@pennyfarthing/core 7.5.0 → 7.6.1

package/pennyfarthing-dist/workflows/brainstorming/workflow.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
+# BMAD Brainstorming Workflow - Imported for BMAD Compatibility
+#
+# This is a reference workflow imported from BMAD for compatibility with
+# BMAD-based projects. It provides structured creative ideation sessions
+# with 62 brainstorming techniques across 10 categories.
+#
+# Key features:
+# - Single-agent facilitation (PM or dedicated facilitator)
+# - Four technique selection modes (user-selected, AI-recommended, random, progressive)
+# - 62 brainstorming techniques from brain-methods.csv
+# - Anti-bias protocol (semantic domain shifting every 10 ideas)
+# - Quantity goal: 100+ ideas before organization
+# - Session continuation support via frontmatter state
+#
+# For Pennyfarthing projects, the /brainstorming command provides a simpler
+# brainstorming experience without the full BMAD ceremony format.
+#
+# Source: BMAD-METHOD/src/core/workflows/brainstorming/
+# Migrated: 2026-01-22
+
+workflow:
+  name: brainstorming
+  description: |
+    BMAD reference workflow: Facilitate interactive brainstorming sessions using
+    diverse creative techniques and ideation methods. Supports 62 techniques across
+    10 categories with four selection modes. This is imported for BMAD compatibility.
+  version: "1.0.0"
+  type: procedural
+  author: BMad
+
+  # Primary agent for this workflow
+  agent: pm
+
+  # Instructions and validation files
+  instructions: ./instructions.md
+  checklist: ./checklist.md
+
+  # Variables available in instruction files
+  variables:
+    project_root: .
+    config_source: "./_bmad/core/config.yaml"
+    output_folder: ./artifacts
+    techniques_csv: ./brain-methods.csv
+    default_output_file: "{output_folder}/analysis/brainstorming-session-{date}.md"
+
+  # Triggers - when to suggest this workflow
+  triggers:
+    types: [brainstorm, bmad-brainstorm, ideation, creative-session]
+    tags: [bmad, reference, procedural, brainstorming, creativity]

package/pennyfarthing-dist/workflows/code-review/checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+# Senior Developer Review - Validation Checklist
+
+- [ ] Story file loaded from `{{story_path}}`
+- [ ] Story Status verified as reviewable (review)
+- [ ] Epic and Story IDs resolved ({{epic_num}}.{{story_num}})
+- [ ] Story Context located or warning recorded
+- [ ] Epic Tech Spec located or warning recorded
+- [ ] Architecture/standards docs loaded (as available)
+- [ ] Tech stack detected and documented
+- [ ] MCP doc search performed (or web fallback) and references captured
+- [ ] Acceptance Criteria cross-checked against implementation
+- [ ] File List reviewed and validated for completeness
+- [ ] Tests identified and mapped to ACs; gaps noted
+- [ ] Code quality review performed on changed files
+- [ ] Security review performed on changed files and dependencies
+- [ ] Outcome decided (Approve/Changes Requested/Blocked)
+- [ ] Review notes appended under "Senior Developer Review (AI)"
+- [ ] Change Log updated with review entry
+- [ ] Status updated according to settings (if enabled)
+- [ ] Sprint status synced (if sprint tracking enabled)
+- [ ] Story saved successfully
+
+_Reviewer: {{user_name}} on {{date}}_

package/pennyfarthing-dist/workflows/code-review/instructions.md

@@ -0,0 +1,234 @@
+# BMAD Code Review Workflow Instructions
+
+This file contains the 5-step adversarial code review workflow imported from BMAD.
+The XML structure is preserved for BMAD compatibility.
+
+```xml
+<workflow>
+  <critical>The workflow execution engine is governed by: {project-root}/_bmad/core/tasks/workflow.xml</critical>
+  <critical>You MUST have already loaded and processed: {installed_path}/workflow.yaml</critical>
+  <critical>Communicate all responses in {communication_language} and language MUST be tailored to {user_skill_level}</critical>
+  <critical>Generate all documents in {document_output_language}</critical>
+
+  <critical>YOU ARE AN ADVERSARIAL CODE REVIEWER - Find what's wrong or missing!</critical>
+  <critical>Your purpose: Validate story file claims against actual implementation</critical>
+  <critical>Challenge everything: Are tasks marked [x] actually done? Are ACs really implemented?</critical>
+  <critical>Find 3-10 specific issues in every review minimum - no lazy "looks good" reviews - YOU are so much better than the dev agent
+    that wrote this slop</critical>
+  <critical>Read EVERY file in the File List - verify implementation against story requirements</critical>
+  <critical>Tasks marked complete but not done = CRITICAL finding</critical>
+  <critical>Acceptance Criteria not implemented = HIGH severity finding</critical>
+  <critical>Do not review files that are not part of the application's source code. Always exclude the _bmad/ and _bmad-output/ folders from the review. Always exclude IDE and CLI configuration folders like .cursor/ and .windsurf/ and .claude/</critical>
+
+
+  <step n="1" goal="Load story and discover changes">
+    <action>Use provided {{story_path}} or ask user which story file to review</action>
+    <action>Read COMPLETE story file</action>
+    <action>Set {{story_key}} = extracted key from filename (e.g., "1-2-user-authentication.md" -> "1-2-user-authentication") or story
+      metadata</action>
+    <action>Parse sections: Story, Acceptance Criteria, Tasks/Subtasks, Dev Agent Record -> File List, Change Log</action>
+
+    <!-- Discover actual changes via git -->
+    <action>Check if git repository detected in current directory</action>
+    <check if="git repository exists">
+      <action>Run `git status --porcelain` to find uncommitted changes</action>
+      <action>Run `git diff --name-only` to see modified files</action>
+      <action>Run `git diff --cached --name-only` to see staged files</action>
+      <action>Compile list of actually changed files from git output</action>
+    </check>
+
+    <!-- Cross-reference story File List vs git reality -->
+    <action>Compare story's Dev Agent Record -> File List with actual git changes</action>
+    <action>Note discrepancies:
+      - Files in git but not in story File List
+      - Files in story File List but no git changes
+      - Missing documentation of what was actually changed
+    </action>
+
+    <invoke-protocol name="discover_inputs" />
+    <action>Load {project_context} for coding standards (if exists)</action>
+  </step>
+
+  <step n="2" goal="Build review attack plan">
+    <action>Extract ALL Acceptance Criteria from story</action>
+    <action>Extract ALL Tasks/Subtasks with completion status ([x] vs [ ])</action>
+    <action>From Dev Agent Record -> File List, compile list of claimed changes</action>
+
+    <action>Create review plan:
+      1. **AC Validation**: Verify each AC is actually implemented
+      2. **Task Audit**: Verify each [x] task is really done
+      3. **Code Quality**: Security, performance, maintainability
+      4. **Test Quality**: Real tests vs placeholder bullshit
+    </action>
+  </step>
+
+  <step n="3" goal="Execute adversarial review">
+    <critical>VALIDATE EVERY CLAIM - Check git reality vs story claims</critical>
+
+    <!-- Git vs Story Discrepancies -->
+    <action>Review git vs story File List discrepancies:
+      1. **Files changed but not in story File List** -> MEDIUM finding (incomplete documentation)
+      2. **Story lists files but no git changes** -> HIGH finding (false claims)
+      3. **Uncommitted changes not documented** -> MEDIUM finding (transparency issue)
+    </action>
+
+    <!-- Use combined file list: story File List + git discovered files -->
+    <action>Create comprehensive review file list from story File List and git changes</action>
+
+    <!-- AC Validation -->
+    <action>For EACH Acceptance Criterion:
+      1. Read the AC requirement
+      2. Search implementation files for evidence
+      3. Determine: IMPLEMENTED, PARTIAL, or MISSING
+      4. If MISSING/PARTIAL -> HIGH SEVERITY finding
+    </action>
+
+    <!-- Task Completion Audit -->
+    <action>For EACH task marked [x]:
+      1. Read the task description
+      2. Search files for evidence it was actually done
+      3. **CRITICAL**: If marked [x] but NOT DONE -> CRITICAL finding
+      4. Record specific proof (file:line)
+    </action>
+
+    <!-- Code Quality Deep Dive -->
+    <action>For EACH file in comprehensive review list:
+      1. **Security**: Look for injection risks, missing validation, auth issues
+      2. **Performance**: N+1 queries, inefficient loops, missing caching
+      3. **Error Handling**: Missing try/catch, poor error messages
+      4. **Code Quality**: Complex functions, magic numbers, poor naming
+      5. **Test Quality**: Are tests real assertions or placeholders?
+    </action>
+
+    <check if="total_issues_found lt 3">
+      <critical>NOT LOOKING HARD ENOUGH - Find more problems!</critical>
+      <action>Re-examine code for:
+        - Edge cases and null handling
+        - Architecture violations
+        - Documentation gaps
+        - Integration issues
+        - Dependency problems
+        - Git commit message quality (if applicable)
+      </action>
+      <action>Find at least 3 more specific, actionable issues</action>
+    </check>
+  </step>
+
+  <step n="4" goal="Present findings and fix them">
+    <action>Categorize findings: HIGH (must fix), MEDIUM (should fix), LOW (nice to fix)</action>
+    <action>Set {{fixed_count}} = 0</action>
+    <action>Set {{action_count}} = 0</action>
+
+    <output>**CODE REVIEW FINDINGS, {user_name}!**
+
+      **Story:** {{story_file}}
+      **Git vs Story Discrepancies:** {{git_discrepancy_count}} found
+      **Issues Found:** {{high_count}} High, {{medium_count}} Medium, {{low_count}} Low
+
+      ## CRITICAL ISSUES
+      - Tasks marked [x] but not actually implemented
+      - Acceptance Criteria not implemented
+      - Story claims files changed but no git evidence
+      - Security vulnerabilities
+
+      ## MEDIUM ISSUES
+      - Files changed but not documented in story File List
+      - Uncommitted changes not tracked
+      - Performance problems
+      - Poor test coverage/quality
+      - Code maintainability issues
+
+      ## LOW ISSUES
+      - Code style improvements
+      - Documentation gaps
+      - Git commit message quality
+    </output>
+
+    <ask>What should I do with these issues?
+
+      1. **Fix them automatically** - I'll update the code and tests
+      2. **Create action items** - Add to story Tasks/Subtasks for later
+      3. **Show me details** - Deep dive into specific issues
+
+      Choose [1], [2], or specify which issue to examine:</ask>
+
+    <check if="user chooses 1">
+      <action>Fix all HIGH and MEDIUM issues in the code</action>
+      <action>Add/update tests as needed</action>
+      <action>Update File List in story if files changed</action>
+      <action>Update story Dev Agent Record with fixes applied</action>
+      <action>Set {{fixed_count}} = number of HIGH and MEDIUM issues fixed</action>
+      <action>Set {{action_count}} = 0</action>
+    </check>
+
+    <check if="user chooses 2">
+      <action>Add "Review Follow-ups (AI)" subsection to Tasks/Subtasks</action>
+      <action>For each issue: `- [ ] [AI-Review][Severity] Description [file:line]`</action>
+      <action>Set {{action_count}} = number of action items created</action>
+      <action>Set {{fixed_count}} = 0</action>
+    </check>
+
+    <check if="user chooses 3">
+      <action>Show detailed explanation with code examples</action>
+      <action>Return to fix decision</action>
+    </check>
+  </step>
+
+  <step n="5" goal="Update story status and sync sprint tracking">
+    <!-- Determine new status based on review outcome -->
+    <check if="all HIGH and MEDIUM issues fixed AND all ACs implemented">
+      <action>Set {{new_status}} = "done"</action>
+      <action>Update story Status field to "done"</action>
+    </check>
+    <check if="HIGH or MEDIUM issues remain OR ACs not fully implemented">
+      <action>Set {{new_status}} = "in-progress"</action>
+      <action>Update story Status field to "in-progress"</action>
+    </check>
+    <action>Save story file</action>
+
+    <!-- Determine sprint tracking status -->
+    <check if="{sprint_status} file exists">
+      <action>Set {{current_sprint_status}} = "enabled"</action>
+    </check>
+    <check if="{sprint_status} file does NOT exist">
+      <action>Set {{current_sprint_status}} = "no-sprint-tracking"</action>
+    </check>
+
+    <!-- Sync sprint-status.yaml when story status changes (only if sprint tracking enabled) -->
+    <check if="{{current_sprint_status}} != 'no-sprint-tracking'">
+      <action>Load the FULL file: {sprint_status}</action>
+      <action>Find development_status key matching {{story_key}}</action>
+
+      <check if="{{new_status}} == 'done'">
+        <action>Update development_status[{{story_key}}] = "done"</action>
+        <action>Save file, preserving ALL comments and structure</action>
+        <output>Sprint status synced: {{story_key}} -> done</output>
+      </check>
+
+      <check if="{{new_status}} == 'in-progress'">
+        <action>Update development_status[{{story_key}}] = "in-progress"</action>
+        <action>Save file, preserving ALL comments and structure</action>
+        <output>Sprint status synced: {{story_key}} -> in-progress</output>
+      </check>
+
+      <check if="story key not found in sprint status">
+        <output>Story file updated, but sprint-status sync failed: {{story_key}} not found in sprint-status.yaml</output>
+      </check>
+    </check>
+
+    <check if="{{current_sprint_status}} == 'no-sprint-tracking'">
+      <output>Story status updated (no sprint tracking configured)</output>
+    </check>
+
+    <output>**Review Complete!**
+
+      **Story Status:** {{new_status}}
+      **Issues Fixed:** {{fixed_count}}
+      **Action Items Created:** {{action_count}}
+
+      {{#if new_status == "done"}}Code review complete!{{else}}Address the action items and continue development.{{/if}}
+    </output>
+  </step>
+
+</workflow>
+```

package/pennyfarthing-dist/workflows/code-review/workflow.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+# BMAD Code Review Workflow - Imported for BMAD Compatibility
+#
+# This is a reference workflow imported from BMAD for compatibility with
+# BMAD-based projects. It provides adversarial code review with mandatory
+# issue discovery (3-10 specific issues minimum per review).
+#
+# Key features:
+# - Adversarial mindset: Find problems, never "looks good"
+# - Git-Story cross-reference: Compare story claims vs actual git changes
+# - AC validation: Verify each Acceptance Criterion is implemented
+# - Task audit: Verify marked-complete tasks are really done
+# - Auto-fix option: Can fix HIGH/MEDIUM issues or create action items
+# - Sprint sync: Updates sprint-status.yaml after review
+#
+# For Pennyfarthing projects, the Reviewer agent and /code-review skill provide
+# native code review without the full BMAD ceremony format.
+#
+# Source: BMAD-METHOD/src/modules/bmm/workflows/4-implementation/code-review/
+# Migrated: 2026-01-22
+
+workflow:
+  name: code-review
+  description: |
+    BMAD reference workflow: Perform an ADVERSARIAL Senior Developer code review
+    that finds 3-10 specific problems in every story. Challenges everything: code
+    quality, test coverage, architecture compliance, security, performance. NEVER
+    accepts "looks good" - must find minimum issues and can auto-fix with user approval.
+    This is imported for BMAD compatibility.
+  version: "1.0.0"
+  type: procedural
+  author: BMad
+
+  # Primary agent for this workflow
+  agent: reviewer
+
+  # Instructions and validation files
+  instructions: ./instructions.md
+  checklist: ./checklist.md
+
+  # Variables available in instruction files
+  variables:
+    project_root: .
+    config_source: "./_bmad/core/config.yaml"
+    output_folder: ./artifacts
+    sprint_status: "{output_folder}/sprint-status.yaml"
+    project_context: "**/project-context.md"
+
+  # Triggers - when to suggest this workflow
+  triggers:
+    types: [code-review, bmad-review, adversarial-review, senior-review]
+    tags: [bmad, reference, procedural, code-review, quality]

package/pennyfarthing-dist/workflows/dev-story/checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,80 @@
+---
+title: 'Enhanced Dev Story Definition of Done Checklist'
+validation-target: 'Story markdown ({{story_path}})'
+validation-criticality: 'HIGHEST'
+required-inputs:
+  - 'Story markdown file with enhanced Dev Notes containing comprehensive implementation context'
+  - 'Completed Tasks/Subtasks section with all items marked [x]'
+  - 'Updated File List section with all changed files'
+  - 'Updated Dev Agent Record with implementation notes'
+optional-inputs:
+  - 'Test results output'
+  - 'CI logs'
+  - 'Linting reports'
+validation-rules:
+  - 'Only permitted story sections modified: Tasks/Subtasks checkboxes, Dev Agent Record, File List, Change Log, Status'
+  - 'All implementation requirements from story Dev Notes must be satisfied'
+  - 'Definition of Done checklist must pass completely'
+  - 'Enhanced story context must contain sufficient technical guidance'
+---
+
+# Enhanced Definition of Done Checklist
+
+**Critical validation:** Story is truly ready for review only when ALL items below are satisfied
+
+## Context & Requirements Validation
+
+- [ ] **Story Context Completeness:** Dev Notes contains ALL necessary technical requirements, architecture patterns, and implementation guidance
+- [ ] **Architecture Compliance:** Implementation follows all architectural requirements specified in Dev Notes
+- [ ] **Technical Specifications:** All technical specifications (libraries, frameworks, versions) from Dev Notes are implemented correctly
+- [ ] **Previous Story Learnings:** Previous story insights incorporated (if applicable) and build upon appropriately
+
+## Implementation Completion
+
+- [ ] **All Tasks Complete:** Every task and subtask marked complete with [x]
+- [ ] **Acceptance Criteria Satisfaction:** Implementation satisfies EVERY Acceptance Criterion in the story
+- [ ] **No Ambiguous Implementation:** Clear, unambiguous implementation that meets story requirements
+- [ ] **Edge Cases Handled:** Error conditions and edge cases appropriately addressed
+- [ ] **Dependencies Within Scope:** Only uses dependencies specified in story or project-context.md
+
+## Testing & Quality Assurance
+
+- [ ] **Unit Tests:** Unit tests added/updated for ALL core functionality introduced/changed by this story
+- [ ] **Integration Tests:** Integration tests added/updated for component interactions when story requirements demand them
+- [ ] **End-to-End Tests:** End-to-end tests created for critical user flows when story requirements specify them
+- [ ] **Test Coverage:** Tests cover acceptance criteria and edge cases from story Dev Notes
+- [ ] **Regression Prevention:** ALL existing tests pass (no regressions introduced)
+- [ ] **Code Quality:** Linting and static checks pass when configured in project
+- [ ] **Test Framework Compliance:** Tests use project's testing frameworks and patterns from Dev Notes
+
+## Documentation & Tracking
+
+- [ ] **File List Complete:** File List includes EVERY new, modified, or deleted file (paths relative to repo root)
+- [ ] **Dev Agent Record Updated:** Contains relevant Implementation Notes and/or Debug Log for this work
+- [ ] **Change Log Updated:** Change Log includes clear summary of what changed and why
+- [ ] **Review Follow-ups:** All review follow-up tasks (marked [AI-Review]) completed and corresponding review items marked resolved (if applicable)
+- [ ] **Story Structure Compliance:** Only permitted sections of story file were modified
+
+## Final Status Verification
+
+- [ ] **Story Status Updated:** Story Status set to "review"
+- [ ] **Sprint Status Updated:** Sprint status updated to "review" (when sprint tracking is used)
+- [ ] **Quality Gates Passed:** All quality checks and validations completed successfully
+- [ ] **No HALT Conditions:** No blocking issues or incomplete work remaining
+- [ ] **User Communication Ready:** Implementation summary prepared for user review
+
+## Final Validation Output
+
+```
+Definition of Done: {{PASS/FAIL}}
+
+Story Ready for Review: {{story_key}}
+Completion Score: {{completed_items}}/{{total_items}} items passed
+Quality Gates: {{quality_gates_status}}
+Test Results: {{test_results_summary}}
+Documentation: {{documentation_status}}
+```
+
+**If FAIL:** List specific failures and required actions before story can be marked Ready for Review
+
+**If PASS:** Story is fully ready for code review and production consideration