mirror of
https://github.com/domfelipe/vibeflow-n8n.git
synced 2026-08-07 10:16:40 +00:00
feat: launch Vibeflow n8n v0.5.0
This commit is contained in:
commit
097f35215f
60 changed files with 2831 additions and 0 deletions
106
docs/conversation-contract.md
Normal file
106
docs/conversation-contract.md
Normal file
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
|
|||
# Conversation Contract
|
||||
|
||||
## Purpose
|
||||
|
||||
Define how the agent should conduct the conversation before, during, and after building a workflow in n8n through MCP.
|
||||
|
||||
## Primary rule
|
||||
|
||||
The agent should ask as little as possible, but not less than the workflow requires.
|
||||
|
||||
## Intake sequence
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 1. Capture the goal
|
||||
The first objective is to understand what the workflow is meant to achieve.
|
||||
|
||||
The user may describe:
|
||||
- a business outcome,
|
||||
- a trigger event,
|
||||
- a sequence of actions,
|
||||
- a pain point,
|
||||
- or a half-formed idea.
|
||||
|
||||
The agent should convert that into a rough workflow shape.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 2. Identify critical unknowns
|
||||
The agent should decide which missing answers materially affect architecture.
|
||||
|
||||
Examples of critical unknowns:
|
||||
- trigger type,
|
||||
- source system,
|
||||
- destination system,
|
||||
- duplicate handling,
|
||||
- approval requirements,
|
||||
- customer-facing communication,
|
||||
- destructive actions.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 3. Ignore optional fluff until later
|
||||
Do not ask for decorative detail early.
|
||||
|
||||
Examples of low-priority detail:
|
||||
- exact message wording,
|
||||
- aesthetic naming choices,
|
||||
- optional metadata fields,
|
||||
- low-risk formatting preferences.
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommended opening question set
|
||||
|
||||
Use this only when needed.
|
||||
|
||||
1. What should trigger the workflow?
|
||||
2. Which apps or systems are involved?
|
||||
3. What should happen from start to finish?
|
||||
4. Are there any rules, approvals, or exceptions I should respect?
|
||||
|
||||
## Planning contract
|
||||
|
||||
Before building, the agent should create a normalized planning summary containing:
|
||||
- workflow_name
|
||||
- workflow_mode
|
||||
- business_goal
|
||||
- trigger
|
||||
- systems_involved
|
||||
- steps
|
||||
- branching_logic
|
||||
- credentials_required
|
||||
- error_handling
|
||||
- assumptions
|
||||
- open_questions
|
||||
- test_strategy
|
||||
|
||||
## Assumption policy
|
||||
|
||||
The agent may infer safe defaults for low-risk details.
|
||||
The agent must clearly state those assumptions.
|
||||
|
||||
The agent must not silently assume:
|
||||
- financial actions,
|
||||
- user-facing outbound communication,
|
||||
- delete or overwrite behavior,
|
||||
- approval rules,
|
||||
- legal/compliance-sensitive logic.
|
||||
|
||||
## Build communication
|
||||
|
||||
When moving into build mode, the agent should summarize:
|
||||
- what it believes it is building,
|
||||
- what assumptions it will use,
|
||||
- what remains unresolved.
|
||||
|
||||
## Final handoff contract
|
||||
|
||||
The final response should contain:
|
||||
- summary of workflow created,
|
||||
- assumptions used,
|
||||
- unresolved dependencies,
|
||||
- manual setup still required,
|
||||
- simple test instructions,
|
||||
- logical next improvements.
|
||||
|
||||
## Bad conversation patterns to avoid
|
||||
|
||||
- asking 10 questions when 3 are enough
|
||||
- pretending credentials exist
|
||||
- skipping the planning summary
|
||||
- hiding uncertainty
|
||||
- returning a technical success without operational clarity
|
||||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue