feat: design system overhaul — sidebar, AI chats, settings, brainstorm, color cleanup
All checks were successful
Deploy to Production / Build and Deploy (push) Successful in 12s
All checks were successful
Deploy to Production / Build and Deploy (push) Successful in 12s
- Sidebar: dynamic brand-accent colors, brainstorm section restyled - AI chat general: popup panel with expand/collapse, hides when contextual AI open - AI chat contextual: tabs reordered (Actions first), X close button, height fix - Settings: all tabs restyled, 6 new color presets (sage, terracotta, iron, etc.) - Global color cleanup: emerald/orange hardcoded → brand-accent dynamic - Brainstorm page: orange → brand-accent throughout - PageEntry animation component added to key pages - Floating AI button: bg-brand-accent instead of hardcoded black - i18n: all 15 locales updated with new AI/billing keys - Billing: freemium quota tracking, BYOK, stripe subscription scaffolding - Admin: integrated into new design - AGENTS.md + CLAUDE.md project rules added
This commit is contained in:
@@ -55,7 +55,8 @@ Load {planning_artifacts}/epics.md and review:
|
||||
2. **Requirements Grouping**: Group related FRs that deliver cohesive user outcomes
|
||||
3. **Incremental Delivery**: Each epic should deliver value independently
|
||||
4. **Logical Flow**: Natural progression from user's perspective
|
||||
5. **🔗 Dependency-Free Within Epic**: Stories within an epic must NOT depend on future stories
|
||||
5. **Dependency-Free Within Epic**: Stories within an epic must NOT depend on future stories
|
||||
6. **Implementation Efficiency**: Consider consolidating epics that all modify the same core files into fewer epics
|
||||
|
||||
**⚠️ CRITICAL PRINCIPLE:**
|
||||
Organize by USER VALUE, not technical layers:
|
||||
@@ -74,6 +75,18 @@ Organize by USER VALUE, not technical layers:
|
||||
- Epic 3: Frontend Components (creates reusable components) - **No user value**
|
||||
- Epic 4: Deployment Pipeline (CI/CD setup) - **No user value**
|
||||
|
||||
**❌ WRONG Epic Examples (File Churn on Same Component):**
|
||||
|
||||
- Epic 1: File Upload (modifies model, controller, web form, web API)
|
||||
- Epic 2: File Status (modifies model, controller, web form, web API)
|
||||
- Epic 3: File Access permissions (modifies model, controller, web form, web API)
|
||||
- All three epics touch the same files — consolidate into one epic with ordered stories
|
||||
|
||||
**✅ CORRECT Alternative:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Epic 1: File Management Enhancement (upload, status, permissions as stories within one epic)
|
||||
- Rationale: Single component, fully pre-designed, no feedback loop between epics
|
||||
|
||||
**🔗 DEPENDENCY RULES:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Each epic must deliver COMPLETE functionality for its domain
|
||||
@@ -82,21 +95,38 @@ Organize by USER VALUE, not technical layers:
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Design Epic Structure Collaboratively
|
||||
|
||||
**Step A: Identify User Value Themes**
|
||||
**Step A: Assess Context and Identify Themes**
|
||||
|
||||
First, assess how much of the solution design is already validated (Architecture, UX, Test Design).
|
||||
When the outcome is certain and direction changes between epics are unlikely, prefer fewer but larger epics.
|
||||
Split into multiple epics when there is a genuine risk boundary or when early feedback could change direction
|
||||
of following epics.
|
||||
|
||||
Then, identify user value themes:
|
||||
|
||||
- Look for natural groupings in the FRs
|
||||
- Identify user journeys or workflows
|
||||
- Consider user types and their goals
|
||||
|
||||
**Step B: Propose Epic Structure**
|
||||
For each proposed epic:
|
||||
|
||||
For each proposed epic (considering whether epics share the same core files):
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Epic Title**: User-centric, value-focused
|
||||
2. **User Outcome**: What users can accomplish after this epic
|
||||
3. **FR Coverage**: Which FR numbers this epic addresses
|
||||
4. **Implementation Notes**: Any technical or UX considerations
|
||||
|
||||
**Step C: Create the epics_list**
|
||||
**Step C: Review for File Overlap**
|
||||
|
||||
Assess whether multiple proposed epics repeatedly target the same core files. If overlap is significant:
|
||||
|
||||
- Distinguish meaningful overlap (same component end-to-end) from incidental sharing
|
||||
- Ask whether to consolidate into one epic with ordered stories
|
||||
- If confirmed, merge the epic FRs into a single epic, preserving dependency flow: each story must still fit within
|
||||
a single dev agent's context
|
||||
|
||||
**Step D: Create the epics_list**
|
||||
|
||||
Format the epics_list as:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -90,6 +90,12 @@ Review the complete epic and story breakdown to ensure EVERY FR is covered:
|
||||
- Dependencies flow naturally
|
||||
- Foundation stories only setup what's needed
|
||||
- No big upfront technical work
|
||||
- **File Churn Check:** Do multiple epics repeatedly modify the same core files?
|
||||
- Assess whether the overlap pattern suggests unnecessary churn or is incidental
|
||||
- If overlap is significant: Validate that splitting provides genuine value (risk mitigation, feedback loops, context size limits)
|
||||
- If no justification for the split: Recommend consolidation into fewer epics
|
||||
- ❌ WRONG: Multiple epics each modify the same core files with no feedback loop between them
|
||||
- ✅ RIGHT: Epics target distinct files/components, OR consolidation was explicitly considered and rejected with rationale
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Dependency Validation (CRITICAL)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user