/will - Future State Prediction
Predict outcomes, compatibility impacts, test results, and future states.
System Prompt
⚠️ EXECUTION DIRECTIVE: When the user invokes this command, you MUST:
- IMMEDIATELY execute - no questions, no explanations first
- Parse the query to identify the prediction needed
- Analyze evidence from code, tests, dependencies
- Provide prediction with confidence level
DO NOT:
- Make predictions without evidence
- Skip confidence levels
The user invoking the command IS the confirmation.
Usage
/will <prediction-query>
Query Patterns
| Query Pattern | Purpose | Analysis Method |
|---|---|---|
/will this break compatibility | API compatibility | Semver analysis, consumers |
/will tests pass | Test prediction | Test history, code changes |
/will this scale | Scalability | Load patterns, bottlenecks |
/will this deploy succeed | Deployment | Config validation, deps |
/will this merge cleanly | Merge prediction | Git conflict analysis |
Execution Steps
Step 1: Parse Prediction Query
# Identify prediction type:
# - compatibility, tests, scale, deploy, merge, performance
Step 2: Gather Evidence
# For compatibility
git diff --name-only HEAD~1 | grep -E '\.(py|ts|js)$'
# Check for breaking changes in public APIs
# For tests
git log --oneline -10 -- tests/
# Check recent test failures
# For deployment
kubectl get deployments -o yaml | grep -E 'image:|replicas:'
# Validate configuration
# For merge
git merge-base HEAD main
git diff --stat $(git merge-base HEAD main)
Step 3: Analyze Impact
# Identify:
# - Direct impacts (what will change)
# - Indirect impacts (what depends on changes)
# - Risk factors (what could go wrong)
Step 4: Provide Prediction
# Format: LIKELY/UNLIKELY + confidence + evidence + risks
Response Format
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ /will: <query> │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ PREDICTION │
│ ────────── │
│ │
│ ✅ LIKELY / ⚠️ UNCERTAIN / ❌ UNLIKELY │
│ │
│ Confidence: XX% (HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW) │
│ │
│ EVIDENCE │
│ ──────── │
│ • <evidence point 1> │
│ • <evidence point 2> │
│ • <evidence point 3> │
│ │
│ IMPACT ANALYSIS │
│ ─────────────── │
│ Direct: │
│ • <direct impact> │
│ Indirect: │
│ • <indirect impact> │
│ │
│ RISK FACTORS │
│ ──────────── │
│ • <risk 1> - Mitigation: <action> │
│ • <risk 2> - Mitigation: <action> │
│ │
│ RECOMMENDED ACTIONS │
│ ─────────────────── │
│ 1. <action to verify/mitigate> │
│ 2. <action to verify/mitigate> │
│ │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Based on: <analysis sources> │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Examples
Compatibility Check
/will this API change break compatibility
Output:
❌ UNLIKELY TO BREAK (85% confidence)
EVIDENCE:
• Only internal functions modified
• Public API signatures unchanged
• No consumers of changed functions found
RISK FACTORS:
• Indirect imports - Mitigation: Search for dynamic imports
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
1. Run: grep -r "from module import changed_func"
2. Check for reflection-based usage
Test Prediction
/will tests pass after this change
Output:
⚠️ UNCERTAIN (55% confidence)
EVIDENCE:
• 3 test files touch modified code
• Last 5 runs: 4 passed, 1 flaky failure
• No test coverage for new edge case
RISK FACTORS:
• test_auth.py has flaky history
• New code path untested
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
1. Add test for new edge case
2. Run tests locally before push
Merge Prediction
/will this branch merge cleanly into main
Output:
✅ LIKELY (90% confidence)
EVIDENCE:
• 5 files changed, none modified in main since branch
• No overlapping line changes detected
• git merge-tree shows no conflicts
RISK FACTORS:
• package.json touched - check for lockfile conflicts
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
1. Run: git fetch origin && git merge-tree HEAD origin/main
Scalability Prediction
/will this handle 10x traffic
Output:
❌ UNLIKELY (70% confidence)
EVIDENCE:
• Single database connection, no pooling
• No caching layer
• Synchronous processing
RISK FACTORS:
• Database becomes bottleneck at 2x
• Memory grows linearly with requests
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
1. Add connection pooling
2. Implement Redis caching
3. Consider async processing
Related Commands
| Command | Purpose |
|---|---|
/should <decision> | Get recommendations |
/can <action> | Check capabilities |
/is <state> | Verify current state |
/does <action> | Verify current behavior |
/how <task> | Get implementation steps |
Success Output
✅ COMMAND COMPLETE: /will
Query: <query>
Prediction: LIKELY/UNCERTAIN/UNLIKELY
Confidence: XX%
Evidence: <count> points analyzed
Completion Checklist
Before marking complete:
- Prediction type identified
- Evidence gathered
- Confidence level assigned
- Risks identified
- Mitigations suggested
Failure Indicators
This command has FAILED if:
- ❌ No query provided
- ❌ Prediction without evidence
- ❌ No confidence level given
- ❌ No actionable recommendations
When NOT to Use
Do NOT use when:
- Need current state (use
/is) - Need capability check (use
/can) - Need recommendations (use
/should)
Principles
This command embodies:
- #9 Based on Facts - Evidence-based predictions
- #6 Clear, Understandable - Clear confidence levels
- #3 Complete Execution - Always includes mitigations
Full Standard: CODITECT-STANDARD-AUTOMATION.md
Version: 1.0.0 Created: 2026-02-04 Author: CODITECT Team Framework: 5W+H Question Framework