Skip to main content

prd-to-goal

Decomposes a PRD, issue, or spec into a copy-pasteable single `/goal until ..., or stop after N turns` line. Use when running /goal against a spec, to reduce acceptance criteria to AND-joined boolean assertions.

소스 정보

저장소
yonatangross/orchestkit
최근 소스 활동
2026년 9월 29일 15:03
감지된 SKILL.md 언어
영어
스타
285
포크
35

설치 방법

기본적으로 소스를 먼저 확인하는 Prompt가 선택됩니다. 직접 명령으로 전환하거나 로컬 사본을 다운로드할 수도 있습니다.

소스 파일 검토

설치 여부를 결정하기 전에 SKILL.md와 SkillsMP에 표시된 보조 파일을 읽어 보세요.

파일 탐색기
2 개 파일

SKILL.md 표시 중

SKILL.md
소스 지침 · 읽기 전용 미리보기
name
prd-to-goal
description
Decomposes a PRD, issue, or spec into a copy-pasteable single `/goal until ..., or stop after N turns` line. Use when running /goal against a spec, to reduce acceptance criteria to AND-joined boolean assertions.
argument-hint
[prd-text | issue#N | path/to/spec.md]
license
MIT
compatibility
Claude Code 2.1.277+ (uses GA `/goal` loop).
user-invocable
true
context
inherit
allowed-tools
Read Write Bash Grep Agent
metadata
{"category":"planning","milestone":"M140","version":"0.1.0","author":"OrchestKit","complexity":"low","tags":"/goal, planning, prd, automation, cc-2.1.139"}
# prd-to-goal — PRD → /goal Decomposition Converts a PRD / issue / spec into a single copy-pasteable `/goal` line. The hard part of `/goal` is not running it — it is writing an `until` clause that is *convergent* (terminates), *falsifiable* (testable boolean), and *observable* (the agent can actually check it without subjective judgement). This skill makes that decomposition reproducible. ## 1. When to use **Use it when:** - You have a written PRD, GitHub issue, or spec and want to run `/goal` against it. - Past `/goal` runs drifted, looped, or burned tokens because the `until` clause was vague (`until tests pass`, `until done`, `until design is good`). - You need to justify the abort budget — turns, tokens, no-progress threshold. **Skip it when:** - One-shot bug fix where the failing test *is* the acceptance criterion. Just run `/goal until pnpm test -- auth.spec.ts passes`. - No written PRD exists. Run `write-prd` first — vibes do not decompose. - The work is destructive or irreversible (DB migrations, mass file deletes). `/goal` retries; you do not want retries on `DROP TABLE`. ## 2. Inputs the skill accepts | Input | How | |---|---| | Pasted PRD text | Provide as the argument, or paste into the chat after invoking. | | GitHub issue | `gh issue view <N> --json title,body,labels` — the skill reads `body`. | | Spec file | Path to a Markdown / text file; the skill `Read`s it. | | ADR / design doc | Same as spec file. | ## 3. The decomposition algorithm 1. **Extract acceptance criteria.** Pull every `MUST`, `SHOULD`, `Definition of Done`, `Acceptance Criteria`, and checkbox-style line. If the doc has none, stop and tell the user to run `write-prd` first — there is nothing to converge on. 2. **Map each criterion to an observable boolean.** Each criterion must reduce to a single shell-checkable assertion. Examples of observable state: - `test -f path/to/file` (file exists) - `pnpm test -- pattern passes` (test command exits 0) - `gh pr view <N> --json state | jq -r .state == "MERGED"` - `wc -l < src/auth.ts` returns a number within bound - `pnpm lint` exits 0 - `curl -sf $URL` returns 2xx 3. **Reject non-observable criteria.** Drop or rewrite criteria that depend on subjective judgement (`code is clean`, `design feels right`, `users are happy`). Either find a proxy (`lint exits 0`, `Lighthouse score > 90`, `NPS survey ID exists`) or surface the criterion back to the user as out of scope for `/goal`. 4. **Compose the `until` clause.** AND-join the observable assertions in priority order — the cheapest, most likely-to-fail check first so the loop short-circuits early. Three to five assertions is the sweet spot; more than seven usually means the PRD is two PRDs. 5. **Fold the budget INTO the same condition.** Claude Code accepts one goal per session, replace-on-set, and the bound is written inside that single condition (`…, or stop after 15 turns`). It is not a second command. Sensible turn caps: - `15` for a single feature, `30` for a refactor, `5` for a bug fix. > **Never emit a second `/goal` line.** A second line does not add a rail — it > parses as a fresh condition, REPLACES the first, and leaves the session > goaled on the budget alone with every acceptance assertion discarded. The > `abort-if` form this skill used to emit was never Claude Code syntax at all: > `grep -c -a -F 'abort-if'` against the 2.1.226 binary returns `0`, and it > appears in none of the 357 archived changelogs. Verified 2026-08-08 (#3312). ## 4. Output template The skill emits exactly ONE line, ready to paste: ``` /goal until <assertion_1> AND <assertion_2> AND <assertion_3>, or stop after <N> turns ``` Emit the line first, on its own. A fenced code block around it is fine, since the user copies it out. Any notes (assertion ordering, what a grep cannot prove) go after the line and stay short. Never emit a second `/goal` line, and never emit a goal line at all when the input has no observable acceptance criteria (step 1 of the algorithm): say so and point at `write-prd` instead. ### Optional: rubric emission (`.claude/rubric.json`) When the user wants graded feedback beyond pass/fail booleans, the skill MAY also emit `.claude/rubric.json` conforming to `ork-rubric/1.0` (schema: `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/shared/rubric.schema.json`), mapping each acceptance criterion to one dimension: ```json { "rubric": "ork-rubric/1.0", "skill": "prd-to-goal", "dimensions": [ { "name": "regression_test_added", "weight": 0.4, "min_pass": 8, "min_blocker": 3 }, { "name": "auth_suite_green", "weight": 0.4, "min_pass": 10, "min_blocker": 5 }, { "name": "lint_clean", "weight": 0.2, "min_pass": 10, "min_blocker": 0 } ] } ``` Scores are 0–10 (`min_pass` = soft floor, `min_blocker` = hard blocker regardless of composite); dimension weights MUST sum to 1.0 — see the schema for the full contract. The file is deliberately **user-editable before the `/goal` run** — that is the point. Adjusting weights and `min_pass` thresholds is how the user injects judgement into the loop without rewriting assertions (rubric-as-environment-feedback, Lance Martin 2026-06-09). The post-timeout grader (§8) treats the rubric, if present, as the user's intent — senior to the literal assertion text. ## 5. Worked examples ### Example A — Bug fix PRD Input (issue body): ``` Title: Login fails on emails containing "+" Acceptance Criteria: - New regression test in tests/auth/test_login.py covers email with "+" - The new test passes - All existing auth tests still pass ``` Output: ``` /goal until test -f tests/auth/test_login.py AND pnpm test -- tests/auth/test_login.py passes AND pnpm test -- tests/auth passes, or stop after 5 turns ``` Rationale: file existence is the cheapest check; the targeted test is the regression gate; the broad auth suite catches collateral damage. ### Example B — Feature PRD Input (PRD excerpt): ``` Feature: User Avatar Endpoint MUST: - New route GET /users/:id/avatar registered - Returns 200 with { url: string, updatedAt: ISO8601 } for known user - Returns 404 for unknown user - Integration test covers both cases - OpenAPI spec updated ``` Output: ``` /goal until grep -q "users/:id/avatar" src/routes/users.ts AND pnpm test -- tests/integration/users.avatar.spec.ts passes AND grep -q "/users/{id}/avatar" openapi.yaml AND pnpm lint passes, or stop after 15 turns ``` Rationale: route `grep` catches a handler that was stubbed but never wired; the integration spec encodes both 200 and 404; OpenAPI grep enforces the docs MUST; lint guards against half-typed code shipping. ### Example C — Refactor PRD Input (PRD excerpt): ``` Refactor: split monolithic src/auth.ts (1842 LOC) into per-strategy files Definition of Done: - src/auth.ts under 200 LOC - New files in src/auth/strategies/*.ts cover oauth, jwt, password - All auth tests still pass - Lint clean - No new files outside src/auth/ ``` Output: ``` /goal until [ $(wc -l < src/auth.ts) -lt 200 ] AND test -f src/auth/strategies/oauth.ts AND test -f src/auth/strategies/jwt.ts AND test -f src/auth/strategies/password.ts AND pnpm test -- tests/auth passes AND pnpm lint passes, or stop after 30 turns ``` Rationale: the LOC bound is the convergent signal — without it, `/goal` can keep "improving" forever. File-existence checks pin the structural decomposition; tests + lint guard correctness. Higher budget because refactors run longer than bug fixes. ## 6. Recipe Library — pre-built loops Where §3–5 *generate* a custom `/goal` line from a spec, the recipe library *ships* ready-made ones for the recurring autonomous loops. Each is a loop shape wrapped around an ork worker skill, following the same convergent / falsifiable / budgeted rules as a generated line. | Recipe | Use when | Worker | |---|---|---| | 🧪 Coverage climb | raise coverage to a target, meaningfully | `cover` | | 🔴 Production error sweep | clear a backlog of actionable errors | `fix-issue` | | 📚 Docs-drift sweep | docs / reference drifted from code | `audit-full` | | ⚡ Page-load budget | a page exceeds its latency budget | `performance` | | 🧹 Repository cleanup | stale memory / state accumulated | `dream` | | ✅ Quality streak | don't trust a single green (flaky suite) | `verify` | | 🎫 Ticket → PR-ready | drive an issue to a CI-green PR | `fix-issue` → `create-pr` | | 🧼 Type/lint zero | clear a type/lint backlog without suppressions | fixer agent | Full recipes — the exact single-line `/goal until …, or stop after N turns` lines, convergent signal, and per-recipe guardrail: `references/recipe-library.md`. That file is the in-repo source intended for an `ork-loops` pack on skills.sh (not yet built; the channel Forward Future's Loop Library uses), so the loop *recipes* can travel while ork supplies the *machinery* each pass runs on. ## 7. Anti-patterns | Bad | Why it fails | Good | |---|---|---| | `/goal until tests pass` | Which tests? Existing or new? On which command? The agent can pick whatever subset is already green and claim done. | `/goal until pnpm test -- tests/auth/test_login.py passes AND pnpm test -- tests/auth passes` | | `/goal until the code looks clean` | Not falsifiable. The agent cannot check "looks clean" — it will either declare victory immediately or never. | `/goal until pnpm lint passes AND [ $(wc -l < src/auth.ts) -lt 200 ]` | | `/goal until done` | Unbounded. There is no terminating condition; combined with a generous `, or stop after 50 turns` this is how runs eat 500K tokens overnight. | Pick 3–5 observable assertions. If you cannot, the PRD is not ready — go to `write-prd`. | ## 8. Post-timeout assertion grader If the `/goal` loop hits its turn bound, do NOT retry the same line and do NOT let the looping agent critique its own assertions. Spawn a FRESH-context grader that audits the assertion set itself: ```python # Bare-eval pattern — independent context window, zero shared state: Bash("CLAUDE_CODE_FORK_SUBAGENT=1 claude -p --bare \"$(cat /tmp/grader-prompt.txt)\"") # or: Agent(subagent_type="general-purpose", prompt=grader_prompt) # fresh spawn, no producer prose ``` The grader receives the `/goal` line, `.claude/rubric.json` (if emitted), a compressed summary of the last N turns, and freshly regenerated repo-state evidence. It returns one verdict: | Verdict | Diagnosis | Action | |---|---|---| | `tighten` | Assertions too weak — agent could satisfy them without real success | Re-run with the stricter revised line | | `loosen` | Assertions unsatisfiable as written (wrong path, impossible bound, pre-broken suite) | Re-run with the achievable revised line | | `abort` | Task genuinely blocked (missing access, contradictory spec, broken env) | Stop; surface the blocker to the user | Grading must happen in an independent context window — never self-critique (verifier sub-agents outperform self-critique because the grader does not share the producer's context; Lance Martin, 2026-06-09). Budget: one grader call per timeout, and the grader never loops itself. Full pattern (prompt template, independence rules, worked example): `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/chain-patterns/references/assertion-grader.md`. ## 9. Related skills - `ork:write-prd` — if the input has no acceptance criteria, run this first. - `ork:brainstorm` — useful when the PRD itself is contested and you want options before writing the goal. - `ork:audit-full` — after `/goal` exits, run audit-full to confirm the assertions actually held end-to-end (the loop trusts the boolean; audit re-checks the intent).
GitHub에서 보기