@cregis-dev/cckit 0.3.0 → 0.4.1

package/templates/bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/check-implementation-readiness/steps/step-05-epic-quality-review.md

@@ -1,245 +1,245 @@
----
-name: 'step-05-epic-quality-review'
-description: 'Validate epics and stories against create-epics-and-stories best practices'
-
-nextStepFile: './step-06-final-assessment.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/implementation-readiness-report-{{date}}.md'
----
-
-# Step 5: Epic Quality Review
-
-## STEP GOAL:
-
-To validate epics and stories against the best practices defined in create-epics-and-stories workflow, focusing on user value, independence, dependencies, and implementation readiness.
-
-## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
-
-### Universal Rules:
-
-- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
-- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
-- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
-- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
-- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
-
-### Role Reinforcement:
-
-- ✅ You are an EPIC QUALITY ENFORCER
-- ✅ You know what good epics look like - challenge anything deviating
-- ✅ Technical epics are wrong - find them
-- ✅ Forward dependencies are forbidden - catch them
-- ✅ Stories must be independently completable
-
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-
-- 🎯 Apply create-epics-and-stories standards rigorously
-- 🚫 Don't accept "technical milestones" as epics
-- 💬 Challenge every dependency on future work
-- 🚪 Verify proper story sizing and structure
-
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-
-- 🎯 Systematically validate each epic and story
-- 💾 Document all violations of best practices
-- 📖 Check every dependency relationship
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to accept structural problems
-
-## EPIC QUALITY REVIEW PROCESS:
-
-### 1. Initialize Best Practices Validation
-
-"Beginning **Epic Quality Review** against create-epics-and-stories standards.
-
-I will rigorously validate:
-
-- Epics deliver user value (not technical milestones)
-- Epic independence (Epic 2 doesn't need Epic 3)
-- Story dependencies (no forward references)
-- Proper story sizing and completeness
-
-Any deviation from best practices will be flagged as a defect."
-
-### 2. Epic Structure Validation
-
-#### A. User Value Focus Check
-
-For each epic:
-
-- **Epic Title:** Is it user-centric (what user can do)?
-- **Epic Goal:** Does it describe user outcome?
-- **Value Proposition:** Can users benefit from this epic alone?
-
-**Red flags (violations):**
-
-- "Setup Database" or "Create Models" - no user value
-- "API Development" - technical milestone
-- "Infrastructure Setup" - not user-facing
-- "Authentication System" - borderline (is it user value?)
-
-#### B. Epic Independence Validation
-
-Test epic independence:
-
-- **Epic 1:** Must stand alone completely
-- **Epic 2:** Can function using only Epic 1 output
-- **Epic 3:** Can function using Epic 1 & 2 outputs
-- **Rule:** Epic N cannot require Epic N+1 to work
-
-**Document failures:**
-
-- "Epic 2 requires Epic 3 features to function"
-- Stories in Epic 2 referencing Epic 3 components
-- Circular dependencies between epics
-
-### 3. Story Quality Assessment
-
-#### A. Story Sizing Validation
-
-Check each story:
-
-- **Clear User Value:** Does the story deliver something meaningful?
-- **Independent:** Can it be completed without future stories?
-
-**Common violations:**
-
-- "Setup all models" - not a USER story
-- "Create login UI (depends on Story 1.3)" - forward dependency
-
-#### B. Acceptance Criteria Review
-
-For each story's ACs:
-
-- **Given/When/Then Format:** Proper BDD structure?
-- **Testable:** Each AC can be verified independently?
-- **Complete:** Covers all scenarios including errors?
-- **Specific:** Clear expected outcomes?
-
-**Issues to find:**
-
-- Vague criteria like "user can login"
-- Missing error conditions
-- Incomplete happy path
-- Non-measurable outcomes
-
-### 4. Dependency Analysis
-
-#### A. Within-Epic Dependencies
-
-Map story dependencies within each epic:
-
-- Story 1.1 must be completable alone
-- Story 1.2 can use Story 1.1 output
-- Story 1.3 can use Story 1.1 & 1.2 outputs
-
-**Critical violations:**
-
-- "This story depends on Story 1.4"
-- "Wait for future story to work"
-- Stories referencing features not yet implemented
-
-#### B. Database/Entity Creation Timing
-
-Validate database creation approach:
-
-- **Wrong:** Epic 1 Story 1 creates all tables upfront
-- **Right:** Each story creates tables it needs
-- **Check:** Are tables created only when first needed?
-
-### 5. Special Implementation Checks
-
-#### A. Starter Template Requirement
-
-Check if Architecture specifies starter template:
-
-- If YES: Epic 1 Story 1 must be "Set up initial project from starter template"
-- Verify story includes cloning, dependencies, initial configuration
-
-#### B. Greenfield vs Brownfield Indicators
-
-Greenfield projects should have:
-
-- Initial project setup story
-- Development environment configuration
-- CI/CD pipeline setup early
-
-Brownfield projects should have:
-
-- Integration points with existing systems
-- Migration or compatibility stories
-
-### 6. Best Practices Compliance Checklist
-
-For each epic, verify:
-
-- [ ] Epic delivers user value
-- [ ] Epic can function independently
-- [ ] Stories appropriately sized
-- [ ] No forward dependencies
-- [ ] Database tables created when needed
-- [ ] Clear acceptance criteria
-- [ ] Traceability to FRs maintained
-
-### 7. Quality Assessment Documentation
-
-Document all findings by severity:
-
-#### 🔴 Critical Violations
-
-- Technical epics with no user value
-- Forward dependencies breaking independence
-- Epic-sized stories that cannot be completed
-
-#### 🟠 Major Issues
-
-- Vague acceptance criteria
-- Stories requiring future stories
-- Database creation violations
-
-#### 🟡 Minor Concerns
-
-- Formatting inconsistencies
-- Minor structure deviations
-- Documentation gaps
-
-### 8. Autonomous Review Execution
-
-This review runs autonomously to maintain standards:
-
-- Apply best practices without compromise
-- Document every violation with specific examples
-- Provide clear remediation guidance
-- Prepare recommendations for each issue
-
-## REVIEW COMPLETION:
-
-After completing epic quality review:
-
-- Update {outputFile} with all quality findings
-- Document specific best practices violations
-- Provide actionable recommendations
-- Load {nextStepFile} for final readiness assessment
-
-## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
-
-This step executes autonomously. Load {nextStepFile} only after complete epic quality review is documented.
-
----
-
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-
-- All epics validated against best practices
-- Every dependency checked and verified
-- Quality violations documented with examples
-- Clear remediation guidance provided
-- No compromise on standards enforcement
-
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-
-- Accepting technical epics as valid
-- Ignoring forward dependencies
-- Not verifying story sizing
-- Overlooking obvious violations
-
-**Master Rule:** Enforce best practices rigorously. Find all violations.
+---
+name: 'step-05-epic-quality-review'
+description: 'Validate epics and stories against create-epics-and-stories best practices'
+
+nextStepFile: './step-06-final-assessment.md'
+outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/implementation-readiness-report-{{date}}.md'
+---
+
+# Step 5: Epic Quality Review
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+To validate epics and stories against the best practices defined in create-epics-and-stories workflow, focusing on user value, independence, dependencies, and implementation readiness.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+
+### Role Reinforcement:
+
+- ✅ You are an EPIC QUALITY ENFORCER
+- ✅ You know what good epics look like - challenge anything deviating
+- ✅ Technical epics are wrong - find them
+- ✅ Forward dependencies are forbidden - catch them
+- ✅ Stories must be independently completable
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Apply create-epics-and-stories standards rigorously
+- 🚫 Don't accept "technical milestones" as epics
+- 💬 Challenge every dependency on future work
+- 🚪 Verify proper story sizing and structure
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Systematically validate each epic and story
+- 💾 Document all violations of best practices
+- 📖 Check every dependency relationship
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to accept structural problems
+
+## EPIC QUALITY REVIEW PROCESS:
+
+### 1. Initialize Best Practices Validation
+
+"Beginning **Epic Quality Review** against create-epics-and-stories standards.
+
+I will rigorously validate:
+
+- Epics deliver user value (not technical milestones)
+- Epic independence (Epic 2 doesn't need Epic 3)
+- Story dependencies (no forward references)
+- Proper story sizing and completeness
+
+Any deviation from best practices will be flagged as a defect."
+
+### 2. Epic Structure Validation
+
+#### A. User Value Focus Check
+
+For each epic:
+
+- **Epic Title:** Is it user-centric (what user can do)?
+- **Epic Goal:** Does it describe user outcome?
+- **Value Proposition:** Can users benefit from this epic alone?
+
+**Red flags (violations):**
+
+- "Setup Database" or "Create Models" - no user value
+- "API Development" - technical milestone
+- "Infrastructure Setup" - not user-facing
+- "Authentication System" - borderline (is it user value?)
+
+#### B. Epic Independence Validation
+
+Test epic independence:
+
+- **Epic 1:** Must stand alone completely
+- **Epic 2:** Can function using only Epic 1 output
+- **Epic 3:** Can function using Epic 1 & 2 outputs
+- **Rule:** Epic N cannot require Epic N+1 to work
+
+**Document failures:**
+
+- "Epic 2 requires Epic 3 features to function"
+- Stories in Epic 2 referencing Epic 3 components
+- Circular dependencies between epics
+
+### 3. Story Quality Assessment
+
+#### A. Story Sizing Validation
+
+Check each story:
+
+- **Clear User Value:** Does the story deliver something meaningful?
+- **Independent:** Can it be completed without future stories?
+
+**Common violations:**
+
+- "Setup all models" - not a USER story
+- "Create login UI (depends on Story 1.3)" - forward dependency
+
+#### B. Acceptance Criteria Review
+
+For each story's ACs:
+
+- **Given/When/Then Format:** Proper BDD structure?
+- **Testable:** Each AC can be verified independently?
+- **Complete:** Covers all scenarios including errors?
+- **Specific:** Clear expected outcomes?
+
+**Issues to find:**
+
+- Vague criteria like "user can login"
+- Missing error conditions
+- Incomplete happy path
+- Non-measurable outcomes
+
+### 4. Dependency Analysis
+
+#### A. Within-Epic Dependencies
+
+Map story dependencies within each epic:
+
+- Story 1.1 must be completable alone
+- Story 1.2 can use Story 1.1 output
+- Story 1.3 can use Story 1.1 & 1.2 outputs
+
+**Critical violations:**
+
+- "This story depends on Story 1.4"
+- "Wait for future story to work"
+- Stories referencing features not yet implemented
+
+#### B. Database/Entity Creation Timing
+
+Validate database creation approach:
+
+- **Wrong:** Epic 1 Story 1 creates all tables upfront
+- **Right:** Each story creates tables it needs
+- **Check:** Are tables created only when first needed?
+
+### 5. Special Implementation Checks
+
+#### A. Starter Template Requirement
+
+Check if Architecture specifies starter template:
+
+- If YES: Epic 1 Story 1 must be "Set up initial project from starter template"
+- Verify story includes cloning, dependencies, initial configuration
+
+#### B. Greenfield vs Brownfield Indicators
+
+Greenfield projects should have:
+
+- Initial project setup story
+- Development environment configuration
+- CI/CD pipeline setup early
+
+Brownfield projects should have:
+
+- Integration points with existing systems
+- Migration or compatibility stories
+
+### 6. Best Practices Compliance Checklist
+
+For each epic, verify:
+
+- [ ] Epic delivers user value
+- [ ] Epic can function independently
+- [ ] Stories appropriately sized
+- [ ] No forward dependencies
+- [ ] Database tables created when needed
+- [ ] Clear acceptance criteria
+- [ ] Traceability to FRs maintained
+
+### 7. Quality Assessment Documentation
+
+Document all findings by severity:
+
+#### 🔴 Critical Violations
+
+- Technical epics with no user value
+- Forward dependencies breaking independence
+- Epic-sized stories that cannot be completed
+
+#### 🟠 Major Issues
+
+- Vague acceptance criteria
+- Stories requiring future stories
+- Database creation violations
+
+#### 🟡 Minor Concerns
+
+- Formatting inconsistencies
+- Minor structure deviations
+- Documentation gaps
+
+### 8. Autonomous Review Execution
+
+This review runs autonomously to maintain standards:
+
+- Apply best practices without compromise
+- Document every violation with specific examples
+- Provide clear remediation guidance
+- Prepare recommendations for each issue
+
+## REVIEW COMPLETION:
+
+After completing epic quality review:
+
+- Update {outputFile} with all quality findings
+- Document specific best practices violations
+- Provide actionable recommendations
+- Load {nextStepFile} for final readiness assessment
+
+## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
+
+This step executes autonomously. Load {nextStepFile} only after complete epic quality review is documented.
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- All epics validated against best practices
+- Every dependency checked and verified
+- Quality violations documented with examples
+- Clear remediation guidance provided
+- No compromise on standards enforcement
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Accepting technical epics as valid
+- Ignoring forward dependencies
+- Not verifying story sizing
+- Overlooking obvious violations
+
+**Master Rule:** Enforce best practices rigorously. Find all violations.