Eric Garcia 0fea499957 feat: lifecycle suffixes for all document states + resolve all clippy warnings

Every document filename now mirrors its lifecycle state with a status
suffix (e.g., .draft.md, .wip.md, .accepted.md). No more bare .md for
tracked document types. Also renamed all from_str methods to parse to
avoid FromStr trait confusion, introduced StagingDeploymentParams struct,
and fixed all 19 clippy warnings across the codebase.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

2026-01-26 12:19:46 -05:00

3.3 KiB

Raw Blame History

Spike: RFC Workflow Guidance Status

Date: 2025-01-24 Time-box: 30 minutes Status: Complete

Question

Does Blue have the RFC workflow baked in like coherence-mcp did?

Short Answer

No. RFC 0011 was supposed to add this, but it's marked "Implemented" with all test items unchecked. The implementation is incomplete.

Investigation

What coherence-mcp Had (The Goal)

Baked-in workflow guidance that told Claude exactly what to do next:

RFC accepted → "Use blue_worktree_create to start implementation"
Worktree created → "Make your changes, then use blue_pr_create"
PR merged → "Use blue_worktree_cleanup to finish"

Each response included next_action with the exact tool and args.

What Blue Has Now

Individual tools exist:

blue_rfc_create / blue_rfc_update_status / blue_rfc_plan / blue_rfc_complete
blue_worktree_create / blue_worktree_cleanup
blue_pr_create / blue_pr_merge
blue_status / blue_next

But no orchestration:

blue_next still uses CLI syntax: "Run 'blue worktree create'" (server.rs:2234)
blue_worktree_create description lacks workflow context (server.rs:484)
No next_action in RFC status changes
No warning when RFC goes in-progress without worktree

RFC 0011 Test Plan Status

Test Item	Status
`blue_rfc_update_status` to "accepted" includes next_action	❌ Not done
`blue_next` uses MCP tool syntax	❌ Not done
`blue_status` hint mentions tool names	❌ Not done
`blue_worktree_create` description includes workflow context	❌ Not done
`blue_rfc_update_status` warns if no worktree	❌ Not done
Manual test: Claude creates worktree after accepting RFC	❌ Not done

All 6 items unchecked, but RFC marked "Implemented".

Evidence from Code

// server.rs:2234 - Still uses CLI syntax
"'{}' is ready to implement. Run 'blue worktree create {}' to start."

// server.rs:484 - No workflow context
"description": "Create an isolated git worktree for RFC implementation."

// Only next_action in entire codebase (worktree.rs:256)
"next_action": "Execute the commands to sync with develop"

What's Missing

next_action struct - Not added to response types
MCP tool syntax in responses - Still says "Run 'blue ...'" not "Use blue_..."
Workflow context in descriptions - Tools don't explain when to use them
Worktree warnings - No warning when RFC goes in-progress without worktree
Generate hint improvements - Hints don't name specific tools

Root Cause

RFC 0011 was created and marked "Implemented" prematurely. There's even a worktree at .blue/worktrees/mcp-workflow-guidance/ suggesting work started but wasn't completed.

Recommendation

Reopen RFC 0011 - Change status back to "in-progress"
Implement the 6 test items - They're well-specified already
This will fix the worktree naming issue - Claude will use Blue's tools instead of improvising

Impact

Without this, Claude will continue to:

Skip worktree creation ~50% of the time
Invent its own worktree naming (like ../fungal-image-analysis-rfc0069)
Work directly on main branch
Not follow the RFC workflow

Outcome

RFC 0011 is the right solution but wasn't actually implemented. Completing it will give Blue the baked-in workflow guidance that coherence-mcp had.

3.3 KiB Raw Blame History