155 lines
7.2 KiB
Markdown
155 lines
7.2 KiB
Markdown
# Pattern Compliance Checklist
|
|
|
|
## Pre-Task Execution
|
|
|
|
### Ultra-Deep Thinking Mode (UDTM)
|
|
- [ ] **UDTM Protocol Initiated**: All five phases planned
|
|
- [ ] **Multi-Angle Analysis**: Minimum 5 perspectives identified
|
|
- [ ] **Assumption Documentation**: All assumptions explicitly listed
|
|
- [ ] **Challenge Protocol**: Each assumption tested for validity
|
|
- [ ] **Verification Sources**: Three independent sources identified
|
|
|
|
### Planning and Context
|
|
- [ ] **Comprehensive Plan**: Detailed approach documented
|
|
- [ ] **Context Gathering**: All necessary information collected
|
|
- [ ] **Dependency Mapping**: All technical and business dependencies identified
|
|
- [ ] **Risk Assessment**: Potential failure modes analyzed
|
|
- [ ] **Success Criteria**: Clear, measurable outcomes defined
|
|
|
|
### Quality Gate Preparation
|
|
- [ ] **Quality Gates Defined**: Specific checkpoints established
|
|
- [ ] **Anti-Pattern Awareness**: Team briefed on patterns to avoid
|
|
- [ ] **Tool Configuration**: Linting and analysis tools properly set up
|
|
- [ ] **Review Protocol**: Brotherhood review process scheduled
|
|
|
|
## During Implementation
|
|
|
|
### Real Implementation Standards
|
|
- [ ] **No Mock Services**: All services perform actual work
|
|
- [ ] **No Placeholders**: No TODO, FIXME, or NotImplemented code
|
|
- [ ] **No Dummy Data**: Real data processing throughout
|
|
- [ ] **Specific Error Handling**: Custom exceptions for different scenarios
|
|
- [ ] **No Shortcuts**: Proper solutions, not workarounds
|
|
|
|
### Code Quality Enforcement
|
|
- [ ] **Zero Linting Violations**: Ruff checks pass completely
|
|
- [ ] **Zero Type Errors**: MyPy validation successful
|
|
- [ ] **Proper Type Hints**: All functions and methods fully typed
|
|
- [ ] **Complete Docstrings**: All public APIs documented
|
|
- [ ] **Consistent Formatting**: Code style standards enforced
|
|
|
|
### Integration Verification
|
|
- [ ] **Existing Pattern Consistency**: Follows established codebase patterns
|
|
- [ ] **API Compatibility**: Works with existing interfaces
|
|
- [ ] **Data Flow Validation**: Information flows correctly through system
|
|
- [ ] **Performance Standards**: Meets established performance criteria
|
|
- [ ] **Security Compliance**: No obvious vulnerabilities introduced
|
|
|
|
### Progressive Validation
|
|
- [ ] **Incremental Testing**: Regular testing throughout development
|
|
- [ ] **Anti-Pattern Scanning**: Continuous monitoring for prohibited patterns
|
|
- [ ] **Quality Gate Checks**: Regular validation against defined criteria
|
|
- [ ] **Integration Testing**: Ongoing verification with existing components
|
|
- [ ] **Documentation Updates**: Real-time documentation maintenance
|
|
|
|
## Brotherhood Review Requirements
|
|
|
|
### Pre-Review Preparation
|
|
- [ ] **Self-Assessment Complete**: Honest evaluation of own work
|
|
- [ ] **UDTM Documentation**: Analysis results properly documented
|
|
- [ ] **Quality Evidence**: Proof of standards compliance provided
|
|
- [ ] **Test Results**: Comprehensive testing results available
|
|
- [ ] **Issue Documentation**: Any problems and resolutions recorded
|
|
|
|
### Review Process
|
|
- [ ] **Independent Analysis**: Reviewer performs independent evaluation
|
|
- [ ] **Reality Check**: "Does this actually work?" question answered
|
|
- [ ] **Technical Validation**: Code quality and architecture verified
|
|
- [ ] **Logic Assessment**: Solution appropriateness confirmed
|
|
- [ ] **Production Readiness**: Deployment viability assessed
|
|
|
|
### Review Outcomes
|
|
- [ ] **Specific Feedback**: Concrete, actionable recommendations provided
|
|
- [ ] **Evidence-Based Assessment**: Claims supported by verifiable facts
|
|
- [ ] **Honest Evaluation**: True quality assessment, not sycophantic approval
|
|
- [ ] **Knowledge Sharing**: Learning opportunities identified and shared
|
|
- [ ] **Improvement Actions**: Clear next steps defined if needed
|
|
|
|
## Final Validation
|
|
|
|
### Functionality Verification
|
|
- [ ] **End-to-End Testing**: Complete workflow verification
|
|
- [ ] **Error Scenario Testing**: Failure modes properly handled
|
|
- [ ] **Performance Testing**: System performs within acceptable parameters
|
|
- [ ] **Security Testing**: Basic security review completed
|
|
- [ ] **User Acceptance**: Requirements fully satisfied
|
|
|
|
### Quality Standards Confirmation
|
|
- [ ] **Code Quality**: All quality metrics satisfied
|
|
- [ ] **Test Coverage**: Adequate test coverage achieved
|
|
- [ ] **Documentation Quality**: Complete and accurate documentation
|
|
- [ ] **Maintainability**: Code can be understood and modified by others
|
|
- [ ] **Scalability**: Solution handles expected growth
|
|
|
|
### Production Readiness
|
|
- [ ] **Deployment Readiness**: Can be safely deployed to production
|
|
- [ ] **Monitoring Capability**: Appropriate logging and monitoring in place
|
|
- [ ] **Rollback Capability**: Can be safely reverted if issues arise
|
|
- [ ] **Support Documentation**: Operations team has necessary information
|
|
- [ ] **Performance Baseline**: Expected performance characteristics documented
|
|
|
|
## Anti-Pattern Final Check
|
|
|
|
### Code Anti-Patterns (Zero Tolerance)
|
|
- [ ] **No Mock Services**: Verified no mock services in production paths
|
|
- [ ] **No Placeholder Code**: Confirmed no TODO, FIXME, or NotImplemented
|
|
- [ ] **No Assumption Code**: All logic based on verified facts
|
|
- [ ] **No Generic Errors**: Specific exception handling throughout
|
|
|
|
### Process Anti-Patterns (Zero Tolerance)
|
|
- [ ] **No Skipped Planning**: Proper design phase completed
|
|
- [ ] **No Quality Shortcuts**: All linting and testing standards met
|
|
- [ ] **No Assumption Implementation**: All assumptions verified before use
|
|
- [ ] **No Documentation Gaps**: Complete technical documentation provided
|
|
|
|
### Communication Anti-Patterns (Zero Tolerance)
|
|
- [ ] **No Sycophantic Approval**: All assessments include specific analysis
|
|
- [ ] **No Vague Feedback**: All feedback includes concrete examples
|
|
- [ ] **No False Confidence**: Uncertainty acknowledged where it exists
|
|
- [ ] **No Scope Creep**: Implementation matches defined requirements
|
|
|
|
## Success Criteria Validation
|
|
|
|
### Quality Achievement
|
|
- [ ] **All Standards Met**: Every quality criterion satisfied
|
|
- [ ] **Zero Critical Issues**: No blocking problems identified
|
|
- [ ] **Performance Acceptable**: Meets or exceeds performance requirements
|
|
- [ ] **Security Adequate**: No significant security vulnerabilities
|
|
- [ ] **Maintainability High**: Code is clean, well-documented, and modular
|
|
|
|
### Pattern Compliance
|
|
- [ ] **UDTM Completed**: Ultra-deep thinking mode fully executed
|
|
- [ ] **Anti-Patterns Eliminated**: Zero prohibited patterns detected
|
|
- [ ] **Quality Gates Passed**: All defined checkpoints successfully cleared
|
|
- [ ] **Brotherhood Review Completed**: Peer validation successfully completed
|
|
- [ ] **Documentation Complete**: All artifacts properly documented
|
|
|
|
### Readiness Confirmation
|
|
- [ ] **Production Ready**: Safe for production deployment
|
|
- [ ] **Team Ready**: Team understands and can support the solution
|
|
- [ ] **Process Compliant**: All organizational processes followed
|
|
- [ ] **Quality Assured**: Confidence in solution reliability and maintainability
|
|
- [ ] **Value Delivered**: Solution meets business requirements and expectations
|
|
|
|
## Checklist Completion Sign-off
|
|
|
|
**Task**: [Description]
|
|
**Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
|
|
**Implementer**: [Name]
|
|
**Reviewer**: [Name]
|
|
|
|
**Compliance Status**: [ ] PASS / [ ] CONDITIONAL / [ ] FAIL
|
|
**Confidence Level**: [1-10] (Must be ≥9 for PASS)
|
|
**Notes**: [Any additional observations or concerns]
|
|
|
|
**Final Approval**: [Signature/Name] - [Date] |