gsd-list-phase-assumptions

---
name: "gsd-list-phase-assumptions"
description: "Surface Claude's assumptions about a phase approach before planning"
metadata:
  short-description: "Surface Claude's assumptions about a phase approach before planning"
---

<codex_skill_adapter>
## A. Skill Invocation
- This skill is invoked by mentioning `$gsd-list-phase-assumptions`.
- Treat all user text after `$gsd-list-phase-assumptions` as `{{GSD_ARGS}}`.
- If no arguments are present, treat `{{GSD_ARGS}}` as empty.

## B. AskUserQuestion → request_user_input Mapping
GSD workflows use `AskUserQuestion` (Claude Code syntax). Translate to Codex `request_user_input`:

Parameter mapping:
- `header` → `header`
- `question` → `question`
- Options formatted as `"Label" — description` → `{label: "Label", description: "description"}`
- Generate `id` from header: lowercase, replace spaces with underscores

Batched calls:
- `AskUserQuestion([q1, q2])` → single `request_user_input` with multiple entries in `questions[]`

Multi-select workaround:
- Codex has no `multiSelect`. Use sequential single-selects, or present a numbered freeform list asking the user to enter comma-separated numbers.

Execute mode fallback:
- When `request_user_input` is rejected (Execute mode), present a plain-text numbered list and pick a reasonable default.

## C. Task() → spawn_agent Mapping
GSD workflows use `Task(...)` (Claude Code syntax). Translate to Codex collaboration tools:

Direct mapping:
- `Task(subagent_type="X", prompt="Y")` → `spawn_agent(agent_type="X", message="Y")`
- `Task(model="...")` → omit (Codex uses per-role config, not inline model selection)
- `fork_context: false` by default — GSD agents load their own context via `<files_to_read>` blocks

Parallel fan-out:
- Spawn multiple agents → collect agent IDs → `wait(ids)` for all to complete

Result parsing:
- Look for structured markers in agent output: `CHECKPOINT`, `PLAN COMPLETE`, `SUMMARY`, etc.
- `close_agent(id)` after collecting results from each agent
</codex_skill_adapter>

<objective>
Analyze a phase and present Claude's assumptions about technical approach, implementation order, scope boundaries, risk areas, and dependencies.

Purpose: Help users see what Claude thinks BEFORE planning begins - enabling course correction early when assumptions are wrong.
Output: Conversational output only (no file creation) - ends with "What do you think?" prompt
</objective>

<execution_context>
@/Users/teo/src/tempo/.codex/get-shit-done/workflows/list-phase-assumptions.md
</execution_context>

<context>
Phase number: {{GSD_ARGS}} (required)

Project state and roadmap are loaded in-workflow using targeted reads.
</context>

<process>
1. Validate phase number argument (error if missing or invalid)
2. Check if phase exists in roadmap
3. Follow list-phase-assumptions.md workflow:
   - Analyze roadmap description
   - Surface assumptions about: technical approach, implementation order, scope, risks, dependencies
   - Present assumptions clearly
   - Prompt "What do you think?"
4. Gather feedback and offer next steps
</process>

<success_criteria>

- Phase validated against roadmap
- Assumptions surfaced across five areas
- User prompted for feedback
- User knows next steps (discuss context, plan phase, or correct assumptions)
  </success_criteria>