Implement Beat 1: Sequential Thinking Age-Encrypted Wrapper (Skeleton)
This commit completes Beat 1 of the SequentialThinkingForCHORUS implementation, providing a functional plaintext skeleton for the age-encrypted wrapper. ## Deliverables ### 1. Main Wrapper Entry Point - `cmd/seqthink-wrapper/main.go`: HTTP server on :8443 - Configuration loading from environment variables - Graceful shutdown handling - MCP server readiness checking with timeout ### 2. MCP Client Package - `pkg/seqthink/mcpclient/client.go`: HTTP client for MCP server - Communicates with MCP server on localhost:8000 - Health check endpoint - Tool call endpoint with 120s timeout ### 3. Proxy Server Package - `pkg/seqthink/proxy/server.go`: HTTP handlers for wrapper - Health and readiness endpoints - Tool call proxy (plaintext for Beat 1) - SSE endpoint placeholder - Metrics endpoint integration ### 4. Observability Package - `pkg/seqthink/observability/logger.go`: Structured logging with zerolog - `pkg/seqthink/observability/metrics.go`: Prometheus metrics - Counters for requests, errors, decrypt/encrypt failures, policy denials - Request duration histogram ### 5. Docker Infrastructure - `deploy/seqthink/Dockerfile`: Multi-stage build - `deploy/seqthink/entrypoint.sh`: Startup orchestration - `deploy/seqthink/mcp_stub.py`: Minimal MCP server for testing ### 6. Build System Integration - Updated `Makefile` with `build-seqthink` target - Uses GOWORK=off and -mod=mod for clean builds - `docker-seqthink` target for container builds ## Testing Successfully builds with: ``` make build-seqthink ``` Binary successfully starts and waits for MCP server connection. ## Next Steps Beat 2 will add: - Age encryption/decryption (pkg/seqthink/ageio) - Content-Type: application/age enforcement - SSE streaming with encrypted frames - Golden tests for crypto round-trips 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
anthonyrawlins
579
docs/SEQUENTIAL-THINKING-INTEGRATION-PLAN.md
Normal file
579
docs/SEQUENTIAL-THINKING-INTEGRATION-PLAN.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,579 @@
|
||||
# Sequential Thinking Integration Plan for CHORUS Agents
|
||||
|
||||
**Date**: 2025-10-13
|
||||
**Status**: Design Phase
|
||||
**Priority**: High - Blocking further intelligence improvements
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Executive Summary
|
||||
|
||||
This document outlines the integration of the Sequential Thinking MCP server into CHORUS agents to enable **structured, multi-step reasoning** before task execution. This addresses the limitation in the SequentialThinkingForCHORUS repository issue and unlocks advanced agent decision-making capabilities.
|
||||
|
||||
**Problem Statement**: CHORUS agents currently use simple prompt-response cycles without structured reasoning, limiting their ability to handle complex tasks requiring multi-step analysis, hypothesis generation, and iterative refinement.
|
||||
|
||||
**Solution**: Integrate the `mcp__sequential-thinking__sequentialthinking` MCP tool into the AI provider layer to enable chain-of-thought reasoning for complex tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Current Architecture Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Existing AI Provider Flow
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
TaskRequest → ModelProvider.ExecuteTask() → TaskResponse
|
||||
↓
|
||||
[Single LLM Call]
|
||||
↓
|
||||
Response String
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Current Providers**:
|
||||
- **OllamaProvider**: Local model execution
|
||||
- **ResetDataProvider**: ResetData LaaS API
|
||||
- **OpenAIProvider**: OpenAI API
|
||||
|
||||
**Current Limitations**:
|
||||
- ✗ No structured reasoning process
|
||||
- ✗ No ability to revise initial thoughts
|
||||
- ✗ No hypothesis generation and verification
|
||||
- ✗ No branching for alternative approaches
|
||||
- ✗ Simple string reasoning field (not structured)
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. TaskResponse Structure
|
||||
|
||||
**Location**: `/home/tony/chorus/project-queues/active/CHORUS/pkg/ai/provider.go:53-78`
|
||||
|
||||
```go
|
||||
type TaskResponse struct {
|
||||
Success bool `json:"success"`
|
||||
TaskID string `json:"task_id"`
|
||||
Response string `json:"response"`
|
||||
Reasoning string `json:"reasoning,omitempty"` // ← Simple string
|
||||
Actions []TaskAction `json:"actions,omitempty"`
|
||||
Artifacts []Artifact `json:"artifacts,omitempty"`
|
||||
TokensUsed TokenUsage `json:"tokens_used,omitempty"`
|
||||
// ... other fields
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Opportunity**: The `Reasoning` field is perfect for storing structured thinking output!
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Sequential Thinking MCP Tool
|
||||
|
||||
### Tool Signature
|
||||
|
||||
```go
|
||||
mcp__sequential-thinking__sequentialthinking(
|
||||
thought: string,
|
||||
nextThoughtNeeded: bool,
|
||||
thoughtNumber: int,
|
||||
totalThoughts: int,
|
||||
isRevision: bool = false,
|
||||
revisesThought: int = null,
|
||||
branchFromThought: int = null,
|
||||
branchId: string = null,
|
||||
needsMoreThoughts: bool = false
|
||||
)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Capabilities
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Adaptive Thinking**: Adjust `totalThoughts` up or down as understanding deepens
|
||||
2. **Revision Support**: Question and revise previous thoughts (`isRevision`, `revisesThought`)
|
||||
3. **Branching**: Explore alternative approaches (`branchFromThought`, `branchId`)
|
||||
4. **Hypothesis Testing**: Generate and verify hypotheses in chain-of-thought
|
||||
5. **Uncertainty Expression**: Express and work through unclear aspects
|
||||
6. **Context Maintenance**: Keep track of all previous thoughts
|
||||
|
||||
### When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
- **Complex problem decomposition**
|
||||
- **Multi-step solution planning**
|
||||
- **Problems requiring course correction**
|
||||
- **Unclear scope requiring exploration**
|
||||
- **Tasks needing context over multiple steps**
|
||||
- **Filtering irrelevant information**
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Proposed Integration Architecture
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Enhanced TaskResponse Structure
|
||||
|
||||
**File**: `pkg/ai/provider.go`
|
||||
|
||||
```go
|
||||
// StructuredReasoning represents chain-of-thought reasoning process
|
||||
type StructuredReasoning struct {
|
||||
Thoughts []ThoughtStep `json:"thoughts"`
|
||||
FinalHypothesis string `json:"final_hypothesis,omitempty"`
|
||||
VerificationSteps []string `json:"verification_steps,omitempty"`
|
||||
Confidence float32 `json:"confidence"` // 0.0-1.0
|
||||
TotalRevisions int `json:"total_revisions"`
|
||||
BranchesExplored int `json:"branches_explored"`
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// ThoughtStep represents a single step in the reasoning process
|
||||
type ThoughtStep struct {
|
||||
Number int `json:"number"`
|
||||
Content string `json:"content"`
|
||||
IsRevision bool `json:"is_revision"`
|
||||
RevisesThought int `json:"revises_thought,omitempty"`
|
||||
BranchID string `json:"branch_id,omitempty"`
|
||||
BranchFrom int `json:"branch_from,omitempty"`
|
||||
Timestamp time.Time `json:"timestamp"`
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// TaskResponse update
|
||||
type TaskResponse struct {
|
||||
// ... existing fields ...
|
||||
Reasoning string `json:"reasoning,omitempty"` // Legacy simple string
|
||||
StructuredReasoning *StructuredReasoning `json:"structured_reasoning,omitempty"` // NEW
|
||||
// ... rest of fields ...
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Sequential Thinking Wrapper
|
||||
|
||||
**New File**: `pkg/ai/sequential_thinking.go`
|
||||
|
||||
```go
|
||||
package ai
|
||||
|
||||
import (
|
||||
"context"
|
||||
"encoding/json"
|
||||
"fmt"
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
// SequentialThinkingEngine wraps MCP sequential thinking tool
|
||||
type SequentialThinkingEngine struct {
|
||||
mcpClient MCPClient // Interface to MCP tool
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// ThinkingRequest represents input for sequential thinking
|
||||
type ThinkingRequest struct {
|
||||
Problem string
|
||||
Context map[string]interface{}
|
||||
MaxThoughts int
|
||||
AllowRevisions bool
|
||||
AllowBranching bool
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// ThinkingResult represents output from sequential thinking
|
||||
type ThinkingResult struct {
|
||||
Thoughts []ThoughtStep
|
||||
FinalConclusion string
|
||||
Confidence float32
|
||||
ReasoningPath string // Markdown summary of thinking process
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Think executes sequential thinking process
|
||||
func (e *SequentialThinkingEngine) Think(ctx context.Context, req *ThinkingRequest) (*ThinkingResult, error) {
|
||||
// Implementation:
|
||||
// 1. Initialize thinking with problem statement
|
||||
// 2. Iteratively call MCP tool until nextThoughtNeeded = false
|
||||
// 3. Track all thoughts, revisions, branches
|
||||
// 4. Generate final conclusion and reasoning summary
|
||||
// 5. Return structured result
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Provider Integration
|
||||
|
||||
**Modified File**: `pkg/ai/resetdata.go`
|
||||
|
||||
```go
|
||||
// ExecuteTask with sequential thinking
|
||||
func (p *ResetDataProvider) ExecuteTask(ctx context.Context, request *TaskRequest) (*TaskResponse, error) {
|
||||
startTime := time.Now()
|
||||
|
||||
// Determine if task requires sequential thinking
|
||||
useSequentialThinking := p.shouldUseSequentialThinking(request)
|
||||
|
||||
var structuredReasoning *StructuredReasoning
|
||||
var enhancedPrompt string
|
||||
|
||||
if useSequentialThinking {
|
||||
// Use sequential thinking engine to analyze task first
|
||||
thinkingEngine := NewSequentialThinkingEngine(p.mcpClient)
|
||||
|
||||
thinkingResult, err := thinkingEngine.Think(ctx, &ThinkingRequest{
|
||||
Problem: p.formatTaskAsProblem(request),
|
||||
Context: request.Context,
|
||||
MaxThoughts: 10,
|
||||
AllowRevisions: true,
|
||||
AllowBranching: true,
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
if err != nil {
|
||||
// Fall back to direct execution if thinking fails
|
||||
log.Warn().Err(err).Msg("Sequential thinking failed, falling back to direct execution")
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
// Use thinking result to enhance prompt
|
||||
enhancedPrompt = p.buildPromptWithThinking(request, thinkingResult)
|
||||
structuredReasoning = convertToStructuredReasoning(thinkingResult)
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Execute with enhanced prompt (if available) or standard prompt
|
||||
messages, _ := p.buildChatMessages(request, enhancedPrompt)
|
||||
|
||||
// ... rest of execution ...
|
||||
|
||||
return &TaskResponse{
|
||||
Success: true,
|
||||
Response: responseText,
|
||||
Reasoning: legacyReasoningString,
|
||||
StructuredReasoning: structuredReasoning, // NEW
|
||||
// ... rest of response ...
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// shouldUseSequentialThinking determines if task warrants sequential thinking
|
||||
func (p *ResetDataProvider) shouldUseSequentialThinking(request *TaskRequest) bool {
|
||||
// Use sequential thinking for:
|
||||
// - High complexity tasks (complexity >= 7)
|
||||
// - Architect role (requires system design)
|
||||
// - Tasks with "design" or "architecture" in title/labels
|
||||
// - Tasks requiring multi-step planning
|
||||
|
||||
if request.Complexity >= 7 {
|
||||
return true
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
role := strings.ToLower(request.AgentRole)
|
||||
if role == "architect" || role == "senior-developer" {
|
||||
return true
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
keywords := []string{"design", "architecture", "refactor", "plan", "strategy"}
|
||||
taskText := strings.ToLower(request.TaskTitle + " " + request.TaskDescription)
|
||||
for _, keyword := range keywords {
|
||||
if strings.Contains(taskText, keyword) {
|
||||
return true
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
return false
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Phases
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Foundation (Days 1-2)
|
||||
|
||||
**Tasks**:
|
||||
1. ✅ Define `StructuredReasoning` and `ThoughtStep` types
|
||||
2. ✅ Add `StructuredReasoning` field to `TaskResponse`
|
||||
3. ✅ Create `SequentialThinkingEngine` skeleton
|
||||
4. ✅ Add MCP client interface for sequential-thinking tool
|
||||
|
||||
**Files to Create/Modify**:
|
||||
- `pkg/ai/provider.go` - Add new types
|
||||
- `pkg/ai/sequential_thinking.go` - New file
|
||||
- `pkg/ai/mcp_client.go` - New file for MCP integration
|
||||
|
||||
**Success Criteria**:
|
||||
- Code compiles without errors
|
||||
- Types are properly defined
|
||||
- MCP client interface is clear
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Sequential Thinking Engine (Days 3-5)
|
||||
|
||||
**Tasks**:
|
||||
1. Implement `SequentialThinkingEngine.Think()` method
|
||||
2. Implement MCP tool call wrapper
|
||||
3. Add thought tracking and revision detection
|
||||
4. Implement branch management
|
||||
5. Generate reasoning summaries
|
||||
6. Write unit tests
|
||||
|
||||
**Files**:
|
||||
- `pkg/ai/sequential_thinking.go` - Full implementation
|
||||
- `pkg/ai/sequential_thinking_test.go` - Unit tests
|
||||
|
||||
**Success Criteria**:
|
||||
- Can execute complete thinking cycles
|
||||
- Properly tracks revisions and branches
|
||||
- Generates clear reasoning summaries
|
||||
- All unit tests pass
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Provider Integration (Days 6-8)
|
||||
|
||||
**Tasks**:
|
||||
1. Modify `ResetDataProvider.ExecuteTask()` for sequential thinking
|
||||
2. Implement `shouldUseSequentialThinking()` heuristics
|
||||
3. Add prompt enhancement with thinking results
|
||||
4. Implement fallback for thinking failures
|
||||
5. Add configuration options
|
||||
6. Write integration tests
|
||||
|
||||
**Files**:
|
||||
- `pkg/ai/resetdata.go` - Modify ExecuteTask
|
||||
- `pkg/ai/ollama.go` - Same modifications
|
||||
- `config/agent.yaml` - Add sequential thinking config
|
||||
|
||||
**Success Criteria**:
|
||||
- Complex tasks trigger sequential thinking
|
||||
- Thinking results enhance task execution
|
||||
- Graceful fallback on failures
|
||||
- Integration tests pass
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Testing & Validation (Days 9-10)
|
||||
|
||||
**Tasks**:
|
||||
1. End-to-end testing with real councils
|
||||
2. Test with various complexity levels
|
||||
3. Validate reasoning quality improvements
|
||||
4. Performance benchmarking
|
||||
5. Documentation updates
|
||||
|
||||
**Test Cases**:
|
||||
- Simple task (complexity=3) → No sequential thinking
|
||||
- Complex task (complexity=8) → Sequential thinking enabled
|
||||
- Architect role → Always uses sequential thinking
|
||||
- Design task → Sequential thinking with branching
|
||||
- Fallback scenario → Graceful degradation
|
||||
|
||||
**Success Criteria**:
|
||||
- Demonstrable improvement in task quality
|
||||
- Acceptable performance overhead (<30% increase in latency)
|
||||
- Clear reasoning traces in artifacts
|
||||
- Documentation complete
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Configuration
|
||||
|
||||
### Agent Configuration
|
||||
|
||||
**File**: `config/agent.yaml`
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
ai_providers:
|
||||
resetdata:
|
||||
type: "resetdata"
|
||||
endpoint: "${RESETDATA_API_ENDPOINT}"
|
||||
api_key: "${RESETDATA_API_KEY}"
|
||||
default_model: "llama3.1:70b"
|
||||
|
||||
# Sequential thinking configuration
|
||||
enable_sequential_thinking: true
|
||||
sequential_thinking:
|
||||
min_complexity: 7 # Minimum complexity to trigger
|
||||
force_for_roles: # Always use for these roles
|
||||
- architect
|
||||
- senior-developer
|
||||
max_thoughts: 15 # Maximum thinking iterations
|
||||
enable_revisions: true # Allow thought revisions
|
||||
enable_branching: true # Allow exploring alternatives
|
||||
confidence_threshold: 0.7 # Minimum confidence for final answer
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Runtime Toggle
|
||||
|
||||
Allow runtime control via council brief:
|
||||
|
||||
```json
|
||||
{
|
||||
"task_id": "task-123",
|
||||
"complexity": 8,
|
||||
"use_sequential_thinking": true, // Explicit override
|
||||
"thinking_config": {
|
||||
"max_thoughts": 20,
|
||||
"allow_branching": true
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Benefits & Expected Improvements
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Better Problem Decomposition
|
||||
|
||||
**Before**:
|
||||
```
|
||||
Agent: Here's my solution [immediately provides implementation]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**After**:
|
||||
```
|
||||
Thought 1: Breaking down the task into 3 main components...
|
||||
Thought 2: Component A requires database schema changes...
|
||||
Thought 3: Wait, revising thought 2 - migration strategy needs consideration...
|
||||
Thought 4: Exploring alternative: event sourcing vs direct updates...
|
||||
Thought 5: Event sourcing better for audit trail requirements...
|
||||
Final: Implementation plan with 5 concrete steps...
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Improved Architecture Decisions
|
||||
|
||||
Architect agents can:
|
||||
- Explore multiple design alternatives
|
||||
- Revise decisions based on discovered constraints
|
||||
- Build and verify hypotheses about scalability
|
||||
- Document reasoning trail for future reference
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Higher Quality Code
|
||||
|
||||
Developer agents can:
|
||||
- Think through edge cases before coding
|
||||
- Consider multiple implementation approaches
|
||||
- Revise initial assumptions
|
||||
- Plan testing strategy upfront
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Debugging Enhancement
|
||||
|
||||
When tasks fail:
|
||||
- Reasoning traces show where agent went wrong
|
||||
- Can identify flawed assumptions
|
||||
- Easier to improve prompts and heuristics
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Performance Considerations
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Latency Impact
|
||||
|
||||
**Estimated Overhead**:
|
||||
- Sequential thinking: 5-15 LLM calls (vs 1 direct call)
|
||||
- Expected latency increase: 10-30 seconds for complex tasks
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Only use for high-complexity tasks (complexity >= 7)
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Token Usage
|
||||
|
||||
**Estimated Increase**:
|
||||
- Each thought: ~200-500 tokens
|
||||
- 10 thoughts: ~3000-5000 additional tokens
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Set reasonable `max_thoughts` limits
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Resource Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
**MCP Server**:
|
||||
- Sequential thinking MCP server must be available
|
||||
- Requires proper error handling and fallback
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Risks & Mitigations
|
||||
|
||||
| Risk | Impact | Mitigation |
|
||||
|------|--------|------------|
|
||||
| MCP server unavailable | High | Graceful fallback to direct execution |
|
||||
| Increased latency unacceptable | Medium | Make sequential thinking opt-in per task |
|
||||
| Token cost explosion | Medium | Set hard limits on max_thoughts |
|
||||
| Reasoning doesn't improve quality | High | A/B testing with metrics |
|
||||
| Complex implementation | Medium | Phased rollout with testing |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Success Metrics
|
||||
|
||||
### Quantitative
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Task Success Rate**: Compare before/after for complexity >= 7 tasks
|
||||
- Target: +15% improvement
|
||||
2. **Code Quality**: Static analysis scores for generated code
|
||||
- Target: +20% improvement in complexity score
|
||||
3. **PR Acceptance Rate**: How many agent PRs get merged
|
||||
- Target: +25% improvement
|
||||
4. **Latency**: Task execution time
|
||||
- Acceptable: <30% increase for complex tasks
|
||||
|
||||
### Qualitative
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Reasoning Quality**: Human review of reasoning traces
|
||||
2. **Decision Clarity**: Can humans understand agent's thought process?
|
||||
3. **Developer Feedback**: Easier to debug failed tasks?
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Rollout Plan
|
||||
|
||||
### Stage 1: Internal Testing (Week 1)
|
||||
|
||||
- Deploy to development environment
|
||||
- Test with synthetic tasks
|
||||
- Gather performance metrics
|
||||
- Refine heuristics
|
||||
|
||||
### Stage 2: Limited Production (Week 2)
|
||||
|
||||
- Enable for architect role only
|
||||
- Enable for complexity >= 9 only
|
||||
- Monitor closely
|
||||
- Collect feedback
|
||||
|
||||
### Stage 3: Expanded Rollout (Week 3-4)
|
||||
|
||||
- Enable for all roles with complexity >= 7
|
||||
- Add complexity-based opt-in
|
||||
- Full production deployment
|
||||
- Continuous monitoring
|
||||
|
||||
### Stage 4: Optimization (Week 5+)
|
||||
|
||||
- Fine-tune heuristics based on data
|
||||
- Optimize thought limits
|
||||
- Improve reasoning summaries
|
||||
- Add advanced features (e.g., multi-agent reasoning)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Future Enhancements
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Multi-Agent Reasoning
|
||||
|
||||
Multiple agents can contribute thoughts to same reasoning chain:
|
||||
- Architect proposes design
|
||||
- Security agent reviews security implications
|
||||
- Performance agent analyzes scalability
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Reasoning Templates
|
||||
|
||||
Pre-defined thinking patterns for common scenarios:
|
||||
- API design checklist
|
||||
- Security review framework
|
||||
- Performance optimization workflow
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Learning from Reasoning
|
||||
|
||||
Store successful reasoning patterns:
|
||||
- Build knowledge base of good reasoning traces
|
||||
- Use as examples in future tasks
|
||||
- Identify common pitfalls
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Visualization
|
||||
|
||||
Dashboard showing reasoning graphs:
|
||||
- Thought flow diagrams
|
||||
- Revision history
|
||||
- Branch exploration trees
|
||||
- Confidence evolution
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## References
|
||||
|
||||
- **SequentialThinkingForCHORUS Issue**: (Repository in GITEA)
|
||||
- **MCP Sequential Thinking Tool**: Available in Claude Code MCP servers
|
||||
- **CHORUS Task Execution**: `/home/tony/chorus/project-queues/active/CHORUS/pkg/execution/engine.go`
|
||||
- **AI Provider Interface**: `/home/tony/chorus/project-queues/active/CHORUS/pkg/ai/provider.go`
|
||||
- **ResetData Provider**: `/home/tony/chorus/project-queues/active/CHORUS/pkg/ai/resetdata.go`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Document Info
|
||||
|
||||
- **Created**: 2025-10-13
|
||||
- **Author**: Claude Code
|
||||
- **Status**: Design Complete - Ready for Implementation
|
||||
- **Next Steps**: Begin Phase 1 implementation
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user