Skip to content

docs: proposal 011 — revision summary on artifact approval - #31

Closed
eshulman2 wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
feat/proposal-011-revision-summary
Closed

docs: proposal 011 — revision summary on artifact approval#31
eshulman2 wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
feat/proposal-011-revision-summary

Conversation

@eshulman2

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Summary

  • Adds proposals/011-revision-summary-on-approval.md proposing a structured revision history that mirrors the existing Q&A summary (proposal 001)
  • Updates proposals/README.md index with the new entry

What the proposal covers

  • revision_history state field accumulating feedback + agent-generated change notes across all revision rounds
  • post_revision_summary_if_needed() utility (modeled on post_qa_summary_if_needed()) posted to Jira on artifact approval
  • Small regenerate.md prompt update to emit a one-sentence change note alongside the revised content
  • Integration points in prd_approval.py and spec_approval.py
  • Estimated ~2 days total effort across 3 phases

Open questions (in the proposal)

  • Scope: PRD + spec only, or also plan and task revisions?
  • Change note source: agent-generated vs. artifact diff?
  • Format: separate Jira comment or merged with the Q&A summary?

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Proposes a revision history mechanism that mirrors the existing Q&A
summary: accumulate feedback+change-note pairs in state during each
regeneration cycle, then post a structured Jira comment when the
artifact is approved.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@eshulman2
eshulman2 marked this pull request as draft May 7, 2026 12:13
@eshulman2 eshulman2 added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation proposal Design proposal or architectural direction requiring alignment work in progress labels Jul 16, 2026
@eshulman2

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Closing without conversion to a standalone issue. The existing Jira/GitHub discussion already provides the source audit trail, while a reliable consolidated summary depends on durable artifact identity/versioning (#150 and #91) and lifecycle-wide artifact history/Q&A (#163). We can reconsider presentation-level summaries after those foundations exist.

@eshulman2 eshulman2 closed this Jul 16, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

documentation Improvements or additions to documentation proposal Design proposal or architectural direction requiring alignment work in progress

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant