**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Identify where the flow begins (user action, API call, etc.) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Component Flow**: Map which components/methods are involved | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Data Path**: Track how data moves through the system | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Exit Points**: Confirm where the flow ends and what results | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence Collection**: Gather specific code citations for each step | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Collaboration Hooks | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Syncs:** 10–15m with QA/Security/Platform owners for high-risk areas. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **ADR:** Record major decisions; link here. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Review:** Share repro + diagnostics checklist in PR/issue. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration with Other Rulesets | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### With software_development.mdc | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Enhanced Evidence Validation**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Use code path tracing for technical investigations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Architecture Assessment**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Apply complexity justification to proposed solutions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Impact Analysis**: Assess effects on existing systems before recommendations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### With base_context.mdc | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Competence Building**: Focus on technical investigation skills | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Collaboration**: Structure outputs for team review and discussion | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Self-Check (model, before responding) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Output matches the **Output Contract** sections. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Each claim has **evidence** or **uncertainty** is flagged. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Hypotheses are testable; diagnostics are actionable. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Competence + collaboration hooks present (≤120 words total). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Respect toggles; keep it concise. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code path traced** (for software investigations). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence validated** against actual code execution. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Optional Globs (examples) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > Uncomment `globs` in the header if you want auto-attach behavior. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `src/platforms/**`, `src/services/**` — | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   attach during service/feature investigations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `docs/adr/**` — attach when editing ADRs | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Referenced Files | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Consider including templates as context: `@adr_template.mdc`, | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `@investigation_report_example.mdc` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Investigation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Problem Definition**: Clearly define the research question or issue | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Scope Definition**: Determine investigation scope and boundaries | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Methodology Planning**: Plan investigation approach and methods | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Resource Assessment**: Identify required resources and tools | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Investigation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence Collection**: Gather relevant evidence and data systematically | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Path Tracing**: Map execution flow for software investigations | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Analysis**: Analyze evidence using appropriate methods | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Document investigation process and findings | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Investigation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Synthesis**: Synthesize findings into actionable insights | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Report Creation**: Create comprehensive investigation report | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Recommendations**: Provide clear, actionable recommendations | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Team Communication**: Share findings and next steps with team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,227 @@ | |||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | alwaysApply: false | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Software Development Ruleset | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-19 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Core development guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Specialized guidelines for software development tasks including code review, | ||||
|  | debugging, architecture decisions, and testing. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Core Principles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 1. Evidence-First Development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Code Citations Required**: Always cite specific file:line references when | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   making claims | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Execution Path Tracing**: Trace actual code execution before proposing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   architectural changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Assumption Validation**: Flag assumptions as "assumed" vs "evidence-based" | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 2. Code Review Standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Trace Before Proposing**: Always trace execution paths before suggesting | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Evidence Over Inference**: Prefer code citations over logical deductions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Scope Validation**: Confirm the actual scope of problems before proposing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   solutions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 3. Problem-Solution Validation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Problem Scope**: Does the solution address the actual problem? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Evidence Alignment**: Does the solution match the evidence? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Complexity Justification**: Is added complexity justified by real needs? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Alternative Analysis**: What simpler solutions were considered? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### 4. Dependency Management & Environment Validation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Pre-build Validation**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Always validate critical dependencies before executing | ||||
|  |   build scripts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Environment Consistency**: Ensure team members have identical development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   environments | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Dependency Verification**: Check that required packages are installed and | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   accessible | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Path Resolution**: Use `npx` for local dependencies to avoid PATH issues | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Required Workflows | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Proposing Changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Path Tracing**: Map execution flow from entry to exit | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence Collection**: Gather specific code citations and logs | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Assumption Surfacing**: Identify what's proven vs. inferred | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Scope Validation**: Confirm the actual extent of the problem | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Dependency Validation**: Verify all required dependencies are available | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   and accessible | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Solution Design | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence Alignment**: Ensure solution addresses proven problems | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Complexity Assessment**: Justify any added complexity | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Alternative Evaluation**: Consider simpler approaches first | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Impact Analysis**: Assess effects on existing systems | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Environment Impact**: Assess how changes affect team member setups | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Software-Specific Competence Hooks | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Evidence Validation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"What code path proves this claim?"** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"How does data actually flow through the system?"** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"What am I assuming vs. what can I prove?"** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Code Tracing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"What's the execution path from user action to system response?"** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"Which components actually interact in this scenario?"** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"Where does the data originate and where does it end up?"** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Architecture Decisions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"What evidence shows this change is necessary?"** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"What simpler solution could achieve the same goal?"** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"How does this change affect the existing system architecture?"** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Dependency & Environment Management | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"What dependencies does this feature require and are they properly | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   declared?"** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"How will this change affect team member development environments?"** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **"What validation can we add to catch dependency issues early?"** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration with Other Rulesets | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### With base_context.mdc | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Inherits generic competence principles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Adds software-specific evidence requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Maintains collaboration and learning focus | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### With research_diagnostic.mdc | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Enhances investigation with code path tracing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Adds evidence validation to diagnostic workflow | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Strengthens problem identification accuracy | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Usage Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### When to Use This Ruleset | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Code reviews and architectural decisions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Bug investigation and debugging | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Performance optimization | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Feature implementation planning | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Testing strategy development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### When to Combine with Others | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **base_context + software_development**: General development tasks | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **research_diagnostic + software_development**: Technical investigations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **All three**: Complex architectural decisions or major refactoring | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Self-Check (model, before responding) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Code path traced and documented | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Evidence cited with specific file:line references | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Assumptions clearly flagged as proven vs. inferred | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Solution complexity justified by evidence | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Simpler alternatives considered and documented | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Impact on existing systems assessed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Dependencies validated and accessible | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Environment impact assessed for team members | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Pre-build validation implemented where appropriate | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: `.cursor/rules/development/dependency_management.mdc` for | ||||
|  |   detailed dependency management practices. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active development guidelines | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: base_context.mdc, research_diagnostic.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Code review team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Development Work | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Path Tracing**: Map execution flow from entry to exit | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence Collection**: Gather specific code citations and logs | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Assumption Surfacing**: Identify what's proven vs. inferred | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Scope Validation**: Confirm the actual extent of the problem | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence Alignment**: Ensure solution addresses proven problems | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Complexity Assessment**: Justify any added complexity | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Alternative Evaluation**: Consider simpler approaches first | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Impact Analysis**: Assess effects on existing systems | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Path Validation**: Verify execution paths are correct | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence Documentation**: Document all code citations and evidence | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Assumption Review**: Confirm all assumptions are documented | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Environment Impact**: Assess how changes affect team member setups | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,146 @@ | |||||
|  | # Time Handling in Development Workflow | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-17 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Production Ready | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Overview | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | This guide establishes **how time should be referenced and used** across the | ||||
|  | development workflow. It is not tied to any one project, but applies to **all | ||||
|  | feature development, issue investigations, ADRs, and documentation**. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## General Principles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Explicit over relative**: Always prefer absolute dates (`2025-08-17`) over | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   relative references like "last week." | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **ISO 8601 Standard**: Use `YYYY-MM-DD` format for all date references in | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   docs, issues, ADRs, and commits. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Time zones**: Default to **UTC** unless explicitly tied to user-facing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   behavior. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Precision**: Only specify as much precision as needed (date vs. datetime vs. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   timestamp). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Consistency**: Align time references across ADRs, commits, and investigation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   reports. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## In Documentation & ADRs | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Record decision dates using **absolute ISO dates**. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - For ongoing timelines, state start and end explicitly (e.g., `2025-08-01` → | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `2025-08-17`). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Avoid ambiguous terms like *recently*, *last month*, or *soon*. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - For time-based experiments (e.g., A/B tests), always include: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - Start date | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - Expected duration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - Review date checkpoint | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## In Code & Commits | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use **UTC timestamps** in logs, DB migrations, and serialized formats. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - In commits, link changes to **date-bound ADRs or investigation docs**. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - For migrations, include both **applied date** and **intended version window**. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use constants for known fixed dates; avoid hardcoding arbitrary strings. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## In Investigations & Research | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Capture **when** an issue occurred (absolute time or version tag). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - When describing failures: note whether they are **time-sensitive** (e.g., | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   after | ||||
|  |   migrations, cache expirations). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Record diagnostic timelines in ISO format (not relative). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - For performance regressions, annotate both **baseline timeframe** and | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   **measurement timeframe**. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Collaboration Hooks | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - During reviews, verify **time references are clear, absolute, and | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   standardized**. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - In syncs, reframe relative terms ("this week") into shared absolute | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   references. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Tag ADRs with both **date created** and **review by** checkpoints. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Self-Check Before Submitting | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Did I check the time using the **developer's actual system time and | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |       timezone**? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Am I using absolute ISO dates? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Is UTC assumed unless specified otherwise? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Did I avoid ambiguous relative terms? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] If duration matters, did I specify both start and end? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] For future work, did I include a review/revisit date? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/development/time_implementation.mdc` for | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   detailed implementation instructions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/development/time_examples.mdc` for practical examples and patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active time handling guidelines | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: None | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Documentation team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Maintainer**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Next Review**: 2025-09-17 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Time-Related Work | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Time Context**: Understand what time information is needed | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Format Review**: Review time formatting standards (UTC, ISO 8601) | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Check**: Identify platform-specific time requirements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **User Context**: Consider user's timezone and preferences | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Time Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **UTC Usage**: Use UTC for all system and log timestamps | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Format Consistency**: Apply consistent time formatting patterns | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Timezone Handling**: Properly handle timezone conversions | ||||
|  | - [ ] **User Display**: Format times appropriately for user display | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Time Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Validation**: Verify time formats are correct and consistent | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing**: Test time handling across different scenarios | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Update relevant documentation with time patterns | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Review**: Confirm implementation follows time standards | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,243 @@ | |||||
|  | # Time Examples — Practical Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for practical examples and | ||||
|  |   patterns when working with time handling in development. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Good | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - "Feature flag rollout started on `2025-08-01` and will be reviewed on | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `2025-08-21`." | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - "Migration applied on `2025-07-15T14:00Z`." | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - "Issue reproduced on `2025-08-17T09:00-05:00 (local)` / | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `2025-08-17T14:00Z (UTC)`." | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Bad | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - "Feature flag rolled out last week." | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - "Migration applied recently." | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - "Now is August, so we assume this was last month." | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### More Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### Issue Reports | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Good**: "User reported login failure at `2025-08-17T14:30:00Z`. Issue | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   persisted until `2025-08-17T15:45:00Z`." | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Bad**: "User reported login failure earlier today. Issue lasted for a | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   while." | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### Release Planning | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Good**: "Feature X scheduled for release on `2025-08-25`. Testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   window: `2025-08-20` to `2025-08-24`." | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Bad**: "Feature X will be released next week after testing." | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### Performance Monitoring | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Good**: "Baseline performance measured on `2025-08-10T09:00:00Z`. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Regression detected on `2025-08-15T14:00:00Z`." | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Bad**: "Performance was good last week but got worse this week." | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Technical Implementation Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Database Storage | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```sql | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | -- ✅ Good: Store in UTC | ||||
|  | created_at TIMESTAMP DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP, | ||||
|  | updated_at TIMESTAMP DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP ON UPDATE CURRENT_TIMESTAMP | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | -- ❌ Bad: Store in local time | ||||
|  | created_at TIMESTAMP DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP, | ||||
|  | updated_at TIMESTAMP DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP ON UPDATE CURRENT_TIMESTAMP | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### API Responses | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ✅ Good: Include both UTC and local time | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "eventTime": "2025-08-17T14:00:00Z", | ||||
|  |   "localTime": "2025-08-17T10:00:00-04:00", | ||||
|  |   "timezone": "America/New_York" | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ❌ Bad: Only local time | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "eventTime": "2025-08-17T10:00:00-04:00" | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Logging | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```python | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # ✅ Good: Log in UTC with timezone info | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | logger.info(f"User action at {datetime.utcnow().isoformat()}Z (UTC)") | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # ❌ Bad: Log in local time | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | logger.info(f"User action at {datetime.now()}") | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Timezone Handling Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Good Timezone Usage | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ✅ Good: Store UTC, convert for display | ||||
|  | const eventTime = new Date().toISOString(); // Store in UTC | ||||
|  | const localTime = new Date().toLocaleString('en-US', { | ||||
|  |   timeZone: 'America/New_York' | ||||
|  | }); // Convert for display | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ✅ Good: Include timezone context | ||||
|  | const timestamp = { | ||||
|  |   utc: "2025-08-17T14:00:00Z", | ||||
|  |   local: "2025-08-17T10:00:00-04:00", | ||||
|  |   timezone: "America/New_York" | ||||
|  | }; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Bad Timezone Usage | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ❌ Bad: Assume timezone | ||||
|  | const now = new Date(); // Assumes system timezone | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ❌ Bad: Mix formats | ||||
|  | const timestamp = "2025-08-17 10:00 AM"; // Ambiguous format | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Common Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Date Range References | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ✅ Good: Explicit date ranges | ||||
|  | const dateRange = { | ||||
|  |   start: "2025-08-01T00:00:00Z", | ||||
|  |   end: "2025-08-31T23:59:59Z" | ||||
|  | }; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ❌ Bad: Relative ranges | ||||
|  | const dateRange = { | ||||
|  |   start: "beginning of month", | ||||
|  |   end: "end of month" | ||||
|  | }; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Duration References | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ✅ Good: Specific durations | ||||
|  | const duration = { | ||||
|  |   value: 30, | ||||
|  |   unit: "days", | ||||
|  |   startDate: "2025-08-01T00:00:00Z" | ||||
|  | }; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ❌ Bad: Vague durations | ||||
|  | const duration = "about a month"; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Version References | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ✅ Good: Version with date | ||||
|  | const version = { | ||||
|  |   number: "1.2.3", | ||||
|  |   releaseDate: "2025-08-17T10:00:00Z", | ||||
|  |   buildDate: "2025-08-17T09:30:00Z" | ||||
|  | }; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ❌ Bad: Version without context | ||||
|  | const version = "latest"; | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## References | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ISO 8601 Date and Time Standard](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [IANA Timezone Database](https://www.iana.org/time-zones) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ADR Template](./adr_template.md) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [Research & Diagnostic Workflow](./research_diagnostic.mdc) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Rule of Thumb**: Every time reference in development artifacts should be | ||||
|  | **clear in 6 months without context**, and aligned to the **developer's actual | ||||
|  | current time**. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Technical Rule of Thumb**: **Store in UTC, display in local time, always | ||||
|  | include timezone context.** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/development/time.mdc` for core principles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/development/time_implementation.mdc` for implementation instructions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active examples and patterns | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Medium | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: time.mdc, time_implementation.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Documentation team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Time Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Time Context**: Understand what time information needs to be implemented | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Format Review**: Review time formatting standards (UTC, ISO 8601) | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Check**: Identify platform-specific time requirements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **User Context**: Consider user's timezone and display preferences | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Time Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **UTC Storage**: Use UTC for all system and log timestamps | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Format Consistency**: Apply consistent time formatting patterns | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Timezone Handling**: Properly handle timezone conversions | ||||
|  | - [ ] **User Display**: Format times appropriately for user display | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Time Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Format Validation**: Verify time formats are correct and consistent | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Cross-Platform Testing**: Test time handling across different platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Update relevant documentation with time patterns | ||||
|  | - [ ] **User Experience**: Confirm time display is clear and user-friendly | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,285 @@ | |||||
|  | # Time Implementation — Technical Instructions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for detailed implementation instructions | ||||
|  |   when working with time handling in development. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Real-Time Context in Developer Interactions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - The model must always resolve **"current time"** using the **developer's | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   actual system time and timezone**. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - When generating timestamps (e.g., in investigation logs, ADRs, or examples), | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   the model should: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - Use the **developer's current local time** by default. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - Indicate the timezone explicitly (e.g., `2025-08-17T10:32-05:00`). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - Optionally provide UTC alongside if context requires cross-team clarity. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - When interpreting relative terms like *now*, *today*, *last week*: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - Resolve them against the **developer's current time**. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - Convert them into **absolute ISO-8601 values** in the output. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## LLM Time Checking Instructions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **CRITICAL**: The LLM must actively query the system for current time rather | ||||
|  | than assuming or inventing times. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### How to Check Current Time | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### 1. **Query System Time (Required)** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Always start** by querying the current system time using available tools | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Never assume** what the current time is | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Never use** placeholder values like "current time" or "now" | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### 2. **Available Time Query Methods** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **System Clock**: Use `date` command or equivalent system time function | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Programming Language**: Use language-specific time functions (e.g., | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   `Date.now()`, `datetime.now()`) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Environment Variables**: Check for time-related environment variables | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **API Calls**: Use time service APIs if available | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### 3. **Required Time Information** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | When querying time, always obtain: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Current Date**: YYYY-MM-DD format | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Current Time**: HH:MM:SS format (24-hour) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Timezone**: Current system timezone or UTC offset | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **UTC Equivalent**: Convert local time to UTC for cross-team clarity | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### 4. **Time Query Examples** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Example: Query system time | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | $ date | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Expected output: Mon Aug 17 10:32:45 EDT 2025 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Example: Query UTC time | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | $ date -u | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Expected output: Mon Aug 17 14:32:45 UTC 2025 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```python | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Example: Python time query | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | import datetime | ||||
|  | current_time = datetime.datetime.now() | ||||
|  | utc_time = datetime.datetime.utcnow() | ||||
|  | print(f"Local: {current_time}") | ||||
|  | print(f"UTC: {utc_time}") | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```javascript | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // Example: JavaScript time query | ||||
|  | const now = new Date(); | ||||
|  | const utc = new Date().toISOString(); | ||||
|  | console.log(`Local: ${now}`); | ||||
|  | console.log(`UTC: ${utc}`); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### 5. **LLM Time Checking Workflow** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Query**: Actively query system for current time | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Validate**: Confirm time data is reasonable and current | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Format**: Convert to ISO 8601 format | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. **Context**: Provide both local and UTC times when helpful | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 5. **Document**: Show the source of time information | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### 6. **Error Handling for Time Queries** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **If time query fails**: Ask user for current time or use "unknown time" | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   with explanation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **If timezone unclear**: Default to UTC and ask for clarification | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **If time seems wrong**: Verify with user before proceeding | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Always log**: Record when and how time was obtained | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### 7. **Time Query Verification** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Before using queried time, verify: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Time is recent (within last few minutes) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Timezone information is available | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] UTC conversion is accurate | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Format follows ISO 8601 standard | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Behavior Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Never invent a "fake now"**: All "current time" references must come from | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   the real system clock available at runtime. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Check developer time zone**: If ambiguous, ask for clarification (e.g., | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   "Should I use UTC or your local timezone?"). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Format for clarity**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - Local time: `YYYY-MM-DDTHH:mm±hh:mm` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   - UTC equivalent (if needed): `YYYY-MM-DDTHH:mmZ` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Technical Implementation Notes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### UTC Storage Principle | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Store all timestamps in UTC** in databases, logs, and serialized formats | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Convert to local time only for user display** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Use ISO 8601 format** for all storage: `YYYY-MM-DDTHH:mm:ss.sssZ` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Common Implementation Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### Database Storage | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```sql | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | -- ✅ Good: Store in UTC | ||||
|  | created_at TIMESTAMP DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP, | ||||
|  | updated_at TIMESTAMP DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP ON UPDATE CURRENT_TIMESTAMP | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### API Responses | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | // ✅ Good: Include both UTC and local time | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "eventTime": "2025-08-17T14:00:00Z", | ||||
|  |   "localTime": "2025-08-17T10:00:00-04:00", | ||||
|  |   "timezone": "America/New_York" | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### Logging | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```python | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # ✅ Good: Log in UTC with timezone info | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | logger.info(f"User action at {datetime.utcnow().isoformat()}Z (UTC)") | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Timezone Handling Best Practices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### 1. Always Store Timezone Information | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Include IANA timezone identifier (e.g., `America/New_York`) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Store UTC offset at time of creation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Handle daylight saving time transitions automatically | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### 2. User Display Considerations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Convert UTC to user's preferred timezone | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Show timezone abbreviation when helpful | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use relative time for recent events ("2 hours ago") | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### 3. Edge Case Handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Daylight Saving Time**: Use timezone-aware libraries | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Leap Seconds**: Handle gracefully (rare but important) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Invalid Times**: Validate before processing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Common Mistakes to Avoid | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### 1. Timezone Confusion | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Don't**: Assume server timezone is user timezone | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Do**: Always convert UTC to user's local time for display | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### 2. Format Inconsistency | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Don't**: Mix different time formats in the same system | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Do**: Standardize on ISO 8601 for all storage | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### 3. Relative Time References | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Don't**: Use relative terms in persistent storage | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Do**: Convert relative terms to absolute timestamps immediately | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/development/time.mdc` for core principles | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/development/time_examples.mdc` for practical examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active implementation guidelines | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Medium | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: time.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, DevOps team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Time Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Time Context**: Understand what time information needs to be implemented | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Format Review**: Review time formatting standards (UTC, ISO 8601) | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Check**: Identify platform-specific time requirements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **User Context**: Consider user's timezone and display preferences | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Time Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **UTC Storage**: Use UTC for all system and log timestamps | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Format Consistency**: Apply consistent time formatting patterns | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Timezone Handling**: Properly handle timezone conversions | ||||
|  | - [ ] **User Display**: Format times appropriately for user display | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Time Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Format Validation**: Verify time formats are correct and consistent | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Cross-Platform Testing**: Test time handling across different platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Update relevant documentation with time patterns | ||||
|  | - [ ] **User Experience**: Confirm time display is clear and user-friendly | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,212 @@ | |||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | description: when dealing with types and Typesript | ||||
|  | alwaysApply: false | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "coaching_level": "light", | ||||
|  |   "socratic_max_questions": 7, | ||||
|  |   "verbosity": "concise", | ||||
|  |   "timebox_minutes": null, | ||||
|  |   "format_enforcement": "strict" | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # TypeScript Type Safety Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-19 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Type safety enforcement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Overview | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Practical rules to keep TypeScript strict and predictable. Minimize exceptions. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Core Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **No `any`** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Use explicit types. If unknown, use `unknown` and **narrow** via guards. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Error handling uses guards** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Reuse guards from `src/interfaces/**` (e.g., `isDatabaseError`, | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |      `isApiError`). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Catch with `unknown`; never cast to `any`. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Dynamic property access is type‑safe** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Use `keyof` + `in` checks: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |      ```ts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |      obj[k as keyof typeof obj] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |      ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Avoid `(obj as any)[k]`. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Type Safety Enforcement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Core Type Safety Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **No `any` Types**: Use explicit types or `unknown` with proper type guards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Error Handling Uses Guards**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Implement and reuse type guards from `src/interfaces/**` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Dynamic Property Access**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Use `keyof` + `in` checks for type-safe property access | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Type Guard Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **API Errors**: Use `isApiError(error)` guards for API error handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Database Errors**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Use `isDatabaseError(error)` guards for database operations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Axios Errors**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Implement `isAxiosError(error)` guards for HTTP error handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Implementation Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Avoid Type Assertions**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   Replace `as any` with proper type guards and interfaces | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Narrow Types Properly**: Use type guards to narrow `unknown` types safely | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Document Type Decisions**: Explain complex type structures and their purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Minimal Special Cases (document in PR when used) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Vue refs / instances**: Use `ComponentPublicInstance` or specific | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   component types for dynamic refs. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **3rd‑party libs without types**: Narrow immediately to a **known | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   interface**; do not leave `any` hanging. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Patterns (short) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Database errors | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```ts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | try { await this.$addContact(contact); } | ||||
|  | catch (e: unknown) { | ||||
|  |   if (isDatabaseError(e) && e.message.includes("Key already exists")) { | ||||
|  |     /* handle duplicate */ | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### API errors | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```ts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | try { await apiCall(); } | ||||
|  | catch (e: unknown) { | ||||
|  |   if (isApiError(e)) { | ||||
|  |     const msg = e.response?.data?.error?.message; | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Dynamic keys | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```ts | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | const keys = Object.keys(newSettings).filter( | ||||
|  | k => k in newSettings && newSettings[k as keyof typeof newSettings] !== | ||||
|  |   undefined | ||||
|  | ); | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Checklists | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Before commit** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] No `any` (except documented, justified cases) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Errors handled via guards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Dynamic access uses `keyof`/`in` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Imports point to correct interfaces/types | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Code review** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Hunt hidden `as any` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Guard‑based error paths verified | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Dynamic ops are type‑safe | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Prefer existing types over re‑inventing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Tools | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `npm run lint-fix` — lint & auto‑fix | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `npm run type-check` — strict type compilation (CI + pre‑release) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - IDE: enable strict TS, ESLint/TS ESLint, Volar (Vue 3) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## References | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - TS Handbook — <https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - TS‑ESLint — <https://typescript-eslint.io/rules/> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Vue 3 + TS — <https://vuejs.org/guide/typescript/> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active type safety guidelines | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: TypeScript, ESLint, Vue 3 | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - TS Handbook — <https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - TS‑ESLint — <https://typescript-eslint.io/rules/> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Vue 3 + TS — <https://vuejs.org/guide/typescript/> | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Type Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Type Analysis**: Understand current type definitions and usage | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Interface Review**: Review existing interfaces and types | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Error Handling**: Plan error handling with type guards | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Dynamic Access**: Identify dynamic access patterns that need type safety | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Type Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Type Safety**: Ensure types provide meaningful safety guarantees | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Error Guards**: Implement proper error handling with type guards | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Dynamic Operations**: Use `keyof`/`in` for dynamic access | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Import Validation**: Verify imports point to correct interfaces/types | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Type Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Linting Check**: Run `npm run lint-fix` to verify code quality | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Type Check**: Run `npm run type-check` for strict type compilation | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Review**: Hunt for hidden `as any` and type safety issues | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Update type documentation and examples | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,37 @@ | |||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | alwaysApply: false | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | # Directive for Documentation Generation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. Produce a **small, focused set of documents** rather than an overwhelming volume. | ||||
|  | 2. Ensure the content is **maintainable and worth preserving**, so that humans | ||||
|  |    are motivated to keep it up to date. | ||||
|  | 3. Prioritize **educational value**: the documents must clearly explain the | ||||
|  |    workings of the system. | ||||
|  | 4. Avoid **shallow, generic, or filler explanations** often found in AI-generated | ||||
|  |    documentation. | ||||
|  | 5. Aim for **clarity, depth, and usefulness**, so readers gain genuine understanding. | ||||
|  | 6. Always check the local system date to determine current date. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Documentation Creation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Scope Definition**: Define what needs to be documented | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Audience Analysis**: Identify target readers and their needs | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Content Planning**: Plan focused, educational content structure | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Maintenance Planning**: Ensure content will be worth preserving | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Documentation Creation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Educational Focus**: Clearly explain how the system works | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Depth and Clarity**: Provide genuine understanding, not surface explanations | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Focused Content**: Keep documents small and focused on specific topics | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Current Date**: Check local system date for time-sensitive content | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Documentation Creation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Quality Review**: Ensure content is clear, deep, and useful | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Maintainability Check**: Verify content motivates humans to keep it updated | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Audience Validation**: Confirm content meets target reader needs | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Integration**: Integrate with existing documentation structure | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,210 @@ | |||||
|  | # Markdown Core Standards & Automation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-21 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Core markdown standards and automation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Overview | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | When generating markdown content, you MUST: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Line Length**: Never exceed 80 characters per line | ||||
|  | 2. **Blank Lines**: Always add blank lines around headings, lists, and | ||||
|  |    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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ❌ Generate long lines that need breaking | ||||
|  | - ❌ 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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ✅ Write within 80-character limits | ||||
|  | - ✅ 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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Line Length | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Maximum line length**: 80 characters | ||||
|  | - **Exception**: Code blocks (JSON, shell, TypeScript, etc.) - no line | ||||
|  |   length enforcement | ||||
|  | - **Rationale**: Ensures readability across different screen sizes and | ||||
|  |   terminal widths | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Blank Lines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Headings**: Must be surrounded by blank lines above and below | ||||
|  | - **Lists**: Must be surrounded by blank lines above and below | ||||
|  | - **Code blocks**: Must be surrounded by blank lines above and below | ||||
|  | - **Maximum consecutive blank lines**: 1 (no multiple blank lines) | ||||
|  | - **File start**: No blank lines at the beginning of the file | ||||
|  | - **File end**: Single newline character at the end | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Whitespace | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **No trailing spaces**: Remove all trailing whitespace from lines | ||||
|  | - **No tabs**: Use spaces for indentation | ||||
|  | - **Consistent indentation**: 2 spaces for list items and nested content | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Heading Standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Format | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Style**: ATX-style headings (`#`, `##`, `###`, etc.) | ||||
|  | - **Case**: Title case for general headings | ||||
|  | - **Code references**: Use backticks for file names and technical terms | ||||
|  |   - ✅ `### Current package.json Scripts` | ||||
|  |   - ❌ `### Current Package.json Scripts` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Hierarchy | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **H1 (#)**: Document title only | ||||
|  | - **H2 (##)**: Major sections | ||||
|  | - **H3 (###)**: Subsections | ||||
|  | - **H4 (####)**: Sub-subsections | ||||
|  | - **H5+**: Avoid deeper nesting | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## List Standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Unordered Lists | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Marker**: Use `-` (hyphen) consistently | ||||
|  | - **Indentation**: 2 spaces for nested items | ||||
|  | - **Blank lines**: Surround lists with blank lines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Ordered Lists | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Format**: `1.`, `2.`, `3.` (sequential numbering) | ||||
|  | - **Indentation**: 2 spaces for nested items | ||||
|  | - **Blank lines**: Surround lists with blank lines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Task Lists | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Format**: `- [ ]` for incomplete, `- [x]` for complete | ||||
|  | - **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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Format**: Single backticks for inline code | ||||
|  | - **Use cases**: File names, commands, variables, technical terms | ||||
|  | - **Examples**: `package.json`, `npm run build`, `VITE_PLATFORM` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Code Blocks | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Format**: Triple backticks with language specification | ||||
|  | - **Language**: Always specify the language for syntax highlighting | ||||
|  | - **Blank lines**: Surround with blank lines above and below | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Automation System | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Available Commands | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`npm run markdown:fix`** - Fix formatting in all markdown files | ||||
|  |   using markdownlint-cli2 --fix | ||||
|  | - **`npm run markdown:check`** - Validate formatting without fixing | ||||
|  |   using markdownlint-cli2 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### How It Works | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **AI Agent Compliance** (Primary): AI follows markdown rules during | ||||
|  |    generation | ||||
|  | 2. **Pre-commit Hooks** (Backup): Catches any remaining formatting | ||||
|  |    issues | ||||
|  | 3. **GitHub Actions** (Pre-merge): Validates formatting before merge | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Benefits | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **No more manual fixes** - AI generates compliant content from start | ||||
|  | - **Consistent style** - All files follow same standards | ||||
|  | - **Faster development** - No need to fix formatting manually | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Generating Markdown Content | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Line Length**: Ensure no line exceeds 80 characters | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Blank Lines**: Add blank lines around headings, lists, and code blocks | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Whitespace**: Remove all trailing spaces, use 2-space indentation | ||||
|  | - [ ] **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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Validation**: Run `npm run markdown:check` to verify compliance | ||||
|  | - [ ] **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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Readability**: Content is clear and follows project conventions | ||||
|  | - [ ] **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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active core standards and automation | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: None | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Documentation team, Development team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,314 @@ | |||||
|  | # Markdown Templates & Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Standard Document Template | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```markdown | ||||
|  | # Document Title | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: YYYY-MM-DD | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **STATUS** - Brief description | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Overview | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] 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 | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Medium | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: X days | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: None | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Technical Specification Template | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```markdown | ||||
|  | # Technical Specification: [Feature Name] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: YYYY-MM-DD | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **DRAFT** - Under Review | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Overview | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Brief description of the technical specification. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Business Context**: Why is this specification needed and what problem | ||||
|  | does it solve for users? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Functional Requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Requirement 1 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Requirement 2 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Non-Functional Requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Performance requirement | ||||
|  | - [ ] Security requirement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Technical Design | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Architecture | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Description of the technical architecture. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Design Rationale**: Why was this architecture chosen over alternatives? | ||||
|  | What are the trade-offs and benefits? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Data Models | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | interface ExampleModel { | ||||
|  |   id: string; | ||||
|  |   name: string; | ||||
|  |   createdAt: Date; | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### API Design | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | interface APIResponse<T> { | ||||
|  |   success: boolean; | ||||
|  |   data: T; | ||||
|  |   error?: string; | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Draft | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: X days | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: None | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Content Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### JSON Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "property": "value", | ||||
|  |   "nested": { | ||||
|  |     "property": "value" | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Shell Commands | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | # Command with comment | ||||
|  | npm run build:web | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Multi-line command | ||||
|  | VITE_GIT_HASH=`git log -1 --pretty=format:%h` \ | ||||
|  |   vite build --config vite.config.web.mts | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### TypeScript Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```typescript | ||||
|  | // Function with JSDoc | ||||
|  | const getEnvironmentConfig = (env: string) => { | ||||
|  |   switch (env) { | ||||
|  |     case 'prod': | ||||
|  |       return { /* production settings */ }; | ||||
|  |     default: | ||||
|  |       return { /* development settings */ }; | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | }; | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## File Structure Standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Document Header | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```markdown | ||||
|  | # Document Title | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: YYYY-MM-DD | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **STATUS** - Brief description | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Overview | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Brief description of the document's purpose and scope. | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Section Organization | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Standard sections: Overview, Current State, Implementation Plan, | ||||
|  | Technical Details, Testing & Validation, Next Steps | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Common Patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Standard implementation plans follow Phase 1 (Foundation), Phase 2 | ||||
|  | (Features), Phase 3 (Testing & Polish) structure. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Using Templates | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Template Selection**: Choose appropriate template for document type | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Structure Review**: Understand required sections and organization | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Content Planning**: Plan what information goes in each section | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Audience Analysis**: Ensure template matches target audience needs | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Template Usage | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Section Completion**: Fill in all required sections completely | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Example Integration**: Include relevant code examples and patterns | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Formatting Consistency**: Apply markdown standards from core rules | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Cross-references**: Link to related documentation and resources | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Template Usage | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Content Review**: Verify all sections contain appropriate content | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Formatting Check**: Run `npm run markdown:check` for compliance | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Template Validation**: Confirm document follows template structure | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Quality Assessment**: Ensure content meets project standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Template-Specific Requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Standard Documents**: Include all required metadata and sections | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Technical Specs**: Complete all requirement and design sections | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Implementation Plans**: Define clear phases and milestones | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Examples**: Provide relevant, working code examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **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 | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active templates and examples | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Medium | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: markdown_core.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Documentation team, Development team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,168 @@ | |||||
|  | # Markdown Workflow & Validation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for markdown validation rules, | ||||
|  | > enforcement procedures, and workflow management. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Markdownlint Configuration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Core Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "MD013": { "line_length": 80, "code_blocks": false }, | ||||
|  |   "MD012": true, | ||||
|  |   "MD022": true, | ||||
|  |   "MD031": true, | ||||
|  |   "MD032": true, | ||||
|  |   "MD047": true, | ||||
|  |   "MD009": true, | ||||
|  |   "MD004": { "style": "dash" } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Rule Explanations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **MD013**: Line length (80 chars, disabled for code blocks) | ||||
|  | - **MD012**: No multiple consecutive blank lines | ||||
|  | - **MD022**: Headings should be surrounded by blank lines | ||||
|  | - **MD031**: Fenced code blocks should be surrounded by blank lines | ||||
|  | - **MD032**: Lists should be surrounded by blank lines | ||||
|  | - **MD047**: Files should end with a single newline | ||||
|  | - **MD009**: No trailing spaces | ||||
|  | - **MD004**: Consistent list markers (dash style) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Validation Commands | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Check All MDC Files | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | npm run markdown:check | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Auto-fix Formatting Issues | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | npm run markdown:fix | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Check Single File | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | npx markdownlint-cli2 .cursor/rules/filename.mdc | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Enforcement Workflow | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Pre-commit Hooks | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Automatic**: `lint-staged` runs `markdownlint-cli2 --fix` on all | ||||
|  |   staged `.mdc` files | ||||
|  | - **Result**: Files are automatically formatted before commit | ||||
|  | - **Blocking**: Commits with unfixable violations are blocked | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### CI/CD Integration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Build Pipeline**: Include markdownlint in automated builds | ||||
|  | - **Quality Reports**: Generate documentation quality metrics | ||||
|  | - **Build Failure**: Fail builds with critical violations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Team Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **PR Requirements**: All documentation PRs must pass markdownlint | ||||
|  | - **Templates**: Use provided templates for new documents | ||||
|  | - **Patterns**: Follow established patterns for consistency | ||||
|  | - **Auto-fixing**: Let automation handle formatting, focus on content | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Quality Assurance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Validation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] All files pass `npm run markdown:check` | ||||
|  | - [ ] Line length under 80 characters | ||||
|  | - [ ] Proper blank line spacing around elements | ||||
|  | - [ ] No trailing spaces | ||||
|  | - [ ] Consistent list markers | ||||
|  | - [ ] Proper heading hierarchy | ||||
|  | - [ ] Code blocks have language specification | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Common Issues & Fixes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### Trailing Spaces | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | # Remove trailing spaces | ||||
|  | sed -i 's/[[:space:]]*$//' .cursor/rules/**/*.mdc | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### Multiple Blank Lines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | # Remove multiple blank lines | ||||
|  | sed -i '/^$/N;/^\n$/D' .cursor/rules/**/*.mdc | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### Missing Newlines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | # Add newline at end if missing | ||||
|  | find .cursor/rules -name "*.mdc" -exec sed -i -e '$a\' {} \; | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration Points | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Git Workflow | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Edit**: Make changes to MDC files | ||||
|  | 2. **Stage**: `git add .cursor/rules/filename.mdc` | ||||
|  | 3. **Auto-fix**: `lint-staged` runs `markdownlint-cli2 --fix` | ||||
|  | 4. **Commit**: Changes are committed with perfect formatting | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Development Workflow | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Create/Edit**: Use templates from `markdown_templates.mdc` | ||||
|  | 2. **Validate**: Run `npm run markdown:check` before committing | ||||
|  | 3. **Auto-fix**: Use `npm run markdown:fix` for bulk fixes | ||||
|  | 4. **Review**: Ensure content quality, not just formatting | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Starting Workflow | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Configuration Review**: Understand markdownlint rules and settings | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Tool Availability**: Ensure markdownlint-cli2 is installed and working | ||||
|  | - [ ] **File Scope**: Identify which files need validation or fixing | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Backup Strategy**: Consider backing up files before bulk operations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Workflow Execution | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Validation First**: Run `npm run markdown:check` to identify issues | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Issue Analysis**: Review and understand each validation error | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Auto-fix Application**: Use `npm run markdown:fix` for automatic fixes | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Manual Review**: Check files that couldn't be auto-fixed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Workflow Completion | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Final Validation**: Confirm all files pass `npm run markdown:check` | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Quality Review**: Verify formatting meets project standards | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Update**: Update any related documentation or guides | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Team Communication**: Share workflow results and any manual fixes needed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Workflow-Specific Requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Pre-commit Hooks**: Ensure lint-staged configuration is working | ||||
|  | - [ ] **CI/CD Integration**: Verify build pipeline includes markdown validation | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Team Guidelines**: Confirm all team members understand the workflow | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Error Resolution**: Document common issues and their solutions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/docs/markdown_core.mdc` for core formatting standards | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/docs/markdown_templates.mdc` for document templates | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active workflow and validation | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Medium | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: markdown_core.mdc, markdown_templates.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Documentation team | ||||
| @ -1,19 +0,0 @@ | |||||
| --- |  | ||||
| globs: *.md |  | ||||
| alwaysApply: false |  | ||||
| --- |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| INITIAL_PLAN.md is unique to projects built inhouse and must never be deleted. |  | ||||
| Maintain traditional files (README, CHANGELOG, BUILDING, etc.) |  | ||||
| Any ad hoc files must always be put into docs folder |  | ||||
| The docs folder must use sub-folders to classify documents by |  | ||||
| There must never be more than seven folders at any sub-folder of the docs tree |  | ||||
| Keep documents no more than seven in number for a folder.   |  | ||||
| If you need more documents than seven, make sub-folders to classify or re-classify documents. |  | ||||
| Re-use documents by ammending or editing but always version them in git. |  | ||||
| put documentation at the file, classs, and method heads |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| Documents themselves must: |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| Headings should be surrounded by blank lines |  | ||||
| Lists should be surrounded by blank |  | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,163 @@ | |||||
|  | # Camera Implementation Documentation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Overview | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | This document describes how camera functionality is implemented across the | ||||
|  | TimeSafari application. The application uses cameras for two main purposes: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. QR Code scanning | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. Photo capture | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Components | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### QRScannerDialog.vue | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Primary component for QR code scanning in web browsers. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Key Features:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Uses `qrcode-stream` for web-based QR scanning | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Supports both front and back cameras | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Provides real-time camera status feedback | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Implements error handling with user-friendly messages | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Includes camera switching functionality | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Camera Access Flow:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. Checks for camera API availability | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. Enumerates available video devices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. Requests camera permissions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. Initializes camera stream with preferred settings | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 5. Handles various error conditions with specific messages | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### PhotoDialog.vue | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Component for photo capture and selection. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Key Features:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Cross-platform photo capture interface | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Image cropping capabilities | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - File selection fallback | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Unified interface for different platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Services | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### QRScanner Services | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### WebDialogQRScanner | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Web-based implementation of QR scanning. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Key Methods:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `checkPermissions()`: Verifies camera permission status | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `requestPermissions()`: Requests camera access | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `isSupported()`: Checks for camera API support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Handles various error conditions with specific messages | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### CapacitorQRScanner | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Native implementation using Capacitor's MLKit. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Key Features:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Uses `@capacitor-mlkit/barcode-scanning` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Supports both front and back cameras | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Implements permission management | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Provides continuous scanning capability | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Platform Services | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### WebPlatformService | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Web-specific implementation of platform features. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Camera Capabilities:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Uses HTML5 file input with capture attribute | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Falls back to file selection if camera unavailable | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Processes captured images for consistent format | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### CapacitorPlatformService | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Native implementation using Capacitor. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Camera Features:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Uses `Camera.getPhoto()` for native camera access | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Supports image editing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Configures high-quality image capture | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Handles base64 image processing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | #### ElectronPlatformService | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | Desktop implementation (currently unimplemented). | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/features/camera_technical.mdc` for | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   detailed technical implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/features/camera_platforms.mdc` for platform-specific details | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active camera implementation overview | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Medium | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: None | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Camera feature team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - iOS and Android devices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Desktop platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Various network conditions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Camera Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Analysis**: Understand camera requirements across all platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Feature Planning**: Plan QR scanning and photo capture features | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Service Planning**: Plan camera service architecture | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Strategy**: Plan testing across web, mobile, and desktop | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Camera Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Component Development**: Implement QRScannerDialog and PhotoDialog | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Service Implementation**: Implement platform-specific camera services | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Permission Handling**: Implement proper camera permission management | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Error Handling**: Implement graceful error handling for camera failures | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Camera Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Cross-Platform Testing**: Test camera functionality across all platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Feature Validation**: Verify QR scanning and photo capture work correctly | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Performance Testing**: Ensure camera performance meets requirements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Update**: Update camera implementation documentation | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,225 @@ | |||||
|  | # Camera Platform-Specific Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: | ||||
|  |   Reference this file for platform-specific camera implementation details. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Web Platform | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Implementation Details | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Uses `getUserMedia` API for camera access | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Implements fallback to file input if camera unavailable | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Handles browser compatibility issues | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Requires HTTPS for camera access | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Browser Support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Chrome: Full support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Firefox: Full support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Safari: Limited support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Edge: Full support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Fallback Mechanisms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. Camera access via getUserMedia | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. File input for image upload | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. Drag and drop support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. Clipboard paste support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Mobile Platform (Capacitor) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### iOS Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Uses `@capacitor-mlkit/barcode-scanning` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Implements proper permission handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Supports both front and back cameras | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Handles camera switching | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Android Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Uses `@capacitor-mlkit/barcode-scanning` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Implements proper permission handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Supports both front and back cameras | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Handles camera switching | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Permission Handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Camera permissions requested at runtime | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Permission state tracked and cached | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Graceful handling of denied permissions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Clear user guidance for enabling permissions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Desktop Platform (Electron) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Current Status | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Camera implementation pending | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Will use platform-specific APIs | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Requires proper permission handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Will support both built-in and external cameras | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Planned Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Native camera access via Electron | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Platform-specific camera APIs | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Proper permission handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Camera switching support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Platform Detection | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Uses `PlatformServiceFactory` for platform detection | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Implements platform-specific camera services | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Handles platform-specific error conditions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Provides platform-specific user guidance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Service Selection | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Web: `WebPlatformService` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Mobile: `CapacitorPlatformService` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Desktop: `ElectronPlatformService` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Cross-Platform Compatibility | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Common Interface | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Unified camera service interface | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Platform-specific implementations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Consistent error handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Unified user experience | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Feature Parity | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Core camera functionality across platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Platform-specific optimizations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Consistent user interface | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Unified error messages | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Platform-Specific Features | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Web | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Browser-based camera access | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - File upload fallback | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Drag and drop support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Clipboard paste support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Mobile | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Native camera access | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Barcode scanning | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Photo capture | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Camera switching | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Desktop | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Native camera access (planned) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - External camera support (planned) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Advanced camera controls (planned) | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Testing Strategy | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Platform Coverage | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Web: Multiple browsers | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Mobile: iOS and Android devices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Desktop: Windows, macOS, Linux | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Test Scenarios | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Permission handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Camera access | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Error conditions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Platform compatibility | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Performance metrics | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/features/camera-implementation.mdc` for | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   core implementation overview | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/features/camera_technical.mdc` for | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   technical implementation details | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active platform-specific implementation guide | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Medium | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: camera-implementation.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Platform team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Camera Platform Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Analysis**: Identify target platforms and their camera capabilities | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Feature Planning**: Plan platform-specific camera features | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Integration Planning**: Plan integration with existing camera systems | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Strategy**: Plan testing across all target platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Camera Platform Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Services**: Implement platform-specific camera functionality | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Feature Development**: Implement planned camera features for each platform | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Integration**: Integrate with existing camera infrastructure | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Performance Optimization**: Optimize camera performance for each platform | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Camera Platform Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Cross-Platform Testing**: Test camera functionality across all platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Feature Validation**: Verify all planned features work correctly | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Performance Testing**: Ensure camera performance meets requirements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Update**: Update platform-specific camera documentation | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,203 @@ | |||||
|  | # Camera Technical Implementation — Details and Best Practices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | > **Agent role**: Reference this file for | ||||
|  |   detailed technical implementation when working with camera features. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Platform-Specific Considerations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### iOS | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Requires `NSCameraUsageDescription` in Info.plist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Supports both front and back cameras | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Implements proper permission handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Android | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Requires camera permissions in manifest | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Supports both front and back cameras | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Handles permission requests through Capacitor | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Web | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Requires HTTPS for camera access | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Implements fallback mechanisms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Handles browser compatibility issues | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Error Handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Common Error Scenarios | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. No camera found | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. Permission denied | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. Camera in use by another application | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. HTTPS required | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 5. Browser compatibility issues | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Error Response | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - User-friendly error messages | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Troubleshooting tips | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Clear instructions for resolution | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Platform-specific guidance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Security Considerations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Permission Management | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Explicit permission requests | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Permission state tracking | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Graceful handling of denied permissions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Data Handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Secure image processing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Proper cleanup of camera resources | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - No persistent storage of camera data | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Best Practices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Camera Access | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. Always check for camera availability | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. Request permissions explicitly | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. Handle all error conditions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. Provide clear user feedback | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 5. Implement proper cleanup | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Performance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. Optimize camera resolution | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. Implement proper resource cleanup | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. Handle camera switching efficiently | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. Manage memory usage | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### User Experience | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. Clear status indicators | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. Intuitive camera controls | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. Helpful error messages | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. Smooth camera switching | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 5. Responsive UI feedback | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Future Improvements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Planned Enhancements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. Implement Electron camera support | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. Add advanced camera features | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. Improve error handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. Enhance user feedback | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 5. Optimize performance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Known Issues | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. Electron camera implementation pending | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. Some browser compatibility limitations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. Platform-specific quirks to address | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Dependencies | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Key Packages | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `@capacitor-mlkit/barcode-scanning` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `qrcode-stream` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `vue-picture-cropper` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Platform-specific camera APIs | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Test Scenarios | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. Permission handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. Camera switching | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. Error conditions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 4. Platform compatibility | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 5. Performance metrics | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Test Environment | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Multiple browsers | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - iOS and Android devices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Desktop platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/features/camera-implementation.mdc` for | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |   core implementation overview | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/features/camera_platforms.mdc` for platform-specific details | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active technical implementation guide | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Medium | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: camera-implementation.mdc | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Camera feature team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Camera Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Analysis**: Identify target platforms and camera capabilities | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Permission Planning**: Plan permission handling for camera access | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Dependency Review**: Review required camera packages and APIs | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Strategy**: Plan testing across multiple platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Camera Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Services**: Implement platform-specific camera services | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Permission Handling**: Implement proper camera permission handling | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Error Handling**: Implement graceful error handling for camera failures | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Performance Optimization**: Optimize camera performance and responsiveness | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Camera Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Cross-Platform Testing**: Test camera functionality across all platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Permission Testing**: Test permission handling and user feedback | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Performance Validation**: Verify camera performance meets requirements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Update**: Update camera technical documentation | ||||
| @ -1,3 +0,0 @@ | |||||
| --- |  | ||||
| alwaysApply: true |  | ||||
| --- |  | ||||
| @ -1,6 +0,0 @@ | |||||
| --- |  | ||||
| alwaysApply: true |  | ||||
| --- |  | ||||
| Always use structlog with rich contextual annotation |  | ||||
| All logs should go to rsyslog |  | ||||
| Logs showing in console should be set to whatever is needed at that time. |  | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,288 @@ | |||||
|  | # Meta-Rule: Bug Diagnosis Workflow | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: August 24, 2025 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Core workflow for all bug investigation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | This meta-rule defines the systematic approach for investigating and diagnosing | ||||
|  | bugs, defects, and unexpected behaviors in the TimeSafari application. It ensures | ||||
|  | consistent, thorough, and efficient problem-solving workflows. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow Constraints | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **This meta-rule enforces DIAGNOSIS MODE for all bundled sub-rules:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "workflowMode": "diagnosis", | ||||
|  |   "constraints": { | ||||
|  |     "mode": "read_only", | ||||
|  |     "forbidden": ["modify", "create", "build", "commit"], | ||||
|  |     "required": "complete_investigation_before_fixing" | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **All bundled sub-rules automatically inherit these constraints.** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow State Update | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **When this meta-rule is invoked, update the workflow state file:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "currentMode": "diagnosis", | ||||
|  |   "lastInvoked": "meta_bug_diagnosis.mdc", | ||||
|  |   "timestamp": "2025-01-27T15:30:00Z", | ||||
|  |   "constraints": { | ||||
|  |     "mode": "read_only", | ||||
|  |     "forbidden": ["modify", "create", "build", "commit"], | ||||
|  |     "allowed": ["read", "search", "analyze", "document"], | ||||
|  |     "required": "complete_investigation_before_fixing" | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **State File Location**: `.cursor/rules/.workflow_state.json` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **This enables the core always-on rule to enforce diagnosis mode constraints.** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## When to Use | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **ALWAYS** - Apply this workflow to every bug investigation, regardless of | ||||
|  | severity or complexity. This ensures systematic problem-solving and prevents | ||||
|  | common investigation pitfalls. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Bundled Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Investigation Foundation** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`development/research_diagnostic.mdc`** - Research and investigation methodologies | ||||
|  | - **`development/logging_standards.mdc`** - Logging and debugging best practices | ||||
|  | - **`development/type_safety_guide.mdc`** - Type safety and error prevention | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Development Workflow** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`workflow/version_control.mdc`** - Version control during investigation | ||||
|  | - **`development/software_development.mdc`** - Development best practices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Critical Development Constraints | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **🚫 NEVER Use Build Commands During Diagnosis** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Critical Rule**: Never use `npm run build:web` or similar build commands during bug diagnosis | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Reason**: These commands block the chat and prevent effective troubleshooting | ||||
|  | - **Impact**: Blocks user interaction, prevents real-time problem solving | ||||
|  | - **Alternative**: Use safe, fast commands for investigation | ||||
|  | - **When to use build**: Only after diagnosis is complete and fixes are ready for testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Safe Diagnosis Commands** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ✅ **Safe to use during diagnosis:** | ||||
|  | - `npm run lint-fix` - Syntax and style checking | ||||
|  | - `npm run type-check` - TypeScript validation (if available) | ||||
|  | - `git status` - Version control status | ||||
|  | - `ls` / `dir` - File listing | ||||
|  | - `cat` / `read_file` - File content inspection | ||||
|  | - `grep_search` - Text pattern searching | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ❌ **Never use during diagnosis:** | ||||
|  | - `npm run build:web` - Blocks chat | ||||
|  | - `npm run build:electron` - Blocks chat   | ||||
|  | - `npm run build:capacitor` - Blocks chat | ||||
|  | - Any long-running build processes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Investigation Workflow | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 1: Problem Definition** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Gather Evidence** | ||||
|  |    - Error messages and stack traces | ||||
|  |    - User-reported symptoms | ||||
|  |    - System logs and timestamps | ||||
|  |    - Reproduction steps | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Context Analysis** | ||||
|  |    - When did the problem start? | ||||
|  |    - What changed recently? | ||||
|  |    - Which platform/environment? | ||||
|  |    - User actions leading to the issue | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 2: Systematic Investigation** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Code Inspection** | ||||
|  |    - Relevant file examination | ||||
|  |    - Import and dependency analysis | ||||
|  |    - Syntax and type checking | ||||
|  |    - Logic flow analysis | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Environment Analysis** | ||||
|  |    - Platform-specific considerations | ||||
|  |    - Configuration and settings | ||||
|  |    - Database and storage state | ||||
|  |    - Network and API connectivity | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 3: Root Cause Identification** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Pattern Recognition** | ||||
|  |    - Similar issues in codebase | ||||
|  |    - Common failure modes | ||||
|  |    - Platform-specific behaviors | ||||
|  |    - Recent changes impact | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Hypothesis Testing** | ||||
|  |    - Targeted code changes | ||||
|  |    - Configuration modifications | ||||
|  |    - Environment adjustments | ||||
|  |    - Systematic elimination | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Investigation Techniques | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Safe Code Analysis** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **File Reading**: Use `read_file` tool for targeted inspection | ||||
|  | - **Pattern Searching**: Use `grep_search` for code patterns | ||||
|  | - **Semantic Search**: Use `codebase_search` for related functionality | ||||
|  | - **Import Tracing**: Follow dependency chains systematically | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Error Analysis** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Stack Trace Analysis**: Identify error origin and propagation | ||||
|  | - **Log Correlation**: Match errors with system events | ||||
|  | - **Timeline Reconstruction**: Build sequence of events | ||||
|  | - **Context Preservation**: Maintain investigation state | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Platform Considerations** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Web Platform**: Browser-specific behaviors and limitations | ||||
|  | - **Electron Platform**: Desktop app considerations | ||||
|  | - **Capacitor Platform**: Mobile app behaviors | ||||
|  | - **Cross-Platform**: Shared vs. platform-specific code | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Evidence Collection Standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Timestamps** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **UTC Format**: All timestamps in UTC for consistency | ||||
|  | - **Precision**: Include milliseconds for precise correlation | ||||
|  | - **Context**: Include relevant system state information | ||||
|  | - **Correlation**: Link events across different components | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Error Context** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Full Error Objects**: Capture complete error information | ||||
|  | - **Stack Traces**: Preserve call stack for analysis | ||||
|  | - **User Actions**: Document steps leading to error | ||||
|  | - **System State**: Capture relevant configuration and state | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Reproduction Steps** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Clear Sequence**: Step-by-step reproduction instructions | ||||
|  | - **Environment Details**: Platform, version, configuration | ||||
|  | - **Data Requirements**: Required data or state | ||||
|  | - **Expected vs. Actual**: Clear behavior comparison | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Investigation Documentation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Problem Summary** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Issue Description**: Clear, concise problem statement | ||||
|  | - **Impact Assessment**: Severity and user impact | ||||
|  | - **Scope Definition**: Affected components and users | ||||
|  | - **Priority Level**: Based on impact and frequency | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Investigation Log** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Timeline**: Chronological investigation steps | ||||
|  | - **Evidence**: Collected information and findings | ||||
|  | - **Hypotheses**: Tested theories and results | ||||
|  | - **Conclusions**: Root cause identification | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Solution Requirements** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Fix Description**: Required changes and approach | ||||
|  | - **Testing Strategy**: Validation and verification steps | ||||
|  | - **Rollback Plan**: Reversion strategy if needed | ||||
|  | - **Prevention Measures**: Future issue prevention | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Quality Standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Investigation Completeness** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Evidence Sufficiency**: Adequate information for root cause | ||||
|  | - **Alternative Theories**: Considered and eliminated | ||||
|  | - **Platform Coverage**: All relevant platforms investigated | ||||
|  | - **Edge Cases**: Unusual scenarios considered | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Documentation Quality** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Clear Communication**: Understandable to all stakeholders | ||||
|  | - **Technical Accuracy**: Precise technical details | ||||
|  | - **Actionable Insights**: Clear next steps and recommendations | ||||
|  | - **Knowledge Transfer**: Lessons learned for future reference | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Common Pitfalls | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Investigation Mistakes** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Jumping to Solutions**: Implementing fixes before understanding | ||||
|  | - **Insufficient Evidence**: Making assumptions without data | ||||
|  | - **Platform Blindness**: Ignoring platform-specific behaviors | ||||
|  | - **Scope Creep**: Expanding investigation beyond original problem | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Communication Issues** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Technical Jargon**: Using unclear terminology | ||||
|  | - **Missing Context**: Insufficient background information | ||||
|  | - **Unclear Recommendations**: Vague or ambiguous next steps | ||||
|  | - **Poor Documentation**: Incomplete or unclear investigation records | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Success Criteria | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Problem clearly defined** with sufficient evidence | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Root cause identified** through systematic investigation | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Solution approach determined** with clear requirements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation complete** for knowledge transfer | ||||
|  | - [ ] **No chat-blocking commands** used during investigation | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform considerations** properly addressed | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Timeline and context** properly documented | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration with Other Meta-Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Bug Fixing** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Investigation Results**: Provide foundation for fix implementation | ||||
|  | - **Solution Requirements**: Define what needs to be built | ||||
|  | - **Testing Strategy**: Inform validation approach | ||||
|  | - **Documentation**: Support implementation guidance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Feature Planning** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Root Cause Analysis**: Identify systemic issues | ||||
|  | - **Prevention Measures**: Plan future issue avoidance | ||||
|  | - **Architecture Improvements**: Identify structural enhancements | ||||
|  | - **Process Refinements**: Improve development workflows | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Research and Documentation** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Knowledge Base**: Contribute to troubleshooting guides | ||||
|  | - **Pattern Recognition**: Identify common failure modes | ||||
|  | - **Best Practices**: Develop investigation methodologies | ||||
|  | - **Team Training**: Improve investigation capabilities | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_bug_fixing.mdc` for implementing fixes | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_feature_planning.mdc` for planning improvements | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_documentation.mdc` for documentation standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active meta-rule for bug diagnosis | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: All bundled sub-rules | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, QA team, DevOps team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,214 @@ | |||||
|  | # Meta-Rule: Bug Fixing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-21 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Bug fix implementation workflow bundling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | This meta-rule bundles all the rules needed for implementing bug fixes | ||||
|  | with proper testing and validation. Use this after diagnosis when | ||||
|  | implementing the actual fix. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow Constraints | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **This meta-rule enforces FIXING MODE for all bundled sub-rules:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "workflowMode": "fixing", | ||||
|  |   "constraints": { | ||||
|  |     "mode": "implementation", | ||||
|  |     "allowed": ["modify", "create", "build", "test", "commit"], | ||||
|  |     "required": "diagnosis_complete_before_fixing" | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **All bundled sub-rules automatically inherit these constraints.** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow State Update | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **When this meta-rule is invoked, update the workflow state file:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "currentMode": "fixing", | ||||
|  |   "lastInvoked": "meta_bug_fixing.mdc", | ||||
|  |   "timestamp": "2025-01-27T15:30:00Z", | ||||
|  |   "constraints": { | ||||
|  |     "mode": "implementation", | ||||
|  |     "allowed": ["modify", "create", "build", "test", "commit"], | ||||
|  |     "forbidden": [], | ||||
|  |     "required": "diagnosis_complete_before_fixing" | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **State File Location**: `.cursor/rules/.workflow_state.json` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **This enables the core always-on rule to enforce fixing mode constraints.** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## When to Use | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Post-Diagnosis**: After root cause is identified and fix is planned | ||||
|  | - **Fix Implementation**: When coding the actual bug fix | ||||
|  | - **Testing & Validation**: When testing the fix works correctly | ||||
|  | - **Code Review**: When reviewing the fix implementation | ||||
|  | - **Deployment**: When preparing the fix for deployment | ||||
|  | - **Documentation**: When documenting the fix and lessons learned | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Bundled Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Implementation Standards** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`development/software_development.mdc`** - Core development | ||||
|  |   principles, evidence requirements, and testing strategy | ||||
|  | - **`development/type_safety_guide.mdc`** - Type-safe implementation | ||||
|  |   with proper error handling and type guards | ||||
|  | - **`development/logging_migration.mdc`** - Proper logging | ||||
|  |   implementation and migration from console.* calls | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Code Quality & Review** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`development/historical_comment_management.mdc`** - Code quality | ||||
|  |   standards and comment transformation rules | ||||
|  | - **`development/historical_comment_patterns.mdc`** - Specific | ||||
|  |   patterns for transforming historical comments | ||||
|  | - **`development/complexity_assessment.mdc`** - Complexity evaluation | ||||
|  |   for fix implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Platform & Testing** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`app/timesafari_development.mdc`** - TimeSafari-specific | ||||
|  |   development workflow and testing requirements | ||||
|  | - **`app/timesafari_platforms.mdc`** - Platform-specific testing | ||||
|  |   and validation requirements | ||||
|  | - **`architecture/build_validation.mdc`** - Build system validation | ||||
|  |   and testing procedures | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow Sequence | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 1: Fix Implementation (Start Here)** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Development Standards** - Apply `software_development.mdc` for | ||||
|  |    core implementation principles | ||||
|  | 2. **Type Safety** - Use `type_safety_guide.mdc` for type-safe | ||||
|  |    implementation | ||||
|  | 3. **Logging Implementation** - Apply `logging_migration.mdc` for | ||||
|  |    proper logging | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 2: Quality & Review** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Code Quality** - Use `historical_comment_management.mdc` for | ||||
|  |    code quality standards | ||||
|  | 2. **Complexity Assessment** - Apply `complexity_assessment.mdc` to | ||||
|  |    evaluate fix complexity | ||||
|  | 3. **Code Review** - Follow review standards from bundled rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 3: Testing & Validation** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Platform Testing** - Use `timesafari_platforms.mdc` for | ||||
|  |    platform-specific testing | ||||
|  | 2. **Build Validation** - Apply `build_validation.mdc` for build | ||||
|  |    system compliance | ||||
|  | 3. **Final Validation** - Verify fix works across all platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Success Criteria | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Fix implemented** following development standards | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Type safety maintained** with proper error handling | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Logging properly implemented** with component context | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code quality standards met** with clean, maintainable code | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing completed** across all target platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Build validation passed** with no build system issues | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code review completed** with all feedback addressed | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation updated** with fix details and lessons learned | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Common Pitfalls | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Don't skip type safety** - leads to runtime errors | ||||
|  | - **Don't ignore logging** - makes future debugging harder | ||||
|  | - **Don't skip platform testing** - misses platform-specific issues | ||||
|  | - **Don't ignore code quality** - creates technical debt | ||||
|  | - **Don't skip build validation** - can break build system | ||||
|  | - **Don't forget documentation** - loses fix context for future | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration Points | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **With Other Meta-Rules** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Bug Diagnosis**: Investigation results drive fix implementation | ||||
|  | - **Feature Implementation**: Fix patterns inform future development | ||||
|  | - **Feature Planning**: Fix complexity informs future planning | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **With Development Workflow** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Fix implementation follows development standards | ||||
|  | - Testing strategy ensures fix quality | ||||
|  | - Code review maintains code quality | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Feedback & Improvement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Sub-Rule Ratings (1-5 scale)** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Development Standards**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Type Safety**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Logging Migration**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Code Quality**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Platform Testing**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Workflow Feedback** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Implementation Clarity**: How clear was the implementation guidance? | ||||
|  | - **Testing Coverage**: Were testing requirements sufficient or excessive? | ||||
|  | - **Process Effectiveness**: How well did the workflow work for you? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Sub-Rule Improvements** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Clarity Issues**: Which rules were unclear or confusing? | ||||
|  | - **Missing Examples**: What examples would make rules more useful? | ||||
|  | - **Integration Problems**: Do any rules conflict or overlap? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Overall Experience** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Time Saved**: How much time did this meta-rule save you? | ||||
|  | - **Quality Improvement**: Did following these rules improve your fix? | ||||
|  | - **Recommendation**: Would you recommend this meta-rule to others? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Bug Fixing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Root Cause Understood**: Confirm root cause is clearly identified | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Fix Strategy Planned**: Plan implementation approach and testing | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Impact Assessed**: Understand impact across all platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Strategy Planned**: Plan testing approach for the fix | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Bug Fixing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Rule Application**: Apply bundled rules in recommended sequence | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Implementation**: Implement fix following development standards | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing**: Test fix across all target platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Document implementation details and decisions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Bug Fixing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Validation**: Verify fix meets all success criteria | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Review**: Complete code review with team | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Deployment**: Deploy fix following deployment procedures | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Feedback Collection**: Collect feedback on meta-rule effectiveness | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_bug_diagnosis.mdc` for investigation workflow | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_feature_implementation.mdc` for implementation patterns | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_feature_planning.mdc` for planning future work | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active meta-rule for bug fixing | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: All bundled sub-rules | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, QA team, DevOps team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,383 @@ | |||||
|  | # Meta-Rule: Change Evaluation and Breaking Change Detection | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer   | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-25   | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Manually activated change evaluation rule | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | This meta-rule provides a systematic approach to evaluate changes between | ||||
|  | branches and detect potential breaking changes. It's designed to catch | ||||
|  | problematic model behavior by analyzing the nature, scope, and impact of | ||||
|  | code changes before they cause issues. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## When to Use | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Manual Activation Only** - This rule should be invoked when: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Reviewing changes before merging branches | ||||
|  | - Investigating unexpected behavior after updates | ||||
|  | - Validating that model-generated changes are safe | ||||
|  | - Analyzing the impact of recent commits | ||||
|  | - Debugging issues that may be caused by recent changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow State Enforcement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **This meta-rule enforces current workflow mode constraints:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Current Workflow State** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "workflowState": { | ||||
|  |     "currentMode": "diagnosis|fixing|planning|research|documentation", | ||||
|  |     "constraints": { | ||||
|  |       "mode": "read_only|implementation|design_only|investigation|writing_only", | ||||
|  |       "allowed": ["array", "of", "allowed", "actions"], | ||||
|  |       "forbidden": ["array", "of", "forbidden", "actions"] | ||||
|  |     } | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Mode-Specific Enforcement** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Diagnosis Mode (read_only):** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Forbidden**: File modification, code creation, build commands, git | ||||
|  |   commits | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Allowed**: File reading, code analysis, investigation, documentation | ||||
|  | - **Response**: Focus on analysis and documentation, not implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Fixing Mode (implementation):** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Allowed**: File modification, code creation, build commands, testing, | ||||
|  |   git commits | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Forbidden**: None (full implementation mode) | ||||
|  | - **Response**: Proceed with implementation and testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Planning Mode (design_only):** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Forbidden**: Implementation, coding, building, deployment | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Allowed**: Analysis, design, estimation, documentation, architecture | ||||
|  | - **Response**: Focus on planning and design, not implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Research Mode (investigation):** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Forbidden**: File modification, implementation, deployment | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Allowed**: Investigation, analysis, research, documentation | ||||
|  | - **Response**: Focus on investigation and analysis | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Documentation Mode (writing_only):** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Forbidden**: Implementation, coding, building, deployment | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Allowed**: Writing, editing, formatting, structuring, reviewing | ||||
|  | - **Response**: Focus on documentation creation and improvement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Change Evaluation Process | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 1: Change Discovery and Analysis** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Branch Comparison Analysis** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Compare working branch with master/main branch | ||||
|  |    - Identify all changed files and their modification types | ||||
|  |    - Categorize changes by scope and impact | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Change Pattern Recognition** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Identify common change patterns (refactoring, feature addition, bug | ||||
|  |      fixes) | ||||
|  |    - Detect unusual or suspicious change patterns | ||||
|  |    - Flag changes that deviate from established patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Dependency Impact Assessment** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Analyze changes to imports, exports, and interfaces | ||||
|  |    - Identify potential breaking changes to public APIs | ||||
|  |    - Assess impact on dependent components and services | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 2: Breaking Change Detection** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **API Contract Analysis** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Check for changes to function signatures, method names, class | ||||
|  |      interfaces | ||||
|  |    - Identify removed or renamed public methods/properties | ||||
|  |    - Detect changes to configuration options and constants | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Data Structure Changes** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Analyze database schema modifications | ||||
|  |    - Check for changes to data models and interfaces | ||||
|  |    - Identify modifications to serialization/deserialization logic | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Behavioral Changes** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Detect changes to business logic and algorithms | ||||
|  |    - Identify modifications to error handling and validation | ||||
|  |    - Check for changes to user experience and workflows | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 3: Risk Assessment and Recommendations** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Risk Level Classification** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - **LOW**: Cosmetic changes, documentation updates, minor refactoring | ||||
|  |    - **MEDIUM**: Internal API changes, configuration modifications, | ||||
|  |      performance improvements | ||||
|  |    - **HIGH**: Public API changes, breaking interface modifications, major | ||||
|  |      architectural changes | ||||
|  |    - **CRITICAL**: Database schema changes, authentication modifications, | ||||
|  |      security-related changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Impact Analysis** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Identify affected user groups and use cases | ||||
|  |    - Assess potential for data loss or corruption | ||||
|  |    - Evaluate impact on system performance and reliability | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Mitigation Strategies** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Recommend testing approaches for affected areas | ||||
|  |    - Suggest rollback strategies if needed | ||||
|  |    - Identify areas requiring additional validation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Implementation Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Change Analysis Tools** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Git Diff Analysis** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    ```bash | ||||
|  |    # Compare working branch with master | ||||
|  |    git diff master..HEAD --name-only | ||||
|  |    git diff master..HEAD --stat | ||||
|  |    git log master..HEAD --oneline | ||||
|  |    ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **File Change Categorization** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - **Core Files**: Application entry points, main services, critical | ||||
|  |      utilities | ||||
|  |    - **Interface Files**: Public APIs, component interfaces, data models | ||||
|  |    - **Configuration Files**: Environment settings, build configurations, | ||||
|  |      deployment scripts | ||||
|  |    - **Test Files**: Unit tests, integration tests, test utilities | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Change Impact Mapping** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    - Map changed files to affected functionality | ||||
|  |    - Identify cross-dependencies and ripple effects | ||||
|  |    - Document potential side effects and unintended consequences | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Breaking Change Detection Patterns** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Function Signature Changes** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    ```typescript | ||||
|  |    // BEFORE | ||||
|  |    function processData(data: string, options?: Options): Result | ||||
|  |     | ||||
|  |    // AFTER - BREAKING CHANGE | ||||
|  |    function processData(data: string, options: Required<Options>): Result | ||||
|  |    ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 2. **Interface Modifications** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    ```typescript | ||||
|  |    // BEFORE | ||||
|  |    interface UserProfile { | ||||
|  |      name: string; | ||||
|  |      email: string; | ||||
|  |    } | ||||
|  |     | ||||
|  |    // AFTER - BREAKING CHANGE | ||||
|  |    interface UserProfile { | ||||
|  |      name: string; | ||||
|  |      email: string; | ||||
|  |      phone: string; // Required new field | ||||
|  |    } | ||||
|  |    ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 3. **Configuration Changes** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  |    ```typescript | ||||
|  |    // BEFORE | ||||
|  |    const config = { | ||||
|  |      apiUrl: 'https://api.example.com', | ||||
|  |      timeout: 5000 | ||||
|  |    }; | ||||
|  |     | ||||
|  |    // AFTER - BREAKING CHANGE | ||||
|  |    const config = { | ||||
|  |      apiUrl: 'https://api.example.com', | ||||
|  |      timeout: 5000, | ||||
|  |      retries: 3 // New required configuration | ||||
|  |    }; | ||||
|  |    ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Output Format | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Change Evaluation Report** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```markdown | ||||
|  | # Change Evaluation Report | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Executive Summary | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Risk Level**: [LOW|MEDIUM|HIGH|CRITICAL] | ||||
|  | - **Overall Assessment**: [SAFE|CAUTION|DANGEROUS|CRITICAL] | ||||
|  | - **Recommendation**: [PROCEED|REVIEW|HALT|IMMEDIATE_ROLLBACK] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Change Analysis | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Files Modified | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Total Changes**: [X] files | ||||
|  | - **Core Files**: [X] files | ||||
|  | - **Interface Files**: [X] files | ||||
|  | - **Configuration Files**: [X] files | ||||
|  | - **Test Files**: [X] files | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Change Categories | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Refactoring**: [X] changes | ||||
|  | - **Feature Addition**: [X] changes | ||||
|  | - **Bug Fixes**: [X] changes | ||||
|  | - **Configuration**: [X] changes | ||||
|  | - **Documentation**: [X] changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Breaking Change Detection | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### API Contract Changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Function Signatures**: [X] modified | ||||
|  | - **Interface Definitions**: [X] modified | ||||
|  | - **Public Methods**: [X] added/removed/modified | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Data Structure Changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Database Schema**: [X] modifications | ||||
|  | - **Data Models**: [X] changes | ||||
|  | - **Serialization**: [X] changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Behavioral Changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Business Logic**: [X] modifications | ||||
|  | - **Error Handling**: [X] changes | ||||
|  | - **User Experience**: [X] changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Risk Assessment | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Impact Analysis | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **User Groups Affected**: [Description] | ||||
|  | - **Use Cases Impacted**: [Description] | ||||
|  | - **Performance Impact**: [Description] | ||||
|  | - **Reliability Impact**: [Description] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Dependencies | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Internal Dependencies**: [List] | ||||
|  | - **External Dependencies**: [List] | ||||
|  | - **Configuration Dependencies**: [List] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Recommendations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Testing Requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Unit tests for modified components | ||||
|  | - [ ] Integration tests for affected workflows | ||||
|  | - [ ] Performance tests for changed algorithms | ||||
|  | - [ ] User acceptance tests for UI changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Validation Steps | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] Code review by domain experts | ||||
|  | - [ ] API compatibility testing | ||||
|  | - [ ] Database migration testing | ||||
|  | - [ ] End-to-end workflow testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Rollback Strategy | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Rollback Complexity**: [LOW|MEDIUM|HIGH] | ||||
|  | - **Rollback Time**: [Estimated time] | ||||
|  | - **Data Preservation**: [Strategy description] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Conclusion | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | [Summary of findings and final recommendation] | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Usage Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Example 1: Safe Refactoring** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | @meta_change_evaluation.mdc analyze changes between feature-branch and master | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Example 2: Breaking Change Investigation** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | @meta_change_evaluation.mdc evaluate potential breaking changes in recent commits | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Example 3: Pre-Merge Validation** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```bash | ||||
|  | @meta_change_evaluation.mdc validate changes before merging feature-branch to master | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Success Criteria | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Change Discovery**: All modified files are identified and categorized | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Pattern Recognition**: Unusual change patterns are detected and flagged | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Breaking Change Detection**: All potential breaking changes are identified | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Risk Assessment**: Accurate risk levels are assigned with justification | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Recommendations**: Actionable recommendations are provided | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Complete change evaluation report is generated | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Common Pitfalls | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Missing Dependencies**: Failing to identify all affected components | ||||
|  | - **Underestimating Impact**: Not considering ripple effects of changes | ||||
|  | - **Incomplete Testing**: Missing critical test scenarios for changes | ||||
|  | - **Configuration Blindness**: Overlooking configuration file changes | ||||
|  | - **Interface Assumptions**: Assuming internal changes won't affect external | ||||
|  |   users | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration with Other Meta-Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **With Bug Diagnosis** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Use change evaluation to identify recent changes that may have caused | ||||
|  |   bugs | ||||
|  | - Correlate change patterns with reported issues | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **With Feature Planning** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Evaluate the impact of planned changes before implementation | ||||
|  | - Identify potential breaking changes early in the planning process | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **With Bug Fixing** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Validate that fixes don't introduce new breaking changes | ||||
|  | - Ensure fixes maintain backward compatibility | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_core_always_on.mdc` for core always-on rules | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_feature_planning.mdc` for feature development | ||||
|  |   workflows | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_bug_diagnosis.mdc` for bug investigation workflows | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_bug_fixing.mdc` for fix implementation workflows | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active change evaluation meta-rule | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High (applies to all change evaluation tasks) | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: All bundled sub-rules | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Quality Assurance team, Release | ||||
|  | Management team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,311 @@ | |||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | alwaysApply: true | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # Meta-Rule: Core Always-On Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-21 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Core rules for every prompt | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | This meta-rule bundles the core rules that should be applied to **every single | ||||
|  | prompt** because they define fundamental behaviors, principles, and context | ||||
|  | that are essential for all AI interactions. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow Constraints | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **This meta-rule enforces ALWAYS-ON MODE for all bundled sub-rules:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "workflowMode": "always_on", | ||||
|  |   "constraints": { | ||||
|  |     "mode": "foundation", | ||||
|  |     "alwaysApplied": true, | ||||
|  |     "required": "applied_to_every_prompt" | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **All bundled sub-rules automatically inherit these constraints.** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow State Enforcement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **This meta-rule enforces current workflow mode constraints for all interactions:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Current Workflow State** | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "workflowState": { | ||||
|  |     "currentMode": "diagnosis|fixing|planning|research|documentation", | ||||
|  |     "constraints": { | ||||
|  |       "mode": "read_only|implementation|design_only|investigation|writing_only", | ||||
|  |       "allowed": ["array", "of", "allowed", "actions"], | ||||
|  |       "forbidden": ["array", "of", "forbidden", "actions"] | ||||
|  |     } | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Constraint Enforcement Rules** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Before responding to any user request, enforce current mode constraints:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Read current workflow state** from `.cursor/rules/.workflow_state.json` | ||||
|  | 2. **Identify current mode** and its constraints | ||||
|  | 3. **Validate user request** against current mode constraints | ||||
|  | 4. **Enforce constraints** before generating response | ||||
|  | 5. **Guide model behavior** based on current mode | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Mode-Specific Enforcement** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Diagnosis Mode (read_only):** | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Forbidden**: File modification, code creation, build commands, git commits | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Allowed**: File reading, code analysis, investigation, documentation | ||||
|  | - **Response**: Guide user toward investigation and analysis, not implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Fixing Mode (implementation):** | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Allowed**: File modification, code creation, build commands, testing, git commits | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Forbidden**: None (full implementation mode) | ||||
|  | - **Response**: Proceed with implementation and testing | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Planning Mode (design_only):** | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Forbidden**: Implementation, coding, building, deployment | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Allowed**: Analysis, design, estimation, documentation, architecture | ||||
|  | - **Response**: Focus on planning and design, not implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Research Mode (investigation):** | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Forbidden**: File modification, implementation, deployment | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Allowed**: Investigation, analysis, research, documentation | ||||
|  | - **Response**: Focus on investigation and analysis | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Documentation Mode (writing_only):** | ||||
|  | - ❌ **Forbidden**: Implementation, coding, building, deployment | ||||
|  | - ✅ **Allowed**: Writing, editing, formatting, structuring, reviewing | ||||
|  | - **Response**: Focus on documentation creation and improvement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Constraint Violation Response** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **If user request violates current mode constraints:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | ❌ **WORKFLOW CONSTRAINT VIOLATION** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Current Mode**: [MODE_NAME] | ||||
|  | **Requested Action**: [ACTION]  | ||||
|  | **Constraint Violation**: [DESCRIPTION] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **What You Can Do Instead**: | ||||
|  | - [LIST OF ALLOWED ALTERNATIVES] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **To Enable This Action**: Invoke @meta_[appropriate_mode].mdc | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Mode Transition Guidance** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **When user needs to change modes, provide clear guidance:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 🔄 **MODE TRANSITION REQUIRED** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Current Mode**: [CURRENT_MODE] | ||||
|  | **Required Mode**: [REQUIRED_MODE] | ||||
|  | **Action**: Invoke @meta_[required_mode].mdc | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **This will enable**: [DESCRIPTION OF NEW CAPABILITIES] | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## When to Use | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **ALWAYS** - These rules apply to every single prompt, regardless of the task | ||||
|  | or context. They form the foundation for all AI assistant behavior. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Bundled Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Core Human Competence Principles** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`core/base_context.mdc`** - Human competence first principles, interaction | ||||
|  |   guidelines, and output contract requirements | ||||
|  | - **`core/less_complex.mdc`** - Minimalist solution principle and complexity | ||||
|  |   guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Time & Context Standards** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`development/time.mdc`** - Time handling principles and UTC standards | ||||
|  | - **`development/time_examples.mdc`** - Practical time implementation examples | ||||
|  | - **`development/time_implementation.mdc`** - Detailed time implementation | ||||
|  |   guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Version Control & Process** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`workflow/version_control.mdc`** - Version control principles and commit | ||||
|  |   guidelines | ||||
|  | - **`workflow/commit_messages.mdc`** - Commit message format and conventions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Application Context** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`app/timesafari.mdc`** - Core TimeSafari application context and | ||||
|  |   development principles | ||||
|  | - **`app/timesafari_development.mdc`** - TimeSafari-specific development | ||||
|  |   workflow and quality standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Why These Rules Are Always-On | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Base Context** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Human Competence First**: Every interaction must increase human competence | ||||
|  | - **Output Contract**: All responses must follow the required structure | ||||
|  | - **Competence Hooks**: Learning and collaboration must be built into every response | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Time Standards** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **UTC Consistency**: All timestamps must use UTC for system operations | ||||
|  | - **Evidence Collection**: Time context is essential for debugging and investigation | ||||
|  | - **Cross-Platform**: Time handling affects all platforms and features | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Version Control** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Commit Standards**: Every code change must follow commit message conventions | ||||
|  | - **Process Consistency**: Version control affects all development work | ||||
|  | - **Team Collaboration**: Commit standards enable effective team communication | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Application Context** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Platform Awareness**: Every task must consider web/mobile/desktop platforms | ||||
|  | - **Architecture Principles**: All work must follow TimeSafari patterns | ||||
|  | - **Development Standards**: Quality and testing requirements apply to all work | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Application Priority | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Primary (Apply First)** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Base Context** - Human competence and output contract | ||||
|  | 2. **Time Standards** - UTC and timestamp requirements | ||||
|  | 3. **Application Context** - TimeSafari principles and platforms | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Secondary (Apply as Needed)** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Version Control** - When making code changes | ||||
|  | 2. **Complexity Guidelines** - When evaluating solution approaches | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration with Other Meta-Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Feature Planning** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Base context ensures human competence focus | ||||
|  | - Time standards inform planning and estimation | ||||
|  | - Application context drives platform considerations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Bug Diagnosis** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Base context ensures systematic investigation | ||||
|  | - Time standards enable proper evidence collection | ||||
|  | - Application context provides system understanding | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Bug Fixing** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Base context ensures quality implementation | ||||
|  | - Time standards maintain logging consistency | ||||
|  | - Application context guides testing strategy | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Feature Implementation** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Base context ensures proper development approach | ||||
|  | - Time standards maintain system consistency | ||||
|  | - Application context drives architecture decisions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Success Criteria | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Base context applied** to every single prompt | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Time standards followed** for all timestamps and logging | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Version control standards** applied to all code changes | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Application context considered** for all platform work | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Human competence focus** maintained in all interactions | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Output contract structure** followed in all responses | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Common Pitfalls | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Don't skip base context** - loses human competence focus | ||||
|  | - **Don't ignore time standards** - creates inconsistent timestamps | ||||
|  | - **Don't forget application context** - misses platform considerations | ||||
|  | - **Don't skip version control** - creates inconsistent commit history | ||||
|  | - **Don't lose competence focus** - reduces learning value | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Feedback & Improvement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Rule Effectiveness Ratings (1-5 scale)** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Base Context**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Time Standards**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Version Control**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Application Context**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Always-On Effectiveness** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Consistency**: Are these rules applied consistently across all prompts? | ||||
|  | - **Value**: Do these rules add value to every interaction? | ||||
|  | - **Overhead**: Are these rules too burdensome for simple tasks? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Integration Feedback** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **With Other Meta-Rules**: How well do these integrate with workflow rules? | ||||
|  | - **Context Switching**: Do these rules help or hinder context switching? | ||||
|  | - **Learning Curve**: Are these rules easy for new users to understand? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Overall Experience** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Quality Improvement**: Do these rules improve response quality? | ||||
|  | - **Efficiency**: Do these rules make interactions more efficient? | ||||
|  | - **Recommendation**: Would you recommend keeping these always-on? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Every Prompt | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Base Context**: Ensure human competence principles are active | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Time Standards**: Verify UTC and timestamp requirements are clear | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Application Context**: Confirm TimeSafari context is loaded | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Version Control**: Prepare commit standards if code changes are needed | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Workflow State**: Read current mode constraints from state file | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Constraint Validation**: Validate user request against current mode | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Response Creation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Output Contract**: Follow required response structure | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Competence Hooks**: Include learning and collaboration elements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Time Consistency**: Apply UTC standards for all time references | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Awareness**: Consider all target platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Mode Enforcement**: Apply current mode constraints to response | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Constraint Violations**: Block forbidden actions and guide alternatives | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Response Creation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Validation**: Verify all always-on rules were applied | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Quality Check**: Ensure response meets competence standards | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Context Review**: Confirm application context was properly considered | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Feedback Collection**: Note any issues with always-on application | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Mode Compliance**: Verify response stayed within current mode constraints | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Transition Guidance**: Provide clear guidance for mode changes if needed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_feature_planning.mdc` for workflow-specific rules | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_bug_diagnosis.mdc` for investigation workflows | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_bug_fixing.mdc` for fix implementation | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_feature_implementation.mdc` for feature development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active core always-on meta-rule | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Critical (applies to every prompt) | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: All bundled sub-rules | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: All AI interactions, Development team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: All bundled sub-rules | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: All AI interactions, Development team | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: All bundled sub-rules | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: All AI interactions, Development team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,275 @@ | |||||
|  | # 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. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow Constraints | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **This meta-rule enforces DOCUMENTATION MODE for all bundled sub-rules:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "workflowMode": "documentation", | ||||
|  |   "constraints": { | ||||
|  |     "mode": "writing_only", | ||||
|  |     "allowed": ["write", "edit", "format", "structure", "review"], | ||||
|  |     "forbidden": ["implement", "code", "build", "deploy"] | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **All bundled sub-rules automatically inherit these constraints.** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow State Update | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **When this meta-rule is invoked, update the workflow state file:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "currentMode": "documentation", | ||||
|  |   "lastInvoked": "meta_documentation.mdc", | ||||
|  |   "timestamp": "2025-01-27T15:30:00Z", | ||||
|  |   "constraints": { | ||||
|  |     "mode": "writing_only", | ||||
|  |     "allowed": ["write", "edit", "format", "structure", "review"], | ||||
|  |     "forbidden": ["implement", "code", "build", "deploy"] | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **State File Location**: `.cursor/rules/.workflow_state.json` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **This enables the core always-on rule to enforce documentation mode constraints.** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## 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 | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,226 @@ | |||||
|  | # Meta-Rule: Feature Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-21 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Feature implementation workflow bundling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | This meta-rule bundles all the rules needed for building features with | ||||
|  | proper architecture and cross-platform support. Use this when implementing | ||||
|  | planned features or refactoring existing code. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow Constraints | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **This meta-rule enforces IMPLEMENTATION MODE for all bundled sub-rules:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "workflowMode": "implementation", | ||||
|  |   "constraints": { | ||||
|  |     "mode": "development", | ||||
|  |     "allowed": ["code", "build", "test", "refactor", "deploy"], | ||||
|  |     "required": "planning_complete_before_implementation" | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **All bundled sub-rules automatically inherit these constraints.** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow State Update | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **When this meta-rule is invoked, update the workflow state file:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "currentMode": "implementation", | ||||
|  |   "lastInvoked": "meta_feature_implementation.mdc", | ||||
|  |   "timestamp": "2025-01-27T15:30:00Z", | ||||
|  |   "constraints": { | ||||
|  |     "mode": "development", | ||||
|  |     "allowed": ["code", "build", "test", "refactor", "deploy"], | ||||
|  |     "forbidden": [], | ||||
|  |     "required": "planning_complete_before_implementation" | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **State File Location**: `.cursor/rules/.workflow_state.json` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **This enables the core always-on rule to enforce implementation mode constraints.** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## When to Use | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Feature Development**: Building new features from planning | ||||
|  | - **Code Refactoring**: Restructuring existing code for better architecture | ||||
|  | - **Platform Expansion**: Adding features to new platforms | ||||
|  | - **Service Implementation**: Building new services or components | ||||
|  | - **Integration Work**: Connecting features with existing systems | ||||
|  | - **Performance Optimization**: Improving feature performance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Bundled Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Development Foundation** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`app/timesafari_development.mdc`** - TimeSafari-specific | ||||
|  |   development workflow and quality standards | ||||
|  | - **`development/software_development.mdc`** - Core development | ||||
|  |   principles and evidence requirements | ||||
|  | - **`development/type_safety_guide.mdc`** - Type-safe implementation | ||||
|  |   with proper error handling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Architecture & Patterns** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`app/architectural_patterns.mdc`** - Design patterns and | ||||
|  |   architectural examples for features | ||||
|  | - **`app/architectural_examples.mdc`** - Implementation examples | ||||
|  |   and testing strategies | ||||
|  | - **`app/architectural_implementation.mdc`** - Implementation | ||||
|  |   guidelines and best practices | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Platform & Services** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`app/timesafari_platforms.mdc`** - Platform abstraction | ||||
|  |   patterns and platform-specific requirements | ||||
|  | - **`development/asset_configuration.mdc`** - Asset management | ||||
|  |   and build integration | ||||
|  | - **`development/logging_standards.mdc`** - Proper logging | ||||
|  |   implementation standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Quality & Validation** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`architecture/build_validation.mdc`** - Build system | ||||
|  |   validation and testing procedures | ||||
|  | - **`architecture/build_testing.mdc`** - Testing requirements | ||||
|  |   and feedback collection | ||||
|  | - **`development/complexity_assessment.mdc`** - Complexity | ||||
|  |   evaluation for implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow Sequence | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 1: Implementation Foundation (Start Here)** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Development Workflow** - Use `timesafari_development.mdc` for | ||||
|  |    development standards and workflow | ||||
|  | 2. **Type Safety** - Apply `type_safety_guide.mdc` for type-safe | ||||
|  |    implementation | ||||
|  | 3. **Architecture Patterns** - Use `architectural_patterns.mdc` for | ||||
|  |    design patterns | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 2: Feature Development** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Platform Services** - Apply `timesafari_platforms.mdc` for | ||||
|  |    platform abstraction | ||||
|  | 2. **Implementation Examples** - Use `architectural_examples.mdc` | ||||
|  |    for implementation guidance | ||||
|  | 3. **Asset Configuration** - Apply `asset_configuration.mdc` for | ||||
|  |    asset management | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 3: Quality & Testing** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Logging Implementation** - Use `logging_standards.mdc` for | ||||
|  |    proper logging | ||||
|  | 2. **Build Validation** - Apply `build_validation.mdc` for build | ||||
|  |    system compliance | ||||
|  | 3. **Testing & Feedback** - Use `build_testing.mdc` for testing | ||||
|  |    requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Success Criteria | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Feature implemented** following development standards | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Type safety maintained** with proper error handling | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Architecture patterns applied** consistently | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform abstraction implemented** correctly | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Logging properly implemented** with component context | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Assets configured** and integrated with build system | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Build validation passed** with no build system issues | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing completed** across all target platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code review completed** with all feedback addressed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Common Pitfalls | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Don't skip architecture patterns** - leads to inconsistent design | ||||
|  | - **Don't ignore platform abstraction** - creates platform-specific code | ||||
|  | - **Don't skip type safety** - leads to runtime errors | ||||
|  | - **Don't ignore logging** - makes future debugging harder | ||||
|  | - **Don't skip build validation** - can break build system | ||||
|  | - **Don't forget asset configuration** - leads to missing assets | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration Points | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **With Other Meta-Rules** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Feature Planning**: Planning outputs drive implementation approach | ||||
|  | - **Bug Fixing**: Implementation patterns inform fix strategies | ||||
|  | - **Bug Diagnosis**: Implementation insights help with investigation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **With Development Workflow** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Implementation follows development standards | ||||
|  | - Architecture decisions drive implementation approach | ||||
|  | - Platform requirements inform testing strategy | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Feedback & Improvement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Sub-Rule Ratings (1-5 scale)** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Development Workflow**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Type Safety**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Architecture Patterns**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Platform Services**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Build Validation**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Workflow Feedback** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Implementation Clarity**: How clear was the implementation guidance? | ||||
|  | - **Pattern Effectiveness**: How well did architecture patterns work? | ||||
|  | - **Platform Coverage**: How well did platform guidance cover your needs? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Sub-Rule Improvements** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Clarity Issues**: Which rules were unclear or confusing? | ||||
|  | - **Missing Examples**: What examples would make rules more useful? | ||||
|  | - **Integration Problems**: Do any rules conflict or overlap? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Overall Experience** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Time Saved**: How much time did this meta-rule save you? | ||||
|  | - **Quality Improvement**: Did following these rules improve your implementation? | ||||
|  | - **Recommendation**: Would you recommend this meta-rule to others? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Feature Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Planning Review**: Review feature planning and requirements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Architecture Planning**: Plan architecture and design patterns | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Analysis**: Understand platform-specific requirements | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing Strategy**: Plan testing approach for the feature | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Feature Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Rule Application**: Apply bundled rules in recommended sequence | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Implementation**: Implement feature following development standards | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing**: Test feature across all target platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Document implementation details and decisions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Feature Implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Validation**: Verify feature meets all success criteria | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Code Review**: Complete code review with team | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing**: Complete comprehensive testing across platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Feedback Collection**: Collect feedback on meta-rule effectiveness | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_feature_planning.mdc` for planning workflow | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_bug_fixing.mdc` for fix implementation patterns | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_bug_diagnosis.mdc` for investigation insights | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active meta-rule for feature implementation | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: All bundled sub-rules | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Architecture team, QA team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,203 @@ | |||||
|  | # Meta-Rule: Feature Planning | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-08-21 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Feature planning workflow bundling | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | This meta-rule bundles all the rules needed for comprehensive feature planning | ||||
|  | across all platforms. Use this when starting any new feature development, | ||||
|  | planning sprints, or estimating work effort. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow Constraints | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **This meta-rule enforces PLANNING MODE for all bundled sub-rules:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "workflowMode": "planning", | ||||
|  |   "constraints": { | ||||
|  |     "mode": "design_only", | ||||
|  |     "allowed": ["analyze", "plan", "design", "estimate", "document"], | ||||
|  |     "forbidden": ["implement", "code", "build", "test", "deploy"] | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **All bundled sub-rules automatically inherit these constraints.** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow State Update | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **When this meta-rule is invoked, update the workflow state file:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "currentMode": "planning", | ||||
|  |   "lastInvoked": "meta_feature_planning.mdc", | ||||
|  |   "timestamp": "2025-01-27T15:30:00Z", | ||||
|  |   "constraints": { | ||||
|  |     "mode": "design_only", | ||||
|  |     "allowed": ["analyze", "plan", "design", "estimate", "document"], | ||||
|  |     "forbidden": ["implement", "code", "build", "test", "deploy"] | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **State File Location**: `.cursor/rules/.workflow_state.json` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **This enables the core always-on rule to enforce planning mode constraints.** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## When to Use | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **New Feature Development**: Planning features from concept to implementation | ||||
|  | - **Sprint Planning**: Estimating effort and breaking down work | ||||
|  | - **Architecture Decisions**: Planning major architectural changes | ||||
|  | - **Platform Expansion**: Adding features to new platforms | ||||
|  | - **Refactoring Planning**: Planning significant code restructuring | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Bundled Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Core Planning Foundation** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`development/planning_examples.mdc`** - Planning templates, examples, and | ||||
|  |   best practices for structured planning | ||||
|  | - **`development/realistic_time_estimation.mdc`** - Time estimation framework | ||||
|  |   with complexity-based phases and milestones | ||||
|  | - **`development/complexity_assessment.mdc`** - Technical and business | ||||
|  |   complexity evaluation with risk assessment | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Platform & Architecture** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`app/timesafari_platforms.mdc`** - Platform-specific requirements, | ||||
|  |   constraints, and capabilities across web/mobile/desktop | ||||
|  | - **`app/architectural_decision_record.mdc`** - ADR process for documenting | ||||
|  |   major architectural decisions and trade-offs | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Development Context** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`app/timesafari.mdc`** - Core application context, principles, and | ||||
|  |   development focus areas | ||||
|  | - **`app/timesafari_development.mdc`** - TimeSafari-specific development | ||||
|  |   workflow and quality standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow Sequence | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 1: Foundation (Start Here)** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Complexity Assessment** - Use `complexity_assessment.mdc` to evaluate | ||||
|  |    technical and business complexity | ||||
|  | 2. **Time Estimation** - Apply `realistic_time_estimation.mdc` framework | ||||
|  |    based on complexity results | ||||
|  | 3. **Core Planning** - Use `planning_examples.mdc` for structured planning | ||||
|  |    approach | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 2: Platform & Architecture** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Platform Analysis** - Review `timesafari_platforms.mdc` for | ||||
|  |    platform-specific requirements | ||||
|  | 2. **Architecture Planning** - Use `architectural_decision_record.mdc` if | ||||
|  |    major architectural changes are needed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 3: Implementation Planning** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Development Workflow** - Reference `timesafari_development.mdc` for | ||||
|  |    development standards and testing strategy | ||||
|  | 2. **Final Planning** - Consolidate all inputs into comprehensive plan | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Success Criteria | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Complexity assessed** and documented with risk factors | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Time estimate created** with clear phases and milestones | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform requirements identified** for all target platforms | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Architecture decisions documented** (if major changes needed) | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Testing strategy planned** with platform-specific considerations | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Dependencies mapped** between tasks and phases | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Stakeholder input gathered** and incorporated | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Common Pitfalls | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Don't skip complexity assessment** - leads to unrealistic estimates | ||||
|  | - **Don't estimate without platform analysis** - misses platform-specific work | ||||
|  | - **Don't plan without stakeholder input** - creates misaligned expectations | ||||
|  | - **Don't ignore testing strategy** - leads to incomplete planning | ||||
|  | - **Don't skip architecture decisions** - creates technical debt | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration Points | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **With Other Meta-Rules** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Bug Diagnosis**: Use complexity assessment for bug investigation planning | ||||
|  | - **Feature Implementation**: This planning feeds directly into implementation | ||||
|  | - **Code Review**: Planning standards inform review requirements | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **With Development Workflow** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Planning outputs become inputs for sprint planning | ||||
|  | - Complexity assessment informs testing strategy | ||||
|  | - Platform requirements drive architecture decisions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Feedback & Improvement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Sub-Rule Ratings (1-5 scale)** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Complexity Assessment**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Time Estimation**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Planning Examples**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Platform Analysis**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Architecture Decisions**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Workflow Feedback** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Sequence Effectiveness**: Did the recommended order work for you? | ||||
|  | - **Missing Guidance**: What additional information would have helped? | ||||
|  | - **Process Gaps**: Where did the workflow break down? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Sub-Rule Improvements** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Clarity Issues**: Which rules were unclear or confusing? | ||||
|  | - **Missing Examples**: What examples would make rules more useful? | ||||
|  | - **Integration Problems**: Do any rules conflict or overlap? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Overall Experience** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Time Saved**: How much time did this meta-rule save you? | ||||
|  | - **Quality Improvement**: Did following these rules improve your planning? | ||||
|  | - **Recommendation**: Would you recommend this meta-rule to others? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Feature Planning | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Scope Definition**: Clearly define the feature scope and boundaries | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Stakeholder Identification**: Identify all stakeholders and decision makers | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Platform Requirements**: Understand target platforms and constraints | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Complexity Assessment**: Plan complexity evaluation approach | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Feature Planning | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Rule Application**: Apply bundled rules in recommended sequence | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Document all planning decisions and rationale | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Stakeholder Input**: Gather and incorporate stakeholder feedback | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Validation**: Validate planning against success criteria | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Feature Planning | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Plan Review**: Review plan with stakeholders and team | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Feedback Collection**: Collect feedback on meta-rule effectiveness | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Update**: Update relevant documentation | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Process Improvement**: Identify improvements for future planning | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_bug_diagnosis.mdc` for investigation planning | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_feature_implementation.mdc` for implementation workflow | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_bug_fixing.mdc` for fix implementation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active meta-rule for feature planning | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: All bundled sub-rules | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Product team, Architecture team | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,285 @@ | |||||
|  | # Meta-Rule: Enhanced Research Workflows | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-01-27 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Research and investigation workflows | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Purpose | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | This meta-rule bundles research-specific rules that should be applied when conducting | ||||
|  | systematic investigation, analysis, evidence collection, or research tasks. It provides | ||||
|  | a comprehensive framework for thorough, methodical research workflows that produce | ||||
|  | actionable insights and evidence-based conclusions. | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow Constraints | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **This meta-rule enforces RESEARCH MODE for all bundled sub-rules:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "workflowMode": "research", | ||||
|  |   "constraints": { | ||||
|  |     "mode": "investigation", | ||||
|  |     "allowed": ["read", "search", "analyze", "plan"], | ||||
|  |     "forbidden": ["modify", "create", "build", "commit"] | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **All bundled sub-rules automatically inherit these constraints.** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Workflow State Update | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **When this meta-rule is invoked, update the workflow state file:** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ```json | ||||
|  | { | ||||
|  |   "currentMode": "research", | ||||
|  |   "lastInvoked": "meta_research.mdc", | ||||
|  |   "timestamp": "2025-01-27T15:30:00Z", | ||||
|  |   "constraints": { | ||||
|  |     "mode": "investigation", | ||||
|  |     "allowed": ["read", "search", "analyze", "plan"], | ||||
|  |     "forbidden": ["modify", "create", "build", "commit"] | ||||
|  |   } | ||||
|  | } | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **State File Location**: `.cursor/rules/.workflow_state.json` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **This enables the core always-on rule to enforce research mode constraints.** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## When to Use | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **RESEARCH TASKS** - Apply this meta-rule when: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Investigating bugs, defects, or system issues | ||||
|  | - Conducting technical research or feasibility analysis | ||||
|  | - Analyzing codebases, architectures, or dependencies | ||||
|  | - Researching solutions, alternatives, or best practices | ||||
|  | - Collecting evidence for decision-making or documentation | ||||
|  | - Performing root cause analysis or impact assessment | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Bundled Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Core Research Principles** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`development/research_diagnostic.mdc`** - Systematic investigation workflow | ||||
|  |   and evidence collection methodology | ||||
|  | - **`development/type_safety_guide.mdc`** - Type analysis and safety research | ||||
|  |   for TypeScript/JavaScript codebases | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Investigation & Analysis** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`workflow/version_control.mdc`** - Git history analysis and commit research | ||||
|  | - **`workflow/commit_messages.mdc`** - Commit pattern analysis and history | ||||
|  |   investigation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Platform & Context Research** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **`app/timesafari.mdc`** - Application context research and platform | ||||
|  |   understanding | ||||
|  | - **`app/timesafari_platforms.mdc`** - Platform-specific research and | ||||
|  |   capability analysis | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Why These Rules Are Research-Focused | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Research Diagnostic** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Systematic Approach**: Provides structured investigation methodology | ||||
|  | - **Evidence Collection**: Ensures thorough data gathering and documentation | ||||
|  | - **Root Cause Analysis**: Guides systematic problem investigation | ||||
|  | - **Impact Assessment**: Helps evaluate scope and consequences | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Type Safety Research** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Code Analysis**: Enables systematic type system investigation | ||||
|  | - **Safety Assessment**: Guides research into type-related issues | ||||
|  | - **Migration Planning**: Supports research for architectural changes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Version Control Research** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **History Analysis**: Enables investigation of code evolution | ||||
|  | - **Pattern Recognition**: Helps identify commit and change patterns | ||||
|  | - **Timeline Research**: Supports chronological investigation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Platform Research** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Capability Analysis**: Guides research into platform-specific features | ||||
|  | - **Context Understanding**: Ensures research considers application context | ||||
|  | - **Cross-Platform Research**: Supports multi-platform investigation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Application Priority | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Primary (Apply First)** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Research Diagnostic** - Systematic investigation methodology | ||||
|  | 2. **Type Safety Guide** - Code analysis and type research | ||||
|  | 3. **Application Context** - Platform and context understanding | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Secondary (Apply as Needed)** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Version Control** - When investigating code history | ||||
|  | 2. **Platform Details** - When researching platform-specific capabilities | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Integration with Other Meta-Rules | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Bug Diagnosis** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Research meta-rule provides investigation methodology | ||||
|  | - Core always-on ensures systematic approach | ||||
|  | - Application context provides system understanding | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Feature Planning** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Research meta-rule guides feasibility research | ||||
|  | - Core always-on ensures competence focus | ||||
|  | - Application context drives platform considerations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Architecture Analysis** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Research meta-rule provides systematic analysis framework | ||||
|  | - Core always-on ensures quality standards | ||||
|  | - Application context informs architectural decisions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Performance Investigation** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - Research meta-rule guides systematic performance research | ||||
|  | - Core always-on ensures thorough investigation | ||||
|  | - Application context provides performance context | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Research Workflow Phases | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 1: Investigation Setup** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Scope Definition** - Define research boundaries and objectives | ||||
|  | 2. **Context Gathering** - Collect relevant application and platform context | ||||
|  | 3. **Methodology Selection** - Choose appropriate research approaches | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 2: Evidence Collection** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Systematic Data Gathering** - Collect evidence using structured methods | ||||
|  | 2. **Documentation** - Record all findings and observations | ||||
|  | 3. **Validation** - Verify evidence accuracy and relevance | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 3: Analysis & Synthesis** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Pattern Recognition** - Identify trends and patterns in evidence | ||||
|  | 2. **Root Cause Analysis** - Determine underlying causes and factors | ||||
|  | 3. **Impact Assessment** - Evaluate scope and consequences | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Phase 4: Conclusion & Action** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Evidence-Based Conclusions** - Draw conclusions from collected evidence | ||||
|  | 2. **Actionable Recommendations** - Provide specific, implementable guidance | ||||
|  | 3. **Documentation** - Create comprehensive research documentation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Success Criteria | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Research diagnostic applied** to all investigation tasks | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Type safety research** conducted for code analysis | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence collection** systematic and comprehensive | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Root cause analysis** thorough and accurate | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Conclusions actionable** and evidence-based | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation complete** and searchable | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Common Research Pitfalls | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Don't skip systematic approach** - leads to incomplete investigation | ||||
|  | - **Don't ignore evidence validation** - creates unreliable conclusions | ||||
|  | - **Don't forget context** - misses important factors | ||||
|  | - **Don't skip documentation** - loses research value | ||||
|  | - **Don't rush conclusions** - produces poor recommendations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Research Quality Standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Evidence Quality** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Completeness**: All relevant evidence collected | ||||
|  | - **Accuracy**: Evidence verified and validated | ||||
|  | - **Relevance**: Evidence directly addresses research questions | ||||
|  | - **Timeliness**: Evidence current and up-to-date | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Analysis Quality** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Systematic**: Analysis follows structured methodology | ||||
|  | - **Objective**: Analysis free from bias and assumptions | ||||
|  | - **Thorough**: All evidence considered and evaluated | ||||
|  | - **Logical**: Conclusions follow from evidence | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Documentation Quality** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Comprehensive**: All findings and methods documented | ||||
|  | - **Searchable**: Documentation easily findable and navigable | ||||
|  | - **Actionable**: Recommendations specific and implementable | ||||
|  | - **Maintainable**: Documentation structure supports updates | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Feedback & Improvement | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Rule Effectiveness Ratings (1-5 scale)** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Research Diagnostic**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Type Safety Guide**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Version Control**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | - **Platform Context**: ___/5 - Comments: _______________ | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Research Workflow Effectiveness** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Investigation Quality**: Are research tasks producing thorough results? | ||||
|  | - **Evidence Collection**: Is evidence gathering systematic and complete? | ||||
|  | - **Conclusion Quality**: Are conclusions actionable and evidence-based? | ||||
|  | - **Documentation Value**: Is research documentation useful and maintainable? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Integration Feedback** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **With Other Meta-Rules**: How well does this integrate with workflow rules? | ||||
|  | - **Context Switching**: Do these rules help or hinder research context? | ||||
|  | - **Learning Curve**: Are these rules easy for new researchers to understand? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Overall Research Experience** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Quality Improvement**: Do these rules improve research outcomes? | ||||
|  | - **Efficiency**: Do these rules make research more efficient? | ||||
|  | - **Recommendation**: Would you recommend keeping this research meta-rule? | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before Research Tasks | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Research Diagnostic**: Ensure systematic investigation methodology | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Type Safety Guide**: Prepare for code analysis if needed | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Application Context**: Load relevant platform and context information | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Version Control**: Prepare for history analysis if needed | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During Research Execution | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Systematic Approach**: Follow structured investigation methodology | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Evidence Collection**: Gather comprehensive and validated evidence | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation**: Record all findings and observations | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Context Awareness**: Consider application and platform context | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After Research Completion | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Validation**: Verify all research phases completed | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Quality Check**: Ensure research meets quality standards | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Documentation Review**: Confirm research properly documented | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Feedback Collection**: Note any issues with research process | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **See also**: | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_core_always_on.mdc` for core always-on rules | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_feature_planning.mdc` for feature development workflows | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_bug_diagnosis.mdc` for bug investigation workflows | ||||
|  | - `.cursor/rules/meta_bug_fixing.mdc` for fix implementation workflows | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active research meta-rule | ||||
|  | **Priority**: High (applies to all research tasks) | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: All bundled sub-rules | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Research team, Quality Assurance team | ||||
|  | description: | ||||
|  | globs: | ||||
|  | alwaysApply: false | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,103 @@ | |||||
|  | # Meta-Rule Architecture Overview | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Author**: Matthew Raymer | ||||
|  | **Date**: 2025-01-27 | ||||
|  | **Status**: 📋 **ACTIVE** - Meta-rule organization and relationships | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Meta-Rule Structure | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Core Always-On Rules** (`meta_core_always_on.mdc`) | ||||
|  | - **Purpose**: Applied to every single prompt | ||||
|  | - **Scope**: Human competence, time standards, version control, application context | ||||
|  | - **Priority**: Critical - foundation for all interactions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Enhanced Research Workflows** (`meta_research.mdc`) ⭐ **NEW** | ||||
|  | - **Purpose**: Applied to research, investigation, and analysis tasks | ||||
|  | - **Scope**: Systematic investigation, evidence collection, root cause analysis | ||||
|  | - **Priority**: High - applies to all research tasks | ||||
|  | - **Bundles**: Research diagnostic, type safety, version control research, platform context | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Feature Development Workflows** (`meta_feature_planning.mdc`) | ||||
|  | - **Purpose**: Applied to feature planning and development tasks | ||||
|  | - **Scope**: Requirements analysis, architecture planning, implementation strategy | ||||
|  | - **Priority**: High - applies to feature development | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Bug Investigation Workflows** (`meta_bug_diagnosis.mdc`) | ||||
|  | - **Purpose**: Applied to bug investigation and diagnosis tasks | ||||
|  | - **Scope**: Defect analysis, evidence collection, root cause identification | ||||
|  | - **Priority**: High - applies to bug investigation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Bug Fixing Workflows** (`meta_bug_fixing.mdc`) | ||||
|  | - **Purpose**: Applied to bug fixing and resolution tasks | ||||
|  | - **Scope**: Fix implementation, testing, validation | ||||
|  | - **Priority**: High - applies to bug resolution | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Research Meta-Rule Integration | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **When to Use Research Meta-Rule** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | The research meta-rule should be applied when: | ||||
|  | - **Investigating bugs** - systematic defect analysis | ||||
|  | - **Researching solutions** - feasibility and alternative analysis | ||||
|  | - **Analyzing codebases** - architecture and dependency research | ||||
|  | - **Collecting evidence** - systematic data gathering | ||||
|  | - **Root cause analysis** - systematic problem investigation | ||||
|  | - **Impact assessment** - scope and consequence evaluation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **How It Complements Other Meta-Rules** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Core Always-On**: Provides foundation (competence, time, context) | ||||
|  | - **Research**: Adds systematic investigation methodology | ||||
|  | - **Feature Planning**: Guides feasibility research and analysis | ||||
|  | - **Bug Diagnosis**: Provides investigation framework | ||||
|  | - **Bug Fixing**: Informs fix strategy through research | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Research Workflow Phases** | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Investigation Setup** - Scope, context, methodology | ||||
|  | 2. **Evidence Collection** - Systematic data gathering | ||||
|  | 3. **Analysis & Synthesis** - Pattern recognition, root cause | ||||
|  | 4. **Conclusion & Action** - Evidence-based recommendations | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Usage Examples | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Bug Investigation** | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | Apply: meta_core_always_on + meta_research + meta_bug_diagnosis | ||||
|  | Result: Systematic investigation with evidence collection and root cause analysis | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Feature Research** | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | Apply: meta_core_always_on + meta_research + meta_feature_planning | ||||
|  | Result: Comprehensive feasibility research with platform context | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### **Architecture Analysis** | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | Apply: meta_core_always_on + meta_research | ||||
|  | Result: Systematic architecture investigation with evidence-based conclusions | ||||
|  | ``` | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Benefits of Enhanced Research Meta-Rule | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Systematic Approach**: Structured investigation methodology | ||||
|  | - **Evidence-Based**: Comprehensive data collection and validation | ||||
|  | - **Quality Standards**: Defined research quality criteria | ||||
|  | - **Integration**: Seamless integration with existing workflows | ||||
|  | - **Documentation**: Comprehensive research documentation standards | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Next Steps | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Test Research Meta-Rule** - Apply to next research task | ||||
|  | 2. **Validate Integration** - Ensure smooth workflow integration | ||||
|  | 3. **Collect Feedback** - Gather effectiveness ratings | ||||
|  | 4. **Iterate** - Refine based on usage experience | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Status**: Active documentation | ||||
|  | **Priority**: Medium | ||||
|  | **Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference | ||||
|  | **Dependencies**: All meta-rules | ||||
|  | **Stakeholders**: Development team, Research team | ||||
| @ -1,6 +0,0 @@ | |||||
| --- |  | ||||
| alwaysApply: true |  | ||||
| --- |  | ||||
| progress reports are based on git commit messages and file differences for that day |  | ||||
| reports are in conversational style |  | ||||
| do not be a bean counter unless otherwise instructed |  | ||||
| @ -1,242 +0,0 @@ | |||||
| # TimeSafari Notifications — LLM Implementation Directive (v2.0) |  | ||||
| _Last updated: August 12, 2025_ |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 0) Role & Objective |  | ||||
| **You are the implementation LLM.** Build an **offline-first daily notifications system** for Android (Kotlin) and iOS (Swift) that **prefetches -> caches -> schedules -> displays** content **without requiring network at display time**. Favor **reliability over richness**. |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 1) Golden Rules |  | ||||
| 1. **Follow the pipeline:** **Prefetch → Cache → Schedule → Display.** |  | ||||
| 2. **Never depend on network at display time.** All assets must be local. |  | ||||
| 3. **Design for failure.** Always have a last-known-good and an emergency fallback. |  | ||||
| 4. **Keep content scannable (<3s), single message, actionable.** |  | ||||
| 5. **Measure everything** (fetch success, delivery, engagement, stale usage). |  | ||||
| 6. **Minimize battery impact** and respect platform limitations and user settings. |  | ||||
| 7. **Ask only when needed:** if a required input is missing, use the defaults below; otherwise proceed. |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 2) Default Assumptions (use unless overridden) |  | ||||
| - **Product mode:** Lightweight Daily Updates (text + emoji) with option to extend to media later. |  | ||||
| - **Fetch size:** 1–2 KB JSON daily. |  | ||||
| - **User schedule default:** 07:30 local time, daily. |  | ||||
| - **Quiet hours:** None (app-level quiet hours supported but disabled by default). |  | ||||
| - **Analytics:** Local log + pluggable uploader (no-op by default). |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 3) Deliverables |  | ||||
| Produce the following artifacts: |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ### Android (Kotlin) |  | ||||
| - `:core`: models, storage, metrics, fallback manager. |  | ||||
| - `:data`: fetchers (WorkManager), mappers, cache policy. |  | ||||
| - `:notify`: scheduler (AlarmManager), receiver, channels. |  | ||||
| - App manifest entries & permissions. |  | ||||
| - Unit tests for fallback, scheduling, metrics. |  | ||||
| - README with battery optimization instructions (OEMs). |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ### iOS (Swift) |  | ||||
| - `NotificationKit`: models, storage, metrics, fallback manager. |  | ||||
| - BGTaskScheduler registration + handler. |  | ||||
| - UNUserNotificationCenter scheduling + categories + attachments. |  | ||||
| - Unit tests for fallback, scheduling, metrics. |  | ||||
| - README with Background App Refresh caveats + Focus/Summary notes. |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 4) Permissions & Required Setup |  | ||||
| ### Android Manifest |  | ||||
| ```xml |  | ||||
| <uses-permission android:name="android.permission.INTERNET" /> |  | ||||
| <uses-permission android:name="android.permission.POST_NOTIFICATIONS" /> |  | ||||
| <uses-permission android:name="android.permission/SCHEDULE_EXACT_ALARM" /> |  | ||||
| <uses-permission android:name="android.permission.WAKE_LOCK" /> |  | ||||
| ``` |  | ||||
| - Create a high-importance **NotificationChannel** `timesafari.daily`. |  | ||||
| - If **SCHEDULE_EXACT_ALARM** denied on Android 12+, auto-fallback to inexact. |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ### iOS App Setup (AppDelegate / SceneDelegate) |  | ||||
| - Register `BGTaskScheduler` with ID `com.timesafari.daily-fetch`. |  | ||||
| - Request alerts, sound, badge via `UNUserNotificationCenter`. |  | ||||
| - Create category `DAILY_UPDATE` with a primary `View` action. |  | ||||
| - Ensure Background Modes: **Background fetch**, **Remote notifications** (optional for future push). |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 5) Data Model (keep minimal, versioned) |  | ||||
| ### Canonical Schema (language-agnostic) |  | ||||
| ``` |  | ||||
| NotificationContent v1 |  | ||||
| - id: string (uuid) |  | ||||
| - title: string |  | ||||
| - body: string (plain text; may include simple emoji) |  | ||||
| - scheduledTime: epoch millis (client-local target) |  | ||||
| - mediaUrl: string? (for future; must be mirrored to local path before use) |  | ||||
| - fetchTime: epoch millis |  | ||||
| ``` |  | ||||
| ### Kotlin |  | ||||
| ```kotlin |  | ||||
| @Entity |  | ||||
| data class NotificationContent( |  | ||||
|     @PrimaryKey val id: String, |  | ||||
|     val title: String, |  | ||||
|     val body: String, |  | ||||
|     val scheduledTime: Long, |  | ||||
|     val mediaUrl: String?, |  | ||||
|     val fetchTime: Long |  | ||||
| ) |  | ||||
| ``` |  | ||||
| ### Swift |  | ||||
| ```swift |  | ||||
| struct NotificationContent: Codable { |  | ||||
|     let id: String |  | ||||
|     let title: String |  | ||||
|     let body: String |  | ||||
|     let scheduledTime: TimeInterval |  | ||||
|     let mediaUrl: String? |  | ||||
|     let fetchTime: TimeInterval |  | ||||
| } |  | ||||
| ``` |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 6) Storage Layers |  | ||||
| **Tier 1: Key-Value (quick)** — next payload, last fetch timestamp, user prefs.   |  | ||||
| **Tier 2: DB (structured)** — history, media metadata, analytics events.   |  | ||||
| **Tier 3: Files (large assets)** — images/audio; LRU cache & quotas. |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| - Android: SharedPreferences/DataStore + Room + `context.cacheDir/notifications/`   |  | ||||
| - iOS: UserDefaults + Core Data/SQLite + `Library/Caches/notifications/` |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 7) Background Execution |  | ||||
| ### Android — WorkManager |  | ||||
| - Periodic daily work with constraints (CONNECTED network).   |  | ||||
| - Total time budget ~10m; use **timeouts** (e.g., fetch ≤30s, overall ≤8m).   |  | ||||
| - On exception/timeout: **schedule from cache**; then `Result.success()` or `Result.retry()` per policy. |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ### iOS — BGTaskScheduler |  | ||||
| - `BGAppRefreshTask` with aggressive time budgeting (10–30s typical).   |  | ||||
| - Submit next request immediately at start of handler.   |  | ||||
| - Set `expirationHandler` first; cancel tasks cleanly; **fallback to cache** on failure. |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 8) Scheduling & Display |  | ||||
| ### Android |  | ||||
| - Prefer `AlarmManager.setExactAndAllowWhileIdle()` if permitted; else inexact.   |  | ||||
| - Receiver builds notification using **BigTextStyle** for long bodies.   |  | ||||
| - Limit actions to ≤3; default: `View` (foreground intent). |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ### iOS |  | ||||
| - `UNCalendarNotificationTrigger` repeating at preferred time.   |  | ||||
| - Category `DAILY_UPDATE` with `View` action.   |  | ||||
| - Media attachments **only if local**; otherwise skip gracefully. |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 9) Fallback Hierarchy (must implement) |  | ||||
| 1. **Foreground prefetch path** if app is open.   |  | ||||
| 2. **Background fetch** with short network timeout.   |  | ||||
| 3. **Last good cache** (annotate staleness: “as of X”).   |  | ||||
| 4. **Emergency phrases** (rotate from static list). |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| Provide helper: |  | ||||
| - `withStaleMarker(content) -> content'` appends age label (e.g., “from 3h ago”). |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 10) Failure Matrix & Responses |  | ||||
| | Scenario | Detect | Action | |  | ||||
| |---|---|---| |  | ||||
| | No network / timeout | Exceptions / status | Use last-good; schedule | |  | ||||
| | Invalid JSON | Parse error | Use emergency content; log | |  | ||||
| | Storage full | Write error | Evict old; retry minimal payload | |  | ||||
| | Notifications disabled | OS state | In-app education screen | |  | ||||
| | Background killed | Gaps in execution | Catch-up next foreground open | |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 11) Metrics (local first; uploader optional) |  | ||||
| Track per attempt: |  | ||||
| ``` |  | ||||
| NotificationMetrics v1 |  | ||||
| - scheduledTime, actualDeliveryTime? |  | ||||
| - contentAge (ms) |  | ||||
| - engagement: {TAPPED, DISMISSED, IGNORED}? |  | ||||
| - failureReason? |  | ||||
| - platformInfo (oem, os version, app state) |  | ||||
| ``` |  | ||||
| - Compute: **Fetch Success Rate**, **Delivery Rate**, **Engagement Rate**, **Stale Content Rate**. |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 12) Testing Requirements |  | ||||
| ### Matrix (minimum) |  | ||||
| - Android 12+ foreground/background/killed; with/without Battery Saver; Wi‑Fi/Mobile/Offline. |  | ||||
| - iOS 16+ background/Low Power/Focus/Scheduled Summary on & off. |  | ||||
| - Offline at trigger time (must still display). |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ### Unit Tests (examples) |  | ||||
| - Fallback when fetch fails (uses last-good and marks stale).   |  | ||||
| - Exact vs inexact scheduling path selected correctly.   |  | ||||
| - Metrics recorded for each stage. |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 13) UX Standards |  | ||||
| - One clear message; no clutter.   |  | ||||
| - ≤2 actions; primary takes user into app.   |  | ||||
| - Respect quiet hours if configured.   |  | ||||
| - Provide onboarding: value explanation → permission request → time picker → test notification → tips for OEM battery settings (Android) or Focus/Summary (iOS). |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 14) Code Stubs (must generate & wire) |  | ||||
| ### Android — Worker (core pattern) |  | ||||
| ```kotlin |  | ||||
| class DailyContentWorker(ctx: Context, params: WorkerParameters) : CoroutineWorker(ctx, params) { |  | ||||
|     override suspend fun doWork(): Result = try { |  | ||||
|         withTimeout(8.minutes) { |  | ||||
|             val content = fetchDailyContent(timeout = 30.seconds) |  | ||||
|             saveToCache(content) |  | ||||
|             scheduleNotification(content) |  | ||||
|         } |  | ||||
|         Result.success() |  | ||||
|     } catch (e: TimeoutCancellationException) { |  | ||||
|         scheduleFromCache(); Result.success() |  | ||||
|     } catch (e: Exception) { |  | ||||
|         scheduleFromCache(); Result.retry() |  | ||||
|     } |  | ||||
| } |  | ||||
| ``` |  | ||||
| ### iOS — BG Refresh Handler (core pattern) |  | ||||
| ```swift |  | ||||
| func handleBackgroundRefresh(_ task: BGAppRefreshTask) { |  | ||||
|     scheduleNextRefresh() |  | ||||
|     var finished = false |  | ||||
|     task.expirationHandler = { if !finished { cancelNetwork(); task.setTaskCompleted(success: false) } } |  | ||||
|     fetchDailyContent(timeout: 15) { result in |  | ||||
|         defer { finished = true; task.setTaskCompleted(success: result.isSuccess) } |  | ||||
|         switch result { |  | ||||
|         case .success(let content): quickSave(content); scheduleNotification(content) |  | ||||
|         case .failure: scheduleFromCache() |  | ||||
|         } |  | ||||
|     } |  | ||||
| } |  | ||||
| ``` |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 15) Security & Privacy |  | ||||
| - Use HTTPS; pin if required.   |  | ||||
| - Strip PII from payloads; keep content generic by default.   |  | ||||
| - Store only what is necessary; apply cache quotas; purge on logout/uninstall.   |  | ||||
| - Respect OS privacy settings (Focus, Scheduled Summary, Quiet Hours). |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 16) Troubleshooting Playbook (LLM should generate helpers) |  | ||||
| - Android: verify permission, channel, OEM battery settings; `adb shell dumpsys notification`.   |  | ||||
| - iOS: check authorization, Background App Refresh, Low Power, Focus/Summary state. |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 17) Roadmap Flags (implement behind switches) |  | ||||
| - `FEATURE_MEDIA_ATTACHMENTS` (default off).   |  | ||||
| - `FEATURE_PERSONALIZATION_ENGINE` (time/frequency, content types).   |  | ||||
| - `FEATURE_PUSH_REALTIME` (server-driven for urgent alerts). |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 18) Definition of Done |  | ||||
| - Notifications deliver daily at user-selected time **without network**.   |  | ||||
| - Graceful fallback chain proven by tests.   |  | ||||
| - Metrics recorded locally; viewable log.   |  | ||||
| - Clear onboarding and self-diagnostic screen.   |  | ||||
| - Battery/OS constraints documented; user education available. |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ## 19) Quick Start (LLM execution order) |  | ||||
| 1. Scaffold modules (Android + iOS).   |  | ||||
| 2. Implement models + storage + fallback content.   |  | ||||
| 3. Implement schedulers (AlarmManager / UNCalendarNotificationTrigger).   |  | ||||
| 4. Implement background fetchers (WorkManager / BGTaskScheduler).   |  | ||||
| 5. Wire onboarding + test notification.   |  | ||||
| 6. Add metrics logging.   |  | ||||
| 7. Ship minimal, then iterate. |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| --- |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| ### Appendix A — Emergency Fallback Lines |  | ||||
| - "🌅 Good morning! Ready to make today amazing?" |  | ||||
| - "💪 Every small step forward counts. You've got this!" |  | ||||
| - "🎯 Focus on what you can control today." |  | ||||
| - "✨ Your potential is limitless. Keep growing!" |  | ||||
| - "🌟 Progress over perfection, always." |  | ||||
| @ -0,0 +1,98 @@ | |||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | alwaysApply: false | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | # ADR Template | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## ADR-XXXX-YY-ZZ: [Short Title] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | **Date:** YYYY-MM-DD | ||||
|  | **Status:** [PROPOSED | ACCEPTED | REJECTED | DEPRECATED | SUPERSEDED] | ||||
|  | **Deciders:** [List of decision makers] | ||||
|  | **Technical Story:** [Link to issue/PR if applicable] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Context | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | [Describe the forces at play, including technological, political, social, and | ||||
|  | project local. These forces are probably in tension, and should be called out as | ||||
|  | such. The language in this section is value-neutral. It is simply describing | ||||
|  |   facts.] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Decision | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | [Describe our response to these forces. We will use the past tense ( | ||||
|  |   "We will...").] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Consequences | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Positive | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [List positive consequences] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Negative | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [List negative consequences or trade-offs] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Neutral | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [List neutral consequences or notes] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Alternatives Considered | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Alternative 1:** [Description] - [Why rejected] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Alternative 2:** [Description] - [Why rejected] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - **Alternative 3:** [Description] - [Why rejected] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Implementation Notes | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | [Any specific implementation details, migration steps, or | ||||
|  |   technical considerations] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## References | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [Link to relevant documentation] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [Link to related ADRs] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [Link to external resources] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Related Decisions | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [List related ADRs or decisions] | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | --- | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Usage Guidelines | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | 1. **Copy this template** for new ADRs | ||||
|  | 2. **Number sequentially** (ADR-001, ADR-002, etc.) | ||||
|  | 3. **Use descriptive titles** that clearly indicate the decision | ||||
|  | 4. **Include all stakeholders** in the deciders list | ||||
|  | 5. **Link to related issues** and documentation | ||||
|  | 6. **Update status** as decisions evolve | ||||
|  | 7. **Store in** `doc/architecture-decisions/` directory | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ## Model Implementation Checklist | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### Before ADR Creation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Decision Context**: Understand the decision that needs to be made | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Stakeholder Identification**: Identify all decision makers | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Research**: Research alternatives and gather evidence | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Template Selection**: Choose appropriate ADR template | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### During ADR Creation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Context Documentation**: Document the context and forces at play | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Decision Recording**: Record the decision and rationale | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Consequences Analysis**: Analyze positive, negative, and neutral consequences | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Alternatives Documentation**: Document alternatives considered | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | ### After ADR Creation | ||||
|  | 
 | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Review**: Review ADR with stakeholders | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Approval**: Get approval from decision makers | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Communication**: Communicate decision to team | ||||
|  | - [ ] **Implementation**: Plan implementation of the decision | ||||
| @ -1,12 +0,0 @@ | |||||
| --- |  | ||||
| alwaysApply: true |  | ||||
| --- |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| **always** |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| use pydantic and marshallow |  | ||||
| use mocking, unit tests, e2e |  | ||||
| fragment tests into folders acccording to feature, sub-feature, sub-sub-feature, etc.   |  | ||||
| document each folder with a README.md |  | ||||
| examples are tests using real data instead of mocks-units |  | ||||
| examples have their own folder system structured the same |  | ||||
| @ -1,5 +0,0 @@ | |||||
| --- |  | ||||
| alwaysApply: true |  | ||||
| --- |  | ||||
| Eagerly query the local system for time in UTC |  | ||||
| Use local system time for all time sense, queries, and calculations involving time. |  | ||||
| @ -1,7 +0,0 @@ | |||||
| --- |  | ||||
| alwaysApply: true |  | ||||
| --- |  | ||||
| use git |  | ||||
| commit messages are based on unstaged files and the chnages made to them |  | ||||
| present proposed messages for approval |  | ||||
| get approval before staging or commmiting |  | ||||
| @ -1,7 +0,0 @@ | |||||
| --- |  | ||||
| alwaysApply: true |  | ||||
| --- |  | ||||
| 
 |  | ||||
| Semantic Versioning: Follows MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH format |  | ||||
| Centralized Management: Single source of truth for all version information |  | ||||
| Git Integration: Automatic commit hash detection |  | ||||
					Loading…
					
					
				
		Reference in new issue