claude-plugins-official/plugins/code-modernization/commands/modernize-brief.md

description	argument-hint
Generate a phased Modernization Brief — the approved plan that transformation agents will execute against	<system-dir> [target-stack]

Synthesize everything in analysis/$1/ into a Modernization Brief — the single document a steering committee approves and engineering executes.

Target stack: $2 (if blank, recommend one based on the assessment findings).

Read analysis/$1/ASSESSMENT.md, analysis/$1/topology.json (plus the .mmd files alongside it — do NOT read TOPOLOGY.html, it's an interactive viewer with the data minified inside), and analysis/$1/BUSINESS_RULES.md first. If any are missing, say so and stop — they come from /modernize-assess, /modernize-map, and /modernize-extract-rules respectively. Run those first.

Two more inputs are conditional:

• analysis/$1/PREFLIGHT.md — read it if it exists. It records two things nothing else has: the human's answers to /modernize-preflight Check 0 (scope, whether they can build and run tests locally and how long CI takes, bespoke build infrastructure, prior attempts, what is off-limits) and the Check 6 scope boundary — whether legacy/$1 is a slice of a larger codebase, and what outside it depends on code inside it. Both constrain this plan more than anything derivable from the source. Never override an answer the human gave there with a guess.
• analysis/$1/DELTA_CATALOG.md — required whenever the target ($2, or your recommendation) is a newer version of the same stack. A same-stack uplift's phase order is decided by its version deltas, not by the topology alone — most of all by whether the existing test suite can even execute on the target runtime. Phasing an uplift without the catalog is planning blind; it is exactly how a test-framework migration ends up scheduled last when it must come first. If the catalog is missing, produce it before phasing — run /modernize-uplift $1 <source> $2 through its Step 3 (the delta-catalog step), or spawn the version-delta-analyst agent directly — then return here. Do not guess at the deltas.

Staleness check: compare modification times. If any input is newer than an existing MODERNIZATION_BRIEF.md, the brief is being justifiably regenerated; but if an existing brief is newer than all inputs and the user re-ran this command anyway, ask what changed. Either way, note the input timestamps in the brief's header so reviewers can see what it was built from.

The Brief

Write analysis/$1/MODERNIZATION_BRIEF.md:

1. Objective

One paragraph: from what, to what, why now.

2. Target Architecture

Mermaid C4 Container diagram of the end state. Name every service, data store, and integration. Below it, a table mapping legacy component → target component(s).

3. Phased Sequence

Break the work into 3-6 phases. Order by strangler-fig for a cross-stack rewrite (lowest-risk, fewest-dependencies first), or build-graph leaf-first for a same-stack uplift (libraries before the apps that depend on them).

For an uplift, leaf-first has three overrides, and getting them wrong is the most common way an uplift plan fails. Apply them here, at planning time. /modernize-uplift Step 1 re-applies the same rules at execution time (its list also names multi-targeting — the technique that satisfies override 3's first option), and an approved order and a re-derived one must never disagree — which is exactly what deciding the order without these would produce:

1. The test harness is not a leaf — it is a prerequisite. Nothing migrated can be validated until the tests that validate it run on the target. If DELTA_CATALOG.md shows the test framework or its runner does not support the target runtime (NUnit 2 or MSTest v1 on modern .NET, JUnit 4 without the vintage engine, nose on Python 3, …), then migrating the test framework is Phase 1 by itself, before any production code moves.
2. Dependency deltas that every consumer shares force a coordinated cut (a major-version bump of an ORM, a namespace move like javax→jakarta). These cannot be done leaf-first incrementally — every consumer changes together — so they get their own cross-cutting phase.
3. Shared nodes with consumers outside the scope (PREFLIGHT.md's scope-boundary check) need an explicit, recorded decision in whichever phase touches them: keep them buildable for both old and new consumers through the transition (multi-targeting, publishing for both versions, a parallel artifact), expand the scope to include the consumers, or accept and schedule the break. Never silently migrate a shared node in place and break every consumer nobody was looking at.

Name the per-phase execution command: /modernize-transform (cross-stack module rewrite), /modernize-reimagine (greenfield rebuild), or /modernize-uplift (same-stack version bump — when the target is a newer version of the same stack, this is the path, not transform). For each phase:

• Scope (which legacy modules, which target services)
• Entry criteria (what must be true to start)
• Exit criteria (what tests/metrics prove it's done)
• Relative scale (T-shirt size — S/M/L/XL — anchored to the phase's share of the assessment's COCOMO complexity index. This ranks phases by size against each other; it is not a duration. Do not state person-months, weeks, calendar dates, or a delivery estimate — agentic transformation does not follow the human-team productivity curves those units assume, so any time figure here would be misleading.)
• Risk level + top 2 risks + mitigation

The named execution command reads this brief and treats its phase's scope, entry criteria, and exit criteria as binding gates. So write entry criteria as checkable preconditions ("baseline recorded in analysis/$1/BASELINE.md", "pilot playbook approved"), not aspirations — and tell the approver they steer execution by editing this file. An edited entry criterion is honored; a note in a chat is not.

Render the phases as a Mermaid flowchart LR showing sequence and dependencies (Phase 1 → Phase 2 → …, with branches where phases are independent). Do not use a gantt chart — gantt encodes calendar durations, and this plan deliberately makes no time claims.

Phase 1 is a pilot, and this brief is a hypothesis. Whenever a phase's units share one execution recipe (an uplift over many projects, a transform over many similar modules), name one representative unit as that phase's own first slice. For an uplift, /modernize-uplift Step 5a enforces this — it will not fan out without a pilot and its playbook; for the other execution commands the pilot lives here, written into that phase's entry criteria, which they read as a gate. A reviewer should see it in this document either way. Say explicitly in §3 that what the pilot surfaces (a delta the analysis missed, a prerequisite that reorders the phases, an environment fact nobody wrote down) is expected to revise this brief, and that a regenerated brief after the pilot is the normal path, not a correction. Legacy systems hide their surprises in the build and the runtime, not in the source; no amount of reading substitutes for one unit taken all the way through.

4. Business Walkthroughs

For each persona flow in analysis/$1/topology.json (flows — produced by /modernize-map), a short narrative table: persona, what happens in business language, which legacy modules implement it today, and which phase from §3 replaces each. This is the section non-technical approvers actually read — it connects "Phase 2" to "what happens when a customer files a claim". If topology.json has no flows, derive 2–3 walkthroughs from the entry points and say they need SME confirmation.

5. Behavior Contract

List the P0 rules from BUSINESS_RULES.md (the ones tagged Priority: P0 — money, regulatory, data integrity) that MUST be proven equivalent before any phase ships. These become the regression suite. Flag any P0 rule with Confidence < High as a blocker requiring SME confirmation before its phase starts.

6. Validation Strategy

State which combination applies: characterization tests, contract tests, parallel-run / dual-execution diff, property-based tests, manual UAT. Justify per phase.

7. Open Questions

Anything requiring human/SME decision before Phase 1 starts. Each as a checkbox the approver must tick.

8. Approval Block

Approved by: ________________  Date: __________
Approval covers: Phase 1 only | Full plan

Present

Present a summary of the brief and stop — write nothing further until the user explicitly approves (use plan mode if the session supports it). This gate is the human-in-the-loop control point; "no objection" is not approval.