- [P20260220-010232] 2026-02-20 01:02:32 +0800
  - summary: CONTEXT TRANSFER: We are continuing a conversation that had gotten too long. Here is a summary: --- ## TASK 1: Execute d…
  - prompt:
```text
CONTEXT TRANSFER: We are continuing a conversation that had gotten too long. Here is a summary:

---
## TASK 1: Execute dataflow structure analysis (data collection + report generation)

**STATUS**: done

**USER QUERIES**: 1 ("执行数据流结构分析，按以下步骤完成")

**DETAILS**:
- Phase 1 (Data Collection): Cleared all historical analysis results from `export/SYSTEM/REPORTS/dataflow_analysis/` (12 old reports, json_trees, db_schemas, field_mappings, bd_descriptions, manifest). Ran `python scripts/ops/analyze_dataflow.py` successfully.
  - 23 ODS tables analyzed, all successful, 0 failures
  - 3,395 total records collected
  - API date range: 2025-11-22 ~ 2026-02-20 (adaptive expansion to 90 days)
  - Files landed: json_trees(23), db_schemas(63), field_mappings(23), bd_descriptions(23), collection_manifest.json
- Phase 2 (Report Generation): Ran `python scripts/ops/gen_dataflow_report.py` successfully.
  - Output: `export/SYSTEM/REPORTS/dataflow_analysis/dataflow_2026-02-20_005219.md`
  - Size: 568.6 KB, 4,839 lines
  - All 7 content checks passed: date range, JSON field count column, field diff report (1.1), coverage table, business descriptions, multi-sample values, anchor links
- Note: There were issues with PowerShell command queue causing `analyze_dataflow.py` to be triggered multiple times, but final results are clean and correct.

**FILEPATHS**:
- `scripts/ops/analyze_dataflow.py`
- `scripts/ops/gen_dataflow_report.py`
- `export/SYSTEM/REPORTS/dataflow_analysis/dataflow_2026-02-20_005219.md`
- `export/SYSTEM/REPORTS/dataflow_analysis/collection_manifest.json`

---

## TASK 2: Compare dataflow report with field_review_for_user.md on field addition plans

**STATUS**: in-progress

**USER QUERIES**: 2 ("将dataflow报告同field_review_for_user.md对比。告诉我在字段新增方案方面的异同")

**DETAILS**:
- User wants a comparison between two reports regarding field addition/mapping plans:
  1. `export/SYSTEM/REPORTS/dataflow_analysis/dataflow_2026-02-20_005219.md` — the freshly generated dataflow structure analysis report
  2. `export/SYSTEM/REPORTS/field_audit/field_review_for_user.md` — the field audit review document (1,211 lines)
- Both files have been fully read into context:
  - `field_review_for_user.md`: Read completely (lines 1-1211). Covers 12 ODS tables with detailed ODS/DWD column listings, "待新增/补映射字段" and "跳过字段" sections per table.
  - `dataflow_2026-02-20_005219.md`: Read first 200 lines covering the summary table (section 1) and the 1.1 field diff report (API↔ODS↔DWD differences). The per-table diff details were partially read.
- The `field_investigation_report.md` (deep investigation report) was also loaded in the initial context, providing the authoritative decisions behind field_review_for_user.md.

**Key data already gathered for comparison**:

From `field_review_for_user.md` (field audit), the field addition plan covers:
- **A类 (existing DWD tables, add columns + FACT_MAPPINGS)**: 
  - `assistant_accounts_master` → 4 fields (system_role_id, job_num, cx_unit_price, pd_unit_price) → dim_assistant_ex
  - `assistant_service_records` → 2 fields (operator_id, operator_name) → dwd_assistant_service_log_ex
  - `assistant_cancellation_records` → 1 field (assistanton → assistant_no_int) → dwd_assistant_trash_event_ex
  - `member_balance_changes` → 1 field (relate_id) → dwd_member_balance_change_ex
  - `site_tables_master` → 14 fields → dim_table_ex
  - `store_goods_master` → 1 field (batch_stock_quantity) → dim_store_goods_ex
- **B类 (only add FACT_MAPPINGS, DWD columns already exist)**:
  - `recharge_settlements` → 5 fields (plcouponsaleamount, mervousalesamount, electricitymoney, realelectricitymoney, electricityadjustmoney)
- **C类 (new DWD tables needed)**:
  - `goods_stock_summary` → 14 fields → new dwd_goods_stock_summary
  - `goods_stock_movements` → 19 fields → new dwd_goods_stock_movement
  - `settlement_ticket_details` → ~38 fields → new dwd_settlement_ticket + _ex
- **Skipped**: discount_price (store_goods_sales_records), commoditycode (tenant_goods_master), provisional_total_cost (store_goods_master), time_slot_sale (ODS doesn't exist)

From `dataflow_2026-02-20_005219.md` (dataflow analysis), the 1.1 diff table shows:
- `assistant_accounts_master`: ODS→DWD unmapped = 4, DWD no ODS source = 8 (SCD2)
- `assistant_service_records`: ODS→DWD unmapped = 4 (not 2 as in field_review)
- `assistant_cancellation_records`: ODS→DWD unmapped = 2
- `store_goods_sales_records`: ODS→DWD unmapped = 1
- `member_balance_changes`: ODS→DWD unmapped = 1, DWD no ODS source = 1
- `recharge_settlements`: ODS→DWD unmapped = 5, DWD no ODS source = 5
- `site_tables_master`: ODS→DWD unmapped = 14, DWD no ODS source = 8 (SCD2)
- `store_goods_master`: ODS→DWD unmapped = 2, DWD no ODS source = 8 (SCD2)
- `goods_stock_summary`: ODS→DWD unmapped = 14 (no DWD table)
- `goods_stock_movements`: ODS→DWD unmapped = 19 (no DWD table)
- `settlement_ticket_details`: ODS→DWD unmapped = 38 (no DWD table)
- `tenant_goods_master`: ODS→DWD unmapped = 1, DWD no ODS source = 8 (SCD2)

**NEXT STEPS**:
- Need to read more of the dataflow report's per-table diff details (beyond line 200) to get the specific field names it flags as unmapped, especially for tables where counts differ from field_review
- Key discrepancy to investigate: `assistant_service_records` shows 4 ODS→DWD unmapped in dataflow vs 2 in field_review — need to see which extra 2 fields the dataflow report flags
- Produce the actual comparison analysis for the user, organized by table, highlighting:
  1. Fields both reports agree need adding
  2. Fields only dataflow report flags (field_review skipped or missed)
  3. Fields only field_review flags (dataflow report missed)
  4. Differences in recommended actions (e.g., "new column" vs "just add FACT_MAPPINGS")

**FILEPATHS**:
- `export/SYSTEM/REPORTS/dataflow_analysis/dataflow_2026-02-20_005219.md`
- `export/SYSTEM/REPORTS/field_audit/field_review_for_user.md`
- `export/SYSTEM/REPORTS/field_audit/field_investigation_report.md`

---

## USER CORRECTIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS:
- All output text must be in simplified Chinese (language-zh.md steering)
- Output paths must come from `.env` environment variables, never hardcoded (export-paths.md steering)
- Python scripts preferred over PowerShell for complex operations (tech.md steering)
- This is a read-only analysis/comparison task — no code changes involved, so no audit needed
- The user is focused on `field_review_for_user.md` in the editor

---

## Files to read
- `export/SYSTEM/REPORTS/dataflow_analysis/dataflow_2026-02-20_005219.md` (start from line 1, read section 1.1 diff details — especially lines 50-500 for the per-table diff breakdowns, then search for specific tables like assistant_service_records, store_goods_sales_records, recharge_settlements, site_tables_master, store_goods_master, tenant_goods_master)
- `export/SYSTEM/REPORTS/field_audit/field_review_for_user.md` (full file, 1211 lines — the field audit review with per-table new field plans)
- `export/SYSTEM/REPORTS/field_audit/field_investigation_report.md` (the deep investigation report with authoritative decisions — especially the "全局汇总" section near the end and per-table "最终决策" entries)

USER QUERIES(most recent first):
1. 好的，将export\SYSTEM\REPORTS\dataflow_analysis\dataflow_2026-02-20_005219.md此文件同export\SYSTEM\REPORTS\field_audit\field_review_for_user.md对比。告诉我在字段新增方案方面的异同
2. Output:
Command executed successfully with no output.

Exit Code: 0
3. Output:
Command executed successfully with no output.

Exit Code: 0
4. 好的，将export\SYSTEM\REPORTS\dataflow_analysis\dataflow_2026-02-20_005219.md此文件同export\SYSTEM\REPORTS\field_audit\field_review_for_user.md对比。告诉我在字段新增方案方面的异同
5. <source-event>
    The user manually invoked this action
    The user is focued on the following file: No file focused
    The user has the following paths open: 
</source-event>

执行数据流结构分析，按以下步骤完成。若发现已完成或有历史任务痕迹则清空，重新执行：

第一阶段：数据采集
1. 运行 `python scripts/ops/analyze_dataflow.py` 完成数据采集（如需指定日期范围，加 --date-from / --date-to 参数）
2. 确认采集结果已落盘，包括：
   - json_trees/（含 samples 多示例值）
   - db_schemas/
   - field_mappings/（三层映射 + 锚点）
   - bd_descriptions/（BD_manual 业务描述）
   - collection_manifest.json（含 json_field_count、date_from、date_to）

第二阶段：报告生成
3. 运行 `python scripts/ops/gen_dataflow_report.py` 生成 Markdown 报告
4. 报告包含以下增强内容：
   - 报告头含 API 请求日期范围（date_from ~ date_to）和 JSON 数据总量
   - 总览表含 API JSON 字段数列
   - 1.1 API↔ODS↔DWD 字段对比差异报告
   - 2.3 覆盖率表含业务描述列
   - API 源字段表含业务描述列 + 多示例值（枚举值解释）
   - ODS 表结构含业务描述列 + 上下游双向映射锚点链接
   - DWD 表结构含业务描述列 + ODS 来源锚点链接
5. 输出文件路径和关键统计摘要

注意：当前仅分析飞球（feiqiu）连接器。未来新增连接器时，应自动发现并纳入分析范围。
6. <implicit-rules>## Implicit Rules
Focus on creating a new spec file or identifying an existing spec to update. 
If starting a new spec, create a requirements.md file in the .kiro/specs directory with clear user stories and acceptance criteria. 
If working with an existing spec, review the current requirements and suggest improvements if needed. 
Do not make direct code changes yet. First establish or review the spec file that will guide our implementation.</implicit-rules>
---

METADATA:
The previous conversation had 4 messages.

INSTRUCTIONS:
Continue working until the user query has been fully addressed. Do not ask for clarification - proceed with the work based on the context provided.
IMPORTANT: you need to read from the files to Read section
```
