Files
bot-bottle/docs/prds
didericis ebad90bfa9 docs(prd): adopt forge sidecar (option 3) for native integration
Flip the forge-native-integration PRD from option 2 (agent calls the
Gitea API directly via cred-proxy; done signal parsed from comments) to
option 3 per issue #317 comment 2715: a forge sidecar backed by a Forge
abstract class.

- signal_done(status, summary) replaces comment-parsing as the done signal
- semantic audit trail from the sidecar feeds provenance directly
- read-anywhere / write-scoped enforcement, tighter than repo-wide API keys
- forge-agnostic agent prompts and sidecar protocol
- DeployKeyProvisioner subsumption deferred; share the HTTP client only

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WL77TgFxKbs3cidGMG9dz7
2026-06-30 17:39:33 -04:00
..

Product requirement docs

One PRD per feature: what to build, why, and how it's scoped. The PRD is the durable spec — it should stand on its own without a Gitea issue thread (see ../README.md for when a PRD is the right document vs. a research note or a decision record).

Naming and numbering

New PRDs use a prd-new-<kebab-title>.md placeholder name while the PR is open. On merge to main a CI workflow assigns the next sequential number (0024-…, 0025-…), renames the file, and updates the title header. Numbers are never reused; gaps are fine.

Once numbered, the filename stays fixed for the life of the doc.

Status

The Status: line near the top tracks the PRD's lifecycle:

  • Draft — proposed, not yet shipped.
  • Active — the design has shipped to main and is in effect.
  • Superseded by PRD NNNN — replaced by a later PRD; kept for history.
  • Retargeted by PRD NNNN — folded into a later PRD's scope.

Format

# PRD prd-new: <short title>    ← placeholder; CI fills in the number on merge

- **Status:** Draft
- **Author:** <who>
- **Created:** YYYY-MM-DD
- **Issue:** #<n>            # optional — convenience pointer only

## Summary
One paragraph: what this builds and the pain it solves.

## Problem
The current state and why it's inadequate.

## Goals / Success Criteria
Bullets a reviewer can check the finished work against.

## Non-goals
What this explicitly does not do — and won't, to head off scope creep.

## Scope
In scope / out of scope, when the boundary needs spelling out.

## Design
How it works: schema, data flow, diagrams, algorithms as needed.

## Implementation chunks
Ordered, mergeable steps (optional; for multi-PR features).

## Open questions
Unresolved decisions — resolve or fold into Design before shipping.

Sections are a guide, not a straitjacket: drop the ones a given PRD doesn't need (a small change rarely needs Scope or Implementation chunks) and add others where they help (e.g. Testing strategy, Alternatives considered, References). Keep the rationale self-contained — inline the reasoning rather than linking out to an issue thread, so the PRD survives a move off Gitea.