Assignment - Bharathi Krishnan

.cursor/plans/002-game-start-drawer-flow-plan.md

@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+# Implementation Plan: Game Start & Drawer Flow
+
+**Branch**: `002-game-start-drawer-flow` | **Date**: 2026-05-30 | **Spec**: [spec.md](../specs/002-game-start-drawer-flow/spec.md)
+
+**Input**: Feature specification from `/specs/002-game-start-drawer-flow/spec.md`
+
+## Summary
+
+Extend the Scenario 1 room flow so player names are trimmed and validated, game start assigns
+the host as drawer with a deterministic secret word (`rocket`), and viewer-aware room snapshots
+expose the word only to the drawer. Add game-screen polling (~2s) for role sync, and enrich the
+game UI with drawer/guesser labels and conditional secret-word display. Work is brownfield:
+extend `Room` round fields, `startRoom()` initialization, `toRoomSnapshot()` filtering, Zod
+name schemas, and frontend create/join/game pages.
+
+See full plan at `specs/002-game-start-drawer-flow/plan.md`.

.cursor/plans/003-gameplay-interaction-plan.md

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+# Plan: Gameplay Interaction (Scenario 3)
+
+**Branch**: `003-gameplay-interaction`  
+**Spec**: [specs/003-gameplay-interaction/spec.md](../specs/003-gameplay-interaction/spec.md)  
+**Full plan**: [specs/003-gameplay-interaction/plan.md](../specs/003-gameplay-interaction/plan.md)
+
+## Summary
+
+Scenario 3 adds drawer canvas (stroke sync via poll), clear canvas, guess submission with
+validation, shared guess history, and deterministic scoring (+100 first correct, +0 incorrect).
+
+## Key artifacts
+
+- [research.md](../specs/003-gameplay-interaction/research.md)
+- [data-model.md](../specs/003-gameplay-interaction/data-model.md)
+- [contracts/rooms-api.md](../specs/003-gameplay-interaction/contracts/rooms-api.md)
+- [quickstart.md](../specs/003-gameplay-interaction/quickstart.md)
+
+## New API endpoints
+
+- `POST /rooms/:code/strokes` — drawer append stroke
+- `POST /rooms/:code/canvas/clear` — drawer clear canvas
+- `POST /rooms/:code/guesses` — guesser submit guess
+
+## Next step
+
+Run `/speckit-tasks` to generate implementation tasks.

.cursor/plans/004-result-restart-validation-plan.md

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+# Plan: Result, Restart & Final Validation (Scenario 4)
+
+**Branch**: `004-result-restart-validation`  
+**Spec**: [specs/004-result-restart-validation/spec.md](../specs/004-result-restart-validation/spec.md)  
+**Full plan**: [specs/004-result-restart-validation/plan.md](../specs/004-result-restart-validation/plan.md)
+
+## Summary
+
+Scenario 4 adds host-only end-round (`playing` → `result`) and restart (`result` → `lobby`)
+transitions. Result mode reveals the secret word to all players on the same `/game` screen
+(word, scores, history — no canvas). Restart preserves players and clears all round state.
+
+## Key artifacts
+
+- [research.md](../specs/004-result-restart-validation/research.md)
+- [data-model.md](../specs/004-result-restart-validation/data-model.md)
+- [contracts/rooms-api.md](../specs/004-result-restart-validation/contracts/rooms-api.md)
+- [quickstart.md](../specs/004-result-restart-validation/quickstart.md)
+
+## New API endpoints
+
+- `POST /rooms/:code/end` — host end round → result state
+- `POST /rooms/:code/restart` — host restart → lobby with cleared round state
+
+## Next step
+
+Run `/speckit-tasks` to generate implementation tasks.

.cursor/rules/specify-rules.mdc

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+alwaysApply: true
+---
+
+<!-- SPECKIT START -->
+For additional context about technologies to be used, project structure,
+shell commands, and other important information, read the current plan at
+`specs/004-result-restart-validation/plan.md` (data model: `specs/004-result-restart-validation/data-model.md`,
+API contracts: `specs/004-result-restart-validation/contracts/rooms-api.md`).
+<!-- SPECKIT END -->

.cursor/skills/speckit-analyze/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,255 @@
+---
+name: "speckit-analyze"
+description: "Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation."
+compatibility: "Requires spec-kit project structure with .specify/ directory"
+metadata:
+  author: "github-spec-kit"
+  source: "templates/commands/analyze.md"
+---
+
+
+## User Input
+
+```text
+$ARGUMENTS
+```
+
+You **MUST** consider the user input before proceeding (if not empty).
+
+## Pre-Execution Checks
+
+**Check for extension hooks (before analysis)**:
+- Check if `.specify/extensions.yml` exists in the project root.
+- If it exists, read it and look for entries under the `hooks.before_analyze` key
+- If the YAML cannot be parsed or is invalid, skip hook checking silently and continue normally
+- Filter out hooks where `enabled` is explicitly `false`. Treat hooks without an `enabled` field as enabled by default.
+- For each remaining hook, do **not** attempt to interpret or evaluate hook `condition` expressions:
+  - If the hook has no `condition` field, or it is null/empty, treat the hook as executable
+  - If the hook defines a non-empty `condition`, skip the hook and leave condition evaluation to the HookExecutor implementation
+- For each executable hook, output the following based on its `optional` flag:
+  - **Optional hook** (`optional: true`):
+    ```
+    ## Extension Hooks
+
+    **Optional Pre-Hook**: {extension}
+    Command: `/{command}`
+    Description: {description}
+
+    Prompt: {prompt}
+    To execute: `/{command}`
+    ```
+  - **Mandatory hook** (`optional: false`):
+    ```
+    ## Extension Hooks
+
+    **Automatic Pre-Hook**: {extension}
+    Executing: `/{command}`
+    EXECUTE_COMMAND: {command}
+
+    Wait for the result of the hook command before proceeding to the Goal.
+    ```
+- If no hooks are registered or `.specify/extensions.yml` does not exist, skip silently
+
+## Goal
+
+Identify inconsistencies, duplications, ambiguities, and underspecified items across the three core artifacts (`spec.md`, `plan.md`, `tasks.md`) before implementation. This command MUST run only after `/speckit-tasks` has successfully produced a complete `tasks.md`.
+
+## Operating Constraints
+
+**STRICTLY READ-ONLY**: Do **not** modify any files. Output a structured analysis report. Offer an optional remediation plan (user must explicitly approve before any follow-up editing commands would be invoked manually).
+
+**Constitution Authority**: The project constitution (`.specify/memory/constitution.md`) is **non-negotiable** within this analysis scope. Constitution conflicts are automatically CRITICAL and require adjustment of the spec, plan, or tasks—not dilution, reinterpretation, or silent ignoring of the principle. If a principle itself needs to change, that must occur in a separate, explicit constitution update outside `/speckit-analyze`.
+
+## Execution Steps
+
+### 1. Initialize Analysis Context
+
+Run `.specify/scripts/bash/check-prerequisites.sh --json --require-tasks --include-tasks` once from repo root and parse JSON for FEATURE_DIR and AVAILABLE_DOCS. Derive absolute paths:
+
+- SPEC = FEATURE_DIR/spec.md
+- PLAN = FEATURE_DIR/plan.md
+- TASKS = FEATURE_DIR/tasks.md
+
+Abort with an error message if any required file is missing (instruct the user to run missing prerequisite command).
+For single quotes in args like "I'm Groot", use escape syntax: e.g 'I'\''m Groot' (or double-quote if possible: "I'm Groot").
+
+### 2. Load Artifacts (Progressive Disclosure)
+
+Load only the minimal necessary context from each artifact:
+
+**From spec.md:**
+
+- Overview/Context
+- Functional Requirements
+- Success Criteria (measurable outcomes — e.g., performance, security, availability, user success, business impact)
+- User Stories
+- Edge Cases (if present)
+
+**From plan.md:**
+
+- Architecture/stack choices
+- Data Model references
+- Phases
+- Technical constraints
+
+**From tasks.md:**
+
+- Task IDs
+- Descriptions
+- Phase grouping
+- Parallel markers [P]
+- Referenced file paths
+
+**From constitution:**
+
+- Load `.specify/memory/constitution.md` for principle validation
+
+### 3. Build Semantic Models
+
+Create internal representations (do not include raw artifacts in output):
+
+- **Requirements inventory**: For each Functional Requirement (FR-###) and Success Criterion (SC-###), record a stable key. Use the explicit FR-/SC- identifier as the primary key when present, and optionally also derive an imperative-phrase slug for readability (e.g., "User can upload file" → `user-can-upload-file`). Include only Success Criteria items that require buildable work (e.g., load-testing infrastructure, security audit tooling), and exclude post-launch outcome metrics and business KPIs (e.g., "Reduce support tickets by 50%").
+- **User story/action inventory**: Discrete user actions with acceptance criteria
+- **Task coverage mapping**: Map each task to one or more requirements or stories (inference by keyword / explicit reference patterns like IDs or key phrases)
+- **Constitution rule set**: Extract principle names and MUST/SHOULD normative statements
+
+### 4. Detection Passes (Token-Efficient Analysis)
+
+Focus on high-signal findings. Limit to 50 findings total; aggregate remainder in overflow summary.
+
+#### A. Duplication Detection
+
+- Identify near-duplicate requirements
+- Mark lower-quality phrasing for consolidation
+
+#### B. Ambiguity Detection
+
+- Flag vague adjectives (fast, scalable, secure, intuitive, robust) lacking measurable criteria
+- Flag unresolved placeholders (TODO, TKTK, ???, `<placeholder>`, etc.)
+
+#### C. Underspecification
+
+- Requirements with verbs but missing object or measurable outcome
+- User stories missing acceptance criteria alignment
+- Tasks referencing files or components not defined in spec/plan
+
+#### D. Constitution Alignment
+
+- Any requirement or plan element conflicting with a MUST principle
+- Missing mandated sections or quality gates from constitution
+
+#### E. Coverage Gaps
+
+- Requirements with zero associated tasks
+- Tasks with no mapped requirement/story
+- Success Criteria requiring buildable work (performance, security, availability) not reflected in tasks
+
+#### F. Inconsistency
+
+- Terminology drift (same concept named differently across files)
+- Data entities referenced in plan but absent in spec (or vice versa)
+- Task ordering contradictions (e.g., integration tasks before foundational setup tasks without dependency note)
+- Conflicting requirements (e.g., one requires Next.js while other specifies Vue)
+
+### 5. Severity Assignment
+
+Use this heuristic to prioritize findings:
+
+- **CRITICAL**: Violates constitution MUST, missing core spec artifact, or requirement with zero coverage that blocks baseline functionality
+- **HIGH**: Duplicate or conflicting requirement, ambiguous security/performance attribute, untestable acceptance criterion
+- **MEDIUM**: Terminology drift, missing non-functional task coverage, underspecified edge case
+- **LOW**: Style/wording improvements, minor redundancy not affecting execution order
+
+### 6. Produce Compact Analysis Report
+
+Output a Markdown report (no file writes) with the following structure:
+
+## Specification Analysis Report
+
+| ID | Category | Severity | Location(s) | Summary | Recommendation |
+|----|----------|----------|-------------|---------|----------------|
+| A1 | Duplication | HIGH | spec.md:L120-134 | Two similar requirements ... | Merge phrasing; keep clearer version |
+
+(Add one row per finding; generate stable IDs prefixed by category initial.)
+
+**Coverage Summary Table:**
+
+| Requirement Key | Has Task? | Task IDs | Notes |
+|-----------------|-----------|----------|-------|
+
+**Constitution Alignment Issues:** (if any)
+
+**Unmapped Tasks:** (if any)
+
+**Metrics:**
+
+- Total Requirements
+- Total Tasks
+- Coverage % (requirements with >=1 task)
+- Ambiguity Count
+- Duplication Count
+- Critical Issues Count
+
+### 7. Provide Next Actions
+
+At end of report, output a concise Next Actions block:
+
+- If CRITICAL issues exist: Recommend resolving before `/speckit-implement`
+- If only LOW/MEDIUM: User may proceed, but provide improvement suggestions
+- Provide explicit command suggestions: e.g., "Run /speckit-specify with refinement", "Run /speckit-plan to adjust architecture", "Manually edit tasks.md to add coverage for 'performance-metrics'"
+
+### 8. Offer Remediation
+
+Ask the user: "Would you like me to suggest concrete remediation edits for the top N issues?" (Do NOT apply them automatically.)
+
+### 9. Check for extension hooks
+
+After reporting, check if `.specify/extensions.yml` exists in the project root.
+- If it exists, read it and look for entries under the `hooks.after_analyze` key
+- If the YAML cannot be parsed or is invalid, skip hook checking silently and continue normally
+- Filter out hooks where `enabled` is explicitly `false`. Treat hooks without an `enabled` field as enabled by default.
+- For each remaining hook, do **not** attempt to interpret or evaluate hook `condition` expressions:
+  - If the hook has no `condition` field, or it is null/empty, treat the hook as executable
+  - If the hook defines a non-empty `condition`, skip the hook and leave condition evaluation to the HookExecutor implementation
+- For each executable hook, output the following based on its `optional` flag:
+  - **Optional hook** (`optional: true`):
+    ```
+    ## Extension Hooks
+
+    **Optional Hook**: {extension}
+    Command: `/{command}`
+    Description: {description}
+
+    Prompt: {prompt}
+    To execute: `/{command}`
+    ```
+  - **Mandatory hook** (`optional: false`):
+    ```
+    ## Extension Hooks
+
+    **Automatic Hook**: {extension}
+    Executing: `/{command}`
+    EXECUTE_COMMAND: {command}
+    ```
+- If no hooks are registered or `.specify/extensions.yml` does not exist, skip silently
+
+## Operating Principles
+
+### Context Efficiency
+
+- **Minimal high-signal tokens**: Focus on actionable findings, not exhaustive documentation
+- **Progressive disclosure**: Load artifacts incrementally; don't dump all content into analysis
+- **Token-efficient output**: Limit findings table to 50 rows; summarize overflow
+- **Deterministic results**: Rerunning without changes should produce consistent IDs and counts
+
+### Analysis Guidelines
+
+- **NEVER modify files** (this is read-only analysis)
+- **NEVER hallucinate missing sections** (if absent, report them accurately)
+- **Prioritize constitution violations** (these are always CRITICAL)
+- **Use examples over exhaustive rules** (cite specific instances, not generic patterns)
+- **Report zero issues gracefully** (emit success report with coverage statistics)
+
+## Context
+
+$ARGUMENTS