@mark-gozner/aigile-method 0.4.5

package/core/checklists/pm-checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,286 @@
+# Product Manager (PM) Requirements Checklist
+
+This checklist serves as a comprehensive framework to ensure the Product Requirements Document (PRD) and Epic definitions are complete, well-structured, and appropriately scoped for MVP development. The PM should systematically work through each item during the product definition process.
+
+[[LLM: INITIALIZATION INSTRUCTIONS - PM CHECKLIST
+
+Before proceeding with this checklist, ensure you have access to:
+
+1. prd.md - The Product Requirements Document (check docs/prd.md)
+2. Any user research, market analysis, or competitive analysis documents
+3. Business goals and strategy documents
+4. Any existing epic definitions or user stories
+
+IMPORTANT: If the PRD is missing, immediately ask the user for its location or content before proceeding.
+
+VALIDATION APPROACH:
+
+1. User-Centric - Every requirement should tie back to user value
+2. MVP Focus - Ensure scope is truly minimal while viable
+3. Clarity - Requirements should be unambiguous and testable
+4. Completeness - All aspects of the product vision are covered
+5. Feasibility - Requirements are technically achievable
+
+EXECUTION MODE:
+Ask the user if they want to work through the checklist:
+
+- Section by section (interactive mode) - Review each section, present findings, get confirmation before proceeding
+- All at once (comprehensive mode) - Complete full analysis and present comprehensive report at end]]
+
+## 1. PROBLEM DEFINITION & CONTEXT
+
+[[LLM: The foundation of any product is a clear problem statement. As you review this section:
+
+1. Verify the problem is real and worth solving
+2. Check that the target audience is specific, not "everyone"
+3. Ensure success metrics are measurable, not vague aspirations
+4. Look for evidence of user research, not just assumptions
+5. Confirm the problem-solution fit is logical]]
+
+### 1.1 Problem Statement
+
+- [ ] Clear articulation of the problem being solved
+- [ ] Identification of who experiences the problem
+- [ ] Explanation of why solving this problem matters
+- [ ] Quantification of problem impact (if possible)
+- [ ] Differentiation from existing solutions
+
+### 1.2 Business Goals & Success Metrics
+
+- [ ] Specific, measurable business objectives defined
+- [ ] Clear success metrics and KPIs established
+- [ ] Metrics are tied to user and business value
+- [ ] Baseline measurements identified (if applicable)
+- [ ] Timeframe for achieving goals specified
+
+### 1.3 User Research & Insights
+
+- [ ] Target user personas clearly defined
+- [ ] User needs and pain points documented
+- [ ] User research findings summarized (if available)
+- [ ] Competitive analysis included
+- [ ] Market context provided
+
+## 2. MVP SCOPE DEFINITION
+
+[[LLM: MVP scope is critical - too much and you waste resources, too little and you can't validate. Check:
+
+1. Is this truly minimal? Challenge every feature
+2. Does each feature directly address the core problem?
+3. Are "nice-to-haves" clearly separated from "must-haves"?
+4. Is the rationale for inclusion/exclusion documented?
+5. Can you ship this in the target timeframe?]]
+
+### 2.1 Core Functionality
+
+- [ ] Essential features clearly distinguished from nice-to-haves
+- [ ] Features directly address defined problem statement
+- [ ] Each Epic ties back to specific user needs
+- [ ] Features and Stories are described from user perspective
+- [ ] Minimum requirements for success defined
+
+### 2.2 Scope Boundaries
+
+- [ ] Clear articulation of what is OUT of scope
+- [ ] Future enhancements section included
+- [ ] Rationale for scope decisions documented
+- [ ] MVP minimizes functionality while maximizing learning
+- [ ] Scope has been reviewed and refined multiple times
+
+### 2.3 MVP Validation Approach
+
+- [ ] Method for testing MVP success defined
+- [ ] Initial user feedback mechanisms planned
+- [ ] Criteria for moving beyond MVP specified
+- [ ] Learning goals for MVP articulated
+- [ ] Timeline expectations set
+
+## 3. USER EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS
+
+[[LLM: UX requirements bridge user needs and technical implementation. Validate:
+
+1. User flows cover the primary use cases completely
+2. Edge cases are identified (even if deferred)
+3. Accessibility isn't an afterthought
+4. Performance expectations are realistic
+5. Error states and recovery are planned]]
+
+### 3.1 User Journeys & Flows
+
+- [ ] Primary user flows documented
+- [ ] Entry and exit points for each flow identified
+- [ ] Decision points and branches mapped
+- [ ] Critical path highlighted
+- [ ] Edge cases considered
+
+### 3.2 Usability Requirements
+
+- [ ] Accessibility considerations documented
+- [ ] Platform/device compatibility specified
+- [ ] Performance expectations from user perspective defined
+- [ ] Error handling and recovery approaches outlined
+- [ ] User feedback mechanisms identified
+
+### 3.3 UI Requirements
+
+- [ ] Information architecture outlined
+- [ ] Critical UI components identified
+- [ ] Visual design guidelines referenced (if applicable)
+- [ ] Content requirements specified
+- [ ] High-level navigation structure defined
+
+## 4. FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS
+
+[[LLM: Functional requirements must be clear enough for implementation. Check:
+
+1. Requirements focus on WHAT not HOW (no implementation details)
+2. Each requirement is testable (how would QA verify it?)
+3. Dependencies are explicit (what needs to be built first?)
+4. Requirements use consistent terminology
+5. Complex features are broken into manageable pieces]]
+
+### 4.1 Feature Completeness
+
+- [ ] All required features for MVP documented
+- [ ] Features have clear, user-focused descriptions
+- [ ] Feature priority/criticality indicated
+- [ ] Requirements are testable and verifiable
+- [ ] Dependencies between features identified
+
+### 4.2 Requirements Quality
+
+- [ ] Requirements are specific and unambiguous
+- [ ] Requirements focus on WHAT not HOW
+- [ ] Requirements use consistent terminology
+- [ ] Complex requirements broken into simpler parts
+- [ ] Technical jargon minimized or explained
+
+### 4.3 User Stories & Acceptance Criteria
+
+- [ ] Stories follow consistent format
+- [ ] Acceptance criteria are testable
+- [ ] Stories are sized appropriately (not too large)
+- [ ] Stories are independent where possible
+- [ ] Stories include necessary context
+- [ ] Local testability requirements (e.g., via CLI) defined in ACs for relevant backend/data stories
+
+## 5. NON-FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS
+
+### 5.1 Performance Requirements
+
+- [ ] Response time expectations defined
+- [ ] Throughput/capacity requirements specified
+- [ ] Scalability needs documented
+- [ ] Resource utilization constraints identified
+- [ ] Load handling expectations set
+
+### 5.2 Security & Compliance
+
+- [ ] Data protection requirements specified
+- [ ] Authentication/authorization needs defined
+- [ ] Compliance requirements documented
+- [ ] Security testing requirements outlined
+- [ ] Privacy considerations addressed
+
+### 5.3 Reliability & Resilience
+
+- [ ] Availability requirements defined
+- [ ] Backup and recovery needs documented
+- [ ] Fault tolerance expectations set
+- [ ] Error handling requirements specified
+- [ ] Maintenance and support considerations included
+
+### 5.4 Technical Constraints
+
+- [ ] Platform/technology constraints documented
+- [ ] Integration requirements outlined
+- [ ] Third-party service dependencies identified
+- [ ] Infrastructure requirements specified
+- [ ] Development environment needs identified
+
+## 6. EPIC & STORY STRUCTURE
+
+### 6.1 Epic Definition
+
+- [ ] Epics represent cohesive units of functionality
+- [ ] Epics focus on user/business value delivery
+- [ ] Epic goals clearly articulated
+- [ ] Epics are sized appropriately for incremental delivery
+- [ ] Epic sequence and dependencies identified
+
+### 6.2 Story Breakdown
+
+- [ ] Stories are broken down to appropriate size
+- [ ] Stories have clear, independent value
+- [ ] Stories include appropriate acceptance criteria
+- [ ] Story dependencies and sequence documented
+- [ ] Stories aligned with epic goals
+
+### 6.3 First Epic Completeness
+
+- [ ] First epic includes all necessary setup steps
+- [ ] Project scaffolding and initialization addressed
+- [ ] Core infrastructure setup included
+- [ ] Development environment setup addressed
+- [ ] Local testability established early
+
+## 7. TECHNICAL GUIDANCE
+
+### 7.1 Architecture Guidance
+
+- [ ] Initial architecture direction provided
+- [ ] Technical constraints clearly communicated
+- [ ] Integration points identified
+- [ ] Performance considerations highlighted
+- [ ] Security requirements articulated
+- [ ] Known areas of high complexity or technical risk flagged for architectural deep-dive
+
+### 7.2 Technical Decision Framework
+
+- [ ] Decision criteria for technical choices provided
+- [ ] Trade-offs articulated for key decisions
+- [ ] Rationale for selecting primary approach over considered alternatives documented (for key design/feature choices)
+- [ ] Non-negotiable technical requirements highlighted
+- [ ] Areas requiring technical investigation identified
+- [ ] Guidance on technical debt approach provided
+
+### 7.3 Implementation Considerations
+
+- [ ] Development approach guidance provided
+- [ ] Testing requirements articulated
+- [ ] Deployment expectations set
+- [ ] Quality gates defined
+- [ ] Definition of done criteria established
+
+## FINAL PM VALIDATION
+
+[[LLM: FINAL PM VALIDATION REPORT
+
+After completing the checklist, provide a comprehensive validation report:
+
+1. PRD Assessment
+   - PRD readiness: COMPLETE / NEEDS REVISION / INCOMPLETE
+   - Scope clarity: CLEAR / PARTIALLY CLEAR / UNCLEAR
+   - Technical feasibility: FEASIBLE / CHALLENGING / HIGH RISK
+
+2. Critical Issues (if any)
+   - List any items that MUST be resolved before development
+   - Specify the impact of each issue
+   - Recommend specific actions
+
+3. Epic & Story Readiness
+   - Can development begin with current epic definitions?
+   - Are stories sufficiently detailed?
+   - Are dependencies clear?
+
+4. Recommendations
+   - Suggested improvements or clarifications needed
+   - Areas requiring special attention
+   - Risk mitigation strategies
+
+Be thorough but practical - perfect requirements don't exist, but they must be sufficient for successful implementation.]]
+
+- [ ] All critical PRD components have been validated
+- [ ] Epic structure supports incremental delivery
+- [ ] Requirements are clear and testable
+- [ ] MVP scope is appropriate and achievable

package/core/checklists/po-master-checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,291 @@
+# Product Owner (PO) Master Validation Checklist
+
+This checklist serves as a comprehensive framework for the Product Owner to validate project plans before development execution. It adapts intelligently based on project type (greenfield vs brownfield) and includes UI/UX considerations when applicable.
+
+[[LLM: INITIALIZATION INSTRUCTIONS - PO MASTER CHECKLIST
+
+PROJECT TYPE DETECTION:
+First, determine the project type by checking:
+
+1. Is this a GREENFIELD project (new from scratch)?
+   - Look for: New project initialization, no existing codebase references
+   - Check for: prd.md, architecture.md, new project setup stories
+
+2. Is this a BROWNFIELD project (enhancing existing system)?
+   - Look for: References to existing codebase, enhancement/modification language
+   - Check for: brownfield-prd.md, brownfield-architecture.md, existing system analysis
+
+3. Does the project include UI/UX components?
+   - Check for: frontend-architecture.md, UI/UX specifications, design files
+   - Look for: Frontend stories, component specifications, user interface mentions
+
+DOCUMENT REQUIREMENTS:
+Based on project type, ensure you have access to:
+
+For GREENFIELD projects:
+- prd.md - The Product Requirements Document
+- architecture.md - The system architecture
+- frontend-architecture.md - If UI/UX is involved
+- All epic and story definitions
+
+For BROWNFIELD projects:
+- brownfield-prd.md - The brownfield enhancement requirements
+- brownfield-architecture.md - The enhancement architecture
+- Existing project codebase access (CRITICAL - cannot proceed without this)
+- Current deployment configuration and infrastructure details
+
+SKIP INSTRUCTIONS:
+- Skip sections marked [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] for greenfield projects
+- Skip sections marked [[GREENFIELD ONLY]] for brownfield projects
+- Skip sections marked [[UI/UX ONLY]] for backend-only projects
+- Note all skipped sections in your final report
+
+VALIDATION APPROACH:
+1. Deep Analysis - Thoroughly analyze each item against documentation
+2. Evidence-Based - Cite specific sections when validating
+3. Critical Thinking - Question assumptions and identify gaps
+4. Risk Assessment - Consider what could go wrong with each decision
+
+EXECUTION MODE:
+Ask the user if they want to work through the checklist:
+- Section by section (interactive mode) - Review each section, get confirmation before proceeding
+- All at once (comprehensive mode) - Complete full analysis and present report at end]]
+
+## 1. PROJECT SETUP & INITIALIZATION
+
+[[LLM: Project setup is the foundation. For greenfield, ensure clean start. For brownfield, ensure safe integration with existing system. Verify setup matches project type.]]
+
+### 1.1 Project Scaffolding [[GREENFIELD ONLY]]
+
+- [ ] Epic 1 includes explicit steps for project creation/initialization
+- [ ] If using a starter template, steps for cloning/setup are included
+- [ ] If building from scratch, all necessary scaffolding steps are defined
+- [ ] Initial README or documentation setup is included
+- [ ] Repository setup and initial commit processes are defined
+
+### 1.2 Existing System Integration [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]]
+
+- [ ] Existing project analysis has been completed and documented
+- [ ] Integration points with current system are identified
+- [ ] Development environment preserves existing functionality
+- [ ] Local testing approach validated for existing features
+- [ ] Rollback procedures defined for each integration point
+
+### 1.3 Development Environment
+
+- [ ] Local development environment setup is clearly defined
+- [ ] Required tools and versions are specified
+- [ ] Steps for installing dependencies are included
+- [ ] Configuration files are addressed appropriately
+- [ ] Development server setup is included
+
+### 1.4 Core Dependencies
+
+- [ ] All critical packages/libraries are installed early
+- [ ] Package management is properly addressed
+- [ ] Version specifications are appropriately defined
+- [ ] Dependency conflicts or special requirements are noted
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] Version compatibility with existing stack verified
+
+## 2. INFRASTRUCTURE & DEPLOYMENT
+
+[[LLM: Infrastructure must exist before use. For brownfield, must integrate with existing infrastructure without breaking it.]]
+
+### 2.1 Database & Data Store Setup
+
+- [ ] Database selection/setup occurs before any operations
+- [ ] Schema definitions are created before data operations
+- [ ] Migration strategies are defined if applicable
+- [ ] Seed data or initial data setup is included if needed
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] Database migration risks identified and mitigated
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] Backward compatibility ensured
+
+### 2.2 API & Service Configuration
+
+- [ ] API frameworks are set up before implementing endpoints
+- [ ] Service architecture is established before implementing services
+- [ ] Authentication framework is set up before protected routes
+- [ ] Middleware and common utilities are created before use
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] API compatibility with existing system maintained
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] Integration with existing authentication preserved
+
+### 2.3 Deployment Pipeline
+
+- [ ] CI/CD pipeline is established before deployment actions
+- [ ] Infrastructure as Code (IaC) is set up before use
+- [ ] Environment configurations are defined early
+- [ ] Deployment strategies are defined before implementation
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] Deployment minimizes downtime
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] Blue-green or canary deployment implemented
+
+### 2.4 Testing Infrastructure
+
+- [ ] Testing frameworks are installed before writing tests
+- [ ] Test environment setup precedes test implementation
+- [ ] Mock services or data are defined before testing
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] Regression testing covers existing functionality
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] Integration testing validates new-to-existing connections
+
+## 3. EXTERNAL DEPENDENCIES & INTEGRATIONS
+
+[[LLM: External dependencies often block progress. For brownfield, ensure new dependencies don't conflict with existing ones.]]
+
+### 3.1 Third-Party Services
+
+- [ ] Account creation steps are identified for required services
+- [ ] API key acquisition processes are defined
+- [ ] Steps for securely storing credentials are included
+- [ ] Fallback or offline development options are considered
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] Compatibility with existing services verified
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] Impact on existing integrations assessed
+
+### 3.2 External APIs
+
+- [ ] Integration points with external APIs are clearly identified
+- [ ] Authentication with external services is properly sequenced
+- [ ] API limits or constraints are acknowledged
+- [ ] Backup strategies for API failures are considered
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] Existing API dependencies maintained
+
+### 3.3 Infrastructure Services
+
+- [ ] Cloud resource provisioning is properly sequenced
+- [ ] DNS or domain registration needs are identified
+- [ ] Email or messaging service setup is included if needed
+- [ ] CDN or static asset hosting setup precedes their use
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] Existing infrastructure services preserved
+
+## 4. UI/UX CONSIDERATIONS [[UI/UX ONLY]]
+
+[[LLM: Only evaluate this section if the project includes user interface components. Skip entirely for backend-only projects.]]
+
+### 4.1 Design System Setup
+
+- [ ] UI framework and libraries are selected and installed early
+- [ ] Design system or component library is established
+- [ ] Styling approach (CSS modules, styled-components, etc.) is defined
+- [ ] Responsive design strategy is established
+- [ ] Accessibility requirements are defined upfront
+
+### 4.2 Frontend Infrastructure
+
+- [ ] Frontend build pipeline is configured before development
+- [ ] Asset optimization strategy is defined
+- [ ] Frontend testing framework is set up
+- [ ] Component development workflow is established
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] UI consistency with existing system maintained
+
+### 4.3 User Experience Flow
+
+- [ ] User journeys are mapped before implementation
+- [ ] Navigation patterns are defined early
+- [ ] Error states and loading states are planned
+- [ ] Form validation patterns are established
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] Existing user workflows preserved or migrated
+
+## 5. USER/AGENT RESPONSIBILITY
+
+[[LLM: Clear ownership prevents confusion. Ensure tasks are assigned appropriately based on what only humans can do.]]
+
+### 5.1 User Actions
+
+- [ ] User responsibilities limited to human-only tasks
+- [ ] Account creation on external services assigned to users
+- [ ] Purchasing or payment actions assigned to users
+- [ ] Credential provision appropriately assigned to users
+
+### 5.2 Developer Agent Actions
+
+- [ ] All code-related tasks assigned to developer agents
+- [ ] Automated processes identified as agent responsibilities
+- [ ] Configuration management properly assigned
+- [ ] Testing and validation assigned to appropriate agents
+
+## 6. FEATURE SEQUENCING & DEPENDENCIES
+
+[[LLM: Dependencies create the critical path. For brownfield, ensure new features don't break existing ones.]]
+
+### 6.1 Functional Dependencies
+
+- [ ] Features depending on others are sequenced correctly
+- [ ] Shared components are built before their use
+- [ ] API endpoints are created before frontend consumption
+- [ ] Database schemas are established before data operations
+- [ ] Authentication is set up before protected features
+
+### 6.2 Epic Sequencing
+
+- [ ] Epic dependencies are clearly mapped
+- [ ] Epic sequence supports incremental value delivery
+- [ ] High-risk or complex epics are appropriately positioned
+- [ ] Learning and validation opportunities are maximized
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] Integration complexity is managed across epics
+
+### 6.3 Story Dependencies
+
+- [ ] Cross-story dependencies are identified and documented
+- [ ] Stories within epics are appropriately sequenced
+- [ ] Blocking dependencies are highlighted
+- [ ] Optional dependencies are clearly marked
+- [ ] Circular dependencies are avoided
+
+## 7. QUALITY & VALIDATION
+
+[[LLM: Quality gates ensure we ship working software. For brownfield, ensure we don't break what's working.]]
+
+### 7.1 Testing Strategy
+
+- [ ] Testing approach is defined for each story type
+- [ ] Unit testing requirements are clear
+- [ ] Integration testing approach is specified
+- [ ] End-to-end testing strategy is defined (if applicable)
+- [ ] [[BROWNFIELD ONLY]] Regression testing covers critical paths
+
+### 7.2 Quality Gates
+
+- [ ] Definition of done criteria are established
+- [ ] Code review processes are defined
+- [ ] Automated quality checks are specified
+- [ ] Performance benchmarks are established (if applicable)
+- [ ] Security validation requirements are defined
+
+### 7.3 Acceptance Criteria
+
+- [ ] All stories have clear acceptance criteria
+- [ ] Acceptance criteria are testable and specific
+- [ ] Edge cases are addressed in acceptance criteria
+- [ ] Error handling requirements are specified
+- [ ] Performance criteria are included where relevant
+
+## FINAL PO VALIDATION
+
+[[LLM: FINAL PO VALIDATION REPORT
+
+After completing the checklist, provide a comprehensive validation report:
+
+1. Project Readiness
+   - Overall readiness: READY / NEEDS REVISION / BLOCKED
+   - Risk level: LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH
+   - Complexity assessment: SIMPLE / MODERATE / COMPLEX
+
+2. Critical Issues (if any)
+   - List any items that MUST be resolved before development
+   - Specify the impact of each issue
+   - Recommend specific actions
+
+3. Epic & Story Assessment
+   - Are epics properly sequenced?
+   - Are stories sufficiently detailed?
+   - Are dependencies clear and manageable?
+
+4. Recommendations
+   - Suggested improvements or optimizations
+   - Areas requiring special attention during development
+   - Risk mitigation strategies
+
+Be thorough but practical - perfect planning doesn't exist, but the plan must be sufficient for successful execution.]]
+
+- [ ] All critical project components have been validated
+- [ ] Epic and story structure supports successful delivery
+- [ ] Dependencies are identified and manageable
+- [ ] Quality gates are established and appropriate

package/core/checklists/story-dod-checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+# Story Definition of Done (DoD) Checklist
+
+## Instructions for Developer Agent
+
+Before marking a story as 'Review', please go through each item in this checklist. Report the status of each item (e.g., [x] Done, [ ] Not Done, [N/A] Not Applicable) and provide brief comments if necessary.
+
+[[LLM: INITIALIZATION INSTRUCTIONS - STORY DOD VALIDATION
+
+This checklist is for DEVELOPER AGENTS to self-validate their work before marking a story complete.
+
+IMPORTANT: This is a self-assessment. Be honest about what's actually done vs what should be done. It's better to identify issues now than have them found in review.
+
+EXECUTION APPROACH:
+
+1. Go through each section systematically
+2. Mark items as [x] Done, [ ] Not Done, or [N/A] Not Applicable
+3. Add brief comments explaining any [ ] or [N/A] items
+4. Be specific about what was actually implemented
+5. Flag any concerns or technical debt created
+
+The goal is quality delivery, not just checking boxes.]]
+
+## Checklist Items
+
+1. **Requirements Met:**
+
+   [[LLM: Be specific - list each requirement and whether it's complete]]
+   - [ ] All functional requirements specified in the story are implemented.
+   - [ ] All acceptance criteria defined in the story are met.
+
+2. **Coding Standards & Project Structure:**
+
+   [[LLM: Code quality matters for maintainability. Check each item carefully]]
+   - [ ] All new/modified code strictly adheres to `Operational Guidelines`.
+   - [ ] All new/modified code aligns with `Project Structure` (file locations, naming, etc.).
+   - [ ] Adherence to `Tech Stack` for technologies/versions used (if story introduces or modifies tech usage).
+   - [ ] Adherence to `Api Reference` and `Data Models` (if story involves API or data model changes).
+   - [ ] Basic security best practices (e.g., input validation, proper error handling, no hardcoded secrets) applied for new/modified code.
+   - [ ] No new linter errors or warnings introduced.
+   - [ ] Code is well-commented where necessary (clarifying complex logic, not obvious statements).
+
+3. **Testing:**
+
+   [[LLM: Testing proves your code works. Be honest about test coverage]]
+   - [ ] All required unit tests as per the story and `Operational Guidelines` Testing Strategy are implemented.
+   - [ ] All required integration tests (if applicable) as per the story and `Operational Guidelines` Testing Strategy are implemented.
+   - [ ] All tests (unit, integration, E2E if applicable) pass successfully.
+   - [ ] Test coverage meets project standards (if defined).
+
+4. **Functionality & Verification:**
+
+   [[LLM: Did you actually run and test your code? Be specific about what you tested]]
+   - [ ] Functionality has been manually verified by the developer (e.g., running the app locally, checking UI, testing API endpoints).
+   - [ ] Edge cases and potential error conditions considered and handled gracefully.
+
+5. **Story Administration:**
+
+   [[LLM: Documentation helps the next developer. What should they know?]]
+   - [ ] All tasks within the story file are marked as complete.
+   - [ ] Any clarifications or decisions made during development are documented in the story file or linked appropriately.
+   - [ ] The story wrap up section has been completed with notes of changes or information relevant to the next story or overall project, the agent model that was primarily used during development, and the changelog of any changes is properly updated.
+
+6. **Dependencies, Build & Configuration:**
+
+   [[LLM: Build issues block everyone. Ensure everything compiles and runs cleanly]]
+   - [ ] Project builds successfully without errors.
+   - [ ] Project linting passes
+   - [ ] Any new dependencies added were either pre-approved in the story requirements OR explicitly approved by the user during development (approval documented in story file).
+   - [ ] If new dependencies were added, they are recorded in the appropriate project files (e.g., `package.json`, `requirements.txt`) with justification.
+   - [ ] No known security vulnerabilities introduced by newly added and approved dependencies.
+   - [ ] If new environment variables or configurations were introduced by the story, they are documented and handled securely.
+
+7. **Documentation (If Applicable):**
+
+   [[LLM: Good documentation prevents future confusion. What needs explaining?]]
+   - [ ] Relevant inline code documentation (e.g., JSDoc, TSDoc, Python docstrings) for new public APIs or complex logic is complete.
+   - [ ] User-facing documentation updated, if changes impact users.
+   - [ ] Technical documentation (e.g., READMEs, system diagrams) updated if significant architectural changes were made.
+
+## Final Confirmation
+
+[[LLM: FINAL DOD SUMMARY
+
+After completing the checklist:
+
+1. Summarize what was accomplished in this story
+2. List any items marked as [ ] Not Done with explanations
+3. Identify any technical debt or follow-up work needed
+4. Note any challenges or learnings for future stories
+5. Confirm whether the story is truly ready for review
+
+Be honest - it's better to flag issues now than have them discovered later.]]
+
+- [ ] I, the Developer Agent, confirm that all applicable items above have been addressed.