@zigrivers/scaffold 2.1.0

package/pipeline/specification/review-api.md

@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+---
+name: review-api
+description: Review API contracts for completeness and consistency
+phase: "specification"
+order: 16
+dependencies: [api-contracts]
+outputs: [docs/reviews/review-api.md]
+conditional: "if-needed"
+knowledge-base: [review-methodology, review-api-contracts]
+---
+
+## Purpose
+Review API contracts targeting API-specific failure modes: operation coverage
+gaps, error contract incompleteness, auth/authz gaps, versioning inconsistencies,
+payload shape mismatches with domain entities, and idempotency gaps.
+
+## Inputs
+- docs/api-contracts.md (required) — contracts to review
+- docs/domain-models/ (required) — for operation coverage
+- docs/adrs/ (required) — for consistency checking
+- docs/system-architecture.md (required) — for interface coverage
+
+## Expected Outputs
+- docs/reviews/review-api.md — findings and resolution log
+- docs/api-contracts.md — updated with fixes
+
+## Quality Criteria
+- Operation coverage against domain model verified
+- Error contracts complete and consistent
+- Auth requirements specified for every endpoint
+- Versioning strategy consistent with ADRs
+- Idempotency documented for all mutating operations
+
+## Methodology Scaling
+- **deep**: Full multi-pass review targeting all API failure modes.
+- **mvp**: Operation coverage check only.
+- **custom:depth(1-5)**: Scale passes with depth.
+
+## Mode Detection
+Re-review mode if previous review exists.

package/pipeline/specification/review-database.md

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+---
+name: review-database
+description: Review database schema for correctness and completeness
+phase: "specification"
+order: 14
+dependencies: [database-schema]
+outputs: [docs/reviews/review-database.md]
+conditional: "if-needed"
+knowledge-base: [review-methodology, review-database-schema]
+---
+
+## Purpose
+Review database schema targeting schema-specific failure modes: entity coverage
+gaps, normalization trade-off issues, missing indexes, migration safety, and
+referential integrity vs. domain invariants.
+
+## Inputs
+- docs/database-schema.md (required) — schema to review
+- docs/domain-models/ (required) — for entity coverage
+- docs/system-architecture.md (required) — for query pattern coverage
+
+## Expected Outputs
+- docs/reviews/review-database.md — findings and resolution log
+- docs/database-schema.md — updated with fixes
+
+## Quality Criteria
+- Entity coverage verified
+- Normalization decisions justified
+- Index coverage for known query patterns verified
+- Migration safety assessed
+- Referential integrity matches domain invariants
+
+## Methodology Scaling
+- **deep**: Full multi-pass review targeting all schema failure modes.
+- **mvp**: Entity coverage check only.
+- **custom:depth(1-5)**: Scale passes with depth.
+
+## Mode Detection
+Re-review mode if previous review exists.

package/pipeline/specification/review-ux.md

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+---
+name: review-ux
+description: Review UX specification for completeness and usability
+phase: "specification"
+order: 18
+dependencies: [ux-spec]
+outputs: [docs/reviews/review-ux.md]
+conditional: "if-needed"
+knowledge-base: [review-methodology, review-ux-spec]
+---
+
+## Purpose
+Review UX specification targeting UX-specific failure modes: user journey gaps,
+accessibility issues, incomplete interaction states, design system inconsistencies,
+and missing error states.
+
+## Inputs
+- docs/ux-spec.md (required) — spec to review
+- docs/prd.md (required) — for journey coverage
+- docs/api-contracts.md (optional) — for data shape alignment
+
+## Expected Outputs
+- docs/reviews/review-ux.md — findings and resolution log
+- docs/ux-spec.md — updated with fixes
+
+## Quality Criteria
+- User journey coverage verified against PRD
+- Accessibility compliance checked
+- All interaction states covered
+- Design system consistency verified
+- Error states present for all failure-capable actions
+
+## Methodology Scaling
+- **deep**: Full multi-pass review. **mvp**: Journey coverage only.
+- **custom:depth(1-5)**: Scale passes with depth.
+
+## Mode Detection
+Re-review mode if previous review exists.

package/pipeline/specification/ux-spec.md

@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+---
+name: ux-spec
+description: Specify UI/UX design including design system
+phase: "specification"
+order: 17
+dependencies: [review-architecture]
+outputs: [docs/ux-spec.md]
+conditional: "if-needed"
+knowledge-base: [ux-specification]
+---
+
+## Purpose
+Define the user experience specification: user flows, wireframes, component
+hierarchy, interaction patterns, and design system (tokens, components, patterns).
+This is the visual and interaction blueprint for the frontend.
+
+## Inputs
+- docs/prd.md (required) — user requirements and personas
+- docs/system-architecture.md (required) — frontend architecture
+- docs/api-contracts.md (optional) — data shapes for UI components
+- docs/user-stories.md (required) — user journeys driving flow design
+
+## Expected Outputs
+- docs/ux-spec.md — UX specification with flows, components, design system
+
+## Quality Criteria
+- Every PRD user journey has a corresponding flow
+- Component hierarchy covers all UI states (loading, error, empty, populated)
+- Design system defines tokens (colors, spacing, typography) and base components
+- Accessibility requirements documented (WCAG level, keyboard nav, screen readers)
+- Responsive breakpoints defined with behavior per breakpoint
+- Error states documented for every user action that can fail
+
+## Methodology Scaling
+- **deep**: Full UX specification. Detailed wireframes described in prose.
+  Complete design system. Interaction state machines. Accessibility audit
+  checklist. Animation and transition specs.
+- **mvp**: Key user flows. Core component list. Basic design tokens.
+- **custom:depth(1-5)**: Depth 1-2: flows and components. Depth 3: add design
+  system. Depth 4-5: full specification with accessibility.
+
+## Mode Detection
+Update mode if spec exists.

package/pipeline/validation/critical-path-walkthrough.md

@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+---
+name: critical-path-walkthrough
+description: Walk critical user journeys end-to-end across all specs
+phase: "validation"
+order: 30
+dependencies: [review-tasks, review-security]
+outputs: [docs/validation/critical-path-walkthrough.md]
+conditional: null
+knowledge-base: [critical-path-analysis]
+---
+
+## Purpose
+Walk critical user journeys end-to-end across all specs. Trace the most
+important user flows from PRD through user stories, UX spec, API contracts,
+architecture components, database operations, and implementation tasks.
+Use story acceptance criteria as the definition of "correct behavior" when
+verifying completeness and consistency at every layer.
+
+## Inputs
+- All phase output artifacts (docs/prd.md, docs/domain-models/, docs/adrs/,
+  docs/system-architecture.md, etc.)
+
+## Expected Outputs
+- docs/validation/critical-path-walkthrough.md — findings report
+
+## Quality Criteria
+- Analysis is comprehensive (not superficial)
+- Findings are actionable (specific file, section, and issue)
+- Severity categorization (P0-P3)
+
+## Methodology Scaling
+- **deep**: Exhaustive analysis with all sub-checks.
+- **mvp**: High-level scan for blocking issues only.
+- **custom:depth(1-5)**: Scale thoroughness with depth.
+
+## Mode Detection
+Not applicable — validation always runs fresh against current artifacts.

package/pipeline/validation/cross-phase-consistency.md

@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+---
+name: cross-phase-consistency
+description: Audit naming, assumptions, data flows, interface contracts across all phases
+phase: "validation"
+order: 27
+dependencies: [review-tasks, review-security]
+outputs: [docs/validation/cross-phase-consistency.md]
+conditional: null
+knowledge-base: [cross-phase-consistency]
+---
+
+## Purpose
+Audit naming, assumptions, data flows, interface contracts across all phases.
+Ensure consistent terminology, compatible assumptions, and aligned interfaces
+between every pair of phase artifacts.
+
+## Inputs
+- All phase output artifacts (docs/prd.md, docs/domain-models/, docs/adrs/,
+  docs/system-architecture.md, etc.)
+
+## Expected Outputs
+- docs/validation/cross-phase-consistency.md — findings report
+
+## Quality Criteria
+- Analysis is comprehensive (not superficial)
+- Findings are actionable (specific file, section, and issue)
+- Severity categorization (P0-P3)
+
+## Methodology Scaling
+- **deep**: Exhaustive analysis with all sub-checks.
+- **mvp**: High-level scan for blocking issues only.
+- **custom:depth(1-5)**: Scale thoroughness with depth.
+
+## Mode Detection
+Not applicable — validation always runs fresh against current artifacts.

package/pipeline/validation/decision-completeness.md

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+---
+name: decision-completeness
+description: Verify all decisions are recorded, justified, non-contradictory
+phase: "validation"
+order: 29
+dependencies: [review-tasks, review-security]
+outputs: [docs/validation/decision-completeness.md]
+conditional: null
+knowledge-base: [decision-completeness]
+---
+
+## Purpose
+Verify all decisions are recorded, justified, non-contradictory. Ensure every
+significant architectural and technology decision has a corresponding ADR,
+that no two ADRs contradict each other, and that all decisions have clear
+rationale.
+
+## Inputs
+- All phase output artifacts (docs/prd.md, docs/domain-models/, docs/adrs/,
+  docs/system-architecture.md, etc.)
+
+## Expected Outputs
+- docs/validation/decision-completeness.md — findings report
+
+## Quality Criteria
+- Analysis is comprehensive (not superficial)
+- Findings are actionable (specific file, section, and issue)
+- Severity categorization (P0-P3)
+
+## Methodology Scaling
+- **deep**: Exhaustive analysis with all sub-checks.
+- **mvp**: High-level scan for blocking issues only.
+- **custom:depth(1-5)**: Scale thoroughness with depth.
+
+## Mode Detection
+Not applicable — validation always runs fresh against current artifacts.

package/pipeline/validation/dependency-graph-validation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+---
+name: dependency-graph-validation
+description: Verify task dependency graphs are acyclic, complete, correctly ordered
+phase: "validation"
+order: 32
+dependencies: [review-tasks, review-security]
+outputs: [docs/validation/dependency-graph-validation.md]
+conditional: null
+knowledge-base: [dependency-validation]
+---
+
+## Purpose
+Verify task dependency graphs are acyclic, complete, correctly ordered.
+Validate that the implementation task dependency graph forms a valid DAG,
+that all dependencies are satisfied before dependent tasks, and that no
+critical tasks are missing from the graph.
+
+## Inputs
+- All phase output artifacts (docs/prd.md, docs/domain-models/, docs/adrs/,
+  docs/system-architecture.md, etc.)
+
+## Expected Outputs
+- docs/validation/dependency-graph-validation.md — findings report
+
+## Quality Criteria
+- Analysis is comprehensive (not superficial)
+- Findings are actionable (specific file, section, and issue)
+- Severity categorization (P0-P3)
+
+## Methodology Scaling
+- **deep**: Exhaustive analysis with all sub-checks.
+- **mvp**: High-level scan for blocking issues only.
+- **custom:depth(1-5)**: Scale thoroughness with depth.
+
+## Mode Detection
+Not applicable — validation always runs fresh against current artifacts.

package/pipeline/validation/implementability-dry-run.md

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+---
+name: implementability-dry-run
+description: Dry-run specs as implementing agent, catching ambiguity
+phase: "validation"
+order: 31
+dependencies: [review-tasks, review-security]
+outputs: [docs/validation/implementability-dry-run.md]
+conditional: null
+knowledge-base: [implementability-review]
+---
+
+## Purpose
+Dry-run specs as implementing agent, catching ambiguity. Simulate what an
+AI agent would experience when picking up each implementation task: are the
+inputs clear, are the acceptance criteria testable, are there ambiguities
+that would force the agent to guess?
+
+## Inputs
+- All phase output artifacts (docs/prd.md, docs/domain-models/, docs/adrs/,
+  docs/system-architecture.md, etc.)
+
+## Expected Outputs
+- docs/validation/implementability-dry-run.md — findings report
+
+## Quality Criteria
+- Analysis is comprehensive (not superficial)
+- Findings are actionable (specific file, section, and issue)
+- Severity categorization (P0-P3)
+
+## Methodology Scaling
+- **deep**: Exhaustive analysis with all sub-checks.
+- **mvp**: High-level scan for blocking issues only.
+- **custom:depth(1-5)**: Scale thoroughness with depth.
+
+## Mode Detection
+Not applicable — validation always runs fresh against current artifacts.

package/pipeline/validation/scope-creep-check.md

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+---
+name: scope-creep-check
+description: Verify specs stay aligned to PRD boundaries
+phase: "validation"
+order: 33
+dependencies: [review-tasks, review-security]
+outputs: [docs/validation/scope-creep-check.md]
+conditional: null
+knowledge-base: [scope-management]
+---
+
+## Purpose
+Verify specs stay aligned to PRD boundaries. Check that user stories,
+architecture, implementation tasks, and other artifacts have not introduced
+features, components, or complexity beyond what the PRD requires. User stories
+should not introduce features not in the PRD — UX-level enhancements are
+allowed only via the innovation step with explicit user approval. Flag any
+scope expansion for explicit approval.
+
+## Inputs
+- All phase output artifacts (docs/prd.md, docs/domain-models/, docs/adrs/,
+  docs/system-architecture.md, etc.)
+
+## Expected Outputs
+- docs/validation/scope-creep-check.md — findings report
+
+## Quality Criteria
+- Analysis is comprehensive (not superficial)
+- Findings are actionable (specific file, section, and issue)
+- Severity categorization (P0-P3)
+
+## Methodology Scaling
+- **deep**: Exhaustive analysis with all sub-checks.
+- **mvp**: High-level scan for blocking issues only.
+- **custom:depth(1-5)**: Scale thoroughness with depth.
+
+## Mode Detection
+Not applicable — validation always runs fresh against current artifacts.

package/pipeline/validation/traceability-matrix.md

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+---
+name: traceability-matrix
+description: Build traceability from PRD requirements through architecture to implementation tasks
+phase: "validation"
+order: 28
+dependencies: [review-tasks, review-security]
+outputs: [docs/validation/traceability-matrix.md]
+conditional: null
+knowledge-base: [traceability]
+---
+
+## Purpose
+Build traceability from PRD requirements through user stories and architecture
+to implementation tasks. Verify the full chain: PRD → User Stories → Domain
+Model → Architecture → Tasks, with no orphans in either direction. Every PRD
+requirement must trace to at least one story, every story to at least one task.
+
+## Inputs
+- All phase output artifacts (docs/prd.md, docs/domain-models/, docs/adrs/,
+  docs/system-architecture.md, etc.)
+
+## Expected Outputs
+- docs/validation/traceability-matrix.md — findings report
+
+## Quality Criteria
+- Analysis is comprehensive (not superficial)
+- Findings are actionable (specific file, section, and issue)
+- Severity categorization (P0-P3)
+
+## Methodology Scaling
+- **deep**: Exhaustive analysis with all sub-checks.
+- **mvp**: High-level scan for blocking issues only.
+- **custom:depth(1-5)**: Scale thoroughness with depth.
+
+## Mode Detection
+Not applicable — validation always runs fresh against current artifacts.