# ClaudeCraftsman Implementation Plan
*Detailed roadmap for building the artisanal agent framework*

**Document**: IMPL-PLAN-claudecraftsman-2025-08-03.md
**Created**: 2025-08-03
**Version**: 1.0
**Status**: Active

## Implementation Overview

ClaudeCraftsman will be built through four phases of artisanal development, where each phase adds sophisticated capabilities while maintaining craftsman quality standards. The implementation follows phase-based planning with quality gates, complexity-driven estimates, and dependency management.

## Implementation Philosophy

### Phase-Based Development
Work is organized by logical phases with dependencies rather than arbitrary time constraints. Each phase completes when quality standards are met, not when calendar dates arrive.

### Quality-First Approach
Every component is built to craftsman standards before progressing to the next phase. Quality gates prevent progression until standards are consistently met.

### Research-Driven Implementation
All implementation decisions are backed by current research using MCP tools. No assumptions without evidence.

### Context Preservation Excellence
Every phase maintains comprehensive context for future phases and team members.

## Phase 1: Planning Foundation
*Building the craftsman specification system*

### Phase Overview
**Objective**: Create master planning craftspeople who produce comprehensive, research-backed specifications
**Complexity**: Medium
**Dependencies**: None (foundation phase)
**Quality Gate**: Planning agents produce comprehensive specifications with proper citations

### Phase 1 Deliverables

#### P1.1: product-architect Agent
**Purpose**: Business requirements craftsperson and PRD creation master
**Complexity**: Low-Medium
**Implementation Priority**: 1 (Must-have)

**Technical Requirements**:
- Integration with MCP research tools (searxng, crawl4ai, context7)
- Time awareness using MCP time tool for current date context
- Comprehensive PRD template with BDD scenario integration
- Research citation requirements with verifiable sources
- File organization following `.claude/docs/current/` standards

**Deliverables**:
- `product-architect.md` agent definition with craftsman approach
- PRD template with research integration requirements
- BDD scenario templates for user story creation
- Citation format standards for research backing
- Quality checklist for PRD completeness

**Acceptance Criteria**:
- [ ] Agent produces PRDs with market research using MCP tools
- [ ] All claims have proper citations with sources and access dates
- [ ] Document naming uses current date from time MCP tool
- [ ] BDD scenarios created for all defined user stories
- [ ] File organization prevents root-level document creation

#### P1.2: design-architect Agent
**Purpose**: Technical specifications artisan and system design master
**Complexity**: Medium
**Implementation Priority**: 1 (Must-have)

**Technical Requirements**:
- Technical research capabilities using MCP tools
- Architecture decision documentation with evidence backing
- Integration with existing system analysis
- Technical specification template with craftsman standards
- Design pattern research and best practice integration

**Deliverables**:
- `design-architect.md` agent definition with design excellence focus
- Technical specification template with research requirements
- Architecture pattern library with researched best practices
- Integration planning templates for system coordination
- Quality standards for technical decision documentation

**Acceptance Criteria**:
- [ ] Agent produces technical specifications with research backing
- [ ] Architecture decisions documented with evidence and alternatives
- [ ] Integration requirements clearly specified with dependencies
- [ ] Technical feasibility validated through authoritative sources
- [ ] Scalability and maintainability considerations documented

#### P1.3: technical-planner Agent
**Purpose**: Implementation planning craftsperson and resource management
**Complexity**: Medium
**Implementation Priority**: 1 (Must-have)

**Technical Requirements**:
- Phase-based planning instead of time-based estimates
- Complexity assessment (Low/Medium/High) for task sizing
- Dependency mapping with critical path analysis
- Quality gate definition for phase progression
- Resource allocation based on agent specializations

**Deliverables**:
- `technical-planner.md` agent definition with planning mastery
- Implementation plan template with phase-based structure
- Task breakdown templates with complexity assessment
- Dependency mapping tools and visualization
- Quality gate checklist for phase completion validation

**Acceptance Criteria**:
- [ ] Plans use phase-based structure (Phase 1, 2, 3) not time-based
- [ ] Tasks have complexity ratings instead of time estimates
- [ ] Dependencies clearly mapped with critical path identified
- [ ] Quality gates defined for each phase with specific criteria
- [ ] Resource allocation matches agent specializations and capabilities

#### P1.4: /design Command Implementation
**Purpose**: Orchestrate complete design workflow through planning agents
**Complexity**: Low-Medium
**Implementation Priority**: 1 (Must-have)

**Technical Requirements**:
- Native Claude Code command integration
- Multi-agent workflow orchestration (product-architect → design-architect → technical-planner)
- Context preservation across agent transitions
- File organization management during workflow
- Quality validation at each transition point

**Deliverables**:
- `design.md` command definition with agent orchestration
- Workflow coordination protocol for planning agents
- Context preservation system for design workflow
- File organization automation for design outputs
- Quality gate enforcement during command execution

**Acceptance Criteria**:
- [ ] Single `/design` command produces PRD, tech spec, and implementation plan
- [ ] Agent transitions preserve complete context without information loss
- [ ] All outputs follow file organization standards automatically
- [ ] Quality gates prevent progression until standards met
- [ ] Command integrates natively with Claude Code without external dependencies

### Phase 1 Success Criteria

**Technical Success**:
- [ ] All planning agents produce comprehensive specifications
- [ ] Research integration working with verifiable citations
- [ ] File organization prevents documentation sprawl
- [ ] Time awareness implemented using MCP tools
- [ ] Agent coordination maintains context across transitions

**Quality Success**:
- [ ] Every specification includes market research with current data
- [ ] All technical decisions backed by evidence from authoritative sources
- [ ] Document naming uses actual current date from time MCP tool
- [ ] BDD scenarios created for all user stories with proper acceptance criteria
- [ ] File organization follows standards with zero root-level documents

**User Success**:
- [ ] `/design` command produces complete planning package
- [ ] Planning output serves as effective foundation for implementation
- [ ] SuperClaude planning patterns preserved with quality enhancements
- [ ] Documentation enables independent understanding by implementation teams

### Phase 1 Implementation Timeline

#### P1.1 → P1.2 Dependencies
- product-architect agent must be functional before design-architect
- PRD template and research standards established
- File organization patterns validated

#### P1.2 → P1.3 Dependencies
- design-architect agent must integrate with product-architect outputs
- Technical specification template working with PRD inputs
- Architecture research capabilities validated

#### P1.3 → P1.4 Dependencies
- technical-planner must consume tech spec outputs effectively
- Phase-based planning templates functional
- Quality gate definitions complete

#### P1.4 Integration Dependencies
- All three planning agents functional and tested individually
- Context preservation system working between agents
- File organization automation tested and reliable

## Phase 2: Implementation Craftspeople
*Building the specialized development artisans*

### Phase Overview
**Objective**: Create implementation craftspeople who transform specifications into quality software
**Complexity**: High
**Dependencies**: Phase 1 completion (planning foundation required)
**Quality Gate**: Implementation agents demonstrate proper handoffs and quality standards

### Phase 2 Deliverables

#### P2.1: system-architect Agent
**Purpose**: High-level architecture decisions with thoughtful consideration
**Complexity**: Medium
**Implementation Priority**: 1 (Must-have)

**Technical Requirements**:
- Integration with design-architect outputs and technical specifications
- Sequential thinking modes ("ultrathink") for complex architectural decisions
- System design patterns research using MCP tools
- Architecture decision records (ADR) generation
- Technology selection with evidence-based validation

**Deliverables**:
- `system-architect.md` agent definition with "ultrathink" integration
- System architecture templates with research requirements
- Technology selection criteria with evaluation frameworks
- ADR templates for documenting architectural decisions
- Integration pattern library for system coordination

**Acceptance Criteria**:
- [ ] Agent consumes technical specifications and produces system architecture
- [ ] Architecture decisions documented with evidence and alternatives considered
- [ ] Technology selections backed by current research and best practices
- [ ] System design supports scalability and maintainability requirements
- [ ] Integration patterns specified for all system components

#### P2.2: backend-architect Agent
**Purpose**: API and server-side development with quality focus
**Complexity**: High
**Implementation Priority**: 1 (Must-have)

**Technical Requirements**:
- Test-driven development (TDD) protocol integration
- API design with OpenAPI specification generation
- Database architecture with schema design
- Security best practices research and implementation
- Performance considerations with benchmarking requirements

**Deliverables**:
- `backend-architect.md` agent definition with TDD protocols
- API specification templates with OpenAPI integration
- Database design templates with migration planning
- Security checklist with current best practices
- Performance benchmarking framework for backend systems

**Acceptance Criteria**:
- [ ] Agent follows TDD protocols with tests written before implementation
- [ ] API specifications generated with comprehensive OpenAPI documentation
- [ ] Database schemas designed with migration and scaling considerations
- [ ] Security requirements implemented following current best practices
- [ ] Performance benchmarks defined with measurable criteria

#### P2.3: frontend-developer Agent
**Purpose**: UI and client-side development with user experience craftsmanship
**Complexity**: High
**Implementation Priority**: 1 (Must-have)

**Technical Requirements**:
- Behavior-driven development (BDD) integration for user scenarios
- Component architecture with reusable design patterns
- Accessibility compliance (WCAG) with validation requirements
- User experience research integration for design decisions
- Modern frontend best practices with current framework recommendations

**Deliverables**:
- `frontend-developer.md` agent definition with BDD integration
- Component architecture templates with design system integration
- Accessibility checklist with WCAG compliance validation
- User experience research integration for design decisions
- Frontend best practices library with current framework guidance

**Acceptance Criteria**:
- [ ] Agent integrates BDD scenarios into component development
- [ ] Component architecture supports reusability and maintainability
- [ ] Accessibility requirements met with WCAG compliance validation
- [ ] User experience decisions backed by research and usability principles
- [ ] Frontend implementation follows current best practices and patterns

#### P2.4: Coordination System Implementation
**Purpose**: Multi-agent workflow management and context preservation
**Complexity**: High
**Implementation Priority**: 1 (Must-have)

**Technical Requirements**:
- workflow-coordinator agent for orchestrating implementation craftspeople
- context-manager agent for context preservation and handoff facilitation
- Handoff protocol implementation with context validation
- Context file management system with integrity checking
- Progress tracking and quality gate enforcement

**Deliverables**:
- `workflow-coordinator.md` agent definition with orchestration capabilities
- `context-manager.md` agent definition with context preservation mastery
- Handoff brief templates with comprehensive context capture
- Context file management system with validation and integrity checking
- Progress tracking system with quality gate enforcement

**Acceptance Criteria**:
- [ ] workflow-coordinator successfully orchestrates multi-agent workflows
- [ ] context-manager preserves 100% context across agent transitions
- [ ] Handoff briefs capture complete context with no information loss
- [ ] Context files maintain integrity with validation and error recovery
- [ ] Progress tracking accurately reflects phase status and quality gate achievement

### Phase 2 Success Criteria

**Technical Success**:
- [ ] All implementation agents coordinate through proper handoff protocols
- [ ] TDD and BDD workflows functional with agent integration
- [ ] Context preservation working across all agent transitions
- [ ] System architecture supports implementation requirements
- [ ] Quality standards maintained throughout implementation process

**Quality Success**:
- [ ] Agent handoffs maintain 100% context preservation
- [ ] Implementation follows test-driven and behavior-driven practices
- [ ] Architecture decisions documented with research backing
- [ ] Code quality meets craftsman standards consistently
- [ ] User experience considerations integrated throughout development

**Integration Success**:
- [ ] Implementation agents consume planning outputs effectively
- [ ] Multi-agent coordination works without manual intervention
- [ ] Context management scales to complex multi-agent workflows
- [ ] Quality gates enforce standards before phase progression
- [ ] Error handling and recovery procedures functional

## Phase 3: Command Framework
*Building the complete command ecosystem*

### Phase Overview
**Objective**: Create comprehensive command suite with workflow orchestration
**Complexity**: High
**Dependencies**: Phase 2 completion (implementation agents required)
**Quality Gate**: Commands integrate seamlessly with design-to-implementation pipeline

### Phase 3 Deliverables

#### P3.1: /workflow Command
**Purpose**: Multi-agent workflow orchestration command
**Complexity**: High
**Implementation Priority**: 1 (Must-have)

**Technical Requirements**:
- Complete workflow orchestration from planning through implementation
- Agent coordination with parallel execution where possible
- Progress tracking with real-time status updates
- Context management throughout entire workflow
- Error handling and recovery procedures

#### P3.2: /implement Command
**Purpose**: Feature implementation with design integration
**Complexity**: High
**Implementation Priority**: 1 (Must-have)

**Technical Requirements**:
- Integration with design outputs from `/design` command
- Implementation agent coordination (system → backend → frontend)
- Test-driven and behavior-driven development enforcement
- Code quality validation and review integration
- Documentation generation during implementation

#### P3.3: Support Commands
**Purpose**: /troubleshoot, /test, and /document commands
**Complexity**: Medium-High
**Implementation Priority**: 2 (Should-have)

**Technical Requirements**:
- `/troubleshoot`: Systematic problem analysis with research integration
- `/test`: Comprehensive testing with coverage analysis and quality validation
- `/document`: Auto-generation of documentation from code and specifications

### Phase 3 Success Criteria

**Functional Success**:
- [ ] All commands integrate properly with agent system
- [ ] Design-to-implementation pipeline working end-to-end
- [ ] Command performance meets baseline requirements
- [ ] Error handling provides clear guidance and recovery options

**Integration Success**:
- [ ] Commands work seamlessly with Claude Code native functionality
- [ ] Agent coordination happens transparently to users
- [ ] Context preservation maintained across complex workflows
- [ ] File organization enforced automatically throughout command execution

## Phase 4: Integration & Mastery
*Completing the system and enabling user adoption*

### Phase Overview
**Objective**: System integration, testing, documentation, and migration tools
**Complexity**: Medium
**Dependencies**: Phase 3 completion (command framework required)
**Quality Gate**: Complete system ready for production use by craftspeople

### Phase 4 Deliverables

#### P4.1: End-to-End Testing
**Purpose**: Comprehensive workflow validation
**Complexity**: Medium
**Implementation Priority**: 1 (Must-have)

**Technical Requirements**:
- Complete feature development workflows using only ClaudeCraftsman
- Performance benchmarking against SuperClaude baseline
- Context preservation validation under load
- Error scenario testing and recovery validation
- Quality standard compliance throughout complex workflows

#### P4.2: Migration Tools & Documentation
**Purpose**: Enable SuperClaude user migration
**Complexity**: Medium
**Implementation Priority**: 1 (Must-have)

**Technical Requirements**:
- Automated setup scripts for directory structure creation
- SuperClaude → ClaudeCraftsman command mapping documentation
- Migration validation tools with success criteria checking
- Troubleshooting guides with common issues and solutions
- Best practices documentation for craftsman development

#### P4.3: Performance Optimization
**Purpose**: Ensure performance meets or exceeds SuperClaude baseline
**Complexity**: Low
**Implementation Priority**: 2 (Should-have)

**Technical Requirements**:
- Agent response time optimization
- Context loading and management optimization
- Command execution efficiency improvements
- Memory usage optimization for large projects
- Performance monitoring and reporting capabilities

### Phase 4 Success Criteria

**System Success**:
- [ ] End-to-end workflows tested and documented
- [ ] Migration tools validated with real SuperClaude users
- [ ] Performance meets or exceeds SuperClaude baseline
- [ ] All documentation complete and accurate

**User Success**:
- [ ] Setup time under 30 minutes for experienced users
- [ ] Migration completion rate >90% for SuperClaude users
- [ ] User satisfaction rating >4.5/5 for workflow quality
- [ ] Self-service adoption possible for new users

## Quality Gates and Dependencies

### Phase Progression Requirements

#### Phase 1 → Phase 2
**Quality Gates**:
- [ ] Planning agents produce comprehensive specifications with proper citations
- [ ] Design command functional with full documentation output
- [ ] Time awareness implemented using MCP tools throughout
- [ ] File organization standards implemented and tested
- [ ] Research integration working with verifiable sources

**Dependencies**:
- product-architect → design-architect → technical-planner workflow functional
- Context preservation working between planning agents
- File organization preventing documentation sprawl
- Research citations enabling independent verification

#### Phase 2 → Phase 3
**Quality Gates**:
- [ ] Agent handoffs maintain 100% context preservation
- [ ] TDD/BDD workflows functional with agent coordination
- [ ] Implementation agents meet craftsman quality standards
- [ ] Context management system stress-tested with complex workflows

**Dependencies**:
- All implementation agents functional individually
- Agent coordination working without manual intervention
- Context preservation scaling to multi-agent workflows
- Quality standards enforced consistently

#### Phase 3 → Phase 4
**Quality Gates**:
- [ ] All commands functional with proper agent integration
- [ ] Design-to-implementation pipeline working end-to-end
- [ ] Performance targets met or exceeded
- [ ] Quality standards maintained under load

**Dependencies**:
- Complete command suite functional
- Agent system stable under complex workflows
- Context management reliable for large projects
- Error handling and recovery procedures tested

#### Phase 4 → Completion
**Quality Gates**:
- [ ] End-to-end testing validates all workflows
- [ ] Migration tools tested with real users
- [ ] Documentation enables self-service adoption
- [ ] All success criteria met across all dimensions

**Dependencies**:
- System performance meets baseline requirements
- Migration validation successful with target users
- Documentation complete and accurate
- Quality standards consistently maintained

## Implementation Strategy

### Development Approach

#### Sequential Implementation Within Phases
- Complete each deliverable to quality standards before starting next
- Validate integration points as components are completed
- Maintain comprehensive context throughout development
- Quality reviews at each deliverable completion

#### Cross-Phase Integration Testing
- Integration testing between phases before progression
- Context preservation validation across phase boundaries
- Performance impact assessment as system complexity increases
- User feedback integration at major milestone completions

#### Continuous Quality Validation
- Research citation verification for all factual claims
- File organization compliance checking throughout development
- Agent output quality assessment against craftsman standards
- Context preservation integrity validation

### Risk Management

#### Technical Risk Mitigation
- **MCP Tool Dependencies**: Graceful degradation when tools unavailable
- **Context Management Complexity**: Comprehensive testing and validation procedures
- **Agent Coordination Failures**: Robust error handling and recovery procedures
- **Performance Degradation**: Regular benchmarking and optimization

#### User Adoption Risk Mitigation
- **Migration Complexity**: Comprehensive guides and automated setup tools
- **Learning Curve**: Progressive disclosure and familiar pattern preservation
- **Feature Gaps**: Rapid feedback integration and gap closure
- **Workflow Disruption**: Backward compatibility during transition periods

## Success Measurement

### Technical Metrics
- Agent response times and coordination success rates
- Context preservation accuracy and integrity validation
- File organization compliance and documentation quality
- Research integration completeness and citation accuracy

### User Metrics
- Migration completion rates and setup time tracking
- User satisfaction ratings and feedback quality
- Workflow productivity impact measurement
- Long-term retention and usage pattern analysis

### Quality Metrics
- Craftsman standard compliance across all outputs
- Research backing completeness for all claims
- Documentation organization and maintainability scores
- Phase completion without rework rates

---

**Implementation Plan Owner**: ClaudeCraftsman Project Team
**Last Updated**: 2025-08-03
**Next Review**: Phase 1 Completion
**Current Status**: Ready to Begin Phase 1 Implementation

*"Every phase is built with the same care and intention as a master craftsperson approaches their finest work."*
