Compound Docs

OR manual: /doc-fix command

Non-trivial problems only:

• Multiple investigation attempts needed
• Tricky debugging that took time
• Non-obvious solution
• Future sessions would benefit

Skip documentation for:

• Simple typos
• Obvious syntax errors
• Trivial fixes immediately corrected </step>

Extract from conversation history:

Required information:

• Module name: Which CORA module had the problem
• Symptom: Observable error/behavior (exact error messages)
• Investigation attempts: What didn't work and why
• Root cause: Technical explanation of actual problem
• Solution: What fixed it (code/config changes)
• Prevention: How to avoid in future

Environment details:

• Rails version
• Stage (0-6 or post-implementation)
• OS version
• File/line references

BLOCKING REQUIREMENT: If critical context is missing (module name, exact error, stage, or resolution steps), ask user and WAIT for response before proceeding to Step 3:

I need a few details to document this properly:

1. Which module had this issue? [ModuleName]
2. What was the exact error message or symptom?
3. What stage were you in? (0-6 or post-implementation)

[Continue after user provides details]

Search docs/solutions/ for similar issues:

# Search by error message keywords
grep -r "exact error phrase" docs/solutions/

# Search by symptom category
ls docs/solutions/[category]/

IF similar issue found:

THEN present decision options:

Found similar issue: docs/solutions/[path]

What's next?
1. Create new doc with cross-reference (recommended)
2. Update existing doc (only if same root cause)
3. Other

Choose (1-3): _

WAIT for user response, then execute chosen action.

ELSE (no similar issue found):

Proceed directly to Step 4 (no user interaction needed). </step>

Format: [sanitized-symptom]-[module]-[YYYYMMDD].md

Sanitization rules:

• Lowercase
• Replace spaces with hyphens
• Remove special characters except hyphens
• Truncate to reasonable length (< 80 chars)

Examples:

• missing-include-BriefSystem-20251110.md
• parameter-not-saving-state-EmailProcessing-20251110.md
• webview-crash-on-resize-Assistant-20251110.md </step>

CRITICAL: All docs require validated YAML frontmatter with enum validation.

<validation_gate name="yaml-schema" blocking="true">

Validate against schema: Load schema.yaml and classify the problem against the enum values defined in yaml-schema.md. Ensure all required fields are present and match allowed values exactly.

BLOCK if validation fails:

❌ YAML validation failed

Errors:
- problem_type: must be one of schema enums, got "compilation_error"
- severity: must be one of [critical, moderate, minor], got "high"
- symptoms: must be array with 1-5 items, got string

Please provide corrected values.

GATE ENFORCEMENT: Do NOT proceed to Step 6 (Create Documentation) until YAML frontmatter passes all validation rules defined in schema.yaml.

</validation_gate> </step>

Determine category from problem_type: Use the category mapping defined in yaml-schema.md (lines 49-61).

Create documentation file:

PROBLEM_TYPE="[from validated YAML]"
CATEGORY="[mapped from problem_type]"
FILENAME="[generated-filename].md"
DOC_PATH="docs/solutions/${CATEGORY}/${FILENAME}"

# Create directory if needed
mkdir -p "docs/solutions/${CATEGORY}"

# Write documentation using template from assets/resolution-template.md
# (Content populated with Step 2 context and validated YAML frontmatter)

Result:

• Single file in category directory
• Enum validation ensures consistent categorization

Create documentation: Populate the structure from assets/resolution-template.md with context gathered in Step 2 and validated YAML frontmatter from Step 5. </step>

If similar issues found in Step 3:

Update existing doc:

# Add Related Issues link to similar doc
echo "- See also: [$FILENAME]($REAL_FILE)" >> [similar-doc.md]

Update new doc: Already includes cross-reference from Step 6.

Update patterns if applicable:

If this represents a common pattern (3+ similar issues):

# Add to docs/solutions/patterns/common-solutions.md
cat >> docs/solutions/patterns/common-solutions.md << 'EOF'

## [Pattern Name]

**Common symptom:** [Description]
**Root cause:** [Technical explanation]
**Solution pattern:** [General approach]

**Examples:**
- [Link to doc 1]
- [Link to doc 2]
- [Link to doc 3]
EOF

Critical Pattern Detection (Optional Proactive Suggestion):

If this issue has automatic indicators suggesting it might be critical:

• Severity: critical in YAML
• Affects multiple modules OR foundational stage (Stage 2 or 3)
• Non-obvious solution

Then in the decision menu (Step 8), add a note:

💡 This might be worth adding to Required Reading (Option 2)

But NEVER auto-promote. User decides via decision menu (Option 2).

Template for critical pattern addition:

When user selects Option 2 (Add to Required Reading), use the template from assets/critical-pattern-template.md to structure the pattern entry. Number it sequentially based on existing patterns in docs/solutions/patterns/cora-critical-patterns.md. </step>

</critical_sequence>

<decision_gate name="post-documentation" wait_for_user="true">

Decision Menu After Capture

After successful documentation, present options and WAIT for user response:

✓ Solution documented

File created:
- docs/solutions/[category]/[filename].md

What's next?
1. Continue workflow (recommended)
2. Add to Required Reading - Promote to critical patterns (cora-critical-patterns.md)
3. Link related issues - Connect to similar problems
4. Add to existing skill - Add to a learning skill (e.g., hotwire-native)
5. Create new skill - Extract into new learning skill
6. View documentation - See what was captured
7. Other

Handle responses:

Option 1: Continue workflow

• Return to calling skill/workflow
• Documentation is complete

Option 2: Add to Required Reading ⭐ PRIMARY PATH FOR CRITICAL PATTERNS

User selects this when:

• System made this mistake multiple times across different modules
• Solution is non-obvious but must be followed every time
• Foundational requirement (Rails, Rails API, threading, etc.)

Action:

1. Extract pattern from the documentation
2. Format as ❌ WRONG vs ✅ CORRECT with code examples
3. Add to docs/solutions/patterns/cora-critical-patterns.md
4. Add cross-reference back to this doc
5. Confirm: "✓ Added to Required Reading. All subagents will see this pattern before code generation."

Option 3: Link related issues

• Prompt: "Which doc to link? (provide filename or describe)"
• Search docs/solutions/ for the doc
• Add cross-reference to both docs
• Confirm: "✓ Cross-reference added"

Option 4: Add to existing skill

User selects this when the documented solution relates to an existing learning skill:

Action:

1. Prompt: "Which skill? (hotwire-native, etc.)"
2. Determine which reference file to update (resources.md, patterns.md, or examples.md)
3. Add link and brief description to appropriate section
4. Confirm: "✓ Added to [skill-name] skill in [file]"

Example: For Hotwire Native Tailwind variants solution:

• Add to hotwire-native/references/resources.md under "CORA-Specific Resources"
• Add to hotwire-native/references/examples.md with link to solution doc

Option 5: Create new skill

User selects this when the solution represents the start of a new learning domain:

Action:

1. Prompt: "What should the new skill be called? (e.g., stripe-billing, email-processing)"
2. Run python3 .claude/skills/skill-creator/scripts/init_skill.py [skill-name]
3. Create initial reference files with this solution as first example
4. Confirm: "✓ Created new [skill-name] skill with this solution as first example"

Option 6: View documentation

• Display the created documentation
• Present decision menu again

Option 7: Other

• Ask what they'd like to do

</decision_gate>

<integration_protocol>

Integration Points

Invoked by:

• /compound command (primary interface)
• Manual invocation in conversation after solution confirmed
• Can be triggered by detecting confirmation phrases like "that worked", "it's fixed", etc.

Invokes:

• None (terminal skill - does not delegate to other skills)

Handoff expectations: All context needed for documentation should be present in conversation history before invocation.

</integration_protocol>

<success_criteria>

Success Criteria

Documentation is successful when ALL of the following are true:

• ✅ YAML frontmatter validated (all required fields, correct formats)
• ✅ File created in docs/solutions/[category]/[filename].md
• ✅ Enum values match schema.yaml exactly
• ✅ Code examples included in solution section
• ✅ Cross-references added if related issues found
• ✅ User presented with decision menu and action confirmed

</success_criteria>

Error Handling

Missing context:

• Ask user for missing details
• Don't proceed until critical info provided

YAML validation failure:

• Show specific errors
• Present retry with corrected values
• BLOCK until valid

Similar issue ambiguity:

• Present multiple matches
• Let user choose: new doc, update existing, or link as duplicate

Module not in CORA-MODULES.md:

• Warn but don't block
• Proceed with documentation
• Suggest: "Add [Module] to CORA-MODULES.md if not there"

Execution Guidelines

MUST do:

• Validate YAML frontmatter (BLOCK if invalid per Step 5 validation gate)
• Extract exact error messages from conversation
• Include code examples in solution section
• Create directories before writing files (mkdir -p)
• Ask user and WAIT if critical context missing

MUST NOT do:

• Skip YAML validation (validation gate is blocking)
• Use vague descriptions (not searchable)
• Omit code examples or cross-references

Quality Guidelines

Good documentation has:

• ✅ Exact error messages (copy-paste from output)
• ✅ Specific file:line references
• ✅ Observable symptoms (what you saw, not interpretations)
• ✅ Failed attempts documented (helps avoid wrong paths)
• ✅ Technical explanation (not just "what" but "why")
• ✅ Code examples (before/after if applicable)
• ✅ Prevention guidance (how to catch early)
• ✅ Cross-references (related issues)

Avoid:

• ❌ Vague descriptions ("something was wrong")
• ❌ Missing technical details ("fixed the code")
• ❌ No context (which version? which file?)
• ❌ Just code dumps (explain why it works)
• ❌ No prevention guidance
• ❌ No cross-references

Example Scenario

User: "That worked! The N+1 query is fixed."

Skill activates:

1. Detect confirmation: "That worked!" triggers auto-invoke
2. Gather context:
   • Module: Brief System
   • Symptom: Brief generation taking >5 seconds, N+1 query when loading email threads
   • Failed attempts: Added pagination (didn't help), checked background job performance
   • Solution: Added eager loading with includes(:emails) on Brief model
   • Root cause: Missing eager loading causing separate database query per email thread
3. Check existing: No similar issue found
4. Generate filename: n-plus-one-brief-generation-BriefSystem-20251110.md
5. Validate YAML:

   module: Brief System
   date: 2025-11-10
   problem_type: performance_issue
   component: rails_model
   symptoms:
     - "N+1 query when loading email threads"
     - "Brief generation taking >5 seconds"
   root_cause: missing_include
   severity: high
   tags: [n-plus-one, eager-loading, performance]
   

   ✅ Valid
6. Create documentation:
   • docs/solutions/performance-issues/n-plus-one-brief-generation-BriefSystem-20251110.md
7. Cross-reference: None needed (no similar issues)

Output:

✓ Solution documented

File created:
- docs/solutions/performance-issues/n-plus-one-brief-generation-BriefSystem-20251110.md

What's next?
1. Continue workflow (recommended)
2. Add to Required Reading - Promote to critical patterns (cora-critical-patterns.md)
3. Link related issues - Connect to similar problems
4. Add to existing skill - Add to a learning skill (e.g., hotwire-native)
5. Create new skill - Extract into new learning skill
6. View documentation - See what was captured
7. Other

Future Enhancements

Not in Phase 7 scope, but potential:

• Search by date range
• Filter by severity
• Tag-based search interface
• Metrics (most common issues, resolution time)
• Export to shareable format (community knowledge sharing)
• Import community solutions