@pennyfarthing/core 7.5.0 → 7.6.1

package/pennyfarthing-dist/workflows/implementation-readiness/steps/step-05-epic-quality-review.md

@@ -0,0 +1,252 @@
+---
+name: 'step-05-epic-quality-review'
+description: 'Validate epics and stories against create-epics-and-stories best practices'
+
+# Path Definitions
+workflow_path: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/implementation-readiness'
+
+# File References
+thisStepFile: './step-05-epic-quality-review.md'
+nextStepFile: './step-06-final-assessment.md'
+workflowFile: '{workflow_path}/workflow.md'
+outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/implementation-readiness-report-{{date}}.md'
+epicsBestPractices: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/create-epics-and-stories'
+---
+
+# Step 5: Epic Quality Review
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+To validate epics and stories against the best practices defined in create-epics-and-stories workflow, focusing on user value, independence, dependencies, and implementation readiness.
+
+## 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 an EPIC QUALITY ENFORCER
+- ✅ You know what good epics look like - challenge anything deviating
+- ✅ Technical epics are wrong - find them
+- ✅ Forward dependencies are forbidden - catch them
+- ✅ Stories must be independently completable
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Apply create-epics-and-stories standards rigorously
+- 🚫 Don't accept "technical milestones" as epics
+- 💬 Challenge every dependency on future work
+- 🚪 Verify proper story sizing and structure
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Systematically validate each epic and story
+- 💾 Document all violations of best practices
+- 📖 Check every dependency relationship
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to accept structural problems
+
+## EPIC QUALITY REVIEW PROCESS:
+
+### 1. Initialize Best Practices Validation
+
+"Beginning **Epic Quality Review** against create-epics-and-stories standards.
+
+I will rigorously validate:
+
+- Epics deliver user value (not technical milestones)
+- Epic independence (Epic 2 doesn't need Epic 3)
+- Story dependencies (no forward references)
+- Proper story sizing and completeness
+
+Any deviation from best practices will be flagged as a defect."
+
+### 2. Epic Structure Validation
+
+#### A. User Value Focus Check
+
+For each epic:
+
+- **Epic Title:** Is it user-centric (what user can do)?
+- **Epic Goal:** Does it describe user outcome?
+- **Value Proposition:** Can users benefit from this epic alone?
+
+**Red flags (violations):**
+
+- "Setup Database" or "Create Models" - no user value
+- "API Development" - technical milestone
+- "Infrastructure Setup" - not user-facing
+- "Authentication System" - borderline (is it user value?)
+
+#### B. Epic Independence Validation
+
+Test epic independence:
+
+- **Epic 1:** Must stand alone completely
+- **Epic 2:** Can function using only Epic 1 output
+- **Epic 3:** Can function using Epic 1 & 2 outputs
+- **Rule:** Epic N cannot require Epic N+1 to work
+
+**Document failures:**
+
+- "Epic 2 requires Epic 3 features to function"
+- Stories in Epic 2 referencing Epic 3 components
+- Circular dependencies between epics
+
+### 3. Story Quality Assessment
+
+#### A. Story Sizing Validation
+
+Check each story:
+
+- **Clear User Value:** Does the story deliver something meaningful?
+- **Independent:** Can it be completed without future stories?
+
+**Common violations:**
+
+- "Setup all models" - not a USER story
+- "Create login UI (depends on Story 1.3)" - forward dependency
+
+#### B. Acceptance Criteria Review
+
+For each story's ACs:
+
+- **Given/When/Then Format:** Proper BDD structure?
+- **Testable:** Each AC can be verified independently?
+- **Complete:** Covers all scenarios including errors?
+- **Specific:** Clear expected outcomes?
+
+**Issues to find:**
+
+- Vague criteria like "user can login"
+- Missing error conditions
+- Incomplete happy path
+- Non-measurable outcomes
+
+### 4. Dependency Analysis
+
+#### A. Within-Epic Dependencies
+
+Map story dependencies within each epic:
+
+- Story 1.1 must be completable alone
+- Story 1.2 can use Story 1.1 output
+- Story 1.3 can use Story 1.1 & 1.2 outputs
+
+**Critical violations:**
+
+- "This story depends on Story 1.4"
+- "Wait for future story to work"
+- Stories referencing features not yet implemented
+
+#### B. Database/Entity Creation Timing
+
+Validate database creation approach:
+
+- **Wrong:** Epic 1 Story 1 creates all tables upfront
+- **Right:** Each story creates tables it needs
+- **Check:** Are tables created only when first needed?
+
+### 5. Special Implementation Checks
+
+#### A. Starter Template Requirement
+
+Check if Architecture specifies starter template:
+
+- If YES: Epic 1 Story 1 must be "Set up initial project from starter template"
+- Verify story includes cloning, dependencies, initial configuration
+
+#### B. Greenfield vs Brownfield Indicators
+
+Greenfield projects should have:
+
+- Initial project setup story
+- Development environment configuration
+- CI/CD pipeline setup early
+
+Brownfield projects should have:
+
+- Integration points with existing systems
+- Migration or compatibility stories
+
+### 6. Best Practices Compliance Checklist
+
+For each epic, verify:
+
+- [ ] Epic delivers user value
+- [ ] Epic can function independently
+- [ ] Stories appropriately sized
+- [ ] No forward dependencies
+- [ ] Database tables created when needed
+- [ ] Clear acceptance criteria
+- [ ] Traceability to FRs maintained
+
+### 7. Quality Assessment Documentation
+
+Document all findings by severity:
+
+#### 🔴 Critical Violations
+
+- Technical epics with no user value
+- Forward dependencies breaking independence
+- Epic-sized stories that cannot be completed
+
+#### 🟠 Major Issues
+
+- Vague acceptance criteria
+- Stories requiring future stories
+- Database creation violations
+
+#### 🟡 Minor Concerns
+
+- Formatting inconsistencies
+- Minor structure deviations
+- Documentation gaps
+
+### 8. Autonomous Review Execution
+
+This review runs autonomously to maintain standards:
+
+- Apply best practices without compromise
+- Document every violation with specific examples
+- Provide clear remediation guidance
+- Prepare recommendations for each issue
+
+## REVIEW COMPLETION:
+
+After completing epic quality review:
+
+- Update {outputFile} with all quality findings
+- Document specific best practices violations
+- Provide actionable recommendations
+- Load {nextStepFile} for final readiness assessment
+
+## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
+
+This step executes autonomously. Load {nextStepFile} only after complete epic quality review is documented.
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- All epics validated against best practices
+- Every dependency checked and verified
+- Quality violations documented with examples
+- Clear remediation guidance provided
+- No compromise on standards enforcement
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Accepting technical epics as valid
+- Ignoring forward dependencies
+- Not verifying story sizing
+- Overlooking obvious violations
+
+**Master Rule:** Enforce best practices rigorously. Find all violations.

package/pennyfarthing-dist/workflows/implementation-readiness/steps/step-06-final-assessment.md

@@ -0,0 +1,133 @@
+---
+name: 'step-06-final-assessment'
+description: 'Compile final assessment and polish the readiness report'
+
+# Path Definitions
+workflow_path: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/implementation-readiness'
+
+# File References
+thisStepFile: './step-06-final-assessment.md'
+workflowFile: '{workflow_path}/workflow.md'
+outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/implementation-readiness-report-{{date}}.md'
+---
+
+# Step 6: Final Assessment
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+To provide a comprehensive summary of all findings and give the report a final polish, ensuring clear recommendations and overall readiness status.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 📖 You are at the final step - complete the assessment
+- 📋 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 delivering the FINAL ASSESSMENT
+- ✅ Your findings are objective and backed by evidence
+- ✅ Provide clear, actionable recommendations
+- ✅ Success is measured by value of findings
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Compile and summarize all findings
+- 🚫 Don't soften the message - be direct
+- 💬 Provide specific examples for problems
+- 🚪 Add final section to the report
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Review all findings from previous steps
+- 💾 Add summary and recommendations
+- 📖 Determine overall readiness status
+- 🚫 Complete and present final report
+
+## FINAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS:
+
+### 1. Initialize Final Assessment
+
+"Completing **Final Assessment**.
+
+I will now:
+
+1. Review all findings from previous steps
+2. Provide a comprehensive summary
+3. Add specific recommendations
+4. Determine overall readiness status"
+
+### 2. Review Previous Findings
+
+Check the {outputFile} for sections added by previous steps:
+
+- File and FR Validation findings
+- UX Alignment issues
+- Epic Quality violations
+
+### 3. Add Final Assessment Section
+
+Append to {outputFile}:
+
+```markdown
+## Summary and Recommendations
+
+### Overall Readiness Status
+
+[READY/NEEDS WORK/NOT READY]
+
+### Critical Issues Requiring Immediate Action
+
+[List most critical issues that must be addressed]
+
+### Recommended Next Steps
+
+1. [Specific action item 1]
+2. [Specific action item 2]
+3. [Specific action item 3]
+
+### Final Note
+
+This assessment identified [X] issues across [Y] categories. Address the critical issues before proceeding to implementation. These findings can be used to improve the artifacts or you may choose to proceed as-is.
+```
+
+### 4. Complete the Report
+
+- Ensure all findings are clearly documented
+- Verify recommendations are actionable
+- Add date and assessor information
+- Save the final report
+
+### 5. Present Completion
+
+Display:
+"**Implementation Readiness Assessment Complete**
+
+Report generated: {outputFile}
+
+The assessment found [number] issues requiring attention. Review the detailed report for specific findings and recommendations."
+
+## WORKFLOW COMPLETE
+
+The implementation readiness workflow is now complete. The report contains all findings and recommendations for the user to consider.
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- All findings compiled and summarized
+- Clear recommendations provided
+- Readiness status determined
+- Final report saved
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Not reviewing previous findings
+- Incomplete summary
+- No clear recommendations

package/pennyfarthing-dist/workflows/implementation-readiness/templates/readiness-report-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+# Implementation Readiness Assessment Report
+
+**Date:** {{date}}
+**Project:** {{project_name}}

package/pennyfarthing-dist/workflows/implementation-readiness/workflow.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+# BMAD Implementation Readiness Workflow - Imported for BMAD Compatibility
+#
+# This is a stepped workflow imported from BMAD that validates PRD, Architecture,
+# and Epics & Stories for completeness and alignment before implementation.
+# Uses an adversarial review approach to find gaps and issues.
+#
+# Purpose: Critical pre-implementation validation gate
+# Role: Expert PM and Scrum Master doing requirements traceability
+# Output: Implementation readiness assessment report
+#
+# Source: BMAD-METHOD/src/modules/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/check-implementation-readiness/
+# Migrated: 2026-01-21
+
+workflow:
+  name: implementation-readiness
+  description: |
+    BMAD reference workflow: Critical validation that assesses PRD, Architecture,
+    and Epics & Stories for completeness and alignment before Phase 4 implementation.
+    Uses adversarial review approach to find gaps and issues in planning artifacts.
+  version: "1.0.0"
+  type: stepped
+
+  # Step configuration
+  steps:
+    path: ./steps/
+    pattern: step-*.md
+
+  # Variables available in step files
+  variables:
+    project_root: .
+    planning_artifacts: ./artifacts
+    output_file: artifacts/implementation-readiness-report.md
+
+  # Agent assignment - PM/SM role for adversarial review
+  agent: sm
+
+  # Triggers - when to suggest this workflow
+  triggers:
+    types: [implementation-readiness, readiness-check, on_demand]
+    tags: [bmad, validation, assessment, pre-implementation]

package/pennyfarthing-dist/workflows/prd/data/domain-complexity.csv

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+domain,signals,complexity,key_concerns,required_knowledge,suggested_workflow,web_searches,special_sections
+healthcare,"medical,diagnostic,clinical,FDA,patient,treatment,HIPAA,therapy,pharma,drug",high,"FDA approval;Clinical validation;HIPAA compliance;Patient safety;Medical device classification;Liability","Regulatory pathways;Clinical trial design;Medical standards;Data privacy;Integration requirements","domain-research","FDA software medical device guidance {date};HIPAA compliance software requirements;Medical software standards {date};Clinical validation software","clinical_requirements;regulatory_pathway;validation_methodology;safety_measures"
+fintech,"payment,banking,trading,investment,crypto,wallet,transaction,KYC,AML,funds,fintech",high,"Regional compliance;Security standards;Audit requirements;Fraud prevention;Data protection","KYC/AML requirements;PCI DSS;Open banking;Regional laws (US/EU/APAC);Crypto regulations","domain-research","fintech regulations {date};payment processing compliance {date};open banking API standards;cryptocurrency regulations {date}","compliance_matrix;security_architecture;audit_requirements;fraud_prevention"
+govtech,"government,federal,civic,public sector,citizen,municipal,voting",high,"Procurement rules;Security clearance;Accessibility (508);FedRAMP;Privacy;Transparency","Government procurement;Security frameworks;Accessibility standards;Privacy laws;Open data requirements","domain-research","government software procurement {date};FedRAMP compliance requirements;section 508 accessibility;government security standards","procurement_compliance;security_clearance;accessibility_standards;transparency_requirements"
+edtech,"education,learning,student,teacher,curriculum,assessment,K-12,university,LMS",medium,"Student privacy (COPPA/FERPA);Accessibility;Content moderation;Age verification;Curriculum standards","Educational privacy laws;Learning standards;Accessibility requirements;Content guidelines;Assessment validity","domain-research","educational software privacy {date};COPPA FERPA compliance;WCAG education requirements;learning management standards","privacy_compliance;content_guidelines;accessibility_features;curriculum_alignment"
+aerospace,"aircraft,spacecraft,aviation,drone,satellite,propulsion,flight,radar,navigation",high,"Safety certification;DO-178C compliance;Performance validation;Simulation accuracy;Export controls","Aviation standards;Safety analysis;Simulation validation;ITAR/export controls;Performance requirements","domain-research + technical-model","DO-178C software certification;aerospace simulation standards {date};ITAR export controls software;aviation safety requirements","safety_certification;simulation_validation;performance_requirements;export_compliance"
+automotive,"vehicle,car,autonomous,ADAS,automotive,driving,EV,charging",high,"Safety standards;ISO 26262;V2X communication;Real-time requirements;Certification","Automotive standards;Functional safety;V2X protocols;Real-time systems;Testing requirements","domain-research","ISO 26262 automotive software;automotive safety standards {date};V2X communication protocols;EV charging standards","safety_standards;functional_safety;communication_protocols;certification_requirements"
+scientific,"research,algorithm,simulation,modeling,computational,analysis,data science,ML,AI",medium,"Reproducibility;Validation methodology;Peer review;Performance;Accuracy;Computational resources","Scientific method;Statistical validity;Computational requirements;Domain expertise;Publication standards","technical-model","scientific computing best practices {date};research reproducibility standards;computational modeling validation;peer review software","validation_methodology;accuracy_metrics;reproducibility_plan;computational_requirements"
+legaltech,"legal,law,contract,compliance,litigation,patent,attorney,court",high,"Legal ethics;Bar regulations;Data retention;Attorney-client privilege;Court system integration","Legal practice rules;Ethics requirements;Court filing systems;Document standards;Confidentiality","domain-research","legal technology ethics {date};law practice management software requirements;court filing system standards;attorney client privilege technology","ethics_compliance;data_retention;confidentiality_measures;court_integration"
+insuretech,"insurance,claims,underwriting,actuarial,policy,risk,premium",high,"Insurance regulations;Actuarial standards;Data privacy;Fraud detection;State compliance","Insurance regulations by state;Actuarial methods;Risk modeling;Claims processing;Regulatory reporting","domain-research","insurance software regulations {date};actuarial standards software;insurance fraud detection;state insurance compliance","regulatory_requirements;risk_modeling;fraud_detection;reporting_compliance"
+energy,"energy,utility,grid,solar,wind,power,electricity,oil,gas",high,"Grid compliance;NERC standards;Environmental regulations;Safety requirements;Real-time operations","Energy regulations;Grid standards;Environmental compliance;Safety protocols;SCADA systems","domain-research","energy sector software compliance {date};NERC CIP standards;smart grid requirements;renewable energy software standards","grid_compliance;safety_protocols;environmental_compliance;operational_requirements"
+gaming,"game,player,gameplay,level,character,multiplayer,quest",redirect,"REDIRECT TO GAME WORKFLOWS","Game design","game-brief","NA","NA"
+general,"",low,"Standard requirements;Basic security;User experience;Performance","General software practices","continue","software development best practices {date}","standard_requirements"

package/pennyfarthing-dist/workflows/prd/data/prd-purpose.md

@@ -0,0 +1,197 @@
+# BMAD PRD Purpose
+
+**The PRD is the top of the required funnel that feeds all subsequent product development work in rhw BMad Method.**
+
+---
+
+## What is a BMAD PRD?
+
+A dual-audience document serving:
+1. **Human Product Managers and builders** - Vision, strategy, stakeholder communication
+2. **LLM Downstream Consumption** - UX Design → Architecture → Epics → Development AI Agents
+
+Each successive document becomes more AI-tailored and granular.
+
+---
+
+## Core Philosophy: Information Density
+
+**High Signal-to-Noise Ratio**
+
+Every sentence must carry information weight. LLMs consume precise, dense content efficiently.
+
+**Anti-Patterns (Eliminate These):**
+- ❌ "The system will allow users to..." → ✅ "Users can..."
+- ❌ "It is important to note that..." → ✅ State the fact directly
+- ❌ "In order to..." → ✅ "To..."
+- ❌ Conversational filler and padding → ✅ Direct, concise statements
+
+**Goal:** Maximum information per word. Zero fluff.
+
+---
+
+## The Traceability Chain
+
+**PRD starts the chain:**
+```
+Vision → Success Criteria → User Journeys → Functional Requirements → (future: User Stories)
+```
+
+**In the PRD, establish:**
+- Vision → Success Criteria alignment
+- Success Criteria → User Journey coverage
+- User Journey → Functional Requirement mapping
+- All requirements traceable to user needs
+
+**Why:** Each downstream artifact (UX, Architecture, Epics, Stories) must trace back to documented user needs and business objectives. This chain ensures we build the right thing.
+
+---
+
+## What Makes Great Functional Requirements?
+
+### FRs are Capabilities, Not Implementation
+
+**Good FR:** "Users can reset their password via email link"
+**Bad FR:** "System sends JWT via email and validates with database" (implementation leakage)
+
+**Good FR:** "Dashboard loads in under 2 seconds for 95th percentile"
+**Bad FR:** "Fast loading time" (subjective, unmeasurable)
+
+### SMART Quality Criteria
+
+**Specific:** Clear, precisely defined capability
+**Measurable:** Quantifiable with test criteria
+**Attainable:** Realistic within constraints
+**Relevant:** Aligns with business objectives
+**Traceable:** Links to source (executive summary or user journey)
+
+### FR Anti-Patterns
+
+**Subjective Adjectives:**
+- ❌ "easy to use", "intuitive", "user-friendly", "fast", "responsive"
+- ✅ Use metrics: "completes task in under 3 clicks", "loads in under 2 seconds"
+
+**Implementation Leakage:**
+- ❌ Technology names, specific libraries, implementation details
+- ✅ Focus on capability and measurable outcomes
+
+**Vague Quantifiers:**
+- ❌ "multiple users", "several options", "various formats"
+- ✅ "up to 100 concurrent users", "3-5 options", "PDF, DOCX, TXT formats"
+
+**Missing Test Criteria:**
+- ❌ "The system shall provide notifications"
+- ✅ "The system shall send email notifications within 30 seconds of trigger event"
+
+---
+
+## What Makes Great Non-Functional Requirements?
+
+### NFRs Must Be Measurable
+
+**Template:**
+```
+"The system shall [metric] [condition] [measurement method]"
+```
+
+**Examples:**
+- ✅ "The system shall respond to API requests in under 200ms for 95th percentile as measured by APM monitoring"
+- ✅ "The system shall maintain 99.9% uptime during business hours as measured by cloud provider SLA"
+- ✅ "The system shall support 10,000 concurrent users as measured by load testing"
+
+### NFR Anti-Patterns
+
+**Unmeasurable Claims:**
+- ❌ "The system shall be scalable" → ✅ "The system shall handle 10x load growth through horizontal scaling"
+- ❌ "High availability required" → ✅ "99.9% uptime as measured by cloud provider SLA"
+
+**Missing Context:**
+- ❌ "Response time under 1 second" → ✅ "API response time under 1 second for 95th percentile under normal load"
+
+---
+
+## Domain-Specific Requirements
+
+**Auto-Detect and Enforce Based on Project Context**
+
+Certain industries have mandatory requirements that must be present:
+
+- **Healthcare:** HIPAA Privacy & Security Rules, PHI encryption, audit logging, MFA
+- **Fintech:** PCI-DSS Level 1, AML/KYC compliance, SOX controls, financial audit trails
+- **GovTech:** NIST framework, Section 508 accessibility (WCAG 2.1 AA), FedRAMP, data residency
+- **E-Commerce:** PCI-DSS for payments, inventory accuracy, tax calculation by jurisdiction
+
+**Why:** Missing these requirements in the PRD means they'll be missed in architecture and implementation, creating expensive rework. During PRD creation there is a step to cover this - during validation we want to make sure it was covered. For this purpose steps will utilize a domain-complexity.csv and project-types.csv.
+
+---
+
+## Document Structure (Markdown, Human-Readable)
+
+### Required Sections
+1. **Executive Summary** - Vision, differentiator, target users
+2. **Success Criteria** - Measurable outcomes (SMART)
+3. **Product Scope** - MVP, Growth, Vision phases
+4. **User Journeys** - Comprehensive coverage
+5. **Domain Requirements** - Industry-specific compliance (if applicable)
+6. **Innovation Analysis** - Competitive differentiation (if applicable)
+7. **Project-Type Requirements** - Platform-specific needs
+8. **Functional Requirements** - Capability contract (FRs)
+9. **Non-Functional Requirements** - Quality attributes (NFRs)
+
+### Formatting for Dual Consumption
+
+**For Humans:**
+- Clear, professional language
+- Logical flow from vision to requirements
+- Easy for stakeholders to review and approve
+
+**For LLMs:**
+- ## Level 2 headers for all main sections (enables extraction)
+- Consistent structure and patterns
+- Precise, testable language
+- High information density
+
+---
+
+## Downstream Impact
+
+**How the PRD Feeds Next Artifacts:**
+
+**UX Design:**
+- User journeys → interaction flows
+- FRs → design requirements
+- Success criteria → UX metrics
+
+**Architecture:**
+- FRs → system capabilities
+- NFRs → architecture decisions
+- Domain requirements → compliance architecture
+- Project-type requirements → platform choices
+
+**Epics & Stories (created after architecture):**
+- FRs → user stories (1 FR could map to 1-3 stories potentially)
+- Acceptance criteria → story acceptance tests
+- Priority → sprint sequencing
+- Traceability → stories map back to vision
+
+**Development AI Agents:**
+- Precise requirements → implementation clarity
+- Test criteria → automated test generation
+- Domain requirements → compliance enforcement
+- Measurable NFRs → performance targets
+
+---
+
+## Summary: What Makes a Great BMAD PRD?
+
+✅ **High Information Density** - Every sentence carries weight, zero fluff
+✅ **Measurable Requirements** - All FRs and NFRs are testable with specific criteria
+✅ **Clear Traceability** - Each requirement links to user need and business objective
+✅ **Domain Awareness** - Industry-specific requirements auto-detected and included
+✅ **Zero Anti-Patterns** - No subjective adjectives, implementation leakage, or vague quantifiers
+✅ **Dual Audience Optimized** - Human-readable AND LLM-consumable
+✅ **Markdown Format** - Professional, clean, accessible to all stakeholders
+
+---
+
+**Remember:** The PRD is the foundation. Quality here ripples through every subsequent phase. A dense, precise, well-traced PRD makes UX design, architecture, epic breakdown, and AI development dramatically more effective.

package/pennyfarthing-dist/workflows/prd/data/project-types.csv

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+project_type,detection_signals,key_questions,required_sections,skip_sections,web_search_triggers,innovation_signals
+api_backend,"API,REST,GraphQL,backend,service,endpoints","Endpoints needed?;Authentication method?;Data formats?;Rate limits?;Versioning?;SDK needed?","endpoint_specs;auth_model;data_schemas;error_codes;rate_limits;api_docs","ux_ui;visual_design;user_journeys","framework best practices;OpenAPI standards","API composition;New protocol"
+mobile_app,"iOS,Android,app,mobile,iPhone,iPad","Native or cross-platform?;Offline needed?;Push notifications?;Device features?;Store compliance?","platform_reqs;device_permissions;offline_mode;push_strategy;store_compliance","desktop_features;cli_commands","app store guidelines;platform requirements","Gesture innovation;AR/VR features"
+saas_b2b,"SaaS,B2B,platform,dashboard,teams,enterprise","Multi-tenant?;Permission model?;Subscription tiers?;Integrations?;Compliance?","tenant_model;rbac_matrix;subscription_tiers;integration_list;compliance_reqs","cli_interface;mobile_first","compliance requirements;integration guides","Workflow automation;AI agents"
+developer_tool,"SDK,library,package,npm,pip,framework","Language support?;Package managers?;IDE integration?;Documentation?;Examples?","language_matrix;installation_methods;api_surface;code_examples;migration_guide","visual_design;store_compliance","package manager best practices;API design patterns","New paradigm;DSL creation"
+cli_tool,"CLI,command,terminal,bash,script","Interactive or scriptable?;Output formats?;Config method?;Shell completion?","command_structure;output_formats;config_schema;scripting_support","visual_design;ux_principles;touch_interactions","CLI design patterns;shell integration","Natural language CLI;AI commands"
+web_app,"website,webapp,browser,SPA,PWA","SPA or MPA?;Browser support?;SEO needed?;Real-time?;Accessibility?","browser_matrix;responsive_design;performance_targets;seo_strategy;accessibility_level","native_features;cli_commands","web standards;WCAG guidelines","New interaction;WebAssembly use"
+game,"game,player,gameplay,level,character","REDIRECT TO USE THE BMad Method Game Module Agent and Workflows - HALT","game-brief;GDD","most_sections","game design patterns","Novel mechanics;Genre mixing"
+desktop_app,"desktop,Windows,Mac,Linux,native","Cross-platform?;Auto-update?;System integration?;Offline?","platform_support;system_integration;update_strategy;offline_capabilities","web_seo;mobile_features","desktop guidelines;platform requirements","Desktop AI;System automation"
+iot_embedded,"IoT,embedded,device,sensor,hardware","Hardware specs?;Connectivity?;Power constraints?;Security?;OTA updates?","hardware_reqs;connectivity_protocol;power_profile;security_model;update_mechanism","visual_ui;browser_support","IoT standards;protocol specs","Edge AI;New sensors"
+blockchain_web3,"blockchain,crypto,DeFi,NFT,smart contract","Chain selection?;Wallet integration?;Gas optimization?;Security audit?","chain_specs;wallet_support;smart_contracts;security_audit;gas_optimization","traditional_auth;centralized_db","blockchain standards;security patterns","Novel tokenomics;DAO structure"