gsd-list-phase-assumptions

name	gsd-list-phase-assumptions
description	Surface Claude's assumptions about a phase approach before planning
metadata	{"short-description":"Surface Claude's assumptions about a phase approach before planning"}

<codex_skill_adapter>

A. Skill Invocation

• This skill is invoked by mentioning $gsd-list-phase-assumptions.
• Treat all user text after $gsd-list-phase-assumptions as {{GSD_ARGS}}.
• If no arguments are present, treat {{GSD_ARGS}} as empty.

B. AskUserQuestion → request_user_input Mapping

GSD workflows use AskUserQuestion (Claude Code syntax). Translate to Codex request_user_input:

Parameter mapping:

• header → header
• question → question
• Options formatted as "Label" — description → {label: "Label", description: "description"}
• Generate id from header: lowercase, replace spaces with underscores

Batched calls:

• AskUserQuestion([q1, q2]) → single request_user_input with multiple entries in questions[]

Multi-select workaround:

• Codex has no multiSelect. Use sequential single-selects, or present a numbered freeform list asking the user to enter comma-separated numbers.

Execute mode fallback:

• When request_user_input is rejected (Execute mode), present a plain-text numbered list and pick a reasonable default.

C. Task() → spawn_agent Mapping

GSD workflows use Task(...) (Claude Code syntax). Translate to Codex collaboration tools:

Direct mapping:

• Task(subagent_type="X", prompt="Y") → spawn_agent(agent_type="X", message="Y")
• Task(model="...") → omit (Codex uses per-role config, not inline model selection)
• fork_context: false by default — GSD agents load their own context via <files_to_read> blocks

Parallel fan-out:

• Spawn multiple agents → collect agent IDs → wait(ids) for all to complete

Result parsing:

• Look for structured markers in agent output: CHECKPOINT, PLAN COMPLETE, SUMMARY, etc.
• close_agent(id) after collecting results from each agent </codex_skill_adapter>

Analyze a phase and present Claude's assumptions about technical approach, implementation order, scope boundaries, risk areas, and dependencies.

Purpose: Help users see what Claude thinks BEFORE planning begins - enabling course correction early when assumptions are wrong. Output: Conversational output only (no file creation) - ends with "What do you think?" prompt

<execution_context> @/Users/teo/src/tempo/.codex/get-shit-done/workflows/list-phase-assumptions.md </execution_context>

Phase number: {{GSD_ARGS}} (required)

Project state and roadmap are loaded in-workflow using targeted reads.

1. Validate phase number argument (error if missing or invalid) 2. Check if phase exists in roadmap 3. Follow list-phase-assumptions.md workflow: - Analyze roadmap description - Surface assumptions about: technical approach, implementation order, scope, risks, dependencies - Present assumptions clearly - Prompt "What do you think?" 4. Gather feedback and offer next steps

<success_criteria>

• Phase validated against roadmap
• Assumptions surfaced across five areas
• User prompted for feedback
• User knows next steps (discuss context, plan phase, or correct assumptions) </success_criteria>