将 openspec skills 迁移到全局 + 定义后续 proto 类型
This commit is contained in:
SepComet
parent
156d72bf4a
commit
371ab30eea
|
|
@ -1,156 +0,0 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-apply-change
|
||||
description: Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change. Use when the user wants to start implementing, continue implementation, or work through tasks.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.2.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Select the change**
|
||||
|
||||
If a name is provided, use it. Otherwise:
|
||||
- Infer from conversation context if the user mentioned a change
|
||||
- Auto-select if only one active change exists
|
||||
- If ambiguous, run `openspec list --json` to get available changes and use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select
|
||||
|
||||
Always announce: "Using change: <name>" and how to override (e.g., `/opsx:apply <other>`).
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Check status to understand the schema**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Parse the JSON to understand:
|
||||
- `schemaName`: The workflow being used (e.g., "spec-driven")
|
||||
- Which artifact contains the tasks (typically "tasks" for spec-driven, check status for others)
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Get apply instructions**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions apply --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This returns:
|
||||
- Context file paths (varies by schema - could be proposal/specs/design/tasks or spec/tests/implementation/docs)
|
||||
- Progress (total, complete, remaining)
|
||||
- Task list with status
|
||||
- Dynamic instruction based on current state
|
||||
|
||||
**Handle states:**
|
||||
- If `state: "blocked"` (missing artifacts): show message, suggest using openspec-continue-change
|
||||
- If `state: "all_done"`: congratulate, suggest archive
|
||||
- Otherwise: proceed to implementation
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Read context files**
|
||||
|
||||
Read the files listed in `contextFiles` from the apply instructions output.
|
||||
The files depend on the schema being used:
|
||||
- **spec-driven**: proposal, specs, design, tasks
|
||||
- Other schemas: follow the contextFiles from CLI output
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Show current progress**
|
||||
|
||||
Display:
|
||||
- Schema being used
|
||||
- Progress: "N/M tasks complete"
|
||||
- Remaining tasks overview
|
||||
- Dynamic instruction from CLI
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Implement tasks (loop until done or blocked)**
|
||||
|
||||
For each pending task:
|
||||
- Show which task is being worked on
|
||||
- Make the code changes required
|
||||
- Keep changes minimal and focused
|
||||
- Mark task complete in the tasks file: `- [ ]` → `- [x]`
|
||||
- Continue to next task
|
||||
|
||||
**Pause if:**
|
||||
- Task is unclear → ask for clarification
|
||||
- Implementation reveals a design issue → suggest updating artifacts
|
||||
- Error or blocker encountered → report and wait for guidance
|
||||
- User interrupts
|
||||
|
||||
7. **On completion or pause, show status**
|
||||
|
||||
Display:
|
||||
- Tasks completed this session
|
||||
- Overall progress: "N/M tasks complete"
|
||||
- If all done: suggest archive
|
||||
- If paused: explain why and wait for guidance
|
||||
|
||||
**Output During Implementation**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Implementing: <change-name> (schema: <schema-name>)
|
||||
|
||||
Working on task 3/7: <task description>
|
||||
[...implementation happening...]
|
||||
✓ Task complete
|
||||
|
||||
Working on task 4/7: <task description>
|
||||
[...implementation happening...]
|
||||
✓ Task complete
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Completion**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Implementation Complete
|
||||
|
||||
**Change:** <change-name>
|
||||
**Schema:** <schema-name>
|
||||
**Progress:** 7/7 tasks complete ✓
|
||||
|
||||
### Completed This Session
|
||||
- [x] Task 1
|
||||
- [x] Task 2
|
||||
...
|
||||
|
||||
All tasks complete! Ready to archive this change.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Pause (Issue Encountered)**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Implementation Paused
|
||||
|
||||
**Change:** <change-name>
|
||||
**Schema:** <schema-name>
|
||||
**Progress:** 4/7 tasks complete
|
||||
|
||||
### Issue Encountered
|
||||
<description of the issue>
|
||||
|
||||
**Options:**
|
||||
1. <option 1>
|
||||
2. <option 2>
|
||||
3. Other approach
|
||||
|
||||
What would you like to do?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Keep going through tasks until done or blocked
|
||||
- Always read context files before starting (from the apply instructions output)
|
||||
- If task is ambiguous, pause and ask before implementing
|
||||
- If implementation reveals issues, pause and suggest artifact updates
|
||||
- Keep code changes minimal and scoped to each task
|
||||
- Update task checkbox immediately after completing each task
|
||||
- Pause on errors, blockers, or unclear requirements - don't guess
|
||||
- Use contextFiles from CLI output, don't assume specific file names
|
||||
|
||||
**Fluid Workflow Integration**
|
||||
|
||||
This skill supports the "actions on a change" model:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Can be invoked anytime**: Before all artifacts are done (if tasks exist), after partial implementation, interleaved with other actions
|
||||
- **Allows artifact updates**: If implementation reveals design issues, suggest updating artifacts - not phase-locked, work fluidly
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,114 +0,0 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-archive-change
|
||||
description: Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow. Use when the user wants to finalize and archive a change after implementation is complete.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.2.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no change name provided, prompt for selection**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec list --json` to get available changes. Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select.
|
||||
|
||||
Show only active changes (not already archived).
|
||||
Include the schema used for each change if available.
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Check artifact completion status**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json` to check artifact completion.
|
||||
|
||||
Parse the JSON to understand:
|
||||
- `schemaName`: The workflow being used
|
||||
- `artifacts`: List of artifacts with their status (`done` or other)
|
||||
|
||||
**If any artifacts are not `done`:**
|
||||
- Display warning listing incomplete artifacts
|
||||
- Use **AskUserQuestion tool** to confirm user wants to proceed
|
||||
- Proceed if user confirms
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Check task completion status**
|
||||
|
||||
Read the tasks file (typically `tasks.md`) to check for incomplete tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
Count tasks marked with `- [ ]` (incomplete) vs `- [x]` (complete).
|
||||
|
||||
**If incomplete tasks found:**
|
||||
- Display warning showing count of incomplete tasks
|
||||
- Use **AskUserQuestion tool** to confirm user wants to proceed
|
||||
- Proceed if user confirms
|
||||
|
||||
**If no tasks file exists:** Proceed without task-related warning.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Assess delta spec sync state**
|
||||
|
||||
Check for delta specs at `openspec/changes/<name>/specs/`. If none exist, proceed without sync prompt.
|
||||
|
||||
**If delta specs exist:**
|
||||
- Compare each delta spec with its corresponding main spec at `openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md`
|
||||
- Determine what changes would be applied (adds, modifications, removals, renames)
|
||||
- Show a combined summary before prompting
|
||||
|
||||
**Prompt options:**
|
||||
- If changes needed: "Sync now (recommended)", "Archive without syncing"
|
||||
- If already synced: "Archive now", "Sync anyway", "Cancel"
|
||||
|
||||
If user chooses sync, use Task tool (subagent_type: "general-purpose", prompt: "Use Skill tool to invoke openspec-sync-specs for change '<name>'. Delta spec analysis: <include the analyzed delta spec summary>"). Proceed to archive regardless of choice.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Perform the archive**
|
||||
|
||||
Create the archive directory if it doesn't exist:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
mkdir -p openspec/changes/archive
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Generate target name using current date: `YYYY-MM-DD-<change-name>`
|
||||
|
||||
**Check if target already exists:**
|
||||
- If yes: Fail with error, suggest renaming existing archive or using different date
|
||||
- If no: Move the change directory to archive
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
mv openspec/changes/<name> openspec/changes/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Display summary**
|
||||
|
||||
Show archive completion summary including:
|
||||
- Change name
|
||||
- Schema that was used
|
||||
- Archive location
|
||||
- Whether specs were synced (if applicable)
|
||||
- Note about any warnings (incomplete artifacts/tasks)
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Success**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Archive Complete
|
||||
|
||||
**Change:** <change-name>
|
||||
**Schema:** <schema-name>
|
||||
**Archived to:** openspec/changes/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>/
|
||||
**Specs:** ✓ Synced to main specs (or "No delta specs" or "Sync skipped")
|
||||
|
||||
All artifacts complete. All tasks complete.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Always prompt for change selection if not provided
|
||||
- Use artifact graph (openspec status --json) for completion checking
|
||||
- Don't block archive on warnings - just inform and confirm
|
||||
- Preserve .openspec.yaml when moving to archive (it moves with the directory)
|
||||
- Show clear summary of what happened
|
||||
- If sync is requested, use openspec-sync-specs approach (agent-driven)
|
||||
- If delta specs exist, always run the sync assessment and show the combined summary before prompting
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,246 +0,0 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-bulk-archive-change
|
||||
description: Archive multiple completed changes at once. Use when archiving several parallel changes.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.2.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Archive multiple completed changes in a single operation.
|
||||
|
||||
This skill allows you to batch-archive changes, handling spec conflicts intelligently by checking the codebase to determine what's actually implemented.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: None required (prompts for selection)
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Get active changes**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec list --json` to get all active changes.
|
||||
|
||||
If no active changes exist, inform user and stop.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Prompt for change selection**
|
||||
|
||||
Use **AskUserQuestion tool** with multi-select to let user choose changes:
|
||||
- Show each change with its schema
|
||||
- Include an option for "All changes"
|
||||
- Allow any number of selections (1+ works, 2+ is the typical use case)
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT auto-select. Always let the user choose.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Batch validation - gather status for all selected changes**
|
||||
|
||||
For each selected change, collect:
|
||||
|
||||
a. **Artifact status** - Run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`
|
||||
- Parse `schemaName` and `artifacts` list
|
||||
- Note which artifacts are `done` vs other states
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Task completion** - Read `openspec/changes/<name>/tasks.md`
|
||||
- Count `- [ ]` (incomplete) vs `- [x]` (complete)
|
||||
- If no tasks file exists, note as "No tasks"
|
||||
|
||||
c. **Delta specs** - Check `openspec/changes/<name>/specs/` directory
|
||||
- List which capability specs exist
|
||||
- For each, extract requirement names (lines matching `### Requirement: <name>`)
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Detect spec conflicts**
|
||||
|
||||
Build a map of `capability -> [changes that touch it]`:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
auth -> [change-a, change-b] <- CONFLICT (2+ changes)
|
||||
api -> [change-c] <- OK (only 1 change)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
A conflict exists when 2+ selected changes have delta specs for the same capability.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Resolve conflicts agentically**
|
||||
|
||||
**For each conflict**, investigate the codebase:
|
||||
|
||||
a. **Read the delta specs** from each conflicting change to understand what each claims to add/modify
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Search the codebase** for implementation evidence:
|
||||
- Look for code implementing requirements from each delta spec
|
||||
- Check for related files, functions, or tests
|
||||
|
||||
c. **Determine resolution**:
|
||||
- If only one change is actually implemented -> sync that one's specs
|
||||
- If both implemented -> apply in chronological order (older first, newer overwrites)
|
||||
- If neither implemented -> skip spec sync, warn user
|
||||
|
||||
d. **Record resolution** for each conflict:
|
||||
- Which change's specs to apply
|
||||
- In what order (if both)
|
||||
- Rationale (what was found in codebase)
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Show consolidated status table**
|
||||
|
||||
Display a table summarizing all changes:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
| Change | Artifacts | Tasks | Specs | Conflicts | Status |
|
||||
|---------------------|-----------|-------|---------|-----------|--------|
|
||||
| schema-management | Done | 5/5 | 2 delta | None | Ready |
|
||||
| project-config | Done | 3/3 | 1 delta | None | Ready |
|
||||
| add-oauth | Done | 4/4 | 1 delta | auth (!) | Ready* |
|
||||
| add-verify-skill | 1 left | 2/5 | None | None | Warn |
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
For conflicts, show the resolution:
|
||||
```
|
||||
* Conflict resolution:
|
||||
- auth spec: Will apply add-oauth then add-jwt (both implemented, chronological order)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
For incomplete changes, show warnings:
|
||||
```
|
||||
Warnings:
|
||||
- add-verify-skill: 1 incomplete artifact, 3 incomplete tasks
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
7. **Confirm batch operation**
|
||||
|
||||
Use **AskUserQuestion tool** with a single confirmation:
|
||||
|
||||
- "Archive N changes?" with options based on status
|
||||
- Options might include:
|
||||
- "Archive all N changes"
|
||||
- "Archive only N ready changes (skip incomplete)"
|
||||
- "Cancel"
|
||||
|
||||
If there are incomplete changes, make clear they'll be archived with warnings.
|
||||
|
||||
8. **Execute archive for each confirmed change**
|
||||
|
||||
Process changes in the determined order (respecting conflict resolution):
|
||||
|
||||
a. **Sync specs** if delta specs exist:
|
||||
- Use the openspec-sync-specs approach (agent-driven intelligent merge)
|
||||
- For conflicts, apply in resolved order
|
||||
- Track if sync was done
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Perform the archive**:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
mkdir -p openspec/changes/archive
|
||||
mv openspec/changes/<name> openspec/changes/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
c. **Track outcome** for each change:
|
||||
- Success: archived successfully
|
||||
- Failed: error during archive (record error)
|
||||
- Skipped: user chose not to archive (if applicable)
|
||||
|
||||
9. **Display summary**
|
||||
|
||||
Show final results:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Bulk Archive Complete
|
||||
|
||||
Archived 3 changes:
|
||||
- schema-management-cli -> archive/2026-01-19-schema-management-cli/
|
||||
- project-config -> archive/2026-01-19-project-config/
|
||||
- add-oauth -> archive/2026-01-19-add-oauth/
|
||||
|
||||
Skipped 1 change:
|
||||
- add-verify-skill (user chose not to archive incomplete)
|
||||
|
||||
Spec sync summary:
|
||||
- 4 delta specs synced to main specs
|
||||
- 1 conflict resolved (auth: applied both in chronological order)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If any failures:
|
||||
```
|
||||
Failed 1 change:
|
||||
- some-change: Archive directory already exists
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Conflict Resolution Examples**
|
||||
|
||||
Example 1: Only one implemented
|
||||
```
|
||||
Conflict: specs/auth/spec.md touched by [add-oauth, add-jwt]
|
||||
|
||||
Checking add-oauth:
|
||||
- Delta adds "OAuth Provider Integration" requirement
|
||||
- Searching codebase... found src/auth/oauth.ts implementing OAuth flow
|
||||
|
||||
Checking add-jwt:
|
||||
- Delta adds "JWT Token Handling" requirement
|
||||
- Searching codebase... no JWT implementation found
|
||||
|
||||
Resolution: Only add-oauth is implemented. Will sync add-oauth specs only.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Example 2: Both implemented
|
||||
```
|
||||
Conflict: specs/api/spec.md touched by [add-rest-api, add-graphql]
|
||||
|
||||
Checking add-rest-api (created 2026-01-10):
|
||||
- Delta adds "REST Endpoints" requirement
|
||||
- Searching codebase... found src/api/rest.ts
|
||||
|
||||
Checking add-graphql (created 2026-01-15):
|
||||
- Delta adds "GraphQL Schema" requirement
|
||||
- Searching codebase... found src/api/graphql.ts
|
||||
|
||||
Resolution: Both implemented. Will apply add-rest-api specs first,
|
||||
then add-graphql specs (chronological order, newer takes precedence).
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Success**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Bulk Archive Complete
|
||||
|
||||
Archived N changes:
|
||||
- <change-1> -> archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<change-1>/
|
||||
- <change-2> -> archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<change-2>/
|
||||
|
||||
Spec sync summary:
|
||||
- N delta specs synced to main specs
|
||||
- No conflicts (or: M conflicts resolved)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Partial Success**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Bulk Archive Complete (partial)
|
||||
|
||||
Archived N changes:
|
||||
- <change-1> -> archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<change-1>/
|
||||
|
||||
Skipped M changes:
|
||||
- <change-2> (user chose not to archive incomplete)
|
||||
|
||||
Failed K changes:
|
||||
- <change-3>: Archive directory already exists
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output When No Changes**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## No Changes to Archive
|
||||
|
||||
No active changes found. Create a new change to get started.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Allow any number of changes (1+ is fine, 2+ is the typical use case)
|
||||
- Always prompt for selection, never auto-select
|
||||
- Detect spec conflicts early and resolve by checking codebase
|
||||
- When both changes are implemented, apply specs in chronological order
|
||||
- Skip spec sync only when implementation is missing (warn user)
|
||||
- Show clear per-change status before confirming
|
||||
- Use single confirmation for entire batch
|
||||
- Track and report all outcomes (success/skip/fail)
|
||||
- Preserve .openspec.yaml when moving to archive
|
||||
- Archive directory target uses current date: YYYY-MM-DD-<name>
|
||||
- If archive target exists, fail that change but continue with others
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,118 +0,0 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-continue-change
|
||||
description: Continue working on an OpenSpec change by creating the next artifact. Use when the user wants to progress their change, create the next artifact, or continue their workflow.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.2.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Continue working on a change by creating the next artifact.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no change name provided, prompt for selection**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec list --json` to get available changes sorted by most recently modified. Then use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select which change to work on.
|
||||
|
||||
Present the top 3-4 most recently modified changes as options, showing:
|
||||
- Change name
|
||||
- Schema (from `schema` field if present, otherwise "spec-driven")
|
||||
- Status (e.g., "0/5 tasks", "complete", "no tasks")
|
||||
- How recently it was modified (from `lastModified` field)
|
||||
|
||||
Mark the most recently modified change as "(Recommended)" since it's likely what the user wants to continue.
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Check current status**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Parse the JSON to understand current state. The response includes:
|
||||
- `schemaName`: The workflow schema being used (e.g., "spec-driven")
|
||||
- `artifacts`: Array of artifacts with their status ("done", "ready", "blocked")
|
||||
- `isComplete`: Boolean indicating if all artifacts are complete
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Act based on status**:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**If all artifacts are complete (`isComplete: true`)**:
|
||||
- Congratulate the user
|
||||
- Show final status including the schema used
|
||||
- Suggest: "All artifacts created! You can now implement this change or archive it."
|
||||
- STOP
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**If artifacts are ready to create** (status shows artifacts with `status: "ready"`):
|
||||
- Pick the FIRST artifact with `status: "ready"` from the status output
|
||||
- Get its instructions:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
- Parse the JSON. The key fields are:
|
||||
- `context`: Project background (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `rules`: Artifact-specific rules (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `template`: The structure to use for your output file
|
||||
- `instruction`: Schema-specific guidance
|
||||
- `outputPath`: Where to write the artifact
|
||||
- `dependencies`: Completed artifacts to read for context
|
||||
- **Create the artifact file**:
|
||||
- Read any completed dependency files for context
|
||||
- Use `template` as the structure - fill in its sections
|
||||
- Apply `context` and `rules` as constraints when writing - but do NOT copy them into the file
|
||||
- Write to the output path specified in instructions
|
||||
- Show what was created and what's now unlocked
|
||||
- STOP after creating ONE artifact
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**If no artifacts are ready (all blocked)**:
|
||||
- This shouldn't happen with a valid schema
|
||||
- Show status and suggest checking for issues
|
||||
|
||||
4. **After creating an artifact, show progress**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output**
|
||||
|
||||
After each invocation, show:
|
||||
- Which artifact was created
|
||||
- Schema workflow being used
|
||||
- Current progress (N/M complete)
|
||||
- What artifacts are now unlocked
|
||||
- Prompt: "Want to continue? Just ask me to continue or tell me what to do next."
|
||||
|
||||
**Artifact Creation Guidelines**
|
||||
|
||||
The artifact types and their purpose depend on the schema. Use the `instruction` field from the instructions output to understand what to create.
|
||||
|
||||
Common artifact patterns:
|
||||
|
||||
**spec-driven schema** (proposal → specs → design → tasks):
|
||||
- **proposal.md**: Ask user about the change if not clear. Fill in Why, What Changes, Capabilities, Impact.
|
||||
- The Capabilities section is critical - each capability listed will need a spec file.
|
||||
- **specs/<capability>/spec.md**: Create one spec per capability listed in the proposal's Capabilities section (use the capability name, not the change name).
|
||||
- **design.md**: Document technical decisions, architecture, and implementation approach.
|
||||
- **tasks.md**: Break down implementation into checkboxed tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
For other schemas, follow the `instruction` field from the CLI output.
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Create ONE artifact per invocation
|
||||
- Always read dependency artifacts before creating a new one
|
||||
- Never skip artifacts or create out of order
|
||||
- If context is unclear, ask the user before creating
|
||||
- Verify the artifact file exists after writing before marking progress
|
||||
- Use the schema's artifact sequence, don't assume specific artifact names
|
||||
- **IMPORTANT**: `context` and `rules` are constraints for YOU, not content for the file
|
||||
- Do NOT copy `<context>`, `<rules>`, `<project_context>` blocks into the artifact
|
||||
- These guide what you write, but should never appear in the output
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,288 +0,0 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-explore
|
||||
description: Enter explore mode - a thinking partner for exploring ideas, investigating problems, and clarifying requirements. Use when the user wants to think through something before or during a change.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.2.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Enter explore mode. Think deeply. Visualize freely. Follow the conversation wherever it goes.
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT: Explore mode is for thinking, not implementing.** You may read files, search code, and investigate the codebase, but you must NEVER write code or implement features. If the user asks you to implement something, remind them to exit explore mode first and create a change proposal. You MAY create OpenSpec artifacts (proposals, designs, specs) if the user asks—that's capturing thinking, not implementing.
|
||||
|
||||
**This is a stance, not a workflow.** There are no fixed steps, no required sequence, no mandatory outputs. You're a thinking partner helping the user explore.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## The Stance
|
||||
|
||||
- **Curious, not prescriptive** - Ask questions that emerge naturally, don't follow a script
|
||||
- **Open threads, not interrogations** - Surface multiple interesting directions and let the user follow what resonates. Don't funnel them through a single path of questions.
|
||||
- **Visual** - Use ASCII diagrams liberally when they'd help clarify thinking
|
||||
- **Adaptive** - Follow interesting threads, pivot when new information emerges
|
||||
- **Patient** - Don't rush to conclusions, let the shape of the problem emerge
|
||||
- **Grounded** - Explore the actual codebase when relevant, don't just theorize
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What You Might Do
|
||||
|
||||
Depending on what the user brings, you might:
|
||||
|
||||
**Explore the problem space**
|
||||
- Ask clarifying questions that emerge from what they said
|
||||
- Challenge assumptions
|
||||
- Reframe the problem
|
||||
- Find analogies
|
||||
|
||||
**Investigate the codebase**
|
||||
- Map existing architecture relevant to the discussion
|
||||
- Find integration points
|
||||
- Identify patterns already in use
|
||||
- Surface hidden complexity
|
||||
|
||||
**Compare options**
|
||||
- Brainstorm multiple approaches
|
||||
- Build comparison tables
|
||||
- Sketch tradeoffs
|
||||
- Recommend a path (if asked)
|
||||
|
||||
**Visualize**
|
||||
```
|
||||
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||||
│ Use ASCII diagrams liberally │
|
||||
├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
|
||||
│ │
|
||||
│ ┌────────┐ ┌────────┐ │
|
||||
│ │ State │────────▶│ State │ │
|
||||
│ │ A │ │ B │ │
|
||||
│ └────────┘ └────────┘ │
|
||||
│ │
|
||||
│ System diagrams, state machines, │
|
||||
│ data flows, architecture sketches, │
|
||||
│ dependency graphs, comparison tables │
|
||||
│ │
|
||||
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Surface risks and unknowns**
|
||||
- Identify what could go wrong
|
||||
- Find gaps in understanding
|
||||
- Suggest spikes or investigations
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## OpenSpec Awareness
|
||||
|
||||
You have full context of the OpenSpec system. Use it naturally, don't force it.
|
||||
|
||||
### Check for context
|
||||
|
||||
At the start, quickly check what exists:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec list --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This tells you:
|
||||
- If there are active changes
|
||||
- Their names, schemas, and status
|
||||
- What the user might be working on
|
||||
|
||||
### When no change exists
|
||||
|
||||
Think freely. When insights crystallize, you might offer:
|
||||
|
||||
- "This feels solid enough to start a change. Want me to create a proposal?"
|
||||
- Or keep exploring - no pressure to formalize
|
||||
|
||||
### When a change exists
|
||||
|
||||
If the user mentions a change or you detect one is relevant:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Read existing artifacts for context**
|
||||
- `openspec/changes/<name>/proposal.md`
|
||||
- `openspec/changes/<name>/design.md`
|
||||
- `openspec/changes/<name>/tasks.md`
|
||||
- etc.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Reference them naturally in conversation**
|
||||
- "Your design mentions using Redis, but we just realized SQLite fits better..."
|
||||
- "The proposal scopes this to premium users, but we're now thinking everyone..."
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Offer to capture when decisions are made**
|
||||
|
||||
| Insight Type | Where to Capture |
|
||||
|--------------|------------------|
|
||||
| New requirement discovered | `specs/<capability>/spec.md` |
|
||||
| Requirement changed | `specs/<capability>/spec.md` |
|
||||
| Design decision made | `design.md` |
|
||||
| Scope changed | `proposal.md` |
|
||||
| New work identified | `tasks.md` |
|
||||
| Assumption invalidated | Relevant artifact |
|
||||
|
||||
Example offers:
|
||||
- "That's a design decision. Capture it in design.md?"
|
||||
- "This is a new requirement. Add it to specs?"
|
||||
- "This changes scope. Update the proposal?"
|
||||
|
||||
4. **The user decides** - Offer and move on. Don't pressure. Don't auto-capture.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What You Don't Have To Do
|
||||
|
||||
- Follow a script
|
||||
- Ask the same questions every time
|
||||
- Produce a specific artifact
|
||||
- Reach a conclusion
|
||||
- Stay on topic if a tangent is valuable
|
||||
- Be brief (this is thinking time)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Handling Different Entry Points
|
||||
|
||||
**User brings a vague idea:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
User: I'm thinking about adding real-time collaboration
|
||||
|
||||
You: Real-time collab is a big space. Let me think about this...
|
||||
|
||||
COLLABORATION SPECTRUM
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
|
||||
Awareness Coordination Sync
|
||||
│ │ │
|
||||
▼ ▼ ▼
|
||||
┌────────┐ ┌────────┐ ┌────────┐
|
||||
│Presence│ │Cursors │ │ CRDT │
|
||||
│ "3 │ │ Multi │ │Conflict│
|
||||
│online" │ │ select │ │ free │
|
||||
└────────┘ └────────┘ └────────┘
|
||||
│ │ │
|
||||
trivial moderate complex
|
||||
|
||||
Where's your head at?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**User brings a specific problem:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
User: The auth system is a mess
|
||||
|
||||
You: [reads codebase]
|
||||
|
||||
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||||
│ CURRENT AUTH FLOW │
|
||||
└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||||
│
|
||||
┌─────────────┼─────────────┐
|
||||
▼ ▼ ▼
|
||||
┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐
|
||||
│ Google │ │ GitHub │ │ Email │
|
||||
│ OAuth │ │ OAuth │ │ Magic │
|
||||
└────┬────┘ └────┬────┘ └────┬────┘
|
||||
│ │ │
|
||||
└─────────────┼─────────────┘
|
||||
▼
|
||||
┌───────────┐
|
||||
│ Session │
|
||||
└─────┬─────┘
|
||||
│
|
||||
▼
|
||||
┌───────────┐
|
||||
│ Perms │
|
||||
└───────────┘
|
||||
|
||||
I see three tangles. Which one's burning?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**User is stuck mid-implementation:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
User: /opsx:explore add-auth-system
|
||||
The OAuth integration is more complex than expected
|
||||
|
||||
You: [reads change artifacts]
|
||||
|
||||
You're on task 4: "Implement OAuth flow"
|
||||
|
||||
Let me trace what's involved...
|
||||
|
||||
[draws diagram, explores options, suggests paths]
|
||||
|
||||
Want to update the design to reflect this?
|
||||
Or add a spike task to investigate?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**User wants to compare options:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
User: Should we use Postgres or SQLite?
|
||||
|
||||
You: Generic answer is boring. What's the context?
|
||||
|
||||
User: A CLI tool that tracks local dev environments
|
||||
|
||||
You: That changes everything.
|
||||
|
||||
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||||
│ CLI TOOL DATA STORAGE │
|
||||
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||||
|
||||
Key constraints:
|
||||
• No daemon running
|
||||
• Must work offline
|
||||
• Single user
|
||||
|
||||
SQLite Postgres
|
||||
Deployment embedded ✓ needs server ✗
|
||||
Offline yes ✓ no ✗
|
||||
Single file yes ✓ no ✗
|
||||
|
||||
SQLite. Not even close.
|
||||
|
||||
Unless... is there a sync component?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Ending Discovery
|
||||
|
||||
There's no required ending. Discovery might:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Flow into a proposal**: "Ready to start? I can create a change proposal."
|
||||
- **Result in artifact updates**: "Updated design.md with these decisions"
|
||||
- **Just provide clarity**: User has what they need, moves on
|
||||
- **Continue later**: "We can pick this up anytime"
|
||||
|
||||
When it feels like things are crystallizing, you might summarize:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## What We Figured Out
|
||||
|
||||
**The problem**: [crystallized understanding]
|
||||
|
||||
**The approach**: [if one emerged]
|
||||
|
||||
**Open questions**: [if any remain]
|
||||
|
||||
**Next steps** (if ready):
|
||||
- Create a change proposal
|
||||
- Keep exploring: just keep talking
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
But this summary is optional. Sometimes the thinking IS the value.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Guardrails
|
||||
|
||||
- **Don't implement** - Never write code or implement features. Creating OpenSpec artifacts is fine, writing application code is not.
|
||||
- **Don't fake understanding** - If something is unclear, dig deeper
|
||||
- **Don't rush** - Discovery is thinking time, not task time
|
||||
- **Don't force structure** - Let patterns emerge naturally
|
||||
- **Don't auto-capture** - Offer to save insights, don't just do it
|
||||
- **Do visualize** - A good diagram is worth many paragraphs
|
||||
- **Do explore the codebase** - Ground discussions in reality
|
||||
- **Do question assumptions** - Including the user's and your own
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,101 +0,0 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-ff-change
|
||||
description: Fast-forward through OpenSpec artifact creation. Use when the user wants to quickly create all artifacts needed for implementation without stepping through each one individually.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.2.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Fast-forward through artifact creation - generate everything needed to start implementation in one go.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: The user's request should include a change name (kebab-case) OR a description of what they want to build.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no clear input provided, ask what they want to build**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** (open-ended, no preset options) to ask:
|
||||
> "What change do you want to work on? Describe what you want to build or fix."
|
||||
|
||||
From their description, derive a kebab-case name (e.g., "add user authentication" → `add-user-auth`).
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT proceed without understanding what the user wants to build.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Create the change directory**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec new change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
This creates a scaffolded change at `openspec/changes/<name>/`.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Get the artifact build order**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Parse the JSON to get:
|
||||
- `applyRequires`: array of artifact IDs needed before implementation (e.g., `["tasks"]`)
|
||||
- `artifacts`: list of all artifacts with their status and dependencies
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Create artifacts in sequence until apply-ready**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the **TodoWrite tool** to track progress through the artifacts.
|
||||
|
||||
Loop through artifacts in dependency order (artifacts with no pending dependencies first):
|
||||
|
||||
a. **For each artifact that is `ready` (dependencies satisfied)**:
|
||||
- Get instructions:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
- The instructions JSON includes:
|
||||
- `context`: Project background (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `rules`: Artifact-specific rules (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `template`: The structure to use for your output file
|
||||
- `instruction`: Schema-specific guidance for this artifact type
|
||||
- `outputPath`: Where to write the artifact
|
||||
- `dependencies`: Completed artifacts to read for context
|
||||
- Read any completed dependency files for context
|
||||
- Create the artifact file using `template` as the structure
|
||||
- Apply `context` and `rules` as constraints - but do NOT copy them into the file
|
||||
- Show brief progress: "✓ Created <artifact-id>"
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Continue until all `applyRequires` artifacts are complete**
|
||||
- After creating each artifact, re-run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`
|
||||
- Check if every artifact ID in `applyRequires` has `status: "done"` in the artifacts array
|
||||
- Stop when all `applyRequires` artifacts are done
|
||||
|
||||
c. **If an artifact requires user input** (unclear context):
|
||||
- Use **AskUserQuestion tool** to clarify
|
||||
- Then continue with creation
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Show final status**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output**
|
||||
|
||||
After completing all artifacts, summarize:
|
||||
- Change name and location
|
||||
- List of artifacts created with brief descriptions
|
||||
- What's ready: "All artifacts created! Ready for implementation."
|
||||
- Prompt: "Run `/opsx:apply` or ask me to implement to start working on the tasks."
|
||||
|
||||
**Artifact Creation Guidelines**
|
||||
|
||||
- Follow the `instruction` field from `openspec instructions` for each artifact type
|
||||
- The schema defines what each artifact should contain - follow it
|
||||
- Read dependency artifacts for context before creating new ones
|
||||
- Use `template` as the structure for your output file - fill in its sections
|
||||
- **IMPORTANT**: `context` and `rules` are constraints for YOU, not content for the file
|
||||
- Do NOT copy `<context>`, `<rules>`, `<project_context>` blocks into the artifact
|
||||
- These guide what you write, but should never appear in the output
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Create ALL artifacts needed for implementation (as defined by schema's `apply.requires`)
|
||||
- Always read dependency artifacts before creating a new one
|
||||
- If context is critically unclear, ask the user - but prefer making reasonable decisions to keep momentum
|
||||
- If a change with that name already exists, suggest continuing that change instead
|
||||
- Verify each artifact file exists after writing before proceeding to next
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,74 +0,0 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-new-change
|
||||
description: Start a new OpenSpec change using the experimental artifact workflow. Use when the user wants to create a new feature, fix, or modification with a structured step-by-step approach.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.2.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Start a new change using the experimental artifact-driven approach.
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: The user's request should include a change name (kebab-case) OR a description of what they want to build.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no clear input provided, ask what they want to build**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** (open-ended, no preset options) to ask:
|
||||
> "What change do you want to work on? Describe what you want to build or fix."
|
||||
|
||||
From their description, derive a kebab-case name (e.g., "add user authentication" → `add-user-auth`).
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT proceed without understanding what the user wants to build.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Determine the workflow schema**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the default schema (omit `--schema`) unless the user explicitly requests a different workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
**Use a different schema only if the user mentions:**
|
||||
- A specific schema name → use `--schema <name>`
|
||||
- "show workflows" or "what workflows" → run `openspec schemas --json` and let them choose
|
||||
|
||||
**Otherwise**: Omit `--schema` to use the default.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Create the change directory**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec new change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
Add `--schema <name>` only if the user requested a specific workflow.
|
||||
This creates a scaffolded change at `openspec/changes/<name>/` with the selected schema.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Show the artifact status**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
This shows which artifacts need to be created and which are ready (dependencies satisfied).
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Get instructions for the first artifact**
|
||||
The first artifact depends on the schema (e.g., `proposal` for spec-driven).
|
||||
Check the status output to find the first artifact with status "ready".
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions <first-artifact-id> --change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
This outputs the template and context for creating the first artifact.
|
||||
|
||||
6. **STOP and wait for user direction**
|
||||
|
||||
**Output**
|
||||
|
||||
After completing the steps, summarize:
|
||||
- Change name and location
|
||||
- Schema/workflow being used and its artifact sequence
|
||||
- Current status (0/N artifacts complete)
|
||||
- The template for the first artifact
|
||||
- Prompt: "Ready to create the first artifact? Just describe what this change is about and I'll draft it, or ask me to continue."
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Do NOT create any artifacts yet - just show the instructions
|
||||
- Do NOT advance beyond showing the first artifact template
|
||||
- If the name is invalid (not kebab-case), ask for a valid name
|
||||
- If a change with that name already exists, suggest continuing that change instead
|
||||
- Pass --schema if using a non-default workflow
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,554 +0,0 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-onboard
|
||||
description: Guided onboarding for OpenSpec - walk through a complete workflow cycle with narration and real codebase work.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.2.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Guide the user through their first complete OpenSpec workflow cycle. This is a teaching experience—you'll do real work in their codebase while explaining each step.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Preflight
|
||||
|
||||
Before starting, check if the OpenSpec CLI is installed:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Unix/macOS
|
||||
openspec --version 2>&1 || echo "CLI_NOT_INSTALLED"
|
||||
# Windows (PowerShell)
|
||||
# if (Get-Command openspec -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue) { openspec --version } else { echo "CLI_NOT_INSTALLED" }
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**If CLI not installed:**
|
||||
> OpenSpec CLI is not installed. Install it first, then come back to `/opsx:onboard`.
|
||||
|
||||
Stop here if not installed.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 1: Welcome
|
||||
|
||||
Display:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Welcome to OpenSpec!
|
||||
|
||||
I'll walk you through a complete change cycle—from idea to implementation—using a real task in your codebase. Along the way, you'll learn the workflow by doing it.
|
||||
|
||||
**What we'll do:**
|
||||
1. Pick a small, real task in your codebase
|
||||
2. Explore the problem briefly
|
||||
3. Create a change (the container for our work)
|
||||
4. Build the artifacts: proposal → specs → design → tasks
|
||||
5. Implement the tasks
|
||||
6. Archive the completed change
|
||||
|
||||
**Time:** ~15-20 minutes
|
||||
|
||||
Let's start by finding something to work on.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 2: Task Selection
|
||||
|
||||
### Codebase Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
Scan the codebase for small improvement opportunities. Look for:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **TODO/FIXME comments** - Search for `TODO`, `FIXME`, `HACK`, `XXX` in code files
|
||||
2. **Missing error handling** - `catch` blocks that swallow errors, risky operations without try-catch
|
||||
3. **Functions without tests** - Cross-reference `src/` with test directories
|
||||
4. **Type issues** - `any` types in TypeScript files (`: any`, `as any`)
|
||||
5. **Debug artifacts** - `console.log`, `console.debug`, `debugger` statements in non-debug code
|
||||
6. **Missing validation** - User input handlers without validation
|
||||
|
||||
Also check recent git activity:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Unix/macOS
|
||||
git log --oneline -10 2>/dev/null || echo "No git history"
|
||||
# Windows (PowerShell)
|
||||
# git log --oneline -10 2>$null; if ($LASTEXITCODE -ne 0) { echo "No git history" }
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Present Suggestions
|
||||
|
||||
From your analysis, present 3-4 specific suggestions:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Task Suggestions
|
||||
|
||||
Based on scanning your codebase, here are some good starter tasks:
|
||||
|
||||
**1. [Most promising task]**
|
||||
Location: `src/path/to/file.ts:42`
|
||||
Scope: ~1-2 files, ~20-30 lines
|
||||
Why it's good: [brief reason]
|
||||
|
||||
**2. [Second task]**
|
||||
Location: `src/another/file.ts`
|
||||
Scope: ~1 file, ~15 lines
|
||||
Why it's good: [brief reason]
|
||||
|
||||
**3. [Third task]**
|
||||
Location: [location]
|
||||
Scope: [estimate]
|
||||
Why it's good: [brief reason]
|
||||
|
||||
**4. Something else?**
|
||||
Tell me what you'd like to work on.
|
||||
|
||||
Which task interests you? (Pick a number or describe your own)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**If nothing found:** Fall back to asking what the user wants to build:
|
||||
> I didn't find obvious quick wins in your codebase. What's something small you've been meaning to add or fix?
|
||||
|
||||
### Scope Guardrail
|
||||
|
||||
If the user picks or describes something too large (major feature, multi-day work):
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
That's a valuable task, but it's probably larger than ideal for your first OpenSpec run-through.
|
||||
|
||||
For learning the workflow, smaller is better—it lets you see the full cycle without getting stuck in implementation details.
|
||||
|
||||
**Options:**
|
||||
1. **Slice it smaller** - What's the smallest useful piece of [their task]? Maybe just [specific slice]?
|
||||
2. **Pick something else** - One of the other suggestions, or a different small task?
|
||||
3. **Do it anyway** - If you really want to tackle this, we can. Just know it'll take longer.
|
||||
|
||||
What would you prefer?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Let the user override if they insist—this is a soft guardrail.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 3: Explore Demo
|
||||
|
||||
Once a task is selected, briefly demonstrate explore mode:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Before we create a change, let me quickly show you **explore mode**—it's how you think through problems before committing to a direction.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Spend 1-2 minutes investigating the relevant code:
|
||||
- Read the file(s) involved
|
||||
- Draw a quick ASCII diagram if it helps
|
||||
- Note any considerations
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Quick Exploration
|
||||
|
||||
[Your brief analysis—what you found, any considerations]
|
||||
|
||||
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||||
│ [Optional: ASCII diagram if helpful] │
|
||||
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||||
|
||||
Explore mode (`/opsx:explore`) is for this kind of thinking—investigating before implementing. You can use it anytime you need to think through a problem.
|
||||
|
||||
Now let's create a change to hold our work.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**PAUSE** - Wait for user acknowledgment before proceeding.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 4: Create the Change
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Creating a Change
|
||||
|
||||
A "change" in OpenSpec is a container for all the thinking and planning around a piece of work. It lives in `openspec/changes/<name>/` and holds your artifacts—proposal, specs, design, tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
Let me create one for our task.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** Create the change with a derived kebab-case name:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec new change "<derived-name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**SHOW:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Created: `openspec/changes/<name>/`
|
||||
|
||||
The folder structure:
|
||||
```
|
||||
openspec/changes/<name>/
|
||||
├── proposal.md ← Why we're doing this (empty, we'll fill it)
|
||||
├── design.md ← How we'll build it (empty)
|
||||
├── specs/ ← Detailed requirements (empty)
|
||||
└── tasks.md ← Implementation checklist (empty)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Now let's fill in the first artifact—the proposal.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 5: Proposal
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## The Proposal
|
||||
|
||||
The proposal captures **why** we're making this change and **what** it involves at a high level. It's the "elevator pitch" for the work.
|
||||
|
||||
I'll draft one based on our task.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** Draft the proposal content (don't save yet):
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Here's a draft proposal:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Why
|
||||
|
||||
[1-2 sentences explaining the problem/opportunity]
|
||||
|
||||
## What Changes
|
||||
|
||||
[Bullet points of what will be different]
|
||||
|
||||
## Capabilities
|
||||
|
||||
### New Capabilities
|
||||
- `<capability-name>`: [brief description]
|
||||
|
||||
### Modified Capabilities
|
||||
<!-- If modifying existing behavior -->
|
||||
|
||||
## Impact
|
||||
|
||||
- `src/path/to/file.ts`: [what changes]
|
||||
- [other files if applicable]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Does this capture the intent? I can adjust before we save it.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**PAUSE** - Wait for user approval/feedback.
|
||||
|
||||
After approval, save the proposal:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions proposal --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Then write the content to `openspec/changes/<name>/proposal.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Proposal saved. This is your "why" document—you can always come back and refine it as understanding evolves.
|
||||
|
||||
Next up: specs.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 6: Specs
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Specs
|
||||
|
||||
Specs define **what** we're building in precise, testable terms. They use a requirement/scenario format that makes expected behavior crystal clear.
|
||||
|
||||
For a small task like this, we might only need one spec file.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** Create the spec file:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Unix/macOS
|
||||
mkdir -p openspec/changes/<name>/specs/<capability-name>
|
||||
# Windows (PowerShell)
|
||||
# New-Item -ItemType Directory -Force -Path "openspec/changes/<name>/specs/<capability-name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Draft the spec content:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Here's the spec:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## ADDED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: <Name>
|
||||
|
||||
<Description of what the system should do>
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: <Scenario name>
|
||||
|
||||
- **WHEN** <trigger condition>
|
||||
- **THEN** <expected outcome>
|
||||
- **AND** <additional outcome if needed>
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
This format—WHEN/THEN/AND—makes requirements testable. You can literally read them as test cases.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Save to `openspec/changes/<name>/specs/<capability>/spec.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 7: Design
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Design
|
||||
|
||||
The design captures **how** we'll build it—technical decisions, tradeoffs, approach.
|
||||
|
||||
For small changes, this might be brief. That's fine—not every change needs deep design discussion.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** Draft design.md:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Here's the design:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Context
|
||||
|
||||
[Brief context about the current state]
|
||||
|
||||
## Goals / Non-Goals
|
||||
|
||||
**Goals:**
|
||||
- [What we're trying to achieve]
|
||||
|
||||
**Non-Goals:**
|
||||
- [What's explicitly out of scope]
|
||||
|
||||
## Decisions
|
||||
|
||||
### Decision 1: [Key decision]
|
||||
|
||||
[Explanation of approach and rationale]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
For a small task, this captures the key decisions without over-engineering.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Save to `openspec/changes/<name>/design.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 8: Tasks
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Tasks
|
||||
|
||||
Finally, we break the work into implementation tasks—checkboxes that drive the apply phase.
|
||||
|
||||
These should be small, clear, and in logical order.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** Generate tasks based on specs and design:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Here are the implementation tasks:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. [Category or file]
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] 1.1 [Specific task]
|
||||
- [ ] 1.2 [Specific task]
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Verify
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] 2.1 [Verification step]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Each checkbox becomes a unit of work in the apply phase. Ready to implement?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**PAUSE** - Wait for user to confirm they're ready to implement.
|
||||
|
||||
Save to `openspec/changes/<name>/tasks.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 9: Apply (Implementation)
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Implementation
|
||||
|
||||
Now we implement each task, checking them off as we go. I'll announce each one and occasionally note how the specs/design informed the approach.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:** For each task:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Announce: "Working on task N: [description]"
|
||||
2. Implement the change in the codebase
|
||||
3. Reference specs/design naturally: "The spec says X, so I'm doing Y"
|
||||
4. Mark complete in tasks.md: `- [ ]` → `- [x]`
|
||||
5. Brief status: "✓ Task N complete"
|
||||
|
||||
Keep narration light—don't over-explain every line of code.
|
||||
|
||||
After all tasks:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Implementation Complete
|
||||
|
||||
All tasks done:
|
||||
- [x] Task 1
|
||||
- [x] Task 2
|
||||
- [x] ...
|
||||
|
||||
The change is implemented! One more step—let's archive it.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 10: Archive
|
||||
|
||||
**EXPLAIN:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Archiving
|
||||
|
||||
When a change is complete, we archive it. This moves it from `openspec/changes/` to `openspec/changes/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>/`.
|
||||
|
||||
Archived changes become your project's decision history—you can always find them later to understand why something was built a certain way.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**DO:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec archive "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**SHOW:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Archived to: `openspec/changes/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>/`
|
||||
|
||||
The change is now part of your project's history. The code is in your codebase, the decision record is preserved.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 11: Recap & Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Congratulations!
|
||||
|
||||
You just completed a full OpenSpec cycle:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Explore** - Thought through the problem
|
||||
2. **New** - Created a change container
|
||||
3. **Proposal** - Captured WHY
|
||||
4. **Specs** - Defined WHAT in detail
|
||||
5. **Design** - Decided HOW
|
||||
6. **Tasks** - Broke it into steps
|
||||
7. **Apply** - Implemented the work
|
||||
8. **Archive** - Preserved the record
|
||||
|
||||
This same rhythm works for any size change—a small fix or a major feature.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Command Reference
|
||||
|
||||
**Core workflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | What it does |
|
||||
|---------|--------------|
|
||||
| `/opsx:propose` | Create a change and generate all artifacts |
|
||||
| `/opsx:explore` | Think through problems before/during work |
|
||||
| `/opsx:apply` | Implement tasks from a change |
|
||||
| `/opsx:archive` | Archive a completed change |
|
||||
|
||||
**Additional commands:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | What it does |
|
||||
|---------|--------------|
|
||||
| `/opsx:new` | Start a new change, step through artifacts one at a time |
|
||||
| `/opsx:continue` | Continue working on an existing change |
|
||||
| `/opsx:ff` | Fast-forward: create all artifacts at once |
|
||||
| `/opsx:verify` | Verify implementation matches artifacts |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What's Next?
|
||||
|
||||
Try `/opsx:propose` on something you actually want to build. You've got the rhythm now!
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Graceful Exit Handling
|
||||
|
||||
### User wants to stop mid-way
|
||||
|
||||
If the user says they need to stop, want to pause, or seem disengaged:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
No problem! Your change is saved at `openspec/changes/<name>/`.
|
||||
|
||||
To pick up where we left off later:
|
||||
- `/opsx:continue <name>` - Resume artifact creation
|
||||
- `/opsx:apply <name>` - Jump to implementation (if tasks exist)
|
||||
|
||||
The work won't be lost. Come back whenever you're ready.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Exit gracefully without pressure.
|
||||
|
||||
### User just wants command reference
|
||||
|
||||
If the user says they just want to see the commands or skip the tutorial:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## OpenSpec Quick Reference
|
||||
|
||||
**Core workflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | What it does |
|
||||
|---------|--------------|
|
||||
| `/opsx:propose <name>` | Create a change and generate all artifacts |
|
||||
| `/opsx:explore` | Think through problems (no code changes) |
|
||||
| `/opsx:apply <name>` | Implement tasks |
|
||||
| `/opsx:archive <name>` | Archive when done |
|
||||
|
||||
**Additional commands:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | What it does |
|
||||
|---------|--------------|
|
||||
| `/opsx:new <name>` | Start a new change, step by step |
|
||||
| `/opsx:continue <name>` | Continue an existing change |
|
||||
| `/opsx:ff <name>` | Fast-forward: all artifacts at once |
|
||||
| `/opsx:verify <name>` | Verify implementation |
|
||||
|
||||
Try `/opsx:propose` to start your first change.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Exit gracefully.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Guardrails
|
||||
|
||||
- **Follow the EXPLAIN → DO → SHOW → PAUSE pattern** at key transitions (after explore, after proposal draft, after tasks, after archive)
|
||||
- **Keep narration light** during implementation—teach without lecturing
|
||||
- **Don't skip phases** even if the change is small—the goal is teaching the workflow
|
||||
- **Pause for acknowledgment** at marked points, but don't over-pause
|
||||
- **Handle exits gracefully**—never pressure the user to continue
|
||||
- **Use real codebase tasks**—don't simulate or use fake examples
|
||||
- **Adjust scope gently**—guide toward smaller tasks but respect user choice
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,110 +0,0 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-propose
|
||||
description: Propose a new change with all artifacts generated in one step. Use when the user wants to quickly describe what they want to build and get a complete proposal with design, specs, and tasks ready for implementation.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.2.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Propose a new change - create the change and generate all artifacts in one step.
|
||||
|
||||
I'll create a change with artifacts:
|
||||
- proposal.md (what & why)
|
||||
- design.md (how)
|
||||
- tasks.md (implementation steps)
|
||||
|
||||
When ready to implement, run /opsx:apply
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: The user's request should include a change name (kebab-case) OR a description of what they want to build.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no clear input provided, ask what they want to build**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** (open-ended, no preset options) to ask:
|
||||
> "What change do you want to work on? Describe what you want to build or fix."
|
||||
|
||||
From their description, derive a kebab-case name (e.g., "add user authentication" → `add-user-auth`).
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT proceed without understanding what the user wants to build.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Create the change directory**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec new change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
This creates a scaffolded change at `openspec/changes/<name>/` with `.openspec.yaml`.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Get the artifact build order**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Parse the JSON to get:
|
||||
- `applyRequires`: array of artifact IDs needed before implementation (e.g., `["tasks"]`)
|
||||
- `artifacts`: list of all artifacts with their status and dependencies
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Create artifacts in sequence until apply-ready**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the **TodoWrite tool** to track progress through the artifacts.
|
||||
|
||||
Loop through artifacts in dependency order (artifacts with no pending dependencies first):
|
||||
|
||||
a. **For each artifact that is `ready` (dependencies satisfied)**:
|
||||
- Get instructions:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
- The instructions JSON includes:
|
||||
- `context`: Project background (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `rules`: Artifact-specific rules (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
|
||||
- `template`: The structure to use for your output file
|
||||
- `instruction`: Schema-specific guidance for this artifact type
|
||||
- `outputPath`: Where to write the artifact
|
||||
- `dependencies`: Completed artifacts to read for context
|
||||
- Read any completed dependency files for context
|
||||
- Create the artifact file using `template` as the structure
|
||||
- Apply `context` and `rules` as constraints - but do NOT copy them into the file
|
||||
- Show brief progress: "Created <artifact-id>"
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Continue until all `applyRequires` artifacts are complete**
|
||||
- After creating each artifact, re-run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`
|
||||
- Check if every artifact ID in `applyRequires` has `status: "done"` in the artifacts array
|
||||
- Stop when all `applyRequires` artifacts are done
|
||||
|
||||
c. **If an artifact requires user input** (unclear context):
|
||||
- Use **AskUserQuestion tool** to clarify
|
||||
- Then continue with creation
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Show final status**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output**
|
||||
|
||||
After completing all artifacts, summarize:
|
||||
- Change name and location
|
||||
- List of artifacts created with brief descriptions
|
||||
- What's ready: "All artifacts created! Ready for implementation."
|
||||
- Prompt: "Run `/opsx:apply` or ask me to implement to start working on the tasks."
|
||||
|
||||
**Artifact Creation Guidelines**
|
||||
|
||||
- Follow the `instruction` field from `openspec instructions` for each artifact type
|
||||
- The schema defines what each artifact should contain - follow it
|
||||
- Read dependency artifacts for context before creating new ones
|
||||
- Use `template` as the structure for your output file - fill in its sections
|
||||
- **IMPORTANT**: `context` and `rules` are constraints for YOU, not content for the file
|
||||
- Do NOT copy `<context>`, `<rules>`, `<project_context>` blocks into the artifact
|
||||
- These guide what you write, but should never appear in the output
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Create ALL artifacts needed for implementation (as defined by schema's `apply.requires`)
|
||||
- Always read dependency artifacts before creating a new one
|
||||
- If context is critically unclear, ask the user - but prefer making reasonable decisions to keep momentum
|
||||
- If a change with that name already exists, ask if user wants to continue it or create a new one
|
||||
- Verify each artifact file exists after writing before proceeding to next
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,138 +0,0 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-sync-specs
|
||||
description: Sync delta specs from a change to main specs. Use when the user wants to update main specs with changes from a delta spec, without archiving the change.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.2.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Sync delta specs from a change to main specs.
|
||||
|
||||
This is an **agent-driven** operation - you will read delta specs and directly edit main specs to apply the changes. This allows intelligent merging (e.g., adding a scenario without copying the entire requirement).
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no change name provided, prompt for selection**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec list --json` to get available changes. Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select.
|
||||
|
||||
Show changes that have delta specs (under `specs/` directory).
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Find delta specs**
|
||||
|
||||
Look for delta spec files in `openspec/changes/<name>/specs/*/spec.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
Each delta spec file contains sections like:
|
||||
- `## ADDED Requirements` - New requirements to add
|
||||
- `## MODIFIED Requirements` - Changes to existing requirements
|
||||
- `## REMOVED Requirements` - Requirements to remove
|
||||
- `## RENAMED Requirements` - Requirements to rename (FROM:/TO: format)
|
||||
|
||||
If no delta specs found, inform user and stop.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **For each delta spec, apply changes to main specs**
|
||||
|
||||
For each capability with a delta spec at `openspec/changes/<name>/specs/<capability>/spec.md`:
|
||||
|
||||
a. **Read the delta spec** to understand the intended changes
|
||||
|
||||
b. **Read the main spec** at `openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md` (may not exist yet)
|
||||
|
||||
c. **Apply changes intelligently**:
|
||||
|
||||
**ADDED Requirements:**
|
||||
- If requirement doesn't exist in main spec → add it
|
||||
- If requirement already exists → update it to match (treat as implicit MODIFIED)
|
||||
|
||||
**MODIFIED Requirements:**
|
||||
- Find the requirement in main spec
|
||||
- Apply the changes - this can be:
|
||||
- Adding new scenarios (don't need to copy existing ones)
|
||||
- Modifying existing scenarios
|
||||
- Changing the requirement description
|
||||
- Preserve scenarios/content not mentioned in the delta
|
||||
|
||||
**REMOVED Requirements:**
|
||||
- Remove the entire requirement block from main spec
|
||||
|
||||
**RENAMED Requirements:**
|
||||
- Find the FROM requirement, rename to TO
|
||||
|
||||
d. **Create new main spec** if capability doesn't exist yet:
|
||||
- Create `openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md`
|
||||
- Add Purpose section (can be brief, mark as TBD)
|
||||
- Add Requirements section with the ADDED requirements
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Show summary**
|
||||
|
||||
After applying all changes, summarize:
|
||||
- Which capabilities were updated
|
||||
- What changes were made (requirements added/modified/removed/renamed)
|
||||
|
||||
**Delta Spec Format Reference**
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## ADDED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: New Feature
|
||||
The system SHALL do something new.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Basic case
|
||||
- **WHEN** user does X
|
||||
- **THEN** system does Y
|
||||
|
||||
## MODIFIED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Existing Feature
|
||||
#### Scenario: New scenario to add
|
||||
- **WHEN** user does A
|
||||
- **THEN** system does B
|
||||
|
||||
## REMOVED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Deprecated Feature
|
||||
|
||||
## RENAMED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
- FROM: `### Requirement: Old Name`
|
||||
- TO: `### Requirement: New Name`
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Principle: Intelligent Merging**
|
||||
|
||||
Unlike programmatic merging, you can apply **partial updates**:
|
||||
- To add a scenario, just include that scenario under MODIFIED - don't copy existing scenarios
|
||||
- The delta represents *intent*, not a wholesale replacement
|
||||
- Use your judgment to merge changes sensibly
|
||||
|
||||
**Output On Success**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Specs Synced: <change-name>
|
||||
|
||||
Updated main specs:
|
||||
|
||||
**<capability-1>**:
|
||||
- Added requirement: "New Feature"
|
||||
- Modified requirement: "Existing Feature" (added 1 scenario)
|
||||
|
||||
**<capability-2>**:
|
||||
- Created new spec file
|
||||
- Added requirement: "Another Feature"
|
||||
|
||||
Main specs are now updated. The change remains active - archive when implementation is complete.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Guardrails**
|
||||
- Read both delta and main specs before making changes
|
||||
- Preserve existing content not mentioned in delta
|
||||
- If something is unclear, ask for clarification
|
||||
- Show what you're changing as you go
|
||||
- The operation should be idempotent - running twice should give same result
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,168 +0,0 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
name: openspec-verify-change
|
||||
description: Verify implementation matches change artifacts. Use when the user wants to validate that implementation is complete, correct, and coherent before archiving.
|
||||
license: MIT
|
||||
compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
author: openspec
|
||||
version: "1.0"
|
||||
generatedBy: "1.2.0"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Verify that an implementation matches the change artifacts (specs, tasks, design).
|
||||
|
||||
**Input**: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **If no change name provided, prompt for selection**
|
||||
|
||||
Run `openspec list --json` to get available changes. Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select.
|
||||
|
||||
Show changes that have implementation tasks (tasks artifact exists).
|
||||
Include the schema used for each change if available.
|
||||
Mark changes with incomplete tasks as "(In Progress)".
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT**: Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Check status to understand the schema**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec status --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
Parse the JSON to understand:
|
||||
- `schemaName`: The workflow being used (e.g., "spec-driven")
|
||||
- Which artifacts exist for this change
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Get the change directory and load artifacts**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
openspec instructions apply --change "<name>" --json
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This returns the change directory and context files. Read all available artifacts from `contextFiles`.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Initialize verification report structure**
|
||||
|
||||
Create a report structure with three dimensions:
|
||||
- **Completeness**: Track tasks and spec coverage
|
||||
- **Correctness**: Track requirement implementation and scenario coverage
|
||||
- **Coherence**: Track design adherence and pattern consistency
|
||||
|
||||
Each dimension can have CRITICAL, WARNING, or SUGGESTION issues.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Verify Completeness**
|
||||
|
||||
**Task Completion**:
|
||||
- If tasks.md exists in contextFiles, read it
|
||||
- Parse checkboxes: `- [ ]` (incomplete) vs `- [x]` (complete)
|
||||
- Count complete vs total tasks
|
||||
- If incomplete tasks exist:
|
||||
- Add CRITICAL issue for each incomplete task
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Complete task: <description>" or "Mark as done if already implemented"
|
||||
|
||||
**Spec Coverage**:
|
||||
- If delta specs exist in `openspec/changes/<name>/specs/`:
|
||||
- Extract all requirements (marked with "### Requirement:")
|
||||
- For each requirement:
|
||||
- Search codebase for keywords related to the requirement
|
||||
- Assess if implementation likely exists
|
||||
- If requirements appear unimplemented:
|
||||
- Add CRITICAL issue: "Requirement not found: <requirement name>"
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Implement requirement X: <description>"
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Verify Correctness**
|
||||
|
||||
**Requirement Implementation Mapping**:
|
||||
- For each requirement from delta specs:
|
||||
- Search codebase for implementation evidence
|
||||
- If found, note file paths and line ranges
|
||||
- Assess if implementation matches requirement intent
|
||||
- If divergence detected:
|
||||
- Add WARNING: "Implementation may diverge from spec: <details>"
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Review <file>:<lines> against requirement X"
|
||||
|
||||
**Scenario Coverage**:
|
||||
- For each scenario in delta specs (marked with "#### Scenario:"):
|
||||
- Check if conditions are handled in code
|
||||
- Check if tests exist covering the scenario
|
||||
- If scenario appears uncovered:
|
||||
- Add WARNING: "Scenario not covered: <scenario name>"
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Add test or implementation for scenario: <description>"
|
||||
|
||||
7. **Verify Coherence**
|
||||
|
||||
**Design Adherence**:
|
||||
- If design.md exists in contextFiles:
|
||||
- Extract key decisions (look for sections like "Decision:", "Approach:", "Architecture:")
|
||||
- Verify implementation follows those decisions
|
||||
- If contradiction detected:
|
||||
- Add WARNING: "Design decision not followed: <decision>"
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Update implementation or revise design.md to match reality"
|
||||
- If no design.md: Skip design adherence check, note "No design.md to verify against"
|
||||
|
||||
**Code Pattern Consistency**:
|
||||
- Review new code for consistency with project patterns
|
||||
- Check file naming, directory structure, coding style
|
||||
- If significant deviations found:
|
||||
- Add SUGGESTION: "Code pattern deviation: <details>"
|
||||
- Recommendation: "Consider following project pattern: <example>"
|
||||
|
||||
8. **Generate Verification Report**
|
||||
|
||||
**Summary Scorecard**:
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Verification Report: <change-name>
|
||||
|
||||
### Summary
|
||||
| Dimension | Status |
|
||||
|--------------|------------------|
|
||||
| Completeness | X/Y tasks, N reqs|
|
||||
| Correctness | M/N reqs covered |
|
||||
| Coherence | Followed/Issues |
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Issues by Priority**:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **CRITICAL** (Must fix before archive):
|
||||
- Incomplete tasks
|
||||
- Missing requirement implementations
|
||||
- Each with specific, actionable recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
2. **WARNING** (Should fix):
|
||||
- Spec/design divergences
|
||||
- Missing scenario coverage
|
||||
- Each with specific recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
3. **SUGGESTION** (Nice to fix):
|
||||
- Pattern inconsistencies
|
||||
- Minor improvements
|
||||
- Each with specific recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
**Final Assessment**:
|
||||
- If CRITICAL issues: "X critical issue(s) found. Fix before archiving."
|
||||
- If only warnings: "No critical issues. Y warning(s) to consider. Ready for archive (with noted improvements)."
|
||||
- If all clear: "All checks passed. Ready for archive."
|
||||
|
||||
**Verification Heuristics**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Completeness**: Focus on objective checklist items (checkboxes, requirements list)
|
||||
- **Correctness**: Use keyword search, file path analysis, reasonable inference - don't require perfect certainty
|
||||
- **Coherence**: Look for glaring inconsistencies, don't nitpick style
|
||||
- **False Positives**: When uncertain, prefer SUGGESTION over WARNING, WARNING over CRITICAL
|
||||
- **Actionability**: Every issue must have a specific recommendation with file/line references where applicable
|
||||
|
||||
**Graceful Degradation**
|
||||
|
||||
- If only tasks.md exists: verify task completion only, skip spec/design checks
|
||||
- If tasks + specs exist: verify completeness and correctness, skip design
|
||||
- If full artifacts: verify all three dimensions
|
||||
- Always note which checks were skipped and why
|
||||
|
||||
**Output Format**
|
||||
|
||||
Use clear markdown with:
|
||||
- Table for summary scorecard
|
||||
- Grouped lists for issues (CRITICAL/WARNING/SUGGESTION)
|
||||
- Code references in format: `file.ts:123`
|
||||
- Specific, actionable recommendations
|
||||
- No vague suggestions like "consider reviewing"
|
||||
|
|
@ -26,14 +26,14 @@ public class MovementComponent : MonoBehaviour
|
|||
private Vector3 _currentPos;
|
||||
private float _lerpTime;
|
||||
[SerializeField] private float _lerpRate = 0.1f;
|
||||
private PlayerInput _cachedInput;
|
||||
private MoveInput _cachedInput;
|
||||
|
||||
public void Init(bool isControlled, Player master, int speed = 0, long serverTick = 0)
|
||||
{
|
||||
this._master = master;
|
||||
this._isControlled = isControlled;
|
||||
this._speed = speed;
|
||||
this._startTickOffset = serverTick;
|
||||
_master = master;
|
||||
_isControlled = isControlled;
|
||||
_speed = speed;
|
||||
_startTickOffset = serverTick;
|
||||
_rigid.interpolation = RigidbodyInterpolation.Interpolate;
|
||||
_rigid.isKinematic = !isControlled;
|
||||
_rigid.velocity = Vector3.zero;
|
||||
|
|
@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ public class MovementComponent : MonoBehaviour
|
|||
{
|
||||
if (_cachedInput != null)
|
||||
{
|
||||
NetworkManager.Instance.SendPlayerInput(_cachedInput);
|
||||
NetworkManager.Instance.SendMoveInput(_cachedInput);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
_lastSendTime = Time.time;
|
||||
|
|
@ -98,21 +98,26 @@ public class MovementComponent : MonoBehaviour
|
|||
ReplayPendingInputs(replayInputs);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
private PlayerInput CaptureInput()
|
||||
private MoveInput CaptureInput()
|
||||
{
|
||||
Vector3 input = new Vector3(Input.GetAxisRaw("Horizontal"), 0, Input.GetAxisRaw("Vertical"));
|
||||
if (input == Vector3.zero) return null;
|
||||
return new PlayerInput()
|
||||
var input = new Vector3(Input.GetAxisRaw("Horizontal"), 0, Input.GetAxisRaw("Vertical"));
|
||||
if (input == Vector3.zero)
|
||||
{
|
||||
return null;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
return new MoveInput
|
||||
{
|
||||
PlayerId = _master.PlayerId,
|
||||
Input = ProtoExtensions.ToProtoVector3(input),
|
||||
Tick = Tick
|
||||
Tick = Tick,
|
||||
MoveX = input.x,
|
||||
MoveY = input.z
|
||||
};
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
private void Simulate(PlayerInput input)
|
||||
private void Simulate(MoveInput input)
|
||||
{
|
||||
Vector3 dir = input == null ? Vector3.zero : input.Input.ToVector3();
|
||||
var dir = input == null ? Vector3.zero : new Vector3(input.MoveX, 0f, input.MoveY);
|
||||
_rigid.velocity = _speed * dir;
|
||||
if (_isControlled)
|
||||
{
|
||||
|
|
@ -165,11 +170,11 @@ public class MovementComponent : MonoBehaviour
|
|||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
private void ReplayPendingInputs(IReadOnlyList<PlayerInput> replayInputs)
|
||||
private void ReplayPendingInputs(IReadOnlyList<MoveInput> replayInputs)
|
||||
{
|
||||
foreach (var replayInput in replayInputs)
|
||||
{
|
||||
_rigid.position += _speed * replayInput.Input.ToVector3() * _sendInterval;
|
||||
_rigid.position += _speed * new Vector3(replayInput.MoveX, 0f, replayInput.MoveY) * _sendInterval;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if (_isControlled)
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
File diff suppressed because it is too large
Load Diff
|
|
@ -4,28 +4,28 @@ namespace Network.Defines
|
|||
{
|
||||
Unknow = 0,
|
||||
|
||||
// 游戏相关
|
||||
PlayerInput = 1,
|
||||
// Gameplay
|
||||
MoveInput = 1,
|
||||
PlayerState = 2,
|
||||
PlayerAction = 3,
|
||||
GameState = 4,
|
||||
ShootInput = 3,
|
||||
CombatEvent = 4,
|
||||
PlayerJoin = 5,
|
||||
PlayerLeave = 6,
|
||||
PlayerAction = 7,
|
||||
GameState = 8,
|
||||
|
||||
// 聊天相关
|
||||
// Chat
|
||||
ChatMessage = 10,
|
||||
PrivateMessage = 11,
|
||||
SystemMessage = 12,
|
||||
|
||||
// 系统相关
|
||||
// Session
|
||||
HeartBeat = 20,
|
||||
|
||||
LoginRequest = 21,
|
||||
LoginResponse = 22,
|
||||
|
||||
LogoutRequest = 23,
|
||||
|
||||
// 房间管理
|
||||
// Room management
|
||||
CreateRoom = 30,
|
||||
JoinRoom = 31,
|
||||
LeaveRoom = 32,
|
||||
|
|
@ -35,4 +35,3 @@ namespace Network.Defines
|
|||
HeartbeatResponse = 41,
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
|
|||
syntax = "proto3";
|
||||
|
||||
package Network.Defines;
|
||||
option csharp_namespace = "Network.Defines";
|
||||
|
||||
message Envelope {
|
||||
int32 type = 1;
|
||||
bytes payload = 2;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
message Vector3 {
|
||||
float x = 1;
|
||||
float y = 2;
|
||||
float z = 3;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
message LoginRequest {
|
||||
string player_id = 1;
|
||||
int32 speed = 2;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
message LoginResponse {
|
||||
repeated string player_id = 1;
|
||||
repeated Vector3 positions = 2;
|
||||
int32 speed = 3;
|
||||
int64 server_tick = 4;
|
||||
bool result = 5;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
message PlayerJoin {
|
||||
string player_id = 1;
|
||||
Vector3 position = 2;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
message LogoutRequest {
|
||||
string player_id = 1;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
message MoveInput {
|
||||
string player_id = 1;
|
||||
int64 tick = 2;
|
||||
float move_x = 3;
|
||||
float move_y = 4;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
message ShootInput {
|
||||
string player_id = 1;
|
||||
int64 tick = 2;
|
||||
float dir_x = 3;
|
||||
float dir_y = 4;
|
||||
string target_id = 5;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
enum CombatEventType {
|
||||
COMBAT_EVENT_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED = 0;
|
||||
COMBAT_EVENT_TYPE_HIT = 1;
|
||||
COMBAT_EVENT_TYPE_DAMAGE_APPLIED = 2;
|
||||
COMBAT_EVENT_TYPE_DEATH = 3;
|
||||
COMBAT_EVENT_TYPE_SHOOT_REJECTED = 4;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
message CombatEvent {
|
||||
int64 tick = 1;
|
||||
CombatEventType event_type = 2;
|
||||
string attacker_id = 3;
|
||||
string target_id = 4;
|
||||
int32 damage = 5;
|
||||
Vector3 hit_position = 6;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
message PlayerState {
|
||||
string player_id = 1;
|
||||
Vector3 position = 2;
|
||||
Vector3 velocity = 3;
|
||||
float rotation = 4;
|
||||
int64 tick = 5;
|
||||
int32 hp = 6;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
message Heartbeat {
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
message HeartbeatResponse {
|
||||
int64 server_tick = 1;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
|
|||
fileFormatVersion: 2
|
||||
guid: 188a244376e8ae247b1c065b510a70d0
|
||||
DefaultImporter:
|
||||
externalObjects: {}
|
||||
userData:
|
||||
assetBundleName:
|
||||
assetBundleVariant:
|
||||
|
|
@ -7,13 +7,13 @@ namespace Network.NetworkApplication
|
|||
{
|
||||
public sealed class ClientPredictionBuffer
|
||||
{
|
||||
private readonly List<PlayerInput> pendingInputs = new();
|
||||
private readonly List<MoveInput> pendingInputs = new();
|
||||
|
||||
public long? LastAuthoritativeTick { get; private set; }
|
||||
|
||||
public IReadOnlyList<PlayerInput> PendingInputs => pendingInputs;
|
||||
public IReadOnlyList<MoveInput> PendingInputs => pendingInputs;
|
||||
|
||||
public void Record(PlayerInput input)
|
||||
public void Record(MoveInput input)
|
||||
{
|
||||
if (input == null)
|
||||
{
|
||||
|
|
@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ namespace Network.NetworkApplication
|
|||
pendingInputs.Add(input);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
public bool TryApplyAuthoritativeState(PlayerState state, out IReadOnlyList<PlayerInput> replayInputs)
|
||||
public bool TryApplyAuthoritativeState(PlayerState state, out IReadOnlyList<MoveInput> replayInputs)
|
||||
{
|
||||
if (state == null)
|
||||
{
|
||||
|
|
@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ namespace Network.NetworkApplication
|
|||
|
||||
if (LastAuthoritativeTick.HasValue && state.Tick <= LastAuthoritativeTick.Value)
|
||||
{
|
||||
replayInputs = Array.Empty<PlayerInput>();
|
||||
replayInputs = Array.Empty<MoveInput>();
|
||||
return false;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ namespace Network.NetworkApplication
|
|||
private static readonly IReadOnlyDictionary<MessageType, DeliveryPolicy> DefaultPolicies =
|
||||
new Dictionary<MessageType, DeliveryPolicy>
|
||||
{
|
||||
{ MessageType.PlayerInput, DeliveryPolicy.HighFrequencySync },
|
||||
{ MessageType.MoveInput, DeliveryPolicy.HighFrequencySync },
|
||||
{ MessageType.PlayerState, DeliveryPolicy.HighFrequencySync }
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,4 +1,3 @@
|
|||
using System;
|
||||
using System.Collections.Generic;
|
||||
using System.Net;
|
||||
using Network.Defines;
|
||||
|
|
@ -39,9 +38,9 @@ namespace Network.NetworkApplication
|
|||
{
|
||||
switch (messageType)
|
||||
{
|
||||
case MessageType.PlayerInput:
|
||||
case MessageType.MoveInput:
|
||||
{
|
||||
var input = PlayerInput.Parser.ParseFrom(payload);
|
||||
var input = MoveInput.Parser.ParseFrom(payload);
|
||||
streamKey = $"input:{Normalize(sender)}:{input.PlayerId}";
|
||||
sequence = input.Tick;
|
||||
return true;
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
|
|||
using System.Collections;
|
||||
using System.Collections;
|
||||
using System.Net;
|
||||
using System.Threading.Tasks;
|
||||
using Network.Defines;
|
||||
|
|
@ -153,7 +153,7 @@ public class NetworkManager : MonoBehaviour
|
|||
player.SyncTick(currentServerTick.Value);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
Debug.Log($"收到PlayerState::PlayerID={message.PlayerId},Position=" + message.Position.ToVector3().ToString());
|
||||
Debug.Log($"收到PlayerState::PlayerID={message.PlayerId},Position=" + message.Position.ToVector3());
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
private void HandleHeartbeatResponse(byte[] data, IPEndPoint sender)
|
||||
|
|
@ -188,20 +188,21 @@ public class NetworkManager : MonoBehaviour
|
|||
Debug.Log($"[NetworkManager] Session {lifecycleEvent.PreviousState} -> {lifecycleEvent.CurrentState} ({lifecycleEvent.Kind}) {lifecycleEvent.Reason}");
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
public void SendPlayerInput(string playerId, Vector3 input)
|
||||
public void SendMoveInput(string playerId, Vector3 input)
|
||||
{
|
||||
var message = new PlayerInput()
|
||||
var message = new MoveInput
|
||||
{
|
||||
PlayerId = playerId,
|
||||
Input = ProtoExtensions.ToProtoVector3(input)
|
||||
MoveX = input.x,
|
||||
MoveY = input.z
|
||||
};
|
||||
_networkRuntime.MessageManager.SendMessage(message, MessageType.PlayerInput);
|
||||
_networkRuntime.MessageManager.SendMessage(message, MessageType.MoveInput);
|
||||
Debug.Log($"PlayerMoveSeq: {_sequence++}");
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
public void SendPlayerInput(PlayerInput message)
|
||||
public void SendMoveInput(MoveInput message)
|
||||
{
|
||||
_networkRuntime.MessageManager.SendMessage(message, MessageType.PlayerInput);
|
||||
_networkRuntime.MessageManager.SendMessage(message, MessageType.MoveInput);
|
||||
Debug.Log($"PlayerMoveSeq: {_sequence++}");
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
|
|||
using System;
|
||||
using System;
|
||||
using System.Collections.Generic;
|
||||
using System.Net;
|
||||
using System.Threading.Tasks;
|
||||
|
|
@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ namespace Tests.EditMode.Network
|
|||
}
|
||||
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
public void SendMessage_PlayerInput_UsesSyncLanePolicy()
|
||||
public void SendMessage_MoveInput_UsesSyncLanePolicy()
|
||||
{
|
||||
var reliableTransport = new FakeTransport();
|
||||
var syncTransport = new FakeTransport();
|
||||
|
|
@ -64,20 +64,80 @@ namespace Tests.EditMode.Network
|
|||
new MainThreadNetworkDispatcher(),
|
||||
new DefaultMessageDeliveryPolicyResolver(),
|
||||
syncTransport);
|
||||
var message = new PlayerInput
|
||||
var message = new MoveInput
|
||||
{
|
||||
PlayerId = "player-1",
|
||||
Tick = 12
|
||||
Tick = 12,
|
||||
MoveX = 1,
|
||||
MoveY = -1
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
manager.SendMessage(message, MessageType.PlayerInput);
|
||||
manager.SendMessage(message, MessageType.MoveInput);
|
||||
|
||||
Assert.That(reliableTransport.SendCallCount, Is.EqualTo(0));
|
||||
Assert.That(syncTransport.SendCallCount, Is.EqualTo(1));
|
||||
|
||||
var envelope = Envelope.Parser.ParseFrom(syncTransport.LastSentData);
|
||||
Assert.That(envelope.Type, Is.EqualTo((int)MessageType.PlayerInput));
|
||||
Assert.That(PlayerInput.Parser.ParseFrom(envelope.Payload).Tick, Is.EqualTo(12));
|
||||
Assert.That(envelope.Type, Is.EqualTo((int)MessageType.MoveInput));
|
||||
Assert.That(MoveInput.Parser.ParseFrom(envelope.Payload).Tick, Is.EqualTo(12));
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
public void SendMessage_ShootInput_UsesReliableLanePolicy()
|
||||
{
|
||||
var reliableTransport = new FakeTransport();
|
||||
var syncTransport = new FakeTransport();
|
||||
var manager = new MessageManager(
|
||||
reliableTransport,
|
||||
new MainThreadNetworkDispatcher(),
|
||||
new DefaultMessageDeliveryPolicyResolver(),
|
||||
syncTransport);
|
||||
var message = new ShootInput
|
||||
{
|
||||
PlayerId = "player-1",
|
||||
Tick = 15,
|
||||
DirX = 0.5f,
|
||||
DirY = 1f,
|
||||
TargetId = "enemy-1"
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
manager.SendMessage(message, MessageType.ShootInput);
|
||||
|
||||
Assert.That(reliableTransport.SendCallCount, Is.EqualTo(1));
|
||||
Assert.That(syncTransport.SendCallCount, Is.EqualTo(0));
|
||||
|
||||
var envelope = Envelope.Parser.ParseFrom(reliableTransport.LastSentData);
|
||||
Assert.That(envelope.Type, Is.EqualTo((int)MessageType.ShootInput));
|
||||
Assert.That(ShootInput.Parser.ParseFrom(envelope.Payload).TargetId, Is.EqualTo("enemy-1"));
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
public void SendMessage_CombatEvent_UsesReliableLanePolicy()
|
||||
{
|
||||
var reliableTransport = new FakeTransport();
|
||||
var syncTransport = new FakeTransport();
|
||||
var manager = new MessageManager(
|
||||
reliableTransport,
|
||||
new MainThreadNetworkDispatcher(),
|
||||
new DefaultMessageDeliveryPolicyResolver(),
|
||||
syncTransport);
|
||||
var message = new CombatEvent
|
||||
{
|
||||
Tick = 20,
|
||||
EventType = CombatEventType.DamageApplied,
|
||||
AttackerId = "player-1",
|
||||
TargetId = "enemy-1",
|
||||
Damage = 7
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
manager.SendMessage(message, MessageType.CombatEvent);
|
||||
|
||||
Assert.That(reliableTransport.SendCallCount, Is.EqualTo(1));
|
||||
Assert.That(syncTransport.SendCallCount, Is.EqualTo(0));
|
||||
|
||||
var envelope = Envelope.Parser.ParseFrom(reliableTransport.LastSentData);
|
||||
Assert.That(envelope.Type, Is.EqualTo((int)MessageType.CombatEvent));
|
||||
Assert.That(CombatEvent.Parser.ParseFrom(envelope.Payload).Damage, Is.EqualTo(7));
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
|
|
@ -184,6 +244,31 @@ namespace Tests.EditMode.Network
|
|||
Assert.That(handledSpeeds, Is.EqualTo(new[] { 1, 2 }));
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
public void Receive_StaleMoveInput_IsDropped()
|
||||
{
|
||||
var transport = new FakeTransport();
|
||||
var manager = new MessageManager(transport, new MainThreadNetworkDispatcher());
|
||||
var handledTicks = new List<long>();
|
||||
|
||||
manager.RegisterHandler(MessageType.MoveInput, (payload, sender) =>
|
||||
{
|
||||
handledTicks.Add(MoveInput.Parser.ParseFrom(payload).Tick);
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
transport.EmitReceive(
|
||||
BuildEnvelope(MessageType.MoveInput, new MoveInput { PlayerId = "player-1", Tick = 8, MoveX = 1 }),
|
||||
Sender);
|
||||
manager.DrainPendingMessagesAsync().GetAwaiter().GetResult();
|
||||
|
||||
transport.EmitReceive(
|
||||
BuildEnvelope(MessageType.MoveInput, new MoveInput { PlayerId = "player-1", Tick = 6, MoveX = -1 }),
|
||||
Sender);
|
||||
manager.DrainPendingMessagesAsync().GetAwaiter().GetResult();
|
||||
|
||||
Assert.That(handledTicks, Is.EqualTo(new long[] { 8 }));
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
public void Receive_StalePlayerState_IsDropped()
|
||||
{
|
||||
|
|
@ -209,6 +294,31 @@ namespace Tests.EditMode.Network
|
|||
Assert.That(handledTicks, Is.EqualTo(new long[] { 8 }));
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
public void Receive_ShootInput_IsNotDroppedBySequenceTracker()
|
||||
{
|
||||
var transport = new FakeTransport();
|
||||
var manager = new MessageManager(transport, new MainThreadNetworkDispatcher());
|
||||
var handledTicks = new List<long>();
|
||||
|
||||
manager.RegisterHandler(MessageType.ShootInput, (payload, sender) =>
|
||||
{
|
||||
handledTicks.Add(ShootInput.Parser.ParseFrom(payload).Tick);
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
transport.EmitReceive(
|
||||
BuildEnvelope(MessageType.ShootInput, new ShootInput { PlayerId = "player-1", Tick = 8, DirX = 1f }),
|
||||
Sender);
|
||||
manager.DrainPendingMessagesAsync().GetAwaiter().GetResult();
|
||||
|
||||
transport.EmitReceive(
|
||||
BuildEnvelope(MessageType.ShootInput, new ShootInput { PlayerId = "player-1", Tick = 6, DirY = 1f }),
|
||||
Sender);
|
||||
manager.DrainPendingMessagesAsync().GetAwaiter().GetResult();
|
||||
|
||||
Assert.That(handledTicks, Is.EqualTo(new long[] { 8, 6 }));
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
private static byte[] BuildEnvelope(MessageType type, IMessage payload)
|
||||
{
|
||||
return new Envelope
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ namespace Tests.EditMode.Network
|
|||
}
|
||||
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
public void SharedNetworkRuntime_RoutesSyncMessagesThroughConfiguredSyncLane()
|
||||
public void SharedNetworkRuntime_RoutesMoveInputThroughConfiguredSyncLane()
|
||||
{
|
||||
var reliableTransport = new FakeTransport();
|
||||
var syncTransport = new FakeTransport();
|
||||
|
|
@ -84,21 +84,23 @@ namespace Tests.EditMode.Network
|
|||
reliableTransport,
|
||||
new ImmediateNetworkMessageDispatcher(),
|
||||
syncTransport: syncTransport);
|
||||
var message = new PlayerInput
|
||||
var message = new MoveInput
|
||||
{
|
||||
PlayerId = "shared-player",
|
||||
Tick = 33
|
||||
Tick = 33,
|
||||
MoveX = 1f,
|
||||
MoveY = -1f
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
runtime.MessageManager.SendMessage(message, MessageType.PlayerInput);
|
||||
runtime.MessageManager.SendMessage(message, MessageType.MoveInput);
|
||||
|
||||
Assert.That(reliableTransport.SendCallCount, Is.EqualTo(0));
|
||||
Assert.That(syncTransport.SendCallCount, Is.EqualTo(1));
|
||||
Assert.That(syncTransport.LastSentData, Is.Not.Null);
|
||||
|
||||
var envelope = Envelope.Parser.ParseFrom(syncTransport.LastSentData);
|
||||
Assert.That(envelope.Type, Is.EqualTo((int)MessageType.PlayerInput));
|
||||
Assert.That(PlayerInput.Parser.ParseFrom(envelope.Payload).Tick, Is.EqualTo(33));
|
||||
Assert.That(envelope.Type, Is.EqualTo((int)MessageType.MoveInput));
|
||||
Assert.That(MoveInput.Parser.ParseFrom(envelope.Payload).Tick, Is.EqualTo(33));
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
private static byte[] BuildEnvelope(MessageType type, IMessage payload)
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -12,12 +12,12 @@ namespace Tests.EditMode.Network
|
|||
public class SyncStrategyTests
|
||||
{
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
public void ClientPredictionBuffer_AuthoritativeState_PrunesAcknowledgedInputs()
|
||||
public void ClientPredictionBuffer_AuthoritativeState_PrunesAcknowledgedMoveInputs()
|
||||
{
|
||||
var buffer = new ClientPredictionBuffer();
|
||||
buffer.Record(new PlayerInput { PlayerId = "player-1", Tick = 10 });
|
||||
buffer.Record(new PlayerInput { PlayerId = "player-1", Tick = 11 });
|
||||
buffer.Record(new PlayerInput { PlayerId = "player-1", Tick = 12 });
|
||||
buffer.Record(new MoveInput { PlayerId = "player-1", Tick = 10, MoveX = 1f });
|
||||
buffer.Record(new MoveInput { PlayerId = "player-1", Tick = 11, MoveX = 1f });
|
||||
buffer.Record(new MoveInput { PlayerId = "player-1", Tick = 12, MoveX = 1f });
|
||||
|
||||
var accepted = buffer.TryApplyAuthoritativeState(
|
||||
new PlayerState { PlayerId = "player-1", Tick = 11 },
|
||||
|
|
@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ namespace Tests.EditMode.Network
|
|||
public void ClientPredictionBuffer_StaleAuthoritativeState_IsIgnored()
|
||||
{
|
||||
var buffer = new ClientPredictionBuffer();
|
||||
buffer.Record(new PlayerInput { PlayerId = "player-1", Tick = 10 });
|
||||
buffer.Record(new MoveInput { PlayerId = "player-1", Tick = 10, MoveX = 1f });
|
||||
buffer.TryApplyAuthoritativeState(new PlayerState { PlayerId = "player-1", Tick = 10 }, out _);
|
||||
|
||||
var accepted = buffer.TryApplyAuthoritativeState(
|
||||
|
|
@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ namespace Tests.EditMode.Network
|
|||
}
|
||||
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
public void ServerNetworkHost_RejectsStaleInputPerPeerWithoutCrossPeerInterference()
|
||||
public void ServerNetworkHost_RejectsStaleMoveInputPerPeerWithoutCrossPeerInterference()
|
||||
{
|
||||
var transport = new FakeTransport();
|
||||
var host = new ServerNetworkHost(transport);
|
||||
|
|
@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ namespace Tests.EditMode.Network
|
|||
var peerB = new IPEndPoint(IPAddress.Parse("127.0.0.1"), 5002);
|
||||
var handledTicksByPeer = new Dictionary<string, List<long>>();
|
||||
|
||||
host.MessageManager.RegisterHandler(MessageType.PlayerInput, (payload, sender) =>
|
||||
host.MessageManager.RegisterHandler(MessageType.MoveInput, (payload, sender) =>
|
||||
{
|
||||
var key = sender.ToString();
|
||||
if (!handledTicksByPeer.TryGetValue(key, out var ticks))
|
||||
|
|
@ -92,17 +92,17 @@ namespace Tests.EditMode.Network
|
|||
handledTicksByPeer.Add(key, ticks);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
ticks.Add(PlayerInput.Parser.ParseFrom(payload).Tick);
|
||||
ticks.Add(MoveInput.Parser.ParseFrom(payload).Tick);
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
transport.EmitReceive(
|
||||
BuildEnvelope(MessageType.PlayerInput, new PlayerInput { PlayerId = "player-a", Tick = 5 }),
|
||||
BuildEnvelope(MessageType.MoveInput, new MoveInput { PlayerId = "player-a", Tick = 5, MoveX = 1f }),
|
||||
peerA);
|
||||
transport.EmitReceive(
|
||||
BuildEnvelope(MessageType.PlayerInput, new PlayerInput { PlayerId = "player-a", Tick = 4 }),
|
||||
BuildEnvelope(MessageType.MoveInput, new MoveInput { PlayerId = "player-a", Tick = 4, MoveX = -1f }),
|
||||
peerA);
|
||||
transport.EmitReceive(
|
||||
BuildEnvelope(MessageType.PlayerInput, new PlayerInput { PlayerId = "player-b", Tick = 4 }),
|
||||
BuildEnvelope(MessageType.MoveInput, new MoveInput { PlayerId = "player-b", Tick = 4, MoveY = 1f }),
|
||||
peerB);
|
||||
|
||||
Assert.That(handledTicksByPeer[peerA.ToString()], Is.EqualTo(new long[] { 5 }));
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ Other core gameplay data such as position and HP remain server-authoritative.
|
|||
## Message Plan
|
||||
|
||||
| Message | Direction | Reliability | Frequency | Purpose |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
|---------------------------|------------------|-------------------------------|-----------|--------------------------------|
|
||||
| `MoveInput` | Client -> Server | Low reliability / latest wins | 10-20 Hz | Report movement input |
|
||||
| `ShootInput` | Client -> Server | Reliable ordered | On demand | Report shoot request |
|
||||
| `PlayerState` | Server -> Client | Low reliability / latest wins | 10-20 Hz | Sync position, rotation, HP |
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
92
TODO.md
92
TODO.md
|
|
@ -13,55 +13,55 @@ Implement the networking MVP described in [MobaSyncMVP.md](D:/Learn/GameLearn/Un
|
|||
|
||||
### 1. Split Network Message Types
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Add `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, and `CombatEvent` to [`Assets/Scripts/Network/Defines/MessageType.cs`](D:/Learn/GameLearn/UnityProjects/NetworkFW/Assets/Scripts/Network/Defines/MessageType.cs)
|
||||
- [ ] Add matching protobuf definitions in the source `.proto` file
|
||||
- [ ] Regenerate [`Assets/Scripts/Network/Defines/Message.cs`](D:/Learn/GameLearn/UnityProjects/NetworkFW/Assets/Scripts/Network/Defines/Message.cs)
|
||||
- [ ] Stop using one broad `PlayerInput` message to carry both movement and shooting
|
||||
- [x] Add `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, and `CombatEvent` to [`Assets/Scripts/Network/Defines/MessageType.cs`](D:/Learn/GameLearn/UnityProjects/NetworkFW/Assets/Scripts/Network/Defines/MessageType.cs)
|
||||
- [x] Add matching protobuf definitions in the source `.proto` file
|
||||
- [x] Regenerate [`Assets/Scripts/Network/Defines/Message.cs`](D:/Learn/GameLearn/UnityProjects/NetworkFW/Assets/Scripts/Network/Defines/Message.cs)
|
||||
- [x] Stop using one broad `PlayerInput` message to carry both movement and shooting
|
||||
|
||||
Acceptance:
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, and `CombatEvent` can be referenced independently in code
|
||||
- [ ] The project builds successfully after regeneration
|
||||
- [x] `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, and `CombatEvent` can be referenced independently in code
|
||||
- [x] The project builds successfully after regeneration
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Update Delivery Policy Mapping
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Update [`Assets/Scripts/Network/NetworkApplication/DefaultMessageDeliveryPolicyResolver.cs`](D:/Learn/GameLearn/UnityProjects/NetworkFW/Assets/Scripts/Network/NetworkApplication/DefaultMessageDeliveryPolicyResolver.cs)
|
||||
- [ ] Map `MoveInput` to `HighFrequencySync`
|
||||
- [ ] Map `PlayerState` to `HighFrequencySync`
|
||||
- [ ] Map `ShootInput` to `ReliableOrdered`
|
||||
- [ ] Map `CombatEvent` to `ReliableOrdered`
|
||||
- [x] Update [`Assets/Scripts/Network/NetworkApplication/DefaultMessageDeliveryPolicyResolver.cs`](D:/Learn/GameLearn/UnityProjects/NetworkFW/Assets/Scripts/Network/NetworkApplication/DefaultMessageDeliveryPolicyResolver.cs)
|
||||
- [x] Map `MoveInput` to `HighFrequencySync`
|
||||
- [x] Map `PlayerState` to `HighFrequencySync`
|
||||
- [x] Map `ShootInput` to `ReliableOrdered`
|
||||
- [x] Map `CombatEvent` to `ReliableOrdered`
|
||||
|
||||
Acceptance:
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] `MessageManager` routes movement/state messages to the sync lane
|
||||
- [ ] `MessageManager` routes shooting/combat-result messages to the reliable lane
|
||||
- [x] `MessageManager` routes movement/state messages to the sync lane
|
||||
- [x] `MessageManager` routes shooting/combat-result messages to the reliable lane
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Update Sequence Filtering For High-Frequency Messages
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Modify [`Assets/Scripts/Network/NetworkApplication/SyncSequenceTracker.cs`](D:/Learn/GameLearn/UnityProjects/NetworkFW/Assets/Scripts/Network/NetworkApplication/SyncSequenceTracker.cs)
|
||||
- [ ] Replace `PlayerInput`-based stale filtering with `MoveInput`
|
||||
- [ ] Keep stale filtering for `PlayerState`
|
||||
- [ ] Do not apply stale-drop logic to `ShootInput`
|
||||
- [ ] Do not apply stale-drop logic to `CombatEvent`
|
||||
- [x] Modify [`Assets/Scripts/Network/NetworkApplication/SyncSequenceTracker.cs`](D:/Learn/GameLearn/UnityProjects/NetworkFW/Assets/Scripts/Network/NetworkApplication/SyncSequenceTracker.cs)
|
||||
- [x] Replace `PlayerInput`-based stale filtering with `MoveInput`
|
||||
- [x] Keep stale filtering for `PlayerState`
|
||||
- [x] Do not apply stale-drop logic to `ShootInput`
|
||||
- [x] Do not apply stale-drop logic to `CombatEvent`
|
||||
|
||||
Acceptance:
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Older `MoveInput` packets are dropped
|
||||
- [ ] Older `PlayerState` packets are dropped
|
||||
- [ ] `ShootInput` is not silently discarded by sequence filtering
|
||||
- [x] Older `MoveInput` packets are dropped
|
||||
- [x] Older `PlayerState` packets are dropped
|
||||
- [x] `ShootInput` is not silently discarded by sequence filtering
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Narrow Prediction Buffer To Movement
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Modify [`Assets/Scripts/Network/NetworkApplication/ClientPredictionBuffer.cs`](D:/Learn/GameLearn/UnityProjects/NetworkFW/Assets/Scripts/Network/NetworkApplication/ClientPredictionBuffer.cs)
|
||||
- [ ] Store `MoveInput` instead of broad `PlayerInput`
|
||||
- [ ] Continue pruning buffered inputs using authoritative `PlayerState.Tick`
|
||||
- [ ] Keep shooting outside the prediction replay path
|
||||
- [x] Modify [`Assets/Scripts/Network/NetworkApplication/ClientPredictionBuffer.cs`](D:/Learn/GameLearn/UnityProjects/NetworkFW/Assets/Scripts/Network/NetworkApplication/ClientPredictionBuffer.cs)
|
||||
- [x] Store `MoveInput` instead of broad `PlayerInput`
|
||||
- [x] Continue pruning buffered inputs using authoritative `PlayerState.Tick`
|
||||
- [x] Keep shooting outside the prediction replay path
|
||||
|
||||
Acceptance:
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Local movement prediction still works
|
||||
- [ ] Authoritative `PlayerState` still prunes acknowledged movement inputs
|
||||
- [ ] Shooting does not depend on prediction buffer replay
|
||||
- [x] Local movement prediction still works
|
||||
- [x] Authoritative `PlayerState` still prunes acknowledged movement inputs
|
||||
- [x] Shooting does not depend on prediction buffer replay
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Preserve And Use Dual-Transport Runtime Wiring
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -92,28 +92,28 @@ Acceptance:
|
|||
|
||||
### 7. Add Message Routing Tests
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Extend [`Assets/Tests/EditMode/Network/MessageManagerTests.cs`](D:/Learn/GameLearn/UnityProjects/NetworkFW/Assets/Tests/EditMode/Network/MessageManagerTests.cs)
|
||||
- [ ] Add `SendMessage_MoveInput_UsesSyncLanePolicy`
|
||||
- [ ] Add `SendMessage_ShootInput_UsesReliableLanePolicy`
|
||||
- [ ] Add `SendMessage_CombatEvent_UsesReliableLanePolicy`
|
||||
- [ ] Add `Receive_StaleMoveInput_IsDropped`
|
||||
- [ ] Add `Receive_ShootInput_IsNotDroppedBySequenceTracker`
|
||||
- [x] Extend [`Assets/Tests/EditMode/Network/MessageManagerTests.cs`](D:/Learn/GameLearn/UnityProjects/NetworkFW/Assets/Tests/EditMode/Network/MessageManagerTests.cs)
|
||||
- [x] Add `SendMessage_MoveInput_UsesSyncLanePolicy`
|
||||
- [x] Add `SendMessage_ShootInput_UsesReliableLanePolicy`
|
||||
- [x] Add `SendMessage_CombatEvent_UsesReliableLanePolicy`
|
||||
- [x] Add `Receive_StaleMoveInput_IsDropped`
|
||||
- [x] Add `Receive_ShootInput_IsNotDroppedBySequenceTracker`
|
||||
|
||||
Acceptance:
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Lane selection is covered by tests for all new MVP messages
|
||||
- [ ] High-frequency stale-drop behavior is covered by tests
|
||||
- [x] Lane selection is covered by tests for all new MVP messages
|
||||
- [x] High-frequency stale-drop behavior is covered by tests
|
||||
|
||||
### 8. Add Sync Strategy Tests
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Extend [`Assets/Tests/EditMode/Network/SyncStrategyTests.cs`](D:/Learn/GameLearn/UnityProjects/NetworkFW/Assets/Tests/EditMode/Network/SyncStrategyTests.cs)
|
||||
- [ ] Add `ClientPredictionBuffer_AuthoritativeState_PrunesAcknowledgedMoveInputs`
|
||||
- [ ] Add `ServerNetworkHost_RejectsStaleMoveInputPerPeerWithoutCrossPeerInterference`
|
||||
- [x] Extend [`Assets/Tests/EditMode/Network/SyncStrategyTests.cs`](D:/Learn/GameLearn/UnityProjects/NetworkFW/Assets/Tests/EditMode/Network/SyncStrategyTests.cs)
|
||||
- [x] Add `ClientPredictionBuffer_AuthoritativeState_PrunesAcknowledgedMoveInputs`
|
||||
- [x] Add `ServerNetworkHost_RejectsStaleMoveInputPerPeerWithoutCrossPeerInterference`
|
||||
|
||||
Acceptance:
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Prediction buffer still behaves correctly after switching to `MoveInput`
|
||||
- [ ] Multi-session stale filtering remains isolated per peer
|
||||
- [x] Prediction buffer still behaves correctly after switching to `MoveInput`
|
||||
- [x] Multi-session stale filtering remains isolated per peer
|
||||
|
||||
### 9. Wire Dual Transports In The Integration Layer
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -129,14 +129,14 @@ Acceptance:
|
|||
|
||||
### 10. Build And Test
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Run `dotnet build Network.EditMode.Tests.csproj -v minimal`
|
||||
- [ ] Run `dotnet test Network.EditMode.Tests.csproj --no-build -v minimal`
|
||||
- [x] Run `dotnet build Network.EditMode.Tests.csproj -v minimal`
|
||||
- [x] Run `dotnet test Network.EditMode.Tests.csproj --no-build -v minimal`
|
||||
|
||||
Acceptance:
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Build succeeds
|
||||
- [ ] Edit-mode network tests succeed
|
||||
- [ ] New MVP regression tests succeed
|
||||
- [x] Build succeeds
|
||||
- [x] Edit-mode network tests succeed
|
||||
- [x] New MVP regression tests succeed
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommended Order
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
|
|||
schema: spec-driven
|
||||
created: 2026-03-28
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
|
|||
## Context
|
||||
|
||||
The shared networking stack already has delivery-policy routing, stale-sequence filtering, and client prediction code, but those behaviors still treat `PlayerInput` as one broad gameplay input message. The MVP in `TODO.md` now requires movement input, shooting input, and authoritative combat results to travel with different semantics: movement is latest-wins sync traffic, while shooting and combat results stay reliable and ordered.
|
||||
|
||||
This change is cross-cutting even though it starts from protocol definitions. `MessageType`, generated protobuf classes, delivery policy resolution, stale filtering, and prediction buffering all currently assume that one input message covers both movement and shooting. The generated code also points to `message.proto`, but the repository currently only contains the generated `Assets/Scripts/Network/Defines/Message.cs`, so the design must account for restoring or recreating the schema source as part of the protocol split.
|
||||
|
||||
## Goals / Non-Goals
|
||||
|
||||
**Goals:**
|
||||
- Establish distinct shared message contracts for `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, `CombatEvent`, and the existing authoritative `PlayerState` flow.
|
||||
- Keep the envelope-based protocol stable while making gameplay message intent explicit in `MessageType` and generated protobuf types.
|
||||
- Realign sync-policy expectations so only movement/state traffic participates in latest-wins stale filtering and prediction replay.
|
||||
- Make the first TODO step implementation-ready by identifying the spec and code surfaces that must change together.
|
||||
|
||||
**Non-Goals:**
|
||||
- Implement the later TODO steps that wire both transport instances, update every handler, or add the final message fields beyond what the protocol split requires.
|
||||
- Replace KCP or redesign the reliable control-plane transport contract.
|
||||
- Rework unrelated room, chat, login, or lifecycle messages.
|
||||
- Commit to a protobuf generation toolchain beyond requiring a checked-in schema source and regenerated C# output.
|
||||
|
||||
## Decisions
|
||||
|
||||
### Split gameplay intent into separate business message types
|
||||
The shared contract will introduce `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, and `CombatEvent` as first-class business messages instead of continuing to overload `PlayerInput`. `PlayerState` remains the authoritative state message. This lets routing and stale filtering reason over message intent directly from `MessageType` rather than inspecting a mixed payload shape or carrying unused fields.
|
||||
|
||||
Alternative considered: keep `PlayerInput` and add optional fields plus message metadata for delivery policy.
|
||||
Rejected because it preserves the ambiguous contract that caused the MVP mismatch and keeps routing/filtering logic coupled to one payload type.
|
||||
|
||||
### Keep the envelope contract stable while changing only gameplay payload identities
|
||||
`Envelope.Type` and `Envelope.Payload` remain the shared wire wrapper across hosts. The change happens at the business-message layer: new `MessageType` enum values, new protobuf message definitions, and regenerated C# classes. This keeps client/server interoperability centered on the existing envelope parsing path and avoids a protocol fork between reliable and sync lanes.
|
||||
|
||||
Alternative considered: introduce separate envelope formats for sync and reliable traffic.
|
||||
Rejected because delivery lane is a routing concern, not a serialization concern, and two envelope formats would complicate shared parsing for little benefit.
|
||||
|
||||
### Treat protobuf schema source restoration as part of the protocol contract
|
||||
Because `Assets/Scripts/Network/Defines/Message.cs` was generated from `message.proto` and the source schema is not currently present in the repository, implementation must restore or recreate `message.proto` in source control before regenerating. The checked-in schema becomes the canonical definition for future protocol changes, instead of editing generated C# manually.
|
||||
|
||||
Alternative considered: hand-edit `Message.cs` to avoid introducing the missing schema file.
|
||||
Rejected because generated protobuf output is not a maintainable source of truth and would make the next protocol iteration error-prone.
|
||||
|
||||
### Narrow latest-wins sequencing and prediction replay to movement
|
||||
`MoveInput` and `PlayerState` remain the only messages that participate in stale-drop sequencing and client prediction replay. `ShootInput` and `CombatEvent` stay outside that path because they represent discrete reliable actions/results where silent stale dropping would hide gameplay events.
|
||||
|
||||
Alternative considered: let all gameplay messages share the same sequence filter for consistency.
|
||||
Rejected because reliable shooting/combat messages need ordered delivery semantics, not latest-wins replacement semantics.
|
||||
|
||||
## Risks / Trade-offs
|
||||
|
||||
- [The repo lacks the checked-in `message.proto` source] -> Mitigation: make schema restoration an explicit implementation task and do not treat generated `Message.cs` as the source of truth.
|
||||
- [Renaming or removing `PlayerInput` can ripple through existing handlers and tests] -> Mitigation: scope this change around protocol and contract surfaces first, then update routing/filtering/tests in follow-up tasks within the same change.
|
||||
- [MessageType numeric compatibility could break mixed-version peers] -> Mitigation: preserve existing envelope behavior, document enum changes, and regenerate all shared message code together.
|
||||
- [Specs may drift from the current TODO ordering if they include later implementation detail] -> Mitigation: keep requirements focused on the message split contract and only the directly dependent routing semantics.
|
||||
|
||||
## Migration Plan
|
||||
|
||||
1. Add the change artifacts that redefine gameplay message capabilities and modified routing requirements around split message types.
|
||||
2. Restore or recreate `message.proto` as the canonical schema source, then add `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, and `CombatEvent` definitions alongside the existing envelope and state messages.
|
||||
3. Update `MessageType` and regenerate `Assets/Scripts/Network/Defines/Message.cs` from the schema so shared code can reference the new types.
|
||||
4. Replace `PlayerInput` assumptions in delivery policy resolution, stale filtering, and prediction buffering with message-specific handling.
|
||||
5. Add or update edit mode tests for routing and stale filtering once the implementation reaches those steps. If rollback is needed, revert the new gameplay message types and route all gameplay input back through the previous `PlayerInput` contract temporarily.
|
||||
|
||||
## Open Questions
|
||||
|
||||
- Which repository path should own the restored `message.proto` so regeneration stays obvious to future contributors?
|
||||
- Should `PlayerInput` be removed immediately after callers migrate, or kept briefly as a compatibility shim during implementation?
|
||||
- Does `CombatEvent` need its event-type enum in this first contract split, or should that remain part of the later message-field finalization step?
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
|
|||
## Why
|
||||
|
||||
The MVP protocol now needs different delivery semantics for movement, shooting, and authoritative combat results, but the shared message contract still models all player intent as one broad `PlayerInput` type. That coupling blocks the next routing and stale-filtering steps in `TODO.md`, so the protocol must be split now before the sync lane work can be implemented safely.
|
||||
|
||||
## What Changes
|
||||
|
||||
- Split the gameplay input contract into dedicated `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, and `CombatEvent` message types instead of overloading `PlayerInput` for both movement and shooting.
|
||||
- Update the shared message-type enum and protobuf schema so each new gameplay message can be referenced, serialized, and regenerated independently in shared networking code.
|
||||
- Preserve `PlayerState` as the authoritative state update while redefining sync-policy expectations around `MoveInput` versus reliable ordered expectations around `ShootInput` and `CombatEvent`.
|
||||
- Retire the MVP assumption that one `PlayerInput` message can satisfy both latest-wins movement traffic and reliable shooting/combat-result traffic.
|
||||
|
||||
## Capabilities
|
||||
|
||||
### New Capabilities
|
||||
- `network-gameplay-message-types`: Shared protocol definitions for distinct movement input, shooting input, authoritative player state, and combat event messages used by the MVP gameplay loop.
|
||||
|
||||
### Modified Capabilities
|
||||
- `network-sync-strategy`: Delivery-policy and stale-filter requirements change from broad `PlayerInput` handling to message-specific behavior for `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, `PlayerState`, and `CombatEvent`.
|
||||
- `kcp-transport`: Reliable transport requirements now explicitly keep `ShootInput` and `CombatEvent` on the ordered KCP lane while allowing `MoveInput` and `PlayerState` to use the sync lane.
|
||||
- `shared-network-foundation`: The shared envelope and message-type contract changes so hosts can route and reference split gameplay message types without introducing Unity-specific protocol forks.
|
||||
|
||||
## Impact
|
||||
|
||||
- Affected code: `Assets/Scripts/Network/Defines/MessageType.cs`, the source `message.proto` used to generate `Assets/Scripts/Network/Defines/Message.cs`, message-routing policy resolvers, sync sequence tracking, and client prediction buffering.
|
||||
- Affected behavior: movement input becomes an explicitly high-frequency latest-wins message, while shooting requests and authoritative combat results become independently routable reliable messages.
|
||||
- Affected tests: edit mode networking tests need coverage for split message-type routing, stale filtering that only applies to movement/state traffic, and regression protection against `PlayerInput`-style overloading returning later.
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
|
|||
## MODIFIED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: KCP is the sole reliable transport implementation
|
||||
The project SHALL expose `KcpTransport` as the only reliable `ITransport` implementation used by runtime networking paths. Reliable control-plane business messages, including login, logout, heartbeat, and other ordered session-management traffic, MUST continue to flow through KCP-backed sessions. `ShootInput` and `CombatEvent` MUST also continue to use the reliable ordered KCP lane, while high-frequency `MoveInput` and `PlayerState` synchronization MAY use a separate sync lane defined by the sync-strategy capability.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Runtime networking uses KCP for reliable control and gameplay event delivery
|
||||
- **WHEN** the application constructs the reliable transport used for login, session control, shooting requests, and combat-result traffic
|
||||
- **THEN** that transport instance is `KcpTransport`
|
||||
- **THEN** reliable control and gameplay-event payloads are sent and received through KCP session state
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: High-frequency sync is allowed to bypass reliable ordered delivery
|
||||
- **WHEN** the runtime routes `MoveInput` or `PlayerState` according to the high-frequency sync strategy
|
||||
- **THEN** those messages are not forced to use the reliable ordered KCP lane
|
||||
- **THEN** reliable KCP delivery remains available for control-plane traffic, `ShootInput`, and `CombatEvent`
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
|
|||
## ADDED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Gameplay message types are defined independently
|
||||
The shared networking contract SHALL define `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, `CombatEvent`, and `PlayerState` as independently addressable business message types rather than overloading one broad gameplay input payload.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Shared code references split gameplay messages
|
||||
- **WHEN** shared networking code or tests need to reference movement input, shooting input, authoritative state, or combat results
|
||||
- **THEN** each concern is represented by its own business message type
|
||||
- **THEN** code does not need to reinterpret one broad `PlayerInput` payload to determine message intent
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Protobuf schema remains the canonical source for generated gameplay messages
|
||||
The repository SHALL keep the source protobuf schema that defines gameplay network messages under version control, and generated C# message types SHALL be regenerated from that schema when gameplay message definitions change.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Gameplay message schema changes regenerate shared C# types
|
||||
- **WHEN** a contributor adds or changes `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, `CombatEvent`, or `PlayerState` fields in the source protobuf schema
|
||||
- **THEN** the shared generated `Message.cs` output is regenerated from that schema
|
||||
- **THEN** the checked-in generated code matches the schema contract used by client and server hosts
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
|
|||
## MODIFIED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Hosts assign delivery policies to synchronization message types
|
||||
The shared networking core SHALL allow hosts to map business message types to delivery policies. `MoveInput` and `PlayerState` MUST be assignable to a high-frequency sync policy that is independent from the reliable ordered control policy used by login and lifecycle traffic, while `ShootInput` and `CombatEvent` MUST remain independently routable business messages that can stay on the reliable ordered lane.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: High-frequency movement and state messages use a dedicated policy
|
||||
- **WHEN** the client or server sends `MoveInput` or `PlayerState`
|
||||
- **THEN** the runtime resolves a high-frequency sync delivery policy for that message type
|
||||
- **THEN** the message is sent through the sync lane configured for that policy instead of defaulting to reliable ordered delivery
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Shooting and combat events keep reliable ordered delivery
|
||||
- **WHEN** the client or server sends `ShootInput` or `CombatEvent`
|
||||
- **THEN** the runtime resolves the reliable ordered delivery policy for that message type
|
||||
- **THEN** those messages continue to use the reliable transport path
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Control traffic keeps reliable delivery
|
||||
- **WHEN** the runtime sends login, logout, heartbeat, or other session-management messages
|
||||
- **THEN** the runtime resolves the reliable ordered control policy
|
||||
- **THEN** those messages continue to use the reliable transport path
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Sequenced sync receivers discard stale gameplay updates
|
||||
The high-frequency sync strategy SHALL tag gameplay synchronization messages with monotonic sequencing information and MUST discard stale `MoveInput` or `PlayerState` updates that arrive older than the last accepted update for the same peer or entity stream. `ShootInput` and `CombatEvent` MUST NOT be discarded by the latest-wins stale filter.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Older movement input is ignored
|
||||
- **WHEN** the server receives a `MoveInput` update with a tick or sequence older than the latest accepted input for that player
|
||||
- **THEN** the server drops that stale movement update
|
||||
- **THEN** the newer accepted movement input remains authoritative for simulation
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Older player state does not rewind a client
|
||||
- **WHEN** the client receives a `PlayerState` update with a tick or sequence older than the latest applied authoritative state for that player
|
||||
- **THEN** the client ignores the stale state update
|
||||
- **THEN** visible movement continues from the newer authoritative state without rewinding to older data
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Reliable gameplay events bypass stale-drop filtering
|
||||
- **WHEN** the runtime receives a `ShootInput` or `CombatEvent` message
|
||||
- **THEN** the latest-wins stale filter does not reject that message solely because of sync-sequence rules
|
||||
- **THEN** reliable ordered handling remains responsible for preserving event delivery semantics
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Authoritative correction prunes acknowledged prediction history
|
||||
The client sync strategy SHALL reconcile local prediction against authoritative player-state updates by pruning acknowledged movement inputs at or before the authoritative tick and only reapplying newer pending `MoveInput` messages.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Reconciliation removes already acknowledged movement inputs
|
||||
- **WHEN** the client accepts an authoritative `PlayerState` update for tick `N`
|
||||
- **THEN** locally buffered predicted `MoveInput` messages with tick less than or equal to `N` are removed from the replay buffer
|
||||
- **THEN** only `MoveInput` messages newer than `N` remain eligible for re-simulation
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
|
|||
## MODIFIED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Shared core preserves current transport and message contracts
|
||||
The shared client/server foundation SHALL preserve the envelope-based business-message contract across client and server hosts while allowing delivery-policy selection behind the shared message-routing layer. Reliable control traffic MUST continue to use the existing `ITransport` contract, and high-frequency sync traffic MUST be composable through a host-agnostic sync strategy without introducing Unity-specific runtime types into the shared networking core. The shared message-type contract MUST allow hosts to distinguish `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, `CombatEvent`, and `PlayerState` as separate business messages across both delivery lanes.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Shared hosts exchange the same envelope format across delivery lanes
|
||||
- **WHEN** a client host sends a business message through either the reliable control path or the high-frequency sync path
|
||||
- **THEN** the payload is encoded with the same shared envelope and message-type contract
|
||||
- **THEN** the server host decodes and routes it through shared networking logic without a host-specific protocol fork
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Hosts compose delivery-policy selection without Unity dependencies
|
||||
- **WHEN** a non-Unity server host constructs the runtime networking stack with reliable control traffic and a high-frequency sync lane
|
||||
- **THEN** it uses shared delivery-policy abstractions without depending on Unity frame-loop types
|
||||
- **THEN** the Unity client can use the same abstractions while still supplying its own host-specific dispatch behavior
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Shared hosts route split gameplay message identities consistently
|
||||
- **WHEN** client or server code sends `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, `CombatEvent`, or `PlayerState`
|
||||
- **THEN** the envelope carries a distinct message-type value for that business message
|
||||
- **THEN** shared routing code can resolve handlers and delivery policy without decoding a mixed `PlayerInput` intent
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
|
|||
## 1. Restore And Split The Shared Schema
|
||||
|
||||
- [x] 1.1 Restore or recreate the checked-in `message.proto` source file that generates `Assets/Scripts/Network/Defines/Message.cs`.
|
||||
- [x] 1.2 Add `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, and `CombatEvent` protobuf message definitions and stop modeling both movement and shooting through one broad `PlayerInput` schema.
|
||||
- [x] 1.3 Update `Assets/Scripts/Network/Defines/MessageType.cs` so split gameplay messages have distinct enum values aligned with the shared envelope contract.
|
||||
- [x] 1.4 Regenerate `Assets/Scripts/Network/Defines/Message.cs` from the updated protobuf schema and verify the generated types are checked in.
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Realign Shared Runtime Message Semantics
|
||||
|
||||
- [x] 2.1 Update delivery-policy resolution so `MoveInput` and `PlayerState` map to the sync lane while `ShootInput` and `CombatEvent` stay reliable ordered.
|
||||
- [x] 2.2 Update sync sequence tracking so stale-drop logic applies to `MoveInput` and `PlayerState` but not to `ShootInput` or `CombatEvent`.
|
||||
- [x] 2.3 Narrow `ClientPredictionBuffer` and related callers to record and replay `MoveInput` only.
|
||||
- [x] 2.4 Replace remaining shared-network references to broad `PlayerInput` intent with the new split gameplay message types.
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Verify The Split Contract
|
||||
|
||||
- [x] 3.1 Extend edit mode networking tests to cover split message routing and stale filtering behavior for `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, and `CombatEvent`.
|
||||
- [x] 3.2 Build `Network.EditMode.Tests.csproj` and run `dotnet test Network.EditMode.Tests.csproj --no-build -v minimal`.
|
||||
- [x] 3.3 Update `TODO.md` or related implementation notes to reflect completion of the split-message-types step if behavior changed during implementation.
|
||||
|
|
@ -47,17 +47,17 @@ The transport SHALL continue driving KCP timers for every active session while i
|
|||
- **THEN** the transport stops receiving new UDP datagrams
|
||||
- **THEN** the transport clears its active KCP session state before shutdown completes
|
||||
### Requirement: KCP is the sole reliable transport implementation
|
||||
The project SHALL expose `KcpTransport` as the only reliable `ITransport` implementation used by runtime networking paths. Reliable control-plane business messages, including login, logout, heartbeat, and other ordered session-management traffic, MUST continue to flow through KCP-backed sessions, while high-frequency `PlayerInput` and `PlayerState` synchronization MAY use a separate sync lane defined by the sync-strategy capability.
|
||||
The project SHALL expose `KcpTransport` as the only reliable `ITransport` implementation used by runtime networking paths. Reliable control-plane business messages, including login, logout, heartbeat, and other ordered session-management traffic, MUST continue to flow through KCP-backed sessions. `ShootInput` and `CombatEvent` MUST also continue to use the reliable ordered KCP lane, while high-frequency `MoveInput` and `PlayerState` synchronization MAY use a separate sync lane defined by the sync-strategy capability.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Runtime networking uses KCP for reliable control delivery
|
||||
- **WHEN** the application constructs the reliable transport used for login and session control traffic
|
||||
#### Scenario: Runtime networking uses KCP for reliable control and gameplay event delivery
|
||||
- **WHEN** the application constructs the reliable transport used for login, session control, shooting requests, and combat-result traffic
|
||||
- **THEN** that transport instance is `KcpTransport`
|
||||
- **THEN** reliable control payloads are sent and received through KCP session state
|
||||
- **THEN** reliable control and gameplay-event payloads are sent and received through KCP session state
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: High-frequency sync is allowed to bypass reliable ordered delivery
|
||||
- **WHEN** the runtime routes `PlayerInput` or `PlayerState` according to the high-frequency sync strategy
|
||||
- **WHEN** the runtime routes `MoveInput` or `PlayerState` according to the high-frequency sync strategy
|
||||
- **THEN** those messages are not forced to use the reliable ordered KCP lane
|
||||
- **THEN** reliable KCP delivery remains available for control-plane traffic
|
||||
- **THEN** reliable KCP delivery remains available for control-plane traffic, `ShootInput`, and `CombatEvent`
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Legacy reliable UDP entry points are retired
|
||||
The codebase SHALL NOT keep a directly instantiable `ReliableUdpTransport` entry point that implies a second reliable delivery mechanism. If a non-reliable UDP transport is needed in the future, it MUST use a distinct name and MUST NOT claim reliable semantics.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
|
|||
## ADDED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Gameplay message types are defined independently
|
||||
The shared networking contract SHALL define `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, `CombatEvent`, and `PlayerState` as independently addressable business message types rather than overloading one broad gameplay input payload.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Shared code references split gameplay messages
|
||||
- **WHEN** shared networking code or tests need to reference movement input, shooting input, authoritative state, or combat results
|
||||
- **THEN** each concern is represented by its own business message type
|
||||
- **THEN** code does not need to reinterpret one broad `PlayerInput` payload to determine message intent
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Protobuf schema remains the canonical source for generated gameplay messages
|
||||
The repository SHALL keep the source protobuf schema that defines gameplay network messages under version control, and generated C# message types SHALL be regenerated from that schema when gameplay message definitions change.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Gameplay message schema changes regenerate shared C# types
|
||||
- **WHEN** a contributor adds or changes `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, `CombatEvent`, or `PlayerState` fields in the source protobuf schema
|
||||
- **THEN** the shared generated `Message.cs` output is regenerated from that schema
|
||||
- **THEN** the checked-in generated code matches the schema contract used by client and server hosts
|
||||
|
|
@ -5,38 +5,48 @@ Define how client and server route high-frequency gameplay synchronization traff
|
|||
|
||||
## Requirements
|
||||
### Requirement: Hosts assign delivery policies to synchronization message types
|
||||
The shared networking core SHALL allow hosts to map business message types to delivery policies. `PlayerInput` and `PlayerState` MUST be assignable to a high-frequency sync policy that is independent from the reliable ordered control policy used by login and lifecycle traffic.
|
||||
The shared networking core SHALL allow hosts to map business message types to delivery policies. `MoveInput` and `PlayerState` MUST be assignable to a high-frequency sync policy that is independent from the reliable ordered control policy used by login and lifecycle traffic, while `ShootInput` and `CombatEvent` MUST remain independently routable business messages that can stay on the reliable ordered lane.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: High-frequency sync messages use a dedicated policy
|
||||
- **WHEN** the client or server sends `PlayerInput` or `PlayerState`
|
||||
#### Scenario: High-frequency movement and state messages use a dedicated policy
|
||||
- **WHEN** the client or server sends `MoveInput` or `PlayerState`
|
||||
- **THEN** the runtime resolves a high-frequency sync delivery policy for that message type
|
||||
- **THEN** the message is sent through the sync lane configured for that policy instead of defaulting to reliable ordered delivery
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Shooting and combat events keep reliable ordered delivery
|
||||
- **WHEN** the client or server sends `ShootInput` or `CombatEvent`
|
||||
- **THEN** the runtime resolves the reliable ordered delivery policy for that message type
|
||||
- **THEN** those messages continue to use the reliable transport path
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Control traffic keeps reliable delivery
|
||||
- **WHEN** the runtime sends login, logout, heartbeat, or other session-management messages
|
||||
- **THEN** the runtime resolves the reliable ordered control policy
|
||||
- **THEN** those messages continue to use the reliable transport path
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Sequenced sync receivers discard stale gameplay updates
|
||||
The high-frequency sync strategy SHALL tag gameplay synchronization messages with monotonic sequencing information and MUST discard stale `PlayerInput` or `PlayerState` updates that arrive older than the last accepted update for the same peer or entity stream.
|
||||
The high-frequency sync strategy SHALL tag gameplay synchronization messages with monotonic sequencing information and MUST discard stale `MoveInput` or `PlayerState` updates that arrive older than the last accepted update for the same peer or entity stream. `ShootInput` and `CombatEvent` MUST NOT be discarded by the latest-wins stale filter.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Older player input is ignored
|
||||
- **WHEN** the server receives a `PlayerInput` update with a tick or sequence older than the latest accepted input for that player
|
||||
- **THEN** the server drops that stale input update
|
||||
- **THEN** the newer accepted input remains authoritative for simulation
|
||||
#### Scenario: Older movement input is ignored
|
||||
- **WHEN** the server receives a `MoveInput` update with a tick or sequence older than the latest accepted input for that player
|
||||
- **THEN** the server drops that stale movement update
|
||||
- **THEN** the newer accepted movement input remains authoritative for simulation
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Older player state does not rewind a client
|
||||
- **WHEN** the client receives a `PlayerState` update with a tick or sequence older than the latest applied authoritative state for that player
|
||||
- **THEN** the client ignores the stale state update
|
||||
- **THEN** visible movement continues from the newer authoritative state without rewinding to older data
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Authoritative correction prunes acknowledged prediction history
|
||||
The client sync strategy SHALL reconcile local prediction against authoritative player-state updates by pruning acknowledged inputs at or before the authoritative tick and only reapplying newer pending inputs.
|
||||
#### Scenario: Reliable gameplay events bypass stale-drop filtering
|
||||
- **WHEN** the runtime receives a `ShootInput` or `CombatEvent` message
|
||||
- **THEN** the latest-wins stale filter does not reject that message solely because of sync-sequence rules
|
||||
- **THEN** reliable ordered handling remains responsible for preserving event delivery semantics
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Reconciliation removes already acknowledged inputs
|
||||
### Requirement: Authoritative correction prunes acknowledged prediction history
|
||||
The client sync strategy SHALL reconcile local prediction against authoritative player-state updates by pruning acknowledged movement inputs at or before the authoritative tick and only reapplying newer pending `MoveInput` messages.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Reconciliation removes already acknowledged movement inputs
|
||||
- **WHEN** the client accepts an authoritative `PlayerState` update for tick `N`
|
||||
- **THEN** locally buffered predicted inputs with tick less than or equal to `N` are removed from the replay buffer
|
||||
- **THEN** only inputs newer than `N` remain eligible for re-simulation
|
||||
- **THEN** locally buffered predicted `MoveInput` messages with tick less than or equal to `N` are removed from the replay buffer
|
||||
- **THEN** only `MoveInput` messages newer than `N` remain eligible for re-simulation
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Clock synchronization is a separate sync-policy concern
|
||||
The shared networking core SHALL process server-tick or clock-synchronization samples through a dedicated sync-policy component rather than storing clock-sync ownership inside `SessionManager`.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ The shared message-routing layer SHALL execute received business handlers throug
|
|||
- **THEN** the shared message-routing layer still processes received messages correctly through that host-selected strategy
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Shared core preserves current transport and message contracts
|
||||
The shared client/server foundation SHALL preserve the envelope-based business-message contract across client and server hosts while allowing delivery-policy selection behind the shared message-routing layer. Reliable control traffic MUST continue to use the existing `ITransport` contract, and high-frequency sync traffic MUST be composable through a host-agnostic sync strategy without introducing Unity-specific runtime types into the shared networking core.
|
||||
The shared client/server foundation SHALL preserve the envelope-based business-message contract across client and server hosts while allowing delivery-policy selection behind the shared message-routing layer. Reliable control traffic MUST continue to use the existing `ITransport` contract, and high-frequency sync traffic MUST be composable through a host-agnostic sync strategy without introducing Unity-specific runtime types into the shared networking core. The shared message-type contract MUST allow hosts to distinguish `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, `CombatEvent`, and `PlayerState` as separate business messages across both delivery lanes.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Shared hosts exchange the same envelope format across delivery lanes
|
||||
- **WHEN** a client host sends a business message through either the reliable control path or the high-frequency sync path
|
||||
|
|
@ -43,6 +43,11 @@ The shared client/server foundation SHALL preserve the envelope-based business-m
|
|||
- **THEN** it uses shared delivery-policy abstractions without depending on Unity frame-loop types
|
||||
- **THEN** the Unity client can use the same abstractions while still supplying its own host-specific dispatch behavior
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Shared hosts route split gameplay message identities consistently
|
||||
- **WHEN** client or server code sends `MoveInput`, `ShootInput`, `CombatEvent`, or `PlayerState`
|
||||
- **THEN** the envelope carries a distinct message-type value for that business message
|
||||
- **THEN** shared routing code can resolve handlers and delivery policy without decoding a mixed `PlayerInput` intent
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Shared runtime owns host-agnostic session lifecycle orchestration
|
||||
The shared network foundation SHALL include host-agnostic session lifecycle orchestration alongside transport startup and message routing. Client and server hosts MUST be able to compose the shared foundation with session orchestration that consumes transport events, login results, and heartbeat signals without depending on Unity-specific runtime types, while supporting both single-session client composition and multi-session server composition.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue