Nine tasks. One through three are the domain and run in strict order: the
clamped month step, the type and signature changes, then the split walk.
Four (migration), five (validation) and six (the band) each depend on three.
Seven (the split editor) is independent. Eight (the purchase dialog) needs
seven and five. Nine is docs and demo data.
Task three carries two deletions that belong tidily to tasks five and six.
They are done early because deleting wouldAdvancePast breaks compilation in
both files, and a task that cannot run its own suite cannot be reviewed.
Every expected value was checked by hand rather than derived from the
implementation: the 30-day step from 2026-09-12 lands on 2026-10-12 then
2026-11-11; 31 Aug + 6 months clamps to 28 Feb 2027; and 31 Jan + 2 months is
31 March, which only holds if the clamp measures from the original day instead
of stepping month by month. That last one is the trap in Task 1 and it has its
own test.
Flagged as the known risk: making SplitEditor generic touches the purchase
dialog, which is unrelated to recurring costs. The claim that PurchaseDraft
satisfies SplitTarget structurally is checkable by tsc alone and should be
verified before the rest of that task is written.
Ten tasks. One through five are the domain and run in strict order: day
arithmetic, types and the 6 -> 7 migration, the occurrence walk, expected
charges, then the fold's second track. Six and seven (actions, import
validation) need only the types. Eight and nine are the two UI surfaces. Ten is
demo data, documents and screenshots.
Task 2 deliberately leaves one test red. The behaviour-preservation guard —
every post in every month folds identically, projected equal to remaining —
is written where the risk is created and goes green in task 5, where the field
it asserts on exists.
Writing it out caught four things the spec could not:
- A fold assertion of -4000 where the accumulators give 4000. Left in, the
implementer would have changed working code to match a wrong expectation.
- A second reachable cause for the walk's termination throw. Under lastCharge,
a confirmation dated more than one step before the slot it claims moves the
cursor backwards; a valid calendar series never can. The message now names
both causes, because they need different fixes, and there is a test.
- parseMoneyInput takes (text, options, fallback). The options list is what
makes "30$" resolve to USD rather than the fallback.
- demo-data.ts builds through actions.*, not literals, so the seeding task
uses addRecurringCost with the ids already in scope.
Task 10 ends by stating what screenshots do NOT prove: how it looks and feels,
the overdue count against a real backlog, and whether two-stage confirmation
matches how the owner actually reconciles.
AGENTS.md now holds the instructions and CLAUDE.md and GEMINI.md are
pointers to it. Three files of instructions become three files that
disagree; one file every agent reads cannot.
The content is reorganised rather than rewritten, into: the invariants,
the guards that fail the build, the validation this codebase deliberately
does not perform, the environment, and where to read next. Every guard
now names the test that catches it, and the two rules with no test behind
them are called out as such, because "only review catches this" is
information the reader needs.
Restructuring surfaced one rule that was missing here entirely — sw.js
must stay unhashed and be served no-cache — which had only ever been
written down in ARCHITECTURE.md.
Dropped: the `bun init` boilerplate code samples. Every rule they carried
is still stated; the hello-world test and the three frontend snippets are
not.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
ARCHITECTURE, PRODUCT and TODO move out of the repository root, and
docs/superpowers/{specs,plans} flattens to docs/{specs,plans}:
"superpowers" names the tool that wrote those documents, not a kind of
document.
No content changes. This commit is the move, plus the roughly thirty
cross-references the move invalidated.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Lucas Winther