95c299df64
* move claude rules and commands to assets/claude * update claude profile to copy assets/claude to .claude * fix formatting * feat(profiles): Implement unified profile system - Convert Claude and Codex profiles to use createProfile() factory - Remove simple vs complex profile distinction in rule transformer - Unify convertAllRulesToProfileRules() to handle all profiles consistently - Fix mcpConfigPath construction in base-profile.js for null mcpConfigName - Update terminology from 'simpleProfiles' to 'assetOnlyProfiles' throughout - Ensure Claude .claude directory copying works in both CLI and MCP contexts - All profiles now follow same execution flow with proper lifecycle functions Changes: - src/profiles/claude.js: Convert to createProfile() factory pattern - src/profiles/codex.js: Convert to createProfile() factory pattern - src/utils/rule-transformer.js: Unified profile handling logic - src/utils/profiles.js: Remove simple profile categorization - src/profiles/base-profile.js: Fix mcpConfigPath construction - scripts/modules/commands.js: Update variable naming - tests/: Update all tests for unified system and terminology Fixes Claude profile asset copying issue in MCP context. All tests passing (617 passed, 11 skipped). * re-checkin claude files * fix formatting * chore: clean up test Claude rules files * chore: add changeset for unified profile system * add claude files back * add changeset * restore proper gitignore * remove claude agents file from root * remove incorrect doc * simplify profiles and update tests * update changeset * update changeset * remove profile specific code * streamline profiles with defaults and update tests * update changeset * add newline at end of gitignore * restore changes * streamline profiles with defaults; update tests and add vscode test * update rule profile tests * update wording for clearer profile management * refactor and clarify terminology * use original projectRoot var name * revert param desc * use updated claude assets from neno * add "YOUR_" before api key here * streamline codex profile * add gemini profile * update gemini profile * update tests * relocate function * update rules interactive setup Gemini desc * remove duplicative code * add comma
121 lines
2.8 KiB
Markdown
121 lines
2.8 KiB
Markdown
Analyze task complexity and generate expansion recommendations.
|
|
|
|
Arguments: $ARGUMENTS
|
|
|
|
Perform deep analysis of task complexity across the project.
|
|
|
|
## Complexity Analysis
|
|
|
|
Uses AI to analyze tasks and recommend which ones need breakdown.
|
|
|
|
## Execution Options
|
|
|
|
```bash
|
|
task-master analyze-complexity [--research] [--threshold=5]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Analysis Parameters
|
|
|
|
- `--research` → Use research AI for deeper analysis
|
|
- `--threshold=5` → Only flag tasks above complexity 5
|
|
- Default: Analyze all pending tasks
|
|
|
|
## Analysis Process
|
|
|
|
### 1. **Task Evaluation**
|
|
For each task, AI evaluates:
|
|
- Technical complexity
|
|
- Time requirements
|
|
- Dependency complexity
|
|
- Risk factors
|
|
- Knowledge requirements
|
|
|
|
### 2. **Complexity Scoring**
|
|
Assigns score 1-10 based on:
|
|
- Implementation difficulty
|
|
- Integration challenges
|
|
- Testing requirements
|
|
- Unknown factors
|
|
- Technical debt risk
|
|
|
|
### 3. **Recommendations**
|
|
For complex tasks:
|
|
- Suggest expansion approach
|
|
- Recommend subtask breakdown
|
|
- Identify risk areas
|
|
- Propose mitigation strategies
|
|
|
|
## Smart Analysis Features
|
|
|
|
1. **Pattern Recognition**
|
|
- Similar task comparisons
|
|
- Historical complexity accuracy
|
|
- Team velocity consideration
|
|
- Technology stack factors
|
|
|
|
2. **Contextual Factors**
|
|
- Team expertise
|
|
- Available resources
|
|
- Timeline constraints
|
|
- Business criticality
|
|
|
|
3. **Risk Assessment**
|
|
- Technical risks
|
|
- Timeline risks
|
|
- Dependency risks
|
|
- Knowledge gaps
|
|
|
|
## Output Format
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Task Complexity Analysis Report
|
|
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
|
|
|
High Complexity Tasks (>7):
|
|
📍 #5 "Implement real-time sync" - Score: 9/10
|
|
Factors: WebSocket complexity, state management, conflict resolution
|
|
Recommendation: Expand into 5-7 subtasks
|
|
Risks: Performance, data consistency
|
|
|
|
📍 #12 "Migrate database schema" - Score: 8/10
|
|
Factors: Data migration, zero downtime, rollback strategy
|
|
Recommendation: Expand into 4-5 subtasks
|
|
Risks: Data loss, downtime
|
|
|
|
Medium Complexity Tasks (5-7):
|
|
📍 #23 "Add export functionality" - Score: 6/10
|
|
Consider expansion if timeline tight
|
|
|
|
Low Complexity Tasks (<5):
|
|
✅ 15 tasks - No expansion needed
|
|
|
|
Summary:
|
|
- Expand immediately: 2 tasks
|
|
- Consider expanding: 5 tasks
|
|
- Keep as-is: 15 tasks
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Actionable Output
|
|
|
|
For each high-complexity task:
|
|
1. Complexity score with reasoning
|
|
2. Specific expansion suggestions
|
|
3. Risk mitigation approaches
|
|
4. Recommended subtask structure
|
|
|
|
## Integration
|
|
|
|
Results are:
|
|
- Saved to `.taskmaster/reports/complexity-analysis.md`
|
|
- Used by expand command
|
|
- Inform sprint planning
|
|
- Guide resource allocation
|
|
|
|
## Next Steps
|
|
|
|
After analysis:
|
|
```
|
|
/project:tm/expand 5 # Expand specific task
|
|
/project:tm/expand/all # Expand all recommended
|
|
/project:tm/complexity-report # View detailed report
|
|
``` |