agentvibes 2.13.6 → 2.13.8

package/.bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/instructions.md

@@ -1,703 +0,0 @@
-# PRD Workflow - Intent-Driven Product Planning
-
-<critical>The workflow execution engine is governed by: {project-root}/.bmad/core/tasks/workflow.xml</critical>
-<critical>You MUST have already loaded and processed: {installed_path}/workflow.yaml</critical>
-<critical>This workflow uses INTENT-DRIVEN PLANNING - adapt organically to product type and context</critical>
-<critical>Communicate all responses in {communication_language} and adapt deeply to {user_skill_level}</critical>
-<critical>Generate all documents in {document_output_language}</critical>
-<critical>LIVING DOCUMENT: Write to PRD.md continuously as you discover - never wait until the end</critical>
-<critical>GUIDING PRINCIPLE: Identify what makes this product special and ensure it's reflected throughout the PRD</critical>
-<critical>Input documents specified in workflow.yaml input_file_patterns - workflow engine handles fuzzy matching, whole vs sharded document discovery automatically</critical>
-<critical>⚠️ ABSOLUTELY NO TIME ESTIMATES - NEVER mention hours, days, weeks, months, or ANY time-based predictions. AI has fundamentally changed development speed - what once took teams weeks/months can now be done by one person in hours. DO NOT give ANY time estimates whatsoever.</critical>
-<critical>⚠️ CHECKPOINT PROTOCOL: After EVERY <template-output> tag, you MUST follow workflow.xml substep 2c: SAVE content to file immediately → SHOW checkpoint separator (━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━) → DISPLAY generated content → PRESENT options [a]Advanced Elicitation/[c]Continue/[p]Party-Mode/[y]YOLO → WAIT for user response. Never batch saves or skip checkpoints.</critical>
-
-<workflow>
-
-<step n="0" goal="Validate workflow readiness" tag="workflow-status">
-<action>Check if {status_file} exists</action>
-
-<action if="status file not found">Set standalone_mode = true</action>
-
-<check if="status file found">
-  <action>Load the FULL file: {status_file}</action>
-  <action>Parse workflow_status section</action>
-  <action>Check status of "prd" workflow</action>
-  <action>Get project_track from YAML metadata</action>
-  <action>Find first non-completed workflow (next expected workflow)</action>
-
-  <check if="project_track is Quick Flow">
-    <output>**Quick Flow Track - Redirecting**
-
-Quick Flow projects use tech-spec workflow for implementation-focused planning.
-PRD is for BMad Method and Enterprise Method tracks that need comprehensive requirements.</output>
-<action>Exit and suggest tech-spec workflow</action>
-</check>
-
-  <check if="prd status is file path (already completed)">
-    <output>⚠️ PRD already completed: {{prd status}}</output>
-    <ask>Re-running will overwrite the existing PRD. Continue? (y/n)</ask>
-    <check if="n">
-      <output>Exiting. Use workflow-status to see your next step.</output>
-      <action>Exit workflow</action>
-    </check>
-  </check>
-
-<action>Set standalone_mode = false</action>
-</check>
-</step>
-
-<step n="0.5" goal="Discover and load input documents">
-<invoke-protocol name="discover_inputs" />
-<note>After discovery, these content variables are available: {product_brief_content}, {research_content}, {document_project_content}</note>
-</step>
-
-<step n="1" goal="Discovery - Project, Domain, and Vision">
-<action>Welcome {user_name} and begin comprehensive discovery, and then start to GATHER ALL CONTEXT:
-1. Check workflow-status.yaml for project_context (if exists)
-2. Review loaded content: {product_brief_content}, {research_content}, {document_project_content} (auto-loaded in Step 0.5)
-3. Detect project type AND domain complexity using data-driven classification
-</action>
-
-<action>Load classification data files COMPLETELY:
-
-- Load {project_types_data} - contains project type definitions, detection signals, and requirements
-- Load {domain_complexity_data} - contains domain classifications, complexity levels, and special requirements
-
-Parse CSV structure:
-
-- project_types_data has columns: project_type, detection_signals, key_questions, required_sections, skip_sections, web_search_triggers, innovation_signals
-- domain_complexity_data has columns: domain, signals, complexity, key_concerns, required_knowledge, suggested_workflow, web_searches, special_sections
-
-Store these in memory for use throughout the workflow.
-</action>
-
-<action>Begin natural discovery conversation:
-"Tell me about what you want to build - what problem does it solve and for whom?"
-
-As the user describes their product, listen for signals to classify:
-
-1. PROJECT TYPE classification
-2. DOMAIN classification
-   </action>
-
-<action>DUAL DETECTION - Use CSV data to match:
-
-**Project Type Detection:**
-
-- Compare user's description against detection_signals from each row in project_types_data
-- Look for keyword matches (semicolon-separated in CSV)
-- Identify best matching project_type (api_backend, mobile_app, saas_b2b, developer_tool, cli_tool, web_app, game, desktop_app, iot_embedded, blockchain_web3)
-- If multiple matches, ask clarifying question
-- Store matched project_type value
-
-**Domain Detection:**
-
-- Compare user's description against signals from each row in domain_complexity_data
-- Match domain keywords (semicolon-separated in CSV)
-- Identify domain (healthcare, fintech, govtech, edtech, aerospace, automotive, scientific, legaltech, insuretech, energy, gaming, general)
-- Get complexity level from matched row (high/medium/low/redirect)
-- Store matched domain and complexity_level values
-
-**Special Cases from CSV:**
-
-- If project_type = "game" → Use project_types_data row to get redirect message
-- If domain = "gaming" → Use domain_complexity_data redirect action
-- If complexity = "high" → Note suggested_workflow and web_searches from domain row
-  </action>
-
-<action>SPECIAL ROUTING based on detected values:
-
-**If game detected (from project_types_data):**
-"Game development requires the BMGD module (BMad Game Development) which has specialized workflows for game design."
-Exit workflow and redirect to BMGD.
-
-**If complex domain detected (complexity = "high" from domain_complexity_data):**
-Extract suggested_workflow and web_searches from the matched domain row.
-Offer domain research options:
-A) Run {suggested_workflow} workflow (thorough) - from CSV
-B) Quick web search using {web_searches} queries - from CSV
-C) User provides their own domain context
-D) Continue with general knowledge
-
-Present the options and WAIT for user choice.
-</action>
-
-<action>IDENTIFY WHAT MAKES IT SPECIAL early in conversation:
-Ask questions like:
-
-- "What excites you most about this product?"
-- "What would make users love this?"
-- "What's the unique value or compelling moment?"
-- "What makes this different from alternatives?"
-
-Capture this differentiator - it becomes a thread connecting throughout the PRD.
-</action>
-
-<template-output>vision_alignment</template-output>
-<template-output>project_classification</template-output>
-<template-output>project_type</template-output>
-<template-output>domain_type</template-output>
-<template-output>complexity_level</template-output>
-<check if="complexity_level == 'high'">
-<template-output>domain_context_summary</template-output>
-</check>
-<template-output>product_differentiator</template-output>
-<template-output>product_brief_path</template-output>
-<template-output>domain_brief_path</template-output>
-<template-output>research_documents</template-output>
-</step>
-
-<step n="2" goal="Success Definition">
-<action>Define what winning looks like for THIS specific product
-
-INTENT: Meaningful success criteria, not generic metrics
-
-Adapt to context:
-
-- Consumer: User love, engagement, retention
-- B2B: ROI, efficiency, adoption
-- Developer tools: Developer experience, community
-- Regulated: Compliance, safety, validation
-
-Make it specific:
-
-- NOT: "10,000 users"
-- BUT: "100 power users who rely on it daily"
-
-- NOT: "99.9% uptime"
-- BUT: "Zero data loss during critical operations"
-
-Connect to what makes the product special:
-
-- "Success means users experience [key value moment] and achieve [desired outcome]"</action>
-
-<template-output>success_criteria</template-output>
-<check if="business focus">
-<template-output>business_metrics</template-output>
-</check>
-</step>
-
-<step n="3" goal="Scope Definition">
-<action>Smart scope negotiation - find the sweet spot
-
-The Scoping Game:
-
-1. "What must work for this to be useful?" → MVP
-2. "What makes it competitive?" → Growth
-3. "What's the dream version?" → Vision
-
-Challenge scope creep conversationally:
-
-- "Could that wait until after launch?"
-- "Is that essential for proving the concept?"
-
-For complex domains:
-
-- Include compliance minimums in MVP
-- Note regulatory gates between phases</action>
-
-<template-output>mvp_scope</template-output>
-<template-output>growth_features</template-output>
-<template-output>vision_features</template-output>
-</step>
-
-<step n="4" goal="Domain-Specific Exploration" optional="true">
-<critical>This step is DATA-DRIVEN using domain_complexity_data CSV loaded in Step 1</critical>
-<action>Execute only if complexity_level = "high" OR domain-brief exists</action>
-
-<action>Retrieve domain-specific configuration from CSV:
-
-1. Find the row in {domain_complexity_data} where domain column matches the detected {domain} from Step 1
-2. Extract these columns from the matched row:
-   - key_concerns (semicolon-separated list)
-   - required_knowledge (describes what expertise is needed)
-   - web_searches (suggested search queries if research needed)
-   - special_sections (semicolon-separated list of domain-specific sections to document)
-3. Parse the semicolon-separated values into lists
-4. Store for use in this step
-   </action>
-
-<action>Explore domain-specific requirements using key_concerns from CSV:
-
-Parse key_concerns into individual concern areas.
-For each concern:
-
-- Ask the user about their approach to this concern
-- Discuss implications for the product
-- Document requirements, constraints, and compliance needs
-
-Example for healthcare domain:
-If key_concerns = "FDA approval;Clinical validation;HIPAA compliance;Patient safety;Medical device classification;Liability"
-Then explore:
-
-- "Will this product require FDA approval? What classification?"
-- "How will you validate clinical accuracy and safety?"
-- "What HIPAA compliance measures are needed?"
-- "What patient safety protocols must be in place?"
-- "What liability considerations affect the design?"
-
-Synthesize domain requirements that will shape everything:
-
-- Regulatory requirements (from key_concerns)
-- Compliance needs (from key_concerns)
-- Industry standards (from required_knowledge)
-- Safety/risk factors (from key_concerns)
-- Required validations (from key_concerns)
-- Special expertise needed (from required_knowledge)
-
-These inform:
-
-- What features are mandatory
-- What NFRs are critical
-- How to sequence development
-- What validation is required
-  </action>
-
-<check if="complexity_level == 'high'">
-  <template-output>domain_considerations</template-output>
-
-<action>Generate domain-specific special sections if defined:
-Parse special_sections list from the matched CSV row.
-For each section name, generate corresponding template-output.
-
-Example mappings from CSV:
-
-- "clinical_requirements" → <template-output>clinical_requirements</template-output>
-- "regulatory_pathway" → <template-output>regulatory_pathway</template-output>
-- "safety_measures" → <template-output>safety_measures</template-output>
-- "compliance_matrix" → <template-output>compliance_matrix</template-output>
-  </action>
-  </check>
-  </step>
-
-<step n="5" goal="Innovation Discovery" optional="true">
-<critical>This step uses innovation_signals from project_types_data CSV loaded in Step 1</critical>
-
-<action>Check for innovation in this product:
-
-1. Retrieve innovation_signals from the project_type row in {project_types_data}
-2. Parse the semicolon-separated innovation signals specific to this project type
-3. Listen for these signals in user's description and throughout conversation
-
-Example for api_backend:
-innovation_signals = "API composition;New protocol"
-
-Example for mobile_app:
-innovation_signals = "Gesture innovation;AR/VR features"
-
-Example for saas_b2b:
-innovation_signals = "Workflow automation;AI agents"
-</action>
-
-<action>Listen for general innovation signals in conversation:
-
-User language indicators:
-
-- "Nothing like this exists"
-- "We're rethinking how [X] works"
-- "Combining [A] with [B] for the first time"
-- "Novel approach to [problem]"
-- "No one has done [concept] before"
-
-Project-type-specific signals (from CSV innovation_signals column):
-
-- Match user's descriptions against the innovation_signals for their project_type
-- If matches found, flag as innovation opportunity
-  </action>
-
-<action>If innovation detected (general OR project-type-specific):
-
-Explore deeply:
-
-- What makes it unique?
-- What assumption are you challenging?
-- How do we validate it works?
-- What's the fallback if it doesn't?
-- Has anyone tried this before?
-
-Use web_search_triggers from project_types_data CSV if relevant:
-<WebSearch if="novel">{web_search_triggers} {concept} innovations {date}</WebSearch>
-</action>
-
-<check if="innovation detected">
-  <template-output>innovation_patterns</template-output>
-  <template-output>validation_approach</template-output>
-</check>
-</step>
-
-<step n="6" goal="Project-Specific Deep Dive">
-<critical>This step is DATA-DRIVEN using project_types_data CSV loaded in Step 1</critical>
-
-<action>Retrieve project-specific configuration from CSV:
-
-1. Find the row in {project_types_data} where project_type column matches the detected {project_type} from Step 1
-2. Extract these columns from the matched row:
-   - key_questions (semicolon-separated list)
-   - required_sections (semicolon-separated list)
-   - skip_sections (semicolon-separated list)
-   - innovation_signals (semicolon-separated list)
-3. Parse the semicolon-separated values into lists
-4. Store for use in this step
-   </action>
-
-<action>Conduct guided discovery using key_questions from CSV:
-
-Parse key_questions into individual questions.
-For each question:
-
-- Ask the user naturally in conversational style
-- Listen for their response
-- Ask clarifying follow-ups as needed
-- Connect answers to product value proposition
-
-Example flow:
-If key_questions = "Endpoints needed?;Authentication method?;Data formats?"
-Then ask:
-
-- "What are the main endpoints your API needs to expose?"
-- "How will you handle authentication and authorization?"
-- "What data formats will you support for requests and responses?"
-
-Adapt questions to the user's context and skill level.
-</action>
-
-<action>Document project-type-specific requirements:
-
-Based on the user's answers to key_questions, synthesize comprehensive requirements for this project type.
-
-Cover the areas indicated by required_sections from CSV (semicolon-separated list).
-Skip areas indicated by skip_sections from CSV.
-
-For each required section:
-
-- Summarize what was discovered
-- Document specific requirements, constraints, and decisions
-- Connect to product differentiator when relevant
-
-Always connect requirements to product value:
-"How does [requirement] support the product's core value proposition?"
-</action>
-
-<template-output>project_type_requirements</template-output>
-
-<!-- Dynamic template outputs based on required_sections from CSV -->
-
-<action>Generate dynamic template outputs based on required_sections:
-
-Parse required_sections list from the matched CSV row.
-For each section name in the list, generate a corresponding template-output.
-
-Common mappings (adapt based on actual CSV values):
-
-- "endpoint_specs" or "endpoint_specification" → <template-output>endpoint_specification</template-output>
-- "auth_model" or "authentication_model" → <template-output>authentication_model</template-output>
-- "platform_reqs" or "platform_requirements" → <template-output>platform_requirements</template-output>
-- "device_permissions" or "device_features" → <template-output>device_features</template-output>
-- "tenant_model" → <template-output>tenant_model</template-output>
-- "rbac_matrix" or "permission_matrix" → <template-output>permission_matrix</template-output>
-
-Generate all outputs dynamically - do not hardcode specific project types.
-</action>
-
-<note>Example CSV row for api_backend:
-key_questions = "Endpoints needed?;Authentication method?;Data formats?;Rate limits?;Versioning?;SDK needed?"
-required_sections = "endpoint_specs;auth_model;data_schemas;error_codes;rate_limits;api_docs"
-skip_sections = "ux_ui;visual_design;user_journeys"
-
-The LLM should parse these and generate corresponding template outputs dynamically.
-
-**Template Variable Strategy:**
-The prd-template.md has common template variables defined (endpoint_specification, authentication_model, platform_requirements, device_features, tenant_model, permission_matrix).
-
-For required_sections that match these common variables:
-
-- Generate the specific template-output (e.g., endpoint_specs → endpoint_specification)
-- These will render in their own subsections in the template
-
-For required_sections that DON'T have matching template variables:
-
-- Include the content in the main project_type_requirements variable
-- This ensures all requirements are captured even if template doesn't have dedicated sections
-
-This hybrid approach balances template structure with CSV-driven flexibility.
-</note>
-</step>
-
-<step n="7" goal="UX Principles" if="project has UI or UX">
-  <action>Only if product has a UI
-
-Light touch on UX - not full design:
-
-- Visual personality
-- Key interaction patterns
-- Critical user flows
-
-"How should this feel to use?"
-"What's the vibe - professional, playful, minimal?"
-
-Connect UX to product vision:
-"The UI should reinforce [core value proposition] through [design approach]"</action>
-
-  <check if="has UI">
-    <template-output>ux_principles</template-output>
-    <template-output>key_interactions</template-output>
-  </check>
-</step>
-
-<step n="8" goal="Functional Requirements Synthesis">
-<critical>This section is THE CAPABILITY CONTRACT for all downstream work</critical>
-<critical>UX designers will ONLY design what's listed here</critical>
-<critical>Architects will ONLY support what's listed here</critical>
-<critical>Epic breakdown will ONLY implement what's listed here</critical>
-<critical>If a capability is missing from FRs, it will NOT exist in the final product</critical>
-
-<action>Before writing FRs, understand their PURPOSE and USAGE:
-
-**Purpose:**
-FRs define WHAT capabilities the product must have. They are the complete inventory
-of user-facing and system capabilities that deliver the product vision.
-
-**How They Will Be Used:**
-
-1. UX Designer reads FRs → designs interactions for each capability
-2. Architect reads FRs → designs systems to support each capability
-3. PM reads FRs → creates epics and stories to implement each capability
-4. Dev Agent reads assembled context → implements stories based on FRs
-
-**Critical Property - COMPLETENESS:**
-Every capability discussed in vision, scope, domain requirements, and project-specific
-sections MUST be represented as an FR. Missing FRs = missing capabilities.
-
-**Critical Property - ALTITUDE:**
-FRs state WHAT capability exists and WHO it serves, NOT HOW it's implemented or
-specific UI/UX details. Those come later from UX and Architecture.
-</action>
-
-<action>Transform everything discovered into comprehensive functional requirements:
-
-**Coverage - Pull from EVERYWHERE:**
-
-- Core features from MVP scope → FRs
-- Growth features → FRs (marked as post-MVP if needed)
-- Domain-mandated features → FRs
-- Project-type specific needs → FRs
-- Innovation requirements → FRs
-- Anti-patterns (explicitly NOT doing) → Note in FR section if needed
-
-**Organization - Group by CAPABILITY AREA:**
-Don't organize by technology or layer. Group by what users/system can DO:
-
-- ✅ "User Management" (not "Authentication System")
-- ✅ "Content Discovery" (not "Search Algorithm")
-- ✅ "Team Collaboration" (not "WebSocket Infrastructure")
-
-**Format - Flat, Numbered List:**
-Each FR is one clear capability statement:
-
-- FR#: [Actor] can [capability] [context/constraint if needed]
-- Number sequentially (FR1, FR2, FR3...)
-- Aim for 20-50 FRs for typical projects (fewer for simple, more for complex)
-
-**Altitude Check:**
-Each FR should answer "WHAT capability exists?" NOT "HOW is it implemented?"
-
-- ✅ "Users can customize appearance settings"
-- ❌ "Users can toggle light/dark theme with 3 font size options stored in LocalStorage"
-
-The second example belongs in Epic Breakdown, not PRD.
-</action>
-
-<example>
-**Well-written FRs at the correct altitude:**
-
-**User Account & Access:**
-
-- FR1: Users can create accounts with email or social authentication
-- FR2: Users can log in securely and maintain sessions across devices
-- FR3: Users can reset passwords via email verification
-- FR4: Users can update profile information and preferences
-- FR5: Administrators can manage user roles and permissions
-
-**Content Management:**
-
-- FR6: Users can create, edit, and delete content items
-- FR7: Users can organize content with tags and categories
-- FR8: Users can search content by keyword, tag, or date range
-- FR9: Users can export content in multiple formats
-
-**Data Ownership (local-first products):**
-
-- FR10: All user data stored locally on user's device
-- FR11: Users can export complete data at any time
-- FR12: Users can import previously exported data
-- FR13: System monitors storage usage and warns before limits
-
-**Collaboration:**
-
-- FR14: Users can share content with specific users or teams
-- FR15: Users can comment on shared content
-- FR16: Users can track content change history
-- FR17: Users receive notifications for relevant updates
-
-**Notice:**
-✅ Each FR is a testable capability
-✅ Each FR is implementation-agnostic (could be built many ways)
-✅ Each FR specifies WHO and WHAT, not HOW
-✅ No UI details, no performance numbers, no technology choices
-✅ Comprehensive coverage of capability areas
-</example>
-
-<action>Generate the complete FR list by systematically extracting capabilities:
-
-1. MVP scope → extract all capabilities → write as FRs
-2. Growth features → extract capabilities → write as FRs (note if post-MVP)
-3. Domain requirements → extract mandatory capabilities → write as FRs
-4. Project-type specifics → extract type-specific capabilities → write as FRs
-5. Innovation patterns → extract novel capabilities → write as FRs
-
-Organize FRs by logical capability groups (5-8 groups typically).
-Number sequentially across all groups (FR1, FR2... FR47).
-</action>
-
-<action>SELF-VALIDATION - Before finalizing, ask yourself:
-
-**Completeness Check:**
-
-1. "Did I cover EVERY capability mentioned in the MVP scope section?"
-2. "Did I include domain-specific requirements as FRs?"
-3. "Did I cover the project-type specific needs (API/Mobile/SaaS/etc)?"
-4. "Could a UX designer read ONLY the FRs and know what to design?"
-5. "Could an Architect read ONLY the FRs and know what to support?"
-6. "Are there any user actions or system behaviors we discussed that have no FR?"
-
-**Altitude Check:**
-
-1. "Am I stating capabilities (WHAT) or implementation (HOW)?"
-2. "Am I listing acceptance criteria or UI specifics?" (Remove if yes)
-3. "Could this FR be implemented 5 different ways?" (Good - means it's not prescriptive)
-
-**Quality Check:**
-
-1. "Is each FR clear enough that someone could test whether it exists?"
-2. "Is each FR independent (not dependent on reading other FRs to understand)?"
-3. "Did I avoid vague terms like 'good', 'fast', 'easy'?" (Use NFRs for quality attributes)
-
-COMPLETENESS GATE: Review your FR list against the entire PRD written so far and think hard - did you miss anything? Add it now before proceeding.
-</action>
-
-<template-output>functional_requirements_complete</template-output>
-</step>
-
-<step n="9" goal="Non-Functional Requirements Discovery">
-<action>Only document NFRs that matter for THIS product
-
-Performance: Only if user-facing impact
-Security: Only if handling sensitive data
-Scale: Only if growth expected
-Accessibility: Only if broad audience
-Integration: Only if connecting systems
-
-For each NFR:
-
-- Why it matters for THIS product
-- Specific measurable criteria
-- Domain-driven requirements
-
-Skip categories that don't apply!</action>
-
-<!-- Only output sections that were discussed -->
-<check if="performance matters">
-  <template-output>performance_requirements</template-output>
-</check>
-<check if="security matters">
-  <template-output>security_requirements</template-output>
-</check>
-<check if="scale matters">
-  <template-output>scalability_requirements</template-output>
-</check>
-<check if="accessibility matters">
-  <template-output>accessibility_requirements</template-output>
-</check>
-<check if="integration matters">
-  <template-output>integration_requirements</template-output>
-</check>
-</step>
-
-<step n="10" goal="Complete PRD and determine next steps">
-<action>Quick review of captured requirements:
-
-"We've captured:
-
-- {{fr_count}} functional requirements
-- {{nfr_count}} non-functional requirements
-- MVP scope defined
-  {{if domain_complexity == 'high'}}
-- Domain-specific requirements addressed
-  {{/if}}
-  {{if innovation_detected}}
-- Innovation patterns documented
-  {{/if}}
-
-Your PRD is complete!"
-</action>
-
-<template-output>prd_summary</template-output>
-<template-output>product_value_summary</template-output>
-
-<check if="standalone_mode != true">
-  <action>Load the FULL file: {status_file}</action>
-  <action>Update workflow_status["prd"] = "{default_output_file}"</action>
-  <action>Save file, preserving ALL comments and structure</action>
-
-<action>Check workflow path to determine next expected workflows:
-
-- Look for "create-epics-and-stories" as optional after PRD
-- Look for "create-design" as conditional (if_has_ui)
-- Look for "create-epics-and-stories-after-ux" as optional
-- Identify the required next phase workflow
-  </action>
-  </check>
-
-<output>**✅ PRD Complete, {user_name}!**
-
-**Created:** PRD.md with {{fr_count}} FRs and NFRs
-
-**Next Steps:**
-
-<check if="standalone_mode != true">
-Based on your {{project_track}} workflow path, you can:
-
-**Option A: Create Epic Breakdown Now** (Optional)
-`workflow create-epics-and-stories`
-
-- Creates basic epic structure from PRD
-- Can be enhanced later with UX/Architecture context
-
-<check if="UI_exists">
-**Option B: UX Design First** (Recommended if UI)
-   `workflow create-design`
-   - Design user experience and interactions
-   - Epic breakdown can incorporate UX details later
-</check>
-
-**Option C: Skip to Architecture**
-`workflow create-architecture`
-
-- Define technical decisions
-- Epic breakdown created after with full context
-
-**Recommendation:** {{if UI_exists}}Do UX Design first, then Architecture, then create epics with full context{{else}}Go straight to Architecture, then create epics{{/if}}
-</check>
-
-<check if="standalone_mode == true">
-**Typical next workflows:**
-1. `workflow create-design` - UX Design (if UI exists)
-2. `workflow create-architecture` - Technical architecture
-3. `workflow create-epics-and-stories` - Epic breakdown
-
-**Note:** Epics can be created at any point but have richer detail when created after UX/Architecture.
-</check>
-</output>
-</step>
-
-</workflow>