From 8e372dd8ed391c48ace5d68313f1b3ac9ba40b11 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Lucas Berger <me@lucasberger.ca>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2026 17:01:32 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] wip: 10.1-aggressive-workflow-modularization paused at
 context gathered

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
---
 .../.continue-here.md                         | 62 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 62 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 .planning/phases/10.1-aggressive-workflow-modularization/.continue-here.md

diff --git a/.planning/phases/10.1-aggressive-workflow-modularization/.continue-here.md b/.planning/phases/10.1-aggressive-workflow-modularization/.continue-here.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ab742ba
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.planning/phases/10.1-aggressive-workflow-modularization/.continue-here.md
@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+---
+phase: 10.1-aggressive-workflow-modularization
+task: 0
+total_tasks: 0
+status: context_gathered
+last_updated: 2026-02-04
+---
+
+<current_state>
+Phase 10.1 context discussion completed. CONTEXT.md created with implementation decisions. Phase has no plans yet — ready for `/gsd:plan-phase 10.1` to create execution plans.
+</current_state>
+
+<completed_work>
+- Phase 10 fully complete (7 plans, all UAT gaps closed)
+- Phase 10.1 CONTEXT.md created via `/gsd:discuss-phase`
+- Fixed misnamed phase directories (10.1 and 10.2 were swapped)
+- Committed: `docs(10.1): capture phase context`
+</completed_work>
+
+<remaining_work>
+- Run `/gsd:plan-phase 10.1` to create execution plans
+- Execute plans to decompose main workflow from 192 nodes to ~50-80 nodes
+- Create domain sub-workflows per the captured decisions
+</remaining_work>
+
+<decisions_made>
+**Decomposition:**
+- Claude proposes optimal boundaries, user approves
+- Extraction threshold: cohesive behavior + 8-15 nodes minimum
+- Existing sub-workflows (Update, Actions, Logs) open to restructuring
+
+**Main workflow:**
+- Main sends all Telegram responses (sub-workflows return data only)
+- Centralized error handling in main
+- Claude to evaluate whether dedicated Telegram sub-workflow adds value
+
+**Contracts:**
+- Input: common fields (chatId, messageId) + domain-specific
+- File naming: `n8n-{domain}.json` (rename existing to match)
+
+**Migration:**
+- Grouped extraction, verify each group
+- Telegram sub-workflow first if validated
+- Git + backup files for rollback
+</decisions_made>
+
+<blockers>
+None
+</blockers>
+
+<context>
+User wants pragmatic modularization — no workflow too large to work with, logical groupings, don't over-engineer. Key insight from discussion: a dedicated Telegram sub-workflow could centralize all messaging complexity (sending, editing, keyboards, errors, callbacks). This needs validation during research/planning.
+
+The goal is main workflow becomes: trigger → auth → route → dispatch to sub-workflows → format response → send via Telegram (or Telegram sub-workflow).
+</context>
+
+<next_action>
+Run `/gsd:plan-phase 10.1` to:
+1. Research current workflow structure
+2. Propose domain boundaries (including Telegram sub-workflow evaluation)
+3. Create execution plans for grouped extraction
+</next_action>