@hanzlaa/rcode 3.6.16 → 4.1.0

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

@@ -0,0 +1,171 @@
+---
+# 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 rcode 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/rcode/skills/actions/2-plan/rcode-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-11-holistic-quality-validation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,261 @@
+---
+# 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), rcode 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, rcode 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 `rcode-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. rcode 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 rcode 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]
+
+**rcode 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
+
+### rcode 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)
+- rcode 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 rcode 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/rcode/skills/actions/2-plan/rcode-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-13-report-complete.md

@@ -0,0 +1,229 @@
+---
+# 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 `rcode-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 `rcode-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.