ワンクリックで
atlas-full
Full 9-phase workflow for complex features, epics, and security-critical changes (2-4 hours)
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
メニュー
Full 9-phase workflow for complex features, epics, and security-critical changes (2-4 hours)
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
SOC 職業分類に基づく
Implementation and troubleshooting agent - builds features and fixes bugs
DevOps expertise for deployment, CI/CD, infrastructure, and automation
Adversarial quality gate agent for code review - finds flaws before users do
Product management expertise for story creation, backlog management, validation, and release coordination
Security audits, vulnerability analysis, and security best practices enforcement
Full 9-phase workflow for complex features, epics, and security-critical changes (2-4 hours)
| name | atlas-full |
| description | Full 9-phase workflow for complex features, epics, and security-critical changes (2-4 hours) |
Perfect for (complex tasks, ~5% of work):
Time estimate: 2-4 hours
Success criteria:
Phase 1: Research → Deep exploration, feasibility analysis
Phase 2: Story Creation → Formal requirements, acceptance criteria
Phase 3: Planning → Technical design, architecture
Phase 4: Adversarial Review → Security audit, edge case analysis
Phase 5: Implementation → Parallel coding, incremental builds
Phase 6: Testing → Comprehensive validation, all platforms
Phase 7: Validation → Acceptance criteria verification
Phase 8: Clean-up → Documentation, artifacts, debt log
Phase 9: Deployment → Full quality gates, staged rollout
Goal: Deep understanding of requirements, feasibility, and technical landscape.
Time allocation: 20-30 minutes
Define the problem space
Explore current implementation
# Find all related code
grep -r "related_feature" src/
# Find similar patterns
find src/ -name "*similar*"
# Check git history for similar features
git log --grep="similar feature" --oneline
Research dependencies and integrations
Identify risks and constraints
Evaluate alternatives
Problem Understanding:
Technical Research:
Risk Analysis:
Feasibility:
## Research Findings: [Feature Name]
### Problem Statement:
[Clear description of what we're solving]
### Users Affected:
- [User type 1]: [how they benefit]
- [User type 2]: [how they benefit]
### Technical Approach:
[High-level approach, alternatives considered]
### Files to Create/Modify:
- /path/to/new/file.js - [purpose]
- /path/to/existing/file.js - [what changes]
- /path/to/test/file.test.js - [test coverage]
### Dependencies:
- External: [external packages, APIs]
- Internal: [internal modules, services]
### Platform Considerations:
- **Platform A**: [specific notes]
- **Platform B**: [specific notes]
- **Platform C**: [specific notes]
### Risks:
1. [Risk 1] - Mitigation: [strategy]
2. [Risk 2] - Mitigation: [strategy]
### Success Metrics:
- [Metric 1]: [target]
- [Metric 2]: [target]
### Timeline Estimate:
- Research: [time]
- Implementation: [time]
- Testing: [time]
- Total: [time]
Goal: Create formal user stories with acceptance criteria and success metrics.
Time allocation: 15-20 minutes
Write user stories
Define acceptance criteria
Set success metrics
Create testing scenarios
Use the template in resources/story-template.md for consistent formatting.
Goal: Create detailed technical design and implementation plan.
Time allocation: 20-30 minutes
Architecture design
File-by-file implementation plan
Data schema design
Testing strategy
Rollout strategy
## Implementation Plan: [Feature Name]
### Architecture
#### Component Structure:
[Describe component hierarchy or architecture]
#### Data Flow:
User Action → Component → Service → State → UI Update [Detailed flow description]
#### State Management:
- **State location**: [where state lives]
- **State shape**: [schema]
- **Update methods**: [new methods needed]
### File-by-File Plan
#### New Files:
1. **/src/services/newService.js**
- Purpose: [what it does]
- Functions:
- `function1()`: [description]
- `function2()`: [description]
- Dependencies: [what it imports]
2. **/src/components/NewComponent.js**
- Purpose: [what it does]
- Props: [prop schema]
- State: [local state]
#### Modified Files:
1. **/src/existing/file.js**
- Add: [new functionality]
- Modify: [existing behavior]
#### Test Files:
1. **/tests/services/newService.test.js**
- Test coverage:
- [ ] Unit tests for all functions
- [ ] Edge cases
- [ ] Error handling
### Data Schema
#### New Fields:
```javascript
entity: {
// ... existing fields
newField: {
type: [type],
required: [boolean],
default: [default value],
validation: [validation rules]
}
}
// How to handle existing data
const migrateOldData = (item) => {
return {
...item,
newField: item.legacyField || defaultValue
}
}
newService.function1() - happy pathnewService.function1() - error casesnewService.function2() - edge casesIteration 1: Core functionality
Iteration 2: UI integration
Iteration 3: Edge cases
Iteration 4: Polish
Development Testing:
Staging/Internal Testing:
Beta/Canary Testing (if applicable):
Production Release:
If critical issues arise:
Metrics to track:
Alerts:
### Planning Validation Checklist:
- [ ] Architecture clearly defined
- [ ] File-by-file plan complete
- [ ] Implementation order logical
- [ ] Testing strategy comprehensive
- [ ] Rollout strategy defined
- [ ] Rollback plan ready
- [ ] Monitoring plan in place
---
## Phase 4: Adversarial Review
**Goal**: Security audit, edge case analysis, and critical evaluation.
**Time allocation**: 15-20 minutes
### Steps:
1. **Security audit**
- Use checklist in `resources/adversarial-checklist.md`
- Identify vulnerabilities
- Assess attack vectors
- Validate data security
- Check authentication/authorization
2. **Edge case analysis**
- What can go wrong?
- What assumptions might break?
- What happens under load?
- What if external dependencies fail?
3. **Performance analysis**
- Memory usage implications
- Network bandwidth usage
- Resource utilization
- Startup time impact
4. **Cross-platform compatibility** (if applicable)
- Platform-specific issues?
- Version compatibility?
- Consistent UX across platforms?
5. **Maintainability review**
- Code complexity reasonable?
- Test coverage sufficient?
- Documentation clear?
- Technical debt acceptable?
### Adversarial Review Checklist:
Use the comprehensive checklist in `resources/adversarial-checklist.md`.
### Adversarial Questions:
Ask yourself tough questions:
1. **"What's the worst that could happen?"**
- User loses data?
- App crashes?
- Security breach?
- How do we prevent it?
2. **"What if this becomes popular?"**
- Can it scale?
- Cost implications?
- Performance under load?
3. **"What if external service fails?"**
- Service down?
- Network offline?
- API timeout?
- Graceful degradation?
4. **"What if user does unexpected thing?"**
- Spams button?
- Enters invalid data?
- Uses old app version?
5. **"What will break in 6 months?"**
- Technical debt?
- Deprecated APIs?
- Maintenance burden?
- Future compatibility?
### Red Flags:
**Stop and reconsider if:**
- 🚩 Security concerns unaddressed
- 🚩 Performance implications unclear
- 🚩 Rollback plan not feasible
- 🚩 Testing strategy inadequate
- 🚩 Technical debt too high
- 🚩 Edge cases not handled
### Adversarial Review Output:
```markdown
## Adversarial Review: [Feature Name]
### Security Assessment: ✅ PASS / ⚠️ CONCERNS / ❌ FAIL
[Details of security review]
**Concerns found**:
1. [Concern 1] - Mitigation: [plan]
2. [Concern 2] - Mitigation: [plan]
### Edge Case Analysis: ✅ COVERED / ⚠️ PARTIAL / ❌ GAPS
[Details of edge case analysis]
**Edge cases to address**:
1. [Case 1] - Plan: [how to handle]
2. [Case 2] - Plan: [how to handle]
### Performance Assessment: ✅ GOOD / ⚠️ ACCEPTABLE / ❌ CONCERNING
[Details of performance analysis]
**Optimizations needed**:
1. [Optimization 1]
2. [Optimization 2]
### Maintainability: ✅ GOOD / ⚠️ ACCEPTABLE / ❌ HIGH DEBT
[Details of maintainability review]
**Debt to address**:
1. [Debt item 1]
2. [Debt item 2]
### Overall Verdict: ✅ PROCEED / ⚠️ PROCEED WITH CAUTION / ❌ REVISE PLAN
**Blocking issues** (must fix before proceeding):
1. [Issue 1]
2. [Issue 2]
**Non-blocking issues** (address during implementation):
1. [Issue 1]
2. [Issue 2]
Goal: Build the feature incrementally with parallel work where possible.
Time allocation: 60-90 minutes
Set up implementation tracking
Implement in iterations
Follow coding standards
Incremental validation
Parallel Work (can be done simultaneously):
Sequential Work (must be done in order):
Before starting:
During implementation:
After each iteration:
Iteration 1: Core Functionality (20-30 min) Goal: Basic feature works in isolation
Iteration 2: UI Integration (20-30 min) Goal: Feature accessible to users
Iteration 3: Edge Cases (15-20 min) Goal: All scenarios handled gracefully
Iteration 4: Polish (10-15 min) Goal: Performance, UX, accessibility
Function length: < 50 lines (split if longer)
File length: < 500 lines (split into modules if longer)
Cyclomatic complexity: < 10 (refactor if higher)
Comments: For non-obvious logic, not obvious code
Variable names: Descriptive, not abbreviated (unless common: id, url)
No magic numbers: Use named constants
Run these commands periodically:
# Linting (fast)
npm run lint
# Type checking (if applicable)
npm run typecheck
# Tests (run after each iteration)
npm test
# Build (before committing)
npm run build
Goal: Comprehensive validation across all scenarios.
Time allocation: 30-45 minutes
Automated testing
# Unit tests
npm test
# Type checking (if applicable)
npm run typecheck
# Linting
npm run lint
# Build validation
npm run build
Manual testing - Happy path
Manual testing - Edge cases
Cross-platform testing (if applicable)
Regression testing
Automated Tests:
Manual Testing - Happy Path:
Manual Testing - Edge Cases:
Regression Testing:
Metrics to measure:
Acceptable thresholds (customize for your project):
## Testing Report: [Feature Name]
### Automated Tests: ✅ PASS / ❌ FAIL
- Unit tests: [X/Y] passed
- Integration tests: [X/Y] passed
- Type checking: [Status]
- Linting: [Status]
- Build: [Status]
- Coverage: [%] (target: [%])
### Manual Testing - Happy Path: ✅ PASS / ❌ FAIL
All acceptance criteria met.
### Manual Testing - Edge Cases: ✅ PASS / ⚠️ PARTIAL / ❌ FAIL
**Passed**:
- [List of edge cases tested]
**Failed**:
- [List of failures and fixes applied]
### Performance Testing: ✅ PASS / ⚠️ ACCEPTABLE / ❌ CONCERNING
- Load time: [time] (target: < 3s)
- Memory usage: [amount]
- No memory leaks: [Yes/No]
### Issues Found & Fixed:
1. [Issue 1] → Fixed: [Description]
2. [Issue 2] → Fixed: [Description]
### Overall: ✅ READY FOR VALIDATION / ❌ NEEDS WORK
[Summary of readiness]
Goal: Verify all acceptance criteria met and feature ready for deployment.
Time allocation: 15-20 minutes
Acceptance criteria review
Success metrics validation
Documentation review
Stakeholder review (if applicable)
Acceptance Criteria:
Success Metrics:
Documentation:
Quality Gates:
Stakeholder Approval (if applicable):
## Validation Report: [Feature Name]
### Acceptance Criteria Validation
#### Must Have ([X/Y]) ✅ [%]
1. ✅ [Criterion 1]
- Evidence: [Description]
2. ✅ [Criterion 2]
- Evidence: [Description]
#### Should Have ([X/Y]) ✅ [%]
[List of should-have criteria]
**Deferred items**: [List any deferred items]
### Success Metrics Validation ✅
**Metrics implemented**:
- ✅ [Metric 1] tracking
- ✅ [Metric 2] tracking
**Targets**:
- [Metric 1]: [target] (trackable ✅)
- [Metric 2]: [target] (trackable ✅)
### Documentation Review ✅
**Updated**:
- ✅ User guide
- ✅ Developer docs
- ✅ README (if needed)
### Quality Gates ✅
- ✅ All tests pass
- ✅ Type checking passes
- ✅ Build succeeds
- ✅ No critical bugs
- ✅ Performance meets targets
- ✅ Security review passed (if applicable)
### Stakeholder Review ✅ (if applicable)
**Demo given to**: [Stakeholders]
**Feedback**:
- [Feedback item 1]
- [Feedback item 2]
**Sign-off**: ✅ Approved for deployment
### Overall: ✅ READY FOR DEPLOYMENT
[Summary of readiness]
Goal: Documentation, artifacts, technical debt log, code cleanup.
Time allocation: 15-20 minutes
Code cleanup
Documentation updates
Technical debt log
Create artifacts
Knowledge transfer
Code Cleanup:
Documentation:
Technical Debt Log:
Artifacts:
Knowledge Transfer:
## Technical Debt: [Feature Name]
### Shortcuts Taken:
1. **[Shortcut 1]**
- Why: [reason]
- Impact: [low/medium/high]
- Recommended fix: [description]
- Estimated effort: [time]
### Future Improvements:
1. **[Improvement 1]**
- Benefit: [description]
- Effort: [time]
- Priority: [low/medium/high]
### Known Limitations:
1. **[Limitation 1]**
- Description: [details]
- Workaround: [if any]
- Fix planned: [yes/no]
### Maintenance Tasks:
1. **[Task 1]**
- Frequency: [daily/weekly/monthly]
- Procedure: [description]
### Refactoring Opportunities:
1. **[Opportunity 1]**
- Current: [current state]
- Proposed: [better approach]
- Benefit: [why refactor]
- Effort: [time]
Goal: Deploy via quality gates with staged rollout.
Time allocation: 15-20 minutes per stage
Pre-deployment validation
# Run quality gates
./scripts/quality-gates.sh
# Or adapt the script from resources/quality-gates.sh
Update change log Document changes in your project's change tracking system.
Deploy to development/staging
Deploy to production (with appropriate testing)
Pre-Deployment:
Development/Staging Deployment:
Production Deployment:
Metrics to watch:
Alert thresholds (customize for your project):
Rollback triggers:
Skip research phase ("I know what to build")
Skip story creation ("Requirements are clear")
Skip adversarial review ("Nothing can go wrong")
Implement everything at once ("I'll test after it's all done")
Skip documentation ("Code is self-documenting")
Deploy to production immediately ("It works on my machine")
Ignore technical debt ("We'll fix it later")
resources/story-template.mdresources/adversarial-checklist.mdscripts/quality-gates.sh# Phase 1: Research
grep -r "feature" src/
git log --grep="similar" --oneline
# Phase 5: Implementation
npm run lint # Run linter
npm test # After each iteration
# Phase 6: Testing
npm test
npm run lint
npm run build
# Phase 9: Deployment
./scripts/quality-gates.sh # Or your quality gates script
# Then deploy according to your project's process
| Phase | Time | Cumulative |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Research | 20-30 min | 0:30 |
| 2. Story Creation | 15-20 min | 0:50 |
| 3. Planning | 20-30 min | 1:20 |
| 4. Adversarial Review | 15-20 min | 1:40 |
| 5. Implementation | 60-90 min | 3:10 |
| 6. Testing | 30-45 min | 3:55 |
| 7. Validation | 15-20 min | 4:15 |
| 8. Clean-up | 15-20 min | 4:35 |
| 9. Deployment | 15-20 min per stage | varies |
| Total | 2-4 hours + rollout |
| Characteristic | Use Full ✅ | Use Standard ❌ |
|---|---|---|
| Files affected | 6+ files | 2-5 files |
| Formal requirements | Yes | No |
| Security critical | Yes | No |
| Cross-platform coordination | Yes | Simple |
| Stakeholder sign-off | Required | Not required |
| Epic-level work | Yes | Task-level |
| Comprehensive testing | Required | Standard tests OK |
| Documentation | Extensive | Standard |
The Full workflow is for complex, critical features that require:
Use Full workflow when:
Don't use Full workflow when:
When in doubt, start with Standard and escalate to Full if complexity emerges.
Remember: The Full workflow ensures 100% acceptance, zero defects, and complete evidence. It's rigorous because the stakes are high. Take the time to do it right. 🚀