From e07f2bc22563d41fffc2d6f152fa87e07de495d6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Mikael Hugo Date: Sat, 2 May 2026 17:39:23 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] fix(sf): add depth calibration to research-milestone prompt MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Mirror the tiered Deep/Targeted/Light breakdown that research-slice.md already had — same structure, milestone-scoped wording. Add explicit '## Steps' header so the numbered steps no longer flow visually out of the calibration paragraph. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) --- .../extensions/sf/prompts/research-milestone.md | 12 ++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/resources/extensions/sf/prompts/research-milestone.md b/src/resources/extensions/sf/prompts/research-milestone.md index 2dd9a3c6c..eada8e929 100644 --- a/src/resources/extensions/sf/prompts/research-milestone.md +++ b/src/resources/extensions/sf/prompts/research-milestone.md @@ -26,9 +26,17 @@ Write for the roadmap planner. It needs to understand: what exists in the codeba ## Calibrate Depth -A milestone adding a small feature to an established codebase needs targeted research — check the relevant code, confirm the approach, note constraints. A milestone introducing new technology, building a new system, or spanning multiple unfamiliar subsystems needs deep research — explore broadly, look up docs, investigate alternatives. Match your effort to the actual uncertainty, not the template's section count. Include only sections that have real content. +Read the milestone title, the user's stated intent, and any inlined context above. Ask: does this milestone introduce new technology, span multiple unfamiliar subsystems, or have ambiguous scope? Or is it a focused feature in well-understood territory? -Then research the codebase and relevant technologies. Narrate key findings and surprises as you go — what exists, what's missing, what constrains the approach. +- **Deep research** — new technology, novel architecture, multiple risky integrations, or genuinely ambiguous scope. Explore broadly, look up docs, investigate alternatives. Write the full strategic frame including risks, boundaries, and slice-ordering rationale. This is the default when the milestone is genuinely uncertain. +- **Targeted research** — known technology but new to this codebase, or moderate complexity. Explore the relevant areas, check one or two libraries, identify constraints. Skip Comparable Systems if nothing applies. +- **Light research** — well-scoped milestone using established patterns already in the codebase. Read the relevant files to confirm the pattern, note constraints, write Summary + Recommendation + Implementation Landscape. A light milestone-research doc can be 30-50 lines. Don't manufacture risks or comparable-systems analysis for work that doesn't have them. + +An honest "this milestone is straightforward, here's the pattern and slice boundaries" beats a fabricated multi-page exploration for work that doesn't need it. + +## Steps + +Research the codebase and relevant technologies. Narrate key findings and surprises as you go — what exists, what's missing, what constrains the approach. 1. {{skillActivation}} 2. **Skill Discovery ({{skillDiscoveryMode}}):**{{skillDiscoveryInstructions}} 3. Explore relevant code. Use native `lsp` first for symbol lookup, references, and cross-file navigation. For small/familiar codebases, use `rg`, `find`, and targeted reads. For large or unfamiliar codebases, use `scout` to build a broad map efficiently before diving in.