@howlil/ez-agents 3.4.1 → 3.5.0

package/ez-agents/templates/research-project/FEATURES.md

@@ -1,147 +1,147 @@
-# Features Research Template
-
-Template for `.planning/research/FEATURES.md` — feature landscape for the project domain.
-
-<template>
-
-```markdown
-# Feature Research
-
-**Domain:** [domain type]
-**Researched:** [date]
-**Confidence:** [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]
-
-## Feature Landscape
-
-### Table Stakes (Users Expect These)
-
-Features users assume exist. Missing these = product feels incomplete.
-
-| Feature | Why Expected | Complexity | Notes |
-|---------|--------------|------------|-------|
-| [feature] | [user expectation] | LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH | [implementation notes] |
-| [feature] | [user expectation] | LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH | [implementation notes] |
-| [feature] | [user expectation] | LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH | [implementation notes] |
-
-### Differentiators (Competitive Advantage)
-
-Features that set the product apart. Not required, but valuable.
-
-| Feature | Value Proposition | Complexity | Notes |
-|---------|-------------------|------------|-------|
-| [feature] | [why it matters] | LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH | [implementation notes] |
-| [feature] | [why it matters] | LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH | [implementation notes] |
-| [feature] | [why it matters] | LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH | [implementation notes] |
-
-### Anti-Features (Commonly Requested, Often Problematic)
-
-Features that seem good but create problems.
-
-| Feature | Why Requested | Why Problematic | Alternative |
-|---------|---------------|-----------------|-------------|
-| [feature] | [surface appeal] | [actual problems] | [better approach] |
-| [feature] | [surface appeal] | [actual problems] | [better approach] |
-
-## Feature Dependencies
-
-```
-[Feature A]
-    └──requires──> [Feature B]
-                       └──requires──> [Feature C]
-
-[Feature D] ──enhances──> [Feature A]
-
-[Feature E] ──conflicts──> [Feature F]
-```
-
-### Dependency Notes
-
-- **[Feature A] requires [Feature B]:** [why the dependency exists]
-- **[Feature D] enhances [Feature A]:** [how they work together]
-- **[Feature E] conflicts with [Feature F]:** [why they're incompatible]
-
-## MVP Definition
-
-### Launch With (v1)
-
-Minimum viable product — what's needed to validate the concept.
-
-- [ ] [Feature] — [why essential]
-- [ ] [Feature] — [why essential]
-- [ ] [Feature] — [why essential]
-
-### Add After Validation (v1.x)
-
-Features to add once core is working.
-
-- [ ] [Feature] — [trigger for adding]
-- [ ] [Feature] — [trigger for adding]
-
-### Future Consideration (v2+)
-
-Features to defer until product-market fit is established.
-
-- [ ] [Feature] — [why defer]
-- [ ] [Feature] — [why defer]
-
-## Feature Prioritization Matrix
-
-| Feature | User Value | Implementation Cost | Priority |
-|---------|------------|---------------------|----------|
-| [feature] | HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW | HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW | P1/P2/P3 |
-| [feature] | HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW | HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW | P1/P2/P3 |
-| [feature] | HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW | HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW | P1/P2/P3 |
-
-**Priority key:**
-- P1: Must have for launch
-- P2: Should have, add when possible
-- P3: Nice to have, future consideration
-
-## Competitor Feature Analysis
-
-| Feature | Competitor A | Competitor B | Our Approach |
-|---------|--------------|--------------|--------------|
-| [feature] | [how they do it] | [how they do it] | [our plan] |
-| [feature] | [how they do it] | [how they do it] | [our plan] |
-
-## Sources
-
-- [Competitor products analyzed]
-- [User research or feedback sources]
-- [Industry standards referenced]
-
----
-*Feature research for: [domain]*
-*Researched: [date]*
-```
-
-</template>
-
-<guidelines>
-
-**Table Stakes:**
-- These are non-negotiable for launch
-- Users don't give credit for having them, but penalize for missing them
-- Example: A community platform without user profiles is broken
-
-**Differentiators:**
-- These are where you compete
-- Should align with the Core Value from PROJECT.md
-- Don't try to differentiate on everything
-
-**Anti-Features:**
-- Prevent scope creep by documenting what seems good but isn't
-- Include the alternative approach
-- Example: "Real-time everything" often creates complexity without value
-
-**Feature Dependencies:**
-- Critical for roadmap phase ordering
-- If A requires B, B must be in an earlier phase
-- Conflicts inform what NOT to combine in same phase
-
-**MVP Definition:**
-- Be ruthless about what's truly minimum
-- "Nice to have" is not MVP
-- Launch with less, validate, then expand
-
-</guidelines>
+# Features Research Template
+
+Template for `.planning/research/FEATURES.md` — feature landscape for the project domain.
+
+<template>
+
+```markdown
+# Feature Research
+
+**Domain:** [domain type]
+**Researched:** [date]
+**Confidence:** [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]
+
+## Feature Landscape
+
+### Table Stakes (Users Expect These)
+
+Features users assume exist. Missing these = product feels incomplete.
+
+| Feature | Why Expected | Complexity | Notes |
+|---------|--------------|------------|-------|
+| [feature] | [user expectation] | LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH | [implementation notes] |
+| [feature] | [user expectation] | LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH | [implementation notes] |
+| [feature] | [user expectation] | LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH | [implementation notes] |
+
+### Differentiators (Competitive Advantage)
+
+Features that set the product apart. Not required, but valuable.
+
+| Feature | Value Proposition | Complexity | Notes |
+|---------|-------------------|------------|-------|
+| [feature] | [why it matters] | LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH | [implementation notes] |
+| [feature] | [why it matters] | LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH | [implementation notes] |
+| [feature] | [why it matters] | LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH | [implementation notes] |
+
+### Anti-Features (Commonly Requested, Often Problematic)
+
+Features that seem good but create problems.
+
+| Feature | Why Requested | Why Problematic | Alternative |
+|---------|---------------|-----------------|-------------|
+| [feature] | [surface appeal] | [actual problems] | [better approach] |
+| [feature] | [surface appeal] | [actual problems] | [better approach] |
+
+## Feature Dependencies
+
+```
+[Feature A]
+    └──requires──> [Feature B]
+                       └──requires──> [Feature C]
+
+[Feature D] ──enhances──> [Feature A]
+
+[Feature E] ──conflicts──> [Feature F]
+```
+
+### Dependency Notes
+
+- **[Feature A] requires [Feature B]:** [why the dependency exists]
+- **[Feature D] enhances [Feature A]:** [how they work together]
+- **[Feature E] conflicts with [Feature F]:** [why they're incompatible]
+
+## MVP Definition
+
+### Launch With (v1)
+
+Minimum viable product — what's needed to validate the concept.
+
+- [ ] [Feature] — [why essential]
+- [ ] [Feature] — [why essential]
+- [ ] [Feature] — [why essential]
+
+### Add After Validation (v1.x)
+
+Features to add once core is working.
+
+- [ ] [Feature] — [trigger for adding]
+- [ ] [Feature] — [trigger for adding]
+
+### Future Consideration (v2+)
+
+Features to defer until product-market fit is established.
+
+- [ ] [Feature] — [why defer]
+- [ ] [Feature] — [why defer]
+
+## Feature Prioritization Matrix
+
+| Feature | User Value | Implementation Cost | Priority |
+|---------|------------|---------------------|----------|
+| [feature] | HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW | HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW | P1/P2/P3 |
+| [feature] | HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW | HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW | P1/P2/P3 |
+| [feature] | HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW | HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW | P1/P2/P3 |
+
+**Priority key:**
+- P1: Must have for launch
+- P2: Should have, add when possible
+- P3: Nice to have, future consideration
+
+## Competitor Feature Analysis
+
+| Feature | Competitor A | Competitor B | Our Approach |
+|---------|--------------|--------------|--------------|
+| [feature] | [how they do it] | [how they do it] | [our plan] |
+| [feature] | [how they do it] | [how they do it] | [our plan] |
+
+## Sources
+
+- [Competitor products analyzed]
+- [User research or feedback sources]
+- [Industry standards referenced]
+
+---
+*Feature research for: [domain]*
+*Researched: [date]*
+```
+
+</template>
+
+<guidelines>
+
+**Table Stakes:**
+- These are non-negotiable for launch
+- Users don't give credit for having them, but penalize for missing them
+- Example: A community platform without user profiles is broken
+
+**Differentiators:**
+- These are where you compete
+- Should align with the Core Value from PROJECT.md
+- Don't try to differentiate on everything
+
+**Anti-Features:**
+- Prevent scope creep by documenting what seems good but isn't
+- Include the alternative approach
+- Example: "Real-time everything" often creates complexity without value
+
+**Feature Dependencies:**
+- Critical for roadmap phase ordering
+- If A requires B, B must be in an earlier phase
+- Conflicts inform what NOT to combine in same phase
+
+**MVP Definition:**
+- Be ruthless about what's truly minimum
+- "Nice to have" is not MVP
+- Launch with less, validate, then expand
+
+</guidelines>