@amrhas82/agentic-kit 1.5.0 → 1.7.5

package/packages/droid/resources/task-briefs.md

@@ -1,4428 +0,0 @@
-# Task Briefs Library
-Consolidated on: 2025-11-01T17:48:43.566871
-This file consolidates all task brief definitions used across the system.
-## Table of Contents
-- [Advanced Elicitation](#advanced-elicitation)
-- [Apply Qa Fixes](#apply-qa-fixes)
-- [Brownfield Create Epic](#brownfield-create-epic)
-- [Brownfield Create Story](#brownfield-create-story)
-- [Correct Course](#correct-course)
-- [Create Brownfield Story](#create-brownfield-story)
-- [Create Deep Research Prompt](#create-deep-research-prompt)
-- [Create Doc](#create-doc)
-- [Create Next Story](#create-next-story)
-- [Document Project](#document-project)
-- [Execute Checklist](#execute-checklist)
-- [Facilitate Brainstorming Session](#facilitate-brainstorming-session)
-- [Generate Ai Frontend Prompt](#generate-ai-frontend-prompt)
-- [Index Docs](#index-docs)
-- [Kb Mode Interaction](#kb-mode-interaction)
-- [Nfr Assess](#nfr-assess)
-- [Qa Gate](#qa-gate)
-- [Review Story](#review-story)
-- [Risk Profile](#risk-profile)
-- [Shard Doc](#shard-doc)
-- [Test Design](#test-design)
-- [Trace Requirements](#trace-requirements)
-- [Validate Next Story](#validate-next-story)
-
----
-
-## Advanced Elicitation {#advanced-elicitation}
-
-
-# Advanced Elicitation Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-- Provide optional reflective and brainstorming actions to enhance content quality
-- Enable deeper exploration of ideas through structured elicitation techniques
-- Support iterative refinement through multiple analytical perspectives
-- Usable during template-driven document creation or any chat conversation
-
-## Usage Scenarios
-
-### Scenario 1: Template Document Creation
-
-After outputting a section during document creation:
-
-1. **Section Review**: Ask user to review the drafted section
-2. **Offer Elicitation**: Present 9 carefully selected elicitation methods
-3. **Simple Selection**: User types a number (0-8) to engage method, or 9 to proceed
-4. **Execute & Loop**: Apply selected method, then re-offer choices until user proceeds
-
-### Scenario 2: General Chat Elicitation
-
-User can request advanced elicitation on any agent output:
-
-- User says "do advanced elicitation" or similar
-- Agent selects 9 relevant methods for the context
-- Same simple 0-9 selection process
-
-## Task Instructions
-
-### 1. Intelligent Method Selection
-
-**Context Analysis**: Before presenting options, analyze:
-
-- **Content Type**: Technical specs, user stories, architecture, requirements, etc.
-- **Complexity Level**: Simple, moderate, or complex content
-- **Stakeholder Needs**: Who will use this information
-- **Risk Level**: High-impact decisions vs routine items
-- **Creative Potential**: Opportunities for innovation or alternatives
-
-**Method Selection Strategy**:
-
-1. **Always Include Core Methods** (choose 3-4):
-   - Expand or Contract for Audience
-   - Critique and Refine
-   - Identify Potential Risks
-   - Assess Alignment with Goals
-
-2. **Context-Specific Methods** (choose 4-5):
-   - **Technical Content**: Tree of Thoughts, ReWOO, Meta-Prompting
-   - **User-Facing Content**: Agile Team Perspective, Stakeholder Roundtable
-   - **Creative Content**: Innovation Tournament, Escape Room Challenge
-   - **Strategic Content**: Red Team vs Blue Team, Hindsight Reflection
-
-3. **Always Include**: "Proceed / No Further Actions" as option 9
-
-### 2. Section Context and Review
-
-When invoked after outputting a section:
-
-1. **Provide Context Summary**: Give a brief 1-2 sentence summary of what the user should look for in the section just presented
-
-2. **Explain Visual Elements**: If the section contains diagrams, explain them briefly before offering elicitation options
-
-3. **Clarify Scope Options**: If the section contains multiple distinct items, inform the user they can apply elicitation actions to:
-   - The entire section as a whole
-   - Individual items within the section (specify which item when selecting an action)
-
-### 3. Present Elicitation Options
-
-**Review Request Process:**
-
-- Ask the user to review the drafted section
-- In the SAME message, inform them they can suggest direct changes OR select an elicitation method
-- Present 9 intelligently selected methods (0-8) plus "Proceed" (9)
-- Keep descriptions short - just the method name
-- Await simple numeric selection
-
-**Action List Presentation Format:**
-
-```text
-**Advanced Elicitation Options**
-Choose a number (0-8) or 9 to proceed:
-
-0. [Method Name]
-1. [Method Name]
-2. [Method Name]
-3. [Method Name]
-4. [Method Name]
-5. [Method Name]
-6. [Method Name]
-7. [Method Name]
-8. [Method Name]
-9. Proceed / No Further Actions
-```
-
-**Response Handling:**
-
-- **Numbers 0-8**: Execute the selected method, then re-offer the choice
-- **Number 9**: Proceed to next section or continue conversation
-- **Direct Feedback**: Apply user's suggested changes and continue
-
-### 4. Method Execution Framework
-
-**Execution Process:**
-
-1. **Retrieve Method**: Access the specific elicitation method from the elicitation-methods data file
-2. **Apply Context**: Execute the method from your current role's perspective
-3. **Provide Results**: Deliver insights, critiques, or alternatives relevant to the content
-4. **Re-offer Choice**: Present the same 9 options again until user selects 9 or gives direct feedback
-
-**Execution Guidelines:**
-
-- **Be Concise**: Focus on actionable insights, not lengthy explanations
-- **Stay Relevant**: Tie all elicitation back to the specific content being analyzed
-- **Identify Personas**: For multi-persona methods, clearly identify which viewpoint is speaking
-- **Maintain Flow**: Keep the process moving efficiently
-
-
----
-
-## Apply Qa Fixes {#apply-qa-fixes}
-
-
-# apply-qa-test-architect-fixes
-
-Implement fixes based on qa-test-architect results (gate and assessments) for a specific story. This task is for the full-stack-dev agent to systematically consume qa-test-architect outputs and apply code/test changes while only updating allowed sections in the story file.
-
-## Purpose
-
-- Read qa-test-architect outputs for a story (gate YAML + assessment markdowns)
-- Create a prioritized, deterministic fix plan
-- Apply code and test changes to close gaps and address issues
-- Update only the allowed story sections for the full-stack-dev agent
-
-## Inputs
-
-```yaml
-required:
-  - story_id: '{epic}.{story}' # e.g., "2.2"
-  - qa_root: from `.core-config.yaml` key `qa.qaLocation` (e.g., `docs/project/qa`)
-  - story_root: from `.core-config.yaml` key `devStoryLocation` (e.g., `docs/project/stories`)
-
-optional:
-  - story_title: '{title}' # derive from story H1 if missing
-  - story_slug: '{slug}' # derive from title (lowercase, hyphenated) if missing
-```
-
-## QA Sources to Read
-
-- Gate (YAML): `{qa_root}/gates/{epic}.{story}-*.yml`
-  - If multiple, use the most recent by modified time
-- Assessments (Markdown):
-  - Test Design: `{qa_root}/assessments/{epic}.{story}-test-design-*.md`
-  - Traceability: `{qa_root}/assessments/{epic}.{story}-trace-*.md`
-  - Risk Profile: `{qa_root}/assessments/{epic}.{story}-risk-*.md`
-  - NFR Assessment: `{qa_root}/assessments/{epic}.{story}-nfr-*.md`
-
-## Prerequisites
-
-- Repository builds and tests run locally (Deno 2)
-- Lint and test commands available:
-  - `deno lint`
-  - `deno test -A`
-
-## Process (Do not skip steps)
-
-### 0) Load Core Config & Locate Story
-
-- Read `.core-config.yaml` and resolve `qa_root` and `story_root`
-- Locate story file in `{story_root}/{epic}.{story}.*.md`
-  - HALT if missing and ask for correct story id/path
-
-### 1) Collect qa-test-architect Findings
-
-- Parse the latest gate YAML:
-  - `gate` (PASS|CONCERNS|FAIL|WAIVED)
-  - `top_issues[]` with `id`, `severity`, `finding`, `suggested_action`
-  - `nfr_validation.*.status` and notes
-  - `trace` coverage summary/gaps
-  - `test_design.coverage_gaps[]`
-  - `risk_summary.recommendations.must_fix[]` (if present)
-- Read any present assessment markdowns and extract explicit gaps/recommendations
-
-### 2) Build Deterministic Fix Plan (Priority Order)
-
-Apply in order, highest priority first:
-
-1. High severity items in `top_issues` (security/perf/reliability/maintainability)
-2. NFR statuses: all FAIL must be fixed → then CONCERNS
-3. Test Design `coverage_gaps` (prioritize P0 scenarios if specified)
-4. Trace uncovered requirements (AC-level)
-5. Risk `must_fix` recommendations
-6. Medium severity issues, then low
-
-Guidance:
-
-- Prefer tests closing coverage gaps before/with code changes
-- Keep changes minimal and targeted; follow project architecture and TS/Deno rules
-
-### 3) Apply Changes
-
-- Implement code fixes per plan
-- Add missing tests to close coverage gaps (unit first; integration where required by AC)
-- Keep imports centralized via `deps.ts` (see `docs/project/typescript-rules.md`)
-- Follow DI boundaries in `src/core/di.ts` and existing patterns
-
-### 4) Validate
-
-- Run `deno lint` and fix issues
-- Run `deno test -A` until all tests pass
-- Iterate until clean
-
-### 5) Update Story (Allowed Sections ONLY)
-
-CRITICAL: full-stack-dev agent is ONLY authorized to update these sections of the story file. Do not modify any other sections (e.g., qa-test-architect Results, Story, Acceptance Criteria, full-stack-dev Notes, Testing):
-
-- Tasks / Subtasks Checkboxes (mark any fix subtask you added as done)
-- full-stack-dev Agent Record →
-  - Agent Model Used (if changed)
-  - Debug Log References (commands/results, e.g., lint/tests)
-  - Completion Notes List (what changed, why, how)
-  - File List (all added/modified/deleted files)
-- Change Log (new dated entry describing applied fixes)
-- Status (see Rule below)
-
-Status Rule:
-
-- If gate was PASS and all identified gaps are closed → set `Status: Ready for Done`
-- Otherwise → set `Status: Ready for Review` and notify qa-test-architect to re-run the review
-
-### 6) Do NOT Edit Gate Files
-
-- full-stack-dev does not modify gate YAML. If fixes address issues, request qa-test-architect to re-run `review-story` to update the gate
-
-## Blocking Conditions
-
-- Missing `.core-config.yaml`
-- Story file not found for `story_id`
-- No qa-test-architect artifacts found (neither gate nor assessments)
-  - HALT and request QA to generate at least a gate file (or proceed only with clear developer-provided fix list)
-
-## Completion Checklist
-
-- deno lint: 0 problems
-- deno test -A: all tests pass
-- All high severity `top_issues` addressed
-- NFR FAIL → resolved; CONCERNS minimized or documented
-- Coverage gaps closed or explicitly documented with rationale
-- Story updated (allowed sections only) including File List and Change Log
-- Status set according to Status Rule
-
-## Example: Story 2.2
-
-Given gate `docs/project/qa/gates/2.2-*.yml` shows
-
-- `coverage_gaps`: Back action behavior untested (AC2)
-- `coverage_gaps`: Centralized dependencies enforcement untested (AC4)
-
-Fix plan:
-
-- Add a test ensuring the Toolkit Menu "Back" action returns to Main Menu
-- Add a static test verifying imports for service/view go through `deps.ts`
-- Re-run lint/tests and update full-stack-dev Agent Record + File List accordingly
-
-## Key Principles
-
-- Deterministic, risk-first prioritization
-- Minimal, maintainable changes
-- Tests validate behavior and close gaps
-- Strict adherence to allowed story update areas
-- Gate ownership remains with QA; full-stack-dev signals readiness via Status
-
-
----
-
-## Brownfield Create Epic {#brownfield-create-epic}
-
-
-# Create Brownfield Epic Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-Create a single epic for smaller brownfield enhancements that don't require the full PRD and Architecture documentation process. This task is for isolated features or modifications that can be completed within a focused scope.
-
-## When to Use This Task
-
-**Use this task when:**
-
-- The enhancement can be completed in 1-3 stories
-- No significant architectural changes are required
-- The enhancement follows existing project patterns
-- Integration complexity is minimal
-- Risk to existing system is low
-
-**Use the full brownfield PRD/Architecture process when:**
-
-- The enhancement requires multiple coordinated stories
-- Architectural planning is needed
-- Significant integration work is required
-- Risk assessment and mitigation planning is necessary
-
-## Instructions
-
-### 1. Project Analysis (Required)
-
-Before creating the epic, gather essential information about the existing project:
-
-**Existing Project Context:**
-
-- [ ] Project purpose and current functionality understood
-- [ ] Existing technology stack identified
-- [ ] Current architecture patterns noted
-- [ ] Integration points with existing system identified
-
-**Enhancement Scope:**
-
-- [ ] Enhancement clearly defined and scoped
-- [ ] Impact on existing functionality assessed
-- [ ] Required integration points identified
-- [ ] Success criteria established
-
-### 2. Epic Creation
-
-Create a focused epic following this structure:
-
-#### Epic Title
-
-{{Enhancement Name}} - Brownfield Enhancement
-
-#### Epic Goal
-
-{{1-2 sentences describing what the epic will accomplish and why it adds value}}
-
-#### Epic Description
-
-**Existing System Context:**
-
-- Current relevant functionality: {{brief description}}
-- Technology stack: {{relevant existing technologies}}
-- Integration points: {{where new work connects to existing system}}
-
-**Enhancement Details:**
-
-- What's being added/changed: {{clear description}}
-- How it integrates: {{integration approach}}
-- Success criteria: {{measurable outcomes}}
-
-#### Stories
-
-List 1-3 focused stories that complete the epic:
-
-1. **Story 1:** {{Story title and brief description}}
-2. **Story 2:** {{Story title and brief description}}
-3. **Story 3:** {{Story title and brief description}}
-
-#### Compatibility Requirements
-
-- [ ] Existing APIs remain unchanged
-- [ ] Database schema changes are backward compatible
-- [ ] UI changes follow existing patterns
-- [ ] Performance impact is minimal
-
-#### Risk Mitigation
-
-- **Primary Risk:** {{main risk to existing system}}
-- **Mitigation:** {{how risk will be addressed}}
-- **Rollback Plan:** {{how to undo changes if needed}}
-
-#### Definition of Done
-
-- [ ] All stories completed with acceptance criteria met
-- [ ] Existing functionality verified through testing
-- [ ] Integration points working correctly
-- [ ] Documentation updated appropriately
-- [ ] No regression in existing features
-
-### 3. Validation Checklist
-
-Before finalizing the epic, ensure:
-
-**Scope Validation:**
-
-- [ ] Epic can be completed in 1-3 stories maximum
-- [ ] No architectural documentation is required
-- [ ] Enhancement follows existing patterns
-- [ ] Integration complexity is manageable
-
-**Risk Assessment:**
-
-- [ ] Risk to existing system is low
-- [ ] Rollback plan is feasible
-- [ ] Testing approach covers existing functionality
-- [ ] Team has sufficient knowledge of integration points
-
-**Completeness Check:**
-
-- [ ] Epic goal is clear and achievable
-- [ ] Stories are properly scoped
-- [ ] Success criteria are measurable
-- [ ] Dependencies are identified
-
-### 4. Handoff to Story Manager
-
-Once the epic is validated, provide this handoff to the Story Manager:
-
----
-
-**Story Manager Handoff:**
-
-"Please develop detailed user stories for this brownfield epic. Key considerations:
-
-- This is an enhancement to an existing system running {{technology stack}}
-- Integration points: {{list key integration points}}
-- Existing patterns to follow: {{relevant existing patterns}}
-- Critical compatibility requirements: {{key requirements}}
-- Each story must include verification that existing functionality remains intact
-
-The epic should maintain system integrity while delivering {{epic goal}}."
-
----
-
-## Success Criteria
-
-The epic creation is successful when:
-
-1. Enhancement scope is clearly defined and appropriately sized
-2. Integration approach respects existing system architecture
-3. Risk to existing functionality is minimized
-4. Stories are logically sequenced for safe implementation
-5. Compatibility requirements are clearly specified
-6. Rollback plan is feasible and documented
-
-## Important Notes
-
-- This task is specifically for SMALL brownfield enhancements
-- If the scope grows beyond 3 stories, consider the full brownfield PRD process
-- Always prioritize existing system integrity over new functionality
-- When in doubt about scope or complexity, escalate to full brownfield planning
-
-
----
-
-## Brownfield Create Story {#brownfield-create-story}
-
-
-# Create Brownfield Story Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-Create a single user story for very small brownfield enhancements that can be completed in one focused development session. This task is for minimal additions or bug fixes that require existing system integration awareness.
-
-## When to Use This Task
-
-**Use this task when:**
-
-- The enhancement can be completed in a single story
-- No new architecture or significant design is required
-- The change follows existing patterns exactly
-- Integration is straightforward with minimal risk
-- Change is isolated with clear boundaries
-
-**Use brownfield-create-epic when:**
-
-- The enhancement requires 2-3 coordinated stories
-- Some design work is needed
-- Multiple integration points are involved
-
-**Use the full brownfield PRD/Architecture process when:**
-
-- The enhancement requires multiple coordinated stories
-- Architectural planning is needed
-- Significant integration work is required
-
-## Instructions
-
-### 1. Quick Project Assessment
-
-Gather minimal but essential context about the existing project:
-
-**Current System Context:**
-
-- [ ] Relevant existing functionality identified
-- [ ] Technology stack for this area noted
-- [ ] Integration point(s) clearly understood
-- [ ] Existing patterns for similar work identified
-
-**Change Scope:**
-
-- [ ] Specific change clearly defined
-- [ ] Impact boundaries identified
-- [ ] Success criteria established
-
-### 2. Story Creation
-
-Create a single focused story following this structure:
-
-#### Story Title
-
-{{Specific Enhancement}} - Brownfield Addition
-
-#### User Story
-
-As a {{user type}},
-I want {{specific action/capability}},
-So that {{clear benefit/value}}.
-
-#### Story Context
-
-**Existing System Integration:**
-
-- Integrates with: {{existing component/system}}
-- Technology: {{relevant tech stack}}
-- Follows pattern: {{existing pattern to follow}}
-- Touch points: {{specific integration points}}
-
-#### Acceptance Criteria
-
-**Functional Requirements:**
-
-1. {{Primary functional requirement}}
-2. {{Secondary functional requirement (if any)}}
-3. {{Integration requirement}}
-
-**Integration Requirements:** 4. Existing {{relevant functionality}} continues to work unchanged 5. New functionality follows existing {{pattern}} pattern 6. Integration with {{system/component}} maintains current behavior
-
-**Quality Requirements:** 7. Change is covered by appropriate tests 8. Documentation is updated if needed 9. No regression in existing functionality verified
-
-#### Technical Notes
-
-- **Integration Approach:** {{how it connects to existing system}}
-- **Existing Pattern Reference:** {{link or description of pattern to follow}}
-- **Key Constraints:** {{any important limitations or requirements}}
-
-#### Definition of Done
-
-- [ ] Functional requirements met
-- [ ] Integration requirements verified
-- [ ] Existing functionality regression tested
-- [ ] Code follows existing patterns and standards
-- [ ] Tests pass (existing and new)
-- [ ] Documentation updated if applicable
-
-### 3. Risk and Compatibility Check
-
-**Minimal Risk Assessment:**
-
-- **Primary Risk:** {{main risk to existing system}}
-- **Mitigation:** {{simple mitigation approach}}
-- **Rollback:** {{how to undo if needed}}
-
-**Compatibility Verification:**
-
-- [ ] No breaking changes to existing APIs
-- [ ] Database changes (if any) are additive only
-- [ ] UI changes follow existing design patterns
-- [ ] Performance impact is negligible
-
-### 4. Validation Checklist
-
-Before finalizing the story, confirm:
-
-**Scope Validation:**
-
-- [ ] Story can be completed in one development session
-- [ ] Integration approach is straightforward
-- [ ] Follows existing patterns exactly
-- [ ] No design or architecture work required
-
-**Clarity Check:**
-
-- [ ] Story requirements are unambiguous
-- [ ] Integration points are clearly specified
-- [ ] Success criteria are testable
-- [ ] Rollback approach is simple
-
-## Success Criteria
-
-The story creation is successful when:
-
-1. Enhancement is clearly defined and appropriately scoped for single session
-2. Integration approach is straightforward and low-risk
-3. Existing system patterns are identified and will be followed
-4. Rollback plan is simple and feasible
-5. Acceptance criteria include existing functionality verification
-
-## Important Notes
-
-- This task is for VERY SMALL brownfield changes only
-- If complexity grows during analysis, escalate to brownfield-create-epic
-- Always prioritize existing system integrity
-- When in doubt about integration complexity, use brownfield-create-epic instead
-- Stories should take no more than 4 hours of focused development work
-
-
----
-
-## Correct Course {#correct-course}
-
-
-# Correct Course Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-- Guide a structured response to a change trigger using the `{root}/checklists/change-checklist`.
-- Analyze the impacts of the change on epics, project artifacts, and the MVP, guided by the checklist's structure.
-- Explore potential solutions (e.g., adjust scope, rollback elements, re-scope features) as prompted by the checklist.
-- Draft specific, actionable proposed updates to any affected project artifacts (e.g., epics, user stories, PRD sections, architecture document sections) based on the analysis.
-- Produce a consolidated "Sprint Change Proposal" document that contains the impact analysis and the clearly drafted proposed edits for user review and approval.
-- Ensure a clear handoff path if the nature of the changes necessitates fundamental replanning by other core agents (like PM or Architect).
-
-## Instructions
-
-### 1. Initial Setup & Mode Selection
-
-- **Acknowledge Task & Inputs:**
-  - Confirm with the user that the "Correct Course Task" (Change Navigation & Integration) is being initiated.
-  - Verify the change trigger and ensure you have the user's initial explanation of the issue and its perceived impact.
-  - Confirm access to all relevant project artifacts (e.g., PRD, Epics/Stories, Architecture Documents, UI/UX Specifications) and, critically, the `{root}/checklists/change-checklist`.
-- **Establish Interaction Mode:**
-  - Ask the user their preferred interaction mode for this task:
-    - **"Incrementally (Default & Recommended):** Shall we work through the change-checklist section by section, discussing findings and collaboratively drafting proposed changes for each relevant part before moving to the next? This allows for detailed, step-by-step refinement."
-    - **"YOLO Mode (Batch Processing):** Or, would you prefer I conduct a more batched analysis based on the checklist and then present a consolidated set of findings and proposed changes for a broader review? This can be quicker for initial assessment but might require more extensive review of the combined proposals."
-  - Once the user chooses, confirm the selected mode and then inform the user: "We will now use the change-checklist to analyze the change and draft proposed updates. I will guide you through the checklist items based on our chosen interaction mode."
-
-### 2. Execute Checklist Analysis (Iteratively or Batched, per Interaction Mode)
-
-- Systematically work through Sections 1-4 of the change-checklist (typically covering Change Context, Epic/Story Impact Analysis, Artifact Conflict Resolution, and Path Evaluation/Recommendation).
-- For each checklist item or logical group of items (depending on interaction mode):
-  - Present the relevant prompt(s) or considerations from the checklist to the user.
-  - Request necessary information and actively analyze the relevant project artifacts (PRD, epics, architecture documents, story history, etc.) to assess the impact.
-  - Discuss your findings for each item with the user.
-  - Record the status of each checklist item (e.g., `[x] Addressed`, `[N/A]`, `[!] Further Action Needed`) and any pertinent notes or decisions.
-  - Collaboratively agree on the "Recommended Path Forward" as prompted by Section 4 of the checklist.
-
-### 3. Draft Proposed Changes (Iteratively or Batched)
-
-- Based on the completed checklist analysis (Sections 1-4) and the agreed "Recommended Path Forward" (excluding scenarios requiring fundamental replans that would necessitate immediate handoff to product-manager/holistic-architect):
-  - Identify the specific project artifacts that require updates (e.g., specific epics, user stories, PRD sections, architecture document components, diagrams).
-  - **Draft the proposed changes directly and explicitly for each identified artifact.** Examples include:
-    - Revising user story text, acceptance criteria, or priority.
-    - Adding, removing, reordering, or splitting user stories within epics.
-    - Proposing modified architecture diagram snippets (e.g., providing an updated Mermaid diagram block or a clear textual description of the change to an existing diagram).
-    - Updating technology lists, configuration details, or specific sections within the PRD or architecture documents.
-    - Drafting new, small supporting artifacts if necessary (e.g., a brief addendum for a specific decision).
-  - If in "Incremental Mode," discuss and refine these proposed edits for each artifact or small group of related artifacts with the user as they are drafted.
-  - If in "YOLO Mode," compile all drafted edits for presentation in the next step.
-
-### 4. Generate "Sprint Change Proposal" with Edits
-
-- Synthesize the complete change-checklist analysis (covering findings from Sections 1-4) and all the agreed-upon proposed edits (from Instruction 3) into a single document titled "Sprint Change Proposal." This proposal should align with the structure suggested by Section 5 of the change-checklist.
-- The proposal must clearly present:
-  - **Analysis Summary:** A concise overview of the original issue, its analyzed impact (on epics, artifacts, MVP scope), and the rationale for the chosen path forward.
-  - **Specific Proposed Edits:** For each affected artifact, clearly show or describe the exact changes (e.g., "Change Story X.Y from: [old text] To: [new text]", "Add new Acceptance Criterion to Story A.B: [new AC]", "Update Section 3.2 of Architecture Document as follows: [new/modified text or diagram description]").
-- Present the complete draft of the "Sprint Change Proposal" to the user for final review and feedback. Incorporate any final adjustments requested by the user.
-
-### 5. Finalize & Determine Next Steps
-
-- Obtain explicit user approval for the "Sprint Change Proposal," including all the specific edits documented within it.
-- Provide the finalized "Sprint Change Proposal" document to the user.
-- **Based on the nature of the approved changes:**
-  - **If the approved edits sufficiently address the change and can be implemented directly or organized by a product-owner/scrum-master:** State that the "Correct Course Task" is complete regarding analysis and change proposal, and the user can now proceed with implementing or logging these changes (e.g., updating actual project documents, backlog items). Suggest handoff to a product-owner/scrum-master agent for backlog organization if appropriate.
-  - **If the analysis and proposed path (as per checklist Section 4 and potentially Section 6) indicate that the change requires a more fundamental replan (e.g., significant scope change, major architectural rework):** Clearly state this conclusion. Advise the user that the next step involves engaging the primary product-manager or Architect agents, using the "Sprint Change Proposal" as critical input and context for that deeper replanning effort.
-
-## Output Deliverables
-
-- **Primary:** A "Sprint Change Proposal" document (in markdown format). This document will contain:
-  - A summary of the change-checklist analysis (issue, impact, rationale for the chosen path).
-  - Specific, clearly drafted proposed edits for all affected project artifacts.
-- **Implicit:** An annotated change-checklist (or the record of its completion) reflecting the discussions, findings, and decisions made during the process.
-
-
----
-
-## Create Brownfield Story {#create-brownfield-story}
-
-
-# Create Brownfield Story Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-Create detailed, implementation-ready stories for brownfield projects where traditional sharded PRD/architecture documents may not exist. This task bridges the gap between various documentation formats (document-project output, brownfield PRDs, epics, or user documentation) and executable stories for the full-stack-dev agent.
-
-## When to Use This Task
-
-**Use this task when:**
-
-- Working on brownfield projects with non-standard documentation
-- Stories need to be created from document-project output
-- Working from brownfield epics without full PRD/architecture
-- Existing project documentation doesn't follow Agentic Kit v4+ structure
-- Need to gather additional context from user during story creation
-
-**Use create-next-story when:**
-
-- Working with properly sharded PRD and v4 architecture documents
-- Following standard greenfield or well-documented brownfield workflow
-- All technical context is available in structured format
-
-## Task Execution Instructions
-
-### 0. Documentation Context
-
-Check for available documentation in this order:
-
-1. **Sharded PRD/Architecture** (docs/prd/, docs/architecture/)
-   - If found, recommend using create-next-story task instead
-
-2. **Brownfield Architecture Document** (docs/brownfield-architecture.md or similar)
-   - Created by document-project task
-   - Contains actual system state, technical debt, workarounds
-
-3. **Brownfield PRD** (docs/prd.md)
-   - May contain embedded technical details
-
-4. **Epic Files** (docs/epics/ or similar)
-   - Created by brownfield-create-epic task
-
-5. **User-Provided Documentation**
-   - Ask user to specify location and format
-
-### 1. Story Identification and Context Gathering
-
-#### 1.1 Identify Story Source
-
-Based on available documentation:
-
-- **From Brownfield PRD**: Extract stories from epic sections
-- **From Epic Files**: Read epic definition and story list
-- **From User Direction**: Ask user which specific enhancement to implement
-- **No Clear Source**: Work with user to define the story scope
-
-#### 1.2 Gather Essential Context
-
-CRITICAL: For brownfield stories, you MUST gather enough context for safe implementation. Be prepared to ask the user for missing information.
-
-**Required Information Checklist:**
-
-- [ ] What existing functionality might be affected?
-- [ ] What are the integration points with current code?
-- [ ] What patterns should be followed (with examples)?
-- [ ] What technical constraints exist?
-- [ ] Are there any "gotchas" or workarounds to know about?
-
-If any required information is missing, list the missing information and ask the user to provide it.
-
-### 2. Extract Technical Context from Available Sources
-
-#### 2.1 From Document-Project Output
-
-If using brownfield-architecture.md from document-project:
-
-- **Technical Debt Section**: Note any workarounds affecting this story
-- **Key Files Section**: Identify files that will need modification
-- **Integration Points**: Find existing integration patterns
-- **Known Issues**: Check if story touches problematic areas
-- **Actual Tech Stack**: Verify versions and constraints
-
-#### 2.2 From Brownfield PRD
-
-If using brownfield PRD:
-
-- **Technical Constraints Section**: Extract all relevant constraints
-- **Integration Requirements**: Note compatibility requirements
-- **Code Organization**: Follow specified patterns
-- **Risk Assessment**: Understand potential impacts
-
-#### 2.3 From User Documentation
-
-Ask the user to help identify:
-
-- Relevant technical specifications
-- Existing code examples to follow
-- Integration requirements
-- Testing approaches used in the project
-
-### 3. Story Creation with Progressive Detail Gathering
-
-#### 3.1 Create Initial Story Structure
-
-Start with the story template, filling in what's known:
-
-```markdown
-# Story {{Enhancement Title}}
-
-## Status: Draft
-
-## Story
-
-As a {{user_type}},
-I want {{enhancement_capability}},
-so that {{value_delivered}}.
-
-## Context Source
-
-- Source Document: {{document name/type}}
-- Enhancement Type: {{single feature/bug fix/integration/etc}}
-- Existing System Impact: {{brief assessment}}
-```
-
-#### 3.2 Develop Acceptance Criteria
-
-Critical: For brownfield, ALWAYS include criteria about maintaining existing functionality
-
-Standard structure:
-
-1. New functionality works as specified
-2. Existing {{affected feature}} continues to work unchanged
-3. Integration with {{existing system}} maintains current behavior
-4. No regression in {{related area}}
-5. Performance remains within acceptable bounds
-
-#### 3.3 Gather Technical Guidance
-
-Critical: This is where you'll need to be interactive with the user if information is missing
-
-Create full-stack-dev Technical Guidance section with available information:
-
-````markdown
-## full-stack-dev Technical Guidance
-
-### Existing System Context
-
-[Extract from available documentation]
-
-### Integration Approach
-
-[Based on patterns found or ask user]
-
-### Technical Constraints
-
-[From documentation or user input]
-
-### Missing Information
-
-Critical: List anything you couldn't find that full-stack-dev will need and ask for the missing information
-
-### 4. Task Generation with Safety Checks
-
-#### 4.1 Generate Implementation Tasks
-
-Based on gathered context, create tasks that:
-
-- Include exploration tasks if system understanding is incomplete
-- Add verification tasks for existing functionality
-- Include rollback considerations
-- Reference specific files/patterns when known
-
-Example task structure for brownfield:
-
-```markdown
-## Tasks / Subtasks
-
-- [ ] Task 1: Analyze existing {{component/feature}} implementation
-  - [ ] Review {{specific files}} for current patterns
-  - [ ] Document integration points
-  - [ ] Identify potential impacts
-
-- [ ] Task 2: Implement {{new functionality}}
-  - [ ] Follow pattern from {{example file}}
-  - [ ] Integrate with {{existing component}}
-  - [ ] Maintain compatibility with {{constraint}}
-
-- [ ] Task 3: Verify existing functionality
-  - [ ] Test {{existing feature 1}} still works
-  - [ ] Verify {{integration point}} behavior unchanged
-  - [ ] Check performance impact
-
-- [ ] Task 4: Add tests
-  - [ ] Unit tests following {{project test pattern}}
-  - [ ] Integration test for {{integration point}}
-  - [ ] Update existing tests if needed
-```
-````
-
-### 5. Risk Assessment and Mitigation
-
-CRITICAL: for brownfield - always include risk assessment
-
-Add section for brownfield-specific risks:
-
-```markdown
-## Risk Assessment
-
-### Implementation Risks
-
-- **Primary Risk**: {{main risk to existing system}}
-- **Mitigation**: {{how to address}}
-- **Verification**: {{how to confirm safety}}
-
-### Rollback Plan
-
-- {{Simple steps to undo changes if needed}}
-
-### Safety Checks
-
-- [ ] Existing {{feature}} tested before changes
-- [ ] Changes can be feature-flagged or isolated
-- [ ] Rollback procedure documented
-```
-
-### 6. Final Story Validation
-
-Before finalizing:
-
-1. **Completeness Check**:
-   - [ ] Story has clear scope and acceptance criteria
-   - [ ] Technical context is sufficient for implementation
-   - [ ] Integration approach is defined
-   - [ ] Risks are identified with mitigation
-
-2. **Safety Check**:
-   - [ ] Existing functionality protection included
-   - [ ] Rollback plan is feasible
-   - [ ] Testing covers both new and existing features
-
-3. **Information Gaps**:
-   - [ ] All critical missing information gathered from user
-   - [ ] Remaining unknowns documented for full-stack-dev agent
-   - [ ] Exploration tasks added where needed
-
-### 7. Story Output Format
-
-Save the story with appropriate naming:
-
-- If from epic: `docs/stories/epic-{n}-story-{m}.md`
-- If standalone: `docs/stories/brownfield-{feature-name}.md`
-- If sequential: Follow existing story numbering
-
-Include header noting documentation context:
-
-```markdown
-# Story: {{Title}}
-
-<!-- Source: {{documentation type used}} -->
-<!-- Context: Brownfield enhancement to {{existing system}} -->
-
-## Status: Draft
-
-[Rest of story content...]
-```
-
-### 8. Handoff Communication
-
-Provide clear handoff to the user:
-
-```text
-Brownfield story created: {{story title}}
-
-Source Documentation: {{what was used}}
-Story Location: {{file path}}
-
-Key Integration Points Identified:
-- {{integration point 1}}
-- {{integration point 2}}
-
-Risks Noted:
-- {{primary risk}}
-
-{{If missing info}}:
-Note: Some technical details were unclear. The story includes exploration tasks to gather needed information during implementation.
-
-Next Steps:
-1. Review story for accuracy
-2. Verify integration approach aligns with your system
-3. Approve story or request adjustments
-4. full-stack-dev agent can then implement with safety checks
-```
-
-## Success Criteria
-
-The brownfield story creation is successful when:
-
-1. Story can be implemented without requiring full-stack-dev to search multiple documents
-2. Integration approach is clear and safe for existing system
-3. All available technical context has been extracted and organized
-4. Missing information has been identified and addressed
-5. Risks are documented with mitigation strategies
-6. Story includes verification of existing functionality
-7. Rollback approach is defined
-
-## Important Notes
-
-- This task is specifically for brownfield projects with non-standard documentation
-- Always prioritize existing system stability over new features
-- When in doubt, add exploration and verification tasks
-- It's better to ask the user for clarification than make assumptions
-- Each story should be self-contained for the dev agent
-- Include references to existing code patterns when available
-
-
----
-
-## Create Deep Research Prompt {#create-deep-research-prompt}
-
-
-# Create Deep Research Prompt Task
-
-This task helps create comprehensive research prompts for various types of deep analysis. It can process inputs from brainstorming sessions, project briefs, market research, or specific research questions to generate targeted prompts for deeper investigation.
-
-## Purpose
-
-Generate well-structured research prompts that:
-
-- Define clear research objectives and scope
-- Specify appropriate research methodologies
-- Outline expected deliverables and formats
-- Guide systematic investigation of complex topics
-- Ensure actionable insights are captured
-
-## Research Type Selection
-
-CRITICAL: First, help the user select the most appropriate research focus based on their needs and any input documents they've provided.
-
-### 1. Research Focus Options
-
-Present these numbered options to the user:
-
-1. **Product Validation Research**
-   - Validate product hypotheses and market fit
-   - Test assumptions about user needs and solutions
-   - Assess technical and business feasibility
-   - Identify risks and mitigation strategies
-
-2. **Market Opportunity Research**
-   - Analyze market size and growth potential
-   - Identify market segments and dynamics
-   - Assess market entry strategies
-   - Evaluate timing and market readiness
-
-3. **User & Customer Research**
-   - Deep dive into user personas and behaviors
-   - Understand jobs-to-be-done and pain points
-   - Map customer journeys and touchpoints
-   - Analyze willingness to pay and value perception
-
-4. **Competitive Intelligence Research**
-   - Detailed competitor analysis and positioning
-   - Feature and capability comparisons
-   - Business model and strategy analysis
-   - Identify competitive advantages and gaps
-
-5. **Technology & Innovation Research**
-   - Assess technology trends and possibilities
-   - Evaluate technical approaches and architectures
-   - Identify emerging technologies and disruptions
-   - Analyze build vs. buy vs. partner options
-
-6. **Industry & Ecosystem Research**
-   - Map industry value chains and dynamics
-   - Identify key players and relationships
-   - Analyze regulatory and compliance factors
-   - Understand partnership opportunities
-
-7. **Strategic Options Research**
-   - Evaluate different strategic directions
-   - Assess business model alternatives
-   - Analyze go-to-market strategies
-   - Consider expansion and scaling paths
-
-8. **Risk & Feasibility Research**
-   - Identify and assess various risk factors
-   - Evaluate implementation challenges
-   - Analyze resource requirements
-   - Consider regulatory and legal implications
-
-9. **Custom Research Focus**
-   - User-defined research objectives
-   - Specialized domain investigation
-   - Cross-functional research needs
-
-### 2. Input Processing
-
-**If Project Brief provided:**
-
-- Extract key product concepts and goals
-- Identify target users and use cases
-- Note technical constraints and preferences
-- Highlight uncertainties and assumptions
-
-**If Brainstorming Results provided:**
-
-- Synthesize main ideas and themes
-- Identify areas needing validation
-- Extract hypotheses to test
-- Note creative directions to explore
-
-**If Market Research provided:**
-
-- Build on identified opportunities
-- Deepen specific market insights
-- Validate initial findings
-- Explore adjacent possibilities
-
-**If Starting Fresh:**
-
-- Gather essential context through questions
-- Define the problem space
-- Clarify research objectives
-- Establish success criteria
-
-## Process
-
-### 3. Research Prompt Structure
-
-CRITICAL: collaboratively develop a comprehensive research prompt with these components.
-
-#### A. Research Objectives
-
-CRITICAL: collaborate with the user to articulate clear, specific objectives for the research.
-
-- Primary research goal and purpose
-- Key decisions the research will inform
-- Success criteria for the research
-- Constraints and boundaries
-
-#### B. Research Questions
-
-CRITICAL: collaborate with the user to develop specific, actionable research questions organized by theme.
-
-**Core Questions:**
-
-- Central questions that must be answered
-- Priority ranking of questions
-- Dependencies between questions
-
-**Supporting Questions:**
-
-- Additional context-building questions
-- Nice-to-have insights
-- Future-looking considerations
-
-#### C. Research Methodology
-
-**Data Collection Methods:**
-
-- Secondary research sources
-- Primary research approaches (if applicable)
-- Data quality requirements
-- Source credibility criteria
-
-**Analysis Frameworks:**
-
-- Specific frameworks to apply
-- Comparison criteria
-- Evaluation methodologies
-- Synthesis approaches
-
-#### D. Output Requirements
-
-**Format Specifications:**
-
-- Executive summary requirements
-- Detailed findings structure
-- Visual/tabular presentations
-- Supporting documentation
-
-**Key Deliverables:**
-
-- Must-have sections and insights
-- Decision-support elements
-- Action-oriented recommendations
-- Risk and uncertainty documentation
-
-### 4. Prompt Generation
-
-**Research Prompt Template:**
-
-```markdown
-## Research Objective
-
-[Clear statement of what this research aims to achieve]
-
-## Background Context
-
-[Relevant information from project brief, brainstorming, or other inputs]
-
-## Research Questions
-
-### Primary Questions (Must Answer)
-
-1. [Specific, actionable question]
-2. [Specific, actionable question]
-   ...
-
-### Secondary Questions (Nice to Have)
-
-1. [Supporting question]
-2. [Supporting question]
-   ...
-
-## Research Methodology
-
-### Information Sources
-
-- [Specific source types and priorities]
-
-### Analysis Frameworks
-
-- [Specific frameworks to apply]
-
-### Data Requirements
-
-- [Quality, recency, credibility needs]
-
-## Expected Deliverables
-
-### Executive Summary
-
-- Key findings and insights
-- Critical implications
-- Recommended actions
-
-### Detailed Analysis
-
-[Specific sections needed based on research type]
-
-### Supporting Materials
-
-- Data tables
-- Comparison matrices
-- Source documentation
-
-## Success Criteria
-
-[How to evaluate if research achieved its objectives]
-
-## Timeline and Priority
-
-[If applicable, any time constraints or phasing]
-```
-
-### 5. Review and Refinement
-
-1. **Present Complete Prompt**
-   - Show the full research prompt
-   - Explain key elements and rationale
-   - Highlight any assumptions made
-
-2. **Gather Feedback**
-   - Are the objectives clear and correct?
-   - Do the questions address all concerns?
-   - Is the scope appropriate?
-   - Are output requirements sufficient?
-
-3. **Refine as Needed**
-   - Incorporate user feedback
-   - Adjust scope or focus
-   - Add missing elements
-   - Clarify ambiguities
-
-### 6. Next Steps Guidance
-
-**Execution Options:**
-
-1. **Use with AI Research Assistant**: Provide this prompt to an AI model with research capabilities
-2. **Guide Human Research**: Use as a framework for manual research efforts
-3. **Hybrid Approach**: Combine AI and human research using this structure
-
-**Integration Points:**
-
-- How findings will feed into next phases
-- Which team members should review results
-- How to validate findings
-- When to revisit or expand research
-
-## Important Notes
-
-- The quality of the research prompt directly impacts the quality of insights gathered
-- Be specific rather than general in research questions
-- Consider both current state and future implications
-- Balance comprehensiveness with focus
-- Document assumptions and limitations clearly
-- Plan for iterative refinement based on initial findings
-
-
----
-
-## Create Doc {#create-doc}
-
-
-# Create Document from Template (YAML Driven)
-
-## ⚠️ CRITICAL EXECUTION NOTICE ⚠️
-
-**THIS IS AN EXECUTABLE WORKFLOW - NOT REFERENCE MATERIAL**
-
-When this task is invoked:
-
-1. **DISABLE ALL EFFICIENCY OPTIMIZATIONS** - This workflow requires full user interaction
-2. **MANDATORY STEP-BY-STEP EXECUTION** - Each section must be processed sequentially with user feedback
-3. **ELICITATION IS REQUIRED** - When `elicit: true`, you MUST use the 1-9 format and wait for user response
-4. **NO SHORTCUTS ALLOWED** - Complete documents cannot be created without following this workflow
-
-**VIOLATION INDICATOR:** If you create a complete document without user interaction, you have violated this workflow.
-
-## Critical: Template Discovery
-
-If a YAML Template has not been provided, list all templates from .templates or ask the user to provide another.
-
-## CRITICAL: Mandatory Elicitation Format
-
-**When `elicit: true`, this is a HARD STOP requiring user interaction:**
-
-**YOU MUST:**
-
-1. Present section content
-2. Provide detailed rationale (explain trade-offs, assumptions, decisions made)
-3. **STOP and present numbered options 1-9:**
-   - **Option 1:** Always "Proceed to next section"
-   - **Options 2-9:** Select 8 methods from data/elicitation-methods
-   - End with: "Select 1-9 or just type your question/feedback:"
-4. **WAIT FOR USER RESPONSE** - Do not proceed until user selects option or provides feedback
-
-**WORKFLOW VIOLATION:** Creating content for elicit=true sections without user interaction violates this task.
-
-**NEVER ask yes/no questions or use any other format.**
-
-## Processing Flow
-
-1. **Parse YAML template** - Load template metadata and sections
-2. **Set preferences** - Show current mode (Interactive), confirm output file
-3. **Process each section:**
-   - Skip if condition unmet
-   - Check agent permissions (owner/editors) - note if section is restricted to specific agents
-   - Draft content using section instruction
-   - Present content + detailed rationale
-   - **IF elicit: true** → MANDATORY 1-9 options format
-   - Save to file if possible
-4. **Continue until complete**
-
-## Detailed Rationale Requirements
-
-When presenting section content, ALWAYS include rationale that explains:
-
-- Trade-offs and choices made (what was chosen over alternatives and why)
-- Key assumptions made during drafting
-- Interesting or questionable decisions that need user attention
-- Areas that might need validation
-
-## Elicitation Results Flow
-
-After user selects elicitation method (2-9):
-
-1. Execute method from data/elicitation-methods
-2. Present results with insights
-3. Offer options:
-   - **1. Apply changes and update section**
-   - **2. Return to elicitation menu**
-   - **3. Ask any questions or engage further with this elicitation**
-
-## Agent Permissions
-
-When processing sections with agent permission fields:
-
-- **owner**: Note which agent role initially creates/populates the section
-- **editors**: List agent roles allowed to modify the section
-- **readonly**: Mark sections that cannot be modified after creation
-
-**For sections with restricted access:**
-
-- Include a note in the generated document indicating the responsible agent
-- Example: "_(This section is owned by full-stack-dev-agent and can only be modified by full-stack-dev-agent)_"
-
-## YOLO Mode
-
-User can type `#yolo` to toggle to YOLO mode (process all sections at once).
-
-## CRITICAL REMINDERS
-
-**❌ NEVER:**
-
-- Ask yes/no questions for elicitation
-- Use any format other than 1-9 numbered options
-- Create new elicitation methods
-
-**✅ ALWAYS:**
-
-- Use exact 1-9 format when elicit: true
-- Select options 2-9 from data/elicitation-methods only
-- Provide detailed rationale explaining decisions
-- End with "Select 1-9 or just type your question/feedback:"
-
-
----
-
-## Create Next Story {#create-next-story}
-
-
-# Create Next Story Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-To identify the next logical story based on project progress and epic definitions, and then to prepare a comprehensive, self-contained, and actionable story file using the `Story Template`. This task ensures the story is enriched with all necessary technical context, requirements, and acceptance criteria, making it ready for efficient implementation by a Developer Agent with minimal need for additional research or finding its own context.
-
-## SEQUENTIAL Task Execution (Do not proceed until current Task is complete)
-
-### 0. Load Core Configuration and Check Workflow
-
-- Load `{root}/core-config.yaml` from the project root
-- If the file does not exist, HALT and inform the user: "core-config.yaml not found. This file is required for story creation. Please add and configure core-config.yaml before proceeding."
-- Extract key configurations: `devStoryLocation`, `prd.*`, `architecture.*`, `workflow.*`
-
-### 1. Identify Next Story for Preparation
-
-#### 1.1 Locate Epic Files and Review Existing Stories
-
-- Based on `prdSharded` from config, locate epic files (sharded location/pattern or monolithic PRD sections)
-- If `devStoryLocation` has story files, load the highest `{epicNum}.{storyNum}.story.md` file
-- **If highest story exists:**
-  - Verify status is 'Done'. If not, alert user: "ALERT: Found incomplete story! File: {lastEpicNum}.{lastStoryNum}.story.md Status: [current status] You should fix this story first, but would you like to accept risk & override to create the next story in draft?"
-  - If proceeding, select next sequential story in the current epic
-  - If epic is complete, prompt user: "Epic {epicNum} Complete: All stories in Epic {epicNum} have been completed. Would you like to: 1) Begin Epic {epicNum + 1} with story 1 2) Select a specific story to work on 3) Cancel story creation"
-  - **CRITICAL**: NEVER automatically skip to another epic. User MUST explicitly instruct which story to create.
-- **If no story files exist:** The next story is ALWAYS 1.1 (first story of first epic)
-- Announce the identified story to the user: "Identified next story for preparation: {epicNum}.{storyNum} - {Story Title}"
-
-### 2. Gather Story Requirements and Previous Story Context
-
-- Extract story requirements from the identified epic file
-- If previous story exists, review full-stack-dev Agent Record sections for:
-  - Completion Notes and Debug Log References
-  - Implementation deviations and technical decisions
-  - Challenges encountered and lessons learned
-- Extract relevant insights that inform the current story's preparation
-
-### 3. Gather Architecture Context
-
-#### 3.1 Determine Architecture Reading Strategy
-
-- **If `architectureVersion: >= v4` and `architectureSharded: true`**: Read `{architectureShardedLocation}/index.md` then follow structured reading order below
-- **Else**: Use monolithic `architectureFile` for similar sections
-
-#### 3.2 Read Architecture Documents Based on Story Type
-
-**For ALL Stories:** tech-stack.md, unified-project-structure.md, coding-standards.md, testing-strategy.md
-
-**For Backend/API Stories, additionally:** data-models.md, database-schema.md, backend-architecture.md, rest-api-spec.md, external-apis.md
-
-**For Frontend/UI Stories, additionally:** frontend-architecture.md, components.md, core-workflows.md, data-models.md
-
-**For Full-Stack Stories:** Read both Backend and Frontend sections above
-
-#### 3.3 Extract Story-Specific Technical Details
-
-Extract ONLY information directly relevant to implementing the current story. Do NOT invent new libraries, patterns, or standards not in the source documents.
-
-Extract:
-
-- Specific data models, schemas, or structures the story will use
-- API endpoints the story must implement or consume
-- Component specifications for UI elements in the story
-- File paths and naming conventions for new code
-- Testing requirements specific to the story's features
-- Security or performance considerations affecting the story
-
-ALWAYS cite source documents: `[Source: architecture/{filename}.md#{section}]`
-
-### 4. Verify Project Structure Alignment
-
-- Cross-reference story requirements with Project Structure Guide from `docs/architecture/unified-project-structure.md`
-- Ensure file paths, component locations, or module names align with defined structures
-- Document any structural conflicts in "Project Structure Notes" section within the story draft
-
-### 5. Populate Story Template with Full Context
-
-- Create new story file: `{devStoryLocation}/{epicNum}.{storyNum}.story.md` using Story Template
-- Fill in basic story information: Title, Status (Draft), Story statement, Acceptance Criteria from Epic
-- **`full-stack-dev Notes` section (CRITICAL):**
-  - CRITICAL: This section MUST contain ONLY information extracted from architecture documents. NEVER invent or assume technical details.
-  - Include ALL relevant technical details from Steps 2-3, organized by category:
-    - **Previous Story Insights**: Key learnings from previous story
-    - **Data Models**: Specific schemas, validation rules, relationships [with source references]
-    - **API Specifications**: Endpoint details, request/response formats, auth requirements [with source references]
-    - **Component Specifications**: UI component details, props, state management [with source references]
-    - **File Locations**: Exact paths where new code should be created based on project structure
-    - **Testing Requirements**: Specific test cases or strategies from testing-strategy.md
-    - **Technical Constraints**: Version requirements, performance considerations, security rules
-  - Every technical detail MUST include its source reference: `[Source: architecture/{filename}.md#{section}]`
-  - If information for a category is not found in the architecture docs, explicitly state: "No specific guidance found in architecture docs"
-- **`Tasks / Subtasks` section:**
-  - Generate detailed, sequential list of technical tasks based ONLY on: Epic Requirements, Story AC, Reviewed Architecture Information
-  - Each task must reference relevant architecture documentation
-  - Include unit testing as explicit subtasks based on the Testing Strategy
-  - Link tasks to ACs where applicable (e.g., `Task 1 (AC: 1, 3)`)
-- Add notes on project structure alignment or discrepancies found in Step 4
-
-### 6. Story Draft Completion and Review
-
-- Review all sections for completeness and accuracy
-- Verify all source references are included for technical details
-- Ensure tasks align with both epic requirements and architecture constraints
-- Update status to "Draft" and save the story file
-- Execute `{root}/tasks/execute-checklist` `{root}/checklists/story-draft-checklist`
-- Provide summary to user including:
-  - Story created: `{devStoryLocation}/{epicNum}.{storyNum}.story.md`
-  - Status: Draft
-  - Key technical components included from architecture docs
-  - Any deviations or conflicts noted between epic and architecture
-  - Checklist Results
-  - Next steps: For Complex stories, suggest the user carefully review the story draft and also optionally have the PO run the task `{root}/tasks/validate-next-story`
-
-
----
-
-## Document Project {#document-project}
-
-
-# Document an Existing Project
-
-## Purpose
-
-Generate comprehensive documentation for existing projects optimized for AI development agents. This task creates structured reference materials that enable AI agents to understand project context, conventions, and patterns for effective contribution to any codebase.
-
-## Task Instructions
-
-### 1. Initial Project Analysis
-
-**CRITICAL:** First, check if a PRD or requirements document exists in context. If yes, use it to focus your documentation efforts on relevant areas only.
-
-**IF PRD EXISTS**:
-
-- Review the PRD to understand what enhancement/feature is planned
-- Identify which modules, services, or areas will be affected
-- Focus documentation ONLY on these relevant areas
-- Skip unrelated parts of the codebase to keep docs lean
-
-**IF NO PRD EXISTS**:
-Ask the user:
-
-"I notice you haven't provided a PRD or requirements document. To create more focused and useful documentation, I recommend one of these options:
-
-1. **Create a PRD first** - Would you like me to help create a brownfield PRD before documenting? This helps focus documentation on relevant areas.
-
-2. **Provide existing requirements** - Do you have a requirements document, epic, or feature description you can share?
-
-3. **Describe the focus** - Can you briefly describe what enhancement or feature you're planning? For example:
-   - 'Adding payment processing to the user service'
-   - 'Refactoring the authentication module'
-   - 'Integrating with a new third-party API'
-
-4. **Document everything** - Or should I proceed with comprehensive documentation of the entire codebase? (Note: This may create excessive documentation for large projects)
-
-Please let me know your preference, or I can proceed with full documentation if you prefer."
-
-Based on their response:
-
-- If they choose option 1-3: Use that context to focus documentation
-- If they choose option 4 or decline: Proceed with comprehensive analysis below
-
-Begin by conducting analysis of the existing project. Use available tools to:
-
-1. **Project Structure Discovery**: Examine the root directory structure, identify main folders, and understand the overall organization
-2. **Technology Stack Identification**: Look for package.json, requirements.txt, Cargo.toml, pom.xml, etc. to identify languages, frameworks, and dependencies
-3. **Build System Analysis**: Find build scripts, CI/CD configurations, and development commands
-4. **Existing Documentation Review**: Check for README files, docs folders, and any existing documentation
-5. **Code Pattern Analysis**: Sample key files to understand coding patterns, naming conventions, and architectural approaches
-
-Ask the user these elicitation questions to better understand their needs:
-
-- What is the primary purpose of this project?
-- Are there any specific areas of the codebase that are particularly complex or important for agents to understand?
-- What types of tasks do you expect AI agents to perform on this project? (e.g., bug fixes, feature additions, refactoring, testing)
-- Are there any existing documentation standards or formats you prefer?
-- What level of technical detail should the documentation target? (junior developers, senior developers, mixed team)
-- Is there a specific feature or enhancement you're planning? (This helps focus documentation)
-
-### 2. Deep Codebase Analysis
-
-CRITICAL: Before generating documentation, conduct extensive analysis of the existing codebase:
-
-1. **Explore Key Areas**:
-   - Entry points (main files, index files, app initializers)
-   - Configuration files and environment setup
-   - Package dependencies and versions
-   - Build and deployment configurations
-   - Test suites and coverage
-
-2. **Ask Clarifying Questions**:
-   - "I see you're using [technology X]. Are there any custom patterns or conventions I should document?"
-   - "What are the most critical/complex parts of this system that developers struggle with?"
-   - "Are there any undocumented 'tribal knowledge' areas I should capture?"
-   - "What technical debt or known issues should I document?"
-   - "Which parts of the codebase change most frequently?"
-
-3. **Map the Reality**:
-   - Identify ACTUAL patterns used (not theoretical best practices)
-   - Find where key business logic lives
-   - Locate integration points and external dependencies
-   - Document workarounds and technical debt
-   - Note areas that differ from standard patterns
-
-**IF PRD PROVIDED**: Also analyze what would need to change for the enhancement
-
-### 3. Core Documentation Generation
-
-[[LLM: Generate a comprehensive BROWNFIELD architecture document that reflects the ACTUAL state of the codebase.
-
-**CRITICAL**: This is NOT an aspirational architecture document. Document what EXISTS, including:
-
-- Technical debt and workarounds
-- Inconsistent patterns between different parts
-- Legacy code that can't be changed
-- Integration constraints
-- Performance bottlenecks
-
-**Document Structure**:
-
-# [Project Name] Brownfield Architecture Document
-
-## Introduction
-
-This document captures the CURRENT STATE of the [Project Name] codebase, including technical debt, workarounds, and real-world patterns. It serves as a reference for AI agents working on enhancements.
-
-### Document Scope
-
-[If PRD provided: "Focused on areas relevant to: {enhancement description}"]
-[If no PRD: "Comprehensive documentation of entire system"]
-
-### Change Log
-
-| Date   | Version | Description                 | Author    |
-| ------ | ------- | --------------------------- | --------- |
-| [Date] | 1.0     | Initial brownfield analysis | [Analyst] |
-
-## Quick Reference - Key Files and Entry Points
-
-### Critical Files for Understanding the System
-
-- **Main Entry**: `src/index.js` (or actual entry point)
-- **Configuration**: `config/app.config.js`, `.env.example`
-- **Core Business Logic**: `src/services/`, `src/domain/`
-- **API Definitions**: `src/routes/` or link to OpenAPI spec
-- **Database Models**: `src/models/` or link to schema files
-- **Key Algorithms**: [List specific files with complex logic]
-
-### If PRD Provided - Enhancement Impact Areas
-
-[Highlight which files/modules will be affected by the planned enhancement]
-
-## High Level Architecture
-
-### Technical Summary
-
-### Actual Tech Stack (from package.json/requirements.txt)
-
-| Category  | Technology | Version | Notes                      |
-| --------- | ---------- | ------- | -------------------------- |
-| Runtime   | Node.js    | 16.x    | [Any constraints]          |
-| Framework | Express    | 4.18.2  | [Custom middleware?]       |
-| Database  | PostgreSQL | 13      | [Connection pooling setup] |
-
-etc...
-
-### Repository Structure Reality Check
-
-- Type: [Monorepo/Polyrepo/Hybrid]
-- Package Manager: [npm/yarn/pnpm]
-- Notable: [Any unusual structure decisions]
-
-## Source Tree and Module Organization
-
-### Project Structure (Actual)
-
-```text
-project-root/
-├── src/
-│   ├── controllers/     # HTTP request handlers
-│   ├── services/        # Business logic (NOTE: inconsistent patterns between user and payment services)
-│   ├── models/          # Database models (Sequelize)
-│   ├── utils/           # Mixed bag - needs refactoring
-│   └── legacy/          # DO NOT MODIFY - old payment system still in use
-├── tests/               # Jest tests (60% coverage)
-├── scripts/             # Build and deployment scripts
-└── config/              # Environment configs
-```
-
-### Key Modules and Their Purpose
-
-- **User Management**: `src/services/userService.js` - Handles all user operations
-- **Authentication**: `src/middleware/auth.js` - JWT-based, custom implementation
-- **Payment Processing**: `src/legacy/payment.js` - CRITICAL: Do not refactor, tightly coupled
-- **[List other key modules with their actual files]**
-
-## Data Models and APIs
-
-### Data Models
-
-Instead of duplicating, reference actual model files:
-
-- **User Model**: See `src/models/User.js`
-- **Order Model**: See `src/models/Order.js`
-- **Related Types**: TypeScript definitions in `src/types/`
-
-### API Specifications
-
-- **OpenAPI Spec**: `docs/api/openapi.yaml` (if exists)
-- **Postman Collection**: `docs/api/postman-collection.json`
-- **Manual Endpoints**: [List any undocumented endpoints discovered]
-
-## Technical Debt and Known Issues
-
-### Critical Technical Debt
-
-1. **Payment Service**: Legacy code in `src/legacy/payment.js` - tightly coupled, no tests
-2. **User Service**: Different pattern than other services, uses callbacks instead of promises
-3. **Database Migrations**: Manually tracked, no proper migration tool
-4. **[Other significant debt]**
-
-### Workarounds and Gotchas
-
-- **Environment Variables**: Must set `NODE_ENV=production` even for staging (historical reason)
-- **Database Connections**: Connection pool hardcoded to 10, changing breaks payment service
-- **[Other workarounds developers need to know]**
-
-## Integration Points and External Dependencies
-
-### External Services
-
-| Service  | Purpose  | Integration Type | Key Files                      |
-| -------- | -------- | ---------------- | ------------------------------ |
-| Stripe   | Payments | REST API         | `src/integrations/stripe/`     |
-| SendGrid | Emails   | SDK              | `src/services/emailService.js` |
-
-etc...
-
-### Internal Integration Points
-
-- **Frontend Communication**: REST API on port 3000, expects specific headers
-- **Background Jobs**: Redis queue, see `src/workers/`
-- **[Other integrations]**
-
-## Development and Deployment
-
-### Local Development Setup
-
-1. Actual steps that work (not ideal steps)
-2. Known issues with setup
-3. Required environment variables (see `.env.example`)
-
-### Build and Deployment Process
-
-- **Build Command**: `npm run build` (webpack config in `webpack.config.js`)
-- **Deployment**: Manual deployment via `scripts/deploy.sh`
-- **Environments**: Dev, Staging, Prod (see `config/environments/`)
-
-## Testing Reality
-
-### Current Test Coverage
-
-- Unit Tests: 60% coverage (Jest)
-- Integration Tests: Minimal, in `tests/integration/`
-- E2E Tests: None
-- Manual Testing: Primary qa-test-architect method
-
-### Running Tests
-
-```bash
-npm test           # Runs unit tests
-npm run test:integration  # Runs integration tests (requires local DB)
-```
-
-## If Enhancement PRD Provided - Impact Analysis
-
-### Files That Will Need Modification
-
-Based on the enhancement requirements, these files will be affected:
-
-- `src/services/userService.js` - Add new user fields
-- `src/models/User.js` - Update schema
-- `src/routes/userRoutes.js` - New endpoints
-- [etc...]
-
-### New Files/Modules Needed
-
-- `src/services/newFeatureService.js` - New business logic
-- `src/models/NewFeature.js` - New data model
-- [etc...]
-
-### Integration Considerations
-
-- Will need to integrate with existing auth middleware
-- Must follow existing response format in `src/utils/responseFormatter.js`
-- [Other integration points]
-
-## Appendix - Useful Commands and Scripts
-
-### Frequently Used Commands
-
-```bash
-npm run dev         # Start development server
-npm run build       # Production build
-npm run migrate     # Run database migrations
-npm run seed        # Seed test data
-```
-
-### Debugging and Troubleshooting
-
-- **Logs**: Check `logs/app.log` for application logs
-- **Debug Mode**: Set `DEBUG=app:*` for verbose logging
-- **Common Issues**: See `docs/troubleshooting.md`]]
-
-### 4. Document Delivery
-
-1. **In Web UI (Gemini, ChatGPT, Claude)**:
-   - Present the entire document in one response (or multiple if too long)
-   - Tell user to copy and save as `docs/brownfield-architecture.md` or `docs/project-architecture.md`
-   - Mention it can be sharded later in IDE if needed
-
-2. **In IDE Environment**:
-   - Create the document as `docs/brownfield-architecture.md`
-   - Inform user this single document contains all architectural information
-   - Can be sharded later using PO agent if desired
-
-The document should be comprehensive enough that future agents can understand:
-
-- The actual state of the system (not idealized)
-- Where to find key files and logic
-- What technical debt exists
-- What constraints must be respected
-- If PRD provided: What needs to change for the enhancement]]
-
-### 5. Quality Assurance
-
-CRITICAL: Before finalizing the document:
-
-1. **Accuracy Check**: Verify all technical details match the actual codebase
-2. **Completeness Review**: Ensure all major system components are documented
-3. **Focus Validation**: If user provided scope, verify relevant areas are emphasized
-4. **Clarity Assessment**: Check that explanations are clear for AI agents
-5. **Navigation**: Ensure document has clear section structure for easy reference
-
-Apply the advanced elicitation task after major sections to refine based on user feedback.
-
-## Success Criteria
-
-- Single comprehensive brownfield architecture document created
-- Document reflects REALITY including technical debt and workarounds
-- Key files and modules are referenced with actual paths
-- Models/APIs reference source files rather than duplicating content
-- If PRD provided: Clear impact analysis showing what needs to change
-- Document enables AI agents to navigate and understand the actual codebase
-- Technical constraints and "gotchas" are clearly documented
-
-## Notes
-
-- This task creates ONE document that captures the TRUE state of the system
-- References actual files rather than duplicating content when possible
-- Documents technical debt, workarounds, and constraints honestly
-- For brownfield projects with PRD: Provides clear enhancement impact analysis
-- The goal is PRACTICAL documentation for AI agents doing real work
-
-
----
-
-## Execute Checklist {#execute-checklist}
-
-
-# Checklist Validation Task
-
-This task provides instructions for validating documentation against checklists. The agent MUST follow these instructions to ensure thorough and systematic validation of documents.
-
-## Available Checklists
-
-If the user asks or does not specify a specific checklist, list the checklists available to the agent persona. If the task is being run not with a specific agent, tell the user to check the .checklists folder to select the appropriate one to run.
-
-## Instructions
-
-1. **Initial Assessment**
-   - If user or the task being run provides a checklist name:
-     - Try fuzzy matching (e.g. "architecture checklist" -> "architect-checklist")
-     - If multiple matches found, ask user to clarify
-     - Load the appropriate checklist from .checklists/
-   - If no checklist specified:
-     - Ask the user which checklist they want to use
-     - Present the available options from the files in the checklists folder
-   - Confirm if they want to work through the checklist:
-     - Section by section (interactive mode - very time consuming)
-     - All at once (YOLO mode - recommended for checklists, there will be a summary of sections at the end to discuss)
-
-2. **Document and Artifact Gathering**
-   - Each checklist will specify its required documents/artifacts at the beginning
-   - Follow the checklist's specific instructions for what to gather, generally a file can be resolved in the docs folder, if not or unsure, halt and ask or confirm with the user.
-
-3. **Checklist Processing**
-
-   If in interactive mode:
-   - Work through each section of the checklist one at a time
-   - For each section:
-     - Review all items in the section following instructions for that section embedded in the checklist
-     - Check each item against the relevant documentation or artifacts as appropriate
-     - Present summary of findings for that section, highlighting warnings, errors and non applicable items (rationale for non-applicability).
-     - Get user confirmation before proceeding to next section or if any thing major do we need to halt and take corrective action
-
-   If in YOLO mode:
-   - Process all sections at once
-   - Create a comprehensive report of all findings
-   - Present the complete analysis to the user
-
-4. **Validation Approach**
-
-   For each checklist item:
-   - Read and understand the requirement
-   - Look for evidence in the documentation that satisfies the requirement
-   - Consider both explicit mentions and implicit coverage
-   - Aside from this, follow all checklist llm instructions
-   - Mark items as:
-     - ✅ PASS: Requirement clearly met
-     - ❌ FAIL: Requirement not met or insufficient coverage
-     - ⚠️ PARTIAL: Some aspects covered but needs improvement
-     - N/A: Not applicable to this case
-
-5. **Section Analysis**
-
-   For each section:
-   - think step by step to calculate pass rate
-   - Identify common themes in failed items
-   - Provide specific recommendations for improvement
-   - In interactive mode, discuss findings with user
-   - Document any user decisions or explanations
-
-6. **Final Report**
-
-   Prepare a summary that includes:
-   - Overall checklist completion status
-   - Pass rates by section
-   - List of failed items with context
-   - Specific recommendations for improvement
-   - Any sections or items marked as N/A with justification
-
-## Checklist Execution Methodology
-
-Each checklist now contains embedded LLM prompts and instructions that will:
-
-1. **Guide thorough thinking** - Prompts ensure deep analysis of each section
-2. **Request specific artifacts** - Clear instructions on what documents/access is needed
-3. **Provide contextual guidance** - Section-specific prompts for better validation
-4. **Generate comprehensive reports** - Final summary with detailed findings
-
-The LLM will:
-
-- Execute the complete checklist validation
-- Present a final report with pass/fail rates and key findings
-- Offer to provide detailed analysis of any section, especially those with warnings or failures
-
-
----
-
-## Facilitate Brainstorming Session {#facilitate-brainstorming-session}
-
-
-docOutputLocation: docs/brainstorming-session-results.md
-template: '{root}/templates/brainstorming-output-tmpl.yaml'
-
----
-
-# Facilitate Brainstorming Session Task
-
-Facilitate interactive brainstorming sessions with users. Be creative and adaptive in applying techniques.
-
-## Process
-
-### Step 1: Session Setup
-
-Ask 4 context questions (don't preview what happens next):
-
-1. What are we brainstorming about?
-2. Any constraints or parameters?
-3. Goal: broad exploration or focused ideation?
-4. Do you want a structured document output to reference later? (Default Yes)
-
-### Step 2: Present Approach Options
-
-After getting answers to Step 1, present 4 approach options (numbered):
-
-1. User selects specific techniques
-2. business-analyst recommends techniques based on context
-3. Random technique selection for creative variety
-4. Progressive technique flow (start broad, narrow down)
-
-### Step 3: Execute Techniques Interactively
-
-**KEY PRINCIPLES:**
-
-- **FACILITATOR ROLE**: Guide user to generate their own ideas through questions, prompts, and examples
-- **CONTINUOUS ENGAGEMENT**: Keep user engaged with chosen technique until they want to switch or are satisfied
-- **CAPTURE OUTPUT**: If (default) document output requested, capture all ideas generated in each technique section to the document from the beginning.
-
-**Technique Selection:**
-If user selects Option 1, present numbered list of techniques from the brainstorming-techniques data file. User can select by number..
-
-**Technique Execution:**
-
-1. Apply selected technique according to data file description
-2. Keep engaging with technique until user indicates they want to:
-   - Choose a different technique
-   - Apply current ideas to a new technique
-   - Move to convergent phase
-   - End session
-
-**Output Capture (if requested):**
-For each technique used, capture:
-
-- Technique name and duration
-- Key ideas generated by user
-- Insights and patterns identified
-- User's reflections on the process
-
-### Step 4: Session Flow
-
-1. **Warm-up** (5-10 min) - Build creative confidence
-2. **Divergent** (20-30 min) - Generate quantity over quality
-3. **Convergent** (15-20 min) - Group and categorize ideas
-4. **Synthesis** (10-15 min) - Refine and develop concepts
-
-### Step 5: Document Output (if requested)
-
-Generate structured document with these sections:
-
-**Executive Summary**
-
-- Session topic and goals
-- Techniques used and duration
-- Total ideas generated
-- Key themes and patterns identified
-
-**Technique Sections** (for each technique used)
-
-- Technique name and description
-- Ideas generated (user's own words)
-- Insights discovered
-- Notable connections or patterns
-
-**Idea Categorization**
-
-- **Immediate Opportunities** - Ready to implement now
-- **Future Innovations** - Requires development/research
-- **Moonshots** - Ambitious, transformative concepts
-- **Insights & Learnings** - Key realizations from session
-
-**Action Planning**
-
-- Top 3 priority ideas with rationale
-- Next steps for each priority
-- Resources/research needed
-- Timeline considerations
-
-**Reflection & Follow-up**
-
-- What worked well in this session
-- Areas for further exploration
-- Recommended follow-up techniques
-- Questions that emerged for future sessions
-
-## Key Principles
-
-- **YOU ARE A FACILITATOR**: Guide the user to brainstorm, don't brainstorm for them (unless they request it persistently)
-- **INTERACTIVE DIALOGUE**: Ask questions, wait for responses, build on their ideas
-- **ONE TECHNIQUE AT A TIME**: Don't mix multiple techniques in one response
-- **CONTINUOUS ENGAGEMENT**: Stay with one technique until user wants to switch
-- **DRAW IDEAS OUT**: Use prompts and examples to help them generate their own ideas
-- **REAL-TIME ADAPTATION**: Monitor engagement and adjust approach as needed
-- Maintain energy and momentum
-- Defer judgment during generation
-- Quantity leads to quality (aim for 100 ideas in 60 minutes)
-- Build on ideas collaboratively
-- Document everything in output document
-
-## Advanced Engagement Strategies
-
-**Energy Management**
-
-- Check engagement levels: "How are you feeling about this direction?"
-- Offer breaks or technique switches if energy flags
-- Use encouraging language and celebrate idea generation
-
-**Depth vs. Breadth**
-
-- Ask follow-up questions to deepen ideas: "Tell me more about that..."
-- Use "Yes, and..." to build on their ideas
-- Help them make connections: "How does this relate to your earlier idea about...?"
-
-**Transition Management**
-
-- Always ask before switching techniques: "Ready to try a different approach?"
-- Offer options: "Should we explore this idea deeper or generate more alternatives?"
-- Respect their process and timing
-
-
----
-
-## Generate Ai Frontend Prompt {#generate-ai-frontend-prompt}
-
-
-# Create AI Frontend Prompt Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-To generate a masterful, comprehensive, and optimized prompt that can be used with any AI-driven frontend development tool (e.g., Vercel v0, Lovable.ai, or similar) to scaffold or generate significant portions of a frontend application.
-
-## Inputs
-
-- Completed UI/UX Specification (`front-end-spec.md`)
-- Completed Frontend Architecture Document (`front-end-architecture`) or a full stack combined architecture such as `architecture.md`
-- Main System Architecture Document (`architecture` - for API contracts and tech stack to give further context)
-
-## Key Activities & Instructions
-
-### 1. Core Prompting Principles
-
-Before generating the prompt, you must understand these core principles for interacting with a generative AI for code.
-
-- **Be Explicit and Detailed**: The AI cannot read your mind. Provide as much detail and context as possible. Vague requests lead to generic or incorrect outputs.
-- **Iterate, Don't Expect Perfection**: Generating an entire complex application in one go is rare. The most effective method is to prompt for one component or one section at a time, then build upon the results.
-- **Provide Context First**: Always start by providing the AI with the necessary context, such as the tech stack, existing code snippets, and overall project goals.
-- **Mobile-First Approach**: Frame all UI generation requests with a mobile-first design mindset. Describe the mobile layout first, then provide separate instructions for how it should adapt for tablet and desktop.
-
-### 2. The Structured Prompting Framework
-
-To ensure the highest quality output, you MUST structure every prompt using the following four-part framework.
-
-1. **High-Level Goal**: Start with a clear, concise summary of the overall objective. This orients the AI on the primary task.
-   - _Example: "Create a responsive user registration form with client-side validation and API integration."_
-2. **Detailed, Step-by-Step Instructions**: Provide a granular, numbered list of actions the AI should take. Break down complex tasks into smaller, sequential steps. This is the most critical part of the prompt.
-   - _Example: "1. Create a new file named `RegistrationForm.js`. 2. Use React hooks for state management. 3. Add styled input fields for 'Name', 'Email', and 'Password'. 4. For the email field, ensure it is a valid email format. 5. On submission, call the API endpoint defined below."_
-3. **Code Examples, Data Structures & Constraints**: Include any relevant snippets of existing code, data structures, or API contracts. This gives the AI concrete examples to work with. Crucially, you must also state what _not_ to do.
-   - _Example: "Use this API endpoint: `POST /api/register`. The expected JSON payload is `{ "name": "string", "email": "string", "password": "string" }`. Do NOT include a 'confirm password' field. Use Tailwind CSS for all styling."_
-4. **Define a Strict Scope**: Explicitly define the boundaries of the task. Tell the AI which files it can modify and, more importantly, which files to leave untouched to prevent unintended changes across the codebase.
-   - _Example: "You should only create the `RegistrationForm.js` component and add it to the `pages/register.js` file. Do NOT alter the `Navbar.js` component or any other existing page or component."_
-
-### 3. Assembling the Master Prompt
-
-You will now synthesize the inputs and the above principles into a final, comprehensive prompt.
-
-1. **Gather Foundational Context**:
-   - Start the prompt with a preamble describing the overall project purpose, the full tech stack (e.g., Next.js, TypeScript, Tailwind CSS), and the primary UI component library being used.
-2. **Describe the Visuals**:
-   - If the user has design files (Figma, etc.), instruct them to provide links or screenshots.
-   - If not, describe the visual style: color palette, typography, spacing, and overall aesthetic (e.g., "minimalist", "corporate", "playful").
-3. **Build the Prompt using the Structured Framework**:
-   - Follow the four-part framework from Section 2 to build out the core request, whether it's for a single component or a full page.
-4. **Present and Refine**:
-   - Output the complete, generated prompt in a clear, copy-pasteable format (e.g., a large code block).
-   - Explain the structure of the prompt and why certain information was included, referencing the principles above.
-   - <important_note>Conclude by reminding the user that all AI-generated code will require careful human review, testing, and refinement to be considered production-ready.</important_note>
-
-
----
-
-## Index Docs {#index-docs}
-
-
-# Index Documentation Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-This task maintains the integrity and completeness of the `docs/index.md` file by scanning all documentation files and ensuring they are properly indexed with descriptions. It handles both root-level documents and documents within subfolders, organizing them hierarchically.
-
-## Task Instructions
-
-You are now operating as a Documentation Indexer. Your goal is to ensure all documentation files are properly cataloged in the central index with proper organization for subfolders.
-
-### Required Steps
-
-1. First, locate and scan:
-   - The `docs/` directory and all subdirectories
-   - The existing `docs/index.md` file (create if absent)
-   - All markdown (`.md`) and text (`.txt`) files in the documentation structure
-   - Note the folder structure for hierarchical organization
-
-2. For the existing `docs/index.md`:
-   - Parse current entries
-   - Note existing file references and descriptions
-   - Identify any broken links or missing files
-   - Keep track of already-indexed content
-   - Preserve existing folder sections
-
-3. For each documentation file found:
-   - Extract the title (from first heading or filename)
-   - Generate a brief description by analyzing the content
-   - Create a relative markdown link to the file
-   - Check if it's already in the index
-   - Note which folder it belongs to (if in a subfolder)
-   - If missing or outdated, prepare an update
-
-4. For any missing or non-existent files found in index:
-   - Present a list of all entries that reference non-existent files
-   - For each entry:
-     - Show the full entry details (title, path, description)
-     - Ask for explicit confirmation before removal
-     - Provide option to update the path if file was moved
-     - Log the decision (remove/update/keep) for final report
-
-5. Update `docs/index.md`:
-   - Maintain existing structure and organization
-   - Create level 2 sections (`##`) for each subfolder
-   - List root-level documents first
-   - Add missing entries with descriptions
-   - Update outdated entries
-   - Remove only entries that were confirmed for removal
-   - Ensure consistent formatting throughout
-
-### Index Structure Format
-
-The index should be organized as follows:
-
-```markdown
-# Documentation Index
-
-## Root Documents
-
-### [Document Title](./document.md)
-
-Brief description of the document's purpose and contents.
-
-### [Another Document](./another.md)
-
-Description here.
-
-## Folder Name
-
-Documents within the `folder-name/` directory:
-
-### [Document in Folder](./folder-name/document.md)
-
-Description of this document.
-
-### [Another in Folder](./folder-name/another.md)
-
-Description here.
-
-## Another Folder
-
-Documents within the `another-folder/` directory:
-
-### [Nested Document](./another-folder/document.md)
-
-Description of nested document.
-```
-
-### Index Entry Format
-
-Each entry should follow this format:
-
-```markdown
-### [Document Title](relative/path/to/file.md)
-
-Brief description of the document's purpose and contents.
-```
-
-### Rules of Operation
-
-1. NEVER modify the content of indexed files
-2. Preserve existing descriptions in index.md when they are adequate
-3. Maintain any existing categorization or grouping in the index
-4. Use relative paths for all links (starting with `./`)
-5. Ensure descriptions are concise but informative
-6. NEVER remove entries without explicit confirmation
-7. Report any broken links or inconsistencies found
-8. Allow path updates for moved files before considering removal
-9. Create folder sections using level 2 headings (`##`)
-10. Sort folders alphabetically, with root documents listed first
-11. Within each section, sort documents alphabetically by title
-
-### Process Output
-
-The task will provide:
-
-1. A summary of changes made to index.md
-2. List of newly indexed files (organized by folder)
-3. List of updated entries
-4. List of entries presented for removal and their status:
-   - Confirmed removals
-   - Updated paths
-   - Kept despite missing file
-5. Any new folders discovered
-6. Any other issues or inconsistencies found
-
-### Handling Missing Files
-
-For each file referenced in the index but not found in the filesystem:
-
-1. Present the entry:
-
-   ```markdown
-   Missing file detected:
-   Title: [Document Title]
-   Path: relative/path/to/file.md
-   Description: Existing description
-   Section: [Root Documents | Folder Name]
-
-   Options:
-
-   1. Remove this entry
-   2. Update the file path
-   3. Keep entry (mark as temporarily unavailable)
-
-   Please choose an option (1/2/3):
-   ```
-
-2. Wait for user confirmation before taking any action
-3. Log the decision for the final report
-
-### Special Cases
-
-1. **Sharded Documents**: If a folder contains an `index.md` file, treat it as a sharded document:
-   - Use the folder's `index.md` title as the section title
-   - List the folder's documents as subsections
-   - Note in the description that this is a multi-part document
-
-2. **README files**: Convert `README.md` to more descriptive titles based on content
-
-3. **Nested Subfolders**: For deeply nested folders, maintain the hierarchy but limit to 2 levels in the main index. Deeper structures should have their own index files.
-
-## Required Input
-
-Please provide:
-
-1. Location of the `docs/` directory (default: `./docs`)
-2. Confirmation of write access to `docs/index.md`
-3. Any specific categorization preferences
-4. Any files or directories to exclude from indexing (e.g., `.git`, `node_modules`)
-5. Whether to include hidden files/folders (starting with `.`)
-
-Would you like to proceed with documentation indexing? Please provide the required input above.
-
-
----
-
-## Kb Mode Interaction {#kb-mode-interaction}
-
-
-# KB Mode Interaction Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-Provide a user-friendly interface to the Agentic Kit knowledge base without overwhelming users with information upfront.
-
-## Instructions
-
-When entering KB mode (\*kb-mode), follow these steps:
-
-### 1. Welcome and Guide
-
-Announce entering KB mode with a brief, friendly introduction.
-
-### 2. Present Topic Areas
-
-Offer a concise list of main topic areas the user might want to explore:
-
-**What would you like to know more about?**
-
-1. **Setup & Installation** - Getting started with Agentic Kit
-2. **Workflows** - Choosing the right workflow for your project
-3. **Web vs IDE** - When to use each environment
-4. **Agents** - Understanding specialized agents and their roles
-5. **Documents** - PRDs, Architecture, Stories, and more
-6. **Agile Process** - How Agentic Kit implements Agile methodologies
-7. **Configuration** - Customizing Agentic Kit for your needs
-8. **Best Practices** - Tips for effective Agentic Kit usage
-
-Or ask me about anything else related to Agentic Kit-Method!
-
-### 3. Respond Contextually
-
-- Wait for user's specific question or topic selection
-- Provide focused, relevant information from the knowledge base
-- Offer to dive deeper or explore related topics
-- Keep responses concise unless user asks for detailed explanations
-
-### 4. Interactive Exploration
-
-- After answering, suggest related topics they might find helpful
-- Maintain conversational flow rather than data dumping
-- Use examples when appropriate
-- Reference specific documentation sections when relevant
-
-### 5. Exit Gracefully
-
-When user is done or wants to exit KB mode:
-
-- Summarize key points discussed if helpful
-- Remind them they can return to KB mode anytime with \*kb-mode
-- Suggest next steps based on what was discussed
-
-## Example Interaction
-
-**User**: \*kb-mode
-
-**Assistant**: I've entered KB mode and have access to the full Agentic Kit knowledge base. I can help you with detailed information about any aspect of Agentic Kit-Method.
-
-**What would you like to know more about?**
-
-1. **Setup & Installation** - Getting started with Agentic Kit
-2. **Workflows** - Choosing the right workflow for your project
-3. **Web vs IDE** - When to use each environment
-4. **Agents** - Understanding specialized agents and their roles
-5. **Documents** - PRDs, Architecture, Stories, and more
-6. **Agile Process** - How Agentic Kit implements Agile methodologies
-7. **Configuration** - Customizing Agentic Kit for your needs
-8. **Best Practices** - Tips for effective Agentic Kit usage
-
-Or ask me about anything else related to Agentic Kit-Method!
-
-**User**: Tell me about workflows
-
-**Assistant**: [Provides focused information about workflows from the KB, then offers to explore specific workflow types or related topics]
-
-
----
-
-## Nfr Assess {#nfr-assess}
-
-
-# nfr-assess
-
-Quick NFR validation focused on the core four: security, performance, reliability, maintainability.
-
-## Inputs
-
-```yaml
-required:
-  - story_id: '{epic}.{story}' # e.g., "1.3"
-  - story_path: `.core-config.yaml` for the `devStoryLocation`
-
-optional:
-  - architecture_refs: `.core-config.yaml` for the `architecture.architectureFile`
-  - technical_preferences: `.core-config.yaml` for the `technicalPreferences`
-  - acceptance_criteria: From story file
-```
-
-## Purpose
-
-Assess non-functional requirements for a story and generate:
-
-1. YAML block for the gate file's `nfr_validation` section
-2. Brief markdown assessment saved to `qa.qaLocation/assessments/{epic}.{story}-nfr-{YYYYMMDD}.md`
-
-## Process
-
-### 0. Fail-safe for Missing Inputs
-
-If story_path or story file can't be found:
-
-- Still create assessment file with note: "Source story not found"
-- Set all selected NFRs to CONCERNS with notes: "Target unknown / evidence missing"
-- Continue with assessment to provide value
-
-### 1. Elicit Scope
-
-**Interactive mode:** Ask which NFRs to assess
-**Non-interactive mode:** Default to core four (security, performance, reliability, maintainability)
-
-```text
-Which NFRs should I assess? (Enter numbers or press Enter for default)
-[1] Security (default)
-[2] Performance (default)
-[3] Reliability (default)
-[4] Maintainability (default)
-[5] Usability
-[6] Compatibility
-[7] Portability
-[8] Functional Suitability
-
-> [Enter for 1-4]
-```
-
-### 2. Check for Thresholds
-
-Look for NFR requirements in:
-
-- Story acceptance criteria
-- `docs/architecture/*.md` files
-- `docs/technical-preferences.md`
-
-**Interactive mode:** Ask for missing thresholds
-**Non-interactive mode:** Mark as CONCERNS with "Target unknown"
-
-```text
-No performance requirements found. What's your target response time?
-> 200ms for API calls
-
-No security requirements found. Required auth method?
-> JWT with refresh tokens
-```
-
-**Unknown targets policy:** If a target is missing and not provided, mark status as CONCERNS with notes: "Target unknown"
-
-### 3. Quick Assessment
-
-For each selected NFR, check:
-
-- Is there evidence it's implemented?
-- Can we validate it?
-- Are there obvious gaps?
-
-### 4. Generate Outputs
-
-## Output 1: Gate YAML Block
-
-Generate ONLY for NFRs actually assessed (no placeholders):
-
-```yaml
-# Gate YAML (copy/paste):
-nfr_validation:
-  _assessed: [security, performance, reliability, maintainability]
-  security:
-    status: CONCERNS
-    notes: 'No rate limiting on auth endpoints'
-  performance:
-    status: PASS
-    notes: 'Response times < 200ms verified'
-  reliability:
-    status: PASS
-    notes: 'Error handling and retries implemented'
-  maintainability:
-    status: CONCERNS
-    notes: 'Test coverage at 65%, target is 80%'
-```
-
-## Deterministic Status Rules
-
-- **FAIL**: Any selected NFR has critical gap or target clearly not met
-- **CONCERNS**: No FAILs, but any NFR is unknown/partial/missing evidence
-- **PASS**: All selected NFRs meet targets with evidence
-
-## Quality Score Calculation
-
-```
-quality_score = 100
-- 20 for each FAIL attribute
-- 10 for each CONCERNS attribute
-Floor at 0, ceiling at 100
-```
-
-If `technical-preferences.md` defines custom weights, use those instead.
-
-## Output 2: Brief Assessment Report
-
-**ALWAYS save to:** `qa.qaLocation/assessments/{epic}.{story}-nfr-{YYYYMMDD}.md`
-
-```markdown
-# NFR Assessment: {epic}.{story}
-
-Date: {date}
-Reviewer: Quinn
-
-<!-- Note: Source story not found (if applicable) -->
-
-## Summary
-
-- Security: CONCERNS - Missing rate limiting
-- Performance: PASS - Meets <200ms requirement
-- Reliability: PASS - Proper error handling
-- Maintainability: CONCERNS - Test coverage below target
-
-## Critical Issues
-
-1. **No rate limiting** (Security)
-   - Risk: Brute force attacks possible
-   - Fix: Add rate limiting middleware to auth endpoints
-
-2. **Test coverage 65%** (Maintainability)
-   - Risk: Untested code paths
-   - Fix: Add tests for uncovered branches
-
-## Quick Wins
-
-- Add rate limiting: ~2 hours
-- Increase test coverage: ~4 hours
-- Add performance monitoring: ~1 hour
-```
-
-## Output 3: Story Update Line
-
-**End with this line for the review task to quote:**
-
-```
-NFR assessment: qa.qaLocation/assessments/{epic}.{story}-nfr-{YYYYMMDD}.md
-```
-
-## Output 4: Gate Integration Line
-
-**Always print at the end:**
-
-```
-Gate NFR block ready → paste into qa.qaLocation/gates/{epic}.{story}-{slug}.yml under nfr_validation
-```
-
-## Assessment Criteria
-
-### Security
-
-**PASS if:**
-
-- Authentication implemented
-- Authorization enforced
-- Input validation present
-- No hardcoded secrets
-
-**CONCERNS if:**
-
-- Missing rate limiting
-- Weak encryption
-- Incomplete authorization
-
-**FAIL if:**
-
-- No authentication
-- Hardcoded credentials
-- SQL injection vulnerabilities
-
-### Performance
-
-**PASS if:**
-
-- Meets response time targets
-- No obvious bottlenecks
-- Reasonable resource usage
-
-**CONCERNS if:**
-
-- Close to limits
-- Missing indexes
-- No caching strategy
-
-**FAIL if:**
-
-- Exceeds response time limits
-- Memory leaks
-- Unoptimized queries
-
-### Reliability
-
-**PASS if:**
-
-- Error handling present
-- Graceful degradation
-- Retry logic where needed
-
-**CONCERNS if:**
-
-- Some error cases unhandled
-- No circuit breakers
-- Missing health checks
-
-**FAIL if:**
-
-- No error handling
-- Crashes on errors
-- No recovery mechanisms
-
-### Maintainability
-
-**PASS if:**
-
-- Test coverage meets target
-- Code well-structured
-- Documentation present
-
-**CONCERNS if:**
-
-- Test coverage below target
-- Some code duplication
-- Missing documentation
-
-**FAIL if:**
-
-- No tests
-- Highly coupled code
-- No documentation
-
-## Quick Reference
-
-### What to Check
-
-```yaml
-security:
-  - Authentication mechanism
-  - Authorization checks
-  - Input validation
-  - Secret management
-  - Rate limiting
-
-performance:
-  - Response times
-  - Database queries
-  - Caching usage
-  - Resource consumption
-
-reliability:
-  - Error handling
-  - Retry logic
-  - Circuit breakers
-  - Health checks
-  - Logging
-
-maintainability:
-  - Test coverage
-  - Code structure
-  - Documentation
-  - Dependencies
-```
-
-## Key Principles
-
-- Focus on the core four NFRs by default
-- Quick assessment, not deep analysis
-- Gate-ready output format
-- Brief, actionable findings
-- Skip what doesn't apply
-- Deterministic status rules for consistency
-- Unknown targets → CONCERNS, not guesses
-
----
-
-## Appendix: ISO 25010 Reference
-
-<details>
-<summary>Full ISO 25010 Quality Model (click to expand)</summary>
-
-### All 8 Quality Characteristics
-
-1. **Functional Suitability**: Completeness, correctness, appropriateness
-2. **Performance Efficiency**: Time behavior, resource use, capacity
-3. **Compatibility**: Co-existence, interoperability
-4. **Usability**: Learnability, operability, accessibility
-5. **Reliability**: Maturity, availability, fault tolerance
-6. **Security**: Confidentiality, integrity, authenticity
-7. **Maintainability**: Modularity, reusability, testability
-8. **Portability**: Adaptability, installability
-
-Use these when assessing beyond the core four.
-
-</details>
-
-<details>
-<summary>Example: Deep Performance Analysis (click to expand)</summary>
-
-```yaml
-performance_deep_dive:
-  response_times:
-    p50: 45ms
-    p95: 180ms
-    p99: 350ms
-  database:
-    slow_queries: 2
-    missing_indexes: ['users.email', 'orders.user_id']
-  caching:
-    hit_rate: 0%
-    recommendation: 'Add Redis for session data'
-  load_test:
-    max_rps: 150
-    breaking_point: 200 rps
-```
-
-</details>
-
-
----
-
-## Qa Gate {#qa-gate}
-
-
-# qa-gate
-
-Create or update a quality gate decision file for a story based on review findings.
-
-## Purpose
-
-Generate a standalone quality gate file that provides a clear pass/fail decision with actionable feedback. This gate serves as an advisory checkpoint for teams to understand quality status.
-
-## Prerequisites
-
-- Story has been reviewed (manually or via review-story task)
-- Review findings are available
-- Understanding of story requirements and implementation
-
-## Gate File Location
-
-**ALWAYS** check the `.core-config.yaml` for the `qa.qaLocation/gates`
-
-Slug rules:
-
-- Convert to lowercase
-- Replace spaces with hyphens
-- Strip punctuation
-- Example: "User Auth - Login!" becomes "user-auth-login"
-
-## Minimal Required Schema
-
-```yaml
-schema: 1
-story: '{epic}.{story}'
-gate: PASS|CONCERNS|FAIL|WAIVED
-status_reason: '1-2 sentence explanation of gate decision'
-reviewer: 'Quinn'
-updated: '{ISO-8601 timestamp}'
-top_issues: [] # Empty array if no issues
-waiver: { active: false } # Only set active: true if WAIVED
-```
-
-## Schema with Issues
-
-```yaml
-schema: 1
-story: '1.3'
-gate: CONCERNS
-status_reason: 'Missing rate limiting on auth endpoints poses security risk.'
-reviewer: 'Quinn'
-updated: '2025-01-12T10:15:00Z'
-top_issues:
-  - id: 'SEC-001'
-    severity: high # ONLY: low|medium|high
-    finding: 'No rate limiting on login endpoint'
-    suggested_action: 'Add rate limiting middleware before production'
-  - id: 'TEST-001'
-    severity: medium
-    finding: 'No integration tests for auth flow'
-    suggested_action: 'Add integration test coverage'
-waiver: { active: false }
-```
-
-## Schema when Waived
-
-```yaml
-schema: 1
-story: '1.3'
-gate: WAIVED
-status_reason: 'Known issues accepted for MVP release.'
-reviewer: 'Quinn'
-updated: '2025-01-12T10:15:00Z'
-top_issues:
-  - id: 'PERF-001'
-    severity: low
-    finding: 'Dashboard loads slowly with 1000+ items'
-    suggested_action: 'Implement pagination in next sprint'
-waiver:
-  active: true
-  reason: 'MVP release - performance optimization deferred'
-  approved_by: 'Product Owner'
-```
-
-## Gate Decision Criteria
-
-### PASS
-
-- All acceptance criteria met
-- No high-severity issues
-- Test coverage meets project standards
-
-### CONCERNS
-
-- Non-blocking issues present
-- Should be tracked and scheduled
-- Can proceed with awareness
-
-### FAIL
-
-- Acceptance criteria not met
-- High-severity issues present
-- Recommend return to InProgress
-
-### WAIVED
-
-- Issues explicitly accepted
-- Requires approval and reason
-- Proceed despite known issues
-
-## Severity Scale
-
-**FIXED VALUES - NO VARIATIONS:**
-
-- `low`: Minor issues, cosmetic problems
-- `medium`: Should fix soon, not blocking
-- `high`: Critical issues, should block release
-
-## Issue ID Prefixes
-
-- `SEC-`: Security issues
-- `PERF-`: Performance issues
-- `REL-`: Reliability issues
-- `TEST-`: Testing gaps
-- `MNT-`: Maintainability concerns
-- `ARCH-`: Architecture issues
-- `DOC-`: Documentation gaps
-- `REQ-`: Requirements issues
-
-## Output Requirements
-
-1. **ALWAYS** create gate file at: `qa.qaLocation/gates` from `.core-config.yaml`
-2. **ALWAYS** append this exact format to story's QA Results section:
-
-   ```text
-   Gate: {STATUS} → qa.qaLocation/gates/{epic}.{story}-{slug}.yml
-   ```
-
-3. Keep status_reason to 1-2 sentences maximum
-4. Use severity values exactly: `low`, `medium`, or `high`
-
-## Example Story Update
-
-After creating gate file, append to story's QA Results section:
-
-```markdown
-## qa-test-architect Results
-
-### Review Date: 2025-01-12
-
-### Reviewed By: Quinn (Test Architect)
-
-[... existing review content ...]
-
-### Gate Status
-
-Gate: CONCERNS → qa.qaLocation/gates/{epic}.{story}-{slug}.yml
-```
-
-## Key Principles
-
-- Keep it minimal and predictable
-- Fixed severity scale (low/medium/high)
-- Always write to standard path
-- Always update story with gate reference
-- Clear, actionable findings
-
-
----
-
-## Review Story {#review-story}
-
-
-# review-story
-
-Perform a comprehensive test architecture review with quality gate decision. This adaptive, risk-aware review creates both a story update and a detailed gate file.
-
-## Inputs
-
-```yaml
-required:
-  - story_id: '{epic}.{story}' # e.g., "1.3"
-  - story_path: '{devStoryLocation}/{epic}.{story}.*.md' # Path from core-config.yaml
-  - story_title: '{title}' # If missing, derive from story file H1
-  - story_slug: '{slug}' # If missing, derive from title (lowercase, hyphenated)
-```
-
-## Prerequisites
-
-- Story status must be "Review"
-- Developer has completed all tasks and updated the File List
-- All automated tests are passing
-
-## Review Process - Adaptive Test Architecture
-
-### 1. Risk Assessment (Determines Review Depth)
-
-**Auto-escalate to deep review when:**
-
-- Auth/payment/security files touched
-- No tests added to story
-- Diff > 500 lines
-- Previous gate was FAIL/CONCERNS
-- Story has > 5 acceptance criteria
-
-### 2. Comprehensive Analysis
-
-**A. Requirements Traceability**
-
-- Map each acceptance criteria to its validating tests (document mapping with Given-When-Then, not test code)
-- Identify coverage gaps
-- Verify all requirements have corresponding test cases
-
-**B. Code Quality Review**
-
-- Architecture and design patterns
-- Refactoring opportunities (and perform them)
-- Code duplication or inefficiencies
-- Performance optimizations
-- Security vulnerabilities
-- Best practices adherence
-
-**C. Test Architecture Assessment**
-
-- Test coverage adequacy at appropriate levels
-- Test level appropriateness (what should be unit vs integration vs e2e)
-- Test design quality and maintainability
-- Test data management strategy
-- Mock/stub usage appropriateness
-- Edge case and error scenario coverage
-- Test execution time and reliability
-
-**D. Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs)**
-
-- Security: Authentication, authorization, data protection
-- Performance: Response times, resource usage
-- Reliability: Error handling, recovery mechanisms
-- Maintainability: Code clarity, documentation
-
-**E. Testability Evaluation**
-
-- Controllability: Can we control the inputs?
-- Observability: Can we observe the outputs?
-- Debuggability: Can we debug failures easily?
-
-**F. Technical Debt Identification**
-
-- Accumulated shortcuts
-- Missing tests
-- Outdated dependencies
-- Architecture violations
-
-### 3. Active Refactoring
-
-- Refactor code where safe and appropriate
-- Run tests to ensure changes don't break functionality
-- Document all changes in qa-test-architect Results section with clear WHY and HOW
-- Do NOT alter story content beyond qa-test-architect Results section
-- Do NOT change story Status or File List; recommend next status only
-
-### 4. Standards Compliance Check
-
-- Verify adherence to `docs/coding-standards.md`
-- Check compliance with `docs/unified-project-structure.md`
-- Validate testing approach against `docs/testing-strategy.md`
-- Ensure all guidelines mentioned in the story are followed
-
-### 5. Acceptance Criteria Validation
-
-- Verify each AC is fully implemented
-- Check for any missing functionality
-- Validate edge cases are handled
-
-### 6. Documentation and Comments
-
-- Verify code is self-documenting where possible
-- Add comments for complex logic if missing
-- Ensure any API changes are documented
-
-## Output 1: Update Story File - qa-test-architect Results Section ONLY
-
-**CRITICAL**: You are ONLY authorized to update the "qa-test-architect Results" section of the story file. DO NOT modify any other sections.
-
-**qa-test-architect Results Anchor Rule:**
-
-- If `## qa-test-architect Results` doesn't exist, append it at end of file
-- If it exists, append a new dated entry below existing entries
-- Never edit other sections
-
-After review and any refactoring, append your results to the story file in the qa-test-architect Results section:
-
-```markdown
-## qa-test-architect Results
-
-### Review Date: [Date]
-
-### Reviewed By: Quinn (Test Architect)
-
-### Code Quality Assessment
-
-[Overall assessment of implementation quality]
-
-### Refactoring Performed
-
-[List any refactoring you performed with explanations]
-
-- **File**: [filename]
-  - **Change**: [what was changed]
-  - **Why**: [reason for change]
-  - **How**: [how it improves the code]
-
-### Compliance Check
-
-- Coding Standards: [✓/✗] [notes if any]
-- Project Structure: [✓/✗] [notes if any]
-- Testing Strategy: [✓/✗] [notes if any]
-- All ACs Met: [✓/✗] [notes if any]
-
-### Improvements Checklist
-
-[Check off items you handled yourself, leave unchecked for full-stack-dev to address]
-
-- [x] Refactored user service for better error handling (services/user.service.ts)
-- [x] Added missing edge case tests (services/user.service.test.ts)
-- [ ] Consider extracting validation logic to separate validator class
-- [ ] Add integration test for error scenarios
-- [ ] Update API documentation for new error codes
-
-### Security Review
-
-[Any security concerns found and whether addressed]
-
-### Performance Considerations
-
-[Any performance issues found and whether addressed]
-
-### Files Modified During Review
-
-[If you modified files, list them here - ask full-stack-dev to update File List]
-
-### Gate Status
-
-Gate: {STATUS} → qa.qaLocation/gates/{epic}.{story}-{slug}.yml
-Risk profile: qa.qaLocation/assessments/{epic}.{story}-risk-{YYYYMMDD}.md
-NFR assessment: qa.qaLocation/assessments/{epic}.{story}-nfr-{YYYYMMDD}.md
-
-# Note: Paths should reference core-config.yaml for custom configurations
-
-### Recommended Status
-
-[✓ Ready for Done] / [✗ Changes Required - See unchecked items above]
-(Story owner decides final status)
-```
-
-## Output 2: Create Quality Gate File
-
-**Template and Directory:**
-
-- Render from `../resources/templates.yaml#/templates/qa-gate-tmpl`
-- Create directory defined in `qa.qaLocation/gates` (see `.core-config.yaml`) if missing
-- Save to: `qa.qaLocation/gates/{epic}.{story}-{slug}.yml`
-
-Gate file structure:
-
-```yaml
-schema: 1
-story: '{epic}.{story}'
-story_title: '{story title}'
-gate: PASS|CONCERNS|FAIL|WAIVED
-status_reason: '1-2 sentence explanation of gate decision'
-reviewer: 'Quinn (Test Architect)'
-updated: '{ISO-8601 timestamp}'
-
-top_issues: [] # Empty if no issues
-waiver: { active: false } # Set active: true only if WAIVED
-
-# Extended fields (optional but recommended):
-quality_score: 0-100 # 100 - (20*FAILs) - (10*CONCERNS) or use technical-preferences.md weights
-expires: '{ISO-8601 timestamp}' # Typically 2 weeks from review
-
-evidence:
-  tests_reviewed: { count }
-  risks_identified: { count }
-  trace:
-    ac_covered: [1, 2, 3] # AC numbers with test coverage
-    ac_gaps: [4] # AC numbers lacking coverage
-
-nfr_validation:
-  security:
-    status: PASS|CONCERNS|FAIL
-    notes: 'Specific findings'
-  performance:
-    status: PASS|CONCERNS|FAIL
-    notes: 'Specific findings'
-  reliability:
-    status: PASS|CONCERNS|FAIL
-    notes: 'Specific findings'
-  maintainability:
-    status: PASS|CONCERNS|FAIL
-    notes: 'Specific findings'
-
-recommendations:
-  immediate: # Must fix before production
-    - action: 'Add rate limiting'
-      refs: ['api/auth/login.ts']
-  future: # Can be addressed later
-    - action: 'Consider caching'
-      refs: ['services/data.ts']
-```
-
-### Gate Decision Criteria
-
-**Deterministic rule (apply in order):**
-
-If risk_summary exists, apply its thresholds first (≥9 → FAIL, ≥6 → CONCERNS), then NFR statuses, then top_issues severity.
-
-1. **Risk thresholds (if risk_summary present):**
-   - If any risk score ≥ 9 → Gate = FAIL (unless waived)
-   - Else if any score ≥ 6 → Gate = CONCERNS
-
-2. **Test coverage gaps (if trace available):**
-   - If any P0 test from test-design is missing → Gate = CONCERNS
-   - If security/data-loss P0 test missing → Gate = FAIL
-
-3. **Issue severity:**
-   - If any `top_issues.severity == high` → Gate = FAIL (unless waived)
-   - Else if any `severity == medium` → Gate = CONCERNS
-
-4. **NFR statuses:**
-   - If any NFR status is FAIL → Gate = FAIL
-   - Else if any NFR status is CONCERNS → Gate = CONCERNS
-   - Else → Gate = PASS
-
-- WAIVED only when waiver.active: true with reason/approver
-
-Detailed criteria:
-
-- **PASS**: All critical requirements met, no blocking issues
-- **CONCERNS**: Non-critical issues found, team should review
-- **FAIL**: Critical issues that should be addressed
-- **WAIVED**: Issues acknowledged but explicitly waived by team
-
-### Quality Score Calculation
-
-```text
-quality_score = 100 - (20 × number of FAILs) - (10 × number of CONCERNS)
-Bounded between 0 and 100
-```
-
-If `technical-preferences.md` defines custom weights, use those instead.
-
-### Suggested Owner Convention
-
-For each issue in `top_issues`, include a `suggested_owner`:
-
-- `full-stack-dev`: Code changes needed
-- `scrum-master`: Requirements clarification needed
-- `product-owner`: Business decision needed
-
-## Key Principles
-
-- You are a Test Architect providing comprehensive quality assessment
-- You have the authority to improve code directly when appropriate
-- Always explain your changes for learning purposes
-- Balance between perfection and pragmatism
-- Focus on risk-based prioritization
-- Provide actionable recommendations with clear ownership
-
-## Blocking Conditions
-
-Stop the review and request clarification if:
-
-- Story file is incomplete or missing critical sections
-- File List is empty or clearly incomplete
-- No tests exist when they were required
-- Code changes don't align with story requirements
-- Critical architectural issues that require discussion
-
-## Completion
-
-After review:
-
-1. Update the QA Results section in the story file
-2. Create the gate file in directory from `qa.qaLocation/gates`
-3. Recommend status: "Ready for Done" or "Changes Required" (owner decides)
-4. If files were modified, list them in QA Results and ask full-stack-dev to update File List
-5. Always provide constructive feedback and actionable recommendations
-
-
----
-
-## Risk Profile {#risk-profile}
-
-
-# risk-profile
-
-Generate a comprehensive risk assessment matrix for a story implementation using probability × impact analysis.
-
-## Inputs
-
-```yaml
-required:
-  - story_id: '{epic}.{story}' # e.g., "1.3"
-  - story_path: 'docs/stories/{epic}.{story}.*.md'
-  - story_title: '{title}' # If missing, derive from story file H1
-  - story_slug: '{slug}' # If missing, derive from title (lowercase, hyphenated)
-```
-
-## Purpose
-
-Identify, assess, and prioritize risks in the story implementation. Provide risk mitigation strategies and testing focus areas based on risk levels.
-
-## Risk Assessment Framework
-
-### Risk Categories
-
-**Category Prefixes:**
-
-- `TECH`: Technical Risks
-- `SEC`: Security Risks
-- `PERF`: Performance Risks
-- `DATA`: Data Risks
-- `BUS`: Business Risks
-- `OPS`: Operational Risks
-
-1. **Technical Risks (TECH)**
-   - Architecture complexity
-   - Integration challenges
-   - Technical debt
-   - Scalability concerns
-   - System dependencies
-
-2. **Security Risks (SEC)**
-   - Authentication/authorization flaws
-   - Data exposure vulnerabilities
-   - Injection attacks
-   - Session management issues
-   - Cryptographic weaknesses
-
-3. **Performance Risks (PERF)**
-   - Response time degradation
-   - Throughput bottlenecks
-   - Resource exhaustion
-   - Database query optimization
-   - Caching failures
-
-4. **Data Risks (DATA)**
-   - Data loss potential
-   - Data corruption
-   - Privacy violations
-   - Compliance issues
-   - Backup/recovery gaps
-
-5. **Business Risks (BUS)**
-   - Feature doesn't meet user needs
-   - Revenue impact
-   - Reputation damage
-   - Regulatory non-compliance
-   - Market timing
-
-6. **Operational Risks (OPS)**
-   - Deployment failures
-   - Monitoring gaps
-   - Incident response readiness
-   - Documentation inadequacy
-   - Knowledge transfer issues
-
-## Risk Analysis Process
-
-### 1. Risk Identification
-
-For each category, identify specific risks:
-
-```yaml
-risk:
-  id: 'SEC-001' # Use prefixes: SEC, PERF, DATA, BUS, OPS, TECH
-  category: security
-  title: 'Insufficient input validation on user forms'
-  description: 'Form inputs not properly sanitized could lead to XSS attacks'
-  affected_components:
-    - 'UserRegistrationForm'
-    - 'ProfileUpdateForm'
-  detection_method: 'Code review revealed missing validation'
-```
-
-### 2. Risk Assessment
-
-Evaluate each risk using probability × impact:
-
-**Probability Levels:**
-
-- `High (3)`: Likely to occur (>70% chance)
-- `Medium (2)`: Possible occurrence (30-70% chance)
-- `Low (1)`: Unlikely to occur (<30% chance)
-
-**Impact Levels:**
-
-- `High (3)`: Severe consequences (data breach, system down, major financial loss)
-- `Medium (2)`: Moderate consequences (degraded performance, minor data issues)
-- `Low (1)`: Minor consequences (cosmetic issues, slight inconvenience)
-
-### Risk Score = Probability × Impact
-
-- 9: Critical Risk (Red)
-- 6: High Risk (Orange)
-- 4: Medium Risk (Yellow)
-- 2-3: Low Risk (Green)
-- 1: Minimal Risk (Blue)
-
-### 3. Risk Prioritization
-
-Create risk matrix:
-
-```markdown
-## Risk Matrix
-
-| Risk ID  | Description             | Probability | Impact     | Score | Priority |
-| -------- | ----------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ----- | -------- |
-| SEC-001  | XSS vulnerability       | High (3)    | High (3)   | 9     | Critical |
-| PERF-001 | Slow query on dashboard | Medium (2)  | Medium (2) | 4     | Medium   |
-| DATA-001 | Backup failure          | Low (1)     | High (3)   | 3     | Low      |
-```
-
-### 4. Risk Mitigation Strategies
-
-For each identified risk, provide mitigation:
-
-```yaml
-mitigation:
-  risk_id: 'SEC-001'
-  strategy: 'preventive' # preventive|detective|corrective
-  actions:
-    - 'Implement input validation library (e.g., validator.js)'
-    - 'Add CSP headers to prevent XSS execution'
-    - 'Sanitize all user inputs before storage'
-    - 'Escape all outputs in templates'
-  testing_requirements:
-    - 'Security testing with OWASP ZAP'
-    - 'Manual penetration testing of forms'
-    - 'Unit tests for validation functions'
-  residual_risk: 'Low - Some zero-day vulnerabilities may remain'
-  owner: 'full-stack-dev'
-  timeline: 'Before deployment'
-```
-
-## Outputs
-
-### Output 1: Gate YAML Block
-
-Generate for pasting into gate file under `risk_summary`:
-
-**Output rules:**
-
-- Only include assessed risks; do not emit placeholders
-- Sort risks by score (desc) when emitting highest and any tabular lists
-- If no risks: totals all zeros, omit highest, keep recommendations arrays empty
-
-```yaml
-# risk_summary (paste into gate file):
-risk_summary:
-  totals:
-    critical: X # score 9
-    high: Y # score 6
-    medium: Z # score 4
-    low: W # score 2-3
-  highest:
-    id: SEC-001
-    score: 9
-    title: 'XSS on profile form'
-  recommendations:
-    must_fix:
-      - 'Add input sanitization & CSP'
-    monitor:
-      - 'Add security alerts for auth endpoints'
-```
-
-### Output 2: Markdown Report
-
-**Save to:** `qa.qaLocation/assessments/{epic}.{story}-risk-{YYYYMMDD}.md`
-
-```markdown
-# Risk Profile: Story {epic}.{story}
-
-Date: {date}
-Reviewer: Quinn (Test Architect)
-
-## Executive Summary
-
-- Total Risks Identified: X
-- Critical Risks: Y
-- High Risks: Z
-- Risk Score: XX/100 (calculated)
-
-## Critical Risks Requiring Immediate Attention
-
-### 1. [ID]: Risk Title
-
-**Score: 9 (Critical)**
-**Probability**: High - Detailed reasoning
-**Impact**: High - Potential consequences
-**Mitigation**:
-
-- Immediate action required
-- Specific steps to take
-  **Testing Focus**: Specific test scenarios needed
-
-## Risk Distribution
-
-### By Category
-
-- Security: X risks (Y critical)
-- Performance: X risks (Y critical)
-- Data: X risks (Y critical)
-- Business: X risks (Y critical)
-- Operational: X risks (Y critical)
-
-### By Component
-
-- Frontend: X risks
-- Backend: X risks
-- Database: X risks
-- Infrastructure: X risks
-
-## Detailed Risk Register
-
-[Full table of all risks with scores and mitigations]
-
-## Risk-Based Testing Strategy
-
-### Priority 1: Critical Risk Tests
-
-- Test scenarios for critical risks
-- Required test types (security, load, chaos)
-- Test data requirements
-
-### Priority 2: High Risk Tests
-
-- Integration test scenarios
-- Edge case coverage
-
-### Priority 3: Medium/Low Risk Tests
-
-- Standard functional tests
-- Regression test suite
-
-## Risk Acceptance Criteria
-
-### Must Fix Before Production
-
-- All critical risks (score 9)
-- High risks affecting security/data
-
-### Can Deploy with Mitigation
-
-- Medium risks with compensating controls
-- Low risks with monitoring in place
-
-### Accepted Risks
-
-- Document any risks team accepts
-- Include sign-off from appropriate authority
-
-## Monitoring Requirements
-
-Post-deployment monitoring for:
-
-- Performance metrics for PERF risks
-- Security alerts for SEC risks
-- Error rates for operational risks
-- Business KPIs for business risks
-
-## Risk Review Triggers
-
-Review and update risk profile when:
-
-- Architecture changes significantly
-- New integrations added
-- Security vulnerabilities discovered
-- Performance issues reported
-- Regulatory requirements change
-```
-
-## Risk Scoring Algorithm
-
-Calculate overall story risk score:
-
-```text
-Base Score = 100
-For each risk:
-  - Critical (9): Deduct 20 points
-  - High (6): Deduct 10 points
-  - Medium (4): Deduct 5 points
-  - Low (2-3): Deduct 2 points
-
-Minimum score = 0 (extremely risky)
-Maximum score = 100 (minimal risk)
-```
-
-## Risk-Based Recommendations
-
-Based on risk profile, recommend:
-
-1. **Testing Priority**
-   - Which tests to run first
-   - Additional test types needed
-   - Test environment requirements
-
-2. **Development Focus**
-   - Code review emphasis areas
-   - Additional validation needed
-   - Security controls to implement
-
-3. **Deployment Strategy**
-   - Phased rollout for high-risk changes
-   - Feature flags for risky features
-   - Rollback procedures
-
-4. **Monitoring Setup**
-   - Metrics to track
-   - Alerts to configure
-   - Dashboard requirements
-
-## Integration with Quality Gates
-
-**Deterministic gate mapping:**
-
-- Any risk with score ≥ 9 → Gate = FAIL (unless waived)
-- Else if any score ≥ 6 → Gate = CONCERNS
-- Else → Gate = PASS
-- Unmitigated risks → Document in gate
-
-### Output 3: Story Hook Line
-
-**Print this line for review task to quote:**
-
-```text
-Risk profile: qa.qaLocation/assessments/{epic}.{story}-risk-{YYYYMMDD}.md
-```
-
-## Key Principles
-
-- Identify risks early and systematically
-- Use consistent probability × impact scoring
-- Provide actionable mitigation strategies
-- Link risks to specific test requirements
-- Track residual risk after mitigation
-- Update risk profile as story evolves
-
-
----
-
-## Shard Doc {#shard-doc}
-
-
-# Document Sharding Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-- Split a large document into multiple smaller documents based on level 2 sections
-- Create a folder structure to organize the sharded documents
-- Maintain all content integrity including code blocks, diagrams, and markdown formatting
-
-## Primary Method: Automatic with markdown-tree
-
-[[LLM: First, check if markdownExploder is set to true in {root}/core-config.yaml. If it is, attempt to run the command: `md-tree explode {input file} {output path}`.
-
-If the command succeeds, inform the user that the document has been sharded successfully and STOP - do not proceed further.
-
-If the command fails (especially with an error indicating the command is not found or not available), inform the user: "The markdownExploder setting is enabled but the md-tree command is not available. Please either:
-
-1. Install @kayvan/markdown-tree-parser globally with: `npm install -g @kayvan/markdown-tree-parser`
-2. Or set markdownExploder to false in {root}/core-config.yaml
-
-**IMPORTANT: STOP HERE - do not proceed with manual sharding until one of the above actions is taken.**"
-
-If markdownExploder is set to false, inform the user: "The markdownExploder setting is currently false. For better performance and reliability, you should:
-
-1. Set markdownExploder to true in {root}/core-config.yaml
-2. Install @kayvan/markdown-tree-parser globally with: `npm install -g @kayvan/markdown-tree-parser`
-
-I will now proceed with the manual sharding process."
-
-Then proceed with the manual method below ONLY if markdownExploder is false.]]
-
-### Installation and Usage
-
-1. **Install globally**:
-
-   ```bash
-   npm install -g @kayvan/markdown-tree-parser
-   ```
-
-2. **Use the explode command**:
-
-   ```bash
-   # For PRD
-   md-tree explode docs/prd.md docs/prd
-
-   # For Architecture
-   md-tree explode docs/architecture.md docs/architecture
-
-   # For any document
-   md-tree explode [source-document] [destination-folder]
-   ```
-
-3. **What it does**:
-   - Automatically splits the document by level 2 sections
-   - Creates properly named files
-   - Adjusts heading levels appropriately
-   - Handles all edge cases with code blocks and special markdown
-
-If the user has @kayvan/markdown-tree-parser installed, use it and skip the manual process below.
-
----
-
-## Manual Method (if @kayvan/markdown-tree-parser is not available or user indicated manual method)
-
-### Task Instructions
-
-1. Identify Document and Target Location
-
-- Determine which document to shard (user-provided path)
-- Create a new folder under `docs/` with the same name as the document (without extension)
-- Example: `docs/prd.md` → create folder `docs/prd/`
-
-2. Parse and Extract Sections
-
-CRITICAL AEGNT SHARDING RULES:
-
-1. Read the entire document content
-2. Identify all level 2 sections (## headings)
-3. For each level 2 section:
-   - Extract the section heading and ALL content until the next level 2 section
-   - Include all subsections, code blocks, diagrams, lists, tables, etc.
-   - Be extremely careful with:
-     - Fenced code blocks (```) - ensure you capture the full block including closing backticks and account for potential misleading level 2's that are actually part of a fenced section example
-     - Mermaid diagrams - preserve the complete diagram syntax
-     - Nested markdown elements
-     - Multi-line content that might contain ## inside code blocks
-
-CRITICAL: Use proper parsing that understands markdown context. A ## inside a code block is NOT a section header.]]
-
-### 3. Create Individual Files
-
-For each extracted section:
-
-1. **Generate filename**: Convert the section heading to lowercase-dash-case
-   - Remove special characters
-   - Replace spaces with dashes
-   - Example: "## Tech Stack" → `tech-stack.md`
-
-2. **Adjust heading levels**:
-   - The level 2 heading becomes level 1 (# instead of ##) in the sharded new document
-   - All subsection levels decrease by 1:
-
-   ```txt
-     - ### → ##
-     - #### → ###
-     - ##### → ####
-     - etc.
-   ```
-
-3. **Write content**: Save the adjusted content to the new file
-
-### 4. Create Index File
-
-Create an `index.md` file in the sharded folder that:
-
-1. Contains the original level 1 heading and any content before the first level 2 section
-2. Lists all the sharded files with links:
-
-```markdown
-# Original Document Title
-
-[Original introduction content if any]
-
-## Sections
-
-- [Section Name 1](./section-name-1.md)
-- [Section Name 2](./section-name-2.md)
-- [Section Name 3](./section-name-3.md)
-  ...
-```
-
-### 5. Preserve Special Content
-
-1. **Code blocks**: Must capture complete blocks including:
-
-   ```language
-   content
-   ```
-
-2. **Mermaid diagrams**: Preserve complete syntax:
-
-   ```mermaid
-   graph TD
-   ...
-   ```
-
-3. **Tables**: Maintain proper markdown table formatting
-
-4. **Lists**: Preserve indentation and nesting
-
-5. **Inline code**: Preserve backticks
-
-6. **Links and references**: Keep all markdown links intact
-
-7. **Template markup**: If documents contain {{placeholders}} ,preserve exactly
-
-### 6. Validation
-
-After sharding:
-
-1. Verify all sections were extracted
-2. Check that no content was lost
-3. Ensure heading levels were properly adjusted
-4. Confirm all files were created successfully
-
-### 7. Report Results
-
-Provide a summary:
-
-```text
-Document sharded successfully:
-- Source: [original document path]
-- Destination: docs/[folder-name]/
-- Files created: [count]
-- Sections:
-  - section-name-1.md: "Section Title 1"
-  - section-name-2.md: "Section Title 2"
-  ...
-```
-
-## Important Notes
-
-- Never modify the actual content, only adjust heading levels
-- Preserve ALL formatting, including whitespace where significant
-- Handle edge cases like sections with code blocks containing ## symbols
-- Ensure the sharding is reversible (could reconstruct the original from shards)
-
-
----
-
-## Test Design {#test-design}
-
-
-# test-design
-
-Create comprehensive test scenarios with appropriate test level recommendations for story implementation.
-
-## Inputs
-
-```yaml
-required:
-  - story_id: '{epic}.{story}' # e.g., "1.3"
-  - story_path: '{devStoryLocation}/{epic}.{story}.*.md' # Path from core-config.yaml
-  - story_title: '{title}' # If missing, derive from story file H1
-  - story_slug: '{slug}' # If missing, derive from title (lowercase, hyphenated)
-```
-
-## Purpose
-
-Design a complete test strategy that identifies what to test, at which level (unit/integration/e2e), and why. This ensures efficient test coverage without redundancy while maintaining appropriate test boundaries.
-
-## Dependencies
-
-```yaml
-data:
-  - test-levels-framework.md # Unit/Integration/E2E decision criteria
-  - test-priorities-matrix.md # P0/P1/P2/P3 classification system
-```
-
-## Process
-
-### 1. Analyze Story Requirements
-
-Break down each acceptance criterion into testable scenarios. For each AC:
-
-- Identify the core functionality to test
-- Determine data variations needed
-- Consider error conditions
-- Note edge cases
-
-### 2. Apply Test Level Framework
-
-**Reference:** Load `test-levels-framework.md` for detailed criteria
-
-Quick rules:
-
-- **Unit**: Pure logic, algorithms, calculations
-- **Integration**: Component interactions, DB operations
-- **E2E**: Critical user journeys, compliance
-
-### 3. Assign Priorities
-
-**Reference:** Load `test-priorities-matrix.md` for classification
-
-Quick priority assignment:
-
-- **P0**: Revenue-critical, security, compliance
-- **P1**: Core user journeys, frequently used
-- **P2**: Secondary features, admin functions
-- **P3**: Nice-to-have, rarely used
-
-### 4. Design Test Scenarios
-
-For each identified test need, create:
-
-```yaml
-test_scenario:
-  id: '{epic}.{story}-{LEVEL}-{SEQ}'
-  requirement: 'AC reference'
-  priority: P0|P1|P2|P3
-  level: unit|integration|e2e
-  description: 'What is being tested'
-  justification: 'Why this level was chosen'
-  mitigates_risks: ['RISK-001'] # If risk profile exists
-```
-
-### 5. Validate Coverage
-
-Ensure:
-
-- Every AC has at least one test
-- No duplicate coverage across levels
-- Critical paths have multiple levels
-- Risk mitigations are addressed
-
-## Outputs
-
-### Output 1: Test Design Document
-
-**Save to:** `qa.qaLocation/assessments/{epic}.{story}-test-design-{YYYYMMDD}.md`
-
-```markdown
-# Test Design: Story {epic}.{story}
-
-Date: {date}
-Designer: Quinn (Test Architect)
-
-## Test Strategy Overview
-
-- Total test scenarios: X
-- Unit tests: Y (A%)
-- Integration tests: Z (B%)
-- E2E tests: W (C%)
-- Priority distribution: P0: X, P1: Y, P2: Z
-
-## Test Scenarios by Acceptance Criteria
-
-### AC1: {description}
-
-#### Scenarios
-
-| ID           | Level       | Priority | Test                      | Justification            |
-| ------------ | ----------- | -------- | ------------------------- | ------------------------ |
-| 1.3-UNIT-001 | Unit        | P0       | Validate input format     | Pure validation logic    |
-| 1.3-INT-001  | Integration | P0       | Service processes request | Multi-component flow     |
-| 1.3-E2E-001  | E2E         | P1       | User completes journey    | Critical path validation |
-
-[Continue for all ACs...]
-
-## Risk Coverage
-
-[Map test scenarios to identified risks if risk profile exists]
-
-## Recommended Execution Order
-
-1. P0 Unit tests (fail fast)
-2. P0 Integration tests
-3. P0 E2E tests
-4. P1 tests in order
-5. P2+ as time permits
-```
-
-### Output 2: Gate YAML Block
-
-Generate for inclusion in quality gate:
-
-```yaml
-test_design:
-  scenarios_total: X
-  by_level:
-    unit: Y
-    integration: Z
-    e2e: W
-  by_priority:
-    p0: A
-    p1: B
-    p2: C
-  coverage_gaps: [] # List any ACs without tests
-```
-
-### Output 3: Trace References
-
-Print for use by trace-requirements task:
-
-```text
-Test design matrix: qa.qaLocation/assessments/{epic}.{story}-test-design-{YYYYMMDD}.md
-P0 tests identified: {count}
-```
-
-## Quality Checklist
-
-Before finalizing, verify:
-
-- [ ] Every AC has test coverage
-- [ ] Test levels are appropriate (not over-testing)
-- [ ] No duplicate coverage across levels
-- [ ] Priorities align with business risk
-- [ ] Test IDs follow naming convention
-- [ ] Scenarios are atomic and independent
-
-## Key Principles
-
-- **Shift left**: Prefer unit over integration, integration over E2E
-- **Risk-based**: Focus on what could go wrong
-- **Efficient coverage**: Test once at the right level
-- **Maintainability**: Consider long-term test maintenance
-- **Fast feedback**: Quick tests run first
-
-
----
-
-## Trace Requirements {#trace-requirements}
-
-
-# trace-requirements
-
-Map story requirements to test cases using Given-When-Then patterns for comprehensive traceability.
-
-## Purpose
-
-Create a requirements traceability matrix that ensures every acceptance criterion has corresponding test coverage. This task helps identify gaps in testing and ensures all requirements are validated.
-
-**IMPORTANT**: Given-When-Then is used here for documenting the mapping between requirements and tests, NOT for writing the actual test code. Tests should follow your project's testing standards (no BDD syntax in test code).
-
-## Prerequisites
-
-- Story file with clear acceptance criteria
-- Access to test files or test specifications
-- Understanding of the implementation
-
-## Traceability Process
-
-### 1. Extract Requirements
-
-Identify all testable requirements from:
-
-- Acceptance Criteria (primary source)
-- User story statement
-- Tasks/subtasks with specific behaviors
-- Non-functional requirements mentioned
-- Edge cases documented
-
-### 2. Map to Test Cases
-
-For each requirement, document which tests validate it. Use Given-When-Then to describe what the test validates (not how it's written):
-
-```yaml
-requirement: 'AC1: User can login with valid credentials'
-test_mappings:
-  - test_file: 'auth/login.test.ts'
-    test_case: 'should successfully login with valid email and password'
-    # Given-When-Then describes WHAT the test validates, not HOW it's coded
-    given: 'A registered user with valid credentials'
-    when: 'They submit the login form'
-    then: 'They are redirected to dashboard and session is created'
-    coverage: full
-
-  - test_file: 'e2e/auth-flow.test.ts'
-    test_case: 'complete login flow'
-    given: 'User on login page'
-    when: 'Entering valid credentials and submitting'
-    then: 'Dashboard loads with user data'
-    coverage: integration
-```
-
-### 3. Coverage Analysis
-
-Evaluate coverage for each requirement:
-
-**Coverage Levels:**
-
-- `full`: Requirement completely tested
-- `partial`: Some aspects tested, gaps exist
-- `none`: No test coverage found
-- `integration`: Covered in integration/e2e tests only
-- `unit`: Covered in unit tests only
-
-### 4. Gap Identification
-
-Document any gaps found:
-
-```yaml
-coverage_gaps:
-  - requirement: 'AC3: Password reset email sent within 60 seconds'
-    gap: 'No test for email delivery timing'
-    severity: medium
-    suggested_test:
-      type: integration
-      description: 'Test email service SLA compliance'
-
-  - requirement: 'AC5: Support 1000 concurrent users'
-    gap: 'No load testing implemented'
-    severity: high
-    suggested_test:
-      type: performance
-      description: 'Load test with 1000 concurrent connections'
-```
-
-## Outputs
-
-### Output 1: Gate YAML Block
-
-**Generate for pasting into gate file under `trace`:**
-
-```yaml
-trace:
-  totals:
-    requirements: X
-    full: Y
-    partial: Z
-    none: W
-  planning_ref: 'qa.qaLocation/assessments/{epic}.{story}-test-design-{YYYYMMDD}.md'
-  uncovered:
-    - ac: 'AC3'
-      reason: 'No test found for password reset timing'
-  notes: 'See qa.qaLocation/assessments/{epic}.{story}-trace-{YYYYMMDD}.md'
-```
-
-### Output 2: Traceability Report
-
-**Save to:** `qa.qaLocation/assessments/{epic}.{story}-trace-{YYYYMMDD}.md`
-
-Create a traceability report with:
-
-```markdown
-# Requirements Traceability Matrix
-
-## Story: {epic}.{story} - {title}
-
-### Coverage Summary
-
-- Total Requirements: X
-- Fully Covered: Y (Z%)
-- Partially Covered: A (B%)
-- Not Covered: C (D%)
-
-### Requirement Mappings
-
-#### AC1: {Acceptance Criterion 1}
-
-**Coverage: FULL**
-
-Given-When-Then Mappings:
-
-- **Unit Test**: `auth.service.test.ts::validateCredentials`
-  - Given: Valid user credentials
-  - When: Validation method called
-  - Then: Returns true with user object
-
-- **Integration Test**: `auth.integration.test.ts::loginFlow`
-  - Given: User with valid account
-  - When: Login API called
-  - Then: JWT token returned and session created
-
-#### AC2: {Acceptance Criterion 2}
-
-**Coverage: PARTIAL**
-
-[Continue for all ACs...]
-
-### Critical Gaps
-
-1. **Performance Requirements**
-   - Gap: No load testing for concurrent users
-   - Risk: High - Could fail under production load
-   - Action: Implement load tests using k6 or similar
-
-2. **Security Requirements**
-   - Gap: Rate limiting not tested
-   - Risk: Medium - Potential DoS vulnerability
-   - Action: Add rate limit tests to integration suite
-
-### Test Design Recommendations
-
-Based on gaps identified, recommend:
-
-1. Additional test scenarios needed
-2. Test types to implement (unit/integration/e2e/performance)
-3. Test data requirements
-4. Mock/stub strategies
-
-### Risk Assessment
-
-- **High Risk**: Requirements with no coverage
-- **Medium Risk**: Requirements with only partial coverage
-- **Low Risk**: Requirements with full unit + integration coverage
-```
-
-## Traceability Best Practices
-
-### Given-When-Then for Mapping (Not Test Code)
-
-Use Given-When-Then to document what each test validates:
-
-**Given**: The initial context the test sets up
-
-- What state/data the test prepares
-- User context being simulated
-- System preconditions
-
-**When**: The action the test performs
-
-- What the test executes
-- API calls or user actions tested
-- Events triggered
-
-**Then**: What the test asserts
-
-- Expected outcomes verified
-- State changes checked
-- Values validated
-
-**Note**: This is for documentation only. Actual test code follows your project's standards (e.g., describe/it blocks, no BDD syntax).
-
-### Coverage Priority
-
-Prioritize coverage based on:
-
-1. Critical business flows
-2. Security-related requirements
-3. Data integrity requirements
-4. User-facing features
-5. Performance SLAs
-
-### Test Granularity
-
-Map at appropriate levels:
-
-- Unit tests for business logic
-- Integration tests for component interaction
-- E2E tests for user journeys
-- Performance tests for NFRs
-
-## Quality Indicators
-
-Good traceability shows:
-
-- Every AC has at least one test
-- Critical paths have multiple test levels
-- Edge cases are explicitly covered
-- NFRs have appropriate test types
-- Clear Given-When-Then for each test
-
-## Red Flags
-
-Watch for:
-
-- ACs with no test coverage
-- Tests that don't map to requirements
-- Vague test descriptions
-- Missing edge case coverage
-- NFRs without specific tests
-
-## Integration with Gates
-
-This traceability feeds into quality gates:
-
-- Critical gaps → FAIL
-- Minor gaps → CONCERNS
-- Missing P0 tests from test-design → CONCERNS
-
-### Output 3: Story Hook Line
-
-**Print this line for review task to quote:**
-
-```text
-Trace matrix: qa.qaLocation/assessments/{epic}.{story}-trace-{YYYYMMDD}.md
-```
-
-- Full coverage → PASS contribution
-
-## Key Principles
-
-- Every requirement must be testable
-- Use Given-When-Then for clarity
-- Identify both presence and absence
-- Prioritize based on risk
-- Make recommendations actionable
-
-
----
-
-## Validate Next Story {#validate-next-story}
-
-
-# Validate Next Story Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-To comprehensively validate a story draft before implementation begins, ensuring it is complete, accurate, and provides sufficient context for successful development. This task identifies issues and gaps that need to be addressed, preventing hallucinations and ensuring implementation readiness.
-
-## SEQUENTIAL Task Execution (Do not proceed until current Task is complete)
-
-### 0. Load Core Configuration and Inputs
-
-- Load `.core-config.yaml`
-- If the file does not exist, HALT and inform the user: "core-config.yaml not found. This file is required for story validation."
-- Extract key configurations: `devStoryLocation`, `prd.*`, `architecture.*`
-- Identify and load the following inputs:
-  - **Story file**: The drafted story to validate (provided by user or discovered in `devStoryLocation`)
-  - **Parent epic**: The epic containing this story's requirements
-  - **Architecture documents**: Based on configuration (sharded or monolithic)
-  - **Story template**: `templates/story-tmpl.md` for completeness validation
-
-### 1. Template Completeness Validation
-
-- Load `.templates/story-tmpl.yaml` and extract all section headings from the template
-- **Missing sections check**: Compare story sections against template sections to verify all required sections are present
-- **Placeholder validation**: Ensure no template placeholders remain unfilled (e.g., `{{EpicNum}}`, `{{role}}`, `_TBD_`)
-- **Agent section verification**: Confirm all sections from template exist for future agent use
-- **Structure compliance**: Verify story follows template structure and formatting
-
-### 2. File Structure and Source Tree Validation
-
-- **File paths clarity**: Are new/existing files to be created/modified clearly specified?
-- **Source tree relevance**: Is relevant project structure included in full-stack-dev Notes?
-- **Directory structure**: Are new directories/components properly located according to project structure?
-- **File creation sequence**: Do tasks specify where files should be created in logical order?
-- **Path accuracy**: Are file paths consistent with project structure from architecture docs?
-
-### 3. UI/Frontend Completeness Validation (if applicable)
-
-- **Component specifications**: Are UI components sufficiently detailed for implementation?
-- **Styling/design guidance**: Is visual implementation guidance clear?
-- **User interaction flows**: Are UX patterns and behaviors specified?
-- **Responsive/accessibility**: Are these considerations addressed if required?
-- **Integration points**: Are frontend-backend integration points clear?
-
-### 4. Acceptance Criteria Satisfaction Assessment
-
-- **AC coverage**: Will all acceptance criteria be satisfied by the listed tasks?
-- **AC testability**: Are acceptance criteria measurable and verifiable?
-- **Missing scenarios**: Are edge cases or error conditions covered?
-- **Success definition**: Is "done" clearly defined for each AC?
-- **Task-AC mapping**: Are tasks properly linked to specific acceptance criteria?
-
-### 5. Validation and Testing Instructions Review
-
-- **Test approach clarity**: Are testing methods clearly specified?
-- **Test scenarios**: Are key test cases identified?
-- **Validation steps**: Are acceptance criteria validation steps clear?
-- **Testing tools/frameworks**: Are required testing tools specified?
-- **Test data requirements**: Are test data needs identified?
-
-### 6. Security Considerations Assessment (if applicable)
-
-- **Security requirements**: Are security needs identified and addressed?
-- **Authentication/authorization**: Are access controls specified?
-- **Data protection**: Are sensitive data handling requirements clear?
-- **Vulnerability prevention**: Are common security issues addressed?
-- **Compliance requirements**: Are regulatory/compliance needs addressed?
-
-### 7. Tasks/Subtasks Sequence Validation
-
-- **Logical order**: Do tasks follow proper implementation sequence?
-- **Dependencies**: Are task dependencies clear and correct?
-- **Granularity**: Are tasks appropriately sized and actionable?
-- **Completeness**: Do tasks cover all requirements and acceptance criteria?
-- **Blocking issues**: Are there any tasks that would block others?
-
-### 8. Anti-Hallucination Verification
-
-- **Source verification**: Every technical claim must be traceable to source documents
-- **Architecture alignment**: full-stack-dev Notes content matches architecture specifications
-- **No invented details**: Flag any technical decisions not supported by source documents
-- **Reference accuracy**: Verify all source references are correct and accessible
-- **Fact checking**: Cross-reference claims against epic and architecture documents
-
-### 9. full-stack-dev Agent Implementation Readiness
-
-- **Self-contained context**: Can the story be implemented without reading external docs?
-- **Clear instructions**: Are implementation steps unambiguous?
-- **Complete technical context**: Are all required technical details present in full-stack-dev Notes?
-- **Missing information**: Identify any critical information gaps
-- **Actionability**: Are all tasks actionable by a development agent?
-
-### 10. Generate Validation Report
-
-Provide a structured validation report including:
-
-#### Template Compliance Issues
-
-- Missing sections from story template
-- Unfilled placeholders or template variables
-- Structural formatting issues
-
-#### Critical Issues (Must Fix - Story Blocked)
-
-- Missing essential information for implementation
-- Inaccurate or unverifiable technical claims
-- Incomplete acceptance criteria coverage
-- Missing required sections
-
-#### Should-Fix Issues (Important Quality Improvements)
-
-- Unclear implementation guidance
-- Missing security considerations
-- Task sequencing problems
-- Incomplete testing instructions
-
-#### Nice-to-Have Improvements (Optional Enhancements)
-
-- Additional context that would help implementation
-- Clarifications that would improve efficiency
-- Documentation improvements
-
-#### Anti-Hallucination Findings
-
-- Unverifiable technical claims
-- Missing source references
-- Inconsistencies with architecture documents
-- Invented libraries, patterns, or standards
-
-#### Final Assessment
-
-- **GO**: Story is ready for implementation
-- **NO-GO**: Story requires fixes before implementation
-- **Implementation Readiness Score**: 1-10 scale
-- **Confidence Level**: High/Medium/Low for successful implementation
-
-
----
-