# Worked examples Three domains, one shape. Each example shows what the agent must produce before answering — a Task Card and a Domain Card — then a compressed answer with labels and a gate line. Module references point at `PROMPT.md`. ## Example A — legacy PHP admin panel **Request (abridged).** "The panel lists hosting accounts without the expiry date. Add it." ```text TASK CARD Subject: self-hosted PHP panel for a registrar account Deliverable: the expiry date rendered in the accounts table and returned by the list endpoint Audience: two operators who use the panel daily Success looks: the column shows a date for 100% of rows that have one in the database Constraints: PHP 8.x, no new dependencies, existing tests must stay green Unknowns: whether "expiry" lives in the accounts table or is derived Out of scope: redesign of the table, sorting, exports DOMAIN CARD Practitioner: backend engineer maintaining an internal admin panel Core vocabulary: migration, endpoint, presenter, scope, idempotent sync Skill set: schema reading; request flow; template rendering; test hygiene Must verify: the real column name; whether the field is nullable; whether the endpoint is cached Sources of truth: migrations, the schema of the live table, the endpoint source Typical failure: writing SQL against remembered column names Definition of done: the endpoint returns "expires_at" and the table renders it, with the existing suite green Anti-patterns: widening SELECT *; formatting dates in the template; adding a migration without a rollback path ``` Answer, compressed: ```text ## Answer Add "expires_at" to the accounts endpoint and render it as an ISO date column. [fact] `accounts` has `paid_till` (DATE, nullable) — migrations/2026_03_accounts.sql:14 [fact] the list endpoint selects an explicit column list — src/Http/Accounts.php:61 [inference] `paid_till` is the "expiry" the operators mean, since no other date column exists [assumption] rows with NULL should render "—" rather than an empty cell; if wrong, only the display changes, not the query ## Evidence - column name and nullability — migrations/2026_03_accounts.sql:14 - explicit select list — src/Http/Accounts.php:61 - test that covers the endpoint — tests/AccountsTest.php:88 ## Assumptions - NULL means "no expiry set" — consequence: the column shows "—" for legacy rows ## Open questions - whether the panel is cached per session; if it is, the date may lag by a request ## Next step php tools/lint.php && php backend/tests/run.php # expected: 0 failures gate 12/12 ``` ## Example B — Windows service with a WinForms configurator **Request (abridged).** "Add a security audit button to the MikroTik page." ```text TASK CARD Subject: Windows service plus a WinForms configurator for network devices Deliverable: a button that requests a security audit over IPC and shows the report Audience: network administrators running the configurator Success looks: the report renders, the service stays healthy, the IPC contract test passes Constraints: append-only IPC command ids; no breaking change to the wire format Unknowns: whether a suitable IPC command already exists Out of scope: remediation, scheduling, export formats DOMAIN CARD Practitioner: senior .NET engineer owning both the service and its UI Core vocabulary: IPC command registry, long operation timeout, DTO, grid export, service identity Skill set: IPC contract discipline; async UI handling; test suite hygiene; log semantics Must verify: the next free command id; whether the dispatcher has a timeout registry; whether the grid must be attached to the clipboard/export helper Sources of truth: the IPC enum, the dispatcher, the UI test that counts async handlers Typical failure: adding an id that collides, or registering a long command without a timeout Definition of done: the command id is unique and documented, the timeout registry lists it, the grid export test passes, the service restarts clean Anti-patterns: calling the service from the UI thread; treating a log line as proof of health ``` Answer, compressed: ```text ## Answer Add IPC command 95 "GetSecurityAudit" (append-only), register it as a long operation, and wire the button through the existing async handler wrapper. [fact] highest used command id is 94 — Service/Ipc/IpcCommand.cs:31 [fact] long operations are listed in a registry with a test — Service/Ipc/IpcConstants.cs:12 [fact] all UI async handlers go through SafeAsyncHandler — Configurator/Pages/MikroTikPage.cs:204 [inference] the audit can take up to 45 s, so it must be a long operation [assumption] no existing audit command exists; if one does, reuse it instead of adding 95 ## Evidence - command id ceiling — Service/Ipc/IpcCommand.cs:31 - timeout registry — Service/Ipc/IpcConstants.cs:12 - async handler policy — Configurator/Pages/MikroTikPage.cs:204 ## Assumptions - the audit is a new capability — consequence: one more command to document and test ## Open questions - whether the service identity differs from the configurator's; a read-only device account may be enough ## Next step dotnet test RdpAudit.sln -c Release --no-build -p:Platform=x64 # expected: all green gate 12/12 ``` ## Example C — documentation product **Request (abridged).** "Our wiki is unreadable; make it a real documentation set." ```text TASK CARD Subject: the documentation surface of one GitHub repository Deliverable: a wiki with navigation, resolving links and a changelog that parses Audience: operators who already found the repository Success looks: every page reachable from navigation, every link resolves, no orphan page Constraints: flat wiki namespace; no relative images; English canonical, ru as translation Unknowns: whether the wiki repository already exists on the server Out of scope: a marketing site, search engine optimisation, blog posts DOMAIN CARD Practitioner: documentation engineer for developer tools Core vocabulary: anchor, flat namespace, sidebar, footer, comparison link, canonical page Skill set: markdown rendering rules; anchor computation; changelog semantics; link resolution Must verify: the platform's image limits; the anchor algorithm; whether a wiki page is addressable without an extension Sources of truth: GitHub documentation, the rendered table of contents, the changelog standard Typical failure: a green link check that never resolved an anchor Definition of done: build and verify clean, dry-run publication reviewed, navigation covers every page, both language sets present Anti-patterns: hand-writing a table of contents; deleting foreign pages "for tidiness" ``` Answer, compressed: ```text ## Answer Eight canonical pages plus eight translations, ordered by a manifest; internal links lose ".md"; the footer carries absolute links only. [fact] a wiki page is addressed without an extension — measured on a live wiki sidebar [fact] a relative image cannot work: the wiki is a separate repository — GitHub documentation [fact] the platform accepts PNG/JPG/GIF under 1 MB for a social preview — GitHub documentation [inference] the existing 12 pages are unreachable because the sidebar lists 6 of them [assumption] the wiki repository is not created yet; if it is, publish directly and skip the first-page step ## Evidence - wiki mechanics — GitHub documentation, "About wikis" - anchor rules and the em-dash case — GitHub documentation plus a live table of contents - image limits — "Customizing your repository's social media preview" ## Assumptions - the first publication needs one page saved in the interface — consequence: one manual step ## Open questions - whether the team wants the wiki indexed; that needs GitHub Pages instead ## Next step python /tools/ghagent.py wiki build && ... wiki verify # expected: 0 errors gate 12/12 ``` ## What the three examples have in common | Element | Why it is there | |---|---| | A declared subject in one phrase | prevents domain drift (M2) | | Three to five "must verify" facts | separates a specialist from a confident generalist | | One acceptance condition a reviewer can test | makes "done" falsifiable | | One labelled assumption with its consequence | keeps honesty without paralysis | | A single next action with an expected result | makes the answer actionable | | A gate line | makes the answer auditable (M8) | None of the three examples required editing the prompt. That is the claim the kit makes: a new domain costs one card, one examples entry and one acceptance line (M10).