@hanzlaa/rcode 3.6.16 → 4.1.0

package/rihal/skills/actions/2-plan/rihal-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-03-density-validation.md

@@ -1,171 +0,0 @@
----
-# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
-nextStepFile: './step-v-04-brief-coverage-validation.md'
-prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
-validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
----
-
-# Step 3: Information Density Validation
-
-## STEP GOAL:
-
-Validate PRD meets Rihal information density standards by scanning for conversational filler, wordy phrases, and redundant expressions that violate conciseness principles.
-
-## 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 Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
-- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
-- ✅ We engage in systematic validation, not collaborative dialogue
-- ✅ You bring analytical rigor and attention to detail
-- ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
-
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-
-- 🎯 Focus ONLY on information density anti-patterns
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate other aspects in this step
-- 💬 Approach: Systematic scanning and categorization
-- 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
-
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-
-- 🎯 Scan PRD for density anti-patterns systematically
-- 💾 Append density findings to validation report
-- 📖 Display "Proceeding to next check..." and load next step
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to pause or request user input
-
-## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
-
-- Available context: PRD file, validation report with format findings
-- Focus: Information density validation only
-- Limits: Don't validate other aspects, don't pause for user input
-- Dependencies: Step 2 completed - format classification done
-
-## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
-
-**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
-
-### 1. Attempt Sub-Process Validation
-
-**Try to use Task tool to spawn a subprocess:**
-
-"Perform information density validation on this PRD:
-
-1. Load the PRD file
-2. Scan for the following anti-patterns:
-   - Conversational filler phrases (examples: 'The system will allow users to...', 'It is important to note that...', 'In order to')
-   - Wordy phrases (examples: 'Due to the fact that', 'In the event of', 'For the purpose of')
-   - Redundant phrases (examples: 'Future plans', 'Absolutely essential', 'Past history')
-3. Count violations by category with line numbers
-4. Classify severity: Critical (>10 violations), Warning (5-10), Pass (<5)
-
-Return structured findings with counts and examples."
-
-### 2. Graceful Degradation (if Task tool unavailable)
-
-If Task tool unavailable, perform analysis directly:
-
-**Scan for conversational filler patterns:**
-- "The system will allow users to..."
-- "It is important to note that..."
-- "In order to"
-- "For the purpose of"
-- "With regard to"
-- Count occurrences and note line numbers
-
-**Scan for wordy phrases:**
-- "Due to the fact that" (use "because")
-- "In the event of" (use "if")
-- "At this point in time" (use "now")
-- "In a manner that" (use "how")
-- Count occurrences and note line numbers
-
-**Scan for redundant phrases:**
-- "Future plans" (just "plans")
-- "Past history" (just "history")
-- "Absolutely essential" (just "essential")
-- "Completely finish" (just "finish")
-- Count occurrences and note line numbers
-
-### 3. Classify Severity
-
-**Calculate total violations:**
-- Conversational filler count
-- Wordy phrases count
-- Redundant phrases count
-- Total = sum of all categories
-
-**Determine severity:**
-- **Critical:** Total > 10 violations
-- **Warning:** Total 5-10 violations
-- **Pass:** Total < 5 violations
-
-### 4. Report Density Findings to Validation Report
-
-Append to validation report:
-
-```markdown
-## Information Density Validation
-
-**Anti-Pattern Violations:**
-
-**Conversational Filler:** {count} occurrences
-[If count > 0, list examples with line numbers]
-
-**Wordy Phrases:** {count} occurrences
-[If count > 0, list examples with line numbers]
-
-**Redundant Phrases:** {count} occurrences
-[If count > 0, list examples with line numbers]
-
-**Total Violations:** {total}
-
-**Severity Assessment:** [Critical/Warning/Pass]
-
-**Recommendation:**
-[If Critical] "PRD requires significant revision to improve information density. Every sentence should carry weight without filler."
-[If Warning] "PRD would benefit from reducing wordiness and eliminating filler phrases."
-[If Pass] "PRD demonstrates good information density with minimal violations."
-```
-
-### 5. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
-
-Display: "**Information Density Validation Complete**
-
-Severity: {Critical/Warning/Pass}
-
-**Proceeding to next validation check...**"
-
-Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} (step-v-04-brief-coverage-validation.md)
-
----
-
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-
-- PRD scanned for all three anti-pattern categories
-- Violations counted with line numbers
-- Severity classified correctly
-- Findings reported to validation report
-- Auto-proceeds to next validation step
-- Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
-
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-
-- Not scanning all anti-pattern categories
-- Missing severity classification
-- Not reporting findings to validation report
-- Pausing for user input (should auto-proceed)
-- Not attempting subprocess architecture
-
-**Master Rule:** Information density validation runs autonomously. Scan, classify, report, auto-proceed. No user interaction needed.

package/rihal/skills/actions/2-plan/rihal-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-11-holistic-quality-validation.md

@@ -1,261 +0,0 @@
----
-# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
-nextStepFile: './step-v-12-completeness-validation.md'
-prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
-validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
----
-
-# Step 11: Holistic Quality Assessment
-
-## STEP GOAL:
-
-Assess the PRD as a cohesive, compelling document - evaluating document flow, dual audience effectiveness (humans and LLMs), Rihal PRD principles compliance, and overall quality rating.
-
-## 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}`
-- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS WRITE all artifact and document content in `{document_output_language}`
-
-### Role Reinforcement:
-
-- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
-- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
-- ✅ We engage in systematic validation, not collaborative dialogue
-- ✅ You bring analytical rigor and document quality expertise
-- ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
-- ✅ Uses Advanced Elicitation for multi-perspective evaluation
-
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-
-- 🎯 Focus ONLY on holistic document quality assessment
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate individual components (done in previous steps)
-- 💬 Approach: Multi-perspective evaluation using Advanced Elicitation
-- 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
-
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-
-- 🎯 Use Advanced Elicitation for multi-perspective assessment
-- 🎯 Evaluate document flow, dual audience, Rihal principles
-- 💾 Append comprehensive assessment to validation report
-- 📖 Display "Proceeding to next check..." and load next step
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to pause or request user input
-
-## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
-
-- Available context: Complete PRD file, validation report with findings from steps 1-10
-- Focus: Holistic quality - the WHOLE document
-- Limits: Don't re-validate individual components, don't pause for user input
-- Dependencies: Steps 1-10 completed - all systematic checks done
-
-## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
-
-**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
-
-### 1. Attempt Sub-Process with Advanced Elicitation
-
-**Try to use Task tool to spawn a subprocess using Advanced Elicitation:**
-
-"Perform holistic quality assessment on this PRD using multi-perspective evaluation:
-
-**Advanced Elicitation workflow:**
-Invoke the `rihal-advanced-elicitation` skill
-
-**Evaluate the PRD from these perspectives:**
-
-**1. Document Flow & Coherence:**
-- Read entire PRD
-- Evaluate narrative flow - does it tell a cohesive story?
-- Check transitions between sections
-- Assess consistency - is it coherent throughout?
-- Evaluate readability - is it clear and well-organized?
-
-**2. Dual Audience Effectiveness:**
-
-**For Humans:**
-- Executive-friendly: Can executives understand vision and goals quickly?
-- Developer clarity: Do developers have clear requirements to build from?
-- Designer clarity: Do designers understand user needs and flows?
-- Stakeholder decision-making: Can stakeholders make informed decisions?
-
-**For LLMs:**
-- Machine-readable structure: Is the PRD structured for LLM consumption?
-- UX readiness: Can an LLM generate UX designs from this?
-- Architecture readiness: Can an LLM generate architecture from this?
-- Epic/Story readiness: Can an LLM break down into epics and stories?
-
-**3. Rihal PRD Principles Compliance:**
-- Information density: Every sentence carries weight?
-- Measurability: Requirements testable?
-- Traceability: Requirements trace to sources?
-- Domain awareness: Domain-specific considerations included?
-- Zero anti-patterns: No filler or wordiness?
-- Dual audience: Works for both humans and LLMs?
-- Markdown format: Proper structure and formatting?
-
-**4. Overall Quality Rating:**
-Rate the PRD on 5-point scale:
-- Excellent (5/5): Exemplary, ready for production use
-- Good (4/5): Strong with minor improvements needed
-- Adequate (3/5): Acceptable but needs refinement
-- Needs Work (2/5): Significant gaps or issues
-- Problematic (1/5): Major flaws, needs substantial revision
-
-**5. Top 3 Improvements:**
-Identify the 3 most impactful improvements to make this a great PRD
-
-Return comprehensive assessment with all perspectives, rating, and top 3 improvements."
-
-**Graceful degradation (if no Task tool or Advanced Elicitation unavailable):**
-- Perform holistic assessment directly in current context
-- Read complete PRD
-- Evaluate document flow, coherence, transitions
-- Assess dual audience effectiveness
-- Check Rihal principles compliance
-- Assign overall quality rating
-- Identify top 3 improvements
-
-### 2. Synthesize Assessment
-
-**Compile findings from multi-perspective evaluation:**
-
-**Document Flow & Coherence:**
-- Overall assessment: [Excellent/Good/Adequate/Needs Work/Problematic]
-- Key strengths: [list]
-- Key weaknesses: [list]
-
-**Dual Audience Effectiveness:**
-- For Humans: [assessment]
-- For LLMs: [assessment]
-- Overall dual audience score: [1-5]
-
-**Rihal Principles Compliance:**
-- Principles met: [count]/7
-- Principles with issues: [list]
-
-**Overall Quality Rating:** [1-5 with label]
-
-**Top 3 Improvements:**
-1. [Improvement 1]
-2. [Improvement 2]
-3. [Improvement 3]
-
-### 3. Report Holistic Quality Findings to Validation Report
-
-Append to validation report:
-
-```markdown
-## Holistic Quality Assessment
-
-### Document Flow & Coherence
-
-**Assessment:** [Excellent/Good/Adequate/Needs Work/Problematic]
-
-**Strengths:**
-{List key strengths}
-
-**Areas for Improvement:**
-{List key weaknesses}
-
-### Dual Audience Effectiveness
-
-**For Humans:**
-- Executive-friendly: [assessment]
-- Developer clarity: [assessment]
-- Designer clarity: [assessment]
-- Stakeholder decision-making: [assessment]
-
-**For LLMs:**
-- Machine-readable structure: [assessment]
-- UX readiness: [assessment]
-- Architecture readiness: [assessment]
-- Epic/Story readiness: [assessment]
-
-**Dual Audience Score:** {score}/5
-
-### Rihal PRD Principles Compliance
-
-| Principle | Status | Notes |
-|-----------|--------|-------|
-| Information Density | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
-| Measurability | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
-| Traceability | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
-| Domain Awareness | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
-| Zero Anti-Patterns | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
-| Dual Audience | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
-| Markdown Format | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
-
-**Principles Met:** {count}/7
-
-### Overall Quality Rating
-
-**Rating:** {rating}/5 - {label}
-
-**Scale:**
-- 5/5 - Excellent: Exemplary, ready for production use
-- 4/5 - Good: Strong with minor improvements needed
-- 3/5 - Adequate: Acceptable but needs refinement
-- 2/5 - Needs Work: Significant gaps or issues
-- 1/5 - Problematic: Major flaws, needs substantial revision
-
-### Top 3 Improvements
-
-1. **{Improvement 1}**
-   {Brief explanation of why and how}
-
-2. **{Improvement 2}**
-   {Brief explanation of why and how}
-
-3. **{Improvement 3}**
-   {Brief explanation of why and how}
-
-### Summary
-
-**This PRD is:** {one-sentence overall assessment}
-
-**To make it great:** Focus on the top 3 improvements above.
-```
-
-### 4. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
-
-Display: "**Holistic Quality Assessment Complete**
-
-Overall Rating: {rating}/5 - {label}
-
-**Proceeding to final validation checks...**"
-
-Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} (step-v-12-completeness-validation.md)
-
----
-
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-
-- Advanced Elicitation used for multi-perspective evaluation (or graceful degradation)
-- Document flow & coherence assessed
-- Dual audience effectiveness evaluated (humans and LLMs)
-- Rihal PRD principles compliance checked
-- Overall quality rating assigned (1-5 scale)
-- Top 3 improvements identified
-- Comprehensive assessment reported to validation report
-- Auto-proceeds to next validation step
-- Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
-
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-
-- Not using Advanced Elicitation for multi-perspective evaluation
-- Missing document flow assessment
-- Missing dual audience evaluation
-- Not checking all Rihal principles
-- Not assigning overall quality rating
-- Missing top 3 improvements
-- Not reporting comprehensive assessment to validation report
-- Not auto-proceeding
-
-**Master Rule:** This evaluates the WHOLE document, not just components. Answers "Is this a good PRD?" and "What would make it great?"

package/rihal/skills/actions/2-plan/rihal-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-13-report-complete.md

@@ -1,229 +0,0 @@
----
-# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
-validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
-prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
----
-
-# Step 13: Validation Report Complete
-
-## STEP GOAL:
-
-Finalize validation report, summarize all findings from steps 1-12, present summary to user conversationally, and offer actionable next steps.
-
-## 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}`
-- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS WRITE all artifact and document content in `{document_output_language}`
-
-### Role Reinforcement:
-
-- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
-- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
-- ✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
-- ✅ You bring synthesis and summary expertise
-- ✅ This is the FINAL step - requires user interaction
-
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-
-- 🎯 Focus ONLY on summarizing findings and presenting options
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to perform additional validation
-- 💬 Approach: Conversational summary with clear next steps
-- 🚪 This is the final step - no next step after this
-
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-
-- 🎯 Load complete validation report
-- 🎯 Summarize all findings from steps 1-12
-- 🎯 Update report frontmatter with final status
-- 💬 Present summary to user conversationally
-- 💬 Offer menu options for next actions
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to proceed without user selection
-
-## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
-
-- Available context: Complete validation report with findings from all validation steps
-- Focus: Summary and presentation only (no new validation)
-- Limits: Don't add new findings, just synthesize existing
-- Dependencies: Steps 1-12 completed - all validation checks done
-
-## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
-
-**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
-
-### 1. Load Complete Validation Report
-
-Read the entire validation report from {validationReportPath}
-
-Extract all findings from:
-- Format Detection (Step 2)
-- Parity Analysis (Step 2B, if applicable)
-- Information Density (Step 3)
-- Product Brief Coverage (Step 4)
-- Measurability (Step 5)
-- Traceability (Step 6)
-- Implementation Leakage (Step 7)
-- Domain Compliance (Step 8)
-- Project-Type Compliance (Step 9)
-- SMART Requirements (Step 10)
-- Holistic Quality (Step 11)
-- Completeness (Step 12)
-
-### 2. Update Report Frontmatter with Final Status
-
-Update validation report frontmatter:
-
-```yaml
----
-validationTarget: '{prd_path}'
-validationDate: '{current_date}'
-inputDocuments: [list of documents]
-validationStepsCompleted: ['step-v-01-discovery', 'step-v-02-format-detection', 'step-v-03-density-validation', 'step-v-04-brief-coverage-validation', 'step-v-05-measurability-validation', 'step-v-06-traceability-validation', 'step-v-07-implementation-leakage-validation', 'step-v-08-domain-compliance-validation', 'step-v-09-project-type-validation', 'step-v-10-smart-validation', 'step-v-11-holistic-quality-validation', 'step-v-12-completeness-validation']
-validationStatus: COMPLETE
-holisticQualityRating: '{rating from step 11}'
-overallStatus: '{Pass/Warning/Critical based on all findings}'
----
-```
-
-### 3. Create Summary of Findings
-
-**Overall Status:**
-- Determine from all validation findings
-- **Pass:** All critical checks pass, minor warnings acceptable
-- **Warning:** Some issues found but PRD is usable
-- **Critical:** Major issues that prevent PRD from being fit for purpose
-
-**Quick Results Table:**
-- Format: [classification]
-- Information Density: [severity]
-- Measurability: [severity]
-- Traceability: [severity]
-- Implementation Leakage: [severity]
-- Domain Compliance: [status]
-- Project-Type Compliance: [compliance score]
-- SMART Quality: [percentage]
-- Holistic Quality: [rating/5]
-- Completeness: [percentage]
-
-**Critical Issues:** List from all validation steps
-**Warnings:** List from all validation steps
-**Strengths:** List positives from all validation steps
-
-**Holistic Quality Rating:** From step 11
-**Top 3 Improvements:** From step 11
-
-**Recommendation:** Based on overall status
-
-### 4. Present Summary to User Conversationally
-
-Display:
-
-"**✓ PRD Validation Complete**
-
-**Overall Status:** {Pass/Warning/Critical}
-
-**Quick Results:**
-{Present quick results table with key findings}
-
-**Critical Issues:** {count or "None"}
-{If any, list briefly}
-
-**Warnings:** {count or "None"}
-{If any, list briefly}
-
-**Strengths:**
-{List key strengths}
-
-**Holistic Quality:** {rating}/5 - {label}
-
-**Top 3 Improvements:**
-1. {Improvement 1}
-2. {Improvement 2}
-3. {Improvement 3}
-
-**Recommendation:**
-{Based on overall status:
-- Pass: "PRD is in good shape. Address minor improvements to make it great."
-- Warning: "PRD is usable but has issues that should be addressed. Review warnings and improve where needed."
-- Critical: "PRD has significant issues that should be fixed before use. Focus on critical issues above."}
-
-**What would you like to do next?**"
-
-### 5. Present MENU OPTIONS
-
-Display:
-
-**[R] Review Detailed Findings** - Walk through validation report section by section
-**[E] Use Edit Workflow** - Use validation report with Edit workflow for systematic improvements
-**[F] Fix Simpler Items** - Immediate fixes for simple issues (anti-patterns, leakage, missing headers)
-**[X] Exit** - Exit and Suggest Next Steps.
-
-#### EXECUTION RULES:
-
-- ALWAYS halt and wait for user input after presenting menu
-- Only proceed based on user selection
-
-#### Menu Handling Logic:
-
-- **IF R (Review Detailed Findings):**
-  - Walk through validation report section by section
-  - Present findings from each validation step
-  - Allow user to ask questions
-  - After review, return to menu
-
-- **IF E (Use Edit Workflow):**
-  - Explain: "The Edit workflow can use this validation report to systematically address issues. Edit mode will guide you through discovering what to edit, reviewing the PRD, and applying targeted improvements."
-  - Offer: "Would you like to launch Edit mode now? It will help you fix validation findings systematically."
-  - If yes: Invoke the `rihal-edit-prd` skill, passing the validation report path as context
-  - If no: Return to menu
-
-- **IF F (Fix Simpler Items):**
-  - Offer immediate fixes for:
-    - Template variables (fill in with appropriate content)
-    - Conversational filler (remove wordy phrases)
-    - Implementation leakage (remove technology names from FRs/NFRs)
-    - Missing section headers (add ## headers)
-  - Ask: "Which simple fixes would you like me to make?"
-  - If user specifies fixes, make them and update validation report
-  - Return to menu
-
-- **IF X (Exit):**
-  - Display: "**Validation Report Saved:** {validationReportPath}"
-  - Display: "**Summary:** {overall status} - {recommendation}"
-  - PRD Validation complete. Invoke the `rihal-help` skill.
-
-- **IF Any other:** Help user, then redisplay menu
-
----
-
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-
-- Complete validation report loaded successfully
-- All findings from steps 1-12 summarized
-- Report frontmatter updated with final status
-- Overall status determined correctly (Pass/Warning/Critical)
-- Quick results table presented
-- Critical issues, warnings, and strengths listed
-- Holistic quality rating included
-- Top 3 improvements presented
-- Clear recommendation provided
-- Menu options presented with clear explanations
-- User can review findings, get help, or exit
-
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-
-- Not loading complete validation report
-- Missing summary of findings
-- Not updating report frontmatter
-- Not determining overall status
-- Missing menu options
-- Unclear next steps
-
-**Master Rule:** User needs clear summary and actionable next steps. Edit workflow is best for complex issues; immediate fixes available for simpler ones.