@agile-vibe-coding/avc 0.2.3 → 0.3.2

package/cli/checks/story/data.json

@@ -0,0 +1,210 @@
+{
+  "perspective": "data",
+  "scope": "story",
+  "checks": [
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-01",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "critical",
+      "category": "acceptance-criteria-quality",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve data processing, transformation, or analytics?",
+      "question": "Is each acceptance criterion testable and measurable with concrete data outcomes?",
+      "failDescription": "Acceptance criteria lack testable, measurable data outcomes",
+      "failSuggestion": "Rewrite each AC with concrete data outcomes: expected row counts, data formats, transformation results, or query outputs"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-02",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "critical",
+      "category": "acceptance-criteria-quality",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve data pipelines or data flows?",
+      "question": "Do criteria cover happy path, edge cases, and error scenarios for data flows (missing data, malformed records, duplicates)?",
+      "failDescription": "Data flow edge cases and error scenarios are not covered in acceptance criteria",
+      "failSuggestion": "Add ACs for data edge cases: missing/null fields, malformed records, duplicate entries, empty datasets, schema mismatches"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-03",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "critical",
+      "category": "acceptance-criteria-quality",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story define multiple data-related acceptance criteria?",
+      "question": "Are acceptance criteria independent and non-overlapping in their data coverage?",
+      "failDescription": "Acceptance criteria overlap or conflict in their data coverage",
+      "failSuggestion": "Ensure each AC covers a distinct data concern: one for schema, one for transformation logic, one for validation rules"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-04",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "critical",
+      "category": "acceptance-criteria-quality",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve data storage, retrieval, or manipulation?",
+      "question": "Are data requirements explicitly stated — schemas, formats, volume expectations, and data types?",
+      "failDescription": "Data requirements are not explicitly stated — missing schemas, formats, or volume expectations",
+      "failSuggestion": "Explicitly state data requirements: field names and types, data formats (JSON, CSV, Parquet), expected volumes, and retention policies"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-05",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "implementation-clarity",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve data engineering or data processing implementation?",
+      "question": "Does the story provide enough data detail for implementation — source systems, data formats, transformation rules?",
+      "failDescription": "Insufficient data detail for implementation — source systems, formats, or transformation rules are missing",
+      "failSuggestion": "Add implementation details: source system names, input/output data formats, specific transformation rules, and data mapping specifications"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-06",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "implementation-clarity",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve data constraints or assumptions about data quality?",
+      "question": "Are technical constraints and assumptions about data quality, completeness, and freshness explicit?",
+      "failDescription": "Data quality constraints and assumptions are not explicit",
+      "failSuggestion": "State data assumptions: expected completeness percentage, freshness SLA, null handling strategy, deduplication approach"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-07",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "implementation-clarity",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story require specific data patterns or processing approaches?",
+      "question": "Are data patterns and approaches specified — batch vs streaming, ETL vs ELT, incremental vs full load?",
+      "failDescription": "Data processing patterns are not specified",
+      "failSuggestion": "Specify the data pattern: batch/streaming, ETL/ELT, incremental/full load, change data capture strategy"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-08",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "testability",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve data logic that needs testing at multiple levels?",
+      "question": "Can the story be tested at multiple levels — unit tests for transformations, integration tests for pipelines, e2e for data flows?",
+      "failDescription": "Story cannot be tested at multiple levels — unclear how to unit test transformations or integration test pipelines",
+      "failSuggestion": "Define testing levels: unit tests for individual transformations, integration tests for source-to-target pipeline, e2e for full data flow validation"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-09",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "testability",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story require test data for validation?",
+      "question": "Are test data requirements clear — sample datasets, boundary values, and representative data distributions?",
+      "failDescription": "Test data requirements are unclear — no sample datasets or boundary values defined",
+      "failSuggestion": "Define test data: sample input datasets, boundary values (empty, max size, special characters), representative distributions for statistical tests"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-10",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "testability",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story produce data outputs that need verification?",
+      "question": "Are expected data outcomes precisely defined — exact output schemas, row counts, or data quality metrics?",
+      "failDescription": "Expected data outcomes are not precisely defined",
+      "failSuggestion": "Define precise expected outcomes: output schema with field types, expected row counts or ranges, data quality metrics (completeness, accuracy thresholds)"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-11",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "scope-dependencies",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve data work that could span multiple days?",
+      "question": "Is the story appropriately scoped — focused on a single cohesive data engineering capability?",
+      "failDescription": "Story scope is too broad — consider splitting into smaller data tasks",
+      "failSuggestion": "Split large data stories: separate ingestion, transformation, validation, and output stages into individual stories"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-12",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "scope-dependencies",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story depend on other data sources, pipelines, or stories?",
+      "question": "Are dependencies on other data sources, pipelines, or stories explicitly identified?",
+      "failDescription": "Dependencies on data sources or upstream pipelines are not explicitly identified",
+      "failSuggestion": "List all data dependencies: upstream pipeline names, source system availability, schema version requirements, data freshness dependencies"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-13",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "scope-dependencies",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story deliver data incrementally?",
+      "question": "Is the story independent enough to be delivered incrementally without breaking existing data consumers?",
+      "failDescription": "Story may not be independently deliverable — risk of breaking existing data consumers",
+      "failSuggestion": "Ensure backward compatibility: define how existing consumers are unaffected, or specify a migration plan for schema changes"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-14",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "best-practices",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve data engineering or data science implementation?",
+      "question": "Does the story follow data best practices — idempotent pipelines, schema evolution, data lineage, and reproducibility?",
+      "failDescription": "Story does not address data best practices",
+      "failSuggestion": "Address data best practices: idempotent pipeline runs, schema evolution strategy, data lineage tracking, and reproducible transformations"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-15",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "best-practices",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve data patterns that could be implemented incorrectly?",
+      "question": "Does the story avoid data anti-patterns — no hardcoded schemas, no unpartitioned large tables, no missing data validation?",
+      "failDescription": "Story may contain data anti-patterns",
+      "failSuggestion": "Check for anti-patterns: hardcoded schemas (use schema registry), unpartitioned tables (define partition strategy), missing validation (add data quality checks)"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-16",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "acceptance-criteria-quality",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story use vague language in its acceptance criteria?",
+      "question": "Do all ACs avoid vague phrases ('handle gracefully', 'validate properly', 'appropriate response') without specifying concrete outcomes?",
+      "failDescription": "ACs use vague language without specifying concrete, observable data outcomes",
+      "failSuggestion": "Replace vague phrases with concrete outcomes: instead of 'handle errors gracefully', specify 'log failed records to dead-letter table with error code and timestamp'"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "data-story-17",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "data",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "testability",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story have logic paths that need testing?",
+      "question": "Does at least one AC explicitly list concrete test scenarios (boundary values, error paths, or specific test cases)?",
+      "failDescription": "Story lacks a test-boundary AC — no AC names the specific data scenarios a developer must test",
+      "failSuggestion": "Add one AC: 'Developer tests must cover: (1) happy path with valid data, (2) empty dataset, (3) malformed records, (4) duplicate entries, (5) schema mismatch'"
+    }
+  ]
+}

package/cli/checks/story/database.json

@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+{
+  "perspective": "database",
+  "scope": "story",
+  "checks": [
+    {
+      "id": "db-story-01",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "critical",
+      "category": "acceptance-criteria",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve database operations? (Does it create tables, modify schemas, write queries, or manage data?)",
+      "question": "Is each acceptance criterion testable and measurable?",
+      "failDescription": "One or more acceptance criteria are not testable or measurable",
+      "failSuggestion": "Make each AC testable: specify exact table/column changes, query results, or constraint behaviors"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "db-story-02",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "acceptance-criteria",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve database operations?",
+      "question": "Do criteria cover happy path, edge cases, and error scenarios?",
+      "failDescription": "Criteria do not cover database edge cases or error scenarios",
+      "failSuggestion": "Add database error scenarios: unique constraint violations, foreign key failures, null handling, concurrent updates"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "db-story-03",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "acceptance-criteria",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve database operations?",
+      "question": "Are database requirements explicitly stated?",
+      "failDescription": "Database requirements are not explicitly stated",
+      "failSuggestion": "State database requirements: table/column definitions, index requirements, migration strategy, data types"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "db-story-04",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "implementation-clarity",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve database operations?",
+      "question": "Does the story provide enough database detail for implementation?",
+      "failDescription": "Insufficient database detail for implementation",
+      "failSuggestion": "Add database details: schema changes, index definitions, query patterns, migration rollback strategy"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "db-story-05",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "implementation-clarity",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve database operations?",
+      "question": "Are database patterns and approaches specified?",
+      "failDescription": "Database patterns and approaches are not specified",
+      "failSuggestion": "Specify database patterns: ORM usage, raw SQL vs query builder, transaction handling, connection pooling"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "db-story-06",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "testability",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve database operations?",
+      "question": "Does the story have a test-boundary AC naming specific scenarios a developer must test?",
+      "failDescription": "Story lacks a test-boundary AC",
+      "failSuggestion": "Add test-boundary AC: 'Tests must cover: (1) successful write, (2) unique constraint violation, (3) FK constraint, (4) null handling'"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "db-story-07",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "scope-dependencies",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve database operations?",
+      "question": "Are dependencies on other stories explicit?",
+      "failDescription": "Dependencies on other stories are not explicit",
+      "failSuggestion": "Make dependencies explicit: reference schema dependencies from other stories"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "db-story-08",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "database",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "best-practices",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve database operations?",
+      "question": "Does the story follow database best practices?",
+      "failDescription": "Database best practices are not followed",
+      "failSuggestion": "Follow database best practices: proper indexing, parameterized queries, migration versioning, data integrity constraints"
+    }
+  ]
+}

package/cli/checks/story/developer.json

@@ -0,0 +1,168 @@
+{
+  "perspective": "developer",
+  "scope": "story",
+  "checks": [
+    {
+      "id": "dev-story-01",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "implementation-completeness",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Does every AC describe a developer-observable outcome (HTTP status, DB write, event emission) — not just user-visible behavior?",
+      "failDescription": "One or more ACs only describe user-visible behavior without developer-observable outcomes",
+      "failSuggestion": "Add developer-observable outcomes: e.g. 'returns 201', 'writes record to DB', 'emits UserCreated event'"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-story-02",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "implementation-completeness",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve asynchronous operations? (Does it call external APIs, databases, or message queues?)",
+      "question": "Do async operations have error-path ACs covering external call failures (DB down, API timeout, queue full)?",
+      "failDescription": "Async operations lack error-path ACs for external call failures",
+      "failSuggestion": "Add error-path ACs: what happens if DB is down (503), API times out (504/retry), queue is full (429/backpressure)"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-story-03",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "implementation-completeness",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve operations that may be retried? (Does it handle webhooks, payment callbacks, or message delivery?)",
+      "question": "Is idempotency stated for operations that may be retried?",
+      "failDescription": "Idempotency is not stated for retryable operations",
+      "failSuggestion": "State idempotency behavior: duplicate requests produce the same result, use idempotency keys or DB constraints"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-story-04",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "implementation-completeness",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story's operations cause side effects? (Does it invalidate caches, emit events, or trigger downstream processes?)",
+      "question": "Are side effects documented (cache invalidation, event emission, downstream triggers)?",
+      "failDescription": "Side effects are not documented",
+      "failSuggestion": "Document side effects: cache invalidation, event emission, webhook triggers, downstream data updates"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-story-05",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "testing-scope-clarity",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Is the unit test boundary implied — which function/module is the primary unit under test?",
+      "failDescription": "Unit test boundary is not implied — unclear which function/module to test",
+      "failSuggestion": "Imply the unit test boundary: name the primary function/module under test"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-story-06",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "testing-scope-clarity",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story interact with external systems? (Does it use databases, external APIs, or message queues?)",
+      "question": "Is the integration test boundary implied — which external system is exercised?",
+      "failDescription": "Integration test boundary is not implied — unclear which external system to test against",
+      "failSuggestion": "Imply the integration test boundary: name the external system exercised (DB, API, queue)"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-story-07",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "testing-scope-clarity",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Are test data requirements explicit (what fixtures/seeds are needed)?",
+      "failDescription": "Test data requirements are not explicit — unclear what fixtures or seeds are needed",
+      "failSuggestion": "Specify test data requirements: user roles, existing records, edge-case states needed for testing"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-story-08",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "testing-scope-clarity",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Does the story have at least one AC per error path so test coverage is unambiguous?",
+      "failDescription": "Story lacks ACs for error paths — test coverage is ambiguous",
+      "failSuggestion": "Add one AC per error path: validation errors, auth failures, not-found, conflict scenarios"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-story-09",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "concurrency-race-conditions",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve concurrent writes or shared resources? (Can multiple users modify the same data?)",
+      "question": "Are concurrent write conflicts addressed (optimistic locking, idempotency key, last-write-wins)?",
+      "failDescription": "Concurrent write conflicts are not addressed",
+      "failSuggestion": "Address concurrent writes: optimistic locking (version column), idempotency key, or last-write-wins with rationale"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-story-10",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "concurrency-race-conditions",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve at-least-once delivery scenarios?",
+      "question": "Is retry behavior defined for at-least-once delivery scenarios?",
+      "failDescription": "Retry behavior is not defined for at-least-once delivery",
+      "failSuggestion": "Define retry behavior: retry count, backoff strategy, dead letter handling"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-story-11",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "concurrency-race-conditions",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve multi-step database operations?",
+      "question": "Are database transaction boundaries stated for multi-step operations?",
+      "failDescription": "Database transaction boundaries are not stated for multi-step operations",
+      "failSuggestion": "State transaction boundaries: which operations are atomic, rollback behavior on partial failure"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-story-12",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "developer-observability",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve security-sensitive or business-critical operations?",
+      "question": "Are logging/audit events mentioned for security-sensitive or business-critical operations?",
+      "failDescription": "Logging/audit events are not mentioned for critical operations",
+      "failSuggestion": "Mention logging requirements: which operations emit audit logs and what data they include"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-story-13",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "developer-observability",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Are error codes machine-readable constants (not free-text messages)?",
+      "failDescription": "Error codes are free-text messages instead of machine-readable constants",
+      "failSuggestion": "Use machine-readable error constants: e.g. 'INVALID_EMAIL' not 'The email address is invalid'"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "dev-story-14",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "developer",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "scope-sizing",
+      "universal": true,
+      "question": "Does the story avoid implicit requirements ('the usual error handling') — is everything explicit?",
+      "failDescription": "Story has implicit requirements — not everything a developer needs is explicit",
+      "failSuggestion": "Make all requirements explicit: no 'the usual error handling' — state exactly what error handling is needed"
+    }
+  ]
+}

package/cli/checks/story/devops.json

@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+{
+  "perspective": "devops",
+  "scope": "story",
+  "checks": [
+    {
+      "id": "devops-story-01",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "critical",
+      "category": "acceptance-criteria",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve deployment, CI/CD, infrastructure, or operational concerns?",
+      "question": "Is each acceptance criterion testable and measurable?",
+      "failDescription": "One or more acceptance criteria are not testable or measurable",
+      "failSuggestion": "Make each AC testable: specify exact expected outcome, metric, or verifiable condition"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-story-02",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "acceptance-criteria",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve deployment, CI/CD, infrastructure, or operational concerns?",
+      "question": "Do criteria cover happy path, edge cases, and error scenarios?",
+      "failDescription": "Criteria do not cover edge cases or error scenarios",
+      "failSuggestion": "Add edge case and error scenario ACs: failed deployment rollback, resource limits exceeded, network failures"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-story-03",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "acceptance-criteria",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve deployment, CI/CD, infrastructure, or operational concerns?",
+      "question": "Are DevOps requirements explicitly stated?",
+      "failDescription": "DevOps requirements are not explicitly stated in acceptance criteria",
+      "failSuggestion": "State DevOps requirements explicitly: deployment target, environment, monitoring hooks, rollback criteria"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-story-04",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "implementation-clarity",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve deployment, CI/CD, infrastructure, or operational concerns?",
+      "question": "Does the story provide enough DevOps detail for implementation?",
+      "failDescription": "Insufficient DevOps detail for implementation",
+      "failSuggestion": "Add DevOps implementation details: specific tools, configuration values, environment variables, pipeline steps"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-story-05",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "implementation-clarity",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve deployment, CI/CD, infrastructure, or operational concerns?",
+      "question": "Are DevOps patterns and approaches specified?",
+      "failDescription": "DevOps patterns and approaches are not specified",
+      "failSuggestion": "Specify DevOps patterns: deployment strategy, IaC approach, monitoring integration, log aggregation"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-story-06",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "major",
+      "category": "testability",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve deployment, CI/CD, infrastructure, or operational concerns?",
+      "question": "Does the story have a test-boundary AC naming specific scenarios a developer must test?",
+      "failDescription": "Story lacks a test-boundary AC — no specific test scenarios named",
+      "failSuggestion": "Add test-boundary AC: 'Tests must cover: (1) successful deployment, (2) rollback on failure, (3) health check pass, (4) resource limit behavior'"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-story-07",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "scope-dependencies",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve deployment, CI/CD, infrastructure, or operational concerns?",
+      "question": "Are dependencies on other stories explicit?",
+      "failDescription": "Dependencies on other stories are not explicit",
+      "failSuggestion": "Make dependencies explicit: reference specific story IDs and what they provide"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "devops-story-08",
+      "tier": 1,
+      "perspective": "devops",
+      "severity": "minor",
+      "category": "best-practices",
+      "universal": false,
+      "applicabilityQuestion": "Does this story involve deployment, CI/CD, infrastructure, or operational concerns?",
+      "question": "Does the story follow DevOps best practices?",
+      "failDescription": "DevOps best practices are not followed",
+      "failSuggestion": "Follow DevOps best practices: infrastructure as code, automated testing, immutable deployments"
+    }
+  ]
+}