Skip to content

[AI Ops] Design footer/header/badge templates for unified branding agent #46

@ashleyshaw

Description

@ashleyshaw

title: "[AI Ops] Spec and implementation plan for unified branding agent (headers, footers, badges)"
type: "AI Ops"
status: "needs-triage"
area: "infrastructure"
labels:

  • "feature"
  • "ai-ops:agents"
  • "area:infrastructure"
  • "documentation"
  • "standards"
  • "priority:important"
  • "status:needs-triage"
    category: "agents"
    tags:
  • "branding"
  • "templates"
  • "headers"
  • "footers"
  • "badges"
  • "markdown"
  • "accessibility"
  • "schema-driven"
  • "implementation-plan"
    owner: "lightspeedwp"
    repository: ".github"
    issue: 33
    children:
  • "[AI Ops] Design footer/header/badge templates for unified branding agent #46"

AI Ops Summary

Define the specification, implementation plan, and delivery sequence for a unified branding agent that manages headers, footers, and badges across Markdown files in the repository.

This parent issue coordinates the full initiative: schema/config updates, template design, agent consolidation/refactor, documentation updates, implementation planning, and validation rules. It exists to ensure the branding system is delivered as a single modular workflow rather than a collection of disconnected rules and scripts.

Child issue:

Problem / Opportunity

Branding logic for Markdown files is currently fragmented across separate concepts, examples, and instructions. Header/footer behaviour, badge handling, and style guidance are related, but they are not yet defined as one coherent system.

That creates several problems:

  • branding rules are spread across multiple files
  • header/footer and badge concerns risk diverging over time
  • template behaviour is not consistently tied to category or frontmatter
  • schema/config does not yet fully model the intended behaviour
  • implementation work could hard-code decisions that should live in config
  • documentation and agent logic can drift apart

There is an opportunity to create a unified branding agent that:

  • uses frontmatter and category/tag metadata as its source of truth
  • applies category-aware headers, footers, and badges consistently
  • keeps branding accessible, readable, and low-noise
  • reduces maintenance cost by centralising rules
  • makes future expansion easier without repeated refactors

Scope

In scope

  • Define the unified branding agent purpose, boundaries, and responsibilities
  • Define the category model for branded Markdown content
  • Define the frontmatter and schema/config requirements
  • Design header, footer, and badge template rules
  • Decide how existing header/footer and badges logic should be merged
  • Document implementation phases and task breakdown
  • Update supporting docs and instructions as needed
  • Define validation and success criteria for the final workflow

Out of scope

  • Repository-wide retroactive application of branding to every existing Markdown file
  • General documentation governance beyond branding-related needs
  • Creating unrelated automation or tooling
  • Restructuring the repo unless separately approved

Objectives

  • Create one clear branding system for Markdown files
  • Keep implementation modular and configuration-driven
  • Minimise duplicated branding logic
  • Keep templates accessible and readable
  • Make category-based behaviour explicit
  • Ensure implementation can be completed in small, reviewable steps

Proposed Deliverables

  • Unified branding agent specification
  • Implementation plan with phases and dependencies
  • Category/tag model for Markdown branding
  • Schema/config changes for category, tags, badges, and templates
  • Template design outputs for headers, footers, and badges
  • Documentation updates for usage and maintenance
  • Validation guidance for accessibility and consistency

Child Issues / Workstreams

#46 — Template design

Design the header/footer/badge templates and document category-aware output rules.

Suggested additional child workstreams

These may remain checklist items here or be split into separate issues if needed:

  • Schema/config update workstream
  • Agent merge/refactor workstream
  • Documentation update workstream
  • Validation/testing workstream

Work Breakdown Structure

Phase 1 — Discovery and current-state audit

Review existing files, rules, and overlaps so the new branding system builds on what already exists instead of duplicating it.

Tasks:

  • Review current related files and artefacts
    • footer-header-style.instructions.md
    • header-footer.agent.md
    • badges.agent.md
    • a11y.instructions.md
    • agent-config.schema.json
    • README.md
  • Identify existing logic that should be retained
  • Identify duplicated or overlapping responsibilities
  • Identify any conflicting guidance or unclear ownership
  • Confirm target directories and file categories in scope
  • Confirm whether any current instruction files need consolidation or cross-linking

Outputs:

  • Current-state inventory
  • List of reusable rules/patterns
  • List of gaps, conflicts, and decisions required

Phase 2 — Category and metadata model

Define how the branding system decides what to render.

Tasks:

  • Confirm category list for Markdown branding
  • Define intended use of category
  • Define intended use of tags
  • Determine whether path/folder context can supplement frontmatter
  • Define precedence rules when category, tags, and path disagree
  • Define defaults when frontmatter is missing
  • Identify metadata needed for future extensibility without over-engineering

Outputs:

  • Category model
  • Metadata/frontmatter contract
  • Precedence and fallback rules

Phase 3 — Template system design

This phase is primarily delivered by child issue #46.

Tasks:

  • Define header rules by category
  • Define footer rules by category
  • Define badge rules by category
  • Define template density and tone rules
  • Define accessibility and readability constraints
  • Produce example outputs for each supported category

Outputs:

  • Category-to-template matrix
  • Template rules
  • Example outputs

Phase 4 — Schema/config design

Translate the branding rules into a configuration model that avoids hard-coded logic.

Tasks:

  • Review current schema coverage
  • Define schema fields for category and tags
  • Define schema fields for badges
  • Define schema fields for header/footer templates
  • Decide what belongs in schema/config vs runtime agent logic
  • Identify validation rules and required defaults

Outputs:

  • Schema/config update plan
  • Proposed agent-config.schema.json changes
  • Validation requirements

Phase 5 — Agent architecture and implementation plan

Define how existing logic is merged into one agent with small, maintainable responsibilities.

Tasks:

  • Confirm naming for the unified agent
  • Define inputs and outputs for the agent
  • Decide how header/footer and badge logic should be merged
  • Identify reusable helper responsibilities
  • Keep runtime logic minimal and config-driven
  • Define safe rollout sequence to reduce regression risk

Outputs:

  • Agent architecture notes
  • Implementation sequence
  • Refactor/merge plan

Phase 6 — Documentation and rollout guidance

Ensure maintainers understand how to use, extend, and review the system.

Tasks:

  • Update or create branding documentation
  • Update related instruction files
  • Add cross-references where scope overlaps with a11y/docs/markdown guidance
  • Document maintenance expectations
  • Document reviewer guidance and success criteria

Outputs:

  • Updated docs
  • Reviewer guidance
  • Maintenance notes

Parent Tracking Checklist

Planning

  • Parent goal and scope agreed
  • In-scope categories confirmed
  • Child issues identified
  • Dependencies mapped
  • Implementation order agreed

Design

  • Category model defined
  • Frontmatter rules defined
  • Template strategy defined
  • Badge strategy defined
  • Accessibility constraints defined

Technical design

  • Schema/config approach defined
  • Agent merge/refactor plan defined
  • Runtime vs config responsibilities agreed
  • Fallback behaviour defined

Delivery

  • Documentation updates planned
  • Validation/testing approach planned
  • Follow-on implementation issues created or captured
  • Reviewer/maintainer sign-off path clear

Acceptance Criteria

  • The unified branding agent scope is clearly defined
  • The branding system is broken into logical workstreams with clear ownership
  • Category, frontmatter, and template requirements are documented
  • Schema/config changes required for implementation are identified
  • Agent merge/refactor direction is documented
  • Documentation update requirements are identified
  • Accessibility/readability constraints are captured
  • Child issues or equivalent task breakdown exist for major workstreams
  • The implementation plan supports small, reviewable PRs
  • PR uses correct branch prefix (ai/)
  • Approved by at least one maintainer

Success Metrics

  • Maintainers can understand the full initiative without inferring missing steps
  • Child issues map cleanly to implementation work
  • Branding logic can be implemented from config/schema rather than hard-coded rules
  • Documentation, schema, and agent behaviour stay aligned
  • The final system is easier to maintain than the current split approach

Risks / Things to Avoid

  • Combining too many concerns into one brittle agent
  • Leaving template rules implied rather than explicit
  • Over-designing the schema beyond current needs
  • Letting decorative branding reduce readability
  • Duplicating logic across docs, config, and runtime code
  • Making the rollout so large that review becomes difficult

Dependencies

Parent dependencies

  • Existing branding-related files and instructions
  • Maintainer agreement on category model and branding constraints

Child dependencies

Enables

  • Schema/config implementation work
  • Unified agent implementation/refactor
  • Clear documentation for future contributors

Additional Context

This issue is the parent planning and orchestration task for the unified branding agent initiative.

It should remain focused on:

  • defining the system
  • sequencing the work
  • keeping the implementation modular
  • reducing maintenance cost over time

Where practical, detailed execution should live in child issues so implementation can proceed in smaller, clearer PRs.

References


Definition of Ready (DoR)

  • AI ops goal described
  • Scope and workstreams defined
  • Dependencies identified
  • Acceptance criteria listed
  • Child issue links added
  • Estimate added

Definition of Done (DoD)

  • All major workstreams are documented
  • Child issues and sequencing are clear
  • Implementation plan reviewed by maintainers
  • Related docs/notes updated
  • Follow-on implementation work is unblocked
  • PR uses correct branch prefix (ai/)

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

No labels
No labels

Type

Priority

None yet

Projects

No projects

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions