louke 0.5.8

Lòukè - 超越氛围写意，乃是工笔造物 (beyond vibes, into craft)

Lòukè - beyond vibes, into Lòukè(craft)

🇨🇳 中文 · 🇺🇸 English

Lòukè is a spec-first, test-driven, tool-aligned multi-agent collaborative development method.

---

1. Why Lòukè?

You can't build real software with a one-line vibe-coding prompt. When vibecoding:

• You haven't figured out what you want, yet you expect the agent to know
• Words are suggestive and leave too much room for imagination, but software must be precise
• You tell many Stories, but neither the AI nor you has formed a complete blueprint

Real software has hundreds to thousands of sub-requirements and tens of thousands of execution paths and boundary conditions.

We must rely on concrete, detailed specs, acceptance criteria, and test plans. Humans must participate in and guide the production of these documents; tools must break them into traceable sub-items so agent code maps one-to-one to those items. Only then can we build a retractable, traceable, trustworthy software production process.

That is the value of Lòukè. Beyond vibecoding — agent programming becomes precision manufacturing, executing every detail you specified perfectly.

Even spec-kit / superpowers / oh-my-openagent don't turn spec into a "programming contract." For spec to be a contract, three things must hold simultaneously:

• Sub-requirements are orthogonal — non-conflicting and non-overlapping, already pruned by Occam's razor.
• Right-sized granularity — an agent cannot read a 10,000-word document and still grasp every small detail, unless you break items into tasks that fit cleanly into a PR.
• Traceable — every thread from requirement to code to test must be bidirectionally traceable: forward to find the source, backward to find the landing. Any requirement without matching code and tests is a blank check hanging on the wall.

And Lòukè differs from these frameworks in philosophy: Lòukè turns this into Infrastructure-as-Checkpoint — the traceable loop is not in the AI's self-discipline, but in the forced execution of external CLIs at commit-time. exit 0/1 is an OS process return value; you can't bypass it. The engineering world only recognizes this one language.

Programmers make mistakes — that's why we have tests. Agents make mistakes too. Don't rely on AI self-discipline; rely on rigorously aligned specs and tools.

2. How Does Lòukè Achieve This?

Lòukè turns the contract's three principles into five observable things. Each maps to an lk command or a traceable artifact — not just prompts, but tools:

• spec → GitHub issue, commits must reference issue — Lex converts each FR into an issue; Devon's commit message enforces #NNN format. Requirement to code, one-way trace, never lost

• test ↔ AC-FRXXXX-YY auto-association, CI static validation closes both directions — every test docstring must carry an AC-FRXXXX-YY ID. lk archer ci-scan validates at commit-time: every AC must be referenced by a test, every test must reference an AC. If the loop doesn't close, merge is blocked

• Anti-pattern CI gate + identity consistency check — lk keeper gate statically scans 8 anti-patterns (assert True / try/except: pass / no-issue skip / mock framework core / ...). lk scout identity-check locks gh/git identity consistency before workflow start. Violations block

• Project wiki auto-distillation — based on LLM compounding engineering, .louke/raw/ (each agent's session records) → .louke/wiki/ (structured knowledge). Facts, decisions, current state at a glance, lint-checkable

• Socratic requirement interrogation — Sage asks multiple rounds of questions around a vague story until it produces traceable spec.md + acceptance.md

Lòukè defines 12 specialized agents, a 10-stage pipeline, and an lk CLI — so every transition is a real check, not the soft "agents review each other." Each agent has its own dedicated toolbox; at every hold point, work is gated for verification.

3. Lòukè vs Others

Framework	Is spec a contract?	Who reviews	Enforcement layer	spec → code → test loop
spec-kit (GitHub)	spec.md is the source, but no MECE / granularity / traceability constraints	No review	None	Manual + social
superpowers (obra, 240k★)	plan.md is plain text, no AC numbering, no commit-time validation	subagent review (same model reviewing itself)	prompt-level self-discipline	TDD indirect guarantee (no ID binding between test and spec)
oh-my-openagent (code-yeongyu, 64k★)	agents digest spec themselves	team of agents (same LLM, different prompts)	hooks / middleware	task self-defined, no FR ↔ test binding
Lòukè	FR-XXXX / AC-FRXXXX-YY + lk archer ci-scan	12 different personas (implementer ≠ reviewer, cross-stage context disjoint)	lk CLI exit 0/1 (OS process return value)	FR ↔ issue ↔ commit ↔ AC ↔ test end-to-end

4. Architecture

• 12 Agents = implementer ≠ reviewer; cross-stage context is disjoint
• lk CLI = OS-process-level contract; exit 0/1 is unbypassable
• Two-tier memory = raw/ (episodic) + wiki/ (distilled), maintained by Librarian
• Promise = spec → code → test three-segment bidirectional reachability; breakage at any node can be traced to its source

5. Pipeline

Stage	Implementer	Reviewer	Notes
M-FOUND	Scout	Warden	Project setup + permission gate
M-SPEC	Sage	Lex	spec + FR → issue
M-TESTPLAN	Archer	Sage	Test plan (Sage has unique spec context)
M-ARCH	Archer	Prism	Architecture + interfaces
M-LOCK	Maestro	User	3-signal lock
M-DEV	Devon	Prism → Keeper ★	Code + unit tests
M-E2E	Shield	Prism → Keeper ★	e2e tests
M-BUGFIX	Devon	Keeper ★	Bug fixes
M-SECURITY	Judge (S-level)	User	Deep security audit
M-MILESTONE	Librarian	Maestro	raw → wiki distillation

★ HOLD POINT — tool-enforced check (lk CLI returns 0/1; pipeline doesn't advance until it passes). ★ only marks the PROD gate that blocks merge at commit-time; stage-transition hold points are not separately marked.

Principle: implementer ≠ reviewer. Always.

6. The 12 Agents

Each agent has a default primary model (with an in-tier fallback). Override via ~/.louke/models.json (user-level) or .louke/models.json (project-level); use lk models list / lk models doctor to check current bindings, lk models bind <abstract> <full> to override.

Agent	Role	Tier	Open-source example	Closed-source example (reference)
Maestro	Conductor — orchestrates the pipeline	A	minimax-m3	gpt-5.6, fable
Sage	The wise — Socratic requirement interrogation	A	glm-5.2	gpt-5.6, fable
Judge	Arbiter — S-level deep security audit	S	minimax-m3	gpt-5.6, fable
Archer	Marksman/architect — test-plan + architecture	S/A	glm-5.2	gpt-5.6, fable
Devon	Smith — R-G-R coding	A	kimi-2.7-code	opus-4.8, gpt-5.5
Prism	Prism — multi-angle code review (anti-pattern + security)	A	deepseek-v4-pro	opus-4.8, gpt-5.5
Shield	Shield — writes e2e test scripts	A	kimi-2.6	opus-4.8, gpt-5.5
Lex	The law — spec-level structural validation	B	deepseek-v4-flash	gpt-5.4-mini, gpt-5.4, sonnet-4.6
Warden	Gatekeeper — guards exit conditions	B	glm-5	gpt-5.4-mini, gpt-5.4, sonnet-4.6
Keeper	Warden of gates — enforces quality gates	B	minimax-2.7	gpt-5.4-mini, gpt-5.4, sonnet-4.6
Scout	Pathfinder — scouts preconditions	B	glm-5	gpt-5.4-mini, gpt-5.4, sonnet-4.6
Librarian	Librarian — distills Wiki, preserves memory	B	minimax-2.7	gpt-5.4-mini, gpt-5.4, sonnet-4.6

7. Usage Guide

7.1. Install

Platform: macOS / Linux. Windows users: please use WSL2 or Docker. install.sh self-checks uname -s and exits with a clear error on unsupported platforms.

# Standard pip-based install (recommended): auto-creates venv, sets PATH, links lk to ~/.local/bin
curl -sSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/zillionare/louke/main/install.sh | bash

# Or pin a version
curl -sSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/zillionare/louke/main/install.sh | bash -s -- v0.3.0

# Or dev mode (clone + editable install)
git clone https://github.com/zillionare/louke
cd louke
./install.sh --editable

# Verify
lk --help

install.sh does four things:

1. Creates an isolated venv at ~/.louke/venv/ (no system-Python pollution)
2. pip install louke into that venv
3. ~/.local/bin/lk → symlink to venv's lk, and appends PATH to your shell rc
4. Verifies the install + prints uninstall instructions

Uninstall: rm -rf ~/.louke/venv ~/.local/bin/lk

7.2. 30-Second Start

# New project (creates <name>/ dir with .louke/ skeleton + OpenCode agents + issue template + CI workflow)
lk init my-project
cd my-project

# Adopt existing git repo (non-destructive, adds .louke/ alongside your code)
cd ~/work/my-existing-repo && lk init .

lk init does:

1. Copies agents/templates into .louke/
2. Generates .opencode/agents/*.md (each agent with resolved model: field)
3. Writes default_agent: maestro to project-level opencode.json
4. Installs .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature.yml (4-digit FR schema) + .github/workflows/louke-ci.yml (AC traceability gate)
5. Resolves abstract model names → provider/model (lk models doctor --fix-auto)

Then start OpenCode — the default primary agent is Maestro. Just tell it what you want in chat, for example:

"We want to add user authentication — username/password login, plus Google login."

From here on, Maestro orchestrates the entire pipeline. You don't need to switch agents manually; Sage's follow-up questions and Judge's security findings all flow back to you through Maestro.

7.3. What a Full Session Looks Like

Using "add user authentication" as an example, the timeline unfolds linearly:

1. M-FOUND — lk scout foundation creates repo, GitHub Project, Test Issue to verify permissions
2. M-SPEC — Sage asks follow-ups in chat (MFA? session timeout? rate limiting?); Lex finds 3 structural issues; Sage fixes them. Locked when 3 signals align: lk sage quote-check exit 0 + Lex 3 stages pass + your IDE confirmation
3. M-TESTPLAN — Archer writes test-plan.md (3-layer strategy + AC traceability + anti-pattern rules); Sage reviews (holds M-SPEC's unique context)
4. M-ARCH — Archer writes architecture.md + interfaces.md; Prism checks spec/code consistency
5. M-LOCK — Spec locked. Implementation begins
6. M-DEV — Devon codes R-G-R. Each commit prefixed test: red / feat: green / refactor. Prism reviews (anti-patterns + security quick scan); lk keeper gate checks commit format + tests
7. M-E2E — Shield writes e2e (B-level, fixed methods: Playwright/testclient/DB); same Prism + Keeper
8. M-SECURITY — lk judge security-audit does pattern scan + S-level semantic review. You make the final call
9. M-MILESTONE — lk librarian from-raw distills the session to wiki; lk maestro advance --stage M-MILESTONE closes the milestone

Each step is a different agent; each hold point is tool-enforced; each handoff is an explicit trace.

The above flow is automatically orchestrated by Maestro — you just tell Maestro in OpenCode "do user authentication," and it will sequentially invoke Scout/Sage/Lex/Archer/Devon/Shield/Judge/Librarian. Below is what you see (through your conversation with Maestro) at each step.

7.4. Configuring Agent Models

New models are released every month. You may need to dynamically adjust agent models. Each agent has a default model; switching coding agents to local small models in day-to-day development saves most of the tokens.

# View current bindings
lk models list
lk models doctor            # Check for missing/failed resolutions

# Temporarily switch an agent to a cheaper model
lk models bind devon kimi-2.7-code
lk models unbind devon       # Restore default

models.json priority: project-level (.louke/models.json) > user-level (~/.louke/models.json).

7.5. Sage's Requirement Discussion — Back to Inline Email!

After receiving the Story, Sage immediately starts a round of requirement clarification in the chat window, but will ask fewer than 7 questions. Deeper questions are better clarified outside of chat. Lòukè brings back the inline comment style from email.

We use Markdown quote blocks to start the discussion:

### FR-0100 Draw a circle

| Valid | Testable | Decided |
| ----- | -------- | ------- |
| ✅     | ✅        | ⚠️       |

You shall draw a circle with a radius of 0.5m.

> Sage: How should the pen color and stroke width be determined?

Sage thinks this requirement is not clear enough to verify. So he asks: how should the pen color and stroke width be determined?

You reply with one more level of > indentation:

> Sage: How should the pen color and stroke width be determined?
>> Aaron: Provide a toolbar and let the user choose
>>> Sage: Requirement confirmed.

This is standard email threading syntax. If you think the spec wording is wrong and doesn't need discussion, you can directly edit the spec; Sage will find your changes through git diff, and if there are any questions, will open a session.

7.6. GitHub Projects: Managing Releases

Lòukè uses GitHub Projects to manage releases. A release starts with a Story. Sage breaks down the requirements, creates GitHub issues, and automatically links them to the GitHub Project. Release Notes naturally derive from this project.

We also throw in a small gift — by creating a project named {repo}-backlog, we give you an idea collection box. If you have an inspiration that can't fit into the current release, you'll find this project surprisingly useful. Future releases start their planning from here.

lk scout foundation creates two Projects per repo:

• {repo}-{version} — per-release, tracks the current milestone's issues
• {repo}-backlog — per-repo (permanent), holds unscheduled ideas

Issues created with gh issue create --no-milestone naturally land in the backlog; during planning, pull backlog issues into the current release with gh project item-add.

8. Quick Command Reference

8.1. Project Initialization

lk init my-project # New project lk init . # Adopt existing repo lk scout foundation --repo owner/repo --version v0.1 --spec-id v0.1-001-init lk scout identity-check --repo owner/repo lk scout invite-owner owner/repo --version v0.1

8.2. Pipeline Advancement

lk maestro status # View current stage lk maestro advance --stage M-DEV # Advance to next stage lk maestro regress --stage M-SPEC --reason "spec missing NFR" lk maestro escalate --reason "user unresponsive for 3 rounds"

8.3. Code Quality

lk archer ci-scan --spec ID # AC traceability validation lk keeper gate # commit format + R-G-R order + anti-pattern scan lk judge security-audit --release releases/v0.1

8.4. Model Management

lk models list # View agent→model bindings lk models doctor # Diagnose missing/failed resolutions lk models bind devon kimi-2.7-code # Temporary override lk models unbind devon

8.5. Wiki

lk librarian lint # Health check lk librarian from-raw # Distill raw sessions to wiki pages

9. Troubleshooting

lk: command not found — ~/.local/bin is not in PATH. Add export PATH=$HOME/.local/bin:$PATH to your shell rc and source it (or restart your terminal).

lk scout foundation fails with gh not authenticated — Run gh auth login first, then lk scout identity-check to verify.

Sage keeps asking about the same requirement — Possible causes:

• Your reply didn't use an extra level of > indentation, so Sage didn't recognize it as a new reply
• You directly edited the text — Sage will discover the change through git diff and ask for confirmation. Reply with "✓ resolved" on the changed section

Commit blocked by lk keeper gate — The terminal prints which anti-pattern was hit. Common causes:

• Commit message doesn't follow R-G-R prefix conventions (e.g., wrote feat: add login instead of feat: green add login)
• feat: green appears before test: red (R-G-R order violation)
• Test docstring missing AC-FRXXXX-YY
• Wrote assert True / try/except: pass / mocked framework core

OpenCode doesn't show the 12 agents after launch — Check the .opencode/agents/ directory and opencode.json's default_agent field; rerun lk init --force if needed.

Wondering "where are we now" — lk maestro status tells you in one line.

10. Future Enhancements (Not in v0.6-008 Scope)

• #78 — .louke/project as a standalone private GitHub repo (via git submodule), separating spec/wiki from public code
• #79 — louke serve web UI for browsing/editing wiki / spec / acceptance / test-plan

11. License

MIT