# GSD-Lite Work Log

<!--
PERPETUAL SESSION WORK LOG - captures all work during project execution.
Tracks vision, planning, execution, decisions, and blockers across multiple tasks.

LIFECYCLE:
- Created: When project starts
- Updated: Throughout project execution
- Housekeeping: User-controlled archiving of completed tasks to HISTORY.md
- Perpetual: Logs persist until user requests archiving

PURPOSE:
- Session continuity: Fresh agents resume by reading Current Understanding (30-second context)
- Detailed history: Atomic log provides HOW we got here with full evidence
- Non-linear access: Grep patterns enable quick discovery (headers, log IDs, types, tasks)
- PR extraction: Filter by task to generate PR descriptions from execution logs

GREP PATTERNS FOR DISCOVERY:
- Headers: grep "^## " WORK.md — discover 3-part structure
- All logs with summaries: grep "^### \[LOG-" WORK.md — scan project evolution from headers
- Log by ID: grep "\[LOG-015\]" WORK.md — find specific entry
- Log by type: grep "\[DECISION\]" WORK.md — find all decisions
- Log by task: grep "Task: MODEL-A" WORK.md — filter by task

FILE READING STRATEGY:
1. Discover structure: grep "^## " to find section boundaries
2. Surgical read: Read from start_line using read_to_next_pattern or calculate end_line
3. See PROTOCOL.md "File Reading Strategy" section for detailed patterns
-->

---

## 1. Current Understanding (Read First)

<!--
HANDOFF SECTION - Read this first when resuming work.
Updated at checkpoint time or when significant state changes.
Target: Fresh agent can understand current state in 30 seconds.

Structure:
- current_mode: What workflow are we in? (moodboard, execution, checkpoint, etc.)
- active_task: What task is being worked on NOW
- parked_tasks: What tasks are on hold (waiting for decisions, dependencies, etc.)
- vision: What user wants - the intent, feel, references, success criteria
- decisions: Key decisions with rationale - not just WHAT but WHY
- blockers: Open questions, stuck items, waiting on user, ambiguities
- next_action: Specific first action when resuming this session

Use concrete facts, not jargon. Avoid "as discussed" or "per original vision" - fresh agent has zero context.

IMPORTANT: Below are EXAMPLE entries showing format - replace with your actual session content.
-->

<current_mode>
Example: execution (following execution.md workflow)
Example: moodboard (extracting user vision)
Example: checkpoint (pausing for session handoff)
</current_mode>

<active_task>
Example: Task: MODEL-A - Design card-based post layout with engagement metrics
Example: Task: AUTH-IMPL - Implement JWT authentication with refresh tokens
</active_task>

<parked_tasks>
Example: Task: MODEL-B - Timeline view implementation (deferred until card layout complete)
Example: Task: PERF-OPT - Database query optimization (waiting on schema finalization)
</parked_tasks>

<vision>
Example: User wants Linear-like feel + Bloomberg density for power users
Example: Authentication must support refresh token rotation for security
Example: Interface should not patronize advanced users with excessive whitespace
</vision>

<decisions>
Example: Use card-based layout, not timeline view (cards support varying content length)
Example: Separate reset tokens from main JWT (better security isolation)
Example: Log all EXEC/DISCOVERY entries with code snippets (enables PR extraction)
</decisions>

<blockers>
Example: None currently. Proceeding with card layout implementation.
Example: Password reset token expiry unclear - waiting on user decision (1 hour vs 24 hours)
</blockers>

<next_action>
Example: Complete card component styling, then verify against Linear reference
Example: Implement token validation middleware (TASK-003)
</next_action>

---

## 2. Key Events Index (Query Accelerator)

<!--
GREP ACCELERATOR - One-line summaries of major log entries.
Updated for "major" entries: VISION, DECISION, BLOCKER, DISCOVERY with code.
Skip EXEC/PLAN entries unless they're phase-changing.

Purpose: Quick scan without reading full atomic log.
Agent greps for type/task, reads index for context, then reads full log entry if needed.

Format: 10 words max per summary.

IMPORTANT: Below are EXAMPLE entries showing format - replace with your actual index content.
-->

| Log ID | Type | Task | Summary |
|--------|------|------|---------|
| EXAMPLE-001 | VISION | MODEL-A | Linear-like + Bloomberg density for power users |
| EXAMPLE-005 | DECISION | MODEL-A | Card-based layout over timeline view |
| EXAMPLE-012 | DISCOVERY | MODEL-A | Found engagement pattern in reference app |
| EXAMPLE-018 | BLOCKER | AUTH-IMPL | Password reset token expiry unclear |
| EXAMPLE-022 | DECISION | AUTH-IMPL | Separate reset token with 1-hour expiry |
| EXAMPLE-030 | DISCOVERY | AUTH-IMPL | bcrypt cost factor 12 optimal for performance |

---

## 3. Atomic Session Log (Chronological)

<!--
TYPE-TAGGED ATOMIC ENTRIES - All session work captured here.
Each entry is self-contained with code snippets where applicable.

Entry types (6 types):
- [VISION] - User vision/preferences, vision evolution, reference points
- [DECISION] - Decision made (tech, scope, approach) with rationale
- [DISCOVERY] - Evidence, findings, data (ALWAYS with code snippets)
- [PLAN] - Planning work: task breakdown, risk identification, approach
- [BLOCKER] - Open questions, stuck items, waiting states
- [EXEC] - Execution work: files modified, commands run (ALWAYS with code snippets)

Entry format:
### [LOG-NNN] - [TYPE] - {{one line summary}} - Task: TASK-ID
**Timestamp:** [YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM]
**Details:** [Full context with code snippets for EXEC/DISCOVERY]

WHY THIS FORMAT:
- Agents grep headers (`^### \[LOG-`) to scan project evolution without reading full content
- Summary in header line enables quick onboarding from grep output alone
- "###" level headers render nicely in IDE outlines for human navigation
- Timestamp moved under header keeps the grep-scanned line focused on WHAT happened

Use action timestamp (when decision made or action taken), not entry-write time.
Code snippets REQUIRED for EXEC and DISCOVERY entries (enables PR extraction).

IMPORTANT: Below are EXAMPLE entries showing format. Real entries should use [LOG-NNN] not [EXAMPLE-NNN].
-->

### [EXAMPLE-001] - [VISION] - User wants Linear-like feel + Bloomberg density for power users - Task: MODEL-A
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-22 14:00
**Details:**
- Context: Discussed UI patterns during moodboard session
- Reference: Clean layout (Linear) but with information density (Bloomberg terminal)
- Implication: Interface should not patronize advanced users with excessive whitespace

### [EXAMPLE-002] - [PLAN] - Broke card layout into 3 sub-tasks - Task: MODEL-A
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-22 14:10
**Details:**
- SUBTASK-001: Base card component with props interface
- SUBTASK-002: Engagement metrics display (likes, comments, shares)
- SUBTASK-003: Layout grid with responsive breakpoints
- Risk: Responsive behavior may need user verification on mobile

### [EXAMPLE-003] - [DECISION] - Use card-based layout, not timeline view - Task: MODEL-A
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-22 14:15
**Details:**
- Rationale: Cards support varying content length (post + engagement + metadata); timeline more rigid
- Alternative considered: Timeline view (simpler implementation, less flexible for content types)
- Impact: Unblocks component design; affects SUBTASK-001 (card props interface)

### [EXAMPLE-004] - [EXEC] - Created base card component with TypeScript interface - Task: MODEL-A
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-22 14:30
**Details:**
- Files modified: src/components/Card.tsx (created), src/types/post.ts (created)
- Code snippet:
```typescript
interface PostCardProps {
  post: {
    id: string;
    content: string;
    author: string;
    timestamp: Date;
    engagement: {
      likes: number;
      comments: number;
      shares: number;
    };
  };
}
```
- Status: SUBTASK-001 complete, proceeding to SUBTASK-002

### [EXAMPLE-005] - [DISCOVERY] - Found engagement pattern in Linear reference app - Task: MODEL-A
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-22 15:00
**Details:**
- Observation: Linear shows engagement inline, not in dropdown/modal
- Evidence from inspection:
```html
<div class="engagement-bar">
  <span class="metric">👍 12</span>
  <span class="metric">💬 5</span>
  <span class="metric">🔄 3</span>
</div>
```
- Impact: Informs SUBTASK-002 design (inline engagement, emoji + count)

### [EXAMPLE-006] - [EXEC] - Implemented engagement metrics component - Task: MODEL-A
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-22 15:30
**Details:**
- Files modified: src/components/EngagementBar.tsx (created)
- Code snippet:
```typescript
export function EngagementBar({ likes, comments, shares }: EngagementProps) {
  return (
    <div className="engagement-bar">
      <Metric icon="👍" count={likes} />
      <Metric icon="💬" count={comments} />
      <Metric icon="🔄" count={shares} />
    </div>
  );
}
```
- Status: SUBTASK-002 complete, proceeding to SUBTASK-003

### [EXAMPLE-007] - [BLOCKER] - Mobile breakpoint unclear - 768px or 640px? - Task: MODEL-A
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-22 16:00
**Details:**
- Issue: User hasn't specified mobile breakpoint preference
- Context: Linear uses 768px, Bloomberg uses custom breakpoints
- Waiting on: User decision on responsive strategy
- Impact: Blocks SUBTASK-003 (layout grid) until clarified

### [EXAMPLE-008] - [DECISION] - Use 768px breakpoint, standard tablet/mobile split - Task: MODEL-A
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-22 16:15
**Details:**
- Rationale: 768px is industry standard, matches Linear reference
- User preference: "Keep it simple, use standard breakpoints"
- Impact: Unblocks SUBTASK-003

### [EXAMPLE-009] - [EXEC] - Implemented responsive grid with 768px breakpoint - Task: MODEL-A
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-22 16:45
**Details:**
- Files modified: src/components/CardGrid.tsx (created), src/styles/grid.css (created)
- Code snippet:
```css
.card-grid {
  display: grid;
  grid-template-columns: repeat(auto-fill, minmax(300px, 1fr));
  gap: 1rem;
}

@media (max-width: 768px) {
  .card-grid {
    grid-template-columns: 1fr;
  }
}
```
- Status: SUBTASK-003 complete, Task: MODEL-A ready for verification

### [EXAMPLE-010] - [VISION] - Authentication must support refresh token rotation - Task: AUTH-IMPL
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-23 10:00
**Details:**
- Security requirement from user: "Don't want long-lived tokens floating around"
- Reference: OAuth 2.0 refresh token rotation best practice
- Success criteria: Access token 15min, refresh token rotates on use

### [EXAMPLE-011] - [PLAN] - JWT auth broken into 3 tasks - Task: AUTH-IMPL
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-23 10:20
**Details:**
- TASK-001: Library setup (jose v0.5.0) + token generation
- TASK-002: Login endpoint with bcrypt password hashing
- TASK-003: Token validation middleware + refresh rotation
- Risk: Token expiry strategy may need user decision

### [EXAMPLE-012] - [EXEC] - Installed jose library and created token generation - Task: AUTH-IMPL
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-23 10:30
**Details:**
- Files modified: src/auth/token.ts (created), package.json (jose added)
- Code snippet:
```typescript
export async function generateAccessToken(userId: string): Promise<string> {
  const secret = new TextEncoder().encode(process.env.JWT_SECRET);
  return await new SignJWT({ userId })
    .setProtectedHeader({ alg: 'HS256' })
    .setExpirationTime('15m')
    .sign(secret);
}
```
- Status: TASK-001 complete

### [EXAMPLE-013] - [DISCOVERY] - bcrypt cost factor 12 optimal for performance - Task: AUTH-IMPL
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-23 11:00
**Details:**
- Benchmark: Cost 10 = 50ms, Cost 12 = 150ms, Cost 14 = 600ms
- Code used for testing:
```typescript
import bcrypt from 'bcrypt';
for (const cost of [10, 12, 14]) {
  const start = Date.now();
  await bcrypt.hash('password', cost);
  console.log(`Cost ${cost}: ${Date.now() - start}ms`);
}
```
- Decision: Use cost 12 (150ms acceptable for login latency)

### [EXAMPLE-014] - [EXEC] - Created login endpoint with bcrypt hashing - Task: AUTH-IMPL
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-23 11:30
**Details:**
- Files modified: src/api/auth/login.ts (created)
- Code snippet:
```typescript
export async function loginHandler(req: Request, res: Response) {
  const { email, password } = req.body;
  const user = await db.findUserByEmail(email);
  const valid = await bcrypt.compare(password, user.passwordHash);
  if (!valid) throw new AuthError('Invalid credentials');
  const accessToken = await generateAccessToken(user.id);
  res.json({ accessToken });
}
```
- Status: TASK-002 complete, proceeding to TASK-003

### [EXAMPLE-015] - [BLOCKER] - Password reset flow unclear - same JWT or separate token? - Task: AUTH-IMPL
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-23 12:00
**Details:**
- Issue: Security model for password reset not specified
- Question: Reuse main JWT or generate separate reset token?
- Waiting on: User decision on security approach
- Impact: Blocks finalization of auth module architecture

### [EXAMPLE-016] - [DECISION] - Use separate reset token, not main JWT - Task: AUTH-IMPL
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-23 12:15
**Details:**
- Rationale: Separate token provides better security isolation
- User preference: "Don't reuse auth token for password reset - keep them separate"
- Expiry: 1 hour for reset token (short-lived for security)
- Impact: Need to add generateResetToken() to auth module

### [EXAMPLE-017] - [EXEC] - Added password reset token generation - Task: AUTH-IMPL
**Timestamp:** 2026-01-23 12:45
**Details:**
- Files modified: src/auth/token.ts (updated), src/api/auth/reset.ts (created)
- Code snippet:
```typescript
export async function generateResetToken(userId: string): Promise<string> {
  const secret = new TextEncoder().encode(process.env.JWT_SECRET);
  return await new SignJWT({ userId, type: 'reset' })
    .setProtectedHeader({ alg: 'HS256' })
    .setExpirationTime('1h')
    .sign(secret);
}
```
- Status: Password reset complete, Task: AUTH-IMPL ready for verification

---

*Housekeeping: Run "write PR for [TASK]" to extract task logs, or "archive [TASK]" to move completed entries to HISTORY.md*
