@devo-bmad-custom/agent-orchestration 1.0.2 → 1.0.3

package/src/bmb/workflows/workflow/steps-v/step-06-validation-design-check.md

@@ -1,195 +1,195 @@
----
-name: 'step-06-validation-design-check'
-description: 'Check if workflow has proper validation steps that load validation data (if validation is critical)'
-
-nextStepFile: './step-07-instruction-style-check.md'
-targetWorkflowPath: '{workflow_folder_path}'
-validationReportFile: '{workflow_folder_path}/validation-report-{datetime}.md'
-workflowPlanFile: '{workflow_folder_path}/workflow-plan.md'
-trimodalWorkflowStructure: '../data/trimodal-workflow-structure.md'
----
-
-# Validation Step 6: Validation Design Check
-
-## STEP GOAL:
-
-To check if the workflow has proper validation steps when validation is critical - validation steps should load from validation data and perform systematic checks.
-
-## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
-
-### Universal Rules:
-
-- 🛑 DO NOT BE LAZY - LOAD AND REVIEW EVERY FILE
-- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
-- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step, ensure entire file is read
-- ✅ Validation does NOT stop for user input - auto-proceed through all validation steps
-- ⚙️ If any instruction references a subprocess, subagent, or tool you do not have access to, you MUST still achieve the outcome in your main context
-
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-
-- 🎯 Check if workflow needs validation steps - use subprocess optimization (per-file deep analysis for Pattern 2)
-- 🚫 DO NOT skip any validation step reviews - DO NOT BE LAZY
-- 💬 Subprocess must either update validation report directly OR return findings to parent for aggregation
-- 🚪 This is validation - systematic and thorough
-
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-
-- 🎯 Determine if validation is critical for this workflow - use subprocess optimization when available
-- 💾 Check validation steps exist and are well-designed - launch subprocess for per-file deep analysis (Pattern 2)
-- 💬 Subprocesses must either update validation report OR return findings for parent aggregation
-- 📖 Append findings to validation report
-- 🚫 DO NOT halt for user input - validation runs to completion
-
-## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
-
-- Some workflows need validation (compliance, safety, quality gates)
-- Others don't (creative, exploratory)
-- Check the design to determine if validation steps are needed
-
-## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
-
-**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip or shortcut.
-
-### 1. Determine If Validation Is Critical
-
-From {workflowPlanFile}, check:
-
-**Does this workflow NEED validation?**
-
-**YES - Validation Critical If:**
-- Compliance/regulatory requirements (tax, legal, medical)
-- Safety-critical outputs
-- Quality gates required
-- User explicitly requested validation steps
-
-**NO - Validation Not Critical If:**
-- Creative/exploratory workflow
-- User-driven without formal requirements
-- Output is user's responsibility to validate
-
-### 2. If Validation Is Critical, Check Validation Steps
-
-**DO NOT BE LAZY - For EVERY validation step file, launch a subprocess that:**
-
-1. Loads that validation step file
-2. Reads and analyzes the step's content deeply (prose, logic, quality, flow, anti-lazy language)
-3. Returns structured analysis findings to parent for aggregation
-
-**SUBPROCESS ANALYSIS PATTERN - Check each validation step file for:**
-
-**Proper Validation Step Design:**
-- ✅ Loads validation data/standards from `data/` folder
-- ✅ Has systematic check sequence (not hand-wavy)
-- ✅ Auto-proceeds through checks (not stopping for each)
-- ✅ Clear pass/fail criteria
-- ✅ Reports findings to user
-
-**"DO NOT BE LAZY" Language Check:**
-- ✅ Step includes "DO NOT BE LAZY - LOAD AND REVIEW EVERY FILE" or similar mandate
-- ✅ Step instructs to "Load and review EVERY file" not "sample files"
-- ✅ Step has "DO NOT SKIP" or "DO NOT SHORTCUT" language
-- ⚠️ WARNING if validation step lacks anti-lazy language
-
-**Critical Flow Check:**
-- ✅ For critical flows (compliance, safety, quality gates): validation steps are in steps-v/ folder (tri-modal)
-- ✅ Validation steps are segregated from create flow
-- ✅ Validation can be run independently
-- ⚠️ For non-critical flows (entertainment, therapy, casual): validation may be inline
-- ❌ ERROR if critical validation is mixed into create steps
-
-**RETURN FORMAT:**
-Return a structured analysis containing:
-- Step file name
-- Proper design checklist (loads data, systematic checks, auto-proceeds, clear criteria, reports findings)
-- Anti-lazy language check (has mandate, mandate text, comprehensive coverage)
-- Critical flow check (location, segregation, independence)
-- Any issues found
-- Overall status (PASS/FAIL/WARN)
-
-**Context savings:** Each subprocess returns analysis (~30 lines), not full step file (~200 lines). Parent gets structured findings, not file contents.
-
-### 3. Aggregate Findings from All Subprocesses
-
-After all validation step files have been analyzed in subprocesses, aggregate findings:
-
-**Process subprocess results:**
-- Compile all structured analysis findings
-- Identify patterns across validation steps
-- Note any critical issues or warnings
-
-### 4. Check Validation Data Files
-
-**If workflow has validation steps:**
-
-1. Check `data/` folder for validation data
-2. Verify data files exist and are properly structured:
-   - CSV files have headers
-   - Markdown files have clear criteria
-   - Data is referenced in step frontmatter
-
-### 5. Document Findings
-
-**Create/Update "Validation Design Check" section in {validationReportFile} using aggregated subprocess findings:**
-
-Document the following information:
-
-**Whether validation is required:** Indicate if this workflow needs validation steps based on its domain type (critical/compliance/safety workflows vs. creative/exploratory ones)
-
-**List of validation steps found:** Provide the names/paths of all validation step files in the workflow
-
-**Validation step quality assessment:** For each validation step, document:
-- Whether it loads validation data/standards from the data/ folder
-- Whether it has a systematic check sequence
-- Whether it auto-proceeds through checks (vs. stopping for user input)
-- Whether it includes "DO NOT BE LAZY" or similar anti-lazy language mandates
-- Whether it has clear pass/fail criteria
-- Overall status (PASS/FAIL/WARN)
-
-**"DO NOT BE LAZY" language presence:** For each validation step, note whether anti-lazy language is present and what it says
-
-**Critical flow segregation:** For workflows requiring validation, document:
-- The workflow domain type
-- Whether validation steps are in the steps-v/ folder (tri-modal structure) or inline with create steps
-- Whether this segregation is appropriate for the workflow type
-
-**Validation data files:** List any validation data files found in the data/ folder, or note if they are missing
-
-**Issues identified:** List any problems found with the validation design, missing data files, or quality concerns
-
-**Overall status:** Provide final assessment (PASS/FAIL/WARN/N/A) with reasoning
-
-### 6. Append to Report
-
-Update {validationReportFile} - replace "## Validation Design Check *Pending...*" with actual findings from subprocess aggregation.
-
-### 7. Save Report and Auto-Proceed
-
-**CRITICAL:** Save the validation report BEFORE loading next step.
-
-Then immediately load, read entire file, then execute {nextStepFile}.
-
-**Display:**
-"**Validation Design check complete.** Proceeding to Instruction Style Check..."
-
----
-
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-
-- Determined if validation is critical
-- If critical: checked all validation steps
-- Validated validation step quality
-- Checked validation data files
-- Findings documented
-- Report saved before proceeding
-- Next validation step loaded
-
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-
-- Not checking validation steps when critical
-- Missing validation data files
-- Not documenting validation design issues
-- Not saving report before proceeding
-
-**Master Rule:** Validation is systematic and thorough. DO NOT BE LAZY. Check validation steps thoroughly. Auto-proceed through all validation steps.
+---
+name: 'step-06-validation-design-check'
+description: 'Check if workflow has proper validation steps that load validation data (if validation is critical)'
+
+nextStepFile: './step-07-instruction-style-check.md'
+targetWorkflowPath: '{workflow_folder_path}'
+validationReportFile: '{workflow_folder_path}/validation-report-{datetime}.md'
+workflowPlanFile: '{workflow_folder_path}/workflow-plan.md'
+trimodalWorkflowStructure: '../data/trimodal-workflow-structure.md'
+---
+
+# Validation Step 6: Validation Design Check
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+To check if the workflow has proper validation steps when validation is critical - validation steps should load from validation data and perform systematic checks.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 DO NOT BE LAZY - LOAD AND REVIEW EVERY FILE
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step, ensure entire file is read
+- ✅ Validation does NOT stop for user input - auto-proceed through all validation steps
+- ⚙️ If any instruction references a subprocess, subagent, or tool you do not have access to, you MUST still achieve the outcome in your main context
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Check if workflow needs validation steps - use subprocess optimization (per-file deep analysis for Pattern 2)
+- 🚫 DO NOT skip any validation step reviews - DO NOT BE LAZY
+- 💬 Subprocess must either update validation report directly OR return findings to parent for aggregation
+- 🚪 This is validation - systematic and thorough
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Determine if validation is critical for this workflow - use subprocess optimization when available
+- 💾 Check validation steps exist and are well-designed - launch subprocess for per-file deep analysis (Pattern 2)
+- 💬 Subprocesses must either update validation report OR return findings for parent aggregation
+- 📖 Append findings to validation report
+- 🚫 DO NOT halt for user input - validation runs to completion
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Some workflows need validation (compliance, safety, quality gates)
+- Others don't (creative, exploratory)
+- Check the design to determine if validation steps are needed
+
+## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
+
+**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip or shortcut.
+
+### 1. Determine If Validation Is Critical
+
+From {workflowPlanFile}, check:
+
+**Does this workflow NEED validation?**
+
+**YES - Validation Critical If:**
+- Compliance/regulatory requirements (tax, legal, medical)
+- Safety-critical outputs
+- Quality gates required
+- User explicitly requested validation steps
+
+**NO - Validation Not Critical If:**
+- Creative/exploratory workflow
+- User-driven without formal requirements
+- Output is user's responsibility to validate
+
+### 2. If Validation Is Critical, Check Validation Steps
+
+**DO NOT BE LAZY - For EVERY validation step file, launch a subprocess that:**
+
+1. Loads that validation step file
+2. Reads and analyzes the step's content deeply (prose, logic, quality, flow, anti-lazy language)
+3. Returns structured analysis findings to parent for aggregation
+
+**SUBPROCESS ANALYSIS PATTERN - Check each validation step file for:**
+
+**Proper Validation Step Design:**
+- ✅ Loads validation data/standards from `data/` folder
+- ✅ Has systematic check sequence (not hand-wavy)
+- ✅ Auto-proceeds through checks (not stopping for each)
+- ✅ Clear pass/fail criteria
+- ✅ Reports findings to user
+
+**"DO NOT BE LAZY" Language Check:**
+- ✅ Step includes "DO NOT BE LAZY - LOAD AND REVIEW EVERY FILE" or similar mandate
+- ✅ Step instructs to "Load and review EVERY file" not "sample files"
+- ✅ Step has "DO NOT SKIP" or "DO NOT SHORTCUT" language
+- ⚠️ WARNING if validation step lacks anti-lazy language
+
+**Critical Flow Check:**
+- ✅ For critical flows (compliance, safety, quality gates): validation steps are in steps-v/ folder (tri-modal)
+- ✅ Validation steps are segregated from create flow
+- ✅ Validation can be run independently
+- ⚠️ For non-critical flows (entertainment, therapy, casual): validation may be inline
+- ❌ ERROR if critical validation is mixed into create steps
+
+**RETURN FORMAT:**
+Return a structured analysis containing:
+- Step file name
+- Proper design checklist (loads data, systematic checks, auto-proceeds, clear criteria, reports findings)
+- Anti-lazy language check (has mandate, mandate text, comprehensive coverage)
+- Critical flow check (location, segregation, independence)
+- Any issues found
+- Overall status (PASS/FAIL/WARN)
+
+**Context savings:** Each subprocess returns analysis (~30 lines), not full step file (~200 lines). Parent gets structured findings, not file contents.
+
+### 3. Aggregate Findings from All Subprocesses
+
+After all validation step files have been analyzed in subprocesses, aggregate findings:
+
+**Process subprocess results:**
+- Compile all structured analysis findings
+- Identify patterns across validation steps
+- Note any critical issues or warnings
+
+### 4. Check Validation Data Files
+
+**If workflow has validation steps:**
+
+1. Check `data/` folder for validation data
+2. Verify data files exist and are properly structured:
+   - CSV files have headers
+   - Markdown files have clear criteria
+   - Data is referenced in step frontmatter
+
+### 5. Document Findings
+
+**Create/Update "Validation Design Check" section in {validationReportFile} using aggregated subprocess findings:**
+
+Document the following information:
+
+**Whether validation is required:** Indicate if this workflow needs validation steps based on its domain type (critical/compliance/safety workflows vs. creative/exploratory ones)
+
+**List of validation steps found:** Provide the names/paths of all validation step files in the workflow
+
+**Validation step quality assessment:** For each validation step, document:
+- Whether it loads validation data/standards from the data/ folder
+- Whether it has a systematic check sequence
+- Whether it auto-proceeds through checks (vs. stopping for user input)
+- Whether it includes "DO NOT BE LAZY" or similar anti-lazy language mandates
+- Whether it has clear pass/fail criteria
+- Overall status (PASS/FAIL/WARN)
+
+**"DO NOT BE LAZY" language presence:** For each validation step, note whether anti-lazy language is present and what it says
+
+**Critical flow segregation:** For workflows requiring validation, document:
+- The workflow domain type
+- Whether validation steps are in the steps-v/ folder (tri-modal structure) or inline with create steps
+- Whether this segregation is appropriate for the workflow type
+
+**Validation data files:** List any validation data files found in the data/ folder, or note if they are missing
+
+**Issues identified:** List any problems found with the validation design, missing data files, or quality concerns
+
+**Overall status:** Provide final assessment (PASS/FAIL/WARN/N/A) with reasoning
+
+### 6. Append to Report
+
+Update {validationReportFile} - replace "## Validation Design Check *Pending...*" with actual findings from subprocess aggregation.
+
+### 7. Save Report and Auto-Proceed
+
+**CRITICAL:** Save the validation report BEFORE loading next step.
+
+Then immediately load, read entire file, then execute {nextStepFile}.
+
+**Display:**
+"**Validation Design check complete.** Proceeding to Instruction Style Check..."
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- Determined if validation is critical
+- If critical: checked all validation steps
+- Validated validation step quality
+- Checked validation data files
+- Findings documented
+- Report saved before proceeding
+- Next validation step loaded
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Not checking validation steps when critical
+- Missing validation data files
+- Not documenting validation design issues
+- Not saving report before proceeding
+
+**Master Rule:** Validation is systematic and thorough. DO NOT BE LAZY. Check validation steps thoroughly. Auto-proceed through all validation steps.