@drafthq/draft 2.7.0

package/core/templates/intake-questions.md

@@ -0,0 +1,403 @@
+---
+project: "{PROJECT_NAME}"
+module: "{MODULE_NAME or 'root'}"
+generated_by: "draft:new-track"
+generated_at: "{ISO_TIMESTAMP}"
+---
+
+# Intake Questions
+
+Structured questions for track creation. **Ask ONE question at a time.** Wait for user response before proceeding. Update drafts progressively.
+
+---
+
+## Flow Instructions
+
+**CRITICAL:** This is a conversation, not a form. Follow this pattern for EACH question:
+
+1. **Ask** — One question only. Wait for response.
+2. **Listen** — Process the user's answer.
+3. **Contribute** — Add your expertise (patterns, risks, alternatives, citations).
+4. **Update** — Modify spec-draft.md with what's been established.
+5. **Bridge** — Summarize briefly, then ask the next question.
+
+**DO NOT** dump multiple questions at once. The value is in the dialogue.
+
+---
+
+## Phase 1: Initial Context
+
+### Question 1.1: Existing Documentation
+> Start here. Gather any existing context before diving in.
+
+**Ask:**
+> "Do you have existing documentation for this work? (PRD, RFC, design doc, Jira ticket, or any notes)"
+
+**If yes:**
+- Request the document or key excerpts
+- Ingest and extract: goals, requirements, constraints, open questions
+- Summarize: "I've extracted [X, Y, Z]. I notice [gap] isn't covered yet."
+
+**If no:**
+- Acknowledge: "No problem. Let's build this from scratch together."
+- Proceed to Phase 2
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Add any extracted context to relevant sections.
+
+---
+
+## Phase 2: Problem Space
+
+### Question 2.1: Problem Definition
+**Ask:**
+> "What problem are we solving?"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- Pattern recognition: "This sounds similar to [industry pattern]..."
+- Domain concepts: Reference Jobs-to-be-Done, DDD problem space if relevant
+- Clarifying probe: "When you say [X], do you mean [A] or [B]?"
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Problem Statement section.
+
+---
+
+### Question 2.2: Urgency & Impact
+**Ask:**
+> "Why does this problem matter now? What happens if we don't solve it?"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- Validate urgency: Is this symptom or root cause?
+- Impact analysis: Who's affected? How severely?
+- Reference: 5 Whys technique if they're describing symptoms
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Background & Why Now section.
+
+---
+
+### Question 2.3: Users & Workarounds
+**Ask:**
+> "Who experiences this pain? How do they currently cope?"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- User segmentation: Are there different user types with different needs?
+- Workaround analysis: Current workarounds often reveal requirements
+- Prior art: "Similar products handle this by [X]..."
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Add user context to Background.
+
+---
+
+### Question 2.4: Scope Boundary
+**Ask:**
+> "What's the scope boundary? Where does this problem end and adjacent problems begin?"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- Identify adjacent problems that should NOT be solved here
+- Reference: Bounded Context (DDD)
+- Flag scope creep risks: "I'd suggest explicitly excluding [X]..."
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Non-Goals section.
+
+---
+
+### Checkpoint: Problem Space Complete
+
+**Summarize:**
+> "Here's what we've established about the problem:
+> - Problem: [summary]
+> - Why now: [summary]
+> - Users: [summary]
+> - Scope: [in] / [out]
+>
+> Does this capture it accurately, or should we refine anything before moving to solutions?"
+
+**Wait for confirmation before proceeding.**
+
+---
+
+## Phase 3: Solution Space
+
+### Question 3.1: Simplest Solution
+**Ask:**
+> "What's the simplest version that solves this problem?"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- MVP identification: What's truly essential vs nice-to-have?
+- Gold-plating risks: "We could simplify by [X]..."
+- Reference: YAGNI, Walking Skeleton, Tracer Bullet (Pragmatic Programmer)
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Requirements > Functional section.
+
+---
+
+### Question 3.2: Approach Rationale
+**Ask:**
+> "Why this approach over alternatives?"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- Present 2-3 alternative approaches with trade-offs
+- Reference: Architecture Decision Records pattern
+- Probe: "Have you considered [alternative]? Trade-off would be [X]..."
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Technical Approach section.
+
+---
+
+### Question 3.3: Explicit Non-Goals
+**Ask:**
+> "What are we explicitly NOT doing? What should be out of scope?"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- Suggest common scope creep items to exclude
+- Reference: Anti-goals pattern, MoSCoW prioritization
+- "I'd recommend also excluding [X] to keep scope tight..."
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Non-Goals section (append to existing).
+
+---
+
+### Question 3.4: Architecture Fit
+**Ask:**
+> "How does this fit with the current architecture?"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- Cross-reference `draft/.ai-context.md` (or `draft/architecture.md`) for integration points
+- Identify affected modules/components
+- Reference: Clean Architecture boundaries, module coupling
+- Flag: "This will touch [modules]. Consider [integration pattern]..."
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Context References and Technical Approach.
+
+---
+
+### Question 3.5: Reusable Patterns
+**Ask:**
+> "What existing patterns or components can we leverage?"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- Search codebase context for reusable patterns
+- Suggest tech-stack.md conventions to follow
+- Reference: DRY, existing abstractions
+- "I see [existing component] could be extended for this..."
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Technical Approach section.
+
+---
+
+### Checkpoint: Solution Space Complete
+
+**Summarize:**
+> "Here's the proposed solution:
+> - Approach: [summary]
+> - Why this approach: [rationale]
+> - Not doing: [non-goals]
+> - Architecture fit: [affected modules]
+> - Reusing: [existing patterns]
+>
+> Ready to discuss risks, or want to refine the approach?"
+
+**Wait for confirmation before proceeding.**
+
+---
+
+## Phase 4: Risk & Constraints
+
+### Question 4.1: What Could Go Wrong
+**Ask:**
+> "What could go wrong with this approach?"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- Surface risks user may not have considered
+- Security: Reference OWASP Top 10 if relevant
+- Performance: Identify potential bottlenecks
+- Edge cases: "What happens when [edge case]?"
+- Reference: Failure mode analysis, distributed systems fallacies
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Open Questions section.
+
+---
+
+### Question 4.2: Dependencies & Blockers
+**Ask:**
+> "What dependencies or blockers exist? (External APIs, other teams, data, infrastructure)"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- Identify external dependencies and their reliability
+- Team dependencies: Who else needs to be involved?
+- Data dependencies: What data do we need? Where does it come from?
+- Reference: Critical path analysis
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Open Questions and Technical Approach.
+
+---
+
+### Question 4.3: Assumptions
+**Ask:**
+> "What assumptions are we making? Why might this fail?"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- List implicit assumptions explicitly
+- Fact-check against `draft/tech-stack.md` and `draft/.ai-context.md`
+- Reference: Pre-mortem technique
+- "I'm assuming [X]. If that's wrong, [consequence]..."
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Open Questions section.
+
+---
+
+### Question 4.4: Constraints
+**Ask:**
+> "What constraints must we operate within? (Timeline, tech limitations, compliance, performance requirements)"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- Identify tech constraints from tech-stack.md
+- Performance requirements: Latency, throughput, scale
+- Compliance: GDPR, SOC2, industry-specific
+- Reference: 12-Factor App constraints, NFR frameworks
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Requirements > Non-Functional section.
+
+---
+
+### Question 4.5: Security & Compliance
+**Ask:**
+> "Are there security or compliance considerations?"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- Flag relevant OWASP concerns
+- Data privacy: PII handling, encryption, access control
+- Authentication/authorization patterns
+- Reference: OWASP ASVS, security by design principles
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Requirements > Non-Functional section.
+
+---
+
+### Checkpoint: Risks Complete
+
+**Summarize:**
+> "Key risks and constraints identified:
+> - Risks: [list]
+> - Dependencies: [list]
+> - Assumptions: [list]
+> - Constraints: [list]
+> - Security: [considerations]
+>
+> Anything else that could derail this, or ready to define success criteria?"
+
+**Wait for confirmation before proceeding.**
+
+---
+
+## Phase 5: Success Criteria
+
+### Question 5.1: Definition of Done
+**Ask:**
+> "How do we know this is complete? What must be true when we're done?"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- Suggest measurable acceptance criteria
+- Convert vague criteria to testable outcomes
+- Reference: SMART criteria, Given-When-Then format
+- "I'd phrase that as: 'Given [X], when [Y], then [Z]'..."
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Acceptance Criteria section.
+
+---
+
+### Question 5.2: Verification Strategy
+**Ask:**
+> "How will we verify it works correctly?"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- Suggest testing strategies appropriate to feature type
+- Reference: Test pyramid, TDD practices
+- Integration testing: What integration points need testing?
+- "I'd recommend [unit/integration/e2e] tests for [component]..."
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Acceptance Criteria section.
+
+---
+
+### Question 5.3: Stakeholder Acceptance
+**Ask:**
+> "What would make stakeholders accept this? What does success look like to them?"
+
+**After response, contribute:**
+- Align with product.md goals
+- Suggest demo scenarios
+- Reference: Stakeholder analysis, acceptance criteria patterns
+- "For [stakeholder], I'd demonstrate [specific scenario]..."
+
+**Update spec-draft.md:** Acceptance Criteria section.
+
+---
+
+### Checkpoint: Success Criteria Complete
+
+**Summarize:**
+> "Success criteria defined:
+> - Done when: [criteria list]
+> - Verified by: [testing approach]
+> - Stakeholders accept when: [demo scenarios]
+>
+> Ready to finalize the spec?"
+
+**Wait for confirmation before proceeding.**
+
+---
+
+## Phase 6: Finalization
+
+### Spec Review
+
+**Present complete spec-draft.md:**
+> "Here's the complete specification:
+> [Display spec-draft.md content]
+>
+> Open questions remaining: [list any]
+>
+> Ready to finalize this spec, or any changes needed?"
+
+**If changes needed:**
+- Discuss specific sections
+- Update spec-draft.md
+- Return to this review step
+
+**If confirmed:**
+- Promote spec-draft.md → spec.md
+- Announce: "Spec finalized. Now let's create the implementation plan."
+
+---
+
+### Plan Creation
+
+**After spec is finalized, propose plan structure:**
+> "Based on the spec, I propose these phases:
+> - Phase 1: [name] — [goal]
+> - Phase 2: [name] — [goal]
+> - Phase 3: [name] — [goal]
+>
+> Each phase will have specific tasks with file references and tests.
+> Does this phasing make sense, or should we adjust?"
+
+**After confirmation:**
+- Build out detailed plan-draft.md with tasks
+- Present for review
+- On confirmation: promote plan-draft.md → plan.md
+
+---
+
+## Anti-Patterns
+
+**STOP if you're doing any of these:**
+
+- Asking multiple questions at once
+- Moving to next question before user responds
+- Accepting answers without contributing expertise
+- Not citing sources when giving advice
+- Skipping checkpoints between phases
+- Not updating drafts after each answer
+- Rushing to finalization without thorough exploration
+
+**The goal is collaborative understanding, not speed.**

package/core/templates/jira.md

@@ -0,0 +1,119 @@
+---
+project: "{PROJECT_NAME}"
+module: "root"
+generated_by: "draft:init"
+generated_at: "{ISO_TIMESTAMP}"
+---
+
+# Jira Configuration & Story Template
+
+## Project Configuration
+
+Place this section in `draft/jira.md` in your project to configure Jira integration.
+
+```yaml
+# Jira Project Configuration
+project_key: PROJ # Jira project key (required)
+board_id: 123 # Board ID for sprint assignment (optional)
+epic_link_field: customfield_10014 # Custom field ID for epic link (varies by instance)
+story_points_field: customfield_10028 # Custom field ID for story points (optional)
+default_issue_type: Story # Default issue type for tasks
+default_priority: Medium # Default priority level
+labels: # Labels to apply to all created issues
+  - draft
+```
+
+---
+
+# Jira Story Template (Minimal)
+
+## Summary
+[Brief, descriptive title]
+
+## Description
+
+```
+h3. Description:
+
+Problem Statement:
+[Describe the current problem or pain point]
+
+ * [Pain point 1]
+ * [Pain point 2]
+ * [Pain point 3]
+
+Solution:
+[Describe the proposed solution at a high level]
+
+Key Features:
+ # [Feature Category 1]
+
+ * [Feature detail 1]
+ * [Feature detail 2]
+
+ # [Feature Category 2]
+
+ * [Feature detail 1]
+ * [Feature detail 2]
+
+Benefits:
+ * [Benefit 1]: [Quantifiable impact]
+ * [Benefit 2]: [Quantifiable impact]
+
+Use Cases:
+ * [Use case 1]
+ * [Use case 2]
+ * [Use case 3]
+```
+
+## Acceptance Criteria
+
+```
+- [ ] [Criterion 1: Specific, testable requirement]
+- [ ] [Criterion 2: Specific, testable requirement]
+- [ ] [Criterion 3: Specific, testable requirement]
+```
+
+## Required Fields
+
+### Standard Fields
+- **Issue Type:** Story
+- **Priority:** Medium
+- **Components:** [Component name]
+- **Fix Version/s:** [Version or master]
+
+### People
+- **Assignee:** [Your email]
+- **Product Owner:** [PO email]
+- **Tech Lead:** [Tech lead email]
+- **Scrum Master:** [Scrum master email]
+
+### Team
+- **Developers:** [List developer emails]
+- **Reviewers:** [List reviewer emails]
+
+### Story Details
+- **Story Points:** [1/2/3/5/8/13]
+- **Work Type:** Operational Excellence
+- **Sub-Team:** [Sub-team name]
+- **Organization:** R&D
+
+### Development Status
+- **Development Status:** Not-Started
+
+### Security
+- **Requires Security Review:** Yes/No
+- **Security Review Status:** Review Needed
+
+### Quality Gates
+- [ ] Tasks complete
+- [ ] Functional Testing complete
+- [ ] 100% code unit tested or Automated
+- [ ] Acceptance criteria met
+- [ ] i18n impact review
+
+### Other
+- **Risk Assessment:** Toss Up
+- **Priority Level:** Normal
+- **Category:** Uncategorized
+- **Roadmap:** Future