@codihaus/claude-skills 1.6.21 → 1.6.22
This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.
- package/package.json +1 -1
- package/skills/debrief/SKILL.md +89 -457
- package/skills/debrief/references/codes.md +135 -0
- package/skills/debrief/references/research.md +227 -0
- package/skills/debrief/references/templates/brd-references.md +80 -0
- package/skills/debrief/references/templates/feature-references.md +98 -0
- package/skills/debrief/references/templates/use-case.md +31 -0
- package/skills/debrief/references/workflow.md +315 -0
- package/skills/debrief/references/file-patterns.md +0 -173
- package/skills/debrief/references/group-codes.md +0 -72
- package/skills/debrief/references/research-queries.md +0 -106
- package/skills/debrief/references/use-case-template.md +0 -141
- /package/skills/debrief/references/{change-request-template.md → templates/change-request.md} +0 -0
package/package.json
CHANGED
package/skills/debrief/SKILL.md
CHANGED
|
@@ -1,513 +1,145 @@
|
|
|
1
1
|
---
|
|
2
2
|
name: debrief
|
|
3
|
-
description:
|
|
4
|
-
version:
|
|
3
|
+
description: Customer requirements → market-validated BRD with tiered features
|
|
4
|
+
version: 4.0.0
|
|
5
5
|
---
|
|
6
6
|
|
|
7
|
-
# /debrief - Business Requirements Document
|
|
7
|
+
# /debrief - Business Requirements Document
|
|
8
8
|
|
|
9
|
-
|
|
10
|
-
> - **Before**: Use `/dev-scout` if existing codebase
|
|
11
|
-
> - **During**: Calls `/dev-arch` to validate architecture feasibility
|
|
12
|
-
> - **After**: Use `/dev-specs` for implementation plans
|
|
13
|
-
> - **Auto**: `docs-graph.json` updated by hook for relationships
|
|
9
|
+
**Role**: Business analyst creating market-validated BRDs.
|
|
14
10
|
|
|
15
|
-
|
|
11
|
+
**Focus**: WHAT features + WHY (business), not HOW (technical).
|
|
16
12
|
|
|
17
|
-
|
|
18
|
-
|
|
19
|
-
- Start a new project (creates initial BRD)
|
|
20
|
-
- Add new feature to existing project (updates BRD)
|
|
21
|
-
- Process change requests (tracked separately)
|
|
22
|
-
|
|
23
|
-
## Usage
|
|
24
|
-
|
|
25
|
-
```
|
|
26
|
-
/debrief "Customer wants a SaaS platform" # New project
|
|
27
|
-
/debrief "Add billing and subscriptions" # Add feature
|
|
28
|
-
/debrief requirements.pdf # From document
|
|
29
|
-
/debrief # Interactive
|
|
30
|
-
/debrief --answers questionnaire.xlsx # Process customer answers
|
|
31
|
-
/debrief --questionnaire-only # Generate questionnaire only (no BRD)
|
|
32
|
-
```
|
|
33
|
-
|
|
34
|
-
## Output Structure
|
|
35
|
-
|
|
36
|
-
All output goes to unified `plans/` structure:
|
|
37
|
-
|
|
38
|
-
```
|
|
39
|
-
plans/
|
|
40
|
-
├── brd/ # This skill manages this folder
|
|
41
|
-
│ ├── README.md # Project overview, feature index
|
|
42
|
-
│ ├── context.md # Stakeholders, constraints
|
|
43
|
-
│ ├── use-cases/ # ALL use cases, grouped by feature
|
|
44
|
-
│ │ ├── auth/ # Auth feature UCs
|
|
45
|
-
│ │ │ ├── UC-AUTH-001-login.md
|
|
46
|
-
│ │ │ ├── UC-AUTH-002-signup.md
|
|
47
|
-
│ │ │ └── UC-AUTH-003-forgot.md
|
|
48
|
-
│ │ ├── billing/ # Billing feature UCs
|
|
49
|
-
│ │ │ ├── UC-PAY-001-checkout.md
|
|
50
|
-
│ │ │ └── UC-PAY-002-refund.md
|
|
51
|
-
│ │ └── ...
|
|
52
|
-
│ ├── changes/ # Change requests
|
|
53
|
-
│ │ └── CR-001-add-sso.md
|
|
54
|
-
│ ├── references.md
|
|
55
|
-
│ └── changelog.md
|
|
56
|
-
│
|
|
57
|
-
├── features/ # Created per feature
|
|
58
|
-
│ ├── auth/ # /dev-scout and /dev-specs work here
|
|
59
|
-
│ ├── billing/
|
|
60
|
-
│ └── ...
|
|
61
|
-
│
|
|
62
|
-
└── scout/ # /dev-scout project level
|
|
63
|
-
```
|
|
64
|
-
|
|
65
|
-
## Expected Outcome
|
|
66
|
-
|
|
67
|
-
Depending on mode:
|
|
68
|
-
|
|
69
|
-
**New Project:**
|
|
70
|
-
- BRD with use cases grouped by feature
|
|
71
|
-
- Context document (stakeholders, constraints, users)
|
|
72
|
-
- Market research (MVP/Standard/Advanced feature tiers)
|
|
73
|
-
- Feature folders created
|
|
74
|
-
- Architecture feasibility validated
|
|
75
|
-
- Questionnaire for customer gaps
|
|
76
|
-
|
|
77
|
-
**Add Feature:**
|
|
78
|
-
- New use cases added to BRD
|
|
79
|
-
- Feature folder created
|
|
80
|
-
- Links to existing features
|
|
81
|
-
- Change request (if BRD confirmed)
|
|
82
|
-
|
|
83
|
-
**Change Request:**
|
|
84
|
-
- CR document tracking the change
|
|
85
|
-
- Affected use cases updated
|
|
86
|
-
- Impact analysis
|
|
87
|
-
|
|
88
|
-
**Process Answers:**
|
|
89
|
-
- Use cases updated with answers
|
|
90
|
-
- Open questions resolved
|
|
91
|
-
- Status updated to "Confirmed" if complete
|
|
92
|
-
|
|
93
|
-
**Questionnaire Only:**
|
|
94
|
-
- Excel questionnaire file generated
|
|
95
|
-
- No BRD or feature folders created
|
|
96
|
-
- Ready to send to customer for answers
|
|
97
|
-
|
|
98
|
-
## Success Criteria
|
|
99
|
-
|
|
100
|
-
- Use cases are testable (clear acceptance criteria)
|
|
101
|
-
- No duplicate features (checked via docs-graph if exists)
|
|
102
|
-
- Open questions captured for customer
|
|
103
|
-
- Architecture can support requirements (validated by /dev-arch)
|
|
104
|
-
- Proper mode detected and handled
|
|
105
|
-
- Naming conventions followed (UC-{GROUP}-{NNN}-{slug})
|
|
106
|
-
|
|
107
|
-
## Modes
|
|
108
|
-
|
|
109
|
-
Detect automatically on start:
|
|
110
|
-
|
|
111
|
-
| Condition | Mode | Behavior |
|
|
112
|
-
|-----------|------|----------|
|
|
113
|
-
| `plans/brd/` doesn't exist | **New Project** | Create full BRD structure |
|
|
114
|
-
| `plans/brd/` exists, adding features | **Add Feature** | Add to existing BRD, check for duplicates |
|
|
115
|
-
| Modifying confirmed use cases | **Change Request** | Create CR first, then update |
|
|
116
|
-
| `--answers` flag provided | **Process Answers** | Update use cases with customer responses |
|
|
117
|
-
| `--questionnaire-only` flag provided | **Questionnaire Only** | Generate questionnaire Excel file only, no BRD |
|
|
118
|
-
|
|
119
|
-
## Context Gathering
|
|
120
|
-
|
|
121
|
-
Use `AskUserQuestion` to understand project context and scope preferences.
|
|
122
|
-
|
|
123
|
-
### For New Project
|
|
124
|
-
|
|
125
|
-
Ask 5 key questions using `AskUserQuestion`:
|
|
126
|
-
|
|
127
|
-
**Q1: Project Type & Source Code**
|
|
128
|
-
Options:
|
|
129
|
-
- New project (no existing code)
|
|
130
|
-
- Existing codebase (current folder)
|
|
131
|
-
- Existing codebase (different folder)
|
|
132
|
-
|
|
133
|
-
**Q2: Industry/Niche**
|
|
134
|
-
Options:
|
|
135
|
-
- SaaS B2B
|
|
136
|
-
- SaaS B2C
|
|
137
|
-
- E-commerce
|
|
138
|
-
- Marketplace
|
|
139
|
-
- Enterprise
|
|
140
|
-
- Other
|
|
141
|
-
|
|
142
|
-
**Q3: Target Users**
|
|
143
|
-
Options:
|
|
144
|
-
- Business users (B2B)
|
|
145
|
-
- Consumers (B2C)
|
|
146
|
-
- Internal users
|
|
147
|
-
- Mixed
|
|
148
|
-
|
|
149
|
-
**Q4: Known Constraints** (multi-select)
|
|
150
|
-
Options:
|
|
151
|
-
- Timeline constraint
|
|
152
|
-
- Budget constraint
|
|
153
|
-
- Compliance requirements
|
|
154
|
-
- Integration requirements
|
|
155
|
-
- None
|
|
156
|
-
|
|
157
|
-
**Q5: Scope Tier Preference**
|
|
158
|
-
Options:
|
|
159
|
-
- **Core (3-5 use cases)** - MVP, essential features only
|
|
160
|
-
- **Standard (8-12 use cases)** - Competitive parity, market standard
|
|
161
|
-
- **Full (15+ use cases)** - Advanced features, differentiation
|
|
162
|
-
|
|
163
|
-
This helps align on MVP vs market standard vs advanced features upfront.
|
|
164
|
-
|
|
165
|
-
### For Add Feature
|
|
166
|
-
|
|
167
|
-
Ask 2 questions:
|
|
168
|
-
|
|
169
|
-
**Q1: Feature Name**
|
|
170
|
-
What to call this feature (e.g., "billing", "notifications", "analytics")
|
|
171
|
-
|
|
172
|
-
**Q2: Scope for This Feature**
|
|
173
|
-
Options:
|
|
174
|
-
- **Core** - MVP/essential only
|
|
175
|
-
- **Standard** - Competitive parity
|
|
176
|
-
- **Full** - Advanced/differentiation features
|
|
177
|
-
|
|
178
|
-
### For Existing Codebase
|
|
179
|
-
|
|
180
|
-
**If user indicates existing codebase:**
|
|
181
|
-
- Scan for docs (CLAUDE.md, README, CONTRIBUTING)
|
|
182
|
-
- Scan frontend files (.vue, .tsx, .jsx) to infer existing features
|
|
183
|
-
- Use `references/file-patterns.md` for scan patterns
|
|
184
|
-
- Summarize findings in `context.md`
|
|
185
|
-
|
|
186
|
-
This codebase discovery informs which features already exist and what gaps remain.
|
|
187
|
-
|
|
188
|
-
## Duplicate Prevention
|
|
189
|
-
|
|
190
|
-
**Use docs-graph** (if exists) to check for duplicates:
|
|
191
|
-
- List existing use cases and features
|
|
192
|
-
- Check for potential overlaps
|
|
193
|
-
- Identify related nodes for impact analysis
|
|
194
|
-
|
|
195
|
-
**Before creating use cases:**
|
|
196
|
-
- Check if similar UC already exists
|
|
197
|
-
- If modifying confirmed UC → Create CR instead
|
|
198
|
-
|
|
199
|
-
## Use Case Generation
|
|
200
|
-
|
|
201
|
-
**Output location:** `plans/brd/use-cases/{feature}/UC-{GROUP}-{NNN}-{slug}.md`
|
|
202
|
-
|
|
203
|
-
**Each use case includes:**
|
|
204
|
-
- User story (As a X, I want Y, so that Z)
|
|
205
|
-
- Acceptance criteria (testable)
|
|
206
|
-
- Business rules
|
|
207
|
-
- Integration notes
|
|
208
|
-
- Open questions
|
|
209
|
-
- References from market research
|
|
210
|
-
|
|
211
|
-
## Market Research
|
|
212
|
-
|
|
213
|
-
**Why research:** Understand feature tiers and competitive landscape to inform scope decisions.
|
|
214
|
-
|
|
215
|
-
**Combines with user's scope preference:**
|
|
216
|
-
- User chose "Core" → Focus research on MVP features
|
|
217
|
-
- User chose "Standard" → Research MVP + market standard features
|
|
218
|
-
- User chose "Full" → Research all tiers including advanced/differentiation
|
|
219
|
-
|
|
220
|
-
**What to research:**
|
|
221
|
-
- Industry patterns (what similar products do)
|
|
222
|
-
- User flows (standard UX patterns in this domain)
|
|
223
|
-
- Compliance requirements (regulations, standards, must-haves)
|
|
224
|
-
- Documentation links (references for engineers)
|
|
225
|
-
|
|
226
|
-
**Expected insights organized by tier:**
|
|
227
|
-
- **MVP Features (Must-Have):** Minimum to be viable product
|
|
228
|
-
- Example: Login, basic CRUD, core workflows
|
|
229
|
-
- **Market Standard (Competitive Parity):** What competitors offer
|
|
230
|
-
- Example: SSO, notifications, exports
|
|
231
|
-
- **Advanced Features (Differentiation):** What sets apart top products
|
|
232
|
-
- Example: AI suggestions, real-time collaboration, advanced analytics
|
|
233
|
-
|
|
234
|
-
**Output:**
|
|
235
|
-
- `references.md` - Organized by feature tier with links and notes
|
|
236
|
-
- Use insights to:
|
|
237
|
-
- Validate user's scope choice (Core/Standard/Full)
|
|
238
|
-
- Prioritize use cases (Must/Should/Could)
|
|
239
|
-
- Guide customer conversations ("This is standard" vs "This is premium")
|
|
240
|
-
|
|
241
|
-
**Format for references.md:**
|
|
242
|
-
```markdown
|
|
243
|
-
## {Feature} - Market Research
|
|
244
|
-
|
|
245
|
-
### MVP (Must-Have)
|
|
246
|
-
- Login/Signup - Industry standard: email + password + OAuth
|
|
247
|
-
- Reference: [Auth0 best practices](link)
|
|
248
|
-
- Profile management - Every product has this
|
|
249
|
-
|
|
250
|
-
### Market Standard (Competitive Parity)
|
|
251
|
-
- SSO integration - 80% of competitors offer this
|
|
252
|
-
- Reference: [SAML guide](link)
|
|
253
|
-
- Email notifications - User expectation
|
|
254
|
-
|
|
255
|
-
### Advanced (Differentiation)
|
|
256
|
-
- AI-powered recommendations - Only Competitor X has this
|
|
257
|
-
- Reference: [ML recommendation patterns](link)
|
|
258
|
-
- Real-time collaboration - Top-tier feature
|
|
259
|
-
```
|
|
260
|
-
|
|
261
|
-
**How it guides use case creation:**
|
|
262
|
-
- User chose "Core" → Create use cases for MVP tier only
|
|
263
|
-
- User chose "Standard" → Create use cases for MVP + Market Standard tiers
|
|
264
|
-
- User chose "Full" → Create use cases for all tiers
|
|
265
|
-
|
|
266
|
-
This alignment ensures use cases match the agreed scope.
|
|
267
|
-
|
|
268
|
-
## BRD Structure
|
|
269
|
-
|
|
270
|
-
**Create/Update:**
|
|
271
|
-
- `README.md` - Project overview, feature index, use case tables
|
|
272
|
-
- `context.md` - Stakeholders, users, constraints, existing features
|
|
273
|
-
- `references.md` - Market research links
|
|
274
|
-
- `changelog.md` - Track all BRD updates
|
|
275
|
-
- `changes/` - Change requests (if modifying confirmed BRD)
|
|
276
|
-
|
|
277
|
-
**Feature folders:**
|
|
278
|
-
- `plans/features/{feature}/README.md` - Feature overview, links to use cases
|
|
279
|
-
|
|
280
|
-
## Architecture Validation
|
|
281
|
-
|
|
282
|
-
**After creating use cases**, call `/dev-arch` to validate feasibility:
|
|
13
|
+
---
|
|
283
14
|
|
|
284
|
-
|
|
285
|
-
- Can current architecture support this?
|
|
286
|
-
- What new architecture decisions needed?
|
|
287
|
-
- Any blockers or major concerns?
|
|
15
|
+
## When to Use
|
|
288
16
|
|
|
289
|
-
|
|
290
|
-
-
|
|
291
|
-
-
|
|
292
|
-
-
|
|
17
|
+
- New project → Create BRD
|
|
18
|
+
- Add features → Extend BRD
|
|
19
|
+
- Process customer answers → Update BRD
|
|
20
|
+
- Questionnaire only → Generate questions
|
|
293
21
|
|
|
294
|
-
|
|
22
|
+
---
|
|
295
23
|
|
|
296
|
-
|
|
297
|
-
- Use case "Open Questions" sections
|
|
298
|
-
- Context gaps
|
|
299
|
-
- Integration uncertainties
|
|
300
|
-
- Business rules needing clarification
|
|
24
|
+
## Usage
|
|
301
25
|
|
|
302
|
-
**If gaps exist, generate questionnaire:**
|
|
303
26
|
```bash
|
|
304
|
-
|
|
27
|
+
/debrief "Customer wants..." # New project
|
|
28
|
+
/debrief "Add {feature}" # Add feature
|
|
29
|
+
/debrief --answers questionnaire.xlsx # Process answers
|
|
30
|
+
/debrief --questionnaire-only # Questions only
|
|
305
31
|
```
|
|
306
32
|
|
|
307
|
-
|
|
308
|
-
- New feature: `plans/features/{feature}/questionnaire-{YYYY-MM-DD}.xlsx`
|
|
309
|
-
- Change request: `plans/brd/changes/CR-{NNN}-questionnaire-{YYYY-MM-DD}.xlsx`
|
|
310
|
-
|
|
311
|
-
**Categories:** Business, Requirements, Constraints, Integration, Technical
|
|
312
|
-
**Priority:** Required (blocks UC), Optional (nice to clarify)
|
|
313
|
-
|
|
314
|
-
## Change Requests
|
|
315
|
-
|
|
316
|
-
**Create CR when:**
|
|
317
|
-
- Modifying confirmed use cases
|
|
318
|
-
- BRD status is "Confirmed" and adding features
|
|
319
|
-
- Scope expansion discovered
|
|
320
|
-
|
|
321
|
-
**CR includes:**
|
|
322
|
-
- Request description
|
|
323
|
-
- Reason for change
|
|
324
|
-
- Impact analysis (new/modified UCs, affected features)
|
|
325
|
-
- Questionnaire (if questions exist)
|
|
326
|
-
|
|
327
|
-
## Process Answers Workflow
|
|
328
|
-
|
|
329
|
-
**When customer returns questionnaire:**
|
|
330
|
-
|
|
331
|
-
1. **Read questionnaire** - Extract answers from Excel
|
|
332
|
-
2. **Update use cases** - Add answers to relevant sections, remove from open questions
|
|
333
|
-
3. **Update feature README** - Note questionnaire processed
|
|
334
|
-
4. **Check completeness** - If gaps remain, generate new questionnaire with new date
|
|
335
|
-
5. **Update status** - Mark UCs as "Confirmed" if complete
|
|
33
|
+
---
|
|
336
34
|
|
|
337
|
-
|
|
35
|
+
## Output Structure
|
|
338
36
|
|
|
339
|
-
|
|
37
|
+
**Project-wide** → `plans/brd/`:
|
|
38
|
+
- README.md (all features index)
|
|
39
|
+
- context.md (stakeholders, users, constraints)
|
|
40
|
+
- references.md (industry, compliance, competitor overview)
|
|
41
|
+
- use-cases/{feature}/ (all use cases, grouped)
|
|
42
|
+
- changelog.md
|
|
340
43
|
|
|
341
|
-
|
|
342
|
-
-
|
|
343
|
-
-
|
|
344
|
-
-
|
|
345
|
-
- Open questions count
|
|
346
|
-
- Questionnaire location (if generated)
|
|
347
|
-
- Next steps:
|
|
348
|
-
- Send questionnaire to customer
|
|
349
|
-
- Review with stakeholders
|
|
350
|
-
- Run `/dev-specs {feature}` (auto-scouts if needed)
|
|
351
|
-
- OR run `/dev-scout` first for project overview
|
|
44
|
+
**Feature-specific** → `plans/features/{feature}/`:
|
|
45
|
+
- README.md (feature overview)
|
|
46
|
+
- references.md (market research, evidence, tier validation)
|
|
47
|
+
- questionnaire-{date}.xlsx (feature questions)
|
|
352
48
|
|
|
353
49
|
---
|
|
354
50
|
|
|
355
|
-
##
|
|
51
|
+
## Key Principles
|
|
356
52
|
|
|
357
|
-
|
|
53
|
+
### 1. Comparison-First Discovery
|
|
358
54
|
|
|
359
|
-
|
|
360
|
-
|
|
361
|
-
-
|
|
362
|
-
-
|
|
55
|
+
**Don't** scan competitors one-by-one.
|
|
56
|
+
**Do** use comparison/alternative pages first:
|
|
57
|
+
- `"{category} comparison"` → feature matrices from 10+ competitors
|
|
58
|
+
- `"best {category} alternatives"` → what features matter
|
|
59
|
+
- `"{competitor A} vs {competitor B}"` → deal-breaker features
|
|
363
60
|
|
|
364
|
-
|
|
61
|
+
Then deep revalidation per feature (ecosystem, user signals).
|
|
365
62
|
|
|
366
|
-
|
|
367
|
-
- Project name (or use current folder name)
|
|
368
|
-
- Topic/Feature being questioned
|
|
369
|
-
- Custom questions (user provides as text/list)
|
|
63
|
+
### 2. Always Generate Questionnaire
|
|
370
64
|
|
|
371
|
-
|
|
372
|
-
|
|
373
|
-
|
|
374
|
-
- Use standard questionnaire format (Summary + Questions sheets)
|
|
65
|
+
Include both:
|
|
66
|
+
- **Validation questions**: "We found 9/10 competitors offer SSO. Confirm this is needed?"
|
|
67
|
+
- **Open questions**: "What's max team size per account?"
|
|
375
68
|
|
|
376
|
-
|
|
377
|
-
- File location
|
|
378
|
-
- Question count
|
|
379
|
-
- Next steps (send to customer, process with --answers)
|
|
69
|
+
Customer validates assumptions + fills gaps.
|
|
380
70
|
|
|
381
|
-
###
|
|
71
|
+
### 3. Scope-Based Organization
|
|
382
72
|
|
|
383
|
-
|
|
384
|
-
|
|
73
|
+
**Project-wide** (brd/references.md):
|
|
74
|
+
- Industry landscape
|
|
75
|
+
- Compliance (GDPR, PCI)
|
|
76
|
+
- Competitor company profiles
|
|
385
77
|
|
|
386
|
-
|
|
387
|
-
|
|
388
|
-
|
|
78
|
+
**Feature-specific** (features/{name}/references.md):
|
|
79
|
+
- Market research for THIS feature
|
|
80
|
+
- Tier validation evidence (MVP/Standard/Advanced)
|
|
81
|
+
- Sequenced features with dependencies
|
|
389
82
|
|
|
390
|
-
|
|
391
|
-
|
|
392
|
-
## Process Answers Workflow
|
|
83
|
+
### 4. Lean Use Cases (80/20)
|
|
393
84
|
|
|
394
|
-
|
|
395
|
-
|
|
396
|
-
|
|
397
|
-
|
|
85
|
+
**Include (20%)**:
|
|
86
|
+
- Story (1 line)
|
|
87
|
+
- Critical acceptance criteria (3-5 bullets)
|
|
88
|
+
- Key business rules (constraints, limits)
|
|
89
|
+
- Open questions
|
|
398
90
|
|
|
399
|
-
|
|
91
|
+
**Defer to /dev-specs (80%)**:
|
|
92
|
+
- Detailed flows
|
|
93
|
+
- Integration points
|
|
94
|
+
- Edge cases
|
|
95
|
+
- UI/UX details
|
|
400
96
|
|
|
401
|
-
|
|
402
|
-
- Parse "Answer" column
|
|
403
|
-
- Match to source use cases via "Context/Source" column
|
|
404
|
-
- Flag unanswered required questions
|
|
97
|
+
Keep use cases ~30 lines max. Business stakeholders scan in 30 seconds.
|
|
405
98
|
|
|
406
|
-
|
|
99
|
+
---
|
|
407
100
|
|
|
408
|
-
|
|
101
|
+
## Workflow
|
|
409
102
|
|
|
410
|
-
|
|
411
|
-
2. **Update use case**:
|
|
412
|
-
- Remove question from `## Open Questions`
|
|
413
|
-
- Add answer to relevant section (Acceptance Criteria, Business Rules, etc.)
|
|
414
|
-
3. **Update feature README** with new information
|
|
415
|
-
4. **Update CR file** if questionnaire is CR-related
|
|
103
|
+
**See** `references/workflow.md` for detailed steps.
|
|
416
104
|
|
|
417
|
-
|
|
105
|
+
**Modes**:
|
|
106
|
+
- No `plans/brd/` → New Project
|
|
107
|
+
- `plans/brd/` exists → Add Feature
|
|
108
|
+
- `--answers {file}` → Process Answers
|
|
109
|
+
- `--questionnaire-only` → Questions Only
|
|
418
110
|
|
|
419
|
-
|
|
420
|
-
- File stays at original location with date
|
|
421
|
-
- Add "Processed: {date}" to Summary sheet
|
|
422
|
-
- If follow-up needed → new questionnaire with new date
|
|
111
|
+
---
|
|
423
112
|
|
|
424
|
-
|
|
425
|
-
```
|
|
426
|
-
plans/features/billing/
|
|
427
|
-
├── questionnaire-2024-01-15.xlsx # Initial, processed
|
|
428
|
-
├── questionnaire-2024-01-22.xlsx # Follow-up, processed
|
|
429
|
-
└── questionnaire-2024-01-28.xlsx # Final clarifications
|
|
430
|
-
```
|
|
113
|
+
## Market Research
|
|
431
114
|
|
|
432
|
-
|
|
115
|
+
**See** `references/market-research-methodology.md`.
|
|
433
116
|
|
|
434
|
-
|
|
435
|
-
- Count remaining open questions across related use cases
|
|
436
|
-
- If still gaps → generate new questionnaire with new date
|
|
437
|
-
- If complete → update use case status to "Confirmed"
|
|
117
|
+
**Sources**: Competitors, ecosystems (Chrome, WordPress, GitHub, etc.), user signals (Reddit, reviews).
|
|
438
118
|
|
|
439
|
-
|
|
119
|
+
**Tiers**:
|
|
120
|
+
- **MVP**: 80%+ competitors, free tier, high demand
|
|
121
|
+
- **Standard**: 60-80% competitors, pro tier, expected
|
|
122
|
+
- **Advanced**: <60% competitors, enterprise, differentiator
|
|
440
123
|
|
|
441
|
-
|
|
124
|
+
---
|
|
442
125
|
|
|
443
|
-
|
|
444
|
-
```markdown
|
|
445
|
-
## Questionnaire History
|
|
446
|
-
| Date | Status | Questions |
|
|
447
|
-
|------|--------|-----------|
|
|
448
|
-
| 2024-01-15 | Processed | 8 answered |
|
|
449
|
-
| 2024-01-22 | Processed | 3 answered |
|
|
450
|
-
```
|
|
126
|
+
## Tools
|
|
451
127
|
|
|
452
|
-
|
|
453
|
-
```markdown
|
|
454
|
-
## Clarifications
|
|
455
|
-
- [Questionnaire 2024-01-20](./CR-001-questionnaire-2024-01-20.xlsx)
|
|
456
|
-
```
|
|
128
|
+
AskUserQuestion, WebSearch, Glob, Read, Write, Bash
|
|
457
129
|
|
|
458
|
-
|
|
130
|
+
---
|
|
459
131
|
|
|
460
|
-
|
|
461
|
-
- Questions answered: X/Y
|
|
462
|
-
- Use cases updated: [list]
|
|
463
|
-
- Files modified: [list]
|
|
464
|
-
- Remaining gaps: [if any]
|
|
465
|
-
- Next questionnaire: [path if generated]
|
|
466
|
-
- Status: Complete | Needs follow-up
|
|
132
|
+
## References
|
|
467
133
|
|
|
468
|
-
|
|
134
|
+
- `references/workflow.md` - Principles and methodology
|
|
135
|
+
- `references/research.md` - Market research guide
|
|
136
|
+
- `references/codes.md` - Group codes and file patterns
|
|
137
|
+
- `references/templates/` - Output formats
|
|
469
138
|
|
|
470
|
-
|
|
471
|
-
|------|---------|
|
|
472
|
-
| `AskUserQuestion` | Context gathering |
|
|
473
|
-
| `Glob` | Find existing files, codebase scan |
|
|
474
|
-
| `Read` | Read existing BRD, docs |
|
|
475
|
-
| `Write` | Create/update BRD files |
|
|
476
|
-
| `WebSearch` | Market research |
|
|
139
|
+
---
|
|
477
140
|
|
|
478
141
|
## Scripts
|
|
479
142
|
|
|
480
|
-
### Customer Questionnaire
|
|
481
|
-
|
|
482
|
-
Generate dynamic questionnaire based on open questions identified during debrief:
|
|
483
|
-
|
|
484
143
|
```bash
|
|
485
144
|
python .claude/skills/debrief/scripts/generate_questionnaire.py output.xlsx questions.json
|
|
486
145
|
```
|
|
487
|
-
|
|
488
|
-
**Input:** JSON file with collected open questions (see Phase 7)
|
|
489
|
-
|
|
490
|
-
**Output:** Excel file with:
|
|
491
|
-
- Summary sheet (project info, priority breakdown, category counts)
|
|
492
|
-
- Questions sheet (categorized questions with context/source)
|
|
493
|
-
- Answer column for customer to fill
|
|
494
|
-
- Required vs Optional priority indicators
|
|
495
|
-
|
|
496
|
-
**Example:**
|
|
497
|
-
```bash
|
|
498
|
-
# After debrief creates questions.json
|
|
499
|
-
python .claude/skills/debrief/scripts/generate_questionnaire.py plans/features/{feature}/questionnaire-{date}.xlsx /tmp/questions.json
|
|
500
|
-
```
|
|
501
|
-
|
|
502
|
-
The questionnaire only contains questions we couldn't answer from:
|
|
503
|
-
- Customer brief
|
|
504
|
-
- Existing codebase (if any)
|
|
505
|
-
- Market research
|
|
506
|
-
|
|
507
|
-
## References
|
|
508
|
-
|
|
509
|
-
- `references/research-queries.md` - Search templates
|
|
510
|
-
- `references/use-case-template.md` - UC file template
|
|
511
|
-
- `references/group-codes.md` - Standard group codes
|
|
512
|
-
- `references/file-patterns.md` - Codebase scan patterns
|
|
513
|
-
- `references/change-request-template.md` - CR template
|