Codex Analyze-With-File Prompt

Overview

Interactive collaborative analysis workflow with documented discussion process. Records understanding evolution, facilitates multi-round Q&A, and uses inline search + external research for deep exploration.

Core workflow: Topic → Explore → Research → Discuss → Document → Refine → Conclude → Next Step

Key features:

• Documented discussion timeline: Captures understanding evolution across all phases
• Decision recording at every critical point: Mandatory recording of key findings, direction changes, and trade-offs
• Technical solution tracking: Records proposed/validated/rejected solutions with evidence and alternatives
• Multi-perspective analysis: Supports up to 4 analysis perspectives (serial, inline)
• External research: Web search for best practices, patterns, and industry standards via

  web.run

• Interactive discussion: Multi-round Q&A with user feedback, direction adjustments, and research requests
• Progress tracking:

  functions.update_plan

  for real-time phase progress visibility
• Structured handoff: Terminal gate with execution planning, issue creation, or completion

Auto Mode

When

--yes

-y

Quick Start

# Basic usage
/codex:analyze-with-file TOPIC="How to optimize this project's authentication architecture"

# With depth selection
/codex:analyze-with-file TOPIC="Performance bottleneck analysis" --depth=deep

# Continue existing session
/codex:analyze-with-file TOPIC="authentication architecture" --continue

# Auto mode (skip confirmations)
/codex:analyze-with-file -y TOPIC="Caching strategy analysis"

Target Topic

$TOPIC

Configuration

-y, --yes

--continue

--depth

Session ID format:

ANL-{YYYY-MM-DD}-{slug}

• slug: lowercase, alphanumeric + CJK characters, max 40 chars
• date: YYYY-MM-DD (UTC+8)
• Auto-detect continue: session folder + discussion.md exists → continue mode

Analysis Flow

Step 0: Session Setup
   ├─ Parse topic, flags (--depth, --continue, -y)
   ├─ Generate session ID: ANL-{date}-{slug}
   ├─ Create session folder (or detect existing → continue mode)
   └─ Initialize progress tracking: functions.update_plan([...phases])

Step 1: Topic Understanding
   ├─ Parse topic, identify analysis dimensions
   ├─ Initial scoping with user: functions.request_user_input (focus, perspectives, depth)
   └─ Initialize discussion.md

Step 2: Exploration (Inline + External Research)
   ├─ Detect codebase → search relevant modules, patterns
   │   ├─ functions.exec_command('ccw spec load --category exploration')
   │   ├─ functions.exec_command('ccw spec load --category debug')
   │   └─ Use Grep, Glob, Read, mcp__ace-tool__search_context
   ├─ External research (if topic warrants): web.run for best practices, patterns
   ├─ Multi-perspective analysis (if selected, serial)
   │   ├─ Single: Comprehensive analysis
   │   └─ Multi (≤4): Serial per-perspective analysis with synthesis
   ├─ Aggregate findings → explorations.json / perspectives.json
   ├─ Update discussion.md with Round 1
   │   ├─ Replace ## Current Understanding with initial findings
   │   └─ Update ## Table of Contents
   └─ Initial Intent Coverage Check (early drift detection)

Step 3: Interactive Discussion (Multi-Round, max 5)
   ├─ Current Understanding Summary (round ≥ 2, before findings)
   ├─ Present exploration findings
   ├─ Gather user feedback: functions.request_user_input
   ├─ Process response:
   │   ├─ Deepen → context-driven + heuristic options → deeper inline analysis
   │   ├─ External Research → web.run for specific tech/pattern investigation
   │   ├─ Adjust → new inline analysis with adjusted focus
   │   ├─ Questions → direct answers with evidence
   │   └─ Complete → exit loop for synthesis
   ├─ Record-Before-Continue: write findings to discussion.md BEFORE updating
   ├─ Technical Solution Triggers: detect and record proposed solutions
   ├─ Update discussion.md:
   │   ├─ Append round details + Narrative Synthesis
   │   ├─ Replace ## Current Understanding with latest state
   │   └─ Update ## Table of Contents
   ├─ Intent Drift Check (round ≥ 2, building on Phase 2 initial check)
   └─ Repeat until user selects complete or max rounds

Step 4: Synthesis & Conclusion
   ├─ Intent Coverage Verification (mandatory gate)
   ├─ Findings-to-Recommendations Traceability (mandatory gate)
   ├─ Consolidate all insights → conclusions.json (with steps[] per recommendation)
   ├─ Update discussion.md with final synthesis
   ├─ Interactive Recommendation Review: functions.request_user_input (batch confirm)
   └─ MANDATORY Terminal Gate: functions.request_user_input (next step selection)
       ├─ 执行任务 → Build implementation scope → handoff to downstream planning
       ├─ 产出Issue → functions.exec_command('ccw issue create')
       └─ 完成 → Display artifact paths, end

Recording Protocol

CRITICAL: During analysis, the following situations MUST trigger immediate recording to discussion.md:

#### Decision Log

#### Key Findings

#### Corrected Assumptions

#### User Input

#### Decision Log

#### Decision Log

#### Technical Solutions

Decision Record Format

> **Decision**: [Description of the decision]
> - **Context**: [What triggered this decision]
> - **Options considered**: [Alternatives evaluated]
> - **Chosen**: [Selected approach] — **Reason**: [Rationale]
> - **Rejected**: [Why other options were discarded]
> - **Impact**: [Effect on analysis direction/conclusions]

Key Finding Record Format

> **Finding**: [Content]
> - **Confidence**: [High/Medium/Low] — **Why**: [Evidence basis]
> - **Hypothesis Impact**: [Confirms/Refutes/Modifies] hypothesis "[name]"
> - **Scope**: [What areas this affects]

Technical Solution Record Format

Record when: an implementation approach is described with specific files/patterns, 2+ alternatives are compared, user confirms/modifies/rejects an approach, or a concrete code change strategy emerges.

> **Solution**: [Description — what approach, pattern, or implementation]
> - **Status**: [Proposed / Validated / Rejected]
> - **Problem**: [What problem this solves]
> - **Rationale**: [Why this approach]
> - **Alternatives**: [Other options considered and why not chosen]
> - **Evidence**: [file:line or code anchor references]
> - **Next Action**: [Follow-up required or none]

Narrative Synthesis Format

Append after each round update:

### Round N: Narrative Synthesis
**起点**: 基于上一轮的 [conclusions/questions]，本轮从 [starting point] 切入。
**关键进展**: [New findings] [confirmed/refuted/modified] 了之前关于 [hypothesis] 的理解。
**决策影响**: 用户选择 [feedback type]，导致分析方向 [adjusted/deepened/maintained]。
**当前理解**: 经过本轮，核心认知更新为 [updated understanding]。
**遗留问题**: [remaining questions driving next round]

Recording Principles

• Immediacy: Record decisions as they happen, not at the end of a phase
• Completeness: Capture context, options, chosen approach, reason, and rejected alternatives
• Traceability: Later phases must be able to trace back why a decision was made
• Depth: Capture reasoning and hypothesis impact, not just outcomes

Implementation Details

Phase 0: Session Initialization

const getUtc8ISOString = () => new Date(Date.now() + 8 * 60 * 60 * 1000).toISOString()

// Parse flags
const autoYes = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--yes') || $ARGUMENTS.includes('-y')
const continueMode = $ARGUMENTS.includes('--continue')
const depthMatch = $ARGUMENTS.match(/--depth[=\s](quick|standard|deep)/)
const analysisDepth = depthMatch ? depthMatch[1] : 'standard'

// Extract topic
const topic = $ARGUMENTS.replace(/--yes|-y|--continue|--depth[=\s]\w+|TOPIC=/g, '').replace(/^["']|["']$/g, '').trim()

// Determine project root
const projectRoot = functions.exec_command('git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null || pwd').trim()

const slug = topic.toLowerCase().replace(/[^a-z0-9\u4e00-\u9fa5]+/g, '-').substring(0, 40)
const dateStr = getUtc8ISOString().substring(0, 10)
const sessionId = `ANL-${dateStr}-${slug}`
const sessionFolder = `${projectRoot}/.workflow/.analysis/${sessionId}`

// Auto-detect continue: session folder + discussion.md exists → continue mode
// If continue → load discussion.md + explorations, resume from last round
functions.exec_command(`mkdir -p ${sessionFolder}`)

// Initialize progress tracking (MANDATORY)
functions.update_plan([
  { id: "phase-1", title: "Phase 1: Topic Understanding", status: "in_progress" },
  { id: "phase-2", title: "Phase 2: Exploration & Research", status: "pending" },
  { id: "phase-3", title: "Phase 3: Interactive Discussion", status: "pending" },
  { id: "phase-4", title: "Phase 4: Synthesis & Conclusion", status: "pending" },
  { id: "next-step", title: "GATE: Post-Completion Next Step", status: "pending" }
])

Phase 1: Topic Understanding

Objective: Parse the topic, identify relevant analysis dimensions, scope the analysis with user input, and initialize the discussion document.

Step 1.1: Parse Topic & Identify Dimensions

Match topic keywords against analysis dimensions (see Dimensions Reference):

// Match topic text against keyword lists from Dimensions Reference
// If multiple dimensions match, include all
// If none match, default to "architecture" and "implementation"
const dimensions = identifyDimensions(topic, ANALYSIS_DIMENSIONS)

Step 1.2: Initial Scoping (New Session Only)

For new sessions, gather user preferences (skipped in auto mode or continue mode):

if (!autoYes && !continueMode) {
  // Single call with up to 3 questions (functions.request_user_input constraint: 1-4 questions, 2-4 options each)
  const scoping = functions.request_user_input({
    questions: [
      {
        id: "focus",
        header: "聚焦领域",
        question: "Select analysis focus areas:",
        multiSelect: true,
        options: generateFocusOptions(dimensions) // Dynamic from Dimension-Direction Mapping, max 4
      },
      {
        id: "perspectives",
        header: "分析视角",
        question: "Select analysis perspectives (single = focused, multi = broader):",
        multiSelect: true,
        options: [
          { label: "Technical", description: "Implementation patterns, code structure, feasibility" },
          { label: "Architectural", description: "System design, scalability, interactions" },
          { label: "Security", description: "Security patterns, vulnerabilities, access control" },
          { label: "Performance", description: "Bottlenecks, optimization, resource utilization" }
        ]  // max 4 perspectives
      },
      {
        id: "depth",
        header: "分析深度",
        question: "Analysis depth level:",
        multiSelect: false,
        options: [
          { label: "Standard(Recommended)", description: "Balanced analysis with good coverage" },
          { label: "Quick Overview", description: "Fast surface-level understanding" },
          { label: "Deep Dive", description: "Comprehensive multi-round investigation" }
        ]
      }
    ]
  })
}

Step 1.3: Initialize discussion.md

const discussionMd = `# Analysis Discussion

**Session ID**: ${sessionId}
**Topic**: ${topic}
**Started**: ${getUtc8ISOString()}
**Dimensions**: ${dimensions.join(', ')}
**Depth**: ${analysisDepth}

## Table of Contents
<!-- TOC: Auto-updated after each round/phase. Links to major sections. -->
- [Analysis Context](#analysis-context)
- [Current Understanding](#current-understanding)
- [Discussion Timeline](#discussion-timeline)
- [Decision Trail](#decision-trail)

## Current Understanding
<!-- REPLACEABLE BLOCK: Overwrite (not append) after each round with latest consolidated understanding.
     Follow Consolidation Rules: promote confirmed insights, track corrections, focus on current state. -->

> To be populated after exploration.

## Analysis Context
- Focus areas: ${focusAreas.join(', ')}
- Perspectives: ${selectedPerspectives.map(p => p.name).join(', ')}
- Depth: ${analysisDepth}

## Initial Questions
${generateInitialQuestions(topic, dimensions).map(q => `- ${q}`).join('\n')}

## Initial Decisions
> Record why these dimensions and focus areas were selected.

---

## Discussion Timeline

> Rounds will be appended below as analysis progresses.
> Each round MUST include a Decision Log section for any decisions made.

---

## Decision Trail

> Consolidated critical decisions across all rounds (populated in Phase 4).
`
Write(`${sessionFolder}/discussion.md`, discussionMd)

Success Criteria:

• Session folder created with discussion.md initialized
• Analysis dimensions identified and user preferences captured
• Initial decisions recorded: Dimension selection rationale, excluded dimensions with reasons

Progress:

functions.update_plan([{id: "phase-1", status: "completed"}, {id: "phase-2", status: "in_progress"}])

Phase 2: Exploration

Objective: Gather codebase context, execute external research, and build understanding. All exploration done inline — no agent delegation.

Step 2.1: Detect Codebase & Explore

const hasCodebase = functions.exec_command(`
  test -f package.json && echo "nodejs" ||
  test -f go.mod && echo "golang" ||
  test -f Cargo.toml && echo "rust" ||
  test -f pyproject.toml && echo "python" ||
  test -f pom.xml && echo "java" ||
  test -d src && echo "generic" ||
  echo "none"
`).trim()

if (hasCodebase !== 'none') {
  // 1. Read project metadata (if exists)
  //    - functions.exec_command('ccw spec load --category exploration')
  //    - functions.exec_command('ccw spec load --category debug')
  //    - .workflow/specs/*.md (project conventions)

  // 2. Search codebase for relevant content
  //    Use: Grep, Glob, Read, or mcp__ace-tool__search_context
  //    Focus on: modules/components, patterns/structure, integration points, config/dependencies

  // 3. Write findings
  Write(`${sessionFolder}/exploration-codebase.json`, JSON.stringify({
    project_type: hasCodebase,
    relevant_files: [...],    // [{path, relevance, summary, dimensions[]}]
    patterns: [...],          // [{pattern, files, description}]
    constraints: [...],       // Architectural constraints found
    integration_points: [...], // [{location, description}]
    key_findings: [...],      // Main insights from code search
    _metadata: { timestamp: getUtc8ISOString(), exploration_scope: '...' }
  }, null, 2))
}

Step 2.1b: External Research (Parallel with Exploration)

Determine if external research adds value — skip for purely internal codebase questions (e.g., "how does module X work"), run for topics involving technology choices, best practices, architecture patterns, or comparison.

const needsResearch = dimensions.some(d =>
  ['architecture', 'comparison', 'decision', 'performance', 'security'].includes(d)
) || topic.match(/best practice|pattern|vs|compare|approach|standard|library|framework/i)

if (needsResearch) {
  // Use web.run for external research
  const researchQueries = [
    `${topic} best practices ${getUtc8ISOString().substring(0,4)}`,
    `${topic} common pitfalls and known issues`,
    ...dimensions.filter(d => ['architecture','security','performance'].includes(d))
      .map(d => `${topic} ${d} patterns and recommendations`)
  ]

  const researchFindings = []
  for (const query of researchQueries.slice(0, 3)) {
    const result = web.run({ search_query: query })
    researchFindings.push({ query, result })
  }

  // Write research findings
  Write(`${sessionFolder}/research.json`, JSON.stringify({
    topic, timestamp: getUtc8ISOString(),
    findings: [...],          // [{finding, detail, confidence, source_url}]
    best_practices: [...],    // [{practice, rationale, source}]
    alternatives: [...],      // [{option, pros, cons, verdict}]
    pitfalls: [...],          // [{issue, mitigation, source}]
    codebase_gaps: [...],     // [{gap, current_approach, recommended_approach}]
    sources: [...],           // [{title, url, key_takeaway}]
    _metadata: { queries_executed: researchQueries.length }
  }, null, 2))
}

Step 2.2: Multi-Perspective Analysis

Analyze from each selected perspective. All analysis done inline by the AI.

Single perspective (default):

// Analyze comprehensively across all identified dimensions
// Use exploration-codebase.json as context
const findings = {
  session_id: sessionId, timestamp: getUtc8ISOString(),
  topic, dimensions,
  sources: [...],            // [{type, file, summary}]
  key_findings: [...],       // Main insights
  discussion_points: [...],  // Questions for user engagement
  open_questions: [...]      // Unresolved questions
}
Write(`${sessionFolder}/explorations.json`, JSON.stringify(findings, null, 2))

Multi-perspective (2-4 perspectives, serial):

// Analyze each perspective sequentially, write individual findings
selectedPerspectives.forEach(perspective => {
  Write(`${sessionFolder}/explorations/${perspective.name}.json`, JSON.stringify({
    perspective: perspective.name,
    relevant_files: [...], patterns: [...],
    key_findings: [...], perspective_insights: [...], open_questions: [...],
    _metadata: { timestamp: getUtc8ISOString() }
  }, null, 2))
})

Step 2.3: Aggregate Findings

// Single perspective → explorations.json already written
// Multi-perspective → synthesize into perspectives.json
if (selectedPerspectives.length > 1) {
  const synthesis = {
    session_id: sessionId, timestamp: getUtc8ISOString(), topic, dimensions,
    perspectives: selectedPerspectives.map(p => ({
      name: p.name,
      findings: readJson(`${sessionFolder}/explorations/${p.name}.json`).key_findings,
      insights: readJson(`${sessionFolder}/explorations/${p.name}.json`).perspective_insights,
      questions: readJson(`${sessionFolder}/explorations/${p.name}.json`).open_questions
    })),
    synthesis: {
      convergent_themes: [...],   // What all perspectives agree on
      conflicting_views: [...],   // Where perspectives differ
      unique_contributions: [...]  // Insights unique to specific perspectives
    },
    // Merge research findings if available
    external_research: fileExists(`${sessionFolder}/research.json`)
      ? { findings: research.findings, best_practices: research.best_practices, codebase_gaps: research.codebase_gaps }
      : null,
    aggregated_findings: [...], discussion_points: [...], open_questions: [...]
  }
  Write(`${sessionFolder}/perspectives.json`, JSON.stringify(synthesis, null, 2))
}

// For single perspective, merge research into explorations.json
if (selectedPerspectives.length <= 1 && fileExists(`${sessionFolder}/research.json`)) {
  const research = readJson(`${sessionFolder}/research.json`)
  // Merge research best_practices[] and pitfalls[] into discussion points
  // Cross-reference: flag gaps where codebase patterns diverge from research best practices
  explorations.external_research = {
    findings: research.findings, best_practices: research.best_practices,
    codebase_gaps: research.codebase_gaps, sources: research.sources
  }
  Write(`${sessionFolder}/explorations.json`, JSON.stringify(explorations, null, 2))
}

Step 2.4: Update discussion.md

Append Round 1 with exploration results using the Round Documentation Pattern.

Single perspective: Sources analyzed, key findings with evidence, discussion points, open questions.

Multi-perspective: Per-perspective summary (brief), then synthesis (convergent themes, conflicting views, unique contributions), discussion points, open questions.

Step 2.5: Initial Intent Coverage Check

Perform the FIRST intent coverage check before entering Phase 3:

// Re-read original user intent from discussion.md header
// Check each intent item against Round 1 findings
appendToDiscussion(`
#### Initial Intent Coverage Check (Post-Exploration)
${originalIntents.map((intent, i) => {
  const status = assessCoverage(intent, explorationFindings)
  return `- ${status.icon} Intent ${i+1}: ${intent} — ${status.detail}`
}).join('\n')}

> 接下来的讨论将重点关注未覆盖 (❌) 和进行中 (🔄) 的意图。
`)

Success Criteria:

• exploration-codebase.json created with codebase context (if codebase exists)
• research.json created with external findings (if topic warrants research)
• explorations.json (single) or perspectives.json (multi) created with findings
• Research best practices merged; codebase gaps flagged
• discussion.md updated with Round 1 results
• Initial Intent Coverage Check completed — early drift detection
• Key findings recorded with evidence references and confidence levels
• Exploration decisions recorded (why certain perspectives/search strategies were chosen)

Progress:

functions.update_plan([{id: "phase-2", status: "completed"}, {id: "phase-3", status: "in_progress"}])

Phase 3: Interactive Discussion

Objective: Iteratively refine understanding through multi-round user-guided discussion cycles. Max Rounds: 5.

Cumulative Context Rule: Every analysis action in Phase 3 MUST include a summary of ALL prior findings to avoid re-discovering known information:

const allFindings = readJson(`${sessionFolder}/explorations.json`) // or perspectives.json
const priorContext = `
## KNOWN FINDINGS (DO NOT re-discover)
- Established files: ${allFindings.sources?.map(s => s.file).join(', ')}
- Key findings: ${allFindings.key_findings?.join('; ')}
- Open questions: ${allFindings.open_questions?.join('; ')}
## NEW TASK: Focus ONLY on unexplored areas below.
`

Step 3.1: Present Findings & Gather Direction

Current Understanding Summary (Round >= 2, BEFORE presenting new findings):

• Generate 1-2 sentence recap of established consensus and last round's direction
• Example: "到目前为止，我们已确认 [established facts]。上一轮 [key action/direction]。现在，这是新一轮的发现："

if (!autoYes) {
  const feedback = functions.request_user_input({
    questions: [{
      header: "分析反馈",
      id: "direction",
      question: `Analysis round ${round}: Feedback on current findings?`,
      multiSelect: false,
      options: [
        { label: "继续深入(Recommended)", description: "Direction correct — deepen or specify direction" },
        { label: "外部研究", description: "Need external research on specific technology/pattern" },
        { label: "调整方向", description: "Different focus or specific questions to address" },
        { label: "分析完成", description: "Sufficient information, proceed to synthesis" }
      ]
    }]
  })
}

Step 3.2: Process User Response

Record-Before-Continue Rule: Each path below MUST write findings and discussion synthesis to

discussion.md

• Append exploration results, reasoning, and any technical approaches to current round section
• Apply Technical Solution Triggers — if an implementation approach is described, 2+ alternatives compared, or user confirms/rejects an approach → record using Technical Solution Record Format
• Ambiguity Check: For each Technical Solution with Status

  Proposed

  , verify no unresolved alternatives remain. If solution lists 2+ options without a chosen one:

  > **⚠️ Ambiguity**: [Solution] has [N] unresolved alternatives: [list]
  > - **Needs**: [Decision criteria or exploration to resolve]
  

  Surface unresolved ambiguities to user in the next feedback round.
• Only THEN proceed to Step 3.3 for Current Understanding replacement and TOC update

Recording Checkpoint: Regardless of option selected, MUST record to discussion.md:

• User's original choice and expression
• Impact on analysis direction
• If direction changed, record a full Decision Record (see Recording Protocol)

web.run({search_query: ...})

external_research

继续深入 sub-options (dynamically generated, max 4 total):

const deepenOptions = functions.request_user_input({
  questions: [{
    header: "深入方向",
    id: "deepen_dir",
    question: `Where to focus next?`,
    multiSelect: false,
    options: [
      // Max 3 context-driven from: unresolved questions, low-confidence findings, unexplored dimensions
      ...generateContextDrivenOptions(allFindings.open_questions, lowConfidenceFindings).slice(0, 3),
      // 1 heuristic option that breaks current frame
      { label: "换角度审视", description: "Compare with best practices / review from different perspective / explore simpler alternatives" }
    ] // Total max 4. "Other" auto-provided for user-specified custom direction
  }]
})

外部研究 flow:

const researchTopic = functions.request_user_input({
  questions: [{
    header: "研究主题",
    id: "research",
    question: "What specific technology/pattern/approach needs external research?",
    multiSelect: false,
    options: [
      // Dynamic from context: unresolved tech questions, unvalidated patterns
      ...generateResearchSuggestions(allFindings).slice(0, 3),
      { label: "自定义", description: "Enter custom research topic (via Other)" }
    ]
  }]
})

// Execute research
const researchResult = web.run({ search_query: `${researchTopic} best practices ${currentYear}` })

// Merge into explorations.json external_research section
// Update research.json (append, don't overwrite)
// Record findings as Key Findings in discussion.md

Step 3.3: Document Each Round

Update discussion.md using the Round Documentation Pattern.

Append to Discussion Timeline: User Direction, Decision Log, Key Findings, Analysis Results, Corrected Assumptions, Open Items, Narrative Synthesis.

Replace (not append):

## Current Understanding

## Table of Contents

Step 3.4: Intent Drift Check (every round >= 2)

Re-read original intent from discussion.md header. Compare against the Initial Intent Coverage Check from Phase 2:

#### Intent Coverage Check
- ✅ Intent 1: [addressed in Round N]
- 🔄 Intent 2: [in-progress, current focus]
- ⚠️ Intent 3: [implicitly absorbed by X — needs explicit confirmation]
- ❌ Intent 4: [not yet discussed]

• If any item is "implicitly absorbed" (⚠️), note explicitly — absorbed ≠ addressed
• If ❌ or ⚠️ items exist → proactively surface to user: "以下原始意图尚未充分覆盖：[list]。是否需要调整优先级？"

Success Criteria:

• User feedback processed for each round
• discussion.md updated with all rounds, assumptions documented and corrected
• All decision points recorded with Decision Record format
• Technical solutions tracked with Solution Record format where applicable
• Direction changes documented with before/after comparison

Progress:

functions.update_plan([{id: "phase-3", status: "completed"}, {id: "phase-4", status: "in_progress"}])

Phase 4: Synthesis & Conclusion

Objective: Consolidate insights, generate conclusions and recommendations.

Step 4.0: Intent Coverage Verification (MANDATORY gate)

For EACH original intent item, determine coverage status:

• ✅ Addressed: Explicitly discussed and concluded
• 🔀 Transformed: Original intent evolved — document transformation chain
• ⚠️ Absorbed: Implicitly covered — flag for confirmation
• ❌ Missed: Not discussed — MUST address or explicitly defer

Write "Intent Coverage Matrix" to discussion.md:

### Intent Coverage Matrix
| # | Original Intent | Status | Where Addressed | Notes |
|---|----------------|--------|-----------------|-------|
| 1 | [intent text] | ✅ Addressed | Round N, Conclusion #M | |
| 2 | [intent text] | 🔀 Transformed | Round N → Round M | Original: X → Final: Y |
| 3 | [intent text] | ❌ Missed | — | Reason for omission |

Gate: If any item is ❌ Missed, MUST either (a) add a discussion round to address it, or (b) explicitly confirm with user that it is intentionally deferred.

Step 4.1: Findings-to-Recommendations Traceability (MANDATORY gate)

Collect ALL actionable findings from every round and map each to a disposition.

Actionable finding sources: key findings with actionable implications, technical solutions (proposed/validated), identified gaps (API-frontend gaps, missing features, design issues), corrected assumptions that imply fixes.

const findingsCoverage = allFindings.map(f => ({
  finding: f.summary, round: f.round,
  disposition: null,  // MUST be assigned before proceeding
  target: null,       // e.g., "Rec #1" or "→ Rec #3" or "Reason: ..."
  reason: null
}))

// Gate: ALL findings MUST have a disposition. Do NOT proceed with any disposition = null.

Append Findings Coverage Matrix to discussion.md:

### Findings Coverage Matrix
| # | Finding (Round) | Disposition | Target |
|---|----------------|-------------|--------|
| 1 | [finding] (R1) | recommendation | Rec #1 |
| 2 | [finding] (R2) | absorbed | → Rec #1 |

Step 4.2: Consolidate Insights

const conclusions = {
  session_id: sessionId, topic,
  completed: getUtc8ISOString(),
  total_rounds: roundCount,
  summary: '...',                    // Executive summary
  key_conclusions: [                 // Main conclusions
    { point: '...', evidence: '...', confidence: 'high|medium|low' }
  ],
  recommendations: [                 // MUST include all findings with disposition = 'recommendation'
    {
      action: '...',                    // What to do (imperative verb + target)
      rationale: '...',                 // Why this matters
      priority: 'high|medium|low',
      evidence_refs: ['file:line', ...],
      steps: [                          // Granular sub-steps for execution
        { description: '...', target: 'file/module', verification: 'how to verify done' }
      ],
      review_status: 'accepted|modified|rejected|pending'
    }
  ],
  open_questions: [...],
  follow_up_suggestions: [
    { type: 'issue|task|research', summary: '...' }
  ],
  decision_trail: [                  // Consolidated decisions from all phases
    { round: 1, decision: '...', context: '...', options_considered: [...], chosen: '...', rejected_reasons: '...', reason: '...', impact: '...' }
  ],
  narrative_trail: [                 // From Narrative Synthesis per round
    { round: 1, starting_point: '...', key_progress: '...', hypothesis_impact: '...', updated_understanding: '...', remaining_questions: '...' }
  ],
  intent_coverage: [                 // From Step 4.0
    { intent: '...', status: 'addressed|transformed|absorbed|missed', where_addressed: '...', notes: '...' }
  ],
  findings_coverage: findingsCoverage // From Step 4.1
}
Write(`${sessionFolder}/conclusions.json`, JSON.stringify(conclusions, null, 2))

Step 4.3: Final discussion.md Update

Synthesis & Conclusions: Executive Summary, Key Conclusions (ranked by confidence), Recommendations (prioritized), Remaining Open Questions.

Current Understanding (Final):

Decision Trail:

Session Statistics: Total discussion rounds, key findings count, dimensions covered, artifacts generated, decision count.

Step 4.4: Interactive Recommendation Review (skip in auto mode)

Batch-confirm via single

functions.request_user_input

// 1. Display all recommendations with numbering
console.log(sortedRecs.map((rec, i) =>
  `${i+1}. **${rec.action}** [${rec.priority}] — ${rec.rationale} (${rec.steps.length} steps)`
).join('\n'))

// 2. Batch review (max 4 per call, one question per recommendation)
const batchSize = 4
for (let batch = 0; batch < sortedRecs.length; batch += batchSize) {
  const batchRecs = sortedRecs.slice(batch, batch + batchSize)
  const review = functions.request_user_input({
    questions: batchRecs.map((rec, i) => ({
      header: `建议#${batch + i + 1}`,
      id: `rec_${batch + i + 1}`,
      question: `"${rec.action}" (${rec.priority}, ${rec.steps.length} steps):`,
      multiSelect: false,
      options: [
        { label: "确认(Recommended)", description: "Accept as-is" },
        { label: "修改", description: "Adjust scope/steps" },
        { label: "删除", description: "Not needed" }
      ]
    }))
  })
  // 确认 → "accepted" | 修改 → follow up for details → "modified" | 删除 → "rejected"
  // Record all review decisions to discussion.md + update conclusions.json
}

Review Summary (append to discussion.md):

### Recommendation Review Summary
| # | Action | Priority | Steps | Review Status | Notes |
|---|--------|----------|-------|---------------|-------|
| 1 | [action] | high | 3 | ✅ Accepted | |
| 2 | [action] | medium | 2 | ✏️ Modified | [modification notes] |
| 3 | [action] | low | 1 | ❌ Rejected | [reason] |

Step 4.5: MANDATORY Terminal Gate — Next Step Selection

CRITICAL: This is a terminal gate. The workflow is INCOMPLETE if this step is not executed. After recommendation review, you MUST immediately proceed here.

Progress:

functions.update_plan([{id: "phase-4", status: "completed"}, {id: "next-step", status: "in_progress"}])

const nextStep = functions.request_user_input({
  questions: [{
    header: "Next Step",
    id: "next_step",
    question: "What would you like to do with the analysis results?",
    multiSelect: false,
    options: [
      { label: "执行任务(Recommended)", description: "Build implementation scope and hand off to planning" },
      { label: "产出Issue", description: "Convert recommendations to tracked issues" },
      { label: "完成", description: "Analysis sufficient, no further action needed" }
    ]
  }]
})

Handle user selection:

"执行任务" → Implementation Scoping + Handoff:

Step A: Build Implementation Scope — Transform recommendations into actionable specs:

const actionableRecs = conclusions.recommendations
  .filter(r => r.review_status === 'accepted' || r.review_status === 'modified')
  .sort((a, b) => (a.priority === 'high' ? 0 : 1) - (b.priority === 'high' ? 0 : 1))

const implScope = actionableRecs.map(rec => ({
  objective: rec.action,
  rationale: rec.rationale,
  priority: rec.priority,
  target_files: rec.steps.flatMap(s => s.target ? [s.target] : []),
  acceptance_criteria: rec.steps.map(s => s.verification || s.description),
  change_summary: rec.steps.map(s => `${s.target || 'TBD'}: ${s.description}`).join('; ')
}))

Step B: User Scope Confirmation (skip in auto mode):

if (!autoYes) {
  // Present implementation scope summary
  console.log(`## Implementation Scope (${implScope.length} items)`)
  implScope.forEach((item, i) => {
    console.log(`${i+1}. **${item.objective}** [${item.priority}]`)
    console.log(`   Files: ${item.target_files.join(', ') || 'TBD by planning'}`)
    console.log(`   Done when: ${item.acceptance_criteria.join(' + ')}`)
  })

  const scopeConfirm = functions.request_user_input({
    questions: [{
      header: "Scope确认",
      id: "scope",
      question: "Implementation scope correct?",
      multiSelect: false,
      options: [
        { label: "确认执行(Recommended)", description: "Scope is clear, proceed to planning" },
        { label: "调整范围", description: "Narrow or expand scope before planning" },
        { label: "补充标准", description: "Add/refine acceptance criteria" }
      ]
    }]
  })
  // Handle 调整范围 / 补充标准 → update implScope, re-confirm
}

Step C: Build Structured Handoff:

const handoff = {
  source: 'analyze-with-file',
  session_id: sessionId,
  session_folder: sessionFolder,
  summary: conclusions.summary,
  implementation_scope: implScope,
  key_findings: conclusions.key_conclusions?.slice(0, 5) || [],
  decision_context: conclusions.decision_trail?.slice(-3) || []
}

// Append plan checklist to discussion.md
appendToDiscussion(`
## Plan Checklist

> **This is a plan only — no code was modified.**

- **Recommendations**: ${actionableRecs.length}
- **Generated**: ${getUtc8ISOString()}

${implScope.map((item, i) => `### ${i+1}. ${item.objective}
- **Priority**: ${item.priority}
- **Rationale**: ${item.rationale}
- **Target files**: ${item.target_files.join(', ') || 'TBD'}
- **Acceptance criteria**: ${item.acceptance_criteria.join('; ')}
- [ ] Ready for execution`).join('\n\n')}
`)

// Hand off to downstream planning tool
functions.exec_command(`echo '${JSON.stringify(handoff)}' > ${sessionFolder}/handoff-spec.json`)

"产出Issue" → Convert recommendations to issues:

for (const rec of actionableRecs) {
  const issueJson = JSON.stringify({
    title: rec.action,
    context: `${rec.action}\n\nRationale: ${rec.rationale}\nEvidence: ${rec.evidence_refs?.join(', ')}`,
    priority: rec.priority === 'high' ? 2 : 3,
    source: 'discovery',
    labels: dimensions
  })
  functions.exec_command(`echo '${issueJson}' | ccw issue create`)
}
// Display created issue IDs with next step hint

"完成" → Display artifact paths, end.

Progress:

functions.update_plan([{id: "next-step", status: "completed"}])

Success Criteria:

• conclusions.json created with complete synthesis including findings_coverage[]
• Findings Coverage Matrix — all actionable findings mapped to disposition
• Intent Coverage Matrix — all original intents accounted for
• Complete decision trail documented and traceable
• Terminal gate executed —

  next-step

  is completed
• No source code modified — analysis is read-only throughout

Templates

Round Documentation Pattern

Each discussion round follows this structure in discussion.md:

### Round N - [Deepen|Research|Adjust|Q&A] (timestamp)

#### User Input
What the user indicated they wanted to focus on

#### Decision Log
<!-- Use Decision Record Format from Recording Protocol -->

#### Key Findings
<!-- Use Key Finding Record Format from Recording Protocol -->

#### Technical Solutions
<!-- Use Technical Solution Record Format from Recording Protocol -->
<!-- Only if implementation approaches were discussed this round -->

#### Analysis Results
Detailed findings from this round's analysis
- Finding 1 (evidence: file:line)
- Finding 2 (evidence: file:line)

#### Corrected Assumptions
- ~~Previous assumption~~ → Corrected understanding
  - Reason: Why the assumption was wrong

#### Open Items
Remaining questions or areas for investigation

#### Narrative Synthesis
<!-- Use Narrative Synthesis Format from Recording Protocol -->

discussion.md Evolution Summary

• Header: Session ID, topic, start time, dimensions
• Analysis Context: Focus areas, perspectives, depth level
• Initial Questions: Key questions to guide the analysis
• Initial Decisions: Why these dimensions and focus areas were selected
• Discussion Timeline: Round-by-round findings
  • Round 1: Exploration Results + Decision Log + Narrative Synthesis
  • Round 2-N: Current Understanding Summary + User feedback + direction adjustments + new insights + Decision Log + Key Findings + Narrative Synthesis
• Decision Trail: Consolidated critical decisions across all rounds
• Synthesis & Conclusions: Summary, key conclusions, recommendations
• Current Understanding (Final): Consolidated insights
• Session Statistics: Rounds completed, findings count, artifacts generated, decision count

Reference

Output Structure

{projectRoot}/.workflow/.analysis/ANL-{date}-{slug}/
├── discussion.md              # Evolution of understanding & discussions
├── exploration-codebase.json  # Phase 2: Codebase context
├── research.json              # Phase 2: External research findings (if topic warrants)
├── explorations/              # Phase 2: Multi-perspective explorations (if selected)
│   ├── technical.json
│   ├── architectural.json
│   └── ...
├── explorations.json          # Phase 2: Single perspective aggregated findings
├── perspectives.json          # Phase 2: Multi-perspective findings with synthesis
├── conclusions.json           # Phase 4: Final synthesis with recommendations
└── handoff-spec.json          # Phase 4: Structured handoff (if "执行任务" selected)

Phase 4 Terminal Gate determines which additional artifacts are generated (plan checklist in discussion.md, handoff-spec.json, or issues).

discussion.md

exploration-codebase.json

research.json

explorations/*.json

explorations.json

perspectives.json

conclusions.json

handoff-spec.json

Analysis Dimensions

Analysis Perspectives

Optional multi-perspective analysis (single perspective is default, max 4):

Selection: User can multi-select up to 4 perspectives in Phase 1, or default to single comprehensive view.

Analysis Depth Levels

Dimension-Direction Mapping

When user selects focus areas, generate directions dynamically:

Implementation: Present 2-3 top dimension-related directions, allow user to multi-select and add custom directions.

Consolidation Rules

When updating "Current Understanding" in discussion.md:

Example:

Bad (cluttered):

## Current Understanding
In round 1 we discussed X, then in round 2 user said Y...

Good (consolidated):

## Current Understanding

### What We Established
- The authentication flow uses JWT with refresh tokens
- Rate limiting is implemented at API gateway level

### What Was Clarified
- ~~Assumed Redis for sessions~~ → Actually uses database-backed sessions

### Key Insights
- Current architecture supports horizontal scaling

Error Handling

--continue

Best Practices

Core Principles

1. No code modifications: This skill is strictly read-only and plan-only. Phase 4 generates plan checklists and handoff specs but does NOT modify source code.
2. Record Decisions Immediately: Never defer recording — capture decisions as they happen using the Decision Record format
3. Track Technical Solutions: Record proposed/validated/rejected solutions with Technical Solution Record format
4. Evidence-Based: Every conclusion should reference specific code or patterns with confidence levels
5. Embrace Corrections: Track wrong→right transformations as valuable learnings
6. Cumulative Context: Always include prior findings in follow-up analysis to avoid re-discovery

Before Starting

1. Clear Topic Definition: Detailed topics lead to better dimension identification
2. User Context: Understanding focus preferences helps scope the analysis
3. Perspective Selection: Choose 2-4 perspectives for complex topics, single for focused queries
4. Scope Understanding: Being clear about depth expectations sets correct analysis intensity

During Analysis

1. Review Findings: Check exploration results before proceeding to discussion
2. Document Assumptions: Track what you think is true for correction later
3. Use Continue Mode: Resume sessions to build on previous findings
4. Iterate Thoughtfully: Each discussion round should meaningfully refine understanding
5. Link Decisions to Outcomes: Explicitly reference which decisions led to which outcomes

Documentation Practices

1. Timeline Clarity: Use clear timestamps for traceability
2. Evolution Tracking: Document how understanding changed across rounds
3. Multi-Perspective Synthesis: When using multiple perspectives, document convergent/conflicting themes

When to Use

Use analyze-with-file when:

• Exploring complex topics collaboratively with documented trail
• Need multi-round iterative refinement of understanding
• Decision-making requires exploring multiple perspectives
• Building shared understanding before implementation
• Want to document how understanding evolved
• Need external research integrated with codebase analysis

Use Terminal Gate (Phase 4) when:

• Analysis conclusions contain clear, actionable recommendations
• 执行任务: Build implementation scope → handoff to downstream planning
• 产出Issue: Convert recommendations to tracked issues via

  ccw issue create

• 完成: Analysis is sufficient, no further action needed

Consider alternatives when:

• Specific bug diagnosis needed → use

  debug-with-file

• Generating new ideas/solutions → use

  brainstorm-with-file

• Complex planning with parallel perspectives → use

  collaborative-plan-with-file

• Ready to implement → use

  lite-plan

Now execute the analyze-with-file workflow for topic: $TOPIC