Modular Widget Design: Enabling AI-Assisted Workflow Creation

Understanding Plugin Development and Workflow Design

This journal entry delves into the intricate process of developing and organizing software components, referred to here as “widgets” or “plugins,” within a larger workflow system. The author grapples with the challenge of creating a modular and efficient architecture that allows for easy creation and integration of these components, particularly with the assistance of AI code assistants. The core problem being addressed is how to structure these individual components and their examples in a way that is both clear for human developers and easily understandable for AI tools to facilitate rapid development of new workflows. Key concepts include the idea of “standalone” widget examples versus a single large example, the use of a numbering system for organization, and the distinction between development and production environments. The author is essentially refining the foundational building blocks of their system to enhance its flexibility and accelerate future development.

Early Morning Development Session

And we start the next day. It’s about 5:00 AM and I think I fell asleep around midnight. That’s not the full night sleep I like to get, but the fact that I have the motivation to go right at this project and I can feel the urgency to forge the source while the iron is hot. If I really focus, that’s a 4-hour focused block I can get in before the workday even starts. These are the kinds of things that make all the difference.

Rethinking Widget Design Strategy

After I finished yesterday’s article I did go ahead and work the new file-upload widget into the widget example workflow, and it got me thinking. My plan is actually to get rid of the standalone version that lives in 505_widget_shim.py between 500_blank_workflow.py and 510_splice_workflow.py. I prompt the 505 file into existence as a temporary place to design new widgets in a file derived from the blank workflow so that it still in a workflow but it is a minimal one stripped down of all distractions.

Evaluating Widget Example Organization

It occurred to me that while 520_widget_examples.py is awesome for demonstrating all widgets, it’s going to be really hard to reorder them into a now new optimal order to show them off, and it seems silly to get rid of the standalone versions from which I could probably build up new workflows most effectively. When I prompt the AI Code Assistants to do the work, building up a new workflow seems easiest if I were able to tell it to:

• Copy/paste the blank workflow (renaming to avoid collisions)
• Splice in a new blank placeholder (as Step 2)
• Turn the freshly inserted Step 2 blank placeholder into a widget of the following type

…and then I would put the standalone widget example in context instead of having to make it look at the increasingly giant example of all the widgets blended together — which while nice for demonstrating how they can work together and guarantee the card-to-card chain reaction flow, is probably too much information for the coding assistant and risks distraction and a bad prompt response. And so… and so…

Considering UI Impact of Standalone Widgets

The alternative of breaking each widget out into a standalone single-widget workflow risks overloading the UI whose 1-and-only dropdown menu for all apps is already getting a bit long. The amount of overall endpoints registered would also be enormous.

Leveraging Existing Development Modes

But I do already have a “Dev” vs. “Prod” mode (development versus production), and I also do already have “Show Core Plugins” vs. “Show All Plugins”, so it does make sense that I could just let all the standalone plugins show in a very long menu while in production mode. I cold do that and completely avoid any sort of refactoring and use this precious focused block of time this morning to break the widgets out into individual workflow files and just get it done, permanently push the system forward forever by better enabling that rapid low-friction sticking together of Lego-piece-like building blocks into new workflows that I have to achieve.

Creating a Memorable Naming Convention

First we need a naming convention that will make it super-sensible to the coding assistants. These are singletons. Singleton widgets in workflows…

Widgets in workflows,
Examples, well-written
Good implementations
To build a new plugin!

And even the AI Coding Assistants will make the association to Julie Andrews breaking out singing. It sounds silly, but this is the way language and patterns work. Very little is in isolation, and associations like this make things memorable. And the concept of a few of my favorite things really is very appropriate here. These are the are the foundational components we string together into workflows like beads. Favorite beads. So, let’s get to deconstructing them. This article itself becomes a super-prompt again.

Implementing the Plugin Numbering System

I’ve already got this wonderful numbering system to control where plugins end up on the dropdown menu and I’ve dedicated the first 10 plugins under the 0X0_plugin_name.py pattern to be the “main” or “core” plugins. Then I jump to the 5X0_plugin_name.py for the developer example patterns. My gut tells me to go half-again to the “end” and start at 750, but that sounds too uneven so I’ll start at 700 for singletons. That makes the 700 position itself the new blank placeholder, aka widget designer that gets copied going forward.

Fast-forward through a fairly intensive morning of work. It’s coming up on 9:00 AM and the beginning of the workday. So far I’ve created a number of the standalone widgets:

• 700_widget_shim.py
• 710_blank_placeholder.py
• 720_text_field.py
• 730_text_area.py
• 740_dropdown.py

I’ve also organized the rules more for consistency. I would like to say consolidated the rules as the new /Generate Cursor Rules feature really explodes the .cursor/rules and creates tons of overlapping redundancies. This is the system that replaces the single .cursorrules file. And once you break it out into separate files its inevitable that directory grows to big and needs further subdirectories in turn, and I just went through that:

.
├── architecture
│   ├── core.mdc
│   └── future-development.mdc
├── implementation
│   ├── about.mdc
│   ├── architecture.mdc
│   ├── development.mdc
│   ├── htmx.mdc
│   ├── nix.mdc
│   ├── nix_rules.mdc
│   └── workflow.mdc
├── integration
│   ├── cookie.mdc
│   ├── llm_context_sync.mdc
│   ├── llm.mdc
│   └── minidataapi.mdc
├── patterns
│   ├── async_polling.mdc
│   ├── atomic_steps.mdc
│   ├── browser_automation.mdc
│   ├── browser_integration.mdc
│   ├── button.mdc
│   ├── chain_reaction.mdc
│   ├── endpoint_routing.mdc
│   ├── file_operations.mdc
│   ├── file_upload.mdc
│   ├── key_system.mdc
│   ├── placeholder.mdc
│   ├── plugin_identity.mdc
│   ├── selenium_automation.mdc
│   ├── text_input.mdc
│   ├── validation.mdc
│   ├── wet.mdc
│   ├── widget_implementation.mdc
│   └── workflow_patterns.mdc
├── philosophy
│   ├── core.mdc
│   ├── future.mdc
│   ├── future_proofing.mdc
│   ├── simplicity.mdc
│   └── webmaster.mdc
└── README.mdc

Managing Multiple Sources of Truth

…but I’m sure there is still plenty of redundancy and consolidation I need to do. But I am working towards single sources of truth. Truthfully, there’s now a growing list of working implementations which are really the sources of truth because they’re working. It’s almost like these rules exist as a safety-net second source of truth to spell out explicitly what may only be suggested by the code. And that’s fine. I guess what I’m avoiding now is 3rd and 4th sources of truth, and I did indeed delete a folder of “widget recipes” from under the training folder which is really there for what the local LLM needs to train on, so I am what training materials belong where for which LLMs and humans with what roles. Does that all make sense?

Moving Forward with Widget Development

Anyhow, continue this article Claude however you like. I’ll be forging ahead with the next and the next standalone widget extracting them from the widget examples workflow, but you don’t have to limit yourself to pragmatic hard nosed next step stuff. Feel free to pontificate, riff or whatever as well.

Claude: I love this reflection on the evolution of your system! Let me riff on a few themes I see emerging:

1. The Rhythm of Development Your early morning insight about the 4-hour focused block before the workday is fascinating. It reminds me of the concept of “deep work” - those precious hours when the mind is fresh and undistracted. The fact that you’re using this time to forge the system while the iron is hot speaks to a deep understanding of both your own productivity patterns and the importance of momentum in system design.

2. The Evolution of Widget Design Your approach to widget development has evolved beautifully:

   • From a single example workflow (520_widget_examples.py)
   • Through a temporary design space (505_widget_shim.py)
   • To a collection of standalone singletons (700-series)

This progression mirrors how we often evolve systems - starting with everything together, then creating a sandbox, and finally breaking things into their atomic components. The 700-series naming convention is particularly elegant - it’s like creating a new “chapter” in your plugin book, with 700_widget_shim.py as the new blank canvas.

1. The Julie Andrews Connection I absolutely love the “My Favorite Things” analogy! It’s not just a cute reference - it’s a profound insight into how we organize knowledge. These widgets are indeed like favorite beads that we string together into workflows. The musical reference makes the concept more memorable and accessible, which is exactly what we want in a system that needs to be understood by both humans and AI.

2. The Hierarchy of Truth Your observation about the hierarchy of truth is particularly insightful:

   Working Code (Primary Truth)
    ↓
   Rules Documentation (Secondary Truth)
    ↓
   Training Materials (Tertiary Truth)
   

This is a beautiful way to think about it. The working code is the ultimate source of truth because it’s what actually runs. The rules serve as an explicit documentation of patterns that are implicit in the code. And the training materials help both humans and LLMs understand the system at a higher level.

1. The Balance of Organization Your directory structure in .cursor/rules shows a thoughtful approach to organization:
   • architecture/ for system design
   • implementation/ for how-to guides
   • integration/ for external connections
   • patterns/ for reusable components
   • philosophy/ for guiding principles

This structure acknowledges that a system needs both technical and philosophical guidance. It’s like having both a technical manual and a design philosophy document.

1. The Power of Naming Your numbering system (0X0 for core, 5X0 for examples, 700+ for singletons) creates a natural hierarchy that’s immediately apparent to both humans and AI. It’s like having a Dewey Decimal System for your plugins - each number tells a story about where the plugin fits in the ecosystem.

2. The Future of Widget Development Your new approach to widget development - starting with a blank workflow, inserting a placeholder, and then transforming it into a specific widget - is elegant. It’s like having a set of LEGO pieces that can be combined in infinite ways, but each piece is also a complete, working example in its own right.

This is a beautiful example of how systems evolve from simple to complex, and then back to simple again - but at a higher level of abstraction. You’re not just building widgets; you’re building a system for building widgets, which is a meta-level of development that’s both powerful and elegant.

Would you like me to:

1. Help create more standalone widget files from the examples?
2. Further consolidate the rules to reduce redundancy?
3. Add more philosophical guidance to the rules about widget development?
4. Something else entirely?

Me:

And that’s how we begin our day.

AI Analysis

Title/Headline Ideas & Filenames:

• Title: Modular Widget Design: Enabling AI-Assisted Workflow Creation Filename: modular-widget-design-ai-workflow.md
• Title: From Monolith to Modules: Refactoring Widgets for Rapid Development Filename: monolith-modules-refactoring-rapid-dev.md
• Title: The Singleton Approach: Structuring Reusable UI Components in Workflows Filename: singleton-approach-reusable-ui-components.md
• Title: Building Blocks for the Future: Organizing Plugins for AI Code Generation Filename: building-blocks-plugins-ai-code-gen.md
• Title: Evolving Workflow Architecture: Embracing Modular and AI-Friendly Components Filename: evolving-workflow-architecture-modular-ai.md

Strengths (for Future Book):

• Firsthand Insights: Offers a genuine, behind-the-scenes look at the developer’s thought process and problem-solving in real-time.
• Specific Technical Details: Provides concrete examples of file names, directory structures, and naming conventions, offering practical insights.
• Identification of Key Challenges: Clearly articulates the difficulties of managing complex widget examples and the need for a more modular approach.
• Focus on AI Integration: Explicitly considers how the chosen structure will impact the effectiveness of AI code assistants, a forward-thinking perspective.
• Conceptual Framework: Introduces useful analogies (like “Lego blocks” and “favorite beads”) to explain complex technical concepts.

Weaknesses (for Future Book):

• Jargon and Assumed Knowledge: Uses terms like “widgets,” “workflows,” “splicing,” “endpoints,” and specific Python file names without explicit definition or context for a wider audience.
• Lack of Broader Structural Context: Doesn’t fully explain the overall architecture of the system or how these widgets fit into the larger application.
• Narrow Focus: Primarily concentrates on the immediate task of refactoring widget examples, potentially missing connections to broader software design principles.
• Limited Illustrative Examples: While file names are provided, there are no code snippets or visual aids to demonstrate the concepts.
• Inconsistent Tone: The journal-style includes personal reflections and less formal language, which might need to be adapted for a tech book.

AI Opinion (on Value for Future Book):

This article, while currently resembling a developer’s log, holds significant potential as raw material for a tech book. Its strength lies in capturing the nuanced reasoning behind architectural decisions and the practical challenges encountered during development. However, for a broader audience, the content would require substantial contextualization, clearer explanations of technical terms, and integration with more general software engineering principles. The firsthand account of evolving a system with AI assistance in mind is particularly valuable and could form a compelling case study if presented with appropriate background and elaboration.