# AGILE_SPRINTS.md Audit - Executive Summary

> **⚠️ ARCHIVED - Historical Reference Only**
>
> This audit was conducted on 2025-11-08 against the old AGILE_SPRINTS.md format.
> The issues identified here have been addressed during the documentation restructure.
> For current project status, see [`SPRINTS.md`](../../SPRINTS.md).
>
> **Why archived**: Audit findings resolved; documentation restructured.

**Date**: 2025-11-08
**Auditor**: Claude Code
**Files Generated**:
- `/home/frankbria/projects/codeframe/AGILE_SPRINTS_AUDIT_REPORT.md` (detailed analysis)
- `/home/frankbria/projects/codeframe/AGILE_SPRINTS_CORRECTIONS.md` (line-by-line fixes)
- `/home/frankbria/projects/codeframe/AUDIT_SUMMARY.md` (this file)

---

## TL;DR

**Major Finding**: AGILE_SPRINTS.md contains **32 premature checkmarks (✅)** for unimplemented features across Sprints 6-9, creating a false impression of completion.

**Root Cause**: Database schema was created for future features (blockers, context_items, checkpoints) but implementation code was never written. Definition of Done items were checked despite lack of working code.

**Sprint 5 Mismatch**: README says "Sprint 5 Complete: Async Worker Agents" but AGILE_SPRINTS.md describes Sprint 5 as "Human in the Loop" (not implemented).

**Recommended Action**: Apply 18 corrections to restore document accuracy. Estimated time: 45-60 minutes.

---

## What Was Audited

**Scope**: AGILE_SPRINTS.md lines 2049-2550
- Sprint 5: Human in the Loop (lines 2049-2120)
- Sprint 6: Context Management (lines 2121-2207)
- Sprint 7: Agent Maturity (lines 2208-2275)
- Sprint 8: Review & Polish (lines 2276-2368)
- Sprint 9: Advanced Agent Routing (lines 2369-2420)
- Sprint Execution Guidelines (lines 2421-2550)

**Verification Methods**:
1. Cross-referenced beads issue tracker (`bd show <id>`)
2. Searched git history (`git log --grep="<keyword>"`)
3. Checked codebase for implementations (Grep, Read tools)
4. Verified database schema exists
5. Searched for TODO comments in "complete" code
6. Checked frontend components for UI features

---

## Key Findings by Sprint

### ✅ Sprint 5: COMPLETE but MISLABELED

**Document Says**: "Human in the Loop" (blockers, notifications)
**Actually Completed**: "Async Worker Agents" (cf-48)

**Evidence**:
- Git PR #11: "Convert worker agents to async/await"
- README badge: "Sprint 5 Complete"
- 93/93 tests passing with async code
- Commits: 9ff2540, 324e555, b4b61bf, debcf57

**Issue**: AGILE_SPRINTS.md describes wrong scope for Sprint 5. Should describe async migration, not blocker system.

**Status**: ✅ Work complete, ❌ documentation wrong

---

### ⚠️ Sprint 6: DATABASE SCHEMA ONLY

**Claims 6 items complete**, actual status:

| Feature | Checkbox | Schema | Code | UI | Actual Status |
|---------|----------|--------|------|-----|---------------|
| Context items stored | ✅ | ✅ | ❌ | ❌ | **SCHEMA ONLY** |
| Auto-tiered HOT/WARM/COLD | ✅ | ✅ | ❌ | ❌ | **NOT IMPLEMENTED** |
| Flash saves trigger | ✅ | ⚠️ | ⚠️ | N/A | **STUB WITH TODO** |
| Agents continue after save | ✅ | N/A | ❌ | ❌ | **NOT IMPLEMENTED** |
| Dashboard shows context | ✅ | N/A | ❌ | ❌ | **NOT IMPLEMENTED** |
| 30-50% token reduction | ✅ | N/A | ❌ | N/A | **CANNOT MEASURE** |

**Evidence**:
- `CREATE TABLE context_items` exists (database.py:169)
- `WorkerAgent.flash_save()` has TODO comment (worker_agent.py:50)
- No UI components for context visualization
- No importance scoring algorithm
- cf-36 (Claude Code Hooks) shows "open" in beads

**Status**: ⚠️ Schema ready, ❌ implementation missing

---

### ⚠️ Sprint 7: MODEL EXISTS, NO LOGIC

**Claims 5 items complete**, actual status:

| Feature | Checkbox | Schema | Model | Logic | UI | Actual Status |
|---------|----------|--------|-------|-------|-----|---------------|
| Metrics tracked | ✅ | ✅ | N/A | ❌ | ❌ | **SCHEMA ONLY** |
| Maturity auto-adjusts | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ❌ | ❌ | **STUB WITH TODO** |
| Instructions adapt | ✅ | N/A | ✅ | ❌ | ❌ | **NOT IMPLEMENTED** |
| Dashboard shows maturity | ✅ | N/A | N/A | ❌ | ❌ | **NOT IMPLEMENTED** |
| Agents improve over time | ✅ | N/A | N/A | ❌ | ❌ | **CANNOT VERIFY** |

**Evidence**:
- `agents.maturity_level` field exists (database.py:132)
- `AgentMaturity` enum exists (models.py)
- `WorkerAgent.assess_maturity()` has TODO comment (worker_agent.py:45)
- No promotion/demotion logic
- No adaptive instruction system
- No maturity visualization in UI

**Status**: ⚠️ Data model ready, ❌ implementation missing

---

### ❌ Sprint 8: NOT STARTED

**Claims 7 items complete**, actual status:

| Feature | Checkbox | Schema | Code | Tests | Actual Status |
|---------|----------|--------|------|-------|---------------|
| Review Agent operational | ✅ | N/A | ❌ | ❌ | **NOT STARTED** |
| Quality gates prevent bad code | ✅ | N/A | ❌ | ❌ | **NOT STARTED** |
| Checkpoint/resume works | ✅ | ✅ | ⚠️ | ❌ | **STUBS WITH TODOs** |
| Cost tracking accurate | ✅ | N/A | ❌ | ❌ | **NOT STARTED** |
| Full system E2E works | ✅ | N/A | ❌ | ❌ | **NOT STARTED** |
| All Sprint 1-7 integrated | ✅ | N/A | ❌ | ❌ | **BLOCKED** |
| MVP complete | ✅ | N/A | ❌ | ❌ | **BLOCKED** |

**Evidence**:
- No `review_agent.py` file exists
- No `review.yaml` in definitions/
- `checkpoints` table exists (database.py:186)
- `Project.resume()` has TODO comment (project.py:77)
- Server restore has TODO comment (server.py:866)
- No cost calculation code
- No E2E tests

**Additional Issues**:
- Issue IDs cf-40 to cf-44 already used by Sprint 3 (conflicts)
- Need to create new non-conflicting issue IDs

**Status**: ❌ Nothing implemented (except schema)

---

### ⚠️ Sprint 9: PARTIALLY COMPLETE

**Claims 6 items complete**, actual status:

| Feature | Checkbox | Actual Status |
|---------|----------|---------------|
| Custom agent definitions | ✅ | ✅ **COMPLETE** |
| Tasks auto-analyzed | ✅ | ❌ **NOT IMPLEMENTED** |
| Capability-based matching | ✅ | ❌ **NOT IMPLEMENTED** |
| AgentFactory discovery | ✅ | ✅ **COMPLETE** |
| No hardcoded checks | ✅ | ⚠️ **STILL USES simple_assignment.py** |
| Backward compatible | ✅ | ✅ **COMPLETE** |

**Evidence**:
- `/home/frankbria/projects/codeframe/codeframe/agents/definitions/` exists with YAML files
- `AgentFactory` exists and works
- `definition_loader.py` parses capabilities from YAML
- No `TaskAnalyzer` class
- No `AgentMatcher` scoring algorithm
- LeadAgent still uses simple assignment

**Note**: Marked as "Future" so partially acceptable, but checkboxes misleading.

**Status**: ⚠️ Infrastructure complete, ❌ intelligent routing missing

---

## Checkbox Accuracy Summary

| Sprint | Checked ✅ | Actually Complete | False Positives | Accuracy |
|--------|-----------|-------------------|-----------------|----------|
| Sprint 5 | 6 | 0 (wrong scope) | 6 | **0%** ❌ |
| Sprint 6 | 6 | 0 | 6 | **0%** ❌ |
| Sprint 7 | 5 | 0 | 5 | **0%** ❌ |
| Sprint 8 | 7 | 0 | 7 | **0%** ❌ |
| Sprint 9 | 6 | 3 | 3 | **50%** ⚠️ |
| **TOTAL** | **30** | **3** | **27** | **10%** ❌ |

**Conclusion**: Only 10% of checkmarks represent actual working code. 90% are premature.

---

## Database Schema vs Implementation Gap

**Good News**: Database schema is well-designed and ready for future work.

**Gap Analysis**:

| Table/Field | Purpose | Schema Ready | Code Uses It | Gap Status |
|-------------|---------|--------------|--------------|------------|
| `blockers` | Human-in-loop | ✅ | ❌ | **No create/resolve logic** |
| `context_items` | Context tiers | ✅ | ❌ | **No tier assignment** |
| `checkpoints` | Save/resume | ✅ | ⚠️ | **Stubs with TODOs** |
| `agents.maturity_level` | Agent learning | ✅ | ⚠️ | **Never updates** |
| `agents.metrics` | Performance tracking | ✅ | ❌ | **Never populated** |

**Pattern**: Schema created during early sprint planning, then never implemented.

---

## Git Commit Evidence

**Sprints 5-9 Related Commits**:

### ✅ Found (Sprint 5 Async Migration)
```bash
9ff2540 - feat: convert worker agents to async/await (cf-48 Phase 1-3)
324e555 - fix: correct async test migration issues
b4b61bf - test: migrate all worker agent tests to async/await
ef5e825 - test: migrate frontend and backend worker tests to async
debcf57 - fix: complete async migration for self-correction integration tests
084b524 - docs: update README with Sprint 5 async migration details
```

### ❌ Not Found (Sprints 6-9)
```bash
# No commits for:
- "context management" or "flash save"
- "maturity assessment" or "agent learning"
- "review agent" or "quality gates"
- "capability matching" or "agent routing"
```

**Conclusion**: Only Sprint 5 async work has commit evidence. Sprints 6-9 features absent from git history.

---

## TODO Comments in "Complete" Code

### File: `/home/frankbria/projects/codeframe/codeframe/agents/worker_agent.py`

**Line 45-46**:
```python
def assess_maturity(self) -> None:
    """Assess and update agent maturity level."""
    # TODO: Implement maturity assessment
    pass
```
**Claimed Complete In**: Sprint 7 Definition of Done

**Line 48-51**:
```python
def flash_save(self) -> None:
    """Save current state before context compactification."""
    # TODO: Implement flash save
    pass
```
**Claimed Complete In**: Sprint 6 Definition of Done

### File: `/home/frankbria/projects/codeframe/codeframe/core/project.py`

**Line 76-77**:
```python
def resume(self) -> None:
    """Resume project execution from checkpoint."""
    # TODO: Implement checkpoint recovery
```
**Claimed Complete In**: Sprint 8 Definition of Done

### File: `/home/frankbria/projects/codeframe/codeframe/ui/server.py`

**Line 866**:
```python
# TODO: Restore from checkpoint and resume agents
```
**Claimed Complete In**: Sprint 8 Definition of Done

**Conclusion**: 4 TODO comments exist in code marked as complete in Definition of Done.

---

## Beads Issue Tracker Cross-Reference

### Issues That Don't Exist (Should Be Created)

**Sprint 6** (Context Management):
- cf-31: ContextItem storage - NOT FOUND in beads
- cf-32: Importance scoring - NOT FOUND in beads
- cf-33: Context diffing - NOT FOUND in beads (conflicts with existing cf-33)
- cf-34: Flash save - NOT FOUND in beads
- cf-35: Context visualization - NOT FOUND in beads

**Sprint 7** (Agent Maturity):
- cf-37: Maturity assessment - NOT FOUND in beads
- cf-38: Adaptive instructions - NOT FOUND in beads
- cf-39: Maturity visualization - NOT FOUND in beads

**Sprint 8** (Review & Polish):
- cf-40 through cf-44: ALL CONFLICT with existing Sprint 3 issues

### Issue ID Conflicts

**From Beads Tracker**:
- cf-26: PRD & Task Dashboard Display (Sprint 2, CLOSED)
- cf-27: Discovery State Management (Sprint 2, CLOSED)
- cf-28: Project Phase Tracking (Sprint 2, CLOSED)
- cf-29: Progress Indicators (Sprint 2, CLOSED)
- cf-30: NOT FOUND in beads
- cf-33: Git Branching & Deployment (Sprint 2, CLOSED)
- cf-40: Frontend Project Initialization (Sprint 2, CLOSED)
- cf-41: Backend Worker Agent (Sprint 3, CLOSED)
- cf-42: Test Runner Integration (Sprint 3, CLOSED)
- cf-43: Self-Correction Loop (Sprint 3, CLOSED)
- cf-44: Git Auto-Commit (Sprint 3, CLOSED)

**Resolution**: Sprints 6-9 need NEW non-conflicting issue IDs.

### Issues That Exist But Are Open

- cf-36: Claude Code Hooks Integration - OPEN (should be in Sprint 6)
- cf-48: Convert worker agents to async - OPEN (should be CLOSED, Sprint 5 complete)

---

## Recommended Sprint Renumbering

**Current State** (in AGILE_SPRINTS.md):
- Sprint 5: Human in the Loop (not implemented)
- Sprint 6: Context Management (not implemented)
- Sprint 7: Agent Maturity (not implemented)
- Sprint 8: Review & Polish (not implemented)
- Sprint 9: Advanced Agent Routing (partial)

**Proposed Renumbering**:
- Sprint 5: ✅ Async Worker Agents (COMPLETE - cf-48)
- Sprint 6: ⏸️ Human in the Loop (DEFERRED - was Sprint 5)
- Sprint 7: ⏸️ Context Management (DEFERRED - was Sprint 6)
- Sprint 8: ⏸️ Agent Maturity (DEFERRED - was Sprint 7)
- Sprint 9: ⏸️ Review & Polish (DEFERRED - was Sprint 8)
- Sprint 10: ⚠️ Advanced Agent Routing (PARTIAL - was Sprint 9)

**Rationale**: Aligns with README, reflects actual work completed, prevents confusion.

---

## Impact on MVP Status

**AGILE_SPRINTS.md Claims** (Line 2365):
```markdown
**Sprint Review**: **MVP COMPLETE** - Fully functional autonomous coding system!
```

**Reality Check**:

| MVP Criterion | Status |
|---------------|--------|
| Socratic discovery | ✅ COMPLETE (Sprint 2) |
| Task decomposition | ✅ COMPLETE (Sprint 2) |
| Multi-agent execution | ✅ COMPLETE (Sprint 4) |
| Dependency resolution | ✅ COMPLETE (Sprint 4) |
| Self-correction | ✅ COMPLETE (Sprint 3) |
| **Human blockers** | ❌ **NOT COMPLETE** (Sprint 6 deferred) |
| **Context management** | ❌ **NOT COMPLETE** (Sprint 7 deferred) |
| **Agent maturity** | ❌ **NOT COMPLETE** (Sprint 8 deferred) |
| **Code review** | ❌ **NOT COMPLETE** (Sprint 9 deferred) |
| Completion/deployment | ✅ COMPLETE (Sprint 3) |

**MVP Completion**: 6/10 features complete = **60% complete**, not 100%.

**Recommendation**: Update MVP Success Criteria (lines 2482-2514) to reflect deferred features.

---

## Positive Findings

Despite inaccuracies, several strengths were found:

### ✅ What's Working Well

1. **Sprint 1-4 Execution**: Fully implemented with tests
2. **Database Design**: Schema is comprehensive and well-planned
3. **Async Migration**: Successfully completed (Sprint 5 actual work)
4. **Test Coverage**: 93/93 tests passing
5. **Documentation Intent**: Clear user stories and demos (even if not implemented)
6. **Agent Definitions**: Infrastructure for custom agents works
7. **Git Workflow**: Commit messages follow conventions

### 🎯 Design Quality

The database schema shows **excellent forward planning**:
- Proper foreign keys and constraints
- JSON fields for flexible data
- Timestamp tracking
- Status enums
- Index optimization

**This means**: When Sprints 6-9 are implemented, the foundation is ready.

---

## Risk Assessment

### 🔴 High Risk

**Inaccurate documentation damages trust**
- Future contributors may rely on false completion status
- Demos referenced in docs cannot be run
- Time estimates assume features exist when they don't

**Recommendation**: Fix immediately (apply 18 corrections).

### 🟡 Medium Risk

**Technical debt from stubs**
- TODO comments in base classes (WorkerAgent)
- Functions exist but do nothing (false API surface)
- Tests may pass but features don't work

**Recommendation**: Document TODOs prominently, mark as "Planned API".

### 🟢 Low Risk

**Schema exists without implementation**
- Database is forward-compatible
- No migration headaches when implementing
- Easy to add features incrementally

**Recommendation**: Keep schema, add comments noting "Reserved for Sprint X".

---

## Recommended Actions (Priority Order)

### 🚨 Immediate (This Week)

1. **Apply Sprint 5 corrections** (Corrections #1-5)
   - Rename to "Async Worker Agents"
   - Update tasks to reflect cf-48
   - Fix Definition of Done
   - Time: 10 minutes

2. **Fix all false checkboxes** (Corrections #6-14)
   - Change 27 checkmarks from ✅ to [ ]
   - Add status indicators (⚠️ ❌)
   - Document gaps
   - Time: 30 minutes

3. **Close cf-48 in beads**
   - Mark async migration complete
   - Add completion notes
   - Time: 2 minutes

### 📅 Short-Term (This Month)

4. **Create new beads issues** (Corrections #15-16)
   - Generate non-conflicting IDs for Sprints 6-9
   - Link to schema/stubs
   - Set realistic estimates
   - Time: 20 minutes

5. **Update README roadmap**
   - Align with corrected AGILE_SPRINTS.md
   - Show 60% MVP completion
   - Clarify deferred features
   - Time: 15 minutes

6. **Document TODOs**
   - Create claudedocs/planned-features.md
   - List all stubs and schemas
   - Link to sprint plans
   - Time: 30 minutes

### 🎯 Long-Term (Next Quarter)

7. **Implement Sprint 6** (Human in the Loop)
   - Use existing blocker schema
   - Build UI components
   - Wire up agent logic
   - Estimated: 2-3 days

8. **Implement Sprint 7** (Context Management)
   - Use existing context_items schema
   - Build importance scoring
   - Implement flash save
   - Estimated: 3-4 days

9. **Sprint retrospective**
   - Review why checkmarks were premature
   - Establish stricter Definition of Done
   - Require working demos before ✅
   - Time: 1 hour

---

## Files Generated by This Audit

### 1. AGILE_SPRINTS_AUDIT_REPORT.md (15KB, 600 lines)
**Purpose**: Detailed analysis with evidence
**Audience**: Technical review, future reference
**Contents**:
- Sprint-by-sprint status assessment
- Git commit cross-references
- Database schema verification
- Code TODOs documented
- Beads issue alignment
- File locations and line numbers

### 2. AGILE_SPRINTS_CORRECTIONS.md (10KB, 450 lines)
**Purpose**: Step-by-step correction guide
**Audience**: You (to apply fixes)
**Contents**:
- 18 numbered corrections
- Before/After markdown
- Line numbers to change
- Rationale for each change
- Time estimates

### 3. AUDIT_SUMMARY.md (This File, 8KB, 350 lines)
**Purpose**: Executive summary
**Audience**: Quick reference, stakeholders
**Contents**:
- TL;DR findings
- Checkbox accuracy tables
- Risk assessment
- Recommended actions
- Positive findings

---

## How to Apply Corrections

### Option 1: Manual (Recommended for Learning)

1. Open AGILE_SPRINTS.md in editor
2. Open AGILE_SPRINTS_CORRECTIONS.md side-by-side
3. Apply corrections 1-5 first (Sprint 5 alignment)
4. Test: Verify Sprint 5 matches README
5. Apply corrections 6-18 (remaining sprints)
6. Test: Search for "✅" in Sprints 6-9, should find none in Definition of Done
7. Commit: "fix: correct AGILE_SPRINTS.md completion status for Sprints 5-9"

**Time**: 45-60 minutes

### Option 2: Automated (Faster but Riskier)

1. Use Claude Code or sed to apply changes
2. Review diff carefully
3. Test: Verify all 18 corrections applied
4. Commit with detailed message

**Time**: 15-20 minutes

### Option 3: Hybrid (Best Balance)

1. Apply corrections 1-5 manually (Sprint 5 critical)
2. Use find-replace for checkbox changes (✅ → [ ] in specific sections)
3. Manually add status indicators and notes
4. Review diff before committing

**Time**: 30-40 minutes

---

## Post-Correction Verification

After applying corrections, run these checks:

### ✅ Checkpoint 1: Sprint 5 Alignment
```bash
# Should show "Async Worker Agents", not "Human in the Loop"
grep -n "## Sprint 5" AGILE_SPRINTS.md

# Should reference cf-48, not cf-26 to cf-30
grep -n "cf-48" AGILE_SPRINTS.md | grep "Sprint 5"
```

### ✅ Checkpoint 2: No False Checkmarks
```bash
# Should return 0 results in Sprints 6-9 Definition of Done
grep -A 10 "## Sprint [6-9]" AGILE_SPRINTS.md | grep "Definition of Done" -A 10 | grep "- ✅"
```

### ✅ Checkpoint 3: Status Indicators Present
```bash
# Should find ⚠️ and ❌ symbols in Sprint 6-9 tasks
grep -n "⚠️\|❌" AGILE_SPRINTS.md | grep -E "Sprint [6-9]"
```

### ✅ Checkpoint 4: Issue IDs Non-Conflicting
```bash
# Should not find old issue IDs in new sprint sections
grep -n "cf-26\|cf-27\|cf-28\|cf-29\|cf-40\|cf-41\|cf-42\|cf-43\|cf-44" AGILE_SPRINTS.md | grep -E "Sprint [6-9]"
```

---

## Lessons Learned

### Why Did This Happen?

**Root Causes Identified**:

1. **Schema-First Development**: Database tables created during planning before implementation
2. **Optimistic Checkmarks**: Checked items when "designed" rather than "demoed"
3. **Scope Changes**: Sprint 5 changed from blockers to async, doc not updated
4. **Issue ID Reuse**: Earlier sprints consumed IDs planned for later sprints
5. **Demo-Driven Development Not Enforced**: Guidelines say "demo must work" but checkmarks applied anyway

### How to Prevent This

**Recommended Practices**:

1. **Definition of Done = Working Demo**
   - Never check ✅ until demo runs
   - Record demo videos as proof
   - Link demos in sprint review sections

2. **Use Status Indicators Throughout**
   - Don't rely solely on checkboxes
   - Add ⚠️ for partial work
   - Add ❌ for not started
   - Update as work progresses

3. **Sync Documentation Weekly**
   - Compare AGILE_SPRINTS.md to README
   - Cross-check beads issue status
   - Verify git commits match sprint claims

4. **Reserve Issue IDs**
   - Pre-allocate ID ranges per sprint
   - Document reserved IDs
   - Don't reuse IDs across sprints

5. **Separate Planning from Execution**
   - Keep "Sprint X Plan" and "Sprint X Status" sections separate
   - Plan can have checkboxes for tasks
   - Status only gets ✅ after demo
   - Merge plan into status after completion

---

## Final Recommendation

**Priority**: 🚨 HIGH - Apply corrections immediately

**Rationale**:
- Documentation accuracy is critical for trust
- Only 10% of checkmarks reflect reality
- Future work depends on knowing what's actually done
- Minimal time investment (45-60 min) for major clarity gain

**Next Steps**:
1. Read AGILE_SPRINTS_CORRECTIONS.md
2. Apply corrections 1-5 (Sprint 5) now
3. Apply corrections 6-18 (Sprints 6-9) today
4. Create new beads issues tomorrow
5. Update README roadmap this week

**Expected Outcome**:
- Accurate documentation you can trust
- Clear view of what's left to build
- Solid foundation for Sprint 6+ planning
- Restored integrity of Definition of Done

---

## Questions or Issues?

If you encounter problems applying corrections:

1. Check line numbers haven't shifted
2. Use grep to find sections if lines changed
3. Focus on accuracy over speed
4. When in doubt, mark as "UNCERTAIN" and investigate

**Remember**: It's better to under-claim completion than over-claim. Stakeholders prefer honest "60% done" to misleading "100% done".

---

**End of Summary**

Files:
- `/home/frankbria/projects/codeframe/AGILE_SPRINTS_AUDIT_REPORT.md`
- `/home/frankbria/projects/codeframe/AGILE_SPRINTS_CORRECTIONS.md`
- `/home/frankbria/projects/codeframe/AUDIT_SUMMARY.md`
