ahnyongjooandClaude Sonnet 5.5
964a841de1
- Code\rebar_pipeline, review_pipeline, pier-program을 정션에서 실제 폴더로 전환 - Code\rhino_mcp 및 CLAUDE_rhino배경.md 추가, .mcp.json은 PYTHONPATH로 새 위치 사용 - pier-program 내부 .git 제거(이력은 backup\pier-program_20261028.bundle에 보관) - worktree 가이드 반영(CLAUDE.local.md, HANDOFF.md) - D:\Rhino-MCP 경로 참조를 새 위치로 치환 Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
237 lines
5.7 KiB
Markdown
237 lines
5.7 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
template: plan-plus
|
|
version: 1.0
|
|
description: Brainstorming-enhanced PDCA Plan template with User Intent, Alternatives, and YAGNI sections
|
|
variables:
|
|
- feature: Feature name
|
|
- date: Creation date (YYYY-MM-DD)
|
|
- author: Author
|
|
- project: Project name (from package.json or agents.md)
|
|
- version: Project version (from package.json)
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# {feature} Planning Document
|
|
|
|
> **Summary**: {One-line description}
|
|
>
|
|
> **Project**: {project}
|
|
> **Version**: {version}
|
|
> **Author**: {author}
|
|
> **Date**: {date}
|
|
> **Status**: Draft
|
|
> **Method**: Plan Plus (Brainstorming-Enhanced PDCA)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Executive Summary
|
|
|
|
| Perspective | Content |
|
|
|-------------|---------|
|
|
| **Problem** | {Core problem this feature solves in 1-2 sentences} |
|
|
| **Solution** | {Selected approach summary in 1-2 sentences} |
|
|
| **Function/UX Effect** | {Expected functional and UX impact} |
|
|
| **Core Value** | {Core value proposition in 1-2 sentences} |
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 1. User Intent Discovery
|
|
|
|
### 1.1 Core Problem
|
|
|
|
{The core problem this feature solves — discovered through brainstorming Q1}
|
|
|
|
### 1.2 Target Users
|
|
|
|
| User Type | Usage Context | Key Need |
|
|
|-----------|---------------|----------|
|
|
| {User type} | {Context} | {Key need} |
|
|
|
|
### 1.3 Success Criteria
|
|
|
|
- [ ] {Measurable success criterion 1}
|
|
- [ ] {Measurable success criterion 2}
|
|
|
|
### 1.4 Constraints
|
|
|
|
| Constraint | Details | Impact |
|
|
|------------|---------|--------|
|
|
| {Constraint} | {Details} | High/Medium/Low |
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 2. Alternatives Explored
|
|
|
|
### 2.1 Approach A: {name} {Mark "— Selected" if chosen}
|
|
|
|
| Aspect | Details |
|
|
|--------|---------|
|
|
| **Summary** | {One-line description} |
|
|
| **Pros** | {Advantages} |
|
|
| **Cons** | {Disadvantages} |
|
|
| **Effort** | {Estimated complexity: Low/Medium/High} |
|
|
| **Best For** | {When this approach is most suitable} |
|
|
|
|
### 2.2 Approach B: {name}
|
|
|
|
| Aspect | Details |
|
|
|--------|---------|
|
|
| **Summary** | {One-line description} |
|
|
| **Pros** | {Advantages} |
|
|
| **Cons** | {Disadvantages} |
|
|
| **Effort** | {Estimated complexity} |
|
|
| **Best For** | {When this approach is most suitable} |
|
|
|
|
### 2.3 Decision Rationale
|
|
|
|
**Selected**: Approach {A/B}
|
|
**Reason**: {Selection reason — based on specific trade-offs}
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 3. YAGNI Review
|
|
|
|
### 3.1 Included (v1 Must-Have)
|
|
|
|
- [ ] {Essential feature 1}
|
|
- [ ] {Essential feature 2}
|
|
- [ ] {Essential feature 3}
|
|
|
|
### 3.2 Deferred (v2+ Maybe)
|
|
|
|
| Feature | Reason for Deferral | Revisit When |
|
|
|---------|---------------------|--------------|
|
|
| {Feature} | {Why not needed now} | {When to reconsider} |
|
|
|
|
### 3.3 Removed (Won't Do)
|
|
|
|
| Feature | Reason for Removal |
|
|
|---------|-------------------|
|
|
| {Feature} | {Removal reason} |
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 4. Scope
|
|
|
|
### 4.1 In Scope
|
|
|
|
- [ ] {Included item 1}
|
|
- [ ] {Included item 2}
|
|
- [ ] {Included item 3}
|
|
|
|
### 4.2 Out of Scope
|
|
|
|
- {Excluded item 1} — (from YAGNI Review)
|
|
- {Excluded item 2}
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 5. Requirements
|
|
|
|
### 5.1 Functional Requirements
|
|
|
|
| ID | Requirement | Priority | Status |
|
|
|----|-------------|----------|--------|
|
|
| FR-01 | {Requirement description} | High/Medium/Low | Pending |
|
|
| FR-02 | {Requirement description} | High/Medium/Low | Pending |
|
|
|
|
### 5.2 Non-Functional Requirements
|
|
|
|
| Category | Criteria | Measurement Method |
|
|
|----------|----------|-------------------|
|
|
| Performance | {e.g., Response time < 200ms} | {Tool/Method} |
|
|
| Security | {e.g., OWASP Top 10 compliance} | {Verification method} |
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 6. Success Criteria
|
|
|
|
### 6.1 Definition of Done
|
|
|
|
- [ ] All functional requirements implemented
|
|
- [ ] Unit tests written and passing
|
|
- [ ] Code review completed
|
|
- [ ] Documentation completed
|
|
|
|
### 6.2 Quality Criteria
|
|
|
|
- [ ] Test coverage above 80%
|
|
- [ ] Zero lint errors
|
|
- [ ] Build succeeds
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 7. Risks and Mitigation
|
|
|
|
| Risk | Impact | Likelihood | Mitigation |
|
|
|------|--------|------------|------------|
|
|
| {Risk 1} | High/Medium/Low | High/Medium/Low | {Mitigation plan} |
|
|
| {Risk 2} | High/Medium/Low | High/Medium/Low | {Mitigation plan} |
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 8. Architecture Considerations
|
|
|
|
### 8.1 Project Level Selection
|
|
|
|
| Level | Characteristics | Recommended For | Selected |
|
|
|-------|-----------------|-----------------|:--------:|
|
|
| **Starter** | Simple structure (`components/`, `lib/`, `types/`) | Static sites, portfolios, landing pages | |
|
|
| **Dynamic** | Feature-based modules, BaaS integration (bkend.ai) | Web apps with backend, SaaS MVPs, fullstack apps | |
|
|
| **Enterprise** | Strict layer separation, DI, microservices | High-traffic systems, complex architectures | |
|
|
|
|
### 8.2 Key Decisions
|
|
|
|
| Decision | Options | Selected | Rationale |
|
|
|----------|---------|----------|-----------|
|
|
| {Decision} | {Option list} | {Selected} | {Rationale} |
|
|
|
|
### 8.3 Component Overview
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
{Component structure diagram}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### 8.4 Data Flow
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
{Data flow diagram}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 9. Convention Prerequisites
|
|
|
|
### 9.1 Applicable Conventions
|
|
|
|
- [ ] Existing project conventions verified
|
|
- [ ] Naming rules confirmed
|
|
- [ ] Folder structure rules confirmed
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 10. Next Steps
|
|
|
|
1. [ ] Write design document (`/pdca design {feature}`)
|
|
2. [ ] Team review and approval
|
|
3. [ ] Start implementation (`/pdca do {feature}`)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Appendix: Brainstorming Log
|
|
|
|
> Key decisions from Plan Plus Phases 1-4.
|
|
|
|
| Phase | Question | Answer | Decision |
|
|
|-------|----------|--------|----------|
|
|
| Intent | {Question summary} | {Answer summary} | {Decision} |
|
|
| Alternatives | {Compared items} | {Selection} | {Rationale} |
|
|
| YAGNI | {Reviewed items} | {Include/Exclude} | {Reason} |
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Version History
|
|
|
|
| Version | Date | Changes | Author |
|
|
|---------|------|---------|--------|
|
|
| 0.1 | {date} | Initial draft (Plan Plus) | {author} |
|