--- name: domain-case-loop description: Use this skill when a user wants to iteratively refine one NDC_1C domain case through a multi-agent loop: automated baseline capture, JSON analysis, minimal domain patch, rerun, and before/after verdict. --- # Domain case loop This skill packages the standard workflow for iterating on one concrete domain case in NDC_1C. ## Use this skill when - the user wants to improve one domain question end-to-end; - the answer exists but is noisy, heuristic, partial, or business-useless; - the route is wrong even if the wording looks better; - there is a gap between exact compute intent and actual fallback output; - there are follow-up / continuation bugs that corrupt business context. ## Do not use this skill when - the user is asking for a broad architecture rewrite; - there is no concrete domain case or no reproducible input; - the task is only prose editing with no technical/domain component; - the task is a generic repo cleanup unrelated to domain capability behavior. ## Repo-specific runtime map Read `references/repo_runtime_map.md` before the first real cycle. Use these repo-native capture paths: - automated capture: `python scripts/domain_case_loop.py run-case ...` - import existing technical export: `python scripts/domain_case_loop.py import-export ...` - `run-case` defaults to the repo's live local profile: `local / qwen2.5-14b-instruct-1m / http://127.0.0.1:1234/v1` - override with `--llm-provider`, `--llm-model`, `--llm-base-url`, `--llm-api-key` when needed ## Workflow ### Step 1 - Normalize the case Create `artifacts/domain_runs//case_brief.md` with: - domain name - raw user question - expected business meaning - expected exact capability - expected result mode - known constraints - acceptance criteria draft Use `references/case_brief_template.md`. ### Step 2 - Capture baseline Preferred path: - run `python scripts/domain_case_loop.py run-case ...` Fallback path: - if the user already has a copied technical export markdown, run `python scripts/domain_case_loop.py import-export ...` Required artifacts: - `baseline_output.md` - `baseline_debug.json` - `baseline_turn.json` ### Step 3 - Analyst verdict Spawn `domain_analyst` and provide: - `case_brief.md` - `baseline_turn.json` - `baseline_output.md` - `baseline_debug.json` - optional relevant code excerpts or file paths Require a full verdict using `references/verdict_template.md`. The verdict must explicitly say whether the case is: - an existing in-contour regression; - a missing route/intent/capability inside project scope; - a true out-of-scope request. ### Step 4 - Domain patch Spawn `domain_coder` with: - the case brief - the analyst verdict - baseline artifacts Require: - a minimal patch - zero architecture drift - rerun after changes - if the domain is in project scope but outside the current contour, convert the verdict into capability enablement work instead of closing the case as unsupported ### Step 5 - Rerun Capture: - `rerun_output.md` - `rerun_debug.json` - `rerun_turn.json` - `patch_summary.md` ### Step 6 - Before/after analysis Spawn `domain_analyst` again for: - before/after comparison - final status recommendation - quality score from 0 to 100 ### Step 7 - Final status Write `final_status.md` with one of: - accepted - partial - blocked - needs_exact_capability `needs_exact_capability` is the default status when the business/domain request is valid for the project, but the current contour is missing the route, intent, capability, or domain bootstrap needed to answer it. Accepted requires: - quality score >= 80 - no unresolved P0 defects - no silent heuristic masking ## Hard rules - Do not count heuristic candidates as confirmed business answers. - If exact data should exist in 1C/MCP, prefer exact route work over prompt cosmetics. - If exact data does not exist yet in the reachable contour, return a technical insufficiency with a crisp blocker. - If the user case belongs to a project-relevant domain but is outside the current contour, do not treat that as a terminal rejection. Treat it as domain enablement work and record the missing route/intent/capability explicitly. - Never fabricate 1C data. - Keep domain fixes minimal and localized. - Preserve successful baseline scenarios. - Treat follow-up continuity as a state-machine problem, not a wording problem. ## Domain-specific framing For this repository: - architecture must remain unchanged; - 1C/MCP is the primary source of truth; - analyst output must be detailed and business-readable; - answers should be suitable for product hardening, not just debugging notes; - machine-readable turn artifacts are first-class inputs for analysis. - New user domains may be unmarked in the current repo. Missing markup is expected and should be handled as enablement, not as a reason to stop the loop. ## Recommended artifact set Use the artifact layout from `references/artifact_layout.md`.