@dragonflymcp/plugin 1.0.0

package/templates/skills/release-management.md.template

@@ -0,0 +1,373 @@
+---
+name: Release Management
+description: Release planning, coordination, and deployment strategies
+version: 1.0.0
+author: Zen Framework
+applies_to:
+  - version-concept
+trigger_keywords:
+  - release
+  - deploy
+  - rollout
+  - production
+  - launch
+  - go live
+priority: P3
+impact: medium
+---
+
+# Release Management Skill
+
+## Purpose
+
+Enable the Version Concept agent to plan and coordinate releases with proper versioning, deployment strategies, and rollback procedures.
+
+## Release Planning Framework
+
+### 1. Release Types
+
+```yaml
+release_types:
+  major_release:
+    version_bump: "major"
+    characteristics:
+      - breaking_changes
+      - significant_new_features
+      - architecture_changes
+    preparation:
+      - migration_guide
+      - deprecation_notices
+      - extended_testing
+    communication: "advance notice required"
+    
+  minor_release:
+    version_bump: "minor"
+    characteristics:
+      - new_features
+      - backwards_compatible
+      - deprecations_introduced
+    preparation:
+      - feature_documentation
+      - upgrade_guide
+    communication: "standard release notes"
+    
+  patch_release:
+    version_bump: "patch"
+    characteristics:
+      - bug_fixes
+      - security_patches
+      - no_new_features
+    preparation:
+      - minimal_testing
+      - fix_verification
+    communication: "changelog entry"
+    
+  hotfix:
+    version_bump: "patch"
+    characteristics:
+      - critical_fix
+      - minimal_scope
+      - expedited_process
+    preparation:
+      - targeted_testing
+      - rollback_ready
+    communication: "incident communication"
+```
+
+### 2. Release Checklist
+
+```yaml
+release_checklist:
+  pre_release:
+    code_quality:
+      - [ ] All tests passing
+      - [ ] Code review completed
+      - [ ] No critical security vulnerabilities
+      - [ ] Performance benchmarks met
+      
+    documentation:
+      - [ ] CHANGELOG updated
+      - [ ] API documentation current
+      - [ ] Migration guide (if needed)
+      - [ ] Release notes drafted
+      
+    versioning:
+      - [ ] Version number updated
+      - [ ] Git tag created
+      - [ ] Dependencies locked
+      
+    environment:
+      - [ ] Staging deployment successful
+      - [ ] Smoke tests passed
+      - [ ] Database migrations tested
+      
+  release:
+    deployment:
+      - [ ] Production deployment executed
+      - [ ] Health checks passing
+      - [ ] Monitoring active
+      - [ ] Rollback procedure verified
+      
+    communication:
+      - [ ] Team notified
+      - [ ] Stakeholders informed
+      - [ ] Release notes published
+      
+  post_release:
+    verification:
+      - [ ] Production smoke tests
+      - [ ] Key metrics stable
+      - [ ] No error rate spike
+      - [ ] User feedback monitored
+```
+
+### 3. Deployment Strategies
+
+```yaml
+deployment_strategies:
+  rolling_deployment:
+    description: "Gradual replacement of instances"
+    process:
+      1. deploy_to_subset: "Start with % of instances"
+      2. verify_health: "Check metrics"
+      3. continue_rollout: "Deploy to more instances"
+      4. complete: "All instances updated"
+    pros: ["No downtime", "Gradual risk"]
+    cons: ["Mixed versions temporarily"]
+    
+  blue_green:
+    description: "Two identical environments"
+    process:
+      1. prepare_green: "Deploy new version to green"
+      2. test_green: "Verify green environment"
+      3. switch_traffic: "Route all traffic to green"
+      4. standby_blue: "Blue becomes standby"
+    pros: ["Instant rollback", "No mixed versions"]
+    cons: ["Double infrastructure cost"]
+    
+  canary:
+    description: "Small percentage gets new version"
+    process:
+      1. deploy_canary: "Deploy to 1-5% of users"
+      2. monitor: "Watch metrics closely"
+      3. expand: "Gradually increase percentage"
+      4. complete: "100% on new version"
+    pros: ["Minimal risk", "Real user feedback"]
+    cons: ["Complex routing", "Slower rollout"]
+    
+  feature_flags:
+    description: "Code deployed, features toggled"
+    process:
+      1. deploy_code: "Ship with flag off"
+      2. enable_percentage: "Enable for subset"
+      3. expand: "Increase enabled percentage"
+      4. cleanup: "Remove flag when stable"
+    pros: ["Decouple deploy from release", "Easy rollback"]
+    cons: ["Technical debt if not cleaned up"]
+```
+
+### 4. Rollback Procedures
+
+```yaml
+rollback_triggers:
+  automatic:
+    - error_rate_spike: ">5% increase"
+    - response_time_degradation: ">50% slower"
+    - health_check_failure: "consecutive failures"
+    
+  manual:
+    - user_reported_issues: "Critical bugs"
+    - business_decision: "Stakeholder request"
+    - security_vulnerability: "Discovered post-deploy"
+
+rollback_procedures:
+  immediate:
+    action: "Revert to previous version"
+    commands:
+      kubernetes: "kubectl rollout undo deployment/app"
+      docker: "docker-compose up -d --force-recreate app:previous"
+      heroku: "heroku releases:rollback"
+    time_target: "<5 minutes"
+    
+  database_considerations:
+    backward_compatible:
+      action: "Rollback application only"
+    backward_incompatible:
+      action: "Rollback migrations first"
+      warning: "Data loss possible"
+```
+
+### 5. Release Communication
+
+```yaml
+communication_templates:
+  internal_announcement:
+    template: |
+      ## Release {version} - {date}
+      
+      ### Summary
+      {brief_description}
+      
+      ### Key Changes
+      {bulleted_list_of_changes}
+      
+      ### Impact
+      {who_is_affected}
+      
+      ### Action Required
+      {any_required_actions}
+      
+  external_release_notes:
+    template: |
+      # {Product} {version}
+      
+      ## What's New
+      {new_features}
+      
+      ## Improvements
+      {enhancements}
+      
+      ## Bug Fixes
+      {fixes}
+      
+      ## Breaking Changes
+      {if_any}
+      
+      ## Upgrade Guide
+      {migration_steps}
+      
+  incident_communication:
+    template: |
+      ## Incident: {title}
+      
+      **Status**: {investigating|identified|resolved}
+      **Impact**: {description_of_impact}
+      **Start Time**: {timestamp}
+      
+      ### Updates
+      {chronological_updates}
+      
+      ### Resolution
+      {how_it_was_fixed}
+      
+      ### Next Steps
+      {preventive_measures}
+```
+
+### 6. Release Automation
+
+```yaml
+ci_cd_integration:
+  release_workflow:
+    trigger: "tag push matching v*"
+    steps:
+      1. build:
+         action: "Build production artifacts"
+         
+      2. test:
+         action: "Run full test suite"
+         
+      3. security_scan:
+         action: "Run security checks"
+         
+      4. deploy_staging:
+         action: "Deploy to staging"
+         
+      5. smoke_tests:
+         action: "Run smoke tests"
+         
+      6. approval_gate:
+         action: "Manual approval for production"
+         
+      7. deploy_production:
+         action: "Deploy to production"
+         strategy: "canary"
+         
+      8. notify:
+         action: "Send release notifications"
+
+github_release_action:
+  script: |
+    - name: Create Release
+      uses: actions/create-release@v1
+      with:
+        tag_name: ${{ github.ref }}
+        release_name: Release ${{ github.ref }}
+        body: |
+          ${{ steps.changelog.outputs.content }}
+        draft: false
+        prerelease: false
+```
+
+### 7. Release Metrics
+
+```yaml
+release_metrics:
+  deployment_frequency:
+    description: "How often releases happen"
+    elite: "Multiple times per day"
+    high: "Weekly"
+    medium: "Monthly"
+    low: "Less than monthly"
+    
+  lead_time:
+    description: "Commit to production"
+    elite: "<1 hour"
+    high: "<1 day"
+    medium: "<1 week"
+    low: ">1 month"
+    
+  change_failure_rate:
+    description: "% of deployments causing failures"
+    elite: "<5%"
+    high: "<10%"
+    medium: "<15%"
+    low: ">15%"
+    
+  mean_time_to_recovery:
+    description: "Time to recover from failure"
+    elite: "<1 hour"
+    high: "<1 day"
+    medium: "<1 week"
+    low: ">1 week"
+```
+
+## Output Format
+
+```yaml
+release_plan:
+  version: "2.1.0"
+  type: "minor"
+  scheduled_date: "2024-01-20"
+  
+  scope:
+    features:
+      - "US-100: User dashboard redesign"
+      - "US-101: Export functionality"
+    fixes:
+      - "BUG-200: Login timeout issue"
+      
+  deployment:
+    strategy: "canary"
+    stages:
+      - percentage: 5
+        duration: "30 minutes"
+        metrics_to_watch: ["error_rate", "response_time"]
+      - percentage: 25
+        duration: "2 hours"
+      - percentage: 100
+        
+  rollback:
+    trigger_conditions:
+      - "Error rate > 2%"
+      - "P95 latency > 500ms"
+    procedure: "kubectl rollout undo"
+    
+  communication:
+    internal: "Slack #releases"
+    external: "Blog post + email"
+    
+  checklist_status:
+    pre_release: "8/8 complete"
+    ready_for_deployment: true
+```

package/templates/skills/requirement-prioritization.md.template

@@ -0,0 +1,357 @@
+---
+name: Requirement Prioritization
+description: Prioritize requirements using MoSCoW, RICE, and value/effort matrices
+version: 1.0.0
+author: Zen Framework
+applies_to:
+  - story-concept
+trigger_keywords:
+  - priority
+  - prioritize
+  - important
+  - urgent
+  - backlog
+  - roadmap
+priority: P3
+impact: medium
+---
+
+# Requirement Prioritization Skill
+
+## Purpose
+
+Enable the Story Concept agent to systematically prioritize requirements using proven frameworks to maximize value delivery.
+
+## Prioritization Frameworks
+
+### 1. MoSCoW Method
+
+```yaml
+moscow_categories:
+  must_have:
+    code: "M"
+    criteria:
+      - critical_for_launch
+      - legal_regulatory_requirement
+      - security_essential
+      - core_functionality
+    percentage_of_scope: "~60%"
+    failure_impact: "Release cannot proceed"
+    
+  should_have:
+    code: "S"
+    criteria:
+      - important_but_not_critical
+      - significant_value
+      - workarounds_exist
+    percentage_of_scope: "~20%"
+    failure_impact: "Painful but deliverable"
+    
+  could_have:
+    code: "C"
+    criteria:
+      - nice_to_have
+      - enhances_experience
+      - first_to_cut
+    percentage_of_scope: "~20%"
+    failure_impact: "Minor disappointment"
+    
+  wont_have:
+    code: "W"
+    criteria:
+      - not_this_release
+      - explicitly_excluded
+      - future_consideration
+    percentage_of_scope: "N/A"
+    note: "Documented for clarity"
+```
+
+### 2. RICE Scoring
+
+```yaml
+rice_framework:
+  reach:
+    description: "How many users impacted per time period"
+    scale: "number of users/quarter"
+    examples:
+      high: 10000  # users
+      medium: 1000
+      low: 100
+      
+  impact:
+    description: "How much does it improve user experience"
+    scale:
+      massive: 3
+      high: 2
+      medium: 1
+      low: 0.5
+      minimal: 0.25
+      
+  confidence:
+    description: "How sure are you about estimates"
+    scale:
+      high: 1.0  # data-backed
+      medium: 0.8  # some evidence
+      low: 0.5  # gut feeling
+      
+  effort:
+    description: "Person-months to complete"
+    scale: "person-months"
+    note: "Higher effort = lower priority"
+    
+  formula: "(Reach * Impact * Confidence) / Effort"
+  
+  example:
+    feature: "One-click checkout"
+    reach: 5000  # users/quarter
+    impact: 2  # high
+    confidence: 0.8  # medium
+    effort: 2  # person-months
+    score: 4000  # (5000 * 2 * 0.8) / 2
+```
+
+### 3. Value vs Effort Matrix
+
+```yaml
+value_effort_quadrants:
+  quick_wins:
+    quadrant: "High Value, Low Effort"
+    action: "Do first"
+    priority: 1
+    characteristics:
+      - immediate_roi
+      - easy_implementation
+      - low_risk
+      
+  big_bets:
+    quadrant: "High Value, High Effort"
+    action: "Plan carefully"
+    priority: 2
+    characteristics:
+      - strategic_importance
+      - requires_investment
+      - break_into_phases
+      
+  fill_ins:
+    quadrant: "Low Value, Low Effort"
+    action: "Do if time permits"
+    priority: 3
+    characteristics:
+      - minor_improvements
+      - low_opportunity_cost
+      
+  money_pits:
+    quadrant: "Low Value, High Effort"
+    action: "Avoid"
+    priority: 4
+    characteristics:
+      - poor_roi
+      - resource_drain
+      - opportunity_cost
+```
+
+### 4. Weighted Scoring Model
+
+```yaml
+weighted_scoring:
+  criteria:
+    business_value:
+      weight: 30
+      scale: 1-5
+      considerations:
+        - revenue_impact
+        - cost_savings
+        - strategic_alignment
+        
+    user_impact:
+      weight: 25
+      scale: 1-5
+      considerations:
+        - user_satisfaction
+        - adoption_likelihood
+        - retention_impact
+        
+    technical_fit:
+      weight: 20
+      scale: 1-5
+      considerations:
+        - architecture_alignment
+        - technical_debt_reduction
+        - platform_capability
+        
+    feasibility:
+      weight: 15
+      scale: 1-5
+      considerations:
+        - skill_availability
+        - dependency_risk
+        - timeline_fit
+        
+    risk:
+      weight: 10
+      scale: 1-5  # inverse: 5 = low risk
+      considerations:
+        - implementation_risk
+        - market_risk
+        - compliance_risk
+        
+  calculation: "Sum(criterion_score * weight) / 100"
+```
+
+### 5. Kano Model
+
+```yaml
+kano_categories:
+  must_be:
+    description: "Expected features, dissatisfaction if missing"
+    satisfaction_curve: "flat at top"
+    examples:
+      - "Login functionality"
+      - "Data security"
+      - "Basic search"
+    priority: "Foundation - must include"
+    
+  one_dimensional:
+    description: "More is better, linear satisfaction"
+    satisfaction_curve: "diagonal"
+    examples:
+      - "Performance speed"
+      - "Storage capacity"
+      - "Feature quantity"
+    priority: "Differentiate on these"
+    
+  attractive:
+    description: "Delighters, not expected"
+    satisfaction_curve: "exponential"
+    examples:
+      - "Surprise features"
+      - "Exceptional UX"
+      - "Personalization"
+    priority: "Add if resources allow"
+    
+  indifferent:
+    description: "No impact on satisfaction"
+    satisfaction_curve: "flat in middle"
+    examples:
+      - "Internal refactoring"
+      - "Unnecessary features"
+    priority: "Deprioritize"
+    
+  reverse:
+    description: "Can cause dissatisfaction"
+    satisfaction_curve: "negative slope"
+    examples:
+      - "Unwanted complexity"
+      - "Feature bloat"
+    priority: "Avoid"
+```
+
+### 6. Priority Assignment Algorithm
+
+```yaml
+priority_assignment:
+  step_1_categorize:
+    method: "MoSCoW classification"
+    output: "initial_tier"
+    
+  step_2_score:
+    method: "RICE or weighted scoring"
+    output: "numeric_score"
+    
+  step_3_rank:
+    within_each_tier: "by score descending"
+    
+  step_4_validate:
+    checks:
+      - dependencies_respected
+      - resource_constraints_feasible
+      - stakeholder_alignment
+      
+  step_5_sequence:
+    considerations:
+      - technical_dependencies
+      - team_availability
+      - risk_distribution
+```
+
+### 7. Stakeholder Alignment
+
+```yaml
+stakeholder_considerations:
+  perspectives:
+    business:
+      focus: ["revenue", "market share", "competitive advantage"]
+      weight: "high for strategic features"
+      
+    users:
+      focus: ["usability", "performance", "features"]
+      weight: "high for UX features"
+      
+    engineering:
+      focus: ["maintainability", "scalability", "tech debt"]
+      weight: "high for infrastructure"
+      
+    operations:
+      focus: ["reliability", "supportability", "monitoring"]
+      weight: "high for stability features"
+      
+  alignment_process:
+    1. gather_input: "Each stakeholder scores features"
+    2. identify_conflicts: "Where priorities differ"
+    3. facilitate_discussion: "Understand perspectives"
+    4. reach_consensus: "Agreed priority order"
+```
+
+## Output Format
+
+```yaml
+prioritization_result:
+  analysis_date: "2024-01-15"
+  items_prioritized: 25
+  
+  priority_tiers:
+    must_have:
+      items:
+        - id: "US-101"
+          title: "User authentication"
+          rice_score: 8500
+          rationale: "Security requirement"
+          
+        - id: "US-102"
+          title: "Basic search"
+          rice_score: 7200
+          rationale: "Core functionality"
+          
+    should_have:
+      items:
+        - id: "US-201"
+          title: "Advanced filtering"
+          rice_score: 4000
+          rationale: "High user demand"
+          
+    could_have:
+      items:
+        - id: "US-301"
+          title: "Dark mode"
+          rice_score: 1500
+          rationale: "Nice to have UX"
+          
+    wont_have:
+      items:
+        - id: "US-401"
+          title: "AI recommendations"
+          rationale: "Future roadmap item"
+          
+  recommendations:
+    sprint_1:
+      focus: "Must-haves"
+      items: ["US-101", "US-102", "US-103"]
+      
+    sprint_2:
+      focus: "Must-haves + Should-haves"
+      items: ["US-104", "US-201", "US-202"]
+      
+  risks:
+    - "US-104 has external dependency"
+    - "US-201 requires design review"
+```