@windagency/valora 2.0.1

package/data/templates/PLAN_QUALITY_CHECKLIST.md

@@ -0,0 +1,167 @@
+# Plan Quality Checklist
+
+**Plan**: [PLAN-ARCH-[TASK-ID].md / PLAN-IMPL-[TASK-ID].md]
+**Reviewer**: [Name/Agent]
+**Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
+
+---
+
+## Instructions
+
+Complete this checklist before submitting a plan for approval. All items must be marked Y (Yes) or N (No). Plans with any N items should include remediation notes.
+
+---
+
+## 1. Dependencies Validation
+
+| #   | Criterion                                           | Status        | Evidence/Notes |
+| --- | --------------------------------------------------- | ------------- | -------------- |
+| 1.1 | All technical dependencies identified with versions | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 1.2 | All external service dependencies documented        | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 1.3 | Dependency availability confirmed                   | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 1.4 | No circular dependencies present                    | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 1.5 | Critical path dependencies marked                   | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+
+**Dependencies Score**: [ ] / 5 items passed
+
+---
+
+## 2. Risk Assessment
+
+| #   | Criterion                                      | Status        | Evidence/Notes |
+| --- | ---------------------------------------------- | ------------- | -------------- |
+| 2.1 | All high-impact risks identified               | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 2.2 | Each risk has mitigation strategy              | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 2.3 | Risk likelihood assessed                       | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 2.4 | Risk impact assessed                           | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 2.5 | Fallback strategies defined for critical risks | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+
+**Risk Score**: [ ] / 5 items passed
+
+---
+
+## 3. Step Atomicity
+
+| #   | Criterion                                               | Status        | Evidence/Notes |
+| --- | ------------------------------------------------------- | ------------- | -------------- |
+| 3.1 | Each step has single clear objective                    | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 3.2 | Each step includes specific file paths                  | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 3.3 | Each step has validation criteria                       | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 3.4 | Steps can be completed independently (where applicable) | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 3.5 | Step order respects dependencies                        | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+
+**Atomicity Score**: [ ] / 5 items passed
+
+---
+
+## 4. Testing Strategy
+
+| #   | Criterion                                 | Status        | Evidence/Notes |
+| --- | ----------------------------------------- | ------------- | -------------- |
+| 4.1 | Unit test coverage planned                | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 4.2 | Integration test coverage planned         | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 4.3 | E2E test coverage planned (if applicable) | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 4.4 | Test scenarios cover happy path           | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 4.5 | Test scenarios cover error cases          | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+
+**Testing Score**: [ ] / 5 items passed
+
+---
+
+## 5. Rollback Procedures
+
+| #   | Criterion                                              | Status        | Evidence/Notes |
+| --- | ------------------------------------------------------ | ------------- | -------------- |
+| 5.1 | Quick rollback procedure documented                    | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 5.2 | Database rollback procedure documented (if applicable) | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 5.3 | Rollback verification steps defined                    | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 5.4 | Rollback can be executed in < 15 minutes               | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 5.5 | No data loss scenarios identified                      | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+
+**Rollback Score**: [ ] / 5 items passed
+
+---
+
+## 6. Effort Estimation
+
+| #   | Criterion                                     | Status        | Evidence/Notes |
+| --- | --------------------------------------------- | ------------- | -------------- |
+| 6.1 | Each step has effort estimate                 | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 6.2 | Confidence level stated                       | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 6.3 | Assumptions documented                        | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 6.4 | Buffer for unknowns included                  | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 6.5 | Historical comparison provided (if available) | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+
+**Effort Score**: [ ] / 5 items passed
+
+---
+
+## 7. Architecture Alignment (Architecture Plans Only)
+
+| #   | Criterion                                    | Status        | Evidence/Notes |
+| --- | -------------------------------------------- | ------------- | -------------- |
+| 7.1 | Technology choices align with existing stack | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 7.2 | Component boundaries clearly defined         | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 7.3 | Integration points documented                | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 7.4 | Constraints and trade-offs explicit          | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+| 7.5 | Go/no-go criteria defined                    | [ ] Y / [ ] N |                |
+
+**Architecture Score**: [ ] / 5 items passed
+
+---
+
+## Summary
+
+| Section                   | Passed | Total  | Percentage |
+| ------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ---------- |
+| 1. Dependencies           |        | 5      |            |
+| 2. Risk Assessment        |        | 5      |            |
+| 3. Step Atomicity         |        | 5      |            |
+| 4. Testing Strategy       |        | 5      |            |
+| 5. Rollback Procedures    |        | 5      |            |
+| 6. Effort Estimation      |        | 5      |            |
+| 7. Architecture Alignment |        | 5      |            |
+| **TOTAL**                 |        | **35** |            |
+
+---
+
+## Quality Gate
+
+**Minimum passing threshold**: 80% (28/35 items)
+
+| Result                   | Criteria                                        |
+| ------------------------ | ----------------------------------------------- |
+| [ ] **PASS**             | >= 28 items passed AND no critical items failed |
+| [ ] **CONDITIONAL PASS** | >= 25 items passed, remediation plan provided   |
+| [ ] **FAIL**             | < 25 items passed OR critical items failed      |
+
+### Critical Items (Must Pass)
+
+The following items are critical and must be marked Y:
+
+- 2.2 - Each risk has mitigation strategy
+- 3.2 - Each step includes specific file paths
+- 5.1 - Quick rollback procedure documented
+
+---
+
+## Remediation Notes
+
+| Item # | Issue | Remediation Action | Owner | Due |
+| ------ | ----- | ------------------ | ----- | --- |
+|        |       |                    |       |     |
+|        |       |                    |       |     |
+
+---
+
+## Approval
+
+| Role     | Name | Decision                      | Date |
+| -------- | ---- | ----------------------------- | ---- |
+| Reviewer |      | [ ] Approved / [ ] Needs Work |      |
+
+**Next Step**:
+
+- If PASS: Proceed to implementation
+- If CONDITIONAL PASS: Address remediation items, then proceed
+- If FAIL: Revise plan and re-submit for review

package/data/templates/PRD.md

@@ -0,0 +1,110 @@
+# Product Requirements Document (PRD)
+
+## 1. Document Info
+
+- **Project Title**: [Concise title]
+- **Version**: 1.0.0
+- **Author**: [PM Name]
+- **Created**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
+- **Last Updated**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
+- **Stakeholders**: [Stakeholders list, comma-separated]
+- **Approvers**: [Approvers list, comma-separated]
+
+## 2. Overview
+
+**Executive Summary**:  
+[Brief description of the product’s mission and business impact.]
+
+**Problem Statement**:  
+[Brief description of the user problem.]
+
+**Target Users / Personas**:  
+[Brief description of key users personas and journeys (Who, what, why).]
+
+**Success Metrics**:
+
+- Metric 1: [e.g., % adoption]
+- Metric 2: [e.g., revenue impact]
+- Metric 3: [e.g., user satisfaction]
+
+## 3. Background & Context
+
+- **Business Context**: [Strategic rationale, market need, competitive analysis]
+- **Project History**: [Prior decisions, iterations, lessons learned]
+- **Constraints & Assumptions**: [Technical, regulatory, or resource limits]
+
+## 4. Product Overview
+
+[Explicit scope boundaries]
+
+- **Core Use Cases**:
+  1. [Use Case 1]
+  2. [Use Case 2]
+- **Key Features**:
+  - Feature 1: [High-level description]
+  - Feature 2: [High-level description]
+
+## 5. Functional Requirements
+
+| ID     | Requirement Description   | Priority                           | Notes / Dependencies |
+| ------ | ------------------------- | ---------------------------------- | -------------------- |
+| FRXXXX | [Requirement description] | ⏫ Urgent/🔼 High/🔽 Medium/⏬ Low | [Optional notes]     |
+| FRXXXX | [Requirement description] | ⏫ Urgent/🔼 High/🔽 Medium/⏬ Low | [Optional notes]     |
+
+## 6. Non-Functional Requirements
+
+| ID      | Requirement Description                    | Priority                           | Notes / Dependencies |
+| ------- | ------------------------------------------ | ---------------------------------- | -------------------- |
+| NFRXXXX | [Performance, scalability, security, etc.] | ⏫ Urgent/🔼 High/🔽 Medium/⏬ Low | [Optional notes]     |
+| NFRXXXX | [Requirement description]                  | ⏫ Urgent/🔼 High/🔽 Medium/⏬ Low | [Optional notes]     |
+
+## 7. Epics & User Stories Breakdown (First Iteration)
+
+### Epic 1: [Epic Title]
+
+**Epic ID**: EPXXXX  
+**Description**: [High-level summary]
+
+**User Stories**:
+
+| ID     | User Story Description          | Acceptance Criteria                  | Priority                           |
+| ------ | ------------------------------- | ------------------------------------ | ---------------------------------- |
+| USXXXX | [As a user, I want … so that …] | [Clear, testable, atomic conditions] | ⏫ Urgent/🔼 High/🔽 Medium/⏬ Low |
+| USXXXX | [As a user, I want … so that …] | [Clear, testable, atomic conditions] | ⏫ Urgent/🔼 High/🔽 Medium/⏬ Low |
+
+### Epic 2: [Epic Title]
+
+[Repeat structure]
+
+## 8. Dependencies & Integration Points
+
+| Dependency / System                 | Description                         | Impact / Notes   |
+| ----------------------------------- | ----------------------------------- | ---------------- |
+| [Technical/Organizational/External] | [Integration or dependency details] | [Optional notes] |
+
+## 9. Acceptance, Success Success Metrics & KPIs
+
+- **Functional**: [List measurable conditions for feature acceptance]
+- **Non-Functional**: [Performance, reliability, security standards]
+- **Business**: [Key business outcomes and KPIs]
+
+## 10. Risks & Mitigation
+
+| Risk               | Probability              | Impact                               | Mitigation Strategy |
+| ------------------ | ------------------------ | ------------------------------------ | ------------------- |
+| [Risk description] | 🟢 Low/🟠 Medium/🔴 High | 🟢 Low/🟡 Medium/🟠 High/🔴 Critical | [Mitigation steps]  |
+
+## 11. Timeline & Milestones
+
+| Milestone               | Target Date  |
+| ----------------------- | ------------ |
+| [Milestone description] | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+
+## 12. Notes & Alternative Approaches
+
+- [Include reasoning for design decisions]
+- [List alternatives considered with confidence levels (%)]
+
+## 13. References
+
+- [Link to design mockups, technical docs, user research, market analysis, etc.]

package/data/templates/PULL_REQUEST.md

@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+## Description
+
+[Context and objective of the change]
+
+## Changes
+
+[List of main changes made and xpected impacts]
+
+## Testing
+
+[List of testing steps]
+
+## Validation
+
+- [ ] Linting passed
+- [ ] All tests passed
+- [ ] terraform plan passed
+- [ ] Security checks passed
+- [ ] Compliance checks passed
+- [ ] Accessibility checks passed (if applicable)
+- [ ] Healthcheck endpoints tested (if applicable)
+- [ ] Documentation updated
+- [ ] CHANGELOG.md updated
+
+## Reviewer checklist
+
+- [ ] Code readable and compliant
+- [ ] CI/CD OK
+- [ ] No secrets
+- [ ] Documentation updated

package/data/templates/REVIEW_CODE_CHECKLIST.md

@@ -0,0 +1,227 @@
+# Code Review Checklist
+
+**Scope**: [File paths or commit range]
+**Reviewer**: [Agent/Human]
+**Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
+
+---
+
+## Instructions
+
+Quick binary validation for code review. Mark each item Y (Yes), N (No), or N/A (Not Applicable). Target completion: ~3 minutes.
+
+**Pre-review automated checks** (run before manual review):
+
+```bash
+pnpm tsc:check && pnpm lint && pnpm test:quick
+```
+
+---
+
+## 1. Automated Quality Checks (CRITICAL)
+
+| #   | Check                       | Status        | Command               |
+| --- | --------------------------- | ------------- | --------------------- |
+| 1.1 | TypeScript check passes     | [ ] Y / [ ] N | `pnpm tsc:check`      |
+| 1.2 | Linting passes              | [ ] Y / [ ] N | `pnpm lint`           |
+| 1.3 | Formatting correct          | [ ] Y / [ ] N | `pnpm format --check` |
+| 1.4 | Tests passing               | [ ] Y / [ ] N | `pnpm test:quick`     |
+| 1.5 | No security vulnerabilities | [ ] Y / [ ] N | `pnpm audit`          |
+
+**Score**: [ ] / 5 items passed
+
+**Auto-gate**: If any item is N, stop review and return to implementation.
+
+---
+
+## 2. Security Review (CRITICAL)
+
+| #   | Check                             | Status                  | Notes |
+| --- | --------------------------------- | ----------------------- | ----- |
+| 2.1 | No hard-coded secrets/credentials | [ ] Y / [ ] N           |       |
+| 2.2 | User input validated              | [ ] Y / [ ] N / [ ] N/A |       |
+| 2.3 | SQL/injection prevention          | [ ] Y / [ ] N / [ ] N/A |       |
+| 2.4 | XSS prevention (output escaped)   | [ ] Y / [ ] N / [ ] N/A |       |
+| 2.5 | Auth/authz on protected routes    | [ ] Y / [ ] N / [ ] N/A |       |
+
+**Score**: [ ] / [ ] applicable items passed
+
+---
+
+## 3. Architecture Compliance
+
+| #   | Check                                  | Status                  | Notes |
+| --- | -------------------------------------- | ----------------------- | ----- |
+| 3.1 | Follows existing patterns              | [ ] Y / [ ] N           |       |
+| 3.2 | No circular dependencies               | [ ] Y / [ ] N           |       |
+| 3.3 | Layer boundaries respected             | [ ] Y / [ ] N           |       |
+| 3.4 | Adapter pattern for third-party        | [ ] Y / [ ] N / [ ] N/A |       |
+| 3.5 | Single responsibility (no God classes) | [ ] Y / [ ] N           |       |
+
+**Score**: [ ] / [ ] applicable items passed
+
+---
+
+## 4. Code Quality
+
+| #   | Check                                 | Status        | Notes |
+| --- | ------------------------------------- | ------------- | ----- |
+| 4.1 | No `any` without justification        | [ ] Y / [ ] N |       |
+| 4.2 | No `@ts-ignore` without justification | [ ] Y / [ ] N |       |
+| 4.3 | Meaningful variable/function names    | [ ] Y / [ ] N |       |
+| 4.4 | No magic numbers (use constants)      | [ ] Y / [ ] N |       |
+| 4.5 | Functions under 50 lines              | [ ] Y / [ ] N |       |
+
+**Score**: [ ] / 5 items passed
+
+---
+
+## 5. Error Handling
+
+| #   | Check                              | Status        | Notes |
+| --- | ---------------------------------- | ------------- | ----- |
+| 5.1 | Errors properly caught and handled | [ ] Y / [ ] N |       |
+| 5.2 | No swallowed errors (empty catch)  | [ ] Y / [ ] N |       |
+| 5.3 | Meaningful error messages          | [ ] Y / [ ] N |       |
+| 5.4 | Errors logged with context         | [ ] Y / [ ] N |       |
+| 5.5 | Async errors handled (try/catch)   | [ ] Y / [ ] N |       |
+
+**Score**: [ ] / 5 items passed
+
+---
+
+## 6. Performance
+
+| #   | Check                                                | Status                  | Notes |
+| --- | ---------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------- | ----- |
+| 6.1 | No N+1 query problems                                | [ ] Y / [ ] N / [ ] N/A |       |
+| 6.2 | No memory leaks (cleanup done)                       | [ ] Y / [ ] N           |       |
+| 6.3 | Appropriate caching used                             | [ ] Y / [ ] N / [ ] N/A |       |
+| 6.4 | No blocking operations in hot paths                  | [ ] Y / [ ] N           |       |
+| 6.5 | Efficient algorithms (no O(n^2) where O(n) possible) | [ ] Y / [ ] N           |       |
+
+**Score**: [ ] / [ ] applicable items passed
+
+---
+
+## 7. Testing
+
+| #   | Check                         | Status        | Notes |
+| --- | ----------------------------- | ------------- | ----- |
+| 7.1 | Unit tests for new functions  | [ ] Y / [ ] N |       |
+| 7.2 | Edge cases covered            | [ ] Y / [ ] N |       |
+| 7.3 | Error cases tested            | [ ] Y / [ ] N |       |
+| 7.4 | No skipped tests (.skip)      | [ ] Y / [ ] N |       |
+| 7.5 | Coverage threshold met (>60%) | [ ] Y / [ ] N |       |
+
+**Score**: [ ] / 5 items passed
+
+---
+
+## 8. Maintainability
+
+| #   | Check                      | Status                  | Notes |
+| --- | -------------------------- | ----------------------- | ----- |
+| 8.1 | Code is self-documenting   | [ ] Y / [ ] N           |       |
+| 8.2 | Complex logic has comments | [ ] Y / [ ] N / [ ] N/A |       |
+| 8.3 | No duplicate code          | [ ] Y / [ ] N           |       |
+| 8.4 | Props drilling < 3 levels  | [ ] Y / [ ] N / [ ] N/A |       |
+| 8.5 | Dependencies injected      | [ ] Y / [ ] N / [ ] N/A |       |
+
+**Score**: [ ] / [ ] applicable items passed
+
+---
+
+## Summary
+
+| Section             | Passed | Total | Critical |
+| ------------------- | ------ | ----- | -------- |
+| 1. Automated Checks |        | 5     | Yes      |
+| 2. Security         |        |       | Yes      |
+| 3. Architecture     |        |       | No       |
+| 4. Code Quality     |        | 5     | No       |
+| 5. Error Handling   |        | 5     | No       |
+| 6. Performance      |        |       | No       |
+| 7. Testing          |        | 5     | No       |
+| 8. Maintainability  |        |       | No       |
+| **TOTAL**           |        |       |          |
+
+---
+
+## Verdict
+
+**Minimum threshold**: 80% overall, critical sections 100%
+
+| Result                  | Criteria                                    |
+| ----------------------- | ------------------------------------------- |
+| [ ] **APPROVE**         | Critical sections 100% AND overall >= 80%   |
+| [ ] **REQUEST_CHANGES** | Overall >= 60% but critical issues or < 80% |
+| [ ] **BLOCK**           | Critical section failures OR overall < 60%  |
+
+---
+
+## Pre-Review Automation Script
+
+Run this before starting the manual review:
+
+```bash
+#!/bin/bash
+# Quick automated review checks
+
+echo "=== Running Automated Code Review Checks ==="
+
+echo "1. TypeScript check..."
+pnpm tsc:check || echo "FAIL: TypeScript errors"
+
+echo "2. Linting..."
+pnpm lint || echo "FAIL: Linting errors"
+
+echo "3. Formatting..."
+pnpm format --check || echo "FAIL: Formatting issues"
+
+echo "4. Quick tests..."
+pnpm test:quick || echo "FAIL: Test failures"
+
+echo "5. Security audit..."
+pnpm audit --audit-level=high || echo "WARN: Security vulnerabilities"
+
+echo "=== Automated checks complete ==="
+```
+
+---
+
+## Issues Found
+
+| #   | Severity | File:Line | Issue | Recommendation |
+| --- | -------- | --------- | ----- | -------------- |
+| 1   |          |           |       |                |
+| 2   |          |           |       |                |
+| 3   |          |           |       |                |
+
+---
+
+## Positive Observations
+
+- [ ] Clean code structure
+- [ ] Good test coverage
+- [ ] Follows established patterns
+- [ ] Well-documented
+- [ ] Efficient implementation
+
+---
+
+## Review Decision
+
+| Decision                | Rationale                                                 |
+| ----------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------- |
+| [ ] **APPROVE**         | Code meets quality standards, ready for functional review |
+| [ ] **REQUEST_CHANGES** | Issues found that need addressing                         |
+| [ ] **BLOCK**           | Critical issues prevent merge                             |
+
+---
+
+## Next Step
+
+- If APPROVE: `/review-functional` for feature validation
+- If REQUEST_CHANGES: `/implement` to address feedback
+- If BLOCK: Escalate or revisit `/plan`