chess/docs/review/approval-status.md
Christoph Wagner 5ad0700b41 refactor: Consolidate repository structure - flatten from workspace pattern
Restructured project from nested workspace pattern to flat single-repo layout.
This eliminates redundant nesting and consolidates all project files under version control.

## Migration Summary

**Before:**
```
alex/ (workspace, not versioned)
├── chess-game/ (git repo)
│   ├── js/, css/, tests/
│   └── index.html
└── docs/ (planning, not versioned)
```

**After:**
```
alex/ (git repo, everything versioned)
├── js/, css/, tests/
├── index.html
├── docs/ (project documentation)
├── planning/ (historical planning docs)
├── .gitea/ (CI/CD)
└── CLAUDE.md (configuration)
```

## Changes Made

### Structure Consolidation
- Moved all chess-game/ contents to root level
- Removed redundant chess-game/ subdirectory
- Flattened directory structure (eliminated one nesting level)

### Documentation Organization
- Moved chess-game/docs/ → docs/ (project documentation)
- Moved alex/docs/ → planning/ (historical planning documents)
- Added CLAUDE.md (workspace configuration)
- Added IMPLEMENTATION_PROMPT.md (original project prompt)

### Version Control Improvements
- All project files now under version control
- Planning documents preserved in planning/ folder
- Merged .gitignore files (workspace + project)
- Added .claude/ agent configurations

### File Updates
- Updated .gitignore to include both workspace and project excludes
- Moved README.md to root level
- All import paths remain functional (relative paths unchanged)

## Benefits

 **Simpler Structure** - One level of nesting removed
 **Complete Versioning** - All documentation now in git
 **Standard Layout** - Matches open-source project conventions
 **Easier Navigation** - Direct access to all project files
 **CI/CD Compatible** - All workflows still functional

## Technical Validation

-  Node.js environment verified
-  Dependencies installed successfully
-  Dev server starts and responds
-  All core files present and accessible
-  Git repository functional

## Files Preserved

**Implementation Files:**
- js/ (3,517 lines of code)
- css/ (4 stylesheets)
- tests/ (87 test cases)
- index.html
- package.json

**CI/CD Pipeline:**
- .gitea/workflows/ci.yml
- .gitea/workflows/release.yml

**Documentation:**
- docs/ (12+ documentation files)
- planning/ (historical planning materials)
- README.md

**Configuration:**
- jest.config.js, babel.config.cjs, playwright.config.js
- .gitignore (merged)
- CLAUDE.md

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
2025-11-23 10:05:26 +01:00

360 lines
9.8 KiB
Markdown

# Approval Status - Chess Game Planning Review
**Review Date**: 2025-11-22
**Swarm ID**: swarm-1763844423540-zqi6om5ev
**Reviewer**: Reviewer Agent (Worker 6)
**Review Type**: Planning Phase Gate Review
---
## APPROVAL DECISION
### ❌ **REJECTED - NOT APPROVED FOR IMPLEMENTATION**
**Reason**: No planning deliverables were produced. The planning phase is incomplete.
---
## Status Summary
| Criteria | Required | Actual | Status |
|----------|----------|--------|--------|
| **Deliverables** | | | |
| Planning Documents | 8+ docs | 0 docs | ❌ FAIL |
| Total Word Count | >10,000 | 0 | ❌ FAIL |
| Code Templates | 5+ files | 0 files | ❌ FAIL |
| Test Specifications | 50+ cases | 0 cases | ❌ FAIL |
| Architecture Diagrams | 3+ diagrams | 0 diagrams | ❌ FAIL |
| **Quality Gates** | | | |
| Completeness | ≥80% | 0% | ❌ FAIL |
| Consistency | ≥90% | N/A | ⚠️ N/A |
| Quality Score | ≥80% | 0% | ❌ FAIL |
| Chess Rules Accuracy | 100% | N/A | ❌ FAIL |
| Implementation Readiness | ≥85% | 0% | ❌ FAIL |
| **OVERALL** | **PASS** | **FAIL** | **❌ REJECTED** |
---
## Gate Review Results
### Gate 1: Planning Complete ❌ FAILED
- [ ] All required documents created
- [ ] Chess rules fully specified
- [ ] Architecture designed
- [ ] Data models defined
- [ ] Test strategy documented
**Result**: ❌ **FAILED** - No documents created
---
### Gate 2: Technical Soundness ⚠️ CANNOT ASSESS
- [ ] Chess rules accurate per FIDE
- [ ] Algorithms efficient and correct
- [ ] Data models properly structured
- [ ] Technology stack justified
- [ ] Dependencies identified
**Result**: ⚠️ **CANNOT ASSESS** - No technical artifacts to review
---
### Gate 3: Quality Standards ❌ FAILED
- [ ] Documentation clear and complete
- [ ] Code templates follow best practices
- [ ] Test coverage comprehensive
- [ ] Accessibility considered
- [ ] Performance addressed
**Result**: ❌ **FAILED** - No quality to assess
---
### Gate 4: Implementation Ready ❌ FAILED
- [ ] Implementation guide clear
- [ ] File structure specified
- [ ] Setup instructions provided
- [ ] Examples included
- [ ] No ambiguities remaining
**Result**: ❌ **FAILED** - Not ready for implementation
---
## Critical Blockers
### Blocker 1: No Deliverables Produced (CRITICAL)
**Severity**: 🔴 CRITICAL
**Impact**: Cannot proceed to implementation
**Resolution Required**: Produce all planning documentation
**Timeline**: Must complete before approval
### Blocker 2: Chess Rules Not Specified (CRITICAL)
**Severity**: 🔴 CRITICAL
**Impact**: Implementation team doesn't know what to build
**Resolution Required**: Complete chess rules documentation
**Timeline**: Required for approval
### Blocker 3: No Architecture Design (CRITICAL)
**Severity**: 🔴 CRITICAL
**Impact**: No technical direction for implementation
**Resolution Required**: Create system architecture and data models
**Timeline**: Required for approval
### Blocker 4: No Implementation Guide (CRITICAL)
**Severity**: 🔴 CRITICAL
**Impact**: Implementation team has no roadmap
**Resolution Required**: Create step-by-step implementation guide
**Timeline**: Required for approval
### Blocker 5: No Test Strategy (HIGH)
**Severity**: 🟡 HIGH
**Impact**: Quality cannot be verified
**Resolution Required**: Define test strategy and test cases
**Timeline**: Required for approval
---
## Approval Criteria
### Minimum Requirements for Approval
**Documentation** (MUST HAVE):
- ✅ Chess rules specification (>2000 words)
- ✅ System architecture document (>1500 words + diagrams)
- ✅ Data models specification (>1000 words)
- ✅ Implementation guide (>2000 words)
- ✅ Code templates (5+ files with examples)
- ✅ Test specifications (>1500 words)
- ✅ Test cases (50+ scenarios)
- ✅ Best practices guide (>1000 words)
**Quality Standards** (MUST MEET):
- Completeness: ≥80%
- Consistency: ≥90%
- Quality: ≥80%
- Accuracy: 100% (for chess rules)
- Implementation Readiness: ≥85%
**Technical Requirements** (MUST ADDRESS):
- All chess piece movements specified
- Special moves documented (castling, en passant, promotion)
- Check/checkmate/stalemate logic defined
- Board representation chosen and justified
- Move validation approach designed
- Game state management specified
---
## Current Status vs. Requirements
### Documentation Status
| Document | Required | Status | Completion |
|----------|----------|--------|------------|
| Chess Rules | YES | ❌ Missing | 0% |
| Best Practices | YES | ❌ Missing | 0% |
| System Architecture | YES | ❌ Missing | 0% |
| Data Models | YES | ❌ Missing | 0% |
| Implementation Guide | YES | ❌ Missing | 0% |
| Code Templates | YES | ❌ Missing | 0% |
| Test Strategy | YES | ❌ Missing | 0% |
| Test Cases | YES | ❌ Missing | 0% |
| **TOTAL** | **8 docs** | **0 docs** | **0%** |
---
## Review Findings Summary
### Completeness Assessment
- **Score**: 0/10 (0%)
- **Status**: ❌ UNACCEPTABLE
- **Details**: No planning artifacts exist
- **Required Actions**: Complete all planning documentation
### Consistency Assessment
- **Score**: N/A (cannot assess)
- **Status**: ⚠️ PENDING
- **Details**: No artifacts to check for consistency
- **Required Actions**: Create artifacts, then assess
### Quality Assessment
- **Score**: 0/10 (0%)
- **Status**: ❌ UNACCEPTABLE
- **Details**: No deliverables to assess quality
- **Required Actions**: Produce deliverables meeting quality standards
### Implementation Readiness
- **Score**: 0/10 (0%)
- **Status**: ❌ NOT READY
- **Details**: No implementation materials exist
- **Required Actions**: Create complete implementation guide
---
## Recommendations for Approval
### Immediate Actions Required
1. **RESTART PLANNING PHASE** (CRITICAL)
- Re-run planning swarm with task execution
- Assign specific deliverable tasks to workers
- Validate outputs are created
2. **PRODUCE ALL PLANNING DOCUMENTS** (CRITICAL)
- Chess rules specification
- System architecture
- Data models
- Implementation guide
- Code templates
- Test specifications
3. **MEET QUALITY STANDARDS** (REQUIRED)
- Ensure completeness ≥80%
- Verify consistency ≥90%
- Achieve quality score ≥80%
- Validate chess rules 100% accurate
4. **ENABLE IMPLEMENTATION** (REQUIRED)
- Provide clear implementation roadmap
- Include code examples
- Specify file structure
- Define setup process
---
## Timeline to Approval
### Estimated Timeline
**Phase 1: Planning Execution** (6-12 hours)
- Workers produce all documentation
- Peer review and refinement
- Output validation
**Phase 2: Re-Review** (2-4 hours)
- Reviewer assesses all deliverables
- Completeness check
- Consistency validation
- Quality assessment
**Phase 3: Revisions** (if needed) (2-6 hours)
- Address review feedback
- Fix inconsistencies
- Improve quality
**Phase 4: Final Approval** (1 hour)
- Final sign-off
- Handoff to implementation swarm
**Total**: 11-23 hours from restart to approval
---
## Conditional Approval Possibility
### NOT APPLICABLE
Conditional approval cannot be granted because:
- ❌ No partial deliverables exist
- ❌ No work-in-progress to evaluate
- ❌ No foundation to build upon
- ❌ Complete restart required
**Minimum for conditional approval**: At least 50% of documents at ≥60% quality
**Actual**: 0% of documents exist
---
## Sign-Off Authority
**Reviewer**: Reviewer Agent (Worker 6)
**Authority**: Planning Phase Gate Keeper
**Decision**: ❌ **REJECTED**
**Date**: 2025-11-22
**Re-Review Required**: YES - After planning deliverables created
---
## Approval Process
### Current Stage: ❌ STAGE 0 - PLANNING NOT STARTED
```
❌ STAGE 0: Planning Not Started ← YOU ARE HERE
⚠️ STAGE 1: Planning In Progress
⚠️ STAGE 2: Planning Complete, Under Review
⚠️ STAGE 3: Revisions In Progress
✅ STAGE 4: APPROVED FOR IMPLEMENTATION
```
**To Advance**: Complete planning phase and produce all deliverables
---
## Handoff Criteria (Not Met)
### Implementation Swarm Requirements
Before handoff to implementation swarm, the following MUST be provided:
- [ ] Complete chess rules specification
- [ ] System architecture and design
- [ ] Data models and schemas
- [ ] Implementation guide with examples
- [ ] Code templates and file structure
- [ ] Test specifications and test cases
- [ ] Best practices and standards
- [ ] References and resources
**Current Status**: 0/8 requirements met
---
## Contact for Questions
**Reviewer**: Reviewer Agent
**Swarm**: swarm-1763844423540-zqi6om5ev
**Role**: Quality gate keeper for planning phase
**Next Review**: After planning deliverables are submitted
---
## Appendix: Approval Stamp
```
╔═══════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ ║
║ APPROVAL STATUS ║
║ ║
║ ❌ REJECTED - NOT APPROVED ║
║ ║
║ Reason: No planning deliverables ║
║ ║
║ Reviewer: Reviewer Agent (Worker 6) ║
║ Date: 2025-11-22 ║
║ Swarm: swarm-1763844423540-zqi6om5ev ║
║ ║
║ Required Action: RESTART PLANNING ║
║ ║
╚═══════════════════════════════════════════╝
```
---
**FINAL DECISION**: ❌ **NOT APPROVED FOR IMPLEMENTATION**
**Next Steps**:
1. Restart planning phase
2. Produce all required documentation
3. Submit for re-review
4. Address any feedback
5. Obtain final approval
---
**This decision is final until planning deliverables are submitted for re-review.**