decomposer: record implementation detail for 8 step(s)
This commit is contained in:
@@ -1,7 +1,6 @@
|
||||
# Step 0 — Implementation Detail
|
||||
|
||||
1. Recorded workflow repository and template provenance.
|
||||
2. Separated functional requirements from non-functional requirements.
|
||||
3. Recorded deployment, Terraform, and scope constraints.
|
||||
4. Recorded workload assumptions and unresolved throughput, compliance, downstream, and SLO questions.
|
||||
5. Set product_selection_deferred to true and verified it with a repository test.
|
||||
1. Captured the workflow request and separated functional requirements from quality attributes.
|
||||
2. Recorded platform, validation, scope, and deployment constraints.
|
||||
3. Documented assumptions and unresolved scale, identity, DR, compliance, residency, budget, and naming questions.
|
||||
4. Marked product selection deferred as true and added a testable statement in requirements-spec.md.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1,8 +1,6 @@
|
||||
# Step 1 — Implementation Detail
|
||||
|
||||
1. Mapped ingress and worker execution to Cloud Run.
|
||||
2. Mapped durable transport and retries to Pub/Sub.
|
||||
3. Mapped raw-event retention and replay to Cloud Storage.
|
||||
4. Added Artifact Registry, IAM service account, Logging, and Monitoring foundations.
|
||||
5. Wrote architecture.md and architecture.mmd.
|
||||
6. Added Terraform provider constraints, APIs, service account, bucket, topic, subscription, repository, Cloud Run service, IAM binding, variables, and outputs.
|
||||
1. Mapped HTTPS ingestion, asynchronous processing, transactional state, secrets, observability, and network isolation to managed Google Cloud products.
|
||||
2. Documented Cloud Run, Pub/Sub, Cloud SQL, Secret Manager, Artifact Registry, VPC, Serverless VPC Access, IAM, Logging, Monitoring, and Trace roles.
|
||||
3. Added the end-to-end Mermaid data-flow diagram and architecture description.
|
||||
4. Added Terraform provider configuration, enabled APIs, network connector, SQL resources, Pub/Sub resources, service account, secret, and Cloud Run services.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1,7 +1,6 @@
|
||||
# Step 2 — Implementation Detail
|
||||
|
||||
1. Added scripts/validate.sh with terraform fmt -check -diff.
|
||||
2. Added backendless terraform init and terraform validate commands.
|
||||
3. Added refresh-free, lock-free terraform plan with no apply path.
|
||||
4. Made plan execution fail clearly when required variables are absent.
|
||||
5. Recorded the environment-dependent validation findings in validation-results.json and the guide.
|
||||
1. Documented terraform fmt -check, terraform init -backend=false, and terraform validate commands in README.md and the guide.
|
||||
2. Documented optional credentialed terraform plan with a saved plan file and no apply operation.
|
||||
3. Added scripts/validate_artifacts.py to verify required requirements, architecture, guide, and Terraform sections.
|
||||
4. Added pytest coverage for required files, four workflow phases, and the no-apply validation rule.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1,7 +1,6 @@
|
||||
# Step 3 — Implementation Detail
|
||||
|
||||
1. Assembled the deferred-selection discovery section.
|
||||
2. Documented selected products and their responsibilities.
|
||||
3. Embedded the Mermaid architecture diagram.
|
||||
4. Documented Terraform files and plan-only behavior.
|
||||
5. Documented validation commands, pending execution status, and production follow-ups.
|
||||
1. Created the guide at the required repository root path.
|
||||
2. Included linked requirements and Terraform artifacts plus the selected product architecture.
|
||||
3. Included Mermaid source, validation status, limitations of the tool-only generation environment, and acceptance criteria.
|
||||
4. Included packaging, repository verification, and publication sections for downstream steps.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
|
||||
# Step 4 — Implementation Detail
|
||||
|
||||
1. Created the exact required guide path.
|
||||
2. Included the complete packaged guide content.
|
||||
3. Added repository tests asserting the guide and companion artifacts exist.
|
||||
1. Persisted solution-architecture-guide.md in the scaffold commit.
|
||||
2. Included explicit Step 4 path and delivery criteria in the guide.
|
||||
3. Added tests that assert the guide exists alongside the other required artifacts.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1,7 +1,6 @@
|
||||
# Step 5 — Implementation Detail
|
||||
|
||||
1. Declared the workflow_agent source template URL.
|
||||
2. Declared phase inputs and outputs for all four phases.
|
||||
3. Marked discovery product selection as deferred.
|
||||
4. Marked validation as deploy_resources false.
|
||||
5. Added tests for required artifact presence and workflow implementation files.
|
||||
1. Recorded the workflow template URL in the guide metadata.
|
||||
2. Documented all four workflow phases in README.md.
|
||||
3. Added artifact-structure validation for requirements, architecture, guide, and Terraform content.
|
||||
4. Added pytest assertions for required files and phase coverage.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
|
||||
# Step 6 — Implementation Detail
|
||||
|
||||
1. Committed all workflow, requirements, architecture, Terraform, validation, test, and guide files together.
|
||||
2. Published the repository at the returned remote URL.
|
||||
3. Included README instructions for the actual validation commands.
|
||||
1. Submitted all step artifacts together in a single scaffold_project_and_generate call.
|
||||
2. Committed 12 generated files as one deliverable revision.
|
||||
3. Recorded the source-control repository URL for subsequent publication verification.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
|
||||
# Step 7 — Implementation Detail
|
||||
|
||||
1. Used the exact scaffold-returned repository URL.
|
||||
2. Confirmed the scaffold operation reported 15 generated files committed.
|
||||
3. Preserved the limitation that no revision identifier was exposed for independent remote verification.
|
||||
1. Documented the required remote comparison in solution-architecture-guide.md.
|
||||
2. Recorded that publication and remote-revision matching require source-control integration execution.
|
||||
3. Avoided claiming remote verification that was not available from the generation environment.
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user