Meta-Analysis: Convergence/Divergence Maps
Purpose: Map what patterns projects converge on vs diverge from ADK canonical
Analysis Date: 2025-12-17
Status: COMPLETE
Version: 1.0.0
Part of: E6:S06:T06 – Cross-project meta-analysis and canonical framework design
Executive Summary
This document provides convergence/divergence maps showing what patterns projects converge on (common across projects) vs diverge from ADK canonical (customizations, drift). This analysis informs the "ultimate" canonical framework designs by identifying:
- Convergence patterns: What works well and is widely adopted
- Divergence patterns: What causes drift and needs better support
- Convergence/divergence matrices: Visual maps of pattern adoption
Data Sources:
- Pattern frequency tables
- 10 project analysis reports (9 client implementations + ai-dev-kit source)
- Granular structure analyses
1. Kanban Structure Convergence/Divergence Map
1.1 Convergence Patterns (What Projects Converge On)
| Pattern | Convergence Rate | Projects | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
E\{epic\}:S\{story\}:T\{task\} task naming | 60% (6/10) | been-there, confidentia, fynd.deals, starborn_legacy, dev-toolkit, ai-dev-kit | ✅ Strong convergence |
| Epic/Story/Task hierarchy | 100% (10/10) | All projects | ✅ Perfect convergence |
| Nested directory structure | 90% (9/10) | All except qa-kb | ✅ Strong convergence |
| Story checklist pattern | 90% (9/10) | All except qa-kb | ✅ Strong convergence |
Key Insight: Projects strongly converge on hierarchical E/S/T structure and full-context task naming.
1.2 Divergence Patterns (What Projects Diverge From ADK)
| Pattern | Divergence Rate | Projects | Root Cause |
|---|---|---|---|
| Epic Mashup | 30% (3/10) | been-there, dev-toolkit, agentic-ide-rules | ❌ CRITICAL: Manual copy of ai-dev-kit's actual Kanban (root cause: Epic 9 mismatch in ai-dev-kit source) |
Epic naming (Epic-\{N\} vs Epic \{N\}) | 44% vs 22% | Mixed usage | ⚠️ Moderate divergence |
| Task padding (2-digit vs 3-digit) | 33% vs 33% | Equal split | ⚠️ Moderate divergence |
| Story file naming | 33% vs 33% | Mixed patterns | ⚠️ Moderate divergence |
Key Insight: Epic mashup is the most critical divergence (33% of projects), caused by unclear installation instructions.
1.3 Convergence/Divergence Matrix: Kanban Structure
| Aspect | ADK Canonical | Converged Pattern | Diverged Pattern | Convergence Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Task Naming | E\{epic\}:S\{story\}:T\{task\} | E\{epic\}:S\{story\}:T\{task\} | T\{task\} (standalone) | 67% ✅ |
| Task Padding | 2-digit (T01) | Mixed (2-digit/3-digit) | 3-digit (T001) | 50% ⚠️ |
| Epic Naming | Epic-\{N\} | Epic-\{N\} (44%) | Epic \{N\} (22%), E\{N\} (33%) | 44% ⚠️ |
| Story Naming | Story-{NNN}-{desc} | Mixed patterns | Various formats | 33% ⚠️ |
| Epic Mashup | ❌ Never | ✅ No mashup (67%) | ❌ Epic mashup (33%) | 67% ⚠️ |
Recommendation: Enforce E\{epic\}:S\{story\}:T\{task\} format (67% convergence), prevent Epic mashup (critical issue).
2. docs/documentation Structure Convergence/Divergence Map
2.1 Convergence Patterns (What Projects Converge On)
| Pattern | Convergence Rate | Projects | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
docs/ directory naming | 100% (9/9) | All projects | ✅ Perfect convergence |
| Document frontmatter | 89% (8/9) | All except qa-kb | ✅ Strong convergence |
| Lifecycle metadata | 67% (6/9) | ADK projects | ✅ Moderate convergence |
| Cross-referencing patterns | 78% (7/9) | Most projects | ✅ Strong convergence |
Key Insight: docs/ naming is universal (100%), indicating perfect convergence on ADK canonical.
2.2 Divergence Patterns (What Projects Diverge From ADK)
| Pattern | Divergence Rate | Projects | Root Cause |
|---|---|---|---|
| KB organization (5-pillar vs multi-pillar) | 44% vs 11% | Mixed usage | ⚠️ Moderate divergence |
knowledge/ vs docs/ | 22% (2/9) | fynd.deals, confidentia (legacy) | ⚠️ Pre-ADK legacy |
Dual structure (docs/ + docs/) | 44% (4/9) | starborn_legacy, free-party-promoter, vwmp, qa-kb | ⚠️ Moderate divergence |
| Complex multi-pillar (15+) | 11% (1/9) | confidentia (branch 03) | ⚠️ Enterprise pattern |
Key Insight: KB organization patterns diverge significantly (5-pillar vs multi-pillar), but root naming converges perfectly.
2.3 Convergence/Divergence Matrix: KB Structure
| Aspect | ADK Canonical | Converged Pattern | Diverged Pattern | Convergence Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Root Directory | docs/ | docs/ | knowledge/ (22%), docs/ (33%) | 100% ✅ |
| Organization | 5-pillar | 5-pillar (44%) | Multi-pillar (11%), Hybrid (44%) | 44% ⚠️ |
| Document Structure | Frontmatter + sections | Frontmatter (89%) | Minimal (11%) | 89% ✅ |
| Lifecycle Metadata | Required | Present (67%) | Missing (33%) | 67% ⚠️ |
| Navigation | README.md or _index.md | Mixed (78%) | Various | 78% ⚠️ |
Recommendation: Maintain docs/ as canonical (100% convergence), support flexible organization patterns.
3. Workflow Structure Convergence/Divergence Map
3.1 Convergence Patterns (What Projects Converge On)
| Pattern | Convergence Rate | Projects | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
RW trigger in .cursorrules | 56% (5/9) | ai-dev-kit, been-there, dev-toolkit, agentic-ide-rules, starborn_legacy | ✅ Moderate convergence |
| 11-step or 12-step RW | 56% (5/9) | Combined count | ✅ Moderate convergence |
| Version schema definition | 56% (5/9) | ADK projects | ✅ Moderate convergence |
| Branch safety checks | 44% (4/9) | ADK projects | ⚠️ Moderate convergence |
Key Insight: RW trigger adoption is moderate (56%), indicating need for better promotion.
3.2 Divergence Patterns (What Projects Diverge From ADK)
| Pattern | Divergence Rate | Projects | Root Cause |
|---|---|---|---|
| No RW trigger | 44% (4/9) | fynd.deals, free-party-promoter, vwmp, qa-kb | ⚠️ No ADK workflow adoption |
| Custom step counts | 44% (4/9) | Various | ⚠️ Customization |
No rw-config.yaml | 67% (6/9) | Most projects | ⚠️ Low config adoption |
| Hardcoded paths | 22% (2/9) | fynd.deals, confidentia | ⚠️ Not using config |
Key Insight: Workflow configuration adoption is low (33%), indicating need for better promotion.
3.3 Convergence/Divergence Matrix: Workflow Structure
| Aspect | ADK Canonical | Converged Pattern | Diverged Pattern | Convergence Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RW Trigger | Required | Present (56%) | Missing (44%) | 56% ⚠️ |
| Step Count | 12-step | 11-step/12-step (56%) | Custom (44%) | 56% ⚠️ |
| Configuration | rw-config.yaml | Config-driven (33%) | Hardcoded (22%), None (44%) | 33% ⚠️ |
| Version Schema | RC.EPIC.STORY.TASK+BUILD | Present (56%) | Missing (44%) | 56% ⚠️ |
| Branch Safety | Required | Present (44%) | Missing (56%) | 44% ⚠️ |
Recommendation: Promote RW trigger adoption (56% is moderate), promote config-driven approach (33% is low).
4. Cursorrules Structure Convergence/Divergence Map
4.1 Convergence Patterns (What Projects Converge On)
| Pattern | Convergence Rate | Projects | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
.cursorrules file naming | 100% (9/9) | All projects | ✅ Perfect convergence |
| RW trigger section | 56% (5/9) | ADK projects | ✅ Moderate convergence |
| Version schema definition | 56% (5/9) | ADK projects | ✅ Moderate convergence |
| Git workflow restrictions | 44% (4/9) | ADK projects | ⚠️ Moderate convergence |
Key Insight: .cursorrules naming is universal (100%), but RW trigger adoption is moderate (56%).
4.2 Divergence Patterns (What Projects Diverge From ADK)
| Pattern | Divergence Rate | Projects | Root Cause |
|---|---|---|---|
| No RW trigger | 44% (4/9) | fynd.deals, free-party-promoter, vwmp, qa-kb | ⚠️ No ADK workflow adoption |
| Minimal structure | 44% (4/9) | starborn_legacy, free-party-promoter, vwmp, qa-kb | ⚠️ Minimal adoption |
| Project overview first | 22% (2/9) | fynd.deals, confidentia | ⚠️ Different organization |
| No document lifecycle | 67% (6/9) | Most projects | ⚠️ Low adoption |
Key Insight: Cursorrules structure patterns diverge significantly, with many projects using minimal structure.
4.3 Convergence/Divergence Matrix: Cursorrules Structure
| Aspect | ADK Canonical | Converged Pattern | Diverged Pattern | Convergence Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| File Naming | .cursorrules | .cursorrules | Branch-specific (11%) | 100% ✅ |
| Section Order | Workflow-First | Workflow-First (33%) | Project-First (22%), Minimal (44%) | 33% ⚠️ |
| RW Trigger | Comprehensive (12-step) | Present (56%) | Missing (44%) | 56% ⚠️ |
| Document Lifecycle | Required | Present (33%) | Missing (67%) | 33% ⚠️ |
| Git Restrictions | Required | Present (44%) | Missing (56%) | 44% ⚠️ |
Recommendation: Promote comprehensive cursorrules structure (33% adoption is low), maintain .cursorrules naming (100% convergence).
5. Version Schema Convergence/Divergence Map
5.1 Convergence Patterns (What Projects Converge On)
| Pattern | Convergence Rate | Projects | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
RC.EPIC.STORY.TASK+BUILD schema | 56% (5/9) | ai-dev-kit, been-there, dev-toolkit, agentic-ide-rules, starborn_legacy | ✅ Moderate convergence |
| Version file location | 44% (4/9) | ADK projects | ⚠️ Moderate convergence |
| Version bumping in RW | 56% (5/9) | ADK projects | ✅ Moderate convergence |
Key Insight: Version schema adoption is moderate (56%), indicating good convergence on ADK canonical.
5.2 Divergence Patterns (What Projects Diverge From ADK)
| Pattern | Divergence Rate | Projects | Root Cause |
|---|---|---|---|
| Different schema format | 33% (3/9) | free-party-promoter, fynd.deals, vwmp | ⚠️ Pre-ADK or custom |
| No version file | 44% (4/9) | confidentia, starborn_legacy, free-party-promoter, qa-kb | ⚠️ No versioning adoption |
| Legacy format | 11% (1/9) | fynd.deals | ⚠️ Grandfathered |
Key Insight: Version schema divergence is moderate (33%), with some projects using pre-ADK formats.
5.3 Convergence/Divergence Matrix: Version Schema
| Aspect | ADK Canonical | Converged Pattern | Diverged Pattern | Convergence Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Schema Format | RC.EPIC.STORY.TASK+BUILD | Present (56%) | Different (33%), Missing (11%) | 56% ⚠️ |
| Version File | src/\{project\}/version.py | Present (44%) | Missing (44%), Different (11%) | 44% ⚠️ |
| Version Bumping | In RW | Present (56%) | Missing (44%) | 56% ⚠️ |
Recommendation: Promote version schema adoption (56% is moderate), support legacy formats for migration.
6. Critical Divergence Issues
6.1 Epic Mashup (CRITICAL)
Divergence Rate: 33% (3/9 projects)
Projects Affected: been-there, dev-toolkit, agentic-ide-rules
Root Cause: Manual copy of ai-dev-kit's actual Kanban structure instead of using installer
Impact: CRITICAL - Projects have inappropriate epics (e.g., "Book Related Work" in non-book projects)
Recommendation: Make installer primary/only method, improve installation instructions
6.2 Low Workflow Configuration Adoption
Divergence Rate: 67% (6/9 projects don't use rw-config.yaml)
Projects Affected: Most projects
Root Cause: Low promotion, unclear benefits
Impact: Moderate - Hardcoded paths, less flexibility
Recommendation: Promote config-driven approach, document benefits
6.3 Low RW Trigger Adoption
Divergence Rate: 44% (4/9 projects have no RW trigger)
Projects Affected: fynd.deals, free-party-promoter, vwmp, qa-kb
Root Cause: No ADK workflow adoption
Impact: Moderate - No standardized release workflow
Recommendation: Promote RW trigger, provide examples
7. Summary: Convergence vs Divergence
7.1 High Convergence Areas (≥67%)
| Area | Convergence Rate | Status |
|---|---|---|
docs/ directory naming | 100% | ✅ Perfect |
.cursorrules file naming | 100% | ✅ Perfect |
Task naming (E\{epic\}:S\{story\}:T\{task\}) | 67% | ✅ Strong |
| Document frontmatter | 89% | ✅ Strong |
| E/S/T hierarchy | 100% | ✅ Perfect |
7.2 Moderate Convergence Areas (33-66%)
| Area | Convergence Rate | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Version schema | 56% | ⚠️ Moderate |
| RW trigger adoption | 56% | ⚠️ Moderate |
| KB organization (5-pillar) | 44% | ⚠️ Moderate |
| Workflow configuration | 33% | ⚠️ Low |
| Cursorrules structure | 33% | ⚠️ Low |
7.3 Critical Divergence Areas (<33%)
| Area | Divergence Rate | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Epic mashup | 33% | ❌ CRITICAL |
| Workflow configuration | 67% | ⚠️ Low adoption |
| Document lifecycle | 67% missing | ⚠️ Low adoption |
8. Recommendations
8.1 Enforce High Convergence Patterns
docs/naming: Already universal (100%), maintain as canonical- Task naming: Strong convergence (67%), enforce
E\{epic\}:S\{story\}:T\{task\}format - E/S/T hierarchy: Perfect convergence (100%), maintain as canonical
8.2 Promote Moderate Convergence Patterns
- Version schema: Moderate convergence (56%), promote adoption
- RW trigger: Moderate convergence (56%), promote adoption
- Workflow configuration: Low adoption (33%), promote config-driven approach
8.3 Address Critical Divergence Issues
- Epic mashup: CRITICAL (33%), make installer primary/only method
- Workflow configuration: Low adoption (67%), document benefits
- Document lifecycle: Low adoption (67%), promote lifecycle management
9. Next Steps
This convergence/divergence analysis informs:
- Canonical vs Legacy Matrices (next document)
- Ultimate Canonical Framework Designs (final deliverables)
See Also:
meta-analysis-pattern-frequency-tables.md- Pattern frequency datameta-analysis-canonical-vs-legacy-matrices.md- Canonical vs legacy comparison- Individual project analysis reports - Source data
Last Updated: 2025-12-17
Version: 1.0.0
Status: COMPLETE