npm - bmad-method - Versions diffs - 6.0.0-alpha.8 → 6.0.0-alpha.9 - Mend

bmad-method 6.0.0-alpha.8 → 6.0.0-alpha.9

This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.

Files changed (539) hide show

package/.bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-ux-design/ux-design-template.md DELETED Viewed

@@ -1,145 +0,0 @@
-# {{project_name}} UX Design Specification
-_Created on {{date}} by {{user_name}}_
-_Generated using BMad Method - Create UX Design Workflow v1.0_
----
-## Executive Summary
-{{project_vision}}
----
-## 1. Design System Foundation
-### 1.1 Design System Choice
-{{design_system_decision}}
----
-## 2. Core User Experience
-### 2.1 Defining Experience
-{{core_experience}}
-### 2.2 Novel UX Patterns
-{{novel_ux_patterns}}
----
-## 3. Visual Foundation
-### 3.1 Color System
-{{visual_foundation}}
-**Interactive Visualizations:**
-- Color Theme Explorer: [ux-color-themes.html](./ux-color-themes.html)
----
-## 4. Design Direction
-### 4.1 Chosen Design Approach
-{{design_direction_decision}}
-**Interactive Mockups:**
-- Design Direction Showcase: [ux-design-directions.html](./ux-design-directions.html)
----
-## 5. User Journey Flows
-### 5.1 Critical User Paths
-{{user_journey_flows}}
----
-## 6. Component Library
-### 6.1 Component Strategy
-{{component_library_strategy}}
----
-## 7. UX Pattern Decisions
-### 7.1 Consistency Rules
-{{ux_pattern_decisions}}
----
-## 8. Responsive Design & Accessibility
-### 8.1 Responsive Strategy
-{{responsive_accessibility_strategy}}
----
-## 9. Implementation Guidance
-### 9.1 Completion Summary
-{{completion_summary}}
----
-## Appendix
-### Related Documents
-- Product Requirements: `{{prd_file}}`
-- Product Brief: `{{brief_file}}`
-- Brainstorming: `{{brainstorm_file}}`
-### Core Interactive Deliverables
-This UX Design Specification was created through visual collaboration:
-- **Color Theme Visualizer**: {{color_themes_html}}
-  - Interactive HTML showing all color theme options explored
-  - Live UI component examples in each theme
-  - Side-by-side comparison and semantic color usage
-- **Design Direction Mockups**: {{design_directions_html}}
-  - Interactive HTML with 6-8 complete design approaches
-  - Full-screen mockups of key screens
-  - Design philosophy and rationale for each direction
-### Optional Enhancement Deliverables
-_This section will be populated if additional UX artifacts are generated through follow-up workflows._
-<!-- Additional deliverables added here by other workflows -->
-### Next Steps & Follow-Up Workflows
-This UX Design Specification can serve as input to:
-- **Wireframe Generation Workflow** - Create detailed wireframes from user flows
-- **Figma Design Workflow** - Generate Figma files via MCP integration
-- **Interactive Prototype Workflow** - Build clickable HTML prototypes
-- **Component Showcase Workflow** - Create interactive component library
-- **AI Frontend Prompt Workflow** - Generate prompts for v0, Lovable, Bolt, etc.
-- **Solution Architecture Workflow** - Define technical architecture with UX context
-### Version History
-| Date     | Version | Changes                         | Author        |
-| -------- | ------- | ------------------------------- | ------------- |
-| {{date}} | 1.0     | Initial UX Design Specification | {{user_name}} |
----
-_This UX Design Specification was created through collaborative design facilitation, not template generation. All decisions were made with user input and are documented with rationale._

package/.bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-ux-design/workflow.yaml DELETED Viewed

@@ -1,60 +0,0 @@
-# Create UX Design Workflow Configuration
-name: create-ux-design
-description: "Collaborative UX design facilitation workflow that creates exceptional user experiences through visual exploration and informed decision-making. Unlike template-driven approaches, this workflow facilitates discovery, generates visual options, and collaboratively designs the UX with the user at every step."
-author: "BMad"
-# Critical variables from config
-config_source: "{project-root}/.bmad/bmm/config.yaml"
-output_folder: "{config_source}:output_folder"
-user_name: "{config_source}:user_name"
-communication_language: "{config_source}:communication_language"
-document_output_language: "{config_source}:document_output_language"
-user_skill_level: "{config_source}:user_skill_level"
-date: system-generated
-# Input requirements - We work from PRD, Brief, or Brainstorming docs
-recommended_inputs:
-  - prd: "Product Requirements Document with features and user journeys"
-  - product_brief: "Product brief with vision and target users"
-  - brainstorming: "Brainstorming documents with ideas and concepts"
-# Input file references (fuzzy matched from output folder)
-prd_file: "{output_folder}/bmm-PRD.md or PRD.md or product-requirements.md"
-brief_file: "{output_folder}/product-brief.md or brief.md or project-brief.md"
-brainstorm_file: "{output_folder}/brainstorming.md or brainstorm.md or ideation.md"
-# Smart input file references - handles both whole docs and sharded docs
-# Priority: Whole document first, then sharded version
-input_file_patterns:
-  prd:
-    whole: "{output_folder}/*prd*.md"
-    sharded: "{output_folder}/*prd*/index.md"
-  product_brief:
-    whole: "{output_folder}/*brief*.md"
-    sharded: "{output_folder}/*brief*/index.md"
-  epics:
-    whole: "{output_folder}/*epic*.md"
-    sharded: "{output_folder}/*epic*/index.md"
-  brainstorming:
-    whole: "{output_folder}/*brainstorm*.md"
-    sharded: "{output_folder}/*brainstorm*/index.md"
-  document_project:
-    sharded: "{output_folder}/docs/index.md"
-# Module path and component files
-installed_path: "{project-root}/.bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-ux-design"
-instructions: "{installed_path}/instructions.md"
-validation: "{installed_path}/checklist.md"
-template: "{installed_path}/ux-design-template.md"
-# Output configuration - Progressive saves throughout workflow
-default_output_file: "{output_folder}/ux-design-specification.md"
-color_themes_html: "{output_folder}/ux-color-themes.html"
-design_directions_html: "{output_folder}/ux-design-directions.html"
-standalone: true
-# Web bundle configuration for standalone deployment

package/.bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/checklist.md DELETED Viewed

@@ -1,350 +0,0 @@
-# PRD + Epics + Stories Validation Checklist
-**Purpose**: Comprehensive validation that PRD, epics, and stories form a complete, implementable product plan.
-**Scope**: Validates the complete planning output (PRD.md + epics.md) for Levels 2-4 software projects
-**Expected Outputs**:
-- PRD.md with complete requirements
-- epics.md with detailed epic and story breakdown
-- Updated bmm-workflow-status.yaml
----
-## 1. PRD Document Completeness
-### Core Sections Present
-- [ ] Executive Summary with vision alignment
-- [ ] Product magic essence clearly articulated
-- [ ] Project classification (type, domain, complexity)
-- [ ] Success criteria defined
-- [ ] Product scope (MVP, Growth, Vision) clearly delineated
-- [ ] Functional requirements comprehensive and numbered
-- [ ] Non-functional requirements (when applicable)
-- [ ] References section with source documents
-### Project-Specific Sections
-- [ ] **If complex domain:** Domain context and considerations documented
-- [ ] **If innovation:** Innovation patterns and validation approach documented
-- [ ] **If API/Backend:** Endpoint specification and authentication model included
-- [ ] **If Mobile:** Platform requirements and device features documented
-- [ ] **If SaaS B2B:** Tenant model and permission matrix included
-- [ ] **If UI exists:** UX principles and key interactions documented
-### Quality Checks
-- [ ] No unfilled template variables ({{variable}})
-- [ ] All variables properly populated with meaningful content
-- [ ] Product magic woven throughout (not just stated once)
-- [ ] Language is clear, specific, and measurable
-- [ ] Project type correctly identified and sections match
-- [ ] Domain complexity appropriately addressed
----
-## 2. Functional Requirements Quality
-### FR Format and Structure
-- [ ] Each FR has unique identifier (FR-001, FR-002, etc.)
-- [ ] FRs describe WHAT capabilities, not HOW to implement
-- [ ] FRs are specific and measurable
-- [ ] FRs are testable and verifiable
-- [ ] FRs focus on user/business value
-- [ ] No technical implementation details in FRs (those belong in architecture)
-### FR Completeness
-- [ ] All MVP scope features have corresponding FRs
-- [ ] Growth features documented (even if deferred)
-- [ ] Vision features captured for future reference
-- [ ] Domain-mandated requirements included
-- [ ] Innovation requirements captured with validation needs
-- [ ] Project-type specific requirements complete
-### FR Organization
-- [ ] FRs organized by capability/feature area (not by tech stack)
-- [ ] Related FRs grouped logically
-- [ ] Dependencies between FRs noted when critical
-- [ ] Priority/phase indicated (MVP vs Growth vs Vision)
----
-## 3. Epics Document Completeness
-### Required Files
-- [ ] epics.md exists in output folder
-- [ ] Epic list in PRD.md matches epics in epics.md (titles and count)
-- [ ] All epics have detailed breakdown sections
-### Epic Quality
-- [ ] Each epic has clear goal and value proposition
-- [ ] Each epic includes complete story breakdown
-- [ ] Stories follow proper user story format: "As a [role], I want [goal], so that [benefit]"
-- [ ] Each story has numbered acceptance criteria
-- [ ] Prerequisites/dependencies explicitly stated per story
-- [ ] Stories are AI-agent sized (completable in 2-4 hour session)
----
-## 4. FR Coverage Validation (CRITICAL)
-### Complete Traceability
-- [ ] **Every FR from PRD.md is covered by at least one story in epics.md**
-- [ ] Each story references relevant FR numbers
-- [ ] No orphaned FRs (requirements without stories)
-- [ ] No orphaned stories (stories without FR connection)
-- [ ] Coverage matrix verified (can trace FR → Epic → Stories)
-### Coverage Quality
-- [ ] Stories sufficiently decompose FRs into implementable units
-- [ ] Complex FRs broken into multiple stories appropriately
-- [ ] Simple FRs have appropriately scoped single stories
-- [ ] Non-functional requirements reflected in story acceptance criteria
-- [ ] Domain requirements embedded in relevant stories
----
-## 5. Story Sequencing Validation (CRITICAL)
-### Epic 1 Foundation Check
-- [ ] **Epic 1 establishes foundational infrastructure**
-- [ ] Epic 1 delivers initial deployable functionality
-- [ ] Epic 1 creates baseline for subsequent epics
-- [ ] Exception: If adding to existing app, foundation requirement adapted appropriately
-### Vertical Slicing
-- [ ] **Each story delivers complete, testable functionality** (not horizontal layers)
-- [ ] No "build database" or "create UI" stories in isolation
-- [ ] Stories integrate across stack (data + logic + presentation when applicable)
-- [ ] Each story leaves system in working/deployable state
-### No Forward Dependencies
-- [ ] **No story depends on work from a LATER story or epic**
-- [ ] Stories within each epic are sequentially ordered
-- [ ] Each story builds only on previous work
-- [ ] Dependencies flow backward only (can reference earlier stories)
-- [ ] Parallel tracks clearly indicated if stories are independent
-### Value Delivery Path
-- [ ] Each epic delivers significant end-to-end value
-- [ ] Epic sequence shows logical product evolution
-- [ ] User can see value after each epic completion
-- [ ] MVP scope clearly achieved by end of designated epics
----
-## 6. Scope Management
-### MVP Discipline
-- [ ] MVP scope is genuinely minimal and viable
-- [ ] Core features list contains only true must-haves
-- [ ] Each MVP feature has clear rationale for inclusion
-- [ ] No obvious scope creep in "must-have" list
-### Future Work Captured
-- [ ] Growth features documented for post-MVP
-- [ ] Vision features captured to maintain long-term direction
-- [ ] Out-of-scope items explicitly listed
-- [ ] Deferred features have clear reasoning for deferral
-### Clear Boundaries
-- [ ] Stories marked as MVP vs Growth vs Vision
-- [ ] Epic sequencing aligns with MVP → Growth progression
-- [ ] No confusion about what's in vs out of initial scope
----
-## 7. Research and Context Integration
-### Source Document Integration
-- [ ] **If product brief exists:** Key insights incorporated into PRD
-- [ ] **If domain brief exists:** Domain requirements reflected in FRs and stories
-- [ ] **If research documents exist:** Research findings inform requirements
-- [ ] **If competitive analysis exists:** Differentiation strategy clear in PRD
-- [ ] All source documents referenced in PRD References section
-### Research Continuity to Architecture
-- [ ] Domain complexity considerations documented for architects
-- [ ] Technical constraints from research captured
-- [ ] Regulatory/compliance requirements clearly stated
-- [ ] Integration requirements with existing systems documented
-- [ ] Performance/scale requirements informed by research data
-### Information Completeness for Next Phase
-- [ ] PRD provides sufficient context for architecture decisions
-- [ ] Epics provide sufficient detail for technical design
-- [ ] Stories have enough acceptance criteria for implementation
-- [ ] Non-obvious business rules documented
-- [ ] Edge cases and special scenarios captured
----
-## 8. Cross-Document Consistency
-### Terminology Consistency
-- [ ] Same terms used across PRD and epics for concepts
-- [ ] Feature names consistent between documents
-- [ ] Epic titles match between PRD and epics.md
-- [ ] No contradictions between PRD and epics
-### Alignment Checks
-- [ ] Success metrics in PRD align with story outcomes
-- [ ] Product magic articulated in PRD reflected in epic goals
-- [ ] Technical preferences in PRD align with story implementation hints
-- [ ] Scope boundaries consistent across all documents
----
-## 9. Readiness for Implementation
-### Architecture Readiness (Next Phase)
-- [ ] PRD provides sufficient context for architecture workflow
-- [ ] Technical constraints and preferences documented
-- [ ] Integration points identified
-- [ ] Performance/scale requirements specified
-- [ ] Security and compliance needs clear
-### Development Readiness
-- [ ] Stories are specific enough to estimate
-- [ ] Acceptance criteria are testable
-- [ ] Technical unknowns identified and flagged
-- [ ] Dependencies on external systems documented
-- [ ] Data requirements specified
-### Track-Appropriate Detail
-**If BMad Method:**
-- [ ] PRD supports full architecture workflow
-- [ ] Epic structure supports phased delivery
-- [ ] Scope appropriate for product/platform development
-- [ ] Clear value delivery through epic sequence
-**If Enterprise Method:**
-- [ ] PRD addresses enterprise requirements (security, compliance, multi-tenancy)
-- [ ] Epic structure supports extended planning phases
-- [ ] Scope includes security, devops, and test strategy considerations
-- [ ] Clear value delivery with enterprise gates
----
-## 10. Quality and Polish
-### Writing Quality
-- [ ] Language is clear and free of jargon (or jargon is defined)
-- [ ] Sentences are concise and specific
-- [ ] No vague statements ("should be fast", "user-friendly")
-- [ ] Measurable criteria used throughout
-- [ ] Professional tone appropriate for stakeholder review
-### Document Structure
-- [ ] Sections flow logically
-- [ ] Headers and numbering consistent
-- [ ] Cross-references accurate (FR numbers, section references)
-- [ ] Formatting consistent throughout
-- [ ] Tables/lists formatted properly
-### Completeness Indicators
-- [ ] No [TODO] or [TBD] markers remain
-- [ ] No placeholder text
-- [ ] All sections have substantive content
-- [ ] Optional sections either complete or omitted (not half-done)
----
-## Critical Failures (Auto-Fail)
-If ANY of these are true, validation FAILS:
-- [ ] ❌ **No epics.md file exists** (two-file output required)
-- [ ] ❌ **Epic 1 doesn't establish foundation** (violates core sequencing principle)
-- [ ] ❌ **Stories have forward dependencies** (breaks sequential implementation)
-- [ ] ❌ **Stories not vertically sliced** (horizontal layers block value delivery)
-- [ ] ❌ **Epics don't cover all FRs** (orphaned requirements)
-- [ ] ❌ **FRs contain technical implementation details** (should be in architecture)
-- [ ] ❌ **No FR traceability to stories** (can't validate coverage)
-- [ ] ❌ **Template variables unfilled** (incomplete document)
----
-## Validation Summary
-**Total Validation Points:** ~85
-### Scoring Guide
-- **Pass Rate ≥ 95% (81+/85):** ✅ EXCELLENT - Ready for architecture phase
-- **Pass Rate 85-94% (72-80/85):** ⚠️ GOOD - Minor fixes needed
-- **Pass Rate 70-84% (60-71/85):** ⚠️ FAIR - Important issues to address
-- **Pass Rate < 70% (<60/85):** ❌ POOR - Significant rework required
-### Critical Issue Threshold
-- **0 Critical Failures:** Proceed to fixes
-- **1+ Critical Failures:** STOP - Must fix critical issues first
----
-## Validation Execution Notes
-**When validating:**
-1. **Load ALL documents:**
-   - PRD.md (required)
-   - epics.md (required)
-   - product-brief.md (if exists)
-   - domain-brief.md (if exists)
-   - research documents (if referenced)
-2. **Validate in order:**
-   - Check critical failures first (immediate stop if any found)
-   - Verify PRD completeness
-   - Verify epics completeness
-   - Cross-reference FR coverage (most important)
-   - Check sequencing (second most important)
-   - Validate research integration
-   - Check polish and quality
-3. **Report findings:**
-   - List critical failures prominently
-   - Group issues by severity
-   - Provide specific line numbers/sections
-   - Suggest concrete fixes
-   - Highlight what's working well
-4. **Provide actionable next steps:**
-   - If validation passes: "Ready for architecture workflow"
-   - If minor issues: "Fix [X] items then re-validate"
-   - If major issues: "Rework [sections] then re-validate"
-   - If critical failures: "Must fix critical items before proceeding"
----
-**Remember:** This validation ensures the entire planning phase is complete and the implementation phase has everything needed to succeed. Be thorough but fair - the goal is quality, not perfection.

package/.bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/create-epics-and-stories/epics-template.md DELETED Viewed

@@ -1,52 +0,0 @@
-# {{project_name}} - Epic Breakdown
-**Author:** {{user_name}}
-**Date:** {{date}}
-**Project Level:** {{project_level}}
-**Target Scale:** {{target_scale}}
----
-## Overview
-This document provides the complete epic and story breakdown for {{project_name}}, decomposing the requirements from the [PRD](./PRD.md) into implementable stories.
-{{epics_summary}}
----
-<!-- Repeat for each epic (N = 1, 2, 3...) -->
-## Epic {{N}}: {{epic_title_N}}
-{{epic_goal_N}}
-<!-- Repeat for each story (M = 1, 2, 3...) within epic N -->
-### Story {{N}}.{{M}}: {{story_title_N_M}}
-As a {{user_type}},
-I want {{capability}},
-So that {{value_benefit}}.
-**Acceptance Criteria:**
-**Given** {{precondition}}
-**When** {{action}}
-**Then** {{expected_outcome}}
-**And** {{additional_criteria}}
-**Prerequisites:** {{dependencies_on_previous_stories}}
-**Technical Notes:** {{implementation_guidance}}
-<!-- End story repeat -->
----
-<!-- End epic repeat -->
----
-_For implementation: Use the `create-story` workflow to generate individual story implementation plans from this epic breakdown._