seed-test-data

name	seed-test-data
description	[Dev Data] Use when you need to implement or enhance test data seeders that simulate QC happy-path scenarios via application-layer commands.

Codex compatibility note:

• Invoke repository skills with $skill-name in Codex; this mirrored copy rewrites legacy Claude /skill-name references.
• Prefer the plan-hard skill for planning guidance in this Codex mirror.
• Task tracker mandate: BEFORE executing any workflow or skill step, create/update task tracking for all steps and keep it synchronized as progress changes.
• User-question prompts mean to ask the user directly in Codex.
• Ignore Claude-specific mode-switch instructions when they appear.
• Strict execution contract: when a user explicitly invokes a skill, execute that skill protocol as written.
• Subagent authorization: when a skill is user-invoked or AI-detected and its protocol requires subagents, that skill activation authorizes use of the required spawn_agent subagent(s) for that task.
• Do not skip, reorder, or merge protocol steps unless the user explicitly approves the deviation first.
• For workflow skills, execute each listed child-skill step explicitly and report step-by-step evidence.
• If a required step/tool cannot run in this environment, stop and ask the user before adapting.

Codex Project-Reference Loading (No Hooks)

Codex does not receive Claude hook-based doc injection. When coding, planning, debugging, testing, or reviewing, open project docs explicitly using this routing.

Always read:

• docs/project-config.json (project-specific paths, commands, modules, and workflow/test settings)
• docs/project-reference/docs-index-reference.md (routes to the full docs/project-reference/* catalog)
• docs/project-reference/lessons.md (always-on guardrails and anti-patterns)

Situation-based docs:

• Backend/CQRS/API/domain/entity changes: backend-patterns-reference.md, domain-entities-reference.md, project-structure-reference.md
• Frontend/UI/styling/design-system: frontend-patterns-reference.md, scss-styling-guide.md, design-system/README.md
• Spec/test-case planning or TC mapping: feature-docs-reference.md
• Integration test implementation/review: integration-test-reference.md
• E2E test implementation/review: e2e-test-reference.md
• Code review/audit work: code-review-rules.md plus domain docs above based on changed files

Do not read all docs blindly. Start from docs-index-reference.md, then open only relevant files for the task.

[BLOCKING] Execute skill steps in declared order. NEVER skip, reorder, or merge steps without explicit user approval. [BLOCKING] Before each step or sub-skill call, update task tracking: set in_progress when step starts, set completed when step ends. [BLOCKING] Every completed/skipped step MUST include brief evidence or explicit skip reason. [BLOCKING] If Task tools are unavailable, create and maintain an equivalent step-by-step plan tracker with the same status transitions.

Quick Summary

Goal: Implement or enhance test data seeders — simulate QC happy-path scenarios via application-layer commands; NEVER direct DB writes.

Workflow:

1. Phase 0 — Detect seeder task type (new / enhance / fix)
2. Step 1 — Discover project seeder patterns, env gate key, count key
3. Step 2 — Analyze feature scope + application commands
4. Step 3 — Find or create seeder file
5. Step 4 — Implement using language-agnostic algorithm
6. Step 5 — Validate against universal rules
7. Review — Fresh sub-agent review round

Key Rules:

• MUST ATTENTION read docs/project-reference/seed-test-data-reference.md and docs/project-config.json (Data Seeders context group) before writing any seeder changes
• NEVER call repository/DB directly for domain data — use application-layer commands
• NEVER duplicate command logic — seeder orchestrates, commands own validation
• ALWAYS gate by environment first; ALWAYS check count before seeding
• ALWAYS read count multiplier from config (NEVER hardcode)
• ALWAYS loop from existing_count to target_count for restart-safety

Phase 0: Detect Seeder Task Type

Before any other step, classify request:

Task Type	Detection	Action
New seeder	No existing seeder for feature area	Create following discovered base class pattern
Enhance existing	Seeder exists, needs new scenarios	Read existing seeder, add without breaking
Fix broken	Seeder fails env gate / idempotency / DI scope	Diagnose via Universal Rules, fix at root
Unknown	Request ambiguous	Ask user — NEVER assume

grep -r "{Feature}Seeder\|{Feature}SeedData\|{Feature}TestData" src/ -l

Universal Seed Data Rules

1. Environment Gate — First check in seeder. Dev/enabled-config only. NEVER production.
2. Command-Based — Calls application commands via full pipeline. Simulates QC manual testing. NEVER direct DB/repo writes for domain entities.
3. No Duplicate Logic — Seeder provides realistic inputs. Commands own validation, domain logic, event side-effects.
4. Idempotency — Check existing count → calculate remaining → seed only difference. Running N times converges to target.
5. Count-Configurable — Reads project config key (discovered Step 1). NEVER hardcode count.
6. Restart-Safe — Idempotency handles restarts: existing count found → seeds only missing remainder.

Protocol

Step 1: Discover Seeder Patterns

Search for project seeder conventions:

# .NET
grep -r "IDataSeeder\|ISeedDataHandler\|ApplicationDataSeeder\|CanSeedTestingData\|SeedingMinimumDummyItemsCount" src/ --include="*.cs" -l

# TypeScript
grep -r "seeder\|SeedData\|DataSeed" src/ --include="*.ts" -l

Record with file:line evidence:

• Seeder base class / interface
• Seeder registration mechanism (DI, module, startup hook)
• Environment gate method/key name
• Count multiplier config key name

Step 1.5: Verify Dev Config Keys

Confirm dev config has both env gate key and count key. If absent, add following project's dev config convention.

Step 2: Feature Scope Analysis

Identify before writing any code:

1. Feature area — domain entity/aggregate being seeded
2. Application commands — grep -r "{Feature}*Command" src/ --include="*.cs" -l
3. Dependencies — data must exist (users, orgs, prerequisite records)
4. Scenarios — 3–5 realistic variations (standard, boundary, multi-actor)
5. Target count — clarify: 1 scenario or N repetitions per scenario

Step 3: Find or Create Seeder

grep -r "{Feature}TestSeeder\|{Feature}SeedingHelper\|{Feature}TestDataSeeder" src/ -l

• Exists → enhance with new scenarios, do NOT break existing ones
• Absent → create following discovered base class pattern

Step 4: Implement

Algorithm (language-agnostic):

seeder():
  if not is_development_environment(): return
  if not seed_enabled_in_config(): return
  target = config.get("SeedCount")
  if target <= 0: return
  existing = count_by_seeder_marker()
  if existing >= target: return
  for i from existing to target:
    call_application_command(build_scenario_input(i))

Seeder marker — stable predicate identifying seeded vs user data:

• Email prefix, created-by field, name prefix, or dedicated boolean flag
• MUST be deterministic across restarts

Step 5: Validate

MUST ATTENTION verify all before complete:

• MUST ATTENTION environment gate is FIRST check — file:line evidence required
• MUST ATTENTION count-before-seed idempotency gate present — file:line evidence
• MUST ATTENTION loop starts at existing_count, not 0 — file:line evidence
• MUST ATTENTION only application-layer commands used for domain entities — NEVER repo/DB
• MUST ATTENTION no business logic or validation duplicated in seeder
• MUST ATTENTION seeder registered via project DI mechanism — file:line evidence
• MUST ATTENTION count config key read correctly (zero → no-op, NEVER hardcoded)
• MUST ATTENTION scoped DI per iteration — shared scope = DbContext/session corruption

Sub-Agent Routing

Task	Sub-Agent	When
Discover seeders + commands across large codebase	general-purpose	Steps 1-2
Review seeder compliance	code-reviewer	Round 1 post-implementation
Seeder handles credentials/PII	security-auditor	Security-sensitive patterns
Seeder runs 1000+ records	performance-optimizer	Performance-intensive

All sub-agent prompts MUST include:

Graph DB active. After grep finds key files, run:
python .claude/scripts/code_graph trace <file> --direction both --json
Pattern: grep → trace → grep verify.

Anti-Patterns

Anti-Pattern	Correct
Direct repo insert for domain entities	Call application command
Seeder validates business rules	Command owns validation; seeder provides valid inputs
No idempotency check	Check count first; seed only remaining
Hardcoded count (for i in 0..10)	Read count from config key (discovered Step 1)
No environment gate	Check project env gate key first
Shared DI scope across loop iterations	Use project's scoped DI per iteration (prevents DbContext corruption)
Batch-all-then-write sub-agent findings	Persist findings per file; NEVER batch at end

Review Loop

Round 1: After implementation, spawn fresh code-reviewer sub-agent with zero memory of implementation:

Review seeder at [file:path]. Verify with file:line evidence for each:
1. Environment gate is FIRST check
2. Idempotency: count-before-seed pattern present
3. Loop starts at existing_count not 0
4. Zero application-layer command bypasses (direct repo/DB = FAIL)
5. No hardcoded count — config key read
6. Scoped DI per iteration
Report: PASS or FAIL with file:line for each finding.

Round 2: If FAIL → fix → new fresh sub-agent. Max 3 rounds → escalate to user. NEVER reuse sub-agent across rounds. A clean round ENDS the review; a round with issues triggers fix → fresh sub-agent re-review.

---

Workflow Recommendation

MUST ATTENTION — NOT IN WORKFLOW YET: Use a direct user question:

1. Activate workflow-seed-test-data (Recommended) — scout → investigate → seed-test-data → review-changes → code-simplifier → docs-update
2. Execute $seed-test-data directly — run this skill standalone

---

Next Steps

MUST ATTENTION after completing: use a direct user question — do NOT skip:

• "$workflow-review-changes (Recommended)" — review all changes before commit
• "$integration-test" — write tests verifying idempotency and count compliance
• "Skip, continue manually" — user decides

---

[IMPORTANT] task tracking for ALL tasks BEFORE starting. For simple tasks, ask user whether to skip.

Critical Thinking Mindset — Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination.

Understand Code First — HARD-GATE: Do NOT write, plan, or fix until you READ existing code.

1. Search 3+ similar patterns (grep/glob) — cite file:line evidence
2. Read existing files in target area — understand structure, base classes, conventions
3. Run python .claude/scripts/code_graph trace <file> --direction both --json when .code-graph/graph.db exists
4. Map dependencies via connections or callers_of — know what depends on your target
5. Write investigation to .ai/workspace/analysis/ for non-trivial tasks (3+ files)
6. Re-read analysis file before implementing — never work from memory alone
7. NEVER invent new patterns when existing ones work — match exactly or document deviation

BLOCKED until: - [ ] Read target files - [ ] Grep 3+ patterns - [ ] Graph trace (if graph.db exists) - [ ] Assumptions verified with evidence

Evidence-Based Reasoning — Speculation is FORBIDDEN. Every claim needs proof.

1. Cite file:line, grep results, or framework docs for EVERY claim
2. Declare confidence: >80% act freely, 60-80% verify first, <60% DO NOT recommend
3. Cross-service validation required for architectural changes
4. "I don't have enough evidence" is valid and expected output

BLOCKED until: - [ ] Evidence file path (file:line) - [ ] Grep search performed - [ ] 3+ similar patterns found - [ ] Confidence level stated

Forbidden without proof: "obviously", "I think", "should be", "probably", "this is because" If incomplete → output: "Insufficient evidence. Verified: [...]. Not verified: [...]."

AI Mistake Prevention — Failure modes to avoid on every task:

Check downstream references before deleting. Deleting components causes documentation and code staleness cascades. Map all referencing files before removal. Verify AI-generated content against actual code. AI hallucinates APIs, class names, and method signatures. Always grep to confirm existence before documenting or referencing. Trace full dependency chain after edits. Changing a definition misses downstream variables and consumers derived from it. Always trace the full chain. Trace ALL code paths when verifying correctness. Confirming code exists is not confirming it executes. Always trace early exits, error branches, and conditional skips — not just happy path. When debugging, ask "whose responsibility?" before fixing. Trace whether bug is in caller (wrong data) or callee (wrong handling). Fix at responsible layer — never patch symptom site. Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing. Before changing any constant, limit, flag, or pattern: read comments, check git blame, examine surrounding code. Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first. Changes touching multiple stacks require verifying EVERY output. One green check is not all green checks. Holistic-first debugging — resist nearest-attention trap. When investigating any failure, list EVERY precondition first (config, env vars, DB names, endpoints, DI registrations, data preconditions), then verify each against evidence before forming any code-layer hypothesis. Surgical changes — apply the diff test. Bug fix: every changed line must trace directly to the bug. Don't restyle or improve adjacent code. Enhancement task: implement improvements AND announce them explicitly. Surface ambiguity before coding — don't pick silently. If request has multiple interpretations, present each with effort estimate and ask. Never assume all-records, file-based, or more complex path.

IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search 3+ existing patterns and read code BEFORE writing any seeder.

MUST ATTENTION cite file:line for every claim; declare confidence; "I don't have enough evidence" is valid output.

MUST ATTENTION apply critical thinking — every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: never present guess as fact.

MUST ATTENTION apply AI mistake prevention — holistic-first debugging, fix at responsible layer, surface ambiguity before coding, re-read files after compaction.

Prompt-Enhance Closing Anchors

IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION follow declared step order for this skill; NEVER skip, reorder, or merge steps without explicit user approval IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION for every step/sub-skill call: set in_progress before execution, set completed after execution IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION every skipped step MUST include explicit reason; every completed step MUST include concise evidence IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION if Task tools unavailable, maintain an equivalent step-by-step plan tracker with synchronized statuses

Closing Reminders

IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION task tracking — break all work into tasks BEFORE starting IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION NEVER call repo/DB directly — use application-layer commands IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION ALWAYS gate by environment FIRST; ALWAYS check count before seeding IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION loop from existing_count to target_count — NEVER from 0 IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION scoped DI per iteration — shared DI scope = silent DbContext corruption IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION fresh sub-agent re-review required ONLY after a fix cycle. Clean Round 1 ENDS the review.

Anti-Rationalization:

Evasion	Rebuttal
"Simple seeder, skip review loop"	Idempotency bugs are silent. Run Round 1 always.
"Already know the base class"	Show file:line. No proof = no knowledge.
"Environment gate is obvious"	Verify it's FIRST check with file:line evidence.
"Just hardcode count for now"	NEVER — config key required. Find it in Step 1.
"No graph.db, skip trace"	Use grep-only trace. Still run 3+ pattern search.
"Existing scenarios look fine, skip enhance"	Read all scenarios; enhancement may conflict — verify first.

[TASK-PLANNING] Before acting, break task into small todo tasks using task tracking.

Hookless Prompt Protocol Mirror (Auto-Synced)

Source: .claude/hooks/lib/prompt-injections.cjs + .claude/.ck.json

[WORKFLOW-EXECUTION-PROTOCOL] [BLOCKING] Workflow Execution Protocol — MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST CRITICAL. Do not skip for any reason.

1. DETECT: Match prompt against workflow catalog
2. ANALYZE: Find best-match workflow AND evaluate if a custom step combination would fit better
3. ASK (REQUIRED FORMAT): Use a direct user question with this structure:
   • Question: "Which workflow do you want to activate?"
   • Option 1: "Activate [BestMatch Workflow] (Recommended)"
   • Option 2: "Activate custom workflow: [step1 → step2 → ...]" (include one-line rationale)
4. ACTIVATE (if confirmed): Call $workflow-start <workflowId> for standard; sequence custom steps manually
5. CREATE TASKS: task tracking for ALL workflow steps
6. EXECUTE: Follow each step in sequence [CRITICAL-THINKING-MINDSET] Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination principle: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination. AI Attention principle (Primacy-Recency): Put the 3 most critical rules at both top and bottom of long prompts/protocols so instruction adherence survives long context windows.

Learned Lessons

Lessons Learned

[CRITICAL] Hard-won project debugging/architecture rules. MUST ATTENTION apply BEFORE forming hypothesis or writing code.

Quick Summary

Goal: Prevent recurrence of known failure patterns — debugging, architecture, naming, AI orchestration, environment.

Top Rules (apply always):

• MUST ATTENTION verify ALL preconditions (config, env, DB names, DI regs) BEFORE code-layer hypothesis
• MUST ATTENTION fix responsible layer — NEVER patch symptom sites with caller-specific defensive code
• MUST ATTENTION use ExecuteInjectScopedAsync for parallel async + repo/UoW — NEVER ExecuteUowTask
• MUST ATTENTION name by PURPOSE not CONTENT — adding member forces rename = abstraction broken
• MUST ATTENTION persist sub-agent findings incrementally after each file — NEVER batch at end
• MUST ATTENTION Windows bash: verify Python alias (where python/where py) — NEVER assume python/python3 resolves

---

Debugging & Root Cause Reasoning

• [2026-04-11] Holistic-first: verify environment before code. Failure → list ALL preconditions (config, env vars, DB names, endpoints, DI regs, credentials, permissions, data prerequisites) → verify each via evidence (grep/cat/query) BEFORE code-layer hypothesis. Worst rabbit holes: diving nearest layer while bug sits elsewhere — e.g., hours debugging "sync timeout", real cause: test appsettings pointing wrong DB. Cheapest check first.
• [2026-04-01] Ask "whose responsibility?" before fixing. Trace: bug in caller (wrong data) or callee (wrong handling)? Fix responsible layer — NEVER patch symptom site masking real issue.
• [2026-04-01] Trace data lifecycle, not error site. Follow data: creation → transformation → consumption. Bug usually where data created wrong, not consumed.
• [2026-04-01] Code is caller-agnostic. Functions/handlers/consumers don't know who invokes them. Comments/guards/messages describe business intent — NEVER reference specific callers (tests, seeders, scripts).

Architecture Invariants

• [2026-03-31] ParallelAsync + repo/UoW MUST use ExecuteInjectScopedAsync, NEVER ExecuteUowTask. ExecuteUowTask creates new UoW but reuses outer DI scope (same DbContext) — parallel iterations sharing non-thread-safe DbContext silently corrupt data. ExecuteInjectScopedAsync creates new UoW + new DI scope (fresh repo per iteration).
• [2026-03-31] Bus message naming MUST include service name prefix — core services NEVER consume feature events. Prefix declares schema ownership (AccountUserEntityEventBusMessage = Accounts owns). Core services (Accounts, Communication) are leaders. Feature services (Growth, Talents) sending to core MUST use {CoreServiceName}...RequestBusMessage — never define own event for core to consume.

Naming & Abstraction

• [2026-04-12] Name PURPOSE not CONTENT — "OrXxx" anti-pattern. HrManagerOrHrOrPayrollHrOperationsPolicy names set members, not what it guards. Add role → rename = broken abstraction. Rule: names express DOES/GUARDS, not CONTAINS. Test: adding/removing member forces rename? YES = content-driven = bad → rename to purpose (e.g., HrOperationsAccessPolicy). Nuance: "Or" fine in behavioral idioms (FirstOrDefault, SuccessOrThrow) — expresses HAPPENS, not membership.

Environment & Tooling

• [2026-04-20] Windows bash: NEVER assume python/python3 resolves — verify alias first. Python may not be in bash PATH under those names. Check: where python / where py. Prefer py (Windows Python Launcher) for one-liners, node if JS alternative exists.

Test-specific lessons → docs/project-reference/integration-test-reference.md Lessons Learned section. Production-code anti-patterns → docs/project-reference/backend-patterns-reference.md Anti-Patterns section. Generic debugging/refactoring reminders → System Lessons in .claude/hooks/lib/prompt-injections.cjs.

---

Closing Reminders

• IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION holistic-first: verify ALL preconditions (config, env, DB names, endpoints, DI regs) BEFORE code-layer hypothesis — cheapest check first
• IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION fix responsible layer — NEVER patch symptom site; trace caller (wrong data) vs callee (wrong handling), fix root owner
• IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION parallel async + repo/UoW → ALWAYS ExecuteInjectScopedAsync, NEVER ExecuteUowTask (shared DbContext = silent data corruption)
• IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION bus message prefix = schema ownership; feature services NEVER define events for core services — use {CoreServiceName}...RequestBusMessage
• IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION name by PURPOSE — adding/removing member forces rename = broken abstraction
• IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION sub-agents MUST write findings after each file/section — NEVER batch all findings into one final write
• IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Windows bash: NEVER assume python/python3 resolves — run where python/where py first, use py launcher or node

[LESSON-LEARNED-REMINDER] [BLOCKING] Task Planning & Continuous Improvement — MANDATORY. Do not skip.

Break work into small tasks (task tracking) before starting. Add final task: "Analyze AI mistakes & lessons learned".

Extract lessons — ROOT CAUSE ONLY, not symptom fixes:

1. Name the FAILURE MODE (reasoning/assumption failure), not symptom — "assumed API existed without reading source" not "used wrong enum value".
2. Generality test: does this failure mode apply to ≥3 contexts/codebases? If not, abstract one level up.
3. Write as a universal rule — strip project-specific names/paths/classes. Useful on any codebase.
4. Consolidate: multiple mistakes sharing one failure mode → ONE lesson.
5. Recurrence gate: "Would this recur in future session WITHOUT this reminder?" — No → skip $learn.
6. Auto-fix gate: "Could $code-review/$code-simplifier/$security/$lint catch this?" — Yes → improve review skill instead.
7. BOTH gates pass → ask user to run $learn. [TASK-PLANNING] [MANDATORY] BEFORE executing any workflow or skill step, create/update task tracking for all planned steps, then keep it synchronized as each step starts/completes.