@pennyfarthing/core 7.9.0 → 7.9.2

package/pennyfarthing-dist/workflows/prd/steps-v/step-v-09-project-type-validation.md

@@ -1,263 +0,0 @@
----
-name: 'step-v-09-project-type-validation'
-description: 'Project-Type Compliance Validation - Validate project-type specific requirements are properly documented'
-
-# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
-nextStepFile: './step-v-10-smart-validation.md'
-prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
-prdFrontmatter: '{prd_frontmatter}'
-validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
-projectTypesData: '../data/project-types.csv'
----
-
-# Step 9: Project-Type Compliance Validation
-
-## STEP GOAL:
-
-Validate project-type specific requirements are properly documented - different project types (api_backend, web_app, mobile_app, etc.) have different required and excluded sections.
-
-## 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 project type expertise and architectural knowledge
-- ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
-
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-
-- 🎯 Focus ONLY on project-type compliance
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate other aspects in this step
-- 💬 Approach: Validate required sections present, excluded sections absent
-- 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
-
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-
-- 🎯 Check classification.projectType from PRD frontmatter
-- 🎯 Validate required sections for that project type are present
-- 🎯 Validate excluded sections for that project type are absent
-- 💾 Append compliance 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 with frontmatter classification, validation report
-- Focus: Project-type compliance only
-- Limits: Don't validate other aspects, don't pause for user input
-- Dependencies: Steps 2-8 completed - domain and requirements validation done
-
-## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
-
-**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
-
-### 1. Load Project Types Data
-
-Load and read the complete file at:
-`{projectTypesData}` (../data/project-types.csv)
-
-This CSV contains:
-- Detection signals for each project type
-- Required sections for each project type
-- Skip/excluded sections for each project type
-- Innovation signals
-
-Internalize this data - it drives what sections must be present or absent for each project type.
-
-### 2. Extract Project Type Classification
-
-From PRD frontmatter, extract:
-- `classification.projectType` - what type of project is this?
-
-**Common project types:**
-- api_backend
-- web_app
-- mobile_app
-- desktop_app
-- data_pipeline
-- ml_system
-- library_sdk
-- infrastructure
-- other
-
-**If no projectType classification found:**
-Assume "web_app" (most common) and note in findings
-
-### 3. Determine Required and Excluded Sections from CSV Data
-
-**From loaded project-types.csv data, for this project type:**
-
-**Required sections:** (from required_sections column)
-These MUST be present in the PRD
-
-**Skip sections:** (from skip_sections column)
-These MUST NOT be present in the PRD
-
-**Example mappings from CSV:**
-- api_backend: Required=[endpoint_specs, auth_model, data_schemas], Skip=[ux_ui, visual_design]
-- mobile_app: Required=[platform_reqs, device_permissions, offline_mode], Skip=[desktop_features, cli_commands]
-- cli_tool: Required=[command_structure, output_formats, config_schema], Skip=[visual_design, ux_principles, touch_interactions]
-- etc.
-
-### 4. Validate Against CSV-Based Requirements
-
-**Based on project type, determine:**
-
-**api_backend:**
-- Required: Endpoint Specs, Auth Model, Data Schemas, API Versioning
-- Excluded: UX/UI sections, mobile-specific sections
-
-**web_app:**
-- Required: User Journeys, UX/UI Requirements, Responsive Design
-- Excluded: None typically
-
-**mobile_app:**
-- Required: Mobile UX, Platform specifics (iOS/Android), Offline mode
-- Excluded: Desktop-specific sections
-
-**desktop_app:**
-- Required: Desktop UX, Platform specifics (Windows/Mac/Linux)
-- Excluded: Mobile-specific sections
-
-**data_pipeline:**
-- Required: Data Sources, Data Transformation, Data Sinks, Error Handling
-- Excluded: UX/UI sections
-
-**ml_system:**
-- Required: Model Requirements, Training Data, Inference Requirements, Model Performance
-- Excluded: UX/UI sections (unless ML UI)
-
-**library_sdk:**
-- Required: API Surface, Usage Examples, Integration Guide
-- Excluded: UX/UI sections, deployment sections
-
-**infrastructure:**
-- Required: Infrastructure Components, Deployment, Monitoring, Scaling
-- Excluded: Feature requirements (this is infrastructure, not product)
-
-### 4. Attempt Sub-Process Validation
-
-"Perform project-type compliance validation for {projectType}:
-
-**Check that required sections are present:**
-{List required sections for this project type}
-For each: Is it present in PRD? Is it adequately documented?
-
-**Check that excluded sections are absent:**
-{List excluded sections for this project type}
-For each: Is it absent from PRD? (Should not be present)
-
-Build compliance table showing:
-- Required sections: [Present/Missing/Incomplete]
-- Excluded sections: [Absent/Present] (Present = violation)
-
-Return compliance table with findings."
-
-**Graceful degradation (if no Task tool):**
-- Manually check PRD for required sections
-- Manually check PRD for excluded sections
-- Build compliance table
-
-### 5. Build Compliance Table
-
-**Required sections check:**
-- For each required section: Present / Missing / Incomplete
-- Count: Required sections present vs total required
-
-**Excluded sections check:**
-- For each excluded section: Absent / Present (violation)
-- Count: Excluded sections present (violations)
-
-**Total compliance score:**
-- Required: {present}/{total}
-- Excluded violations: {count}
-
-### 6. Report Project-Type Compliance Findings to Validation Report
-
-Append to validation report:
-
-```markdown
-## Project-Type Compliance Validation
-
-**Project Type:** {projectType}
-
-### Required Sections
-
-**{Section 1}:** [Present/Missing/Incomplete]
-{If missing or incomplete: Note specific gaps}
-
-**{Section 2}:** [Present/Missing/Incomplete]
-{If missing or incomplete: Note specific gaps}
-
-[Continue for all required sections]
-
-### Excluded Sections (Should Not Be Present)
-
-**{Section 1}:** [Absent/Present] ✓
-{If present: This section should not be present for {projectType}}
-
-**{Section 2}:** [Absent/Present] ✓
-{If present: This section should not be present for {projectType}}
-
-[Continue for all excluded sections]
-
-### Compliance Summary
-
-**Required Sections:** {present}/{total} present
-**Excluded Sections Present:** {violations} (should be 0)
-**Compliance Score:** {percentage}%
-
-**Severity:** [Critical if required sections missing, Warning if incomplete, Pass if complete]
-
-**Recommendation:**
-[If Critical] "PRD is missing required sections for {projectType}. Add missing sections to properly specify this type of project."
-[If Warning] "Some required sections for {projectType} are incomplete. Strengthen documentation."
-[If Pass] "All required sections for {projectType} are present. No excluded sections found."
-```
-
-### 7. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
-
-Display: "**Project-Type Compliance Validation Complete**
-
-Project Type: {projectType}
-Compliance: {score}%
-
-**Proceeding to next validation check...**"
-
-Immediately load and execute {nextStepFile} (step-v-10-smart-validation.md)
-
----
-
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-
-- Project type extracted correctly (or default assumed)
-- Required sections validated for presence and completeness
-- Excluded sections validated for absence
-- Compliance table built with status for all sections
-- Severity assessed correctly
-- Findings reported to validation report
-- Auto-proceeds to next validation step
-- Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
-
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-
-- Not checking project type before proceeding
-- Missing required section checks
-- Missing excluded section checks
-- Not building compliance table
-- Not reporting findings to validation report
-- Not auto-proceeding
-
-**Master Rule:** Different project types have different requirements. API PRDs don't need UX sections - validate accordingly.

package/pennyfarthing-dist/workflows/prd/steps-v/step-v-10-smart-validation.md

@@ -1,209 +0,0 @@
----
-name: 'step-v-10-smart-validation'
-description: 'SMART Requirements Validation - Validate Functional Requirements meet SMART quality criteria'
-
-# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
-nextStepFile: './step-v-11-holistic-quality-validation.md'
-prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
-validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
-advancedElicitationTask: '{project_root}/_bmad/core/workflows/advanced-elicitation/workflow.xml'
----
-
-# Step 10: SMART Requirements Validation
-
-## STEP GOAL:
-
-Validate Functional Requirements meet SMART quality criteria (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Traceable), ensuring high-quality requirements.
-
-## 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 requirements engineering expertise and quality assessment
-- ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
-
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-
-- 🎯 Focus ONLY on FR quality assessment using SMART framework
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate other aspects in this step
-- 💬 Approach: Score each FR on SMART criteria (1-5 scale)
-- 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
-
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-
-- 🎯 Extract all FRs from PRD
-- 🎯 Score each FR on SMART criteria (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Traceable)
-- 💾 Flag FRs with score < 3 in any category
-- 📖 Append scoring table and suggestions 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
-- Focus: FR quality assessment only using SMART framework
-- Limits: Don't validate NFRs or other aspects, don't pause for user input
-- Dependencies: Steps 2-9 completed - comprehensive validation checks done
-
-## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
-
-**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
-
-### 1. Extract All Functional Requirements
-
-From the PRD's Functional Requirements section, extract:
-- All FRs with their FR numbers (FR-001, FR-002, etc.)
-- Count total FRs
-
-### 2. Attempt Sub-Process Validation
-
-**Try to use Task tool to spawn a subprocess:**
-
-"Perform SMART requirements validation on these Functional Requirements:
-
-{List all FRs}
-
-**For each FR, score on SMART criteria (1-5 scale):**
-
-**Specific (1-5):**
-- 5: Clear, unambiguous, well-defined
-- 3: Somewhat clear but could be more specific
-- 1: Vague, ambiguous, unclear
-
-**Measurable (1-5):**
-- 5: Quantifiable metrics, testable
-- 3: Partially measurable
-- 1: Not measurable, subjective
-
-**Attainable (1-5):**
-- 5: Realistic, achievable with constraints
-- 3: Probably achievable but uncertain
-- 1: Unrealistic, technically infeasible
-
-**Relevant (1-5):**
-- 5: Clearly aligned with user needs and business objectives
-- 3: Somewhat relevant but connection unclear
-- 1: Not relevant, doesn't align with goals
-
-**Traceable (1-5):**
-- 5: Clearly traces to user journey or business objective
-- 3: Partially traceable
-- 1: Orphan requirement, no clear source
-
-**For each FR with score < 3 in any category:**
-- Provide specific improvement suggestions
-
-Return scoring table with all FR scores and improvement suggestions for low-scoring FRs."
-
-**Graceful degradation (if no Task tool):**
-- Manually score each FR on SMART criteria
-- Note FRs with low scores
-- Provide improvement suggestions
-
-### 3. Build Scoring Table
-
-For each FR:
-- FR number
-- Specific score (1-5)
-- Measurable score (1-5)
-- Attainable score (1-5)
-- Relevant score (1-5)
-- Traceable score (1-5)
-- Average score
-- Flag if any category < 3
-
-**Calculate overall FR quality:**
-- Percentage of FRs with all scores ≥ 3
-- Percentage of FRs with all scores ≥ 4
-- Average score across all FRs and categories
-
-### 4. Report SMART Findings to Validation Report
-
-Append to validation report:
-
-```markdown
-## SMART Requirements Validation
-
-**Total Functional Requirements:** {count}
-
-### Scoring Summary
-
-**All scores ≥ 3:** {percentage}% ({count}/{total})
-**All scores ≥ 4:** {percentage}% ({count}/{total})
-**Overall Average Score:** {average}/5.0
-
-### Scoring Table
-
-| FR # | Specific | Measurable | Attainable | Relevant | Traceable | Average | Flag |
-|------|----------|------------|------------|----------|-----------|--------|------|
-| FR-001 | {s1} | {m1} | {a1} | {r1} | {t1} | {avg1} | {X if any <3} |
-| FR-002 | {s2} | {m2} | {a2} | {r2} | {t2} | {avg2} | {X if any <3} |
-[Continue for all FRs]
-
-**Legend:** 1=Poor, 3=Acceptable, 5=Excellent
-**Flag:** X = Score < 3 in one or more categories
-
-### Improvement Suggestions
-
-**Low-Scoring FRs:**
-
-**FR-{number}:** {specific suggestion for improvement}
-[For each FR with score < 3 in any category]
-
-### Overall Assessment
-
-**Severity:** [Critical if >30% flagged FRs, Warning if 10-30%, Pass if <10%]
-
-**Recommendation:**
-[If Critical] "Many FRs have quality issues. Revise flagged FRs using SMART framework to improve clarity and testability."
-[If Warning] "Some FRs would benefit from SMART refinement. Focus on flagged requirements above."
-[If Pass] "Functional Requirements demonstrate good SMART quality overall."
-```
-
-### 5. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
-
-Display: "**SMART Requirements Validation Complete**
-
-FR Quality: {percentage}% with acceptable scores ({severity})
-
-**Proceeding to next validation check...**"
-
-Immediately load and execute {nextStepFile} (step-v-11-holistic-quality-validation.md)
-
----
-
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-
-- All FRs extracted from PRD
-- Each FR scored on all 5 SMART criteria (1-5 scale)
-- FRs with scores < 3 flagged for improvement
-- Improvement suggestions provided for low-scoring FRs
-- Scoring table built with all FR scores
-- Overall quality assessment calculated
-- Findings reported to validation report
-- Auto-proceeds to next validation step
-- Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
-
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-
-- Not scoring all FRs on all SMART criteria
-- Missing improvement suggestions for low-scoring FRs
-- Not building scoring table
-- Not calculating overall quality metrics
-- Not reporting findings to validation report
-- Not auto-proceeding
-
-**Master Rule:** FRs should be high-quality, not just present. SMART framework provides objective quality measure.