# AGENTS.md House Plan is one HACS package with two parts plus a demo harness: - **Lovelace card** (`src/`, TypeScript + Lit) — the primary product, bundled to the entry, manifest and hashed chunks under `dist/`. - **Storage integration** (`custom_components/houseplan/`, Python) — the Home Assistant backend. - **Demo harness** (`demo/`) — a Playwright page (`demo/srv/demo.html`) that renders the card against a fake `hass` for screenshots and the `smoke_*.mjs` suite. The home is fully synthetic. Launcher `demo/serve.mjs`; golden scenes `demo/golden/`, performance `demo/performance/`, guard suite `demo/guard/`, live stand seed `demo/stand/` — each with its own README. This file is the map and the few rules every session needs before its first command. `PROCESS.md` is the only complete canon and wins any disagreement; the sections below link to it instead of retelling it. ## Read this first **`docs/SCOPE.md` before anything else.** It was fixed with the owner and states its own authority: features are built, improved and accepted **only** if they serve a job listed there. Its central consequence: **View mode is the product for two of the three personas.** Editors are admin-only tools and must never leak interactions into View. For work that changes visible behaviour, also read `docs/USER-GUIDE.ru.md` — interface wording comes from there and is not invented. **Reading order by role** (#634). `node scripts/entry-cost.mjs` measures each route and `test/entry-cost.test.mjs` keeps this list equal to its routes: - author (analysis, spec, implementation, infrastructure): `docs/SCOPE.md` → `AGENTS.md` → `docs/process/AUTHOR.md` → `docs/STATUS.md`; - reviewer (spec or code): `docs/SCOPE.md` → `AGENTS.md` → `docs/process/REVIEWER.md`, then the issue body and its comments; - changing the pipeline, the gates or the process itself: `docs/SCOPE.md` → `AGENTS.md` → `PROCESS.md` → `docs/STATUS.md`. The two digests quote and link `PROCESS.md` section by section; open the linked section whenever a digest line governs your current step. For non-trivial changes add `docs/ARCHITECTURE.md` plus the canonical document of the subsystem you touch (one list, the same one the reviewer prompt in `_process.yml` reads): `SUN.md`, `LIGHT.md`, `CANVAS.md`, `WALL-THICKNESS.md`, `UX-MODES.md`, `CONFIG-COMPATIBILITY.md`, `TOUCH-SUPPORT.md`, `ISOMETRIC.md`, `VACUUM.md`, `DECOR-EDITOR.md`, `DEVICE-PRESENTATION.md`, `FILTERING.md`, `STAIRS.md`, `RADAR.md`, `PDF-EXPORT.md`, `STYLING-HOOKS.md`. Where the rest lives: commands — `package.json` scripts, `CONTRIBUTING.md`, `docs/DEVELOPMENT.md` (toolchain, build, release — its Release section is the only home of release mechanics); tests and gates — `docs/TESTING.md`. ## Rule #1 > Changing product code without an issue is forbidden. Code changes only when the > issue exists and sits in "Ready for development" or later. Check before touching product code: ``` gh issue view --repo Matysh/houseplan-card --json number,state,labels ``` The label must be one of `S5-ready`, `S6-in-progress`, `S7-code-review`. Anything else — refuse and say why. "Issue #83 is in `S2-analysis`, code is off limits. Start with the spec?" is the correct answer, not a smaller patch. GitHub Issues are the canonical task records and the **labels** are the status (`PROCESS.md` §9); when repository documentation disagrees with an issue, the issue wins. Change classes (`PROCESS.md` §1): **A** product (`src/**`, integration Python, manifests, i18n), **B** gates and tooling (tests, `demo/**`, `scripts/**`, `.github/**`, build and package configuration), **C** documentation, **D** generated (bundle, golden baselines) — D beats A where paths overlap. The committed bundle changes only in a commit with a `Release:` trailer (#657); an ordinary task restores it with `npm run bundle:clean` before committing. **Tracks** (`PROCESS.md` §5, §5.1): `small` is the default — the spec lives in the issue body and its review is a comment; taking the full track means naming the `small` criterion the task fails. `trivial` skips the spec stage for a bug whose expected behaviour is already on record. An **infrastructure** task — not a single class A file — skips analysis and spec and enters at `S7-code-review` (`PROCESS.md` §1). Code review is never skipped on any track: it checks scope, risks and the evidence from executed tests, but does not replace executing them. ## Specs The spec lives in the **issue body**, under a `## ТЗ` heading (owner decision 2026-09-10, #517); `docs/specs/` is an archive of specs written before that date and takes no new files. Required sections and the rule for questions are `PROCESS.md` §7.1: only **product** ambiguity goes to the owner — what a person sees or does, and how much user-visible change belongs in this issue — in one batched comment with a proposed default for each question and `blocked` on top of `S3-spec`. Everything a user cannot observe is yours to decide and record. ## Commits and branches Hooks install themselves on `npm ci` (`prepare` → `scripts/install-hooks.mjs`); `git config core.hooksPath` must print `.githooks`. Every non-merge commit carries **terminal** trailers: ```text Issue: #123 User-Visible: yes ``` One `Issue:` line per issue. `User-Visible: yes` requires edits to **both** `docs/CHANGELOG.md` and `docs/CHANGELOG.ru.md` in the same commit. A commit touching `demo/golden/baselines/**` also needs `Release:` plus exactly one of `Baseline-Reviewed: ` or `Baseline-Reviewed-Local: sha256:` (`PROCESS.md` §10.1). Never invent a review link and never rewrite published history to satisfy trailers. Branch `issue/-slug`; direct commits to `dev`, no PR (owner's decision); a violation is fixed with a follow-up commit, never a force-push. - **Push after every task, not before a beta** — while work sits unpushed there is nothing to review. - **Standing permission: push `issue/-slug` without asking.** The reviewer runs in CI and reads only the remote; a task branch publishes nothing to users. Push the material **before** applying the review label. - **Do not merge into `dev` by hand.** On a green review the pipeline rebases, pushes and only then sets `S8-merged`. A conflicting rebase returns the task to `S6-in-progress` with the verdict intact; `node scripts/rebase-on-dev.mjs` resolves conflicts in generated files only (`PROCESS.md` §2.10), then push and re-apply `S7-code-review`. - Everything else needs the owner's explicit command: pushing `main`, tags, publishing betas and releases, closing issues. ## Working trees (#115) One checkout, one `HEAD`: two agents sharing a directory inherit each other's branch. `houseplan-card-src/houseplan-card` is the author's tree — task branches live there, and unfamiliar local changes belong to the author or the owner, never reset or clean them away. `houseplan-card-src/hp-dev` is the owner's worktree, permanently on `dev`. The reviewer owns no tree: it runs in CI on a fresh checkout. A worktree works only on the machine that created it — its `.git` file records an absolute path in that machine's format. ## Handoff and the verdict Start a task from its packet: `node scripts/task-packet.mjs --issue NN` (status, track, what the status permits, the branch against `dev`, the previous verdict and the unwitnessed AC; it writes nothing). The local gate is `npm run gate:small` (`docs/TESTING.md` › Локальный набор перед пушем); run the smokes named in the AC before `S7-code-review`. **"Verified" without a named command and its result is not evidence.** Comment formats — claim, handoff, verdict — are `PROCESS.md` §7.2. **One handoff, one push** (`PROCESS.md` §10.4). Run `node scripts/process-gate.mjs --issues` before pushing; after `S7-code-review` do not push to the branch until the verdict or the return arrives — a push on top of a running review cancels it. **Having applied `S4-spec-review` or `S7-code-review`, wait for the result instead of ending the session.** The label starts the pipeline by itself. Poll with `node scripts/wait-verdict.mjs --issue NN [--sha ]` (#496): it watches the label and the pipeline's comments every 90 s, at most 110 times, prints only on a change and exits 0 on a new label, 3 on an event that needs a hand, 4 on timeout. Watch the **label**, not the comment. Do not wait while `blocked` is set. | Now reads | What happened | What you do | |---|---|---| | `S5-ready` | the spec is accepted | write the code | | `S3-spec` | the spec came back | read the verdict, revise, re-apply `S4-spec-review` | | `S6-in-progress` | the code came back | revise, re-apply `S7-code-review` — **or**, if the verdict was green and only the merge conflicted, just rebase and re-apply. The comment says which | | `S8-merged` | accepted and already in `dev` | nothing | | `review-4` | the cycle limit is spent | stop, the owner decides | **After a review run the label always changes.** If it did not, the run itself failed rather than the work — say so to the owner instead of polling on. The bounded queue reconciler (#555) re-wakes a review whose event was lost; it is a safety net, not permission to stop waiting for the review you started. A failed pre-release gate (golden, full smokes, performance, HA harness) does not send the issue back to review: fix, re-run what failed, record the exact command and result in the issue (`PROCESS.md` §11.4 — and its limits). ## Environments The owner's Windows machine: `.\scripts\windows-toolchain.ps1 setup|check` owns the pinned Node and Python; WSL works from an ext4 clone with `bash scripts/wsl-setup.sh --verify` (`docs/DEVELOPMENT.md` › Local Windows workstation). `npm run toolchain:check` compares any machine with the pins CI uses. The full Home Assistant harness cannot run on native Windows; without an importable `homeassistant` pytest does not collect `test_ha_*.py` at all, so a green pure run proves nothing about the harness (`docs/TESTING.md`). Cloud agents have the harness at `.venv-backend/bin/python`.