@the-bearded-bear/claude-craft 8.23.3 → 8.26.0-next.2a54921

package/Project/i18n/en/commands/dependencies.md

@@ -1,143 +1,9 @@
 ---
-name: dependencies
-description: Generate a visual dependency graph between user stories using Mermaid
-arguments:
-  - name: sprint
-    description: Sprint ID to scope the graph (e.g., Sprint-3)
-    required: false
-  - name: format
-    description: Output format (mermaid, table, json)
-    required: false
-  - name: output
-    description: Output path (default stdout)
-    required: false
+description: "Deprecated (removed in 9.0): use /project:report deps"
+deprecated: true
+replaced-by: /project:report
 ---
 
-# /project:dependencies
+> ⚠️ `/project:dependencies` is deprecated and will be removed in 9.0. Use `/project:report deps`.
 
-## Mission
-
-Generate a visual dependency graph showing relationships between user stories. Detect circular dependencies, identify bottleneck stories, and help optimize execution order.
-
-## Prerequisites
-
-- `project-management/backlog/` contains user stories with `Depends on:` fields
-- Optional: `.bmad/sprint-status.yaml` for sprint context
-- Optional: `project-management/prd.md` for epic grouping
-
-## Plan Mode
-
-> **Plan mode is mandatory.** Before executing, Claude activates plan mode to analyze impacted code, propose an implementation plan, and wait for your validation before making any changes.
-
-## Workflow
-
-### Step 1: Load Stories
-
-1. Scan `project-management/backlog/` for all story files
-2. If `--sprint` is provided, filter to stories assigned to that sprint
-3. Extract `Depends on:` fields from each story's Traceability section
-4. Build adjacency list of dependencies
-
-### Step 2: Validate Dependencies
-
-1. Check for circular dependencies (A -> B -> C -> A)
-2. Check for references to non-existent stories
-3. Check for self-references
-4. Report any issues found
-
-### Step 3: Generate Graph
-
-**Mermaid format (default):**
-
-```mermaid
-graph TD
-    subgraph "EPIC-001: Authentication"
-        US-001[US-001: Login Page]
-        US-002[US-002: JWT Tokens]
-        US-003[US-003: Password Reset]
-    end
-
-    subgraph "EPIC-002: User Management"
-        US-004[US-004: User Profile]
-        US-005[US-005: Admin Dashboard]
-    end
-
-    US-002 --> US-001
-    US-003 --> US-002
-    US-004 --> US-001
-    US-005 --> US-004
-
-    classDef done fill:#90EE90
-    classDef inProgress fill:#FFD700
-    classDef blocked fill:#FF6B6B
-    classDef ready fill:#87CEEB
-
-    class US-001 done
-    class US-002 inProgress
-    class US-003 blocked
-    class US-004 ready
-    class US-005 ready
-```
-
-### Step 4: Analyze Dependencies
-
-Generate analysis including:
-- **Bottleneck stories**: Stories that block the most other stories
-- **Independent stories**: Stories with no dependencies (can start anytime)
-- **Dependency chains**: Longest chain of sequential dependencies
-- **Parallel opportunities**: Groups of stories that can be worked in parallel
-
-### Step 5: Output Report
-
-```
-+==========================================================+
-|           STORY DEPENDENCY GRAPH                         |
-+==========================================================+
-| Sprint: Sprint-3 | Stories: 8 | Dependencies: 5          |
-+==========================================================+
-|                                                          |
-| Bottleneck Stories (block 3+ others):                    |
-|   !! US-001: Login Page (blocks 4 stories)               |
-|                                                          |
-| Independent Stories (no dependencies):                   |
-|   OK US-006: Landing Page                                |
-|   OK US-007: Error Pages                                 |
-|                                                          |
-| Longest Chain (3 steps):                                 |
-|   US-001 -> US-002 -> US-003                             |
-|                                                          |
-| Parallel Groups:                                         |
-|   Group 1: US-006, US-007 (independent)                  |
-|   Group 2: US-004, US-005 (after US-001)                 |
-|                                                          |
-| Issues:                                                  |
-|   OK No circular dependencies                            |
-|   OK No missing references                               |
-+==========================================================+
-```
-
-## Example Session
-
-```
-User: /project:dependencies --sprint=Sprint-3
-
-Claude: Analyzing dependencies for Sprint-3...
-
-Found 8 stories with 5 dependencies.
-
-[Mermaid graph displayed]
-
-Key findings:
-- US-001 is a bottleneck (blocks 4 stories). Consider prioritizing it.
-- US-006 and US-007 are independent and can start immediately.
-- Critical path: US-001 -> US-002 -> US-003 (3 sprints if sequential)
-
-Recommendation: Start with US-001 + US-006/US-007 in parallel.
-```
-
-## Related Commands
-
-- `/project:critical-path` — Identify the critical path
-- `/project:trace` — View traceability matrix
-- `/sprint:next-story` — Get next story (considers dependencies)
-- `/sprint:status` — View sprint progress
+Run `/project:report deps $ARGUMENTS`: read `.claude/commands/project/report.md` and follow it with these arguments.

package/Project/i18n/en/commands/gap-analysis.md

@@ -1,294 +1,9 @@
 ---
-name: gap-analysis
-description: Compare existing specifications with actual codebase to identify gaps and inconsistencies
-arguments:
-  - name: prd
-    description: Path to PRD (default project-management/prd.md)
-    required: false
-  - name: scope
-    description: Analysis scope (full, requirements, stories, code)
-    required: false
+description: "Deprecated (removed in 9.0): use /project:reverse gaps"
+deprecated: true
+replaced-by: /project:reverse
 ---
 
-# /project:gap-analysis
+> ⚠️ `/project:gap-analysis` is deprecated and will be removed in 9.0. Use `/project:reverse gaps`.
 
-## Mission
-
-Compare existing specifications (PRD, user stories, tech spec) with the actual codebase to identify gaps, inconsistencies, and missing coverage. This command produces an actionable report with severity-ranked findings and remediation suggestions.
-
-## Prerequisites
-
-- PRD exists at `project-management/prd.md` (from `/project:generate-prd` or `/project:reverse-prd`)
-- Codebase is accessible for analysis
-- Optional: Scan report at `project-management/scan-report.md`
-- Optional: User stories in `project-management/backlog/user-stories/`
-- Optional: Tech spec at `project-management/tech-spec.md`
-
-## Plan Mode
-
-> **Plan mode is mandatory.** Before executing, Claude activates plan mode to analyze impacted code, propose an implementation plan, and wait for your validation before making any changes.
-
-## Workflow
-
-### Step 1: Load Specifications
-
-```
-+--------------------------------------------------------------+
-|              GAP ANALYSIS - LOADING SPECS                       |
-+--------------------------------------------------------------+
-| Loading specifications and codebase data...                    |
-+--------------------------------------------------------------+
-```
-
-**Actions:**
-1. Load PRD from `project-management/prd.md`
-2. Load user stories from `project-management/backlog/user-stories/`
-3. Load tech spec from `project-management/tech-spec.md` (if exists)
-4. Load scan report from `project-management/scan-report.md` (or run `/project:scan`)
-5. Parse all functional requirements (FR-xxx), non-functional requirements (NFR-xxx), and user stories (US-xxx)
-
-### Step 2: Scan Codebase
-
-```
-+--------------------------------------------------------------+
-|              GAP ANALYSIS - SCANNING CODE                      |
-+--------------------------------------------------------------+
-| Scanning codebase for implemented features...                  |
-+--------------------------------------------------------------+
-```
-
-**Actions:**
-1. If scan report is missing or outdated, run a fresh scan
-2. Catalog all implemented features:
-   - API endpoints (routes, controllers, handlers)
-   - Business logic (services, use cases, domain events)
-   - Data models (entities, migrations, relationships)
-   - Tests (unit, integration, E2E)
-   - Infrastructure (Docker, CI/CD, monitoring)
-3. Build a feature inventory indexed by module/domain
-
-### Step 3: Compare Spec vs Code
-
-```
-+--------------------------------------------------------------+
-|              GAP ANALYSIS - COMPARING                          |
-+--------------------------------------------------------------+
-| Comparing specifications with codebase...                      |
-+--------------------------------------------------------------+
-```
-
-**Four-way comparison:**
-
-#### 1. Spec without Code (Not Implemented)
-Requirements defined in the PRD or user stories that have no corresponding implementation in the codebase.
-
-| Check | Method |
-|-------|--------|
-| FR-xxx without matching endpoint | Match requirement keywords to route paths and controller actions |
-| US-xxx without matching feature | Match story actions to implemented handlers |
-| NFR-xxx without matching config | Match NFR descriptions to infrastructure setup |
-
-#### 2. Code without Spec (Undocumented)
-Features implemented in the codebase that are not covered by any specification document.
-
-| Check | Method |
-|-------|--------|
-| Endpoints without FR reference | List endpoints not mapped to any requirement |
-| Services without US reference | List services not referenced in any user story |
-| Entities without spec coverage | List data models not documented in specs |
-
-#### 3. Spec-Code Mismatch (Inconsistent)
-Implementation differs from what the specification defines.
-
-| Check | Method |
-|-------|--------|
-| Field mismatches | Compare entity fields vs spec-defined attributes |
-| Status flow mismatches | Compare implemented state machine vs spec-defined workflow |
-| Auth mismatches | Compare actual auth rules vs spec-defined access control |
-| Validation mismatches | Compare actual validation vs spec-defined constraints |
-| Response format mismatches | Compare actual API responses vs spec-defined schemas |
-
-#### 4. Test Gaps (Untested)
-Features that exist in both spec and code but lack test coverage.
-
-| Check | Method |
-|-------|--------|
-| Features without unit tests | Map features to test files |
-| Features without integration tests | Check for API/DB test coverage |
-| Acceptance criteria without E2E tests | Match Gherkin scenarios to test methods |
-| Error paths without tests | Check validation/error test coverage |
-
-### Step 4: Analyze and Classify Gaps
-
-```
-+--------------------------------------------------------------+
-|              GAP ANALYSIS - CLASSIFICATION                     |
-+--------------------------------------------------------------+
-| Classifying gaps by severity...                                |
-+--------------------------------------------------------------+
-```
-
-**Severity Levels:**
-
-| Severity | Criteria | Action Required |
-|----------|----------|----------------|
-| **Critical** | Core business feature missing or broken; security vulnerability; data integrity risk | Immediate fix required |
-| **Major** | Important feature gap; significant spec-code mismatch; missing critical tests | Fix in current sprint |
-| **Minor** | Documentation gap; non-critical mismatch; missing edge-case tests | Fix in next sprint |
-| **Info** | Style inconsistency; optional feature not implemented; enhancement opportunity | Backlog item |
-
-**Classification Rules:**
-- Spec without Code + P0 requirement = **Critical**
-- Spec without Code + P1 requirement = **Major**
-- Spec without Code + P2 requirement = **Minor**
-- Code without Spec + auth-related = **Major**
-- Code without Spec + CRUD = **Minor**
-- Spec-Code Mismatch + data integrity = **Critical**
-- Spec-Code Mismatch + UI/UX = **Minor**
-- Test Gap + business logic = **Major**
-- Test Gap + edge case = **Minor**
-
-### Step 5: Generate Report
-
-```
-+--------------------------------------------------------------+
-|              GAP ANALYSIS - REPORT                             |
-+--------------------------------------------------------------+
-| Generating gap analysis report...                              |
-+--------------------------------------------------------------+
-```
-
-**Generate a comprehensive report with:**
-1. Executive summary with coverage percentages
-2. Gap inventory grouped by category and severity
-3. Detailed findings with evidence (file paths, line references)
-4. Remediation suggestions for each gap
-5. Priority-ranked action list
-
-## Output Format
-
-```
-project-management/
-+-- analysis/
-    +-- gap-analysis.md          # Full gap analysis report
-```
-
-**Report Structure:**
-
-```
-+==============================================================+
-|                   GAP ANALYSIS REPORT                          |
-+==============================================================+
-| Project: {name}                                                |
-| Analysis Date: {date}                                          |
-| Scope: {scope}                                                 |
-+==============================================================+
-| Spec Coverage: 72%                                             |
-| Code Coverage: 85%                                             |
-| Test Coverage: 60%                                             |
-+==============================================================+
-| Gaps Found: 12                                                 |
-| +-- Critical: 3                                                |
-| +-- Major: 5                                                   |
-| +-- Minor: 4                                                   |
-+==============================================================+
-
-## 1. Spec without Code (Not Implemented)
-
-| ID     | Requirement                    | Priority | Severity |
-|--------|--------------------------------|----------|----------|
-| FR-005 | Password reset flow            | P0       | Critical |
-| FR-008 | Export orders to PDF           | P1       | Major    |
-| FR-012 | Email notification preferences | P2       | Minor    |
-
-## 2. Code without Spec (Undocumented)
-
-| Feature                  | Module  | Endpoint              | Severity |
-|--------------------------|---------|-----------------------|----------|
-| Admin dashboard stats    | Admin   | GET /api/admin/stats  | Major    |
-| Health check endpoint    | Infra   | GET /health           | Info     |
-| Debug toolbar            | Dev     | GET /_profiler         | Info     |
-
-## 3. Spec-Code Mismatch (Inconsistent)
-
-| Spec                     | Expected            | Actual               | Severity |
-|--------------------------|---------------------|----------------------|----------|
-| FR-003: Order status     | 5 status values     | 4 status values      | Major    |
-| US-007: User fields      | 10 fields           | 8 fields (2 missing) | Major    |
-| NFR-002: Response time   | < 200ms             | Not measured          | Minor    |
-
-## 4. Test Gaps (Untested)
-
-| Feature                  | Unit | Integration | E2E  | Severity |
-|--------------------------|------|-------------|------|----------|
-| Payment processing       | Yes  | No          | No   | Critical |
-| Order cancellation       | Yes  | Yes         | No   | Minor    |
-| User profile update      | No   | No          | No   | Major    |
-
-## Remediation Action List (Priority Ranked)
-
-| # | Action                                    | Severity | Effort |
-|---|-------------------------------------------|----------|--------|
-| 1 | Implement FR-005 (password reset)         | Critical | M      |
-| 2 | Add integration tests for payment         | Critical | S      |
-| 3 | Implement FR-003 missing order status     | Critical | S      |
-| 4 | Document admin dashboard stats endpoint   | Major    | S      |
-| 5 | Add missing User entity fields            | Major    | M      |
-| 6 | Add unit tests for user profile update    | Major    | S      |
-| 7 | Implement FR-008 (PDF export)             | Major    | L      |
-| 8 | Implement FR-012 (notification prefs)     | Minor    | M      |
-| 9 | Add E2E test for order cancellation       | Minor    | S      |
-| 10| Measure and enforce response time NFR     | Minor    | M      |
-
-Effort: S = Small (< 2h) | M = Medium (2-8h) | L = Large (> 8h)
-```
-
-## Example Session
-
-```
-User: /project:gap-analysis
-
-Claude: Starting gap analysis...
-
-[Loading Specs]
-Loaded PRD: 14 functional requirements, 6 NFRs
-Loaded user stories: 18 stories across 5 modules
-Loaded scan report: 23 endpoints, 8 entities, 60 tests
-
-[Scanning Code]
-Cataloging implemented features...
-Found 23 endpoints, 15 services, 8 entities
-
-[Comparing]
-Matching specifications to codebase...
-
-Spec Coverage: 72% (10/14 FRs implemented)
-Code Coverage: 85% (20/23 endpoints documented)
-Test Coverage: 60% (estimated from test-to-feature ratio)
-
-[Classification]
-Classified 12 gaps:
-- 3 Critical (2 missing P0 features, 1 untested payment flow)
-- 5 Major (3 mismatches, 1 undocumented feature, 1 test gap)
-- 4 Minor (2 P2 features, 1 edge-case test, 1 NFR measurement)
-
-Gap analysis report: project-management/analysis/gap-analysis.md
-
-Top 3 actions to address immediately:
-1. [CRITICAL] Implement password reset flow (FR-005)
-2. [CRITICAL] Add integration tests for payment processing
-3. [CRITICAL] Add missing order status value (FR-003)
-
-Would you like to:
-1. Create user stories for the missing features?
-2. Generate tasks for the remediation items?
-3. Focus on a specific gap category?
-```
-
-## Related Commands
-
-- `/project:scan` - Scan codebase (prerequisite if no scan report)
-- `/project:reverse-prd` - Generate PRD from codebase
-- `/project:reverse-stories` - Generate user stories from codebase
-- `/project:generate-backlog` - Create SCRUM backlog from PRD
-- `/project:generate-tech-spec` - Generate technical specification
+Run `/project:reverse gaps $ARGUMENTS`: read `.claude/commands/project/reverse.md` and follow it with these arguments.