bmad-method 6.0.0-alpha.0 → 6.0.0-alpha.2

package/src/modules/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/solutioning-gate-check/checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,175 @@
+# Implementation Readiness Validation Checklist
+
+## Document Completeness
+
+### Core Planning Documents
+
+- [ ] PRD exists and is complete (Level 2-4 projects)
+- [ ] PRD contains measurable success criteria
+- [ ] PRD defines clear scope boundaries and exclusions
+- [ ] Architecture document exists (architecture\*.md) (Level 3-4 projects)
+- [ ] Technical Specification exists with implementation details
+- [ ] Epic and story breakdown document exists
+- [ ] All documents are dated and versioned
+
+### Document Quality
+
+- [ ] No placeholder sections remain in any document
+- [ ] All documents use consistent terminology
+- [ ] Technical decisions include rationale and trade-offs
+- [ ] Assumptions and risks are explicitly documented
+- [ ] Dependencies are clearly identified and documented
+
+## Alignment Verification
+
+### PRD to Architecture Alignment (Level 3-4)
+
+- [ ] Every functional requirement in PRD has architectural support documented
+- [ ] All non-functional requirements from PRD are addressed in architecture
+- [ ] Architecture doesn't introduce features beyond PRD scope
+- [ ] Performance requirements from PRD match architecture capabilities
+- [ ] Security requirements from PRD are fully addressed in architecture
+- [ ] If architecture.md: Implementation patterns are defined for consistency
+- [ ] If architecture.md: All technology choices have verified versions
+- [ ] If UX spec exists: Architecture supports UX requirements
+
+### PRD to Stories Coverage (Level 2-4)
+
+- [ ] Every PRD requirement maps to at least one story
+- [ ] All user journeys in PRD have complete story coverage
+- [ ] Story acceptance criteria align with PRD success criteria
+- [ ] Priority levels in stories match PRD feature priorities
+- [ ] No stories exist without PRD requirement traceability
+
+### Architecture to Stories Implementation
+
+- [ ] All architectural components have implementation stories
+- [ ] Infrastructure setup stories exist for each architectural layer
+- [ ] Integration points defined in architecture have corresponding stories
+- [ ] Data migration/setup stories exist if required by architecture
+- [ ] Security implementation stories cover all architecture security decisions
+
+## Story and Sequencing Quality
+
+### Story Completeness
+
+- [ ] All stories have clear acceptance criteria
+- [ ] Technical tasks are defined within relevant stories
+- [ ] Stories include error handling and edge cases
+- [ ] Each story has clear definition of done
+- [ ] Stories are appropriately sized (no epic-level stories remaining)
+
+### Sequencing and Dependencies
+
+- [ ] Stories are sequenced in logical implementation order
+- [ ] Dependencies between stories are explicitly documented
+- [ ] No circular dependencies exist
+- [ ] Prerequisite technical tasks precede dependent stories
+- [ ] Foundation/infrastructure stories come before feature stories
+
+### Greenfield Project Specifics
+
+- [ ] Initial project setup and configuration stories exist
+- [ ] If using architecture.md: First story is starter template initialization command
+- [ ] Development environment setup is documented
+- [ ] CI/CD pipeline stories are included early in sequence
+- [ ] Database/storage initialization stories are properly placed
+- [ ] Authentication/authorization stories precede protected features
+
+## Risk and Gap Assessment
+
+### Critical Gaps
+
+- [ ] No core PRD requirements lack story coverage
+- [ ] No architectural decisions lack implementation stories
+- [ ] All integration points have implementation plans
+- [ ] Error handling strategy is defined and implemented
+- [ ] Security concerns are all addressed
+
+### Technical Risks
+
+- [ ] No conflicting technical approaches between stories
+- [ ] Technology choices are consistent across all documents
+- [ ] Performance requirements are achievable with chosen architecture
+- [ ] Scalability concerns are addressed if applicable
+- [ ] Third-party dependencies are identified with fallback plans
+
+## UX and Special Concerns (if applicable)
+
+### UX Coverage
+
+- [ ] UX requirements are documented in PRD
+- [ ] UX implementation tasks exist in relevant stories
+- [ ] Accessibility requirements have story coverage
+- [ ] Responsive design requirements are addressed
+- [ ] User flow continuity is maintained across stories
+
+### Special Considerations
+
+- [ ] Compliance requirements are fully addressed
+- [ ] Internationalization needs are covered if required
+- [ ] Performance benchmarks are defined and measurable
+- [ ] Monitoring and observability stories exist
+- [ ] Documentation stories are included where needed
+
+## Overall Readiness
+
+### Ready to Proceed Criteria
+
+- [ ] All critical issues have been resolved
+- [ ] High priority concerns have mitigation plans
+- [ ] Story sequencing supports iterative delivery
+- [ ] Team has necessary skills for implementation
+- [ ] No blocking dependencies remain unresolved
+
+### Quality Indicators
+
+- [ ] Documents demonstrate thorough analysis
+- [ ] Clear traceability exists across all artifacts
+- [ ] Consistent level of detail throughout documents
+- [ ] Risks are identified with mitigation strategies
+- [ ] Success criteria are measurable and achievable
+
+## Assessment Completion
+
+### Report Quality
+
+- [ ] All findings are supported by specific examples
+- [ ] Recommendations are actionable and specific
+- [ ] Severity levels are appropriately assigned
+- [ ] Positive findings are highlighted
+- [ ] Next steps are clearly defined
+
+### Process Validation
+
+- [ ] All expected documents were reviewed
+- [ ] Cross-references were systematically checked
+- [ ] Project level considerations were applied correctly
+- [ ] Workflow status was checked and considered
+- [ ] Output folder was thoroughly searched for artifacts
+
+---
+
+## Issue Log
+
+### Critical Issues Found
+
+- [ ] ***
+- [ ] ***
+- [ ] ***
+
+### High Priority Issues Found
+
+- [ ] ***
+- [ ] ***
+- [ ] ***
+
+### Medium Priority Issues Found
+
+- [ ] ***
+- [ ] ***
+- [ ] ***
+
+---
+
+_Use this checklist to ensure comprehensive validation of implementation readiness_

package/src/modules/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/solutioning-gate-check/instructions.md

@@ -0,0 +1,273 @@
+# Implementation Ready Check - Workflow Instructions
+
+<critical>The workflow execution engine is governed by: {project-root}/bmad/core/tasks/workflow.xml</critical>
+<critical>You MUST have already loaded and processed: {project-root}/bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/solutioning-gate-check/workflow.yaml</critical>
+<critical>Communicate all findings and analysis in {communication_language} throughout the assessment</critical>
+
+<workflow>
+
+<step n="0" goal="Initialize and understand project context">
+<invoke-workflow path="{workflow_status_workflow}">
+  <param>mode: data</param>
+  <param>data_request: project_config</param>
+</invoke-workflow>
+
+<check if="status_exists == false">
+  <output>**Note: No Workflow Status File Found**
+
+The Implementation Ready Check can run standalone or as part of the BMM workflow path.
+
+**Recommended:** Run `workflow-init` first for:
+
+- Project context tracking
+- Workflow sequencing guidance
+- Progress monitoring across workflows
+
+**Or continue standalone** without progress tracking.
+</output>
+<ask>Continue in standalone mode or exit to run workflow-init? (continue/exit)</ask>
+<check if="continue">
+<action>Set standalone_mode = true</action>
+</check>
+<check if="exit">
+<action>Exit workflow</action>
+</check>
+</check>
+
+<check if="status_exists == true">
+  <action>Store {{status_file_path}} for later updates</action>
+  <action>Store {{project_level}}, {{active_path}}, and {{workflow_phase}} for validation context</action>
+
+<action>Based on the project_level, understand what artifacts should exist:
+
+- Level 0-1: Tech spec and simple stories only (no PRD, minimal solutioning)
+- Level 2: PRD, tech spec, epics/stories (no separate architecture doc)
+- Level 3-4: Full suite - PRD, architecture document, epics/stories, possible UX artifacts
+  </action>
+
+<critical>The validation approach must adapt to the project level - don't look for documents that shouldn't exist at lower levels</critical>
+</check>
+
+<template-output>project_context</template-output>
+</step>
+
+<step n="1" goal="Discover and inventory project artifacts">
+<action>Search the {output_folder} for relevant planning and solutioning documents based on project level identified in Step 0</action>
+
+<action>For Level 0-1 projects, locate:
+
+- Technical specification document(s)
+- Story/task lists or simple epic breakdowns
+- Any API or interface definitions
+  </action>
+
+<action>For Level 2-4 projects, locate:
+
+- Product Requirements Document (PRD)
+- Architecture document (architecture.md) (Level 3-4 only)
+- Technical Specification (Level 2 includes architecture within)
+- Epic and story breakdowns
+- UX artifacts if the active path includes UX workflow
+- Any supplementary planning documents
+  </action>
+
+<action>Create an inventory of found documents with:
+
+- Document type and purpose
+- File path and last modified date
+- Brief description of what each contains
+- Any missing expected documents flagged as potential issues
+  </action>
+
+<template-output>document_inventory</template-output>
+</step>
+
+<step n="2" goal="Deep analysis of core planning documents">
+<action>Load and thoroughly analyze each discovered document to extract:
+- Core requirements and success criteria
+- Architectural decisions and constraints
+- Technical implementation approaches
+- User stories and acceptance criteria
+- Dependencies and sequencing requirements
+- Any assumptions or risks documented
+</action>
+
+<action>For PRD analysis (Level 2-4), focus on:
+
+- User requirements and use cases
+- Functional and non-functional requirements
+- Success metrics and acceptance criteria
+- Scope boundaries and explicitly excluded items
+- Priority levels for different features
+  </action>
+
+<action>For Architecture/Tech Spec analysis, focus on:
+
+- System design decisions and rationale
+- Technology stack and framework choices
+- Integration points and APIs
+- Data models and storage decisions
+- Security and performance considerations
+- Any architectural constraints that might affect story implementation
+  </action>
+
+<action>For Epic/Story analysis, focus on:
+
+- Coverage of PRD requirements
+- Story sequencing and dependencies
+- Acceptance criteria completeness
+- Technical tasks within stories
+- Estimated complexity and effort indicators
+  </action>
+
+<template-output>document_analysis</template-output>
+</step>
+
+<step n="3" goal="Cross-reference validation and alignment check">
+<action>Systematically validate alignment between all artifacts, adapting validation based on project level</action>
+
+<action>PRD ↔ Architecture Alignment (Level 3-4):
+
+- Verify every PRD requirement has corresponding architectural support
+- Check that architectural decisions don't contradict PRD constraints
+- Identify any architectural additions beyond PRD scope (potential gold-plating)
+- Ensure non-functional requirements from PRD are addressed in architecture document
+- If using new architecture workflow: verify implementation patterns are defined
+  </action>
+
+<action>PRD ↔ Stories Coverage (Level 2-4):
+
+- Map each PRD requirement to implementing stories
+- Identify any PRD requirements without story coverage
+- Find stories that don't trace back to PRD requirements
+- Validate that story acceptance criteria align with PRD success criteria
+  </action>
+
+<action>Architecture ↔ Stories Implementation Check:
+
+- Verify architectural decisions are reflected in relevant stories
+- Check that story technical tasks align with architectural approach
+- Identify any stories that might violate architectural constraints
+- Ensure infrastructure and setup stories exist for architectural components
+  </action>
+
+<action>For Level 0-1 projects (Tech Spec only):
+
+- Validate internal consistency within tech spec
+- Check that all specified features have corresponding stories
+- Verify story sequencing matches technical dependencies
+  </action>
+
+<template-output>alignment_validation</template-output>
+</step>
+
+<step n="4" goal="Gap and risk analysis">
+<action>Identify and categorize all gaps, risks, and potential issues discovered during validation</action>
+
+<action>Check for Critical Gaps:
+
+- Missing stories for core requirements
+- Unaddressed architectural concerns
+- Absent infrastructure or setup stories for greenfield projects
+- Missing error handling or edge case coverage
+- Security or compliance requirements not addressed
+  </action>
+
+<action>Identify Sequencing Issues:
+
+- Dependencies not properly ordered
+- Stories that assume components not yet built
+- Parallel work that should be sequential
+- Missing prerequisite technical tasks
+  </action>
+
+<action>Detect Potential Contradictions:
+
+- Conflicts between PRD and architecture approaches
+- Stories with conflicting technical approaches
+- Acceptance criteria that contradict requirements
+- Resource or technology conflicts
+  </action>
+
+<action>Find Gold-Plating and Scope Creep:
+
+- Features in architecture not required by PRD
+- Stories implementing beyond requirements
+- Technical complexity beyond project needs
+- Over-engineering indicators
+  </action>
+
+<template-output>gap_risk_analysis</template-output>
+</step>
+
+<step n="5" goal="UX and special concerns validation" optional="true">
+<check if="UX artifacts exist or UX workflow in active path">
+<action>Review UX artifacts and validate integration:
+- Check that UX requirements are reflected in PRD
+- Verify stories include UX implementation tasks
+- Ensure architecture supports UX requirements (performance, responsiveness)
+- Identify any UX concerns not addressed in stories
+</action>
+
+<action>Validate accessibility and usability coverage:
+
+- Check for accessibility requirement coverage in stories
+- Verify responsive design considerations if applicable
+- Ensure user flow completeness across stories
+  </action>
+  </check>
+
+<template-output>ux_validation</template-output>
+</step>
+
+<step n="6" goal="Generate comprehensive readiness assessment">
+<action>Compile all findings into a structured readiness report with:
+- Executive summary of readiness status
+- Project context and validation scope
+- Document inventory and coverage assessment
+- Detailed findings organized by severity (Critical, High, Medium, Low)
+- Specific recommendations for each issue
+- Overall readiness recommendation (Ready, Ready with Conditions, Not Ready)
+</action>
+
+<action>Provide actionable next steps:
+
+- List any critical issues that must be resolved
+- Suggest specific document updates needed
+- Recommend additional stories or tasks required
+- Propose sequencing adjustments if needed
+  </action>
+
+<action>Include positive findings:
+
+- Highlight well-aligned areas
+- Note particularly thorough documentation
+- Recognize good architectural decisions
+- Commend comprehensive story coverage where found
+  </action>
+
+<template-output>readiness_assessment</template-output>
+</step>
+
+<step n="7" goal="Workflow status update offer" optional="true">
+<ask>The readiness assessment is complete. Would you like to update the workflow status to proceed to the next phase? [yes/no]
+
+Note: This will advance the project workflow to the next phase in your current path.</ask>
+
+<action if="user_response == 'yes'">
+Determine the next workflow phase based on current status:
+- If Level 0-1: Advance to implementation phase
+- If Level 2-4 in solutioning: Advance to Phase 4 (Implementation)
+- Update the workflow status configuration accordingly
+- Confirm the update with the user
+</action>
+
+<action if="user_response == 'no'">
+Acknowledge that the workflow status remains unchanged.
+Remind user they can manually update when ready.
+</action>
+
+<template-output>status_update_result</template-output>
+</step>
+
+</workflow>

package/src/modules/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/solutioning-gate-check/template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,146 @@
+# Implementation Readiness Assessment Report
+
+**Date:** {{date}}
+**Project:** {{project_name}}
+**Assessed By:** {{user_name}}
+**Assessment Type:** Phase 3 to Phase 4 Transition Validation
+
+---
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+{{readiness_assessment}}
+
+---
+
+## Project Context
+
+{{project_context}}
+
+---
+
+## Document Inventory
+
+### Documents Reviewed
+
+{{document_inventory}}
+
+### Document Analysis Summary
+
+{{document_analysis}}
+
+---
+
+## Alignment Validation Results
+
+### Cross-Reference Analysis
+
+{{alignment_validation}}
+
+---
+
+## Gap and Risk Analysis
+
+### Critical Findings
+
+{{gap_risk_analysis}}
+
+---
+
+## UX and Special Concerns
+
+{{ux_validation}}
+
+---
+
+## Detailed Findings
+
+### 🔴 Critical Issues
+
+_Must be resolved before proceeding to implementation_
+
+{{critical_issues}}
+
+### 🟠 High Priority Concerns
+
+_Should be addressed to reduce implementation risk_
+
+{{high_priority_concerns}}
+
+### 🟡 Medium Priority Observations
+
+_Consider addressing for smoother implementation_
+
+{{medium_priority_observations}}
+
+### 🟢 Low Priority Notes
+
+_Minor items for consideration_
+
+{{low_priority_notes}}
+
+---
+
+## Positive Findings
+
+### ✅ Well-Executed Areas
+
+{{positive_findings}}
+
+---
+
+## Recommendations
+
+### Immediate Actions Required
+
+{{immediate_actions}}
+
+### Suggested Improvements
+
+{{suggested_improvements}}
+
+### Sequencing Adjustments
+
+{{sequencing_adjustments}}
+
+---
+
+## Readiness Decision
+
+### Overall Assessment: {{overall_readiness_status}}
+
+{{readiness_rationale}}
+
+### Conditions for Proceeding (if applicable)
+
+{{conditions_for_proceeding}}
+
+---
+
+## Next Steps
+
+{{recommended_next_steps}}
+
+### Workflow Status Update
+
+{{status_update_result}}
+
+---
+
+## Appendices
+
+### A. Validation Criteria Applied
+
+{{validation_criteria_used}}
+
+### B. Traceability Matrix
+
+{{traceability_matrix}}
+
+### C. Risk Mitigation Strategies
+
+{{risk_mitigation_strategies}}
+
+---
+
+_This readiness assessment was generated using the BMad Method Implementation Ready Check workflow (v6-alpha)_