@cregis-dev/cckit 0.4.1 → 0.6.1

package/templates/bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/check-implementation-readiness/steps/step-02-prd-analysis.md

@@ -1,172 +0,0 @@
----
-name: 'step-02-prd-analysis'
-description: 'Read and analyze PRD to extract all FRs and NFRs for coverage validation'
-
-nextStepFile: './step-03-epic-coverage-validation.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/implementation-readiness-report-{{date}}.md'
-epicsFile: '{planning_artifacts}/*epic*.md' # Will be resolved to actual file
----
-
-# Step 2: PRD Analysis
-
-## STEP GOAL:
-
-To fully read and analyze the PRD document (whole or sharded) to extract all Functional Requirements (FRs) and Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs) for validation against epics coverage.
-
-## 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 expert Product Manager and Scrum Master
-- ✅ Your expertise is in requirements analysis and traceability
-- ✅ You think critically about requirement completeness
-- ✅ Success is measured in thorough requirement extraction
-
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-
-- 🎯 Focus ONLY on reading and extracting from PRD
-- 🚫 Don't validate files (done in step 1)
-- 💬 Read PRD completely - whole or all sharded files
-- 🚪 Extract every FR and NFR with numbering
-
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-
-- 🎯 Load and completely read the PRD
-- 💾 Extract all requirements systematically
-- 📖 Document findings in the report
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to skip or summarize PRD content
-
-## PRD ANALYSIS PROCESS:
-
-### 1. Initialize PRD Analysis
-
-"Beginning **PRD Analysis** to extract all requirements.
-
-I will:
-
-1. Load the PRD document (whole or sharded)
-2. Read it completely and thoroughly
-3. Extract ALL Functional Requirements (FRs)
-4. Extract ALL Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs)
-5. Document findings for coverage validation"
-
-### 2. Load and Read PRD
-
-From the document inventory in step 1:
-
-- If whole PRD file exists: Load and read it completely
-- If sharded PRD exists: Load and read ALL files in the PRD folder
-- Ensure complete coverage - no files skipped
-
-### 3. Extract Functional Requirements (FRs)
-
-Search for and extract:
-
-- Numbered FRs (FR1, FR2, FR3, etc.)
-- Requirements labeled "Functional Requirement"
-- User stories or use cases that represent functional needs
-- Business rules that must be implemented
-
-Format findings as:
-
-```
-## Functional Requirements Extracted
-
-FR1: [Complete requirement text]
-FR2: [Complete requirement text]
-FR3: [Complete requirement text]
-...
-Total FRs: [count]
-```
-
-### 4. Extract Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs)
-
-Search for and extract:
-
-- Performance requirements (response times, throughput)
-- Security requirements (authentication, encryption, etc.)
-- Usability requirements (accessibility, ease of use)
-- Reliability requirements (uptime, error rates)
-- Scalability requirements (concurrent users, data growth)
-- Compliance requirements (standards, regulations)
-
-Format findings as:
-
-```
-## Non-Functional Requirements Extracted
-
-NFR1: [Performance requirement]
-NFR2: [Security requirement]
-NFR3: [Usability requirement]
-...
-Total NFRs: [count]
-```
-
-### 5. Document Additional Requirements
-
-Look for:
-
-- Constraints or assumptions
-- Technical requirements not labeled as FR/NFR
-- Business constraints
-- Integration requirements
-
-### 6. Add to Assessment Report
-
-Append to {outputFile}:
-
-```markdown
-## PRD Analysis
-
-### Functional Requirements
-
-[Complete FR list from section 3]
-
-### Non-Functional Requirements
-
-[Complete NFR list from section 4]
-
-### Additional Requirements
-
-[Any other requirements or constraints found]
-
-### PRD Completeness Assessment
-
-[Initial assessment of PRD completeness and clarity]
-```
-
-### 7. Auto-Proceed to Next Step
-
-After PRD analysis complete, immediately load next step for epic coverage validation.
-
-## PROCEEDING TO EPIC COVERAGE VALIDATION
-
-PRD analysis complete. Loading next step to validate epic coverage.
-
----
-
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-
-- PRD loaded and read completely
-- All FRs extracted with full text
-- All NFRs identified and documented
-- Findings added to assessment report
-
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-
-- Not reading complete PRD (especially sharded versions)
-- Missing requirements in extraction
-- Summarizing instead of extracting full text
-- Not documenting findings in report
-
-**Master Rule:** Complete requirement extraction is essential for traceability validation.

package/templates/bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/check-implementation-readiness/steps/step-03-epic-coverage-validation.md

@@ -1,173 +0,0 @@
----
-name: 'step-03-epic-coverage-validation'
-description: 'Validate that all PRD FRs are covered in epics and stories'
-
-nextStepFile: './step-04-ux-alignment.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/implementation-readiness-report-{{date}}.md'
----
-
-# Step 3: Epic Coverage Validation
-
-## STEP GOAL:
-
-To validate that all Functional Requirements from the PRD are captured in the epics and stories document, identifying any gaps in coverage.
-
-## 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 expert Product Manager and Scrum Master
-- ✅ Your expertise is in requirements traceability
-- ✅ You ensure no requirements fall through the cracks
-- ✅ Success is measured in complete FR coverage
-
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-
-- 🎯 Focus ONLY on FR coverage validation
-- 🚫 Don't analyze story quality (that's later)
-- 💬 Compare PRD FRs against epic coverage list
-- 🚪 Document every missing FR
-
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-
-- 🎯 Load epics document completely
-- 💾 Extract FR coverage from epics
-- 📖 Compare against PRD FR list
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to proceed without documenting gaps
-
-## EPIC COVERAGE VALIDATION PROCESS:
-
-### 1. Initialize Coverage Validation
-
-"Beginning **Epic Coverage Validation**.
-
-I will:
-
-1. Load the epics and stories document
-2. Extract FR coverage information
-3. Compare against PRD FRs from previous step
-4. Identify any FRs not covered in epics"
-
-### 2. Load Epics Document
-
-From the document inventory in step 1:
-
-- Load the epics and stories document (whole or sharded)
-- Read it completely to find FR coverage information
-- Look for sections like "FR Coverage Map" or similar
-
-### 3. Extract Epic FR Coverage
-
-From the epics document:
-
-- Find FR coverage mapping or list
-- Extract which FR numbers are claimed to be covered
-- Document which epics cover which FRs
-
-Format as:
-
-```
-## Epic FR Coverage Extracted
-
-FR1: Covered in Epic X
-FR2: Covered in Epic Y
-FR3: Covered in Epic Z
-...
-Total FRs in epics: [count]
-```
-
-### 4. Compare Coverage Against PRD
-
-Using the PRD FR list from step 2:
-
-- Check each PRD FR against epic coverage
-- Identify FRs NOT covered in epics
-- Note any FRs in epics but NOT in PRD
-
-Create coverage matrix:
-
-```
-## FR Coverage Analysis
-
-| FR Number | PRD Requirement | Epic Coverage  | Status    |
-| --------- | --------------- | -------------- | --------- |
-| FR1       | [PRD text]      | Epic X Story Y | ✓ Covered |
-| FR2       | [PRD text]      | **NOT FOUND**  | ❌ MISSING |
-| FR3       | [PRD text]      | Epic Z Story A | ✓ Covered |
-```
-
-### 5. Document Missing Coverage
-
-List all FRs not covered:
-
-```
-## Missing FR Coverage
-
-### Critical Missing FRs
-
-FR#: [Full requirement text from PRD]
-- Impact: [Why this is critical]
-- Recommendation: [Which epic should include this]
-
-### High Priority Missing FRs
-
-[List any other uncovered FRs]
-```
-
-### 6. Add to Assessment Report
-
-Append to {outputFile}:
-
-```markdown
-## Epic Coverage Validation
-
-### Coverage Matrix
-
-[Complete coverage matrix from section 4]
-
-### Missing Requirements
-
-[List of uncovered FRs from section 5]
-
-### Coverage Statistics
-
-- Total PRD FRs: [count]
-- FRs covered in epics: [count]
-- Coverage percentage: [percentage]
-```
-
-### 7. Auto-Proceed to Next Step
-
-After coverage validation complete, immediately load next step.
-
-## PROCEEDING TO UX ALIGNMENT
-
-Epic coverage validation complete. Loading next step for UX alignment.
-
----
-
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-
-- Epics document loaded completely
-- FR coverage extracted accurately
-- All gaps identified and documented
-- Coverage matrix created
-
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-
-- Not reading complete epics document
-- Missing FRs in comparison
-- Not documenting uncovered requirements
-- Incomplete coverage analysis
-
-**Master Rule:** Every FR must have a traceable implementation path.

package/templates/bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/check-implementation-readiness/steps/step-04-ux-alignment.md

@@ -1,133 +0,0 @@
----
-name: 'step-04-ux-alignment'
-description: 'Check for UX document and validate alignment with PRD and Architecture'
-
-nextStepFile: './step-05-epic-quality-review.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/implementation-readiness-report-{{date}}.md'
----
-
-# Step 4: UX Alignment
-
-## STEP GOAL:
-
-To check if UX documentation exists and validate that it aligns with PRD requirements and Architecture decisions, ensuring architecture accounts for both PRD and UX needs.
-
-## 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 a UX VALIDATOR ensuring user experience is properly addressed
-- ✅ UX requirements must be supported by architecture
-- ✅ Missing UX documentation is a warning if UI is implied
-- ✅ Alignment gaps must be documented
-
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-
-- 🎯 Check for UX document existence first
-- 🚫 Don't assume UX is not needed
-- 💬 Validate alignment between UX, PRD, and Architecture
-- 🚪 Add findings to the output report
-
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-
-- 🎯 Search for UX documentation
-- 💾 If found, validate alignment
-- 📖 If not found, assess if UX is implied
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to proceed without completing assessment
-
-## UX ALIGNMENT PROCESS:
-
-### 1. Initialize UX Validation
-
-"Beginning **UX Alignment** validation.
-
-I will:
-
-1. Check if UX documentation exists
-2. If UX exists: validate alignment with PRD and Architecture
-3. If no UX: determine if UX is implied and document warning"
-
-### 2. Search for UX Documentation
-
-Search patterns:
-
-- `{planning_artifacts}/*ux*.md` (whole document)
-- `{planning_artifacts}/*ux*/index.md` (sharded)
-- Look for UI-related terms in other documents
-
-### 3. If UX Document Exists
-
-#### A. UX ↔ PRD Alignment
-
-- Check UX requirements reflected in PRD
-- Verify user journeys in UX match PRD use cases
-- Identify UX requirements not in PRD
-
-#### B. UX ↔ Architecture Alignment
-
-- Verify architecture supports UX requirements
-- Check performance needs (responsiveness, load times)
-- Identify UI components not supported by architecture
-
-### 4. If No UX Document
-
-Assess if UX/UI is implied:
-
-- Does PRD mention user interface?
-- Are there web/mobile components implied?
-- Is this a user-facing application?
-
-If UX implied but missing: Add warning to report
-
-### 5. Add Findings to Report
-
-Append to {outputFile}:
-
-```markdown
-## UX Alignment Assessment
-
-### UX Document Status
-
-[Found/Not Found]
-
-### Alignment Issues
-
-[List any misalignments between UX, PRD, and Architecture]
-
-### Warnings
-
-[Any warnings about missing UX or architectural gaps]
-```
-
-### 6. Auto-Proceed to Next Step
-
-After UX assessment complete, immediately load next step.
-
-## PROCEEDING TO EPIC QUALITY REVIEW
-
-UX alignment assessment complete. Loading next step for epic quality review.
-
----
-
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-
-- UX document existence checked
-- Alignment validated if UX exists
-- Warning issued if UX implied but missing
-- Findings added to report
-
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-
-- Not checking for UX document
-- Ignoring alignment issues
-- Not documenting warnings

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

@@ -1,245 +0,0 @@
----
-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.