bmad-method 6.0.0-alpha.2 → 6.0.0-alpha.20

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

@@ -1,175 +0,0 @@
-# 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

@@ -1,273 +0,0 @@
-# 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

@@ -1,146 +0,0 @@
-# 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)_