bmad-method 4.27.5 → 5.0.0

package/bmad-core/data/brainstorming-techniques.md

@@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
-# Brainstorming Techniques Data
-
-## Creative Expansion
-
-1. **What If Scenarios**: Ask one provocative question, get their response, then ask another
-2. **Analogical Thinking**: Give one example analogy, ask them to find 2-3 more
-3. **Reversal/Inversion**: Pose the reverse question, let them work through it
-4. **First Principles Thinking**: Ask "What are the fundamentals?" and guide them to break it down
-
-## Structured Frameworks
-
-5. **SCAMPER Method**: Go through one letter at a time, wait for their ideas before moving to next
-6. **Six Thinking Hats**: Present one hat, ask for their thoughts, then move to next hat
-7. **Mind Mapping**: Start with central concept, ask them to suggest branches
-
-## Collaborative Techniques
-
-8. **"Yes, And..." Building**: They give idea, you "yes and" it, they "yes and" back - alternate
-9. **Brainwriting/Round Robin**: They suggest idea, you build on it, ask them to build on yours
-10. **Random Stimulation**: Give one random prompt/word, ask them to make connections
-
-## Deep Exploration
-
-11. **Five Whys**: Ask "why" and wait for their answer before asking next "why"
-12. **Morphological Analysis**: Ask them to list parameters first, then explore combinations together
-13. **Provocation Technique (PO)**: Give one provocative statement, ask them to extract useful ideas
-
-## Advanced Techniques
-
-14. **Forced Relationships**: Connect two unrelated concepts and ask them to find the bridge
-15. **Assumption Reversal**: Challenge their core assumptions and ask them to build from there
-16. **Role Playing**: Ask them to brainstorm from different stakeholder perspectives
-17. **Time Shifting**: "How would you solve this in 1995? 2030?"
-18. **Resource Constraints**: "What if you had only $10 and 1 hour?"
-19. **Metaphor Mapping**: Use extended metaphors to explore solutions
-20. **Question Storming**: Generate questions instead of answers first

package/bmad-core/data/elicitation-methods.md

@@ -1,134 +0,0 @@
-# Elicitation Methods Data
-
-## Core Reflective Methods
-
-**Expand or Contract for Audience**
-- Ask whether to 'expand' (add detail, elaborate) or 'contract' (simplify, clarify)
-- Identify specific target audience if relevant
-- Tailor content complexity and depth accordingly
-
-**Explain Reasoning (CoT Step-by-Step)**
-- Walk through the step-by-step thinking process
-- Reveal underlying assumptions and decision points
-- Show how conclusions were reached from current role's perspective
-
-**Critique and Refine**
-- Review output for flaws, inconsistencies, or improvement areas
-- Identify specific weaknesses from role's expertise
-- Suggest refined version reflecting domain knowledge
-
-## Structural Analysis Methods
-
-**Analyze Logical Flow and Dependencies**
-- Examine content structure for logical progression
-- Check internal consistency and coherence
-- Identify and validate dependencies between elements
-- Confirm effective ordering and sequencing
-
-**Assess Alignment with Overall Goals**
-- Evaluate content contribution to stated objectives
-- Identify any misalignments or gaps
-- Interpret alignment from specific role's perspective
-- Suggest adjustments to better serve goals
-
-## Risk and Challenge Methods
-
-**Identify Potential Risks and Unforeseen Issues**
-- Brainstorm potential risks from role's expertise
-- Identify overlooked edge cases or scenarios
-- Anticipate unintended consequences
-- Highlight implementation challenges
-
-**Challenge from Critical Perspective**
-- Adopt critical stance on current content
-- Play devil's advocate from specified viewpoint
-- Argue against proposal highlighting weaknesses
-- Apply YAGNI principles when appropriate (scope trimming)
-
-## Creative Exploration Methods
-
-**Tree of Thoughts Deep Dive**
-- Break problem into discrete "thoughts" or intermediate steps
-- Explore multiple reasoning paths simultaneously
-- Use self-evaluation to classify each path as "sure", "likely", or "impossible"
-- Apply search algorithms (BFS/DFS) to find optimal solution paths
-
-**Hindsight is 20/20: The 'If Only...' Reflection**
-- Imagine retrospective scenario based on current content
-- Identify the one "if only we had known/done X..." insight
-- Describe imagined consequences humorously or dramatically
-- Extract actionable learnings for current context
-
-## Multi-Persona Collaboration Methods
-
-**Agile Team Perspective Shift**
-- Rotate through different Scrum team member viewpoints
-- Product Owner: Focus on user value and business impact
-- Scrum Master: Examine process flow and team dynamics
-- Developer: Assess technical implementation and complexity
-- QA: Identify testing scenarios and quality concerns
-
-**Stakeholder Round Table**
-- Convene virtual meeting with multiple personas
-- Each persona contributes unique perspective on content
-- Identify conflicts and synergies between viewpoints
-- Synthesize insights into actionable recommendations
-
-**Meta-Prompting Analysis**
-- Step back to analyze the structure and logic of current approach
-- Question the format and methodology being used
-- Suggest alternative frameworks or mental models
-- Optimize the elicitation process itself
-
-## Advanced 2025 Techniques
-
-**Self-Consistency Validation**
-- Generate multiple reasoning paths for same problem
-- Compare consistency across different approaches
-- Identify most reliable and robust solution
-- Highlight areas where approaches diverge and why
-
-**ReWOO (Reasoning Without Observation)**
-- Separate parametric reasoning from tool-based actions
-- Create reasoning plan without external dependencies
-- Identify what can be solved through pure reasoning
-- Optimize for efficiency and reduced token usage
-
-**Persona-Pattern Hybrid**
-- Combine specific role expertise with elicitation pattern
-- Architect + Risk Analysis: Deep technical risk assessment
-- UX Expert + User Journey: End-to-end experience critique
-- PM + Stakeholder Analysis: Multi-perspective impact review
-
-**Emergent Collaboration Discovery**
-- Allow multiple perspectives to naturally emerge
-- Identify unexpected insights from persona interactions
-- Explore novel combinations of viewpoints
-- Capture serendipitous discoveries from multi-agent thinking
-
-## Game-Based Elicitation Methods
-
-**Red Team vs Blue Team**
-- Red Team: Attack the proposal, find vulnerabilities
-- Blue Team: Defend and strengthen the approach
-- Competitive analysis reveals blind spots
-- Results in more robust, battle-tested solutions
-
-**Innovation Tournament**
-- Pit multiple alternative approaches against each other
-- Score each approach across different criteria
-- Crowd-source evaluation from different personas
-- Identify winning combination of features
-
-**Escape Room Challenge**
-- Present content as constraints to work within
-- Find creative solutions within tight limitations
-- Identify minimum viable approach
-- Discover innovative workarounds and optimizations
-
-## Process Control
-
-**Proceed / No Further Actions**
-- Acknowledge choice to finalize current work
-- Accept output as-is or move to next step
-- Prepare to continue without additional elicitation

package/bmad-core/tasks/advanced-elicitation.md

@@ -1,117 +0,0 @@
-# Advanced Elicitation Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-- Provide optional reflective and brainstorming actions to enhance content quality
-- Enable deeper exploration of ideas through structured elicitation techniques
-- Support iterative refinement through multiple analytical perspectives
-- Usable during template-driven document creation or any chat conversation
-
-## Usage Scenarios
-
-### Scenario 1: Template Document Creation
-
-After outputting a section during document creation:
-
-1. **Section Review**: Ask user to review the drafted section
-2. **Offer Elicitation**: Present 9 carefully selected elicitation methods
-3. **Simple Selection**: User types a number (0-8) to engage method, or 9 to proceed
-4. **Execute & Loop**: Apply selected method, then re-offer choices until user proceeds
-
-### Scenario 2: General Chat Elicitation
-
-User can request advanced elicitation on any agent output:
-
-- User says "do advanced elicitation" or similar
-- Agent selects 9 relevant methods for the context
-- Same simple 0-9 selection process
-
-## Task Instructions
-
-### 1. Intelligent Method Selection
-
-**Context Analysis**: Before presenting options, analyze:
-
-- **Content Type**: Technical specs, user stories, architecture, requirements, etc.
-- **Complexity Level**: Simple, moderate, or complex content
-- **Stakeholder Needs**: Who will use this information
-- **Risk Level**: High-impact decisions vs routine items
-- **Creative Potential**: Opportunities for innovation or alternatives
-
-**Method Selection Strategy**:
-
-1. **Always Include Core Methods** (choose 3-4):
-   - Expand or Contract for Audience
-   - Critique and Refine
-   - Identify Potential Risks
-   - Assess Alignment with Goals
-
-2. **Context-Specific Methods** (choose 4-5):
-   - **Technical Content**: Tree of Thoughts, ReWOO, Meta-Prompting
-   - **User-Facing Content**: Agile Team Perspective, Stakeholder Roundtable
-   - **Creative Content**: Innovation Tournament, Escape Room Challenge
-   - **Strategic Content**: Red Team vs Blue Team, Hindsight Reflection
-
-3. **Always Include**: "Proceed / No Further Actions" as option 9
-
-### 2. Section Context and Review
-
-When invoked after outputting a section:
-
-1. **Provide Context Summary**: Give a brief 1-2 sentence summary of what the user should look for in the section just presented
-
-2. **Explain Visual Elements**: If the section contains diagrams, explain them briefly before offering elicitation options
-
-3. **Clarify Scope Options**: If the section contains multiple distinct items, inform the user they can apply elicitation actions to:
-   - The entire section as a whole
-   - Individual items within the section (specify which item when selecting an action)
-
-### 3. Present Elicitation Options
-
-**Review Request Process:**
-
-- Ask the user to review the drafted section
-- In the SAME message, inform them they can suggest direct changes OR select an elicitation method
-- Present 9 intelligently selected methods (0-8) plus "Proceed" (9)
-- Keep descriptions short - just the method name
-- Await simple numeric selection
-
-**Action List Presentation Format:**
-
-```text
-**Advanced Elicitation Options**
-Choose a number (0-8) or 9 to proceed:
-
-0. [Method Name]
-1. [Method Name]
-2. [Method Name]
-3. [Method Name]
-4. [Method Name]
-5. [Method Name]
-6. [Method Name]
-7. [Method Name]
-8. [Method Name]
-9. Proceed / No Further Actions
-```
-
-**Response Handling:**
-
-- **Numbers 0-8**: Execute the selected method, then re-offer the choice
-- **Number 9**: Proceed to next section or continue conversation
-- **Direct Feedback**: Apply user's suggested changes and continue
-
-### 4. Method Execution Framework
-
-**Execution Process:**
-
-1. **Retrieve Method**: Access the specific elicitation method from the elicitation-methods data file
-2. **Apply Context**: Execute the method from your current role's perspective
-3. **Provide Results**: Deliver insights, critiques, or alternatives relevant to the content
-4. **Re-offer Choice**: Present the same 9 options again until user selects 9 or gives direct feedback
-
-**Execution Guidelines:**
-
-- **Be Concise**: Focus on actionable insights, not lengthy explanations
-- **Stay Relevant**: Tie all elicitation back to the specific content being analyzed
-- **Identify Personas**: For multi-persona methods, clearly identify which viewpoint is speaking
-- **Maintain Flow**: Keep the process moving efficiently

package/bmad-core/tasks/create-brownfield-story.md

@@ -1,355 +0,0 @@
-# Create Brownfield Story Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-Create detailed, implementation-ready stories for brownfield projects where traditional sharded PRD/architecture documents may not exist. This task bridges the gap between various documentation formats (document-project output, brownfield PRDs, epics, or user documentation) and executable stories for the Dev agent.
-
-## When to Use This Task
-
-**Use this task when:**
-
-- Working on brownfield projects with non-standard documentation
-- Stories need to be created from document-project output
-- Working from brownfield epics without full PRD/architecture
-- Existing project documentation doesn't follow BMad v4+ structure
-- Need to gather additional context from user during story creation
-
-**Use create-next-story when:**
-
-- Working with properly sharded PRD and v4 architecture documents
-- Following standard greenfield or well-documented brownfield workflow
-- All technical context is available in structured format
-
-## Task Execution Instructions
-
-### 0. Check Workflow Plan and Documentation Context
-
-[[LLM: Check for workflow plan first, then available documentation]]
-
-#### 0.1 Check Workflow Plan
-
-- Load core-config.yaml and check if `workflow.trackProgress: true`
-- If yes, check for active plan at `workflow.planFile`
-- If plan exists:
-  - Verify story creation aligns with current plan step
-  - If out of sequence, warn user (enforce based on config)
-  - Note which step this story creation corresponds to
-
-#### 0.2 Determine Documentation Context
-
-Check for available documentation in this order:
-
-1. **Sharded PRD/Architecture** (docs/prd/, docs/architecture/)
-   - If found, recommend using create-next-story task instead
-
-2. **Brownfield Architecture Document** (docs/brownfield-architecture.md or similar)
-   - Created by document-project task
-   - Contains actual system state, technical debt, workarounds
-
-3. **Brownfield PRD** (docs/prd.md)
-   - May contain embedded technical details
-
-4. **Epic Files** (docs/epics/ or similar)
-   - Created by brownfield-create-epic task
-
-5. **User-Provided Documentation**
-   - Ask user to specify location and format
-
-### 1. Story Identification and Context Gathering
-
-#### 1.1 Identify Story Source
-
-Based on available documentation:
-
-- **From Brownfield PRD**: Extract stories from epic sections
-- **From Epic Files**: Read epic definition and story list
-- **From User Direction**: Ask user which specific enhancement to implement
-- **No Clear Source**: Work with user to define the story scope
-
-#### 1.2 Gather Essential Context
-
-[[LLM: For brownfield stories, you MUST gather enough context for safe implementation. Be prepared to ask the user for missing information.]]
-
-**Required Information Checklist:**
-
-- [ ] What existing functionality might be affected?
-- [ ] What are the integration points with current code?
-- [ ] What patterns should be followed (with examples)?
-- [ ] What technical constraints exist?
-- [ ] Are there any "gotchas" or workarounds to know about?
-
-If any required information is missing, ask the user:
-
-```
-I need additional context for this brownfield story:
-
-Missing Information:
-- [List specific missing items]
-
-Please provide:
-1. [Specific question about integration]
-2. [Specific question about patterns]
-3. [Specific question about constraints]
-
-Or point me to documentation that contains this information.
-```
-
-### 2. Extract Technical Context from Available Sources
-
-#### 2.1 From Document-Project Output
-
-If using brownfield-architecture.md from document-project:
-
-- **Technical Debt Section**: Note any workarounds affecting this story
-- **Key Files Section**: Identify files that will need modification
-- **Integration Points**: Find existing integration patterns
-- **Known Issues**: Check if story touches problematic areas
-- **Actual Tech Stack**: Verify versions and constraints
-
-#### 2.2 From Brownfield PRD
-
-If using brownfield PRD:
-
-- **Technical Constraints Section**: Extract all relevant constraints
-- **Integration Requirements**: Note compatibility requirements
-- **Code Organization**: Follow specified patterns
-- **Risk Assessment**: Understand potential impacts
-
-#### 2.3 From User Documentation
-
-[[LLM: When working with non-BMad documentation, actively extract and organize the information into categories the Dev agent will need]]
-
-Ask the user to help identify:
-
-- Relevant technical specifications
-- Existing code examples to follow
-- Integration requirements
-- Testing approaches used in the project
-
-### 3. Story Creation with Progressive Detail Gathering
-
-#### 3.1 Create Initial Story Structure
-
-Start with the story template, filling in what's known:
-
-```markdown
-# Story {{Enhancement Title}}
-
-## Status: Draft
-
-## Story
-As a {{user_type}},
-I want {{enhancement_capability}},
-so that {{value_delivered}}.
-
-## Context Source
-[[LLM: Document where story requirements came from]]
-- Source Document: {{document name/type}}
-- Enhancement Type: {{single feature/bug fix/integration/etc}}
-- Existing System Impact: {{brief assessment}}
-```
-
-#### 3.2 Develop Acceptance Criteria
-
-[[LLM: For brownfield, ALWAYS include criteria about maintaining existing functionality]]
-
-Standard structure:
-
-1. New functionality works as specified
-2. Existing {{affected feature}} continues to work unchanged  
-3. Integration with {{existing system}} maintains current behavior
-4. No regression in {{related area}}
-5. Performance remains within acceptable bounds
-
-#### 3.3 Gather Technical Guidance
-
-[[LLM: This is where you'll need to be interactive with the user if information is missing]]
-
-Create Dev Technical Guidance section with available information:
-
-```markdown
-## Dev Technical Guidance
-
-### Existing System Context
-[Extract from available documentation]
-
-### Integration Approach
-[Based on patterns found or ask user]
-
-### Technical Constraints
-[From documentation or user input]
-
-### Missing Information
-[[LLM: List anything you couldn't find that dev will need]]
-- [ ] {{missing item 1}}
-- [ ] {{missing item 2}}
-```
-
-If critical information is missing, pause and ask:
-
-```
-To complete the technical guidance for this story, I need:
-
-1. **{{Missing Category}}**: 
-   - Specifically: {{what you need to know}}
-   - Why needed: {{how it impacts implementation}}
-   
-Can you provide this information or point me to relevant code/docs?
-```
-
-### 4. Task Generation with Safety Checks
-
-#### 4.1 Generate Implementation Tasks
-
-Based on gathered context, create tasks that:
-
-- Include exploration tasks if system understanding is incomplete
-- Add verification tasks for existing functionality
-- Include rollback considerations
-- Reference specific files/patterns when known
-
-Example task structure for brownfield:
-
-```markdown
-## Tasks / Subtasks
-
-- [ ] Task 1: Analyze existing {{component/feature}} implementation
-  - [ ] Review {{specific files}} for current patterns
-  - [ ] Document integration points
-  - [ ] Identify potential impacts
-
-- [ ] Task 2: Implement {{new functionality}}
-  - [ ] Follow pattern from {{example file}}
-  - [ ] Integrate with {{existing component}}
-  - [ ] Maintain compatibility with {{constraint}}
-
-- [ ] Task 3: Verify existing functionality
-  - [ ] Test {{existing feature 1}} still works
-  - [ ] Verify {{integration point}} behavior unchanged
-  - [ ] Check performance impact
-
-- [ ] Task 4: Add tests
-  - [ ] Unit tests following {{project test pattern}}
-  - [ ] Integration test for {{integration point}}
-  - [ ] Update existing tests if needed
-```
-
-### 5. Risk Assessment and Mitigation
-
-[[LLM: CRITICAL for brownfield - always include risk assessment]]
-
-Add section for brownfield-specific risks:
-
-```markdown
-## Risk Assessment
-
-### Implementation Risks
-- **Primary Risk**: {{main risk to existing system}}
-- **Mitigation**: {{how to address}}
-- **Verification**: {{how to confirm safety}}
-
-### Rollback Plan
-- {{Simple steps to undo changes if needed}}
-
-### Safety Checks
-- [ ] Existing {{feature}} tested before changes
-- [ ] Changes can be feature-flagged or isolated
-- [ ] Rollback procedure documented
-```
-
-### 6. Final Story Validation
-
-Before finalizing:
-
-1. **Completeness Check**:
-   - [ ] Story has clear scope and acceptance criteria
-   - [ ] Technical context is sufficient for implementation
-   - [ ] Integration approach is defined
-   - [ ] Risks are identified with mitigation
-
-2. **Safety Check**:
-   - [ ] Existing functionality protection included
-   - [ ] Rollback plan is feasible
-   - [ ] Testing covers both new and existing features
-
-3. **Information Gaps**:
-   - [ ] All critical missing information gathered from user
-   - [ ] Remaining unknowns documented for dev agent
-   - [ ] Exploration tasks added where needed
-
-### 7. Story Output Format
-
-Save the story with appropriate naming:
-
-- If from epic: `docs/stories/epic-{n}-story-{m}.md`
-- If standalone: `docs/stories/brownfield-{feature-name}.md`
-- If sequential: Follow existing story numbering
-
-Include header noting documentation context:
-
-```markdown
-# Story: {{Title}}
-
-<!-- Source: {{documentation type used}} -->
-<!-- Context: Brownfield enhancement to {{existing system}} -->
-
-## Status: Draft
-[Rest of story content...]
-```
-
-### 8. Handoff Communication
-
-Provide clear handoff to the user:
-
-```text
-Brownfield story created: {{story title}}
-
-Source Documentation: {{what was used}}
-Story Location: {{file path}}
-
-Key Integration Points Identified:
-- {{integration point 1}}
-- {{integration point 2}}
-
-Risks Noted:
-- {{primary risk}}
-
-{{If missing info}}: 
-Note: Some technical details were unclear. The story includes exploration tasks to gather needed information during implementation.
-
-Next Steps:
-1. Review story for accuracy
-2. Verify integration approach aligns with your system
-3. Approve story or request adjustments
-4. Dev agent can then implement with safety checks
-```
-
-### 9. Update Workflow Plan (if applicable)
-
-[[LLM: After successful story creation]]
-
-- If workflow plan tracking is enabled and story was created successfully:
-  - Call update-workflow-plan task to mark step complete
-  - Parameters: task: create-brownfield-story, step_id: {from plan check}, status: complete
-  - If plan shows next recommended step, include it in handoff message
-
-## Success Criteria
-
-The brownfield story creation is successful when:
-
-1. Story can be implemented without requiring dev to search multiple documents
-2. Integration approach is clear and safe for existing system
-3. All available technical context has been extracted and organized
-4. Missing information has been identified and addressed
-5. Risks are documented with mitigation strategies
-6. Story includes verification of existing functionality
-7. Rollback approach is defined
-
-## Important Notes
-
-- This task is specifically for brownfield projects with non-standard documentation
-- Always prioritize existing system safety over new features
-- When in doubt, add exploration and verification tasks
-- It's better to ask the user for clarification than make assumptions
-- Each story should be self-contained for the dev agent
-- Include references to existing code patterns when available