|
| 1 | +# Spec: Ops Dashboard Workflows Page Refinement — Decisions |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +**Status:** approved (2026-06-01) |
| 4 | + |
| 5 | +> Pre-committed decisions per the existing CLAUDE.md lesson |
| 6 | +> "Pre-committed decision matrices survive contact with data." Each |
| 7 | +> decision was ratified in the 2026-06-01 in-session conversation |
| 8 | +> that produced [requirements.md](requirements.md). Patrick stepped |
| 9 | +> through them with `chips` / `y` / `no` / `By concern` / etc. and |
| 10 | +> the kebab + v1 scope advice was ratified separately. Edits to |
| 11 | +> this file after v1 ships require a follow-up PR with rationale. |
| 12 | +
|
| 13 | +--- |
| 14 | + |
| 15 | +## Decision matrix |
| 16 | + |
| 17 | +| Decision | Choice | Rationale | |
| 18 | +|---|---|---| |
| 19 | +| **D1 — Bucket dimension** | **By concern** (review / test / docs / refactor / audit / meta / other) | Maps to "which workflow do I want?" — the load-bearing decision users face. Static derivation (mirror `spec_lifecycle.py`), no telemetry dependency, no usage data required. Alternatives rejected: by-cost-tier (less directly answer-shaped); by-last-used (telemetry-dependent, page-load cost); combination (visual weight, more state to manage). Bucket assignment is **canonical** per workflow — one workflow lives in exactly one bucket. | |
| 20 | +| **D2 — Filter widget shape** | **Chip row above table, one chip per concern** | Mirrors the just-shipped Specs page pattern (PRs #533-#539). One-click toggle, inline counts double as population indicator, fits the existing dashboard visual language. Alternatives rejected: dropdown (hides state behind click), segmented control (overkill for 7 buckets), none (defeats the point). | |
| 21 | +| **D3 — Search input** | **Yes — plain text, filters within active buckets** | At 20 workflows the volume case for search is weaker than for 45 specs, but workflow names are MORE cryptic (`secure-release` vs `release-prep`, `orchestrated-health-check` vs `health-check`) so keystroke-level disambiguation matters more. Search input lives in the chip toolbar (mirrors Specs A3a layout). Filter is substring-match against workflow `name` only — description matching adds noise (descriptions contain "code review" in 5+ workflows). | |
| 22 | +| **D4 — Cost-estimate column** | **No** | Vetoed in conversation. Would require a telemetry-derived estimate (lookup of `~/.attune/telemetry/usage.jsonl` per workflow) which (a) adds page-load cost, (b) is empty for never-run workflows, and (c) gives a misleading number for workflows whose cost varies by depth/path. Phase 5+'s improved SDK error messages already address the silent-failure aspect of cost surprises (real cause now surfaces). Revisit in v2 if usage data accumulates and users want a budgeting affordance. | |
| 23 | +| **D5 — Kebab action menu** | **3 actions: View recent runs / Copy run command / View docs** | Distinct from the Specs page kebab — Workflows is about run-management, not spec-metadata navigation. Each action is non-destructive and unique-to-row. Skipped: "View source" alone (better as sub-action of docs); "View typical cost" (telemetry-dependent per D4); "Edit scope" (already addressed by per-row scope picker). | |
| 24 | +| **D6 — URL params for state** | **Yes — `?bucket=…&q=…`** | Mirrors the Specs A3c pattern (PR #539). Shareable links for "show me all `audit` workflows" or "find any workflow matching `release`". Default URL (no params) = all buckets active, no search, alphabetical-by-name sort. | |
| 25 | +| **D7 — Sort dimension** | **Alphabetical-by-name** | Workflows have a stable namespace; alphabetical is the lookup-friendly default. v2 may add "by last-run-date" if usage data accumulates and users surface a real need. No tier-based sort (D1's concern grouping already clusters cost-similar workflows). | |
| 26 | +| **D8 — Implementation pattern** | **4-5 small PRs mirroring Specs A1→A3c** | Pattern shipped clean for Specs page. Drift-guard tests on the bucket-derivation module + source-grep tests on the JS + TestClient tests on the route. | |
| 27 | + |
| 28 | +--- |
| 29 | + |
| 30 | +## Concern bucket assignment |
| 31 | + |
| 32 | +Authoritative mapping (codified in the implementation module |
| 33 | +`src/attune/ops/workflow_concern.py`, mirroring `spec_lifecycle.py`): |
| 34 | + |
| 35 | +| Concern | Workflows | |
| 36 | +|---|---| |
| 37 | +| `review` | `code-review`, `deep-review`, `security-audit`, `bug-predict` | |
| 38 | +| `test` | `test-gen`, `test-audit` | |
| 39 | +| `docs` | `doc-gen`, `doc-audit`, `doc-orchestrator` | |
| 40 | +| `refactor` | `simplify-code`, `refactor-plan` | |
| 41 | +| `audit` | `discovery-sweep`, `perf-audit`, `dependency-check` | |
| 42 | +| `meta` | `release-prep`, `secure-release`, `orchestrated-health-check`, `health-check` | |
| 43 | +| `other` | `rag-code-gen`, `research-synthesis` | |
| 44 | + |
| 45 | +**Trade-offs ratified:** |
| 46 | + |
| 47 | +- **`bug-predict` lives in `review`** (not `audit`) because its UX |
| 48 | + intent matches the review-class workflows: "tell me what's wrong |
| 49 | + with this code." `audit` is for codebase-wide health surveys. |
| 50 | +- **`security-audit` lives in `review`** for the same reason — |
| 51 | + it's a focused review of one file/dir. The big-picture audit |
| 52 | + workflows live in `audit`. |
| 53 | +- **`doc-orchestrator` lives in `docs`** even though it's a |
| 54 | + meta-workflow (composes other docs workflows). `meta` is |
| 55 | + reserved for release/health ops; `doc-orchestrator` is a |
| 56 | + domain-specific composer. |
| 57 | +- **Naming consistency**: `audit` is BOTH a concern name AND a |
| 58 | + workflow-name suffix (`test-audit`, `doc-audit`, `perf-audit`). |
| 59 | + These are routed by purpose, not name pattern — `test-audit` |
| 60 | + is `test` concern, `doc-audit` is `docs`, `perf-audit` is |
| 61 | + `audit`. (Concern is about *what the user wants to do*, not |
| 62 | + the workflow's filename.) |
| 63 | + |
| 64 | +--- |
| 65 | + |
| 66 | +## Filter widget behavioral details (D2) |
| 67 | + |
| 68 | +- **Default chip state**: all 7 chips ACTIVE on first paint. Unlike |
| 69 | + the Specs page (where Complete defaults OFF because completed |
| 70 | + specs are visual noise), Workflows are all relevant by default — |
| 71 | + no concern is structurally "noise." |
| 72 | +- **All-off state**: if all chips are toggled off, render |
| 73 | + "All concerns filtered out — re-enable at least one chip." |
| 74 | + (Mirrors Specs page empty-state pattern.) |
| 75 | +- **Search**: filters the *already-bucket-filtered* set. |
| 76 | + 0-result state: "No workflows in active concerns match |
| 77 | + '<query>'." |
| 78 | +- **Persistence**: chip selections + search live in URL query |
| 79 | + params (`?bucket=review,audit&q=security`). |
| 80 | + |
| 81 | +## Kebab menu behavioral details (D5) |
| 82 | + |
| 83 | +- **Menu items (v1)**: `View recent runs`, `Copy run command`, |
| 84 | + `View docs`. |
| 85 | +- **Close behavior**: click outside, Escape, or selecting an item |
| 86 | + closes the menu. One menu open at a time per page. (Mirrors |
| 87 | + Specs page kebab.) |
| 88 | +- **`View recent runs` target**: scrolls to / opens the per-row |
| 89 | + recent-runs strip that's hidden by default. Existing |
| 90 | + `data-recent-runs="<name>"` element gets `hidden=false` toggle. |
| 91 | +- **`Copy run command` action**: copies |
| 92 | + `attune workflow run <name>` to clipboard. If the workflow has |
| 93 | + a non-empty scope-picker selection, includes |
| 94 | + ` --path <selected-scope>`. Toast confirmation (mirrors |
| 95 | + Specs page Copy slug toast). |
| 96 | +- **`View docs` target**: opens |
| 97 | + `/help/<workflow-name>` in a new tab. The dashboard's `/help` |
| 98 | + page (PR #482-#484) renders the `.help/templates/<workflow>/` |
| 99 | + content. Fallback to `/help` index if no per-workflow page |
| 100 | + exists yet. |
| 101 | +- **Disabled state**: works in read-only mode (all 3 actions are |
| 102 | + non-mutating). No `allow_run` gating needed. |
| 103 | +- **Keyboard**: arrow keys focus row, `M` (or `.`) opens menu on |
| 104 | + focused row, arrows in menu, Enter to fire. (Mirrors Specs |
| 105 | + page keyboard pattern.) |
| 106 | + |
| 107 | +--- |
| 108 | + |
| 109 | +## Out of scope (parking lot) |
| 110 | + |
| 111 | +- **Cost-estimate column** — D4 vetoed for v1. v2 trigger |
| 112 | + conditions: users surface a real budgeting pain AND telemetry |
| 113 | + accumulates enough per-workflow runs that the estimate is |
| 114 | + meaningful (≥10 runs per workflow). |
| 115 | +- **`by last-used` sort** — D7 deferred. v2 trigger: D1 grouping |
| 116 | + proves insufficient AND users ask for recency-based prioritization. |
| 117 | +- **`Edit scope` row action** — already addressed by per-row scope |
| 118 | + picker. No kebab duplication. |
| 119 | +- **Per-row cost preview tooltip** — same blocker as D4. |
| 120 | +- **Multi-select / bulk-run** — explicit non-goal. Each workflow |
| 121 | + run is a deliberate decision. |
| 122 | +- **Custom concern grouping per-user** — v2 if requested. v1 is the |
| 123 | + authoritative mapping above. |
| 124 | + |
| 125 | +--- |
| 126 | + |
| 127 | +## Carryover |
| 128 | + |
| 129 | +- **2026-06-01** — All 8 decisions ratified in conversation. Patrick |
| 130 | + approved the kebab actions (View recent runs / Copy run command |
| 131 | + / View docs) and the v1 scope (H1+H4 closure via chips + search |
| 132 | + + bucket grouping + kebab) as my recommendation; the rest he |
| 133 | + ratified directly with `y` / `chips` / `By concern` shorthand |
| 134 | + per [feedback_response_shorthand](../../../../.claude/memory/feedback_response_shorthand.md). |
| 135 | +- **Spec progresses to Phase 3 (wireframe)** for visual review. |
| 136 | + Per the existing CLAUDE.md "wireframes surface design gaps" |
| 137 | + lesson, expect at least one decision to need revision when the |
| 138 | + wireframe lands. Capture revisions here, not in requirements.md. |
0 commit comments