forked from jsnbuchanan/crowd-funder-for-time-pwa
ceefd454ce
Add comprehensive development guidelines enforcing least-complex solutions for bugs and features. Establishes Rule of Three for abstractions, prohibits drive-by refactors, and requires evidence-based future-proofing. - Enforces minimal viable diffs that fully resolve issues - Prevents speculative abstractions without concrete usage - Requires ADR discussion and evidence for added complexity - Includes PR checklist and assistant output contract - Promotes dependency frugality and targeted testing
50 lines
3.0 KiB
Plaintext
50 lines
3.0 KiB
Plaintext
---
|
||
description: Enforce minimalist fixes for bugs/features; future-proofing requires prior discussion and strong evidence.
|
||
globs: "**/*"
|
||
alwaysApply: true
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
# 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.
|