ln-310-story-validator

仓库: levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills
安装量: 59
排名: #12557

安装

npx skills add https://github.com/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills --skill ln-310-story-validator

Validate and auto-fix Stories and Tasks against 2025 standards before execution.

Purpose & Scope

  • Validate Story plus child Tasks against industry standards and project patterns

  • Calculate Penalty Points for violations, then auto-fix to reach 0 points

  • Delegate to ln-002-best-practices-researcher for creating documentation (guides, manuals, ADRs, research)

  • Support Plan Mode: show audit results, wait for approval, then fix

  • Approve Story after fixes (Backlog -> Todo) with tabular output summary

When to Use

  • Reviewing Stories before approval (Backlog -> Todo)

  • Validating implementation path across Story and Tasks

  • Ensuring standards, architecture, and solution fit

  • Optimizing or correcting proposed approaches

Penalty Points System

Goal: Quantitative assessment of Story/Tasks quality. Target = 0 penalty points after fixes.

| CRITICAL | 10 | RFC/OWASP/security violations

| HIGH | 5 | Outdated libraries, architecture issues

| MEDIUM | 3 | Best practices violations

| LOW | 1 | Structural/cosmetic issues

Workflow:

  • Audit: Calculate penalty points for all 17 criteria

  • Fix: Auto-fix and zero out points

  • Report: Total Before -> 0 After

Mode Detection

Detect operating mode at startup:

Plan Mode Active:

  • Phase 1-2: Full audit (discovery + research + penalty calculation)

  • Phase 3: Show results + fix plan -> WAIT for user approval

  • Phase 4-5: After approval -> execute fixes

Normal Mode:

  • Phase 1-5: Standard workflow without stopping

  • Automatically fix and approve

Workflow Overview

Phase 1: Discovery & Loading

Step 1: Configuration & Metadata Loading

  • Auto-discover configuration: Team ID (docs/tasks/kanban_board.md), project docs (CLAUDE.md), epic from Story.project

  • Load metadata only: Story ID/title/status/labels, child Task IDs/titles/status/labels

  • Expect 3-8 implementation tasks; record parentId for filtering

  • Rationale: keep loading light; full descriptions arrive in Phase 2

Phase 2: Research & Audit

Always execute for every Story - no exceptions.

Step 1: Domain Extraction

  • Extract technical domains from Story title + Technical Notes + Implementation Tasks

  • Load pattern registry from references/domain_patterns.md

  • Scan Story content for pattern matches via keyword detection

  • Build list of detected domains requiring documentation

Step 2: Documentation Delegation

  • For EACH detected pattern, delegate to ln-002:
Skill(skill="ln-002-best-practices-researcher",
      args="doc_type=[guide|manual|adr] topic='[pattern]'")
  • Receive file paths to created documentation (docs/guides/, docs/manuals/, docs/adrs/, docs/research/)

Step 3: Research via MCP

  • Query MCP Ref for industry standards: ref_search_documentation(query="[topic] RFC OWASP best practices 2025")

  • Query Context7 for library versions: resolve-library-id + query-docs

  • Extract: standards (RFC numbers, OWASP rules), library versions, patterns

Step 4: Penalty Points Calculation

  • Evaluate all 17 criteria against Story/Tasks

  • Assign penalty points per violation (CRITICAL=10, HIGH=5, MEDIUM=3, LOW=1)

  • Calculate total penalty points

  • Build fix plan for each violation

Phase 3: Audit Results & Fix Plan

Display audit results:

  • Penalty Points table (criterion, severity, points, description)

  • Total: X penalty points

  • Fix Plan: list of fixes for each criterion

Mode handling:

  • IF Plan Mode: Show results + "After your approval, changes will be applied" -> WAIT

  • ELSE (Normal Mode): Proceed to Phase 4 immediately

Phase 4: Auto-Fix

Execute fixes for ALL 17 criteria on the spot.

  • Execution order (6 groups):

Structural (#1-#4) — Story/Tasks template compliance

  • Standards (#5) — RFC/OWASP compliance FIRST (before YAGNI/KISS!)

  • Solution (#6) — Library versions

  • Workflow (#7-#13) — Test strategy, docs integration, size, cleanup, YAGNI, KISS, task order

  • Quality (#14-#15) — Documentation complete, hardcoded values

  • Traceability (#16-#17) — Story-Task alignment, AC coverage (LAST, after all fixes)

  • Use Auto-Fix Actions table below as authoritative checklist

  • Zero out penalty points as fixes applied

  • Test Strategy section must exist but remain empty (testing handled separately)

Phase 5: Approve & Notify

  • Set Story + all Tasks to Todo (Linear); update kanban_board.md with APPROVED marker

  • Add Linear comment with full validation summary:

Penalty Points table (Before -> After = 0)

  • Auto-Fixes Applied table

  • Documentation Created table (docs created via ln-002)

  • Standards Compliance Evidence table

  • Display tabular output (Unicode box-drawing) to terminal

  • Final: Total Penalty Points = 0

  • Optional: If --execute flag provided, delegate to ln-400-story-executor to start execution immediately after approval

Auto-Fix Actions Reference

Structural (#1-#4)

| 1 | Story Structure | 8 sections per template | LOW (1) | Add/reorder sections with TODO placeholders; update Linear

| 2 | Tasks Structure | Each Task has 7 sections | LOW (1) | Load each Task; add/reorder sections; update Linear

| 3 | Story Statement | As a/I want/So that clarity | LOW (1) | Rewrite using persona/capability/value; update Linear

| 4 | Acceptance Criteria | Given/When/Then, 3-5 items | MEDIUM (3) | Normalize to G/W/T; add edge cases; update Linear

Standards (#5)

| 5 | Standards Compliance | RFC, OWASP, REST, Security | CRITICAL (10) | Query MCP Ref; update Technical Notes with compliant approach

Solution (#6)

| 6 | Library & Version | Libraries are latest stable | HIGH (5) | Query Context7; update to recommended versions

Workflow (#7-#13)

| 7 | Test Strategy | Section exists but empty | LOW (1) | Ensure section present; leave empty (testing handled separately)

| 8 | Documentation Integration | No standalone doc tasks | MEDIUM (3) | Remove doc-only tasks; fold into implementation DoD

| 9 | Story Size | 3-8 tasks; 3-5h each | MEDIUM (3) | If <3 or >8, add TODO; flag task size issues

| 10 | Test Task Cleanup | No premature test tasks | MEDIUM (3) | Remove test tasks before final; testing appears later

| 11 | YAGNI | No premature features | MEDIUM (3) | Move speculative items to Out of Scope unless standards require

| 12 | KISS | Simplest solution | MEDIUM (3) | Simplify unless standards require complexity

| 13 | Task Order | DB→Service→API→UI | MEDIUM (3) | Reorder Tasks foundation-first

Quality (#14-#15)

| 14 | Documentation Complete | Pattern docs exist + referenced | HIGH (5) | Delegate to ln-002; add all doc links to Technical Notes

| 15 | Code Quality Basics | No hardcoded values | MEDIUM (3) | Add TODOs for constants/config/env

Traceability (#16-#17)

| 16 | Story-Task Alignment | Tasks implement Story statement | MEDIUM (3) | Add TODO to misaligned Tasks; warn user

| 17 | AC-Task Coverage | Each AC has implementing Task | MEDIUM (3) | Add TODO for uncovered ACs; suggest missing Tasks

Maximum Penalty: 50 points

Self-Audit Protocol (Mandatory)

Before marking any criterion as complete, provide concrete evidence (doc path, MCP result, Linear update).

| 1 | Validated all 8 Story sections? | Section list

| 2 | Loaded full description for each Task? | Task validation count

| 3 | Statement in As a/I want/So that? | Quoted statement

| 4 | AC are G/W/T and testable? | AC count and format

| 5 | Verified RFC/OWASP/REST compliance? | Standards list + MCP result

| 6 | Checked library versions via Context7? | Context7 result

| 7 | Test Strategy kept empty? | Note that testing deferred

| 8 | Docs integrated, no standalone tasks? | Integration evidence

| 9 | Task count 3-8 and 3-5h? | Task count/sizes

| 10 | No premature test tasks? | Search result

| 11 | Only current-scope features (YAGNI)? | Scope review

| 12 | Simplest approach within standards (KISS)? | Simplicity justification

| 13 | Tasks ordered Foundation-First? | Task order list

| 14 | All pattern docs exist and referenced? | Doc paths from ln-002

| 15 | Hardcoded values handled? | TODO/config evidence

| 16 | Each Task aligns with Story statement? | Alignment check result

| 17 | Each AC has implementing Task? | Coverage matrix

Definition of Done

  • Phase 1: Auto-discovery done; Story + Tasks metadata loaded; task count checked

  • Phase 2: Domain extraction complete; ln-002 delegated for docs; MCP research done; Penalty Points calculated

  • Phase 3: Audit results shown; IF Plan Mode: user approved

  • Phase 4: All 17 criteria auto-fixed; Penalty Points = 0; Test Strategy empty; test tasks removed

  • Phase 5: Story/Tasks set to Todo; kanban_board.md updated; Linear comment added; tabular output displayed

  • Optional: If --execute flag, ln-400-story-executor invoked after approval

Example Workflow

Story: "Create user management API with rate limiting"

  • Phase 1: Load metadata (5 Tasks, status Backlog)

  • Phase 2:

Domain extraction: REST API, Rate Limiting

  • Delegate ln-002: creates Guide-05 (REST patterns), Guide-06 (Rate Limiting)

  • MCP Ref: RFC 7231 compliance, OWASP API Security

  • Context7: Express v4.19 (current v4.17)

  • Penalty Points: 18 total (version=5, missing docs=5, structure=3, standards=5)

  • Phase 3:

Show Penalty Points table

  • IF Plan Mode: "18 penalty points found. Fix plan ready. Approve?"

  • Phase 4:

Fix #6: Update Express v4.17 -> v4.19

  • Fix #5: Add RFC 7231 compliance notes

  • Fix #13: Add Guide-05, Guide-06 references

  • Fix #17: Docs already created by ln-002

  • All fixes applied, Penalty Points = 0

  • Phase 5: Story -> Todo, tabular report

Template Loading

Templates: story_template.md, task_template_implementation.md

Loading Logic:

  • Check if docs/templates/{template}.md exists in target project

  • IF NOT EXISTS: a. Create docs/templates/ directory if missing b. Copy shared/templates/{template}.md → docs/templates/{template}.md c. Replace placeholders in the LOCAL copy:

{{TEAM_ID}} → from docs/tasks/kanban_board.md

  • {{DOCS_PATH}} → "docs" (standard)

  • Use LOCAL copy (docs/templates/{template}.md) for all validation operations

Rationale: Templates are copied to target project on first use, ensuring:

  • Project independence (no dependency on skills repository)

  • Customization possible (project can modify local templates)

  • Placeholder replacement happens once at copy time

Reference Files

  • Templates (centralized): shared/templates/story_template.md, shared/templates/task_template_implementation.md

  • Local copies: docs/templates/ (in target project)

  • Validation Checklists (Progressive Disclosure):

references/verification_checklist_template.md (overview of 6 categories)

  • references/structural_validation.md (criteria #1-#4)

  • references/standards_validation.md (criterion #5)

  • references/solution_validation.md (criterion #6)

  • references/workflow_validation.md (criteria #7-#13)

  • references/quality_validation.md (criteria #14-#15)

  • references/traceability_validation.md (criteria #16-#17)

  • references/domain_patterns.md (pattern registry for ln-002 delegation)

  • references/penalty_points.md (penalty system details)

  • Linear integration: ../shared/templates/linear_integration.md

Version: 5.0.0 Last Updated: 2025-01-07

← 返回排行榜