@agile-vibe-coding/avc 0.1.1 → 0.3.1

package/cli/checks/epic/database.json

@@ -0,0 +1,114 @@
+{
+  "perspective": "database",
+  "scope": "epic",
+  "checks": [
+    {
+      "id": "db-epic-01",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "critical",
+      "category": "completeness",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve data persistence or database operations? (Does it store, query, or manage structured data?)",
+      "question": "Does the epic scope clearly define database boundaries?",
+      "failDescription": "Database boundaries are not defined — unclear which data entities and operations are in scope",
+      "failSuggestion": "Define database boundaries: which tables/collections, relationships, and operations belong to this epic"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "db-epic-02",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "critical",
+      "category": "completeness",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve data persistence or database operations?",
+      "question": "Are all critical database features identified?",
+      "failDescription": "Critical database features are missing — schema, indexes, or migration strategy not identified",
+      "failSuggestion": "Identify critical database features: schema definition, indexes, migrations, data validation constraints"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "db-epic-03",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "completeness",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic depend on database services or infrastructure?",
+      "question": "Are dependencies on database services/infrastructure explicit?",
+      "failDescription": "Database service dependencies are not explicit",
+      "failSuggestion": "Make database dependencies explicit: database engine, version, hosting, backup service"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "db-epic-04",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "completeness",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve data persistence or database operations?",
+      "question": "Are database success criteria measurable?",
+      "failDescription": "Database success criteria are not measurable",
+      "failSuggestion": "Define measurable database criteria: query latency targets, throughput, data integrity constraints"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "db-epic-05",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "clarity",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve data persistence or database operations?",
+      "question": "Is database terminology used correctly?",
+      "failDescription": "Database terminology is used incorrectly or inconsistently",
+      "failSuggestion": "Review database terminology: normalization, indexes, foreign keys, constraints, migrations"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "db-epic-06",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "technical-depth",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve database architecture? (Does it need schema design, optimization, or scaling?)",
+      "question": "Are database architectural patterns considered?",
+      "failDescription": "Database architectural patterns are not considered",
+      "failSuggestion": "Consider database patterns: normalization/denormalization strategy, indexing, partitioning, replication"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "db-epic-07",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "technical-depth",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve database queries that need to perform well?",
+      "question": "Are performance/scalability concerns for database addressed?",
+      "failDescription": "Database performance and scalability concerns are not addressed",
+      "failSuggestion": "Address database performance: query optimization, indexing strategy, connection pooling, read replicas"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "db-epic-08",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "consistency",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve data persistence or database operations?",
+      "question": "Does the database approach align with project context?",
+      "failDescription": "Database approach does not align with project context",
+      "failSuggestion": "Ensure database approach aligns with project: consistent engine, naming conventions, migration strategy"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "db-epic-09",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "best-practices",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve data persistence or database operations?",
+      "question": "Are industry-standard database patterns followed (normalization, indexing)?",
+      "failDescription": "Database best practices are not followed",
+      "failSuggestion": "Follow database best practices: proper normalization, strategic indexing, referential integrity constraints"
+    }
+  ]
+}

package/cli/checks/epic/developer.json

@@ -0,0 +1,182 @@
+{
+  "perspective": "developer",
+  "scope": "epic",
+  "checks": [
+    {
+      "id": "dev-epic-01",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "critical",
+      "category": "clarity-feasibility",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Is the epic description clear and unambiguous for developers?",
+      "failDescription": "Epic description is vague or ambiguous — developers cannot understand what to build",
+      "failSuggestion": "Rewrite the epic description to be specific about what is being built, the approach, and key technical decisions"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-epic-02",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "critical",
+      "category": "clarity-feasibility",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Are the features technically feasible with reasonable effort?",
+      "failDescription": "One or more features appear technically infeasible or require unreasonable effort",
+      "failSuggestion": "Review features for technical feasibility and break down overly complex features into achievable increments"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-epic-03",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "clarity-feasibility",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Is the epic scope appropriate for iterative development?",
+      "failDescription": "Epic scope is too large or too small for iterative development",
+      "failSuggestion": "Adjust scope to be deliverable in stories that each cover a single cohesive capability — add as many as needed to fully cover the epic"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-epic-04",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "clarity-feasibility",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Are technical constraints and assumptions explicitly stated?",
+      "failDescription": "Technical constraints and assumptions are implicit — developers may make wrong assumptions",
+      "failSuggestion": "Make constraints and assumptions explicit: runtime version, OS constraints, browser support, API compatibility requirements"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-epic-05",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "code-quality-maintainability",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Does the epic mention code quality standards (linting, formatting, code review)?",
+      "failDescription": "Code quality standards are not mentioned — no linting, formatting, or code review requirements",
+      "failSuggestion": "Mention code quality standards: linting rules, formatting conventions, and code review requirements"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-epic-06",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "code-quality-maintainability",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Does the epic address testing strategy (unit, integration, e2e)?",
+      "failDescription": "Testing strategy is not addressed — no mention of unit, integration, or e2e testing",
+      "failSuggestion": "Address testing strategy: specify which types of tests are expected (unit, integration, e2e) and coverage targets"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-epic-07",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "code-quality-maintainability",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Are documentation requirements specified (code comments, API docs, README)?",
+      "failDescription": "Documentation requirements are not specified",
+      "failSuggestion": "Specify documentation requirements: inline code comments, API documentation, README updates"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-epic-08",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "development-workflow",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Does the epic support incremental development and testing?",
+      "failDescription": "Epic does not support incremental development — features may need to be delivered all at once",
+      "failSuggestion": "Structure the epic to support incremental development: features should be independently testable and deployable"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-epic-09",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "development-workflow",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Are dependencies clear and do they avoid blocking parallelization unnecessarily?",
+      "failDescription": "Dependencies are unclear or block parallelization unnecessarily",
+      "failSuggestion": "Clarify dependencies and minimize blocking relationships to allow parallel development"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-epic-10",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "development-workflow",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Is a version control strategy implied or specified (branching, commits)?",
+      "failDescription": "Version control strategy is not addressed",
+      "failSuggestion": "Specify or imply version control strategy: feature branches, commit conventions, merge approach"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-epic-11",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "developer-experience",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Does the epic provide sufficient context for developers to start work?",
+      "failDescription": "Insufficient context for developers — key background information or technical context is missing",
+      "failSuggestion": "Provide enough context: domain background, technical rationale, relevant prior decisions"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-epic-12",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "developer-experience",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Are technical decisions justified (why this approach)?",
+      "failDescription": "Technical decisions are not justified — unclear why a particular approach was chosen",
+      "failSuggestion": "Justify key technical decisions: explain why this approach was chosen over alternatives"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-epic-13",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "developer-experience",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Does the epic avoid introducing unnecessary complexity?",
+      "failDescription": "Epic introduces unnecessary complexity — simpler alternatives may exist",
+      "failSuggestion": "Review for unnecessary complexity and simplify where possible without losing functionality"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-epic-14",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "best-practices",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Does the epic follow SOLID principles and clean code practices?",
+      "failDescription": "Epic design does not follow SOLID principles or clean code practices",
+      "failSuggestion": "Align the epic design with SOLID principles: single responsibility, open/closed, dependency inversion"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-epic-15",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "best-practices",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Does the epic avoid common anti-patterns (tight coupling, god objects, premature optimization)?",
+      "failDescription": "Epic may introduce anti-patterns — tight coupling, god objects, or premature optimization",
+      "failSuggestion": "Review for anti-patterns: avoid tight coupling between components, god objects, and premature optimization"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-epic-16",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "best-practices",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Does the epic consider technical debt and refactoring needs?",
+      "failDescription": "Technical debt and refactoring needs are not considered",
+      "failSuggestion": "Acknowledge technical debt implications and plan for necessary refactoring"
+    }
+  ]
+}

package/cli/checks/epic/devops.json

@@ -0,0 +1,174 @@
+{
+  "perspective": "devops",
+  "scope": "epic",
+  "checks": [
+    {
+      "id": "devops-epic-01",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "critical",
+      "category": "completeness",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve deployment, infrastructure, or operational concerns? (Does it require CI/CD, containers, or cloud infrastructure?)",
+      "question": "Does the epic scope clearly define deployment and operational boundaries?",
+      "failDescription": "Deployment and operational boundaries are not defined",
+      "failSuggestion": "Define deployment boundaries: what is deployed, where, and how (container, serverless, VM)"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-epic-02",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "critical",
+      "category": "completeness",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve deployment, infrastructure, or operational concerns? (Does it require CI/CD, monitoring, or scaling?)",
+      "question": "Are all critical DevOps features identified (CI/CD, monitoring, scaling)?",
+      "failDescription": "Critical DevOps features are missing — CI/CD, monitoring, or scaling not addressed",
+      "failSuggestion": "Identify critical DevOps features: CI/CD pipeline, monitoring/alerting, auto-scaling strategy"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-epic-03",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "completeness",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic depend on infrastructure services? (Does it use cloud provider, container registry, or external services?)",
+      "question": "Are dependencies on infrastructure services explicit (cloud provider, container registry)?",
+      "failDescription": "Infrastructure service dependencies are not explicit",
+      "failSuggestion": "Make infrastructure dependencies explicit: cloud provider, container registry, DNS, CDN, load balancer"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-epic-04",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "completeness",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic have operational requirements? (Does it need uptime, recovery, or deployment frequency targets?)",
+      "question": "Are operational success criteria measurable (e.g. 99.9% uptime, < 15min MTTR)?",
+      "failDescription": "Operational success criteria are not measurable",
+      "failSuggestion": "Define measurable operational criteria: uptime SLA (e.g. 99.9%), MTTR (e.g. < 15min), deployment frequency"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-epic-05",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "clarity",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve DevOps infrastructure or operational concerns?",
+      "question": "Is DevOps terminology used correctly and consistently?",
+      "failDescription": "DevOps terminology is used incorrectly or inconsistently",
+      "failSuggestion": "Review and correct DevOps terminology for consistency (e.g. container vs VM, deployment vs release)"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-epic-06",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "clarity",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve DevOps infrastructure or operational concerns?",
+      "question": "Is the epic description understandable to non-DevOps team members?",
+      "failDescription": "Epic description uses excessive DevOps jargon without explanation",
+      "failSuggestion": "Simplify or explain DevOps concepts so non-DevOps team members can understand the epic"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-epic-07",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "clarity",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve DevOps infrastructure or operational concerns?",
+      "question": "Are operational features described in terms of business value (faster deployments, reduced downtime)?",
+      "failDescription": "Operational features lack business value context",
+      "failSuggestion": "Frame operational features in business terms: 'automated deployment reduces release time from 2hr to 5min'"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-epic-08",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "technical-depth",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve deploying services? (Does it require containerization, orchestration, or scaling?)",
+      "question": "Is infrastructure architecture considered (containerization, orchestration, scaling)?",
+      "failDescription": "Infrastructure architecture is not considered — containerization, orchestration, or scaling missing",
+      "failSuggestion": "Address infrastructure architecture: containerization (Docker), orchestration (K8s/ECS), scaling strategy"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-epic-09",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "technical-depth",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve deploying to production? (Does it require a deployment strategy?)",
+      "question": "Is a deployment strategy addressed (blue/green, canary, rolling updates)?",
+      "failDescription": "Deployment strategy is not addressed",
+      "failSuggestion": "Define deployment strategy: blue/green, canary, or rolling updates with rollback plan"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-epic-10",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "technical-depth",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve running production services? (Does it require logging, metrics, or tracing?)",
+      "question": "Is an observability stack defined (metrics, logs, traces)?",
+      "failDescription": "Observability stack is not defined — no metrics, logging, or tracing specified",
+      "failSuggestion": "Define observability stack: logging (ELK, CloudWatch), metrics (Prometheus, Datadog), tracing (X-Ray, Jaeger)"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-epic-11",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "technical-depth",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve production data or services? (Does it require backup or disaster recovery?)",
+      "question": "Is a disaster recovery and backup strategy mentioned?",
+      "failDescription": "Disaster recovery and backup strategy is not mentioned",
+      "failSuggestion": "Mention disaster recovery: backup frequency, RTO/RPO targets, recovery procedures"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-epic-12",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "consistency",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve DevOps infrastructure or operational concerns?",
+      "question": "Does the DevOps approach align with the project context and cloud platform?",
+      "failDescription": "DevOps approach does not align with project context or cloud platform",
+      "failSuggestion": "Align DevOps approach with project context: ensure tools and patterns match the chosen cloud platform"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-epic-13",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "best-practices",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve DevOps infrastructure or operational concerns?",
+      "question": "Are industry-standard DevOps patterns followed (12-factor app, GitOps, immutable infrastructure)?",
+      "failDescription": "Industry-standard DevOps patterns are not followed",
+      "failSuggestion": "Follow DevOps best practices: 12-factor app principles, GitOps workflows, immutable infrastructure"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-epic-14",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "best-practices",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve DevOps infrastructure or operational concerns?",
+      "question": "Does the epic avoid DevOps anti-patterns (manual deployments, configuration drift, snowflake servers)?",
+      "failDescription": "Epic may introduce DevOps anti-patterns — manual deployments, configuration drift, or snowflake servers",
+      "failSuggestion": "Avoid DevOps anti-patterns: automate deployments, manage config as code, use immutable infrastructure"
+    }
+  ]
+}

package/cli/checks/epic/frontend.json

@@ -0,0 +1,162 @@
+{
+  "perspective": "frontend",
+  "scope": "epic",
+  "checks": [
+    {
+      "id": "fe-epic-01",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "frontend",
+      "severity": "critical",
+      "category": "ui-architecture-specification",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve a user-facing web interface? (Does it include UI components, pages, or client-side rendering?)",
+      "question": "Does the epic state the frontend framework (React, Vue, Angular, etc.)?",
+      "failDescription": "Frontend framework is not stated — foundational technology decision is missing",
+      "failSuggestion": "State the frontend framework: React, Vue, Angular, Svelte, etc."
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "fe-epic-02",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "frontend",
+      "severity": "critical",
+      "category": "ui-architecture-specification",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve fetching data from a server? (Does it make API calls or query a backend?)",
+      "question": "Does the epic name the server-state management library (TanStack Query, SWR, Apollo) and describe its usage pattern?",
+      "failDescription": "Server-state management library is not named or its usage pattern is not described",
+      "failSuggestion": "Name the server-state management library (TanStack Query, SWR, Apollo) and describe caching/refetch patterns"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "fe-epic-03",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "frontend",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "ui-architecture-specification",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve client-side state beyond server data? (Does it need UI state, form state, or application state?)",
+      "question": "Does the epic name the client-state management strategy (Zustand, Redux, Context) — or explicitly state 'no client state beyond React Query cache'?",
+      "failDescription": "Client-state management strategy is not named or explicitly declared absent",
+      "failSuggestion": "Name the client-state strategy (Zustand, Redux, Context) or explicitly state 'no client state beyond server-state cache'"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "fe-epic-04",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "frontend",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "ui-architecture-specification",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve a user-facing web interface? (Does it include UI components?)",
+      "question": "Does the epic name the key UI component types (table, form, modal, drawer, chart, etc.)?",
+      "failDescription": "Key UI component types are not named",
+      "failSuggestion": "Name the key UI component types: tables, forms, modals, drawers, charts, etc."
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "fe-epic-05",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "frontend",
+      "severity": "critical",
+      "category": "async-error-ux-strategy",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve asynchronous operations? (Does it fetch data, submit forms, or call APIs?)",
+      "question": "Does the epic name a loading state strategy (skeleton loaders, spinners, progressive enhancement)?",
+      "failDescription": "Loading state strategy is not named — users will see undefined behavior during async operations",
+      "failSuggestion": "Name the loading state strategy: skeleton loaders, spinners, disabled buttons, or progressive enhancement"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "fe-epic-06",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "frontend",
+      "severity": "critical",
+      "category": "async-error-ux-strategy",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve asynchronous operations? (Does it fetch data, submit forms, or call APIs?)",
+      "question": "Does the epic name an error state strategy (toast notifications, inline errors, error boundaries)?",
+      "failDescription": "Error state strategy is not named — errors will not be communicated to users",
+      "failSuggestion": "Name the error state strategy: toast notifications, inline errors, error boundaries, or retry prompts"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "fe-epic-07",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "frontend",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "async-error-ux-strategy",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve lists or search views? (Does it display collections of items or search results?)",
+      "question": "Does the epic describe empty state handling for all list/search views?",
+      "failDescription": "Empty state handling is not described for list/search views",
+      "failSuggestion": "Describe empty state handling: what renders when data is empty (illustration, message, call-to-action)"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "fe-epic-08",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "frontend",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "async-error-ux-strategy",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve data mutations? (Does it create, update, or delete data?)",
+      "question": "Does the epic state an optimistic update strategy for mutation-heavy features?",
+      "failDescription": "Optimistic update strategy is not stated for mutation-heavy features",
+      "failSuggestion": "State whether mutations use optimistic updates (immediate UI update, rollback on failure) or wait for server confirmation"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "fe-epic-09",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "frontend",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "accessibility-standards",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve a user-facing web interface? (Does it render UI for end users?)",
+      "question": "Does the epic state an accessibility standard (WCAG 2.1 AA or equivalent) if user-facing?",
+      "failDescription": "Accessibility standard is not stated for user-facing interface",
+      "failSuggestion": "State the accessibility standard: WCAG 2.1 AA, Section 508, or equivalent"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "fe-epic-10",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "frontend",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "accessibility-standards",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve interactive UI components? (Does it have forms, modals, menus, or dropdowns?)",
+      "question": "Does the epic require keyboard navigation for interactive components?",
+      "failDescription": "Keyboard navigation requirement is not stated for interactive components",
+      "failSuggestion": "Require keyboard navigation for interactive components: Tab, Enter, Escape, Arrow keys for forms, modals, menus"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "fe-epic-11",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "frontend",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "accessibility-standards",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve dynamic content updates? (Does it have live feeds, notifications, or async-loaded content?)",
+      "question": "Does the epic describe an ARIA strategy for dynamic content (live regions, labeled controls)?",
+      "failDescription": "ARIA strategy for dynamic content is not described",
+      "failSuggestion": "Describe ARIA strategy: aria-live regions for async updates, aria-label for controls, aria-describedby for errors"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "fe-epic-12",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "frontend",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "performance-build",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve a web application with multiple routes or heavy components? (Does it have route-based views or large libraries?)",
+      "question": "Does the epic describe a code splitting strategy (route-level, component-level) if relevant?",
+      "failDescription": "Code splitting strategy is not described",
+      "failSuggestion": "Describe code splitting: route-level lazy loading, component-level splitting for heavy libraries"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "fe-epic-13",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "frontend",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "performance-build",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this epic involve a user-facing web application? (Does it need to load quickly for end users?)",
+      "question": "Does the epic specify performance targets (bundle size, LCP, FID, CLS) — or 'N/A for internal tool'?",
+      "failDescription": "Performance targets are not specified",
+      "failSuggestion": "Specify performance targets: bundle size budget, LCP < 2.5s, FID < 100ms, CLS < 0.1 — or state 'N/A for internal tool'"
+    }
+  ]
+}