chess/planning/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

9.8 KiB

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.