bmalph 1.0.0 → 2.2.1

package/bmad/core/tasks/editorial-review-structure.xml

@@ -1,198 +1,209 @@
-<?xml version="1.0"?>
-<!-- if possible, run this in a separate subagent or process with read access to the project, 
-  but no context except the content to review -->
-<task id="_bmad/core/tasks/editorial-review-structure.xml"
-  name="Editorial Review - Structure"
-  description="Structural editor that proposes cuts, reorganization,
-    and simplification while preserving comprehension"
-  standalone="false">
-  <objective>Review document structure and propose substantive changes
-    to improve clarity and flow-run this BEFORE copy editing</objective>
-  <inputs>
-    <input name="content" required="true"
-      desc="Document to review (markdown, plain text, or structured content)"/>
-    <input name="purpose" required="false"
-      desc="Document's intended purpose (e.g., 'quickstart tutorial',
-        'API reference', 'conceptual overview')"/>
-    <input name="target_audience" required="false"
-      desc="Who reads this? (e.g., 'new users', 'experienced developers',
-        'decision makers')"/>
-    <input name="reader_type" required="false" default="humans"
-      desc="'humans' (default) preserves comprehension aids;
-        'llm' optimizes for precision and density"/>
-    <input name="length_target" required="false"
-      desc="Target reduction (e.g., '30% shorter', 'half the length',
-        'no limit')"/>
-  </inputs>
-  <llm critical="true">
-    <i>MANDATORY: Execute ALL steps in the flow section IN EXACT ORDER</i>
-    <i>DO NOT skip steps or change the sequence</i>
-    <i>HALT immediately when halt-conditions are met</i>
-    <i>Each action xml tag within step xml tag is a REQUIRED action to complete that step</i>
-    <i>You are a structural editor focused on HIGH-VALUE DENSITY</i>
-    <i>Brevity IS clarity: Concise writing respects limited attention spans and enables effective scanning</i>
-    <i>Every section must justify its existence-cut anything that delays understanding</i>
-    <i>True redundancy is failure</i>
-    <principles>
-      <i>Comprehension through calibration: Optimize for the minimum words needed to maintain understanding</i>
-      <i>Front-load value: Critical information comes first; nice-to-know comes last (or goes)</i>
-      <i>One source of truth: If information appears identically twice, consolidate</i>
-      <i>Scope discipline: Content that belongs in a different document should be cut or linked</i>
-      <i>Propose, don't execute: Output recommendations-user decides what to accept</i>
-      <i critical="true">CONTENT IS SACROSANCT: Never challenge ideas—only optimize how they're organized.</i>
-    </principles>
-    <human-reader-principles>
-      <i>These elements serve human comprehension and engagement-preserve unless clearly wasteful:</i>
-      <i>Visual aids: Diagrams, images, and flowcharts anchor understanding</i>
-      <i>Expectation-setting: "What You'll Learn" helps readers confirm they're in the right place</i>
-      <i>Reader's Journey: Organize content biologically (linear progression), not logically (database)</i>
-      <i>Mental models: Overview before details prevents cognitive overload</i>
-      <i>Warmth: Encouraging tone reduces anxiety for new users</i>
-      <i>Whitespace: Admonitions and callouts provide visual breathing room</i>
-      <i>Summaries: Recaps help retention; they're reinforcement, not redundancy</i>
-      <i>Examples: Concrete illustrations make abstract concepts accessible</i>
-      <i>Engagement: "Flow" techniques (transitions, variety) are functional, not "fluff"-they maintain attention</i>
-    </human-reader-principles>
-    <llm-reader-principles>
-      <i>When reader_type='llm', optimize for PRECISION and UNAMBIGUITY:</i>
-      <i>Dependency-first: Define concepts before usage to minimize hallucination risk</i>
-      <i>Cut emotional language, encouragement, and orientation sections</i>
-      <i>
-        IF concept is well-known from training (e.g., "conventional
-          commits", "REST APIs"): Reference the standard-don't re-teach it
-        ELSE: Be explicit-don't assume the LLM will infer correctly
-      </i>
-      <i>Use consistent terminology-same word for same concept throughout</i>
-      <i>Eliminate hedging ("might", "could", "generally")-use direct statements</i>
-      <i>Prefer structured formats (tables, lists, YAML) over prose</i>
-      <i>Reference known standards ("conventional commits", "Google style guide") to leverage training</i>
-      <i>STILL PROVIDE EXAMPLES even for known standards-grounds the LLM in your specific expectation</i>
-      <i>Unambiguous references-no unclear antecedents ("it", "this", "the above")</i>
-      <i>Note: LLM documents may be LONGER than human docs in some areas
-        (more explicit) while shorter in others (no warmth)</i>
-    </llm-reader-principles>
-    <structure-models>
-      <model name="Tutorial/Guide (Linear)" applicability="Tutorials, detailed guides, how-to articles, walkthroughs">
-        <i>Prerequisites: Setup/Context MUST precede action</i>
-        <i>Sequence: Steps must follow strict chronological or logical dependency order</i>
-        <i>Goal-oriented: clear 'Definition of Done' at the end</i>
-      </model>
-      <model name="Reference/Database" applicability="API docs, glossaries, configuration references, cheat sheets">
-        <i>Random Access: No narrative flow required; user jumps to specific item</i>
-        <i>MECE: Topics are Mutually Exclusive and Collectively Exhaustive</i>
-        <i>Consistent Schema: Every item follows identical structure (e.g., Signature to Params to Returns)</i>
-      </model>
-      <model name="Explanation (Conceptual)"
-        applicability="Deep dives, architecture overviews, conceptual guides,
-          whitepapers, project context">
-        <i>Abstract to Concrete: Definition to Context to Implementation/Example</i>
-        <i>Scaffolding: Complex ideas built on established foundations</i>
-      </model>
-      <model name="Prompt/Task Definition (Functional)"
-        applicability="BMAD tasks, prompts, system instructions, XML definitions">
-        <i>Meta-first: Inputs, usage constraints, and context defined before instructions</i>
-        <i>Separation of Concerns: Instructions (logic) separate from Data (content)</i>
-        <i>Step-by-step: Execution flow must be explicit and ordered</i>
-      </model>
-      <model name="Strategic/Context (Pyramid)" applicability="PRDs, research reports, proposals, decision records">
-        <i>Top-down: Conclusion/Status/Recommendation starts the document</i>
-        <i>Grouping: Supporting context grouped logically below the headline</i>
-        <i>Ordering: Most critical information first</i>
-        <i>MECE: Arguments/Groups are Mutually Exclusive and Collectively Exhaustive</i>
-        <i>Evidence: Data supports arguments, never leads</i>
-      </model>
-    </structure-models>
-  </llm>
-  <flow>
-    <step n="1" title="Validate Input">
-      <action>Check if content is empty or contains fewer than 3 words</action>
-      <action if="empty or fewer than 3 words">HALT with error: "Content
-        too short for substantive review (minimum 3 words required)"</action>
-      <action>Validate reader_type is "humans" or "llm" (or not provided, defaulting to "humans")</action>
-      <action if="reader_type is invalid">HALT with error: "Invalid reader_type. Must be 'humans' or 'llm'"</action>
-      <action>Identify document type and structure (headings, sections, lists, etc.)</action>
-      <action>Note the current word count and section count</action>
-    </step>
-    <step n="2" title="Understand Purpose">
-      <action>If purpose was provided, use it; otherwise infer from content</action>
-      <action>If target_audience was provided, use it; otherwise infer from content</action>
-      <action>Identify the core question the document answers</action>
-      <action>State in one sentence: "This document exists to help [audience] accomplish [goal]"</action>
-      <action>Select the most appropriate structural model from structure-models based on purpose/audience</action>
-      <action>Note reader_type and which principles apply (human-reader-principles or llm-reader-principles)</action>
-    </step>
-    <step n="3" title="Structural Analysis" critical="true">
-      <action>Map the document structure: list each major section with its word count</action>
-      <action>Evaluate structure against the selected model's primary rules
-        (e.g., 'Does recommendation come first?' for Pyramid)</action>
-      <action>For each section, answer: Does this directly serve the stated purpose?</action>
-      <action if="reader_type='humans'">For each comprehension aid (visual,
-        summary, example, callout), answer: Does this help readers
-        understand or stay engaged?</action>
-      <action>Identify sections that could be: cut entirely, merged with
-        another, moved to a different location, or split</action>
-      <action>Identify true redundancies: identical information repeated
-        without purpose (not summaries or reinforcement)</action>
-      <action>Identify scope violations: content that belongs in a different document</action>
-      <action>Identify burying: critical information hidden deep in the document</action>
-    </step>
-    <step n="4" title="Flow Analysis">
-      <action>Assess the reader's journey: Does the sequence match how readers will use this?</action>
-      <action>Identify premature detail: explanation given before the reader needs it</action>
-      <action>Identify missing scaffolding: complex ideas without adequate setup</action>
-      <action>Identify anti-patterns: FAQs that should be inline, appendices
-        that should be cut, overviews that repeat the body verbatim</action>
-      <action if="reader_type='humans'">Assess pacing: Is there enough
-        whitespace and visual variety to maintain attention?</action>
-    </step>
-    <step n="5" title="Generate Recommendations">
-      <action>Compile all findings into prioritized recommendations</action>
-      <action>Categorize each recommendation: CUT (remove entirely),
-        MERGE (combine sections), MOVE (reorder), CONDENSE (shorten
-        significantly), QUESTION (needs author decision), PRESERVE
-        (explicitly keep-for elements that might seem cuttable but
-        serve comprehension)</action>
-      <action>For each recommendation, state the rationale in one sentence</action>
-      <action>Estimate impact: how many words would this save (or cost, for PRESERVE)?</action>
-      <action>If length_target was provided, assess whether recommendations meet it</action>
-      <action if="reader_type='humans' and recommendations would cut
-        comprehension aids">Flag with warning: "This cut may impact
-        reader comprehension/engagement"</action>
-    </step>
-    <step n="6" title="Output Results">
-      <action>Output document summary (purpose, audience, reader_type, current length)</action>
-      <action>Output the recommendation list in priority order</action>
-      <action>Output estimated total reduction if all recommendations accepted</action>
-      <action if="no recommendations">Output: "No substantive changes recommended-document structure is sound"</action>
-      <output-format>
-## Document Summary
-- **Purpose:** [inferred or provided purpose]
-- **Audience:** [inferred or provided audience]
-- **Reader type:** [selected reader type]
-- **Structure model:** [selected structure model]
-- **Current length:** [X] words across [Y] sections
-
-## Recommendations
-
-### 1. [CUT/MERGE/MOVE/CONDENSE/QUESTION/PRESERVE] - [Section or element name]
-**Rationale:** [One sentence explanation]
-**Impact:** ~[X] words
-**Comprehension note:** [If applicable, note impact on reader understanding]
-
-### 2. ...
-
-## Summary
-- **Total recommendations:** [N]
-- **Estimated reduction:** [X] words ([Y]% of original)
-- **Meets length target:** [Yes/No/No target specified]
-- **Comprehension trade-offs:** [Note any cuts that sacrifice reader engagement for brevity]
-      </output-format>
-    </step>
-  </flow>
-  <halt-conditions>
-    <condition>HALT with error if content is empty or fewer than 3 words</condition>
-    <condition>HALT with error if reader_type is not "humans" or "llm"</condition>
-    <condition>If no structural issues found, output "No substantive changes
-      recommended" (this is valid completion, not an error)</condition>
-  </halt-conditions>
-</task>
+<?xml version="1.0"?>
+<!-- if possible, run this in a separate subagent or process with read access to the project, 
+  but no context except the content to review -->
+<task id="_bmad/core/tasks/editorial-review-structure.xml"
+  name="Editorial Review - Structure"
+  description="Structural editor that proposes cuts, reorganization,
+    and simplification while preserving comprehension">
+  <objective>Review document structure and propose substantive changes
+    to improve clarity and flow-run this BEFORE copy editing</objective>
+  <inputs>
+    <input name="content" required="true"
+      desc="Document to review (markdown, plain text, or structured content)" />
+    <input name="style_guide" required="false"
+      desc="Project-specific style guide. When provided, overrides all generic
+        principles in this task (except CONTENT IS SACROSANCT). The style guide
+        is the final authority on tone, structure, and language choices." />
+    <input name="purpose" required="false"
+      desc="Document's intended purpose (e.g., 'quickstart tutorial',
+        'API reference', 'conceptual overview')" />
+    <input name="target_audience" required="false"
+      desc="Who reads this? (e.g., 'new users', 'experienced developers',
+        'decision makers')" />
+    <input name="reader_type" required="false" default="humans"
+      desc="'humans' (default) preserves comprehension aids;
+        'llm' optimizes for precision and density" />
+    <input name="length_target" required="false"
+      desc="Target reduction (e.g., '30% shorter', 'half the length',
+        'no limit')" />
+  </inputs>
+  <llm critical="true">
+    <i>MANDATORY: Execute ALL steps in the flow section IN EXACT ORDER</i>
+    <i>DO NOT skip steps or change the sequence</i>
+    <i>HALT immediately when halt-conditions are met</i>
+    <i>Each action xml tag within step xml tag is a REQUIRED action to complete that step</i>
+    <i>You are a structural editor focused on HIGH-VALUE DENSITY</i>
+    <i>Brevity IS clarity: Concise writing respects limited attention spans and enables effective scanning</i>
+    <i>Every section must justify its existence-cut anything that delays understanding</i>
+    <i>True redundancy is failure</i>
+    <principles>
+      <i>Comprehension through calibration: Optimize for the minimum words needed to maintain understanding</i>
+      <i>Front-load value: Critical information comes first; nice-to-know comes last (or goes)</i>
+      <i>One source of truth: If information appears identically twice, consolidate</i>
+      <i>Scope discipline: Content that belongs in a different document should be cut or linked</i>
+      <i>Propose, don't execute: Output recommendations-user decides what to accept</i>
+      <i critical="true">CONTENT IS SACROSANCT: Never challenge ideas—only optimize how they're organized.</i>
+    </principles>
+    <i critical="true">STYLE GUIDE OVERRIDE: If a style_guide input is provided,
+      it overrides ALL generic principles in this task (including human-reader-principles,
+      llm-reader-principles, reader_type-specific priorities, structure-models selection,
+      and the Microsoft Writing Style Guide baseline). The ONLY exception is CONTENT IS
+      SACROSANCT—never change what ideas say, only how they're expressed. When style
+      guide conflicts with this task, style guide wins.</i>
+    <human-reader-principles>
+      <i>These elements serve human comprehension and engagement-preserve unless clearly wasteful:</i>
+      <i>Visual aids: Diagrams, images, and flowcharts anchor understanding</i>
+      <i>Expectation-setting: "What You'll Learn" helps readers confirm they're in the right place</i>
+      <i>Reader's Journey: Organize content biologically (linear progression), not logically (database)</i>
+      <i>Mental models: Overview before details prevents cognitive overload</i>
+      <i>Warmth: Encouraging tone reduces anxiety for new users</i>
+      <i>Whitespace: Admonitions and callouts provide visual breathing room</i>
+      <i>Summaries: Recaps help retention; they're reinforcement, not redundancy</i>
+      <i>Examples: Concrete illustrations make abstract concepts accessible</i>
+      <i>Engagement: "Flow" techniques (transitions, variety) are functional, not "fluff"-they maintain attention</i>
+    </human-reader-principles>
+    <llm-reader-principles>
+      <i>When reader_type='llm', optimize for PRECISION and UNAMBIGUITY:</i>
+      <i>Dependency-first: Define concepts before usage to minimize hallucination risk</i>
+      <i>Cut emotional language, encouragement, and orientation sections</i>
+      <i>
+        IF concept is well-known from training (e.g., "conventional
+        commits", "REST APIs"): Reference the standard-don't re-teach it
+        ELSE: Be explicit-don't assume the LLM will infer correctly
+      </i>
+      <i>Use consistent terminology-same word for same concept throughout</i>
+      <i>Eliminate hedging ("might", "could", "generally")-use direct statements</i>
+      <i>Prefer structured formats (tables, lists, YAML) over prose</i>
+      <i>Reference known standards ("conventional commits", "Google style guide") to leverage training</i>
+      <i>STILL PROVIDE EXAMPLES even for known standards-grounds the LLM in your specific expectation</i>
+      <i>Unambiguous references-no unclear antecedents ("it", "this", "the above")</i>
+      <i>Note: LLM documents may be LONGER than human docs in some areas
+        (more explicit) while shorter in others (no warmth)</i>
+    </llm-reader-principles>
+    <structure-models>
+      <model name="Tutorial/Guide (Linear)" applicability="Tutorials, detailed guides, how-to articles, walkthroughs">
+        <i>Prerequisites: Setup/Context MUST precede action</i>
+        <i>Sequence: Steps must follow strict chronological or logical dependency order</i>
+        <i>Goal-oriented: clear 'Definition of Done' at the end</i>
+      </model>
+      <model name="Reference/Database" applicability="API docs, glossaries, configuration references, cheat sheets">
+        <i>Random Access: No narrative flow required; user jumps to specific item</i>
+        <i>MECE: Topics are Mutually Exclusive and Collectively Exhaustive</i>
+        <i>Consistent Schema: Every item follows identical structure (e.g., Signature to Params to Returns)</i>
+      </model>
+      <model name="Explanation (Conceptual)"
+        applicability="Deep dives, architecture overviews, conceptual guides,
+          whitepapers, project context">
+        <i>Abstract to Concrete: Definition to Context to Implementation/Example</i>
+        <i>Scaffolding: Complex ideas built on established foundations</i>
+      </model>
+      <model name="Prompt/Task Definition (Functional)"
+        applicability="BMAD tasks, prompts, system instructions, XML definitions">
+        <i>Meta-first: Inputs, usage constraints, and context defined before instructions</i>
+        <i>Separation of Concerns: Instructions (logic) separate from Data (content)</i>
+        <i>Step-by-step: Execution flow must be explicit and ordered</i>
+      </model>
+      <model name="Strategic/Context (Pyramid)" applicability="PRDs, research reports, proposals, decision records">
+        <i>Top-down: Conclusion/Status/Recommendation starts the document</i>
+        <i>Grouping: Supporting context grouped logically below the headline</i>
+        <i>Ordering: Most critical information first</i>
+        <i>MECE: Arguments/Groups are Mutually Exclusive and Collectively Exhaustive</i>
+        <i>Evidence: Data supports arguments, never leads</i>
+      </model>
+    </structure-models>
+  </llm>
+  <flow>
+    <step n="1" title="Validate Input">
+      <action>Check if content is empty or contains fewer than 3 words</action>
+      <action if="empty or fewer than 3 words">HALT with error: "Content
+        too short for substantive review (minimum 3 words required)"</action>
+      <action>Validate reader_type is "humans" or "llm" (or not provided, defaulting to "humans")</action>
+      <action if="reader_type is invalid">HALT with error: "Invalid reader_type. Must be 'humans' or 'llm'"</action>
+      <action>Identify document type and structure (headings, sections, lists, etc.)</action>
+      <action>Note the current word count and section count</action>
+    </step>
+    <step n="2" title="Understand Purpose">
+      <action>If purpose was provided, use it; otherwise infer from content</action>
+      <action>If target_audience was provided, use it; otherwise infer from content</action>
+      <action>Identify the core question the document answers</action>
+      <action>State in one sentence: "This document exists to help [audience] accomplish [goal]"</action>
+      <action>Select the most appropriate structural model from structure-models based on purpose/audience</action>
+      <action>Note reader_type and which principles apply (human-reader-principles or llm-reader-principles)</action>
+    </step>
+    <step n="3" title="Structural Analysis" critical="true">
+      <action if="style_guide provided">Consult style_guide now and note its key requirements—these override default principles for this
+        analysis</action>
+      <action>Map the document structure: list each major section with its word count</action>
+      <action>Evaluate structure against the selected model's primary rules
+        (e.g., 'Does recommendation come first?' for Pyramid)</action>
+      <action>For each section, answer: Does this directly serve the stated purpose?</action>
+      <action if="reader_type='humans'">For each comprehension aid (visual,
+        summary, example, callout), answer: Does this help readers
+        understand or stay engaged?</action>
+      <action>Identify sections that could be: cut entirely, merged with
+        another, moved to a different location, or split</action>
+      <action>Identify true redundancies: identical information repeated
+        without purpose (not summaries or reinforcement)</action>
+      <action>Identify scope violations: content that belongs in a different document</action>
+      <action>Identify burying: critical information hidden deep in the document</action>
+    </step>
+    <step n="4" title="Flow Analysis">
+      <action>Assess the reader's journey: Does the sequence match how readers will use this?</action>
+      <action>Identify premature detail: explanation given before the reader needs it</action>
+      <action>Identify missing scaffolding: complex ideas without adequate setup</action>
+      <action>Identify anti-patterns: FAQs that should be inline, appendices
+        that should be cut, overviews that repeat the body verbatim</action>
+      <action if="reader_type='humans'">Assess pacing: Is there enough
+        whitespace and visual variety to maintain attention?</action>
+    </step>
+    <step n="5" title="Generate Recommendations">
+      <action>Compile all findings into prioritized recommendations</action>
+      <action>Categorize each recommendation: CUT (remove entirely),
+        MERGE (combine sections), MOVE (reorder), CONDENSE (shorten
+        significantly), QUESTION (needs author decision), PRESERVE
+        (explicitly keep-for elements that might seem cuttable but
+        serve comprehension)</action>
+      <action>For each recommendation, state the rationale in one sentence</action>
+      <action>Estimate impact: how many words would this save (or cost, for PRESERVE)?</action>
+      <action>If length_target was provided, assess whether recommendations meet it</action>
+      <action if="reader_type='humans' and recommendations would cut
+        comprehension aids">Flag with warning: "This cut may impact
+        reader comprehension/engagement"</action>
+    </step>
+    <step n="6" title="Output Results">
+      <action>Output document summary (purpose, audience, reader_type, current length)</action>
+      <action>Output the recommendation list in priority order</action>
+      <action>Output estimated total reduction if all recommendations accepted</action>
+      <action if="no recommendations">Output: "No substantive changes recommended-document structure is sound"</action>
+      <output-format>
+        ## Document Summary
+        - **Purpose:** [inferred or provided purpose]
+        - **Audience:** [inferred or provided audience]
+        - **Reader type:** [selected reader type]
+        - **Structure model:** [selected structure model]
+        - **Current length:** [X] words across [Y] sections
+
+        ## Recommendations
+
+        ### 1. [CUT/MERGE/MOVE/CONDENSE/QUESTION/PRESERVE] - [Section or element name]
+        **Rationale:** [One sentence explanation]
+        **Impact:** ~[X] words
+        **Comprehension note:** [If applicable, note impact on reader understanding]
+
+        ### 2. ...
+
+        ## Summary
+        - **Total recommendations:** [N]
+        - **Estimated reduction:** [X] words ([Y]% of original)
+        - **Meets length target:** [Yes/No/No target specified]
+        - **Comprehension trade-offs:** [Note any cuts that sacrifice reader engagement for brevity]
+      </output-format>
+    </step>
+  </flow>
+  <halt-conditions>
+    <condition>HALT with error if content is empty or fewer than 3 words</condition>
+    <condition>HALT with error if reader_type is not "humans" or "llm"</condition>
+    <condition>If no structural issues found, output "No substantive changes
+      recommended" (this is valid completion, not an error)</condition>
+  </halt-conditions>
+</task>

package/bmad/core/tasks/help.md

@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+---
+name: help
+description: Get unstuck by showing what workflow steps come next or answering questions about what to do
+---
+
+# Task: BMAD Help
+
+## ROUTING RULES
+
+- **Empty `phase` = anytime** — Universal tools work regardless of workflow state
+- **Numbered phases indicate sequence** — Phases like `1-discover` → `2-define` → `3-build` → `4-ship` flow in order (naming varies by module)
+- **Stay in module** — Guide through the active module's workflow based on phase+sequence ordering
+- **Descriptions contain routing** — Read for alternate paths (e.g., "back to previous if fixes needed")
+- **`required=true` blocks progress** — Required workflows must complete before proceeding to later phases
+- **Artifacts reveal completion** — Search resolved output paths for `outputs` patterns, fuzzy-match found files to workflow rows
+
+## DISPLAY RULES
+
+### Command-Based Workflows
+When `command` field has a value:
+- Show the command prefixed with `/` (e.g., `/bmad-bmm-create-prd`)
+
+### Agent-Based Workflows
+When `command` field is empty:
+- User loads agent first via `/agent-command`
+- Then invokes by referencing the `code` field or describing the `name` field
+- Do NOT show a slash command — show the code value and agent load instruction instead
+
+Example presentation for empty command:
+```
+Explain Concept (EC)
+Load: /tech-writer, then ask to "EC about [topic]"
+Agent: Tech Writer
+Description: Create clear technical explanations with examples...
+```
+
+## MODULE DETECTION
+
+- **Empty `module` column** → universal tools (work across all modules)
+- **Named `module`** → module-specific workflows
+
+Detect the active module from conversation context, recent workflows, or user query keywords. If ambiguous, ask the user.
+
+## INPUT ANALYSIS
+
+Determine what was just completed:
+- Explicit completion stated by user
+- Workflow completed in current conversation
+- Artifacts found matching `outputs` patterns
+- If `index.md` exists, read it for additional context
+- If still unclear, ask: "What workflow did you most recently complete?"
+
+## EXECUTION
+
+1. **Load catalog** — Load `{project-root}/_bmad/_config/bmad-help.csv`
+
+2. **Resolve output locations and config** — Scan each folder under `_bmad/` (except `_config`) for `config.yaml`. For each workflow row, resolve its `output-location` variables against that module's config so artifact paths can be searched. Also extract `communication_language` and `project_knowledge` from each scanned module's config.
+
+3. **Ground in project knowledge** — If `project_knowledge` resolves to an existing path, read available documentation files (architecture docs, project overview, tech stack references) for grounding context. Use discovered project facts when composing any project-specific output. Never fabricate project-specific details — if documentation is unavailable, state so.
+
+4. **Detect active module** — Use MODULE DETECTION above
+
+5. **Analyze input** — Task may provide a workflow name/code, conversational phrase, or nothing. Infer what was just completed using INPUT ANALYSIS above.
+
+6. **Present recommendations** — Show next steps based on:
+   - Completed workflows detected
+   - Phase/sequence ordering (ROUTING RULES)
+   - Artifact presence
+
+   **Optional items first** — List optional workflows until a required step is reached
+   **Required items next** — List the next required workflow
+
+   For each item, apply DISPLAY RULES above and include:
+   - Workflow **name**
+   - **Command** OR **Code + Agent load instruction** (per DISPLAY RULES)
+   - **Agent** title and display name from the CSV (e.g., "🎨 Alex (Designer)")
+   - Brief **description**
+
+7. **Additional guidance to convey**:
+   - Present all output in `{communication_language}`
+   - Run each workflow in a **fresh context window**
+   - For **validation workflows**: recommend using a different high-quality LLM if available
+   - For conversational requests: match the user's tone while presenting clearly
+
+8. Return to the calling process after presenting recommendations.