maister-development

name	maister:development
description	Unified orchestrator for all development tasks. ALWAYS execute when invoked — never skip for 'straightforward' tasks. Phases adapt based on detected task characteristics rather than predetermined types. Use for any development work that modifies code.
user-invocable	true

Development Orchestrator

Unified workflow for all development tasks — bug fixes, enhancements, and new features. Phases activate based on context and analysis findings, not predetermined task types.

Initialization

BEFORE executing any phase, you MUST complete these steps:

Step 0: Session-reminder conflict resolution (decide ONCE)

Before doing anything else, settle this policy now and do not re-litigate it at any gate:

→ **MANDATORY GATE** — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke AskUserQuestion now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1). / → MANDATORY GATE markers fire regardless of session-reminders, permission mode, or prior approval patterns. Auto / acceptEdits / bypassPermissions modes, reminders saying "work without stopping" / "continue without asking" / "minimize clarifying questions," and compaction summaries showing the user approving every prior gate do NOT exempt you from invoking AskUserQuestion at a gate. They apply only to your discretionary clarifications.

If you find yourself reasoning "the user has been approving everything, so I can skip this gate" or "auto-mode is on, so I should minimize questions" — that reasoning IS the failure mode. STOP and fire the gate.

Full framework rule: ../orchestrator-framework/references/orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 and § 2.1.

Step 1: Load Framework Patterns

Read the framework reference file NOW using the Read tool:

1. ../orchestrator-framework/references/orchestrator-patterns.md - Delegation rules, interactive mode, state schema, initialization, context passing, issue resolution

Step 2: Detect Research Context

If argument is a research folder path (matches .maister/tasks/research/*):

• Auto-detect research folder, extract task description from research_context.research_question
• Read research artifacts (see Research-Based Development section below)
• Set research_reference in state automatically

If --research=<path> flag provided:

• Read research artifacts from specified path
• Copy to analysis/research-context/
• Set research_reference in state

Step 3: Initialize Workflow

1. Capture the clock: run date -u +"%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ" via Bash NOW — you do NOT know the time from context. Every timestamp written this turn (created, updated, generated, phases[].started) uses this value. Date-only or T00:00:00Z values are the documented failure mode (orchestrator-patterns.md § 4 Timestamp Rule). Re-run date in later turns before writing timestamps.
2. Create Task Items: Use TaskCreate for all phases (see Phase Configuration), then set dependencies with TaskUpdate addBlockedBy
3. Create Task Directory: .maister/tasks/development/YYYY-MM-DD-task-name/
4. Initialize State: Create orchestrator-state.yml with task info and research reference
5. Set up Operator Dashboard (orchestrator-patterns.md § 8) — first read .maister/config.yml and set orchestrator.options.html_output (default true if the file/key is absent). When html_output is false, SKIP this entire step — no dashboard.html, no dashboard-data.js, no browser auto-open — and proceed. Otherwise: copy ../orchestrator-framework/assets/dashboard.html to the task root as dashboard.html, write the initial dashboard-data.js (all phases pending), then auto-open it in the user's browser (open / xdg-open / start per platform, passing the plain absolute filesystem path — NEVER a hand-built file:// URL; on failure just print the path — never block). On resume: re-copy dashboard.html only if missing; regenerate dashboard-data.js from state; then auto-open it in the browser again (same opener as a new task — the OS focuses an already-open tab rather than duplicating).
6. Discover project documentation: Read .maister/docs/INDEX.md (if exists), extract ALL file paths from the "Project Documentation" section. This includes predefined docs (vision, roadmap, tech-stack, architecture) AND any user-added project docs (e.g., deployment.md, api-strategy.md). Store complete list as project_context.project_doc_paths in state.

Step 4: Ingest Design Context

Mockups and design artifacts become binding inputs to implementation when present. Auto-detect from three sources and unify under analysis/design-context/. Skip silently when no sources exist — non-UI tasks see no change.

Source 1 — Product-design task path: If the argument resolves to a .maister/tasks/product-design/* directory (presence of outputs/product-brief.md or analysis/mockups/):

• Copy outputs/product-brief.md → analysis/design-context/brief.md
• Copy analysis/mockups/* → analysis/design-context/mockups/

Source 2 — Inline mockup references in task description: Scan the task description for absolute or relative paths ending in .html, .png, .jpg, .jpeg, .gif, .svg, .pdf, plus design-tool URLs (Figma, Sketch Cloud, Zeplin):

• For each resolvable local file: copy into analysis/design-context/mockups/
• For URLs: append the link to analysis/design-context/external-links.md (do not fetch — leave to user)

Source 3 — Legacy locations (resumed tasks, mid-flight migrations): If analysis/visuals/ or analysis/ui-mockups.md is populated and analysis/design-context/ does not yet exist, migrate the legacy contents into design-context/ (visuals → mockups/, ui-mockups.md → ascii/ui-mockups.md).

After ingestion (when design-context/ was populated):

• Generate analysis/design-context/INDEX.md enumerating every screen/component with stable IDs (e.g., screen:login, component:user-card) inferred from filenames and content. One row per screen/component with: id, source mockup, brief description.
• Set task_context.design_reference and phase_summaries.design (one-paragraph summary + path to INDEX.md).

Skip if no sources detected — proceed to phase execution without design-context/.

Output:

🚀 Development Orchestrator Started

Task: [description]
Directory: [task-path]
Dashboard: open [task-path]/dashboard.html in a browser to monitor progress

Starting Phase 1: Codebase Analysis...

---

Operator Visibility (applies to every phase)

Config gate: these rules assume options.html_output is true (read from .maister/config.yml at init, default true). When false: skip rule 2 entirely (no dashboard — no dashboard.html/dashboard-data.js, no browser open, no rewrites) and rule 3's companions (do NOT pass html_style_guide_path; subagents write md only). Rule 1 (§ 7 TL;DR blocks) and phase_summaries in state stay active either way.

Cross-cutting rules from orchestrator-patterns.md apply throughout this workflow:

1. Artifact Summary Contract (§ 7): every artifact-writing subagent prompt MUST include the contract instruction (artifacts open with TL;DR / Key Decisions / Open Questions & Risks). At context extraction, lift decisions, risks, and artifacts into phase_summaries.[phase] (shared entry shape, § 4).
2. Dashboard upkeep (§ 8): rewrite dashboard-data.js at every phase START (mark it in_progress before delegating), BEFORE firing every exit gate (register the finished phase's artifacts/summary/decisions/risks so the operator reviews them on the dashboard while answering — status stays in_progress until the gate passes), after every phase completion (including skips, with reason), every gate decision, every verification cycle, and at finalization. It is a terse projection of state — never duplicate artifact content into it.
3. HTML companions (§ 9): pass html_style_guide_path (absolute path to ../orchestrator-framework/references/html-report-style.md) to specification-creator, implementation-planner, and e2e-test-verifier. Register returned html_path values in phase_summaries.[phase].artifacts[].html.

---

When to Use

Use for all development tasks: bug fixes, enhancements, new features, and any work that modifies code.

DO NOT use for: Performance optimization, security remediation, migrations, documentation-only, pure refactoring (use specialized orchestrators).

---

Phase Configuration

Phase	content	activeForm	Activation
1	"Analyze codebase & clarify requirements"	"Analyzing codebase & clarifying"	Always
2	"Analyze gaps & clarify scope"	"Analyzing gaps & clarifying scope"	Always
3	"Write failing test (TDD Red)"	"Writing failing test"	When has_reproducible_defect
4	"Generate UI mockups"	"Generating UI mockups"	When ui_heavy
5	"Gather requirements & create specification"	"Gathering requirements & creating specification"	Always
6	"Audit specification"	"Auditing specification"	Always (conditional)
7	"Plan implementation"	"Planning implementation"	Always
8	"Execute implementation"	"Executing implementation"	Always
9	"Verify test passes (TDD Green)"	"Verifying test passes"	When Phase 3 was executed
10	"Prompt verification options"	"Prompting verification options"	Always
11	"Verify implementation & resolve issues"	"Verifying implementation"	Always
12	"Run E2E tests"	"Running E2E tests"	When e2e_enabled
13	"Generate user documentation"	"Generating user documentation"	When user_docs_enabled
14	"Finalize workflow"	"Finalizing workflow"	Always

---

Workflow Phases

Phase 1: Codebase Analysis & Clarifications

Purpose: Comprehensive codebase exploration followed by scope/requirements clarification Execute:

1. Skill tool - maister:codebase-analyzer
2. Update state with analysis results
3. Direct - use AskUserQuestion for max 5 critical clarifying questions
4. Save clarifications to analysis/clarifications.md Output: analysis/codebase-analysis.md, analysis/clarifications.md State: Update task_context.risk_level, phase_summaries.codebase_analysis, task_context.clarifications_resolved

→ AUTO-CONTINUE — Do NOT end turn, do NOT prompt user. Proceed immediately to Phase 2.

---

Phase 2: Gap Analysis & Scope Clarification

Purpose: Compare current vs desired state, detect task characteristics, then resolve scope/approach decisions Execute:

1. Task tool - maister:gap-analyzer subagent
2. Extract and store structured data from gap-analyzer result: a. Read task_characteristics from gap-analyzer output — 5 fields: has_reproducible_defect, modifies_existing_code, creates_new_entities, involves_data_operations, ui_heavy b. Write all 5 fields to orchestrator-state.yml at task_context.task_characteristics c. Read risk_level from output and write to task_context.risk_level d. Extract phase summary (1-2 sentences) and write to phase_summaries.gap_analysis e. SELF-CHECK: "Did I read the 5 task_characteristics from the gap-analyzer output and write them to state? Let me re-read orchestrator-state.yml to verify the values match the gap-analyzer output."

⛔ DECISION GATE (mandatory — do NOT skip):

• Parse decisions_needed from gap-analyzer output
• If decisions_needed.critical OR decisions_needed.important is non-empty:
  • MUST use AskUserQuestion — every decision is its own single-select question with its own option set (never flattened into a single question's option list). Critical decisions: one call each with full context. Important decisions: may be grouped as up to 4 separate questions within one call (orchestrator-patterns.md § 3 Decision Gate Pattern)
• If both are empty: Note "No scope decisions needed" in state

SELF-CHECK before continuing: "Did the gap-analyzer return decisions_needed items? If yes, did I invoke AskUserQuestion? If I skipped this, STOP and go back."

3. Save scope clarifications to analysis/scope-clarifications.md
4. Set optional phase defaults based on detected characteristics:
   • If task_characteristics.ui_heavy: true → set options.e2e_enabled: true, options.user_docs_enabled: true
   • If task_characteristics.creates_new_entities: true → set options.user_docs_enabled: true
   • Command flags (--e2e, --no-e2e, --user-docs, --no-user-docs) override these defaults

Output: analysis/gap-analysis.md, analysis/scope-clarifications.md (conditional) State: Update task_context.task_characteristics, task_context.scope_expanded, options.e2e_enabled, options.user_docs_enabled, phase_summaries.gap_analysis

Context to pass: Risk level, codebase summary, key files, clarifications, project_doc_paths (from state)

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke AskUserQuestion now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

The Phase 2 exit gate always invokes AskUserQuestion. The branching is over which questions get asked, not whether to ask:

1. If decisions_needed.critical or .important is non-empty → present the DECISION GATE questions first (see DECISION GATE block above)
2. Then always ask the executive-summary routing question (Phase 3 / 4 / 5 based on task_characteristics) shown below

Empty decisions_needed skips step 1 only. Step 2 is unconditional. There is no path through Phase 2 that bypasses AskUserQuestion.

ANTI-PATTERN — DO NOT DO THIS:

• ❌ "The UI change is small/simple, skipping Phase 4..." — STOP. If ui_heavy is true, Phase 4 runs. The gap-analyzer made this assessment, not you.
• ❌ "No new screens needed, just a component..." — STOP. ui_heavy is a signal from the gap-analyzer. Do NOT override it with your own complexity judgment.

AskUserQuestion - Display executive summary before asking. Read analysis/gap-analysis.md and extract: task type detected, risk level, key characteristics enabled (TDD gates, UI mockups, E2E, user docs), scope decisions made (if any). Then read task_context.task_characteristics from orchestrator-state.yml and determine the next phase:

• If has_reproducible_defect is true → ask "Continue to Phase 3: TDD Red Gate?"
• If ui_heavy is true → ask "Continue to Phase 4: UI Mockup Generation?"
• Otherwise → ask "Continue to Phase 5: Technical Approach, Requirements & Specification?"

---

Phase 3: TDD Red Gate (Conditional)

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the AskUserQuestion tool call from Phase 2 in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding AskUserQuestion call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

Purpose: Write a failing test that reproduces the defect Execute: Direct - write test, verify it FAILS Output: implementation/tdd-red-gate.md, failing test file State: Update tdd_red_passed: true

Skip if: task_characteristics.has_reproducible_defect is false (not set by gap-analyzer)

Critical: Test MUST fail before implementation (proves defect exists)

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke AskUserQuestion now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

AskUserQuestion - "TDD red gate complete. Continue to Phase 4?"

---

Phase 4: UI Mockup Generation (Conditional)

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the AskUserQuestion tool call from the preceding phase in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding AskUserQuestion call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

Purpose: Generate ASCII mockups showing UI integration Execute: Task tool - maister:ui-mockup-generator subagent Output: analysis/design-context/ascii/ui-mockups.md + appended entries in analysis/design-context/INDEX.md State: Update phase_summaries.ui_mockups, phase_summaries.design

Skip if:

• task_characteristics.ui_heavy is false, OR
• analysis/design-context/mockups/ is already populated (Step 4 ingested external mockups — no need to regenerate ASCII)

Context to pass: Gap analysis, scope decisions, component choices, analysis/design-context/INDEX.md path (if exists from Step 4)

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke AskUserQuestion now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

AskUserQuestion - "UI mockups complete. Continue to Phase 5?"

---

Phase 5: Technical Approach, Requirements & Specification

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the AskUserQuestion tool call from the preceding phase in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding AskUserQuestion call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

⛔ ROUTING GUARD: Read task_context.task_characteristics from orchestrator-state.yml. If has_reproducible_defect is true and Phase 3 is NOT in completed_phases → STOP, execute Phase 3 first. If ui_heavy is true and Phase 4 is NOT in completed_phases → STOP, execute Phase 4 first.

Purpose: Resolve technical decisions, gather specification requirements, then create comprehensive specification Execute:

Part A — Technical & Architecture Clarification (inline, conditional):

1. If complex task with multiple approaches: Direct - use AskUserQuestion for 3-5 technical questions
2. If multiple valid architectural approaches exist: Present 2-3 approaches via AskUserQuestion. The chosen approach is passed to specification-creator so the spec is written with the decided architecture.
3. Save to analysis/technical-clarifications.md (conditional)

Skip technical clarification if: Simple task, risk_level = low, no multiple approaches detected

Part B — Requirements Gathering (inline): 3. Direct - use AskUserQuestion for specification requirements:

• Adaptive question count based on description length:
  • Brief (<30 words): 6-8 questions
  • Standard (30-100 words): 4-6 questions
  • Detailed (>100 words): 2-3 focused questions
• Frame as confirmable assumptions: "I assume X, is that correct?"
• REQUIRED questions (always include):
  1. User Journey: How will users discover/access this? Which personas? How fits existing workflows?
  2. Existing Code Reuse: Similar features, UI components, backend patterns to reference?
  3. Visual Assets: Any mockups, wireframes, screenshots? Place in analysis/design-context/mockups/ (or reference paths inline — Step 4 auto-ingests them)

4. Check for visual assets in analysis/design-context/ (single source of truth — populated by Step 4 ingestion and/or Phase 4 ASCII generation):
   • If design-context/INDEX.md exists: note for subagent context (mockup files become binding inputs)
   • If user provides new mockups during this phase: place them in analysis/design-context/mockups/, regenerate INDEX.md
   • If not found and non-UI task: skip visual asset processing
5. Save gathered requirements to analysis/requirements.md with: initial description, Q&A from all rounds, similar features identified, visual assets and insights, functional requirements summary, reusability opportunities, scope boundaries, technical considerations

Part C — Specification Creation (subagent):

ANTI-PATTERN — DO NOT DO THIS:

• ❌ "Let me create the specification..." — STOP. Delegate to specification-creator.
• ❌ "I'll write the spec based on requirements..." — STOP. Delegate to specification-creator.
• ❌ "The task is simple enough to spec inline..." — STOP. Simplicity is NOT a reason to skip delegation.

INVOKE NOW — Task tool call:

6. Task tool - maister:specification-creator subagent

Context to pass to subagent: task_path, task_description, task_characteristics, requirements_path (analysis/requirements.md), project_context_paths (INDEX.md + project_doc_paths from state — all discovered project docs), risk_level, phase_summaries (codebase_analysis, gap_analysis, clarifications, scope_clarifications, ui_mockups, design), research_context (if any), design_reference (if any — points spec-creator to analysis/design-context/ for mockups and brief), html_style_guide_path (for the spec.html companion)

SELF-CHECK: Did you just invoke the Task tool with maister:specification-creator? Or did you start writing spec.md yourself? If the latter, STOP immediately and invoke the Task tool instead.

Output: analysis/technical-clarifications.md (conditional), analysis/requirements.md, implementation/spec.md State: Update task_context.tech_clarified, task_context.architecture_decision, phase_summaries.specification

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke AskUserQuestion now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

AskUserQuestion - Display executive summary before asking. Read implementation/spec.md and extract: spec title, scope boundaries (what's included and excluded), number of key requirements, architecture approach chosen (if any), assumptions made. Format as brief overview then "Continue to specification audit?"

---

Phase 6: Specification Audit (Recommended)

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the AskUserQuestion tool call from Phase 5 in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding AskUserQuestion call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

Purpose: Independent review of specification before implementation Execute: Task tool - maister:spec-auditor subagent Output: verification/spec-audit.md State: Update options.spec_audit_enabled

Recommended: Always. Present spec audit as the recommended default. User can skip if they choose.

AskUserQuestion - "Run specification audit? (Recommended)" with "Yes, run audit (Recommended)" as first option

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke AskUserQuestion now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

AskUserQuestion - Display executive summary before asking. Read verification/spec-audit.md and extract: overall verdict (pass/pass-with-concerns/fail), issue counts by severity, top 1-2 critical findings if any. Format as brief overview then "Continue to implementation planning?"

---

Phase 7: Implementation Planning

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the AskUserQuestion tool call from Phase 6 in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding AskUserQuestion call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

Purpose: Break specification into implementation steps

ANTI-PATTERN — DO NOT DO THIS:

• ❌ "Let me create the implementation plan..." — STOP. Delegate to implementation-planner.
• ❌ "I'll break this into steps..." — STOP. Delegate to implementation-planner.
• ❌ "This is simple enough to plan inline..." — STOP. Simplicity is NOT a reason to skip delegation.

INVOKE NOW — Task tool call:

Execute: Task tool - maister:implementation-planner subagent Output: implementation/implementation-plan.md State: Update task groups and dependencies

Context to pass to subagent: task_path, task_description, task_characteristics, phase_summaries (specification, gap_analysis, codebase_analysis, design), research_context (if any), design_reference (if any — when analysis/design-context/INDEX.md exists, planner MUST enumerate every screen/component, map task groups to them via the required Visual References field, and produce implementation/visual-coverage.md proving every screen is covered by ≥1 group), html_style_guide_path (for the implementation-plan.html companion)

SELF-CHECK: Did you just invoke the Task tool with maister:implementation-planner? Or did you start writing implementation-plan.md yourself? If the latter, STOP immediately and invoke the Task tool instead.

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke AskUserQuestion now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

AskUserQuestion - Display executive summary before asking. Read implementation/implementation-plan.md and extract: number of task groups, total implementation steps, key dependencies between groups, estimated complexity. Format as brief overview then "Continue to implementation?"

---

Phase 8: Implementation

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the AskUserQuestion tool call from Phase 7 in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding AskUserQuestion call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

Purpose: Execute the implementation plan

ANTI-PATTERN — DO NOT DO THIS:

• ❌ "Let me implement this directly..." — STOP. Delegate to implementation-plan-executor.
• ❌ "This is simple enough to code inline..." — STOP. Simplicity is NOT a reason to skip delegation.

INVOKE NOW — Skill tool call:

Execute: Skill tool - maister:implementation-plan-executor Output: Implemented code, implementation/work-log.md State: Update implementation progress, extract phase_summaries.implementation

SELF-CHECK: Did you just invoke the Skill tool with maister:implementation-plan-executor? Or did you start writing code yourself? If the latter, STOP immediately and invoke the Skill tool instead.

⚠️ POST-IMPLEMENTATION CONTINUATION — After the skill completes and returns control:

1. HTML plan reconciliation (backstop for syncs missed during waves): if implementation/implementation-plan.html exists, for every group whose md checkboxes are all [x], run the executor's idempotent marker-flip command (sed flipping data-step="N\.[0-9]*" class="step todo" and data-group="N" class="group todo" to done). VERIFY: when all md steps are checked, grep -c 'class="step todo"' implementation/implementation-plan.html must return 0 — a non-zero count means unflipped markers remain; flip them before continuing.
2. Read orchestrator-state.yml to confirm you are the orchestrator
3. Update state: add Phase 8 to completed_phases
4. Evaluate conditional: if task_characteristics.has_reproducible_defect AND Phase 3 in completed_phases → Phase 9, else → Phase 10

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke AskUserQuestion now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

AskUserQuestion - Display executive summary before asking. Extract from phase_summaries.implementation and implementation/work-log.md: task groups completed, files changed, test results from incremental runs, any known issues or deferred items. Format as brief overview then "Continue to verification?"

---

Phase 9: TDD Green Gate (Conditional)

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the AskUserQuestion tool call from Phase 8 in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding AskUserQuestion call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

Purpose: Verify the failing test now passes Execute: Direct - run the test written in Phase 3 Output: implementation/tdd-green-gate.md State: Update tdd_green_passed: true

Skip if: Phase 3 was not executed

Critical: Test MUST pass (proves defect is fixed)

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke AskUserQuestion now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

AskUserQuestion - "TDD gate passed. Continue to Phase 10?"

---

Phase 10: Verification Options Prompt

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the AskUserQuestion tool call from the preceding phase in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding AskUserQuestion call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

Purpose: Determine which verification checks to run using tiered decision matrix Execute: Direct - display plan, confirm/adjust via AskUserQuestion Output: Updated state with all verification options State: Set options.code_review_enabled, options.pragmatic_review_enabled, options.reality_check_enabled, options.production_check_enabled, options.e2e_enabled, options.user_docs_enabled Auto-set: skip_test_suite: true (full test suite already passed during implementation phase; cleared before re-verification if fixes are applied)

Step 1: Display the verification plan:

Verification Plan:
  Obligatory (always run):
    ✓ Completeness check
    ✓ Test suite (skipped — passed during implementation; re-enabled after fixes)

  Recommended (adjustable):
    ✓ Code review — quality and security analysis
    ✓ Pragmatic review — detects over-engineering
    ✓ Reality check — validates work solves the problem
    ✓ Production readiness — deployment readiness checks

  Conditional:
    [✓/—] E2E browser testing — [reason]
    [✓/—] User documentation — [reason]

Step 2 (3 questions):

Q1 (always): AskUserQuestion (multi-select) — "Which standard verifications to run?" Options: "Code review (Recommended)", "Pragmatic review (Recommended)", "Reality check (Recommended)", "Production readiness (Recommended)". All pre-selected.

Q2 (SKIP if options.e2e_enabled: false and no --e2e flag): AskUserQuestion — "Enable E2E browser verification?" Options: "Yes (Recommended)", "No, skip".

Q3 (SKIP if options.user_docs_enabled: false and no --user-docs flag): AskUserQuestion — "Generate user documentation?" Options: "Yes (Recommended)", "No, skip".

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke AskUserQuestion now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

---

Phase 11: Verification & Issue Resolution

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the AskUserQuestion tool call from Phase 10 in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding AskUserQuestion call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

Purpose: Comprehensive implementation verification with fix-then-reverify cycles Output: verification/implementation-verification.md, optional code-review/pragmatic/reality reports, updated implementation/work-log.md State: Update verification results, verification_context

Execute:

Step 1: Invoke Skill tool - maister:implementation-verifier

Step 2: Display detailed issue breakdown grouped by category and severity:

Verification Results:
  Critical ([N]):
    - [category]: [description] — [file:line] [fixable/manual]
    ...
  Warning ([N]):
    - [category]: [description] — [file:line] [fixable/manual]
    ...
  Info ([N]):
    - [description] (listed for awareness, not actionable)

Step 3: Gate on verification status:

• status: passed → skip to Post-Verification Continuation
• status: passed_with_issues or failed → enter user-driven fix loop (Step 4)

Step 4: User-driven fix loop (max 3 iterations):

1. Present all critical + warning issues as a numbered list
2. AskUserQuestion — "Which issues should I fix?" with options:
   • "Fix all fixable issues" (convenience default)
   • "Let me choose specific issues" (user picks by number)
   • "Skip fixes, proceed as-is"
3. Fix selected issues, log each to verification_context.fixes_applied
4. After fixes applied: set skip_test_suite: false (code changed, tests must re-run)
5. AskUserQuestion — "Re-run verification to check fixes?" with options:
   • "Yes, re-run verification" → re-invoke maister:implementation-verifier → return to Step 2
   • "No, proceed to next phase"
6. Update verification_context.reverify_count

Exit conditions:

• No critical issues remain → proceed
• User explicitly chooses "Skip fixes, proceed as-is" or "No, proceed to next phase" → proceed with issues logged
• Max 3 iterations reached → AskUserQuestion: "Proceed with known issues?" / "Stop workflow"
• MUST NOT proceed with unresolved critical issues unless user explicitly approves

⚠️ POST-VERIFICATION CONTINUATION — After issue resolution completes:

1. Canonical report check: verification/implementation-verification.md + .html MUST reflect the FINAL post-fix verdict before leaving this phase. If fixes were applied and the canonical report still shows the pre-fix state (regardless of whether re-checks were run via the full verifier skill or individual subagents writing *-reverify.md side files), re-invoke maister:implementation-verifier (or have it recompile Phase 3) so the report and companion are rewritten with a "Fix & Re-Verification History" section. A stale pre-fix report is a phase-exit violation.
2. Read orchestrator-state.yml to confirm you are the orchestrator
3. Update state: add Phase 11 to completed_phases
4. Proceed to Phase 12

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke AskUserQuestion now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

AskUserQuestion - Display executive summary: total issues found, issues fixed, issues remaining by severity. Then "Continue to Phase 12?"

---

Phase 12: E2E Testing (Optional)

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the AskUserQuestion tool call from Phase 11 in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding AskUserQuestion call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

⚠ Serialization rule: Phases 12 and 13 share the Playwright MCP browser instance. They MUST run strictly sequentially. Do NOT dispatch the Phase 12 Task call and the Phase 13 Task call in the same assistant message, even when both are enabled. Wait for Phase 12 to return, honor the → **MANDATORY GATE** — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke AskUserQuestion now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1). / AskUserQuestion gate below, then start Phase 13. Concurrent dispatch will corrupt both browser sessions.

Purpose: Runtime browser verification with screenshots (via Playwright MCP tools, not test file generation) Execute: Task tool - maister:e2e-test-verifier subagent Prompt must include: task_path (absolute), spec_path, base_url, html_style_guide_path (for the HTML companion reports). If analysis/design-context/mockups/ exists, also include design_context_path so the verifier performs an LLM-judged structural visual-fidelity comparison and writes verification/visual-fidelity.md. Report saves to {task_path}/verification/e2e-verification-report.md. Output: verification/e2e-verification-report.md (+ .html companion), screenshots, verification/visual-fidelity.md (+ .html companion) (when mockups present — report-only, never gates completion) State: Update E2E results; on success mark Phase 12 in completed_phases (Phase 13 reads this as a precondition).

Skip if: options.e2e_enabled = false

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke AskUserQuestion now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

AskUserQuestion - "E2E complete. Continue to Phase 13?"

---

Phase 13: User Documentation (Optional)

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the AskUserQuestion tool call from the preceding phase in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding AskUserQuestion call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

⚠ Serialization rule: Phases 12 and 13 share the Playwright MCP browser instance — see the same rule on Phase 12. Phase 13 MUST NOT be dispatched in the same assistant message as Phase 12, regardless of how the user answered the gate.

Preconditions: If options.e2e_enabled = true, Phase 12 MUST be present in completed_phases before Phase 13 starts. If it is not yet completed (e.g., E2E is still running or failed), do not start Phase 13 — return to the Phase 12 gate.

Purpose: Generate user-facing documentation with screenshots Execute: Task tool - maister:user-docs-generator subagent Prompt must include: task_path (absolute), spec_path, base_url. When Phase 12 ran successfully (E2E enabled and completed), also include e2e_screenshots_path: {task_path}/verification/screenshots/ together with the instruction "Reuse applicable E2E screenshots from this directory before capturing new ones via Playwright." When Phase 12 was skipped or failed, omit e2e_screenshots_path entirely. Guide saves to {task_path}/documentation/user-guide.md. Output: documentation/user-guide.md, screenshots (reused from E2E run when applicable) State: Update docs generation status

Skip if: options.user_docs_enabled = false

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke AskUserQuestion now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

AskUserQuestion - "Documentation complete. Continue to Phase 14?"

---

Phase 14: Finalization

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the AskUserQuestion tool call from the preceding phase in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding AskUserQuestion call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

Purpose: Complete workflow and provide next steps Execute: Direct - create summary, update state, guide commit Output: Workflow summary State: Set task.status: completed

Process:

1. Create workflow summary
2. Update task status to "completed"
3. Provide commit message template
4. Guide next steps (code review, PR, deployment)

→ End of workflow

---

Domain Context (State Extensions)

Development-specific fields in orchestrator-state.yml:

orchestrator:
  options:
    html_output: true  # Seeded from .maister/config.yml at init (default true). Gates dashboard + HTML companions.
    spec_audit_enabled: true
    skip_test_suite: true
    e2e_enabled: null
    user_docs_enabled: null
    code_review_enabled: true
    pragmatic_review_enabled: true
    reality_check_enabled: true
    production_check_enabled: true
  task_context:
    risk_level: null
    clarifications_resolved: null
    scope_expanded: null
    architecture_decision: null
    task_characteristics:
      has_reproducible_defect: false
      modifies_existing_code: false
      creates_new_entities: false
      involves_data_operations: false
      ui_heavy: false
    research_reference:
      path: null
      research_question: null
      research_type: null
      confidence_level: null
    design_reference:
      source: null  # "product-design" | "inline-prompt" | "legacy-migration" | null
      product_design_path: null  # set when Source 1 detected
      mockup_count: 0
      has_brief: false
      index_path: null  # path to analysis/design-context/INDEX.md
    phase_summaries:
      # Every entry also carries the shared base shape (orchestrator-patterns.md § 4):
      #   decisions: []   risks: []   artifacts: [{path, label, html}]
      research: {summary: null, key_findings: [], recommended_approach: null}
      design: {summary: null, screen_count: 0, component_count: 0, index_path: null}
      codebase_analysis: {key_files: [], primary_language: null, summary: null}
      clarifications: []
      gap_analysis: {integration_points: [], summary: null}
      scope_clarifications: {scope_expanded: null, summary: null}
      ui_mockups: {components_designed: [], summary: null}
      specification: {summary: null}
      architecture_decision: {decision: null, summary: null}

---

Task Structure

.maister/tasks/development/YYYY-MM-DD-task-name/
├── orchestrator-state.yml
├── dashboard.html                 # Operator dashboard (copied plugin asset — never model-generated)
├── dashboard-data.js              # Dashboard data projection (rewritten after each phase/gate)
├── analysis/
│   ├── research-context/          # If --research provided
│   ├── design-context/            # If mockups detected (Step 4 ingestion or Phase 4 generation)
│   │   ├── mockups/               # HTML/PNG/screenshots (from product-design or inline prompt)
│   │   ├── ascii/                 # ASCII mockups from Phase 4 ui-mockup-generator
│   │   ├── brief.md               # Product brief (when ingested from product-design task)
│   │   ├── external-links.md      # Figma/Sketch/Zeplin URLs (no fetch — for reference)
│   │   └── INDEX.md               # Screen/component inventory with stable IDs
│   ├── codebase-analysis.md       # Phase 1
│   ├── clarifications.md          # Phase 1
│   ├── gap-analysis.md            # Phase 2
│   ├── scope-clarifications.md    # Phase 2 (conditional)
│   └── technical-clarifications.md # Phase 5 (conditional)
├── implementation/
│   ├── spec.md                    # Phase 5
│   ├── spec.html                  # Phase 5 (HTML companion)
│   ├── requirements.md            # Phase 5
│   ├── implementation-plan.md     # Phase 7
│   ├── implementation-plan.html   # Phase 7 (HTML companion)
│   ├── visual-coverage.md         # Phase 7 (when design-context exists)
│   ├── work-log.md                # Phase 8
│   ├── tdd-red-gate.md            # Phase 3 (conditional)
│   └── tdd-green-gate.md          # Phase 9 (conditional)
├── verification/
│   ├── spec-audit.md              # Phase 6 (recommended)
│   ├── implementation-verification.md  # Phase 11
│   ├── implementation-verification.html # Phase 11 (HTML companion)
│   ├── e2e-verification-report.md      # Phase 12 (optional)
│   ├── e2e-verification-report.html    # Phase 12 (HTML companion)
│   ├── visual-fidelity.md              # Phase 12 (when design-context exists, report-only)
│   └── visual-fidelity.html            # Phase 12 (HTML companion)
└── documentation/
    └── user-guide.md              # Phase 13 (optional)

---

Auto-Recovery

Phase	Max Attempts	Strategy
1	2	Expand search, prompt user
2	2	Re-analyze, ask user
3	2	Rewrite test, skip TDD with doc
5	2	Regenerate spec
7	2	Regenerate plan
8	5	Fix syntax, imports, tests
9	3	Return to implementation
11	3	Fix tests, re-run

---

Command Flags

Flag	Effect
--from=PHASE	Start from specific phase
--research=PATH	Link to completed research task
--audit / --no-audit	Force/skip specification audit
--e2e / --no-e2e	Force/skip E2E testing
--user-docs / --no-user-docs	Force/skip user documentation
--sequential	Disable parallel wave dispatch in the executor; run one task group at a time. Persisted as orchestrator.options.sequential: true in orchestrator-state.yml and read by implementation-plan-executor Phase 2. Defaults to off (parallel waves).

---

Research-Based Development

When starting development from a completed research task, the orchestrator loads research context to INFORM all phases.

Invocation Methods

Method 1: Research folder as sole argument (recommended)

/maister:development .maister/tasks/research/2026-01-12-oauth-research

The orchestrator auto-detects this is a research folder and:

• Extracts task description from research_context.research_question
• Reads all research artifacts
• Sets research_reference in state

Method 2: Explicit --research flag

/maister:development "Implement OAuth" --research=.maister/tasks/research/2026-01-12-oauth-research

Research Artifacts (Standard List)

When research context is detected, read these files from the research folder:

Artifact	Path	Purpose
State	orchestrator-state.yml	research_type, confidence_level
Report	outputs/research-report.md	Main findings and conclusions
Solution Exploration	outputs/solution-exploration.md	Alternatives and trade-offs (input to Phase 5)
High-Level Design	outputs/high-level-design.md	C4 architecture (input to Phase 5)
Decision Log	outputs/decision-log.md	ADR decisions (input to Phase 5)

How Research Informs Each Phase

Research INFORMS phases, never SKIPS them. Research context passes to ALL phases via task_context.phase_summaries.research. No phases are skipped.

Phase	How Research Context is Used
Phase 1	Codebase analyzer receives research findings as search guidance
Phase 2	Gap analyzer uses research recommendations for comparison
Phase 5	Specification creator uses high-level-design.md as INPUT (still creates full spec). Architecture decisions use research report AND decision-log.md (lighter when ADRs comprehensive)
Phase 7	Implementation planner references research approach for task grouping

---

Design-Informed Development

When mockups or design artifacts are present, they become binding inputs to implementation — not optional references. The analysis/design-context/ directory unifies all visual sources (product-design output, inline prompt references, Phase 4 ASCII generation) and propagates through every downstream phase.

Auto-Detection Sources (Step 4 of Initialization)

Source 1 — Product-design task path (recommended handoff):

/maister:development .maister/tasks/product-design/2026-05-09-user-dashboard/

Auto-detected when the argument resolves to a .maister/tasks/product-design/* directory. Brief and mockups are copied into design-context/.

Source 2 — Inline mockup paths in task description:

/maister:development "Implement the dashboard from /tmp/dashboard-mockup.html"

Auto-detected file paths (.html, .png, .jpg, .jpeg, .gif, .svg, .pdf) are copied into design-context/mockups/. Design-tool URLs (Figma, Sketch Cloud, Zeplin) are recorded in design-context/external-links.md.

Source 3 — Phase 4 ASCII generation: When no external mockups exist and task_characteristics.ui_heavy is true, ui-mockup-generator produces ASCII mockups in design-context/ascii/.

How Design Context Informs Each Phase

Design INFORMS phases, never SKIPS them. Design context passes via task_context.phase_summaries.design and task_context.design_reference.

Phase	How Design Context is Used
Phase 4	Skipped if design-context/mockups/ already populated; otherwise outputs to design-context/ascii/
Phase 5	specification-creator reads from design-context/ (single source); produces "Visual Design" section in spec.md
Phase 7	implementation-planner enumerates screens from design-context/INDEX.md, attaches required Visual References to UI task groups, produces implementation/visual-coverage.md proving every screen is covered by ≥1 group
Phase 8	task-group-implementer reads each referenced mockup before coding; layout, copy, field order, and explicit states are binding
Phase 12	e2e-test-verifier performs LLM-judged structural visual-fidelity comparison after capturing screenshots; writes verification/visual-fidelity.md (report-only, never gates completion)

Graceful Degradation

When no mockups are detected at any source, the entire design-context machinery is skipped:

• No design-context/ directory
• No design_reference in state (remains null)
• No Visual References field in task groups (planner omits the section entirely)
• No visual-coverage.md or visual-fidelity.md

Non-UI tasks see zero behavior change.

---

Command Integration

Invoked via:

• /maister:development [description] [--e2e] [--user-docs] [--research=PATH] (new)
• /maister:development [task-path] [--from=PHASE] [--reset-attempts] (resume)

---

TDD Gate Rules

Phase 3 (Red Gate): Test MUST FAIL before implementation (activated when gap-analyzer detects reproducible defect) Phase 9 (Green Gate): Test MUST PASS after implementation (activated when Phase 3 was executed)