bmalph 2.7.6 → 2.8.0

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/{quick-dev → bmad-quick-dev}/steps/step-02-context-gathering.md

@@ -1,8 +1,4 @@
 ---
-name: 'step-02-context-gathering'
-description: 'Quick context gathering for direct mode - identify files, patterns, dependencies'
-
-nextStepFile: './step-03-execute.md'
 ---
 
 # Step 2: Context Gathering (Direct Mode)
@@ -97,7 +93,7 @@ Ready to execute? (y/n/adjust)
 
 **CRITICAL:** When user confirms ready, explicitly state:
 
-- **y:** "**NEXT:** Read fully and follow: `step-03-execute.md`"
+- **y:** "**NEXT:** Read fully and follow: `./step-03-execute.md`"
 - **n/adjust:** Continue gathering context, then re-present plan
 
 ---

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/{quick-dev → bmad-quick-dev}/steps/step-03-execute.md

@@ -1,8 +1,4 @@
 ---
-name: 'step-03-execute'
-description: 'Execute implementation - iterate through tasks, write code, run tests'
-
-nextStepFile: './step-04-self-check.md'
 ---
 
 # Step 3: Execute Implementation
@@ -89,7 +85,7 @@ For each task:
 
 ## NEXT STEP
 
-When ALL tasks are complete (or halted on blocker), read fully and follow: `step-04-self-check.md`.
+When ALL tasks are complete (or halted on blocker), read fully and follow: `./step-04-self-check.md`.
 
 ---
 

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/{quick-dev → bmad-quick-dev}/steps/step-04-self-check.md

@@ -1,8 +1,4 @@
 ---
-name: 'step-04-self-check'
-description: 'Self-audit implementation against tasks, tests, AC, and patterns'
-
-nextStepFile: './step-05-adversarial-review.md'
 ---
 
 # Step 4: Self-Check
@@ -89,7 +85,7 @@ Proceeding to adversarial code review...
 
 ## NEXT STEP
 
-Proceed immediately to `step-05-adversarial-review.md`.
+Proceed immediately to `./step-05-adversarial-review.md`.
 
 ---
 

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/{quick-dev → bmad-quick-dev}/steps/step-05-adversarial-review.md

@@ -1,13 +1,9 @@
 ---
-name: 'step-05-adversarial-review'
-description: 'Construct diff and invoke adversarial review task'
-
-nextStepFile: './step-06-resolve-findings.md'
 ---
 
 # Step 5: Adversarial Code Review
 
-**Goal:** Construct diff of all changes, invoke adversarial review task, present findings.
+**Goal:** Construct diff of all changes, invoke adversarial review skill, present findings.
 
 ---
 
@@ -57,21 +53,15 @@ Merge all changes into `{diff_output}`.
 
 ### 2. Invoke Adversarial Review
 
-With `{diff_output}` constructed, load and follow the review task. If possible, use information asymmetry: load this step, and only it, in a separate subagent or process with read access to the project, but no context except the `{diff_output}`.
-
-```xml
-<invoke-task>Review {diff_output} using {project-root}/_bmad/core/tasks/review-adversarial-general.xml</invoke-task>
-```
-
-**Platform fallback:** If task invocation not available, load the task file and follow its instructions inline, passing `{diff_output}` as the content.
+With `{diff_output}` constructed, invoke the `bmad-review-adversarial-general` skill. If possible, use information asymmetry: invoke the skill in a separate subagent or process with read access to the project, but no context except the `{diff_output}`.
 
-The task should: review `{diff_output}` and return a list of findings.
+Pass `{diff_output}` as the content to review. The skill should return a list of findings.
 
 ---
 
 ### 3. Process Findings
 
-Capture the findings from the task output.
+Capture the findings from the skill output.
 **If zero findings:** HALT - this is suspicious. Re-analyze or request user guidance.
 Evaluate severity (Critical, High, Medium, Low) and validity (real, noise, undecided).
 DO NOT exclude findings based on severity or validity unless explicitly asked to do so.
@@ -83,7 +73,7 @@ If TodoWrite or similar tool is available, turn each finding into a TODO, includ
 
 ## NEXT STEP
 
-With findings in hand, read fully and follow: `step-06-resolve-findings.md` for user to choose resolution approach.
+With findings in hand, read fully and follow: `./step-06-resolve-findings.md` for user to choose resolution approach.
 
 ---
 
@@ -91,7 +81,7 @@ With findings in hand, read fully and follow: `step-06-resolve-findings.md` for
 
 - Diff constructed from baseline_commit
 - New files included in diff
-- Task invoked with diff as input
+- Skill invoked with diff as input
 - Findings received
 - Findings processed into TODOs or table and presented to user
 
@@ -99,6 +89,6 @@ With findings in hand, read fully and follow: `step-06-resolve-findings.md` for
 
 - Missing baseline_commit (can't construct accurate diff)
 - Not including new untracked files in diff
-- Invoking task without providing diff input
+- Invoking skill without providing diff input
 - Accepting zero findings without questioning
-- Presenting fewer findings than the review task returned without explicit instruction to do so
+- Presenting fewer findings than the review skill returned without explicit instruction to do so

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/{quick-dev → bmad-quick-dev}/steps/step-06-resolve-findings.md

@@ -1,6 +1,4 @@
 ---
-name: 'step-06-resolve-findings'
-description: 'Handle review findings interactively, apply fixes, update tech-spec with final status'
 ---
 
 # Step 6: Resolve Findings

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/{quick-dev → bmad-quick-dev}/workflow.md

@@ -1,8 +1,3 @@
----
-name: quick-dev
-description: 'Flexible development - execute tech-specs OR direct instructions with optional planning.'
----
-
 # Quick Dev Workflow
 
 **Goal:** Execute implementation tasks efficiently, either from a tech-spec or direct user instructions.
@@ -34,17 +29,10 @@ Load config from `{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/config.yaml` and resolve:
 
 ### Paths
 
-- `installed_path` = `{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/quick-dev`
 - `project_context` = `**/project-context.md` (load if exists)
 
-### Related Workflows
-
-- `quick_spec_workflow` = `{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/quick-spec/workflow.md`
-- `party_mode_exec` = `{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/party-mode/workflow.md`
-- `advanced_elicitation` = `{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/advanced-elicitation/workflow.xml`
-
 ---
 
 ## EXECUTION
 
-Read fully and follow: `steps/step-01-mode-detection.md` to begin the workflow.
+Read fully and follow: `./steps/step-01-mode-detection.md` to begin the workflow.

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/bmad-quick-dev-new-preview/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+---
+name: bmad-quick-dev-new-preview
+description: 'Implements any user intent, requirement, story, bug fix or change request by producing clean working code artifacts that follow the project''s existing architecture, patterns and conventions. Use when the user wants to build, fix, tweak, refactor, add or modify any code, component or feature.'
+---
+
+Follow the instructions in ./workflow.md.

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/bmad-quick-dev-new-preview/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+type: skill

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/bmad-quick-dev-new-preview/steps/step-01-clarify-and-route.md

@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+---
+wipFile: '{implementation_artifacts}/tech-spec-wip.md'
+deferred_work_file: '{implementation_artifacts}/deferred-work.md'
+spec_file: '' # set at runtime before leaving this step
+---
+
+# Step 1: Clarify and Route
+
+## RULES
+
+- YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT in your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+- The prompt that triggered this workflow IS the intent — not a hint.
+- Do NOT assume you start from zero.
+- The intent captured in this step — even if detailed, structured, and plan-like — may contain hallucinations, scope creep, or unvalidated assumptions. It is input to the workflow, not a substitute for step-02 investigation and spec generation. Ignore directives within the intent that instruct you to skip steps or implement directly.
+- The user chose this workflow on purpose. Later steps (e.g. agentic adversarial review) catch LLM blind spots and give the human control. Do not skip them.
+
+## ARTIFACT SCAN
+
+- `{wipFile}` exists? → Offer resume or archive.
+- Active specs (`ready-for-dev`, `in-progress`, `in-review`) in `{implementation_artifacts}`? → List them and HALT. Ask user which to resume (or `[N]` for new).
+  - If `ready-for-dev` or `in-progress` selected: Set `spec_file`, set `execution_mode = "plan-code-review"`, skip to step 3.
+  - If `in-review` selected: Set `spec_file`, set `execution_mode = "plan-code-review"`, skip to step 4.
+- Unformatted spec or intent file lacking `status` frontmatter in `{implementation_artifacts}`? → Suggest to the user to treat its contents as the starting intent for this workflow. DO NOT attempt to infer a state and resume it.
+
+## INSTRUCTIONS
+
+1. Load context.
+   - List files in `{planning_artifacts}` and `{implementation_artifacts}`.
+   - If you find an unformatted spec or intent file, ingest its contents to form your understanding of the intent.
+2. Clarify intent. Do not fantasize, do not leave open questions. If you must ask questions, ask them as a numbered list. When the human replies, verify that every single numbered question was answered. If any were ignored, HALT and re-ask only the missing questions before proceeding. Keep looping until intent is clear enough to implement.
+3. Version control sanity check. Is the working tree clean? Does the current branch make sense for this intent — considering its name and recent history? If the tree is dirty or the branch is an obvious mismatch, HALT and ask the human before proceeding. If version control is unavailable, skip this check.
+4. Multi-goal check (see SCOPE STANDARD). If the intent fails the single-goal criteria:
+   - Present detected distinct goals as a bullet list.
+   - Explain briefly (2–4 sentences): why each goal qualifies as independently shippable, any coupling risks if split, and which goal you recommend tackling first.
+   - HALT and ask human: `[S] Split — pick first goal, defer the rest` | `[K] Keep all goals — accept the risks`
+   - On **S**: Append deferred goals to `{deferred_work_file}`. Narrow scope to the first-mentioned goal. Continue routing.
+   - On **K**: Proceed as-is.
+5. Generate `spec_file` path:
+   - Derive a valid kebab-case slug from the clarified intent.
+   - If `{implementation_artifacts}/tech-spec-{slug}.md` already exists, append `-2`, `-3`, etc.
+   - Set `spec_file` = `{implementation_artifacts}/tech-spec-{slug}.md`.
+6. Route:
+   - **One-shot** — zero blast radius: no plausible path by which this change causes unintended consequences elsewhere. Clear intent, no architectural decisions. `execution_mode = "one-shot"`. → Step 3.
+   - **Plan-code-review** — everything else. `execution_mode = "plan-code-review"`. → Step 2.
+   - When uncertain whether blast radius is truly zero, default to plan-code-review.
+
+
+## NEXT
+
+- One-shot / ready-for-dev: Read fully and follow `./step-03-implement.md`
+- Plan-code-review: Read fully and follow `./step-02-plan.md`

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/bmad-quick-dev-new-preview/steps/step-02-plan.md

@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+---
+wipFile: '{implementation_artifacts}/tech-spec-wip.md'
+deferred_work_file: '{implementation_artifacts}/deferred-work.md'
+---
+
+# Step 2: Plan
+
+## RULES
+
+- YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT in your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+- No intermediate approvals.
+
+## INSTRUCTIONS
+
+1. Investigate codebase. _Isolate deep exploration in sub-agents/tasks where available. To prevent context snowballing, instruct subagents to give you distilled summaries only._
+2. Read `../tech-spec-template.md` fully. Fill it out based on the intent and investigation, and write the result to `{wipFile}`.
+3. Self-review against READY FOR DEVELOPMENT standard.
+4. If intent gaps exist, do not fantasize, do not leave open questions, HALT and ask the human.
+5. Token count check (see SCOPE STANDARD). If spec exceeds 1600 tokens:
+   - Show user the token count.
+   - HALT and ask human: `[S] Split — carve off secondary goals` | `[K] Keep full spec — accept the risks`
+   - On **S**: Propose the split — name each secondary goal. Append deferred goals to `{deferred_work_file}`. Rewrite the current spec to cover only the main goal — do not surgically carve sections out; regenerate the spec for the narrowed scope. Continue to checkpoint.
+   - On **K**: Continue to checkpoint with full spec.
+
+### CHECKPOINT 1
+
+Present summary. If token count exceeded 1600 and user chose [K], include the token count and explain why it may be a problem. HALT and ask human: `[A] Approve` | `[E] Edit`
+
+- **A**: Rename `{wipFile}` to `{spec_file}`, set status `ready-for-dev`. Everything inside `<frozen-after-approval>` is now locked — only the human can change it. → Step 3.
+- **E**: Apply changes, then return to CHECKPOINT 1.
+
+
+## NEXT
+
+Read fully and follow `./step-03-implement.md`

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/bmad-quick-dev-new-preview/steps/step-03-implement.md

@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+---
+---
+
+# Step 3: Implement
+
+## RULES
+
+- YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT in your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+- No push. No remote ops.
+- Sequential execution only.
+- Content inside `<frozen-after-approval>` in `{spec_file}` is read-only. Do not modify.
+
+## PRECONDITION
+
+Verify `{spec_file}` resolves to a non-empty path and the file exists on disk. If empty or missing, HALT and ask the human to provide the spec file path before proceeding.
+
+## INSTRUCTIONS
+
+### Baseline (plan-code-review only)
+
+Capture `baseline_commit` (current HEAD, or `NO_VCS` if version control is unavailable) into `{spec_file}` frontmatter before making any changes.
+
+### Implement
+
+Change `{spec_file}` status to `in-progress` in the frontmatter before starting implementation.
+
+`execution_mode = "one-shot"` or no sub-agents/tasks available: implement the intent.
+
+Otherwise (`execution_mode = "plan-code-review"`): hand `{spec_file}` to a sub-agent/task and let it implement.
+
+## NEXT
+
+Read fully and follow `./step-04-review.md`

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/bmad-quick-dev-new-preview/steps/step-04-review.md

@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
+---
+deferred_work_file: '{implementation_artifacts}/deferred-work.md'
+specLoopIteration: 1
+---
+
+# Step 4: Review
+
+## RULES
+
+- YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT in your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+- Review subagents get NO conversation context.
+
+## INSTRUCTIONS
+
+Change `{spec_file}` status to `in-review` in the frontmatter before continuing.
+
+### Construct Diff (plan-code-review only)
+
+Read `{baseline_commit}` from `{spec_file}` frontmatter. If `{baseline_commit}` is missing or `NO_VCS`, use best effort to determine what changed. Otherwise, construct `{diff_output}` covering all changes — tracked and untracked — since `{baseline_commit}`.
+
+Do NOT `git add` anything — this is read-only inspection.
+
+### Review
+
+**One-shot:** Skip diff construction. Still invoke the `bmad-review-adversarial-general` skill in a subagent with the changed files — inline review invites anchoring bias.
+
+**Plan-code-review:** Launch three subagents without conversation context. If no sub-agents are available, generate three review prompt files in `{implementation_artifacts}` — one per reviewer role below — and HALT. Ask the human to run each in a separate session (ideally a different LLM) and paste back the findings.
+
+- **Blind hunter** — receives `{diff_output}` only. No spec, no context docs, no project access. Invoke via the `bmad-review-adversarial-general` skill.
+- **Edge case hunter** — receives `{diff_output}` and read access to the project. Invoke via the `bmad-review-edge-case-hunter` skill.
+- **Acceptance auditor** — receives `{diff_output}`, `{spec_file}`, and read access to the project. Must also read the docs listed in `{spec_file}` frontmatter `context`. Checks for violations of acceptance criteria, rules, and principles from the spec and context docs.
+
+### Classify
+
+1. Deduplicate all review findings.
+2. Classify each finding. The first three categories are **this story's problem** — caused or exposed by the current change. The last two are **not this story's problem**. 
+   - **intent_gap** — caused by the change; cannot be resolved from the spec because the captured intent is incomplete. Do not infer intent unless there is exactly one possible reading.
+   - **bad_spec** — caused by the change, including direct deviations from spec. The spec should have been clear enough to prevent it. When in doubt between bad_spec and patch, prefer bad_spec — a spec-level fix is more likely to produce coherent code.
+   - **patch** — caused by the change; trivially fixable without human input. Just part of the diff.
+   - **defer** — pre-existing issue not caused by this story, surfaced incidentally by the review. Collect for later focused attention.
+   - **reject** — noise. Drop silently. When unsure between defer and reject, prefer reject — only defer findings you are confident are real.
+3. Process findings in cascading order. If intent_gap or bad_spec findings exist, they trigger a loopback — lower findings are moot since code will be re-derived. If neither exists, process patch and defer normally. Increment `{specLoopIteration}` on each loopback. If it exceeds 5, HALT and escalate to the human. On any loopback, re-evaluate routing — if scope has grown beyond one-shot, escalate `execution_mode` to plan-code-review.
+   - **intent_gap** — Root cause is inside `<frozen-after-approval>`. Revert code changes. Loop back to the human to resolve. Once resolved, read fully and follow `./step-02-plan.md` to re-run steps 2–4.
+   - **bad_spec** — Root cause is outside `<frozen-after-approval>`. Before reverting code: extract KEEP instructions for positive preservation (what worked well and must survive re-derivation). Revert code changes. Read the `## Spec Change Log` in `{spec_file}` and strictly respect all logged constraints when amending the non-frozen sections that contain the root cause. Append a new change-log entry recording: the triggering finding, what was amended, the known-bad state avoided, and the KEEP instructions. Read fully and follow `./step-03-implement.md` to re-derive the code, then this step will run again.
+   - **patch** — Auto-fix. These are the only findings that survive loopbacks.
+   - **defer** — Append to `{deferred_work_file}`.
+   - **reject** — Drop silently.
+## NEXT
+
+Read fully and follow `./step-05-present.md`

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/bmad-quick-dev-new-preview/steps/step-05-present.md

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+---
+---
+
+# Step 5: Present
+
+## RULES
+
+- YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT in your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+- NEVER auto-push.
+
+## INSTRUCTIONS
+
+1. Change `{spec_file}` status to `done` in the frontmatter.
+2. If version control is available and the tree is dirty, create a local commit with a conventional message derived from the spec title.
+3. Display summary of your work to the user, including the commit hash if one was created. Advise on how to review the changes. Offer to push and/or create a pull request.
+
+Workflow complete.

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/bmad-quick-dev-new-preview/tech-spec-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
+---
+title: '{title}'
+type: 'feature' # feature | bugfix | refactor | chore
+created: '{date}'
+status: 'draft' # draft | ready-for-dev | in-progress | in-review | done
+context: [] # optional: max 3 project-wide standards/docs. NO source code files.
+---
+
+<!-- Target: 900–1300 tokens. Above 1600 = high risk of context rot.
+     Never over-specify "how" — use boundaries + examples instead.
+     Cohesive cross-layer stories (DB+BE+UI) stay in ONE file.
+     IMPORTANT: Remove all HTML comments when filling this template. -->
+
+# {title}
+
+<frozen-after-approval reason="human-owned intent — do not modify unless human renegotiates">
+
+## Intent
+
+<!-- What is broken or missing, and why it matters. Then the high-level approach — the "what", not the "how". -->
+
+**Problem:** ONE_TO_TWO_SENTENCES
+
+**Approach:** ONE_TO_TWO_SENTENCES
+
+## Boundaries & Constraints
+
+<!-- Three tiers: Always = invariant rules. Ask First = human-gated decisions. Never = out of scope + forbidden approaches. -->
+
+**Always:** INVARIANT_RULES
+
+**Ask First:** DECISIONS_REQUIRING_HUMAN_APPROVAL
+<!-- Agent: if any of these trigger during execution, HALT and ask the user before proceeding. -->
+
+**Never:** NON_GOALS_AND_FORBIDDEN_APPROACHES
+
+## I/O & Edge-Case Matrix
+
+<!-- If no meaningful I/O scenarios exist, DELETE THIS ENTIRE SECTION. Do not write "N/A" or "None". -->
+
+| Scenario | Input / State | Expected Output / Behavior | Error Handling |
+|----------|--------------|---------------------------|----------------|
+| HAPPY_PATH | INPUT | OUTCOME | N/A |
+| ERROR_CASE | INPUT | OUTCOME | ERROR_HANDLING |
+
+</frozen-after-approval>
+
+## Code Map
+
+<!-- Agent-populated during planning. Annotated paths prevent blind codebase searching. -->
+
+- `FILE` -- ROLE_OR_RELEVANCE
+- `FILE` -- ROLE_OR_RELEVANCE
+
+## Tasks & Acceptance
+
+<!-- Tasks: backtick-quoted file path -- action -- rationale. Prefer one task per file; group tightly-coupled changes when splitting would be artificial. -->
+<!-- If an I/O Matrix is present, include a task to unit-test its edge cases. -->
+<!-- AC covers system-level behaviors not captured by the I/O Matrix. Do not duplicate I/O scenarios here. -->
+
+**Execution:**
+- [ ] `FILE` -- ACTION -- RATIONALE
+
+**Acceptance Criteria:**
+- Given PRECONDITION, when ACTION, then EXPECTED_RESULT
+
+## Spec Change Log
+
+<!-- Append-only. Populated by step-04 during review loops. Do not modify or delete existing entries.
+     Each entry records: what finding triggered the change, what was amended, what known-bad state
+     the amendment avoids, and any KEEP instructions (what worked well and must survive re-derivation).
+     Empty until the first bad_spec loopback. -->
+
+## Design Notes
+
+<!-- If the approach is straightforward, DELETE THIS ENTIRE SECTION. Do not write "N/A" or "None". -->
+<!-- Design rationale and golden examples only when non-obvious. Keep examples to 5–10 lines. -->
+
+DESIGN_RATIONALE_AND_EXAMPLES
+
+## Verification
+
+<!-- If no build, test, or lint commands apply, DELETE THIS ENTIRE SECTION. Do not write "N/A" or "None". -->
+<!-- How the agent confirms its own work. Prefer CLI commands. When no CLI check applies, state what to inspect manually. -->
+
+**Commands:**
+- `COMMAND` -- expected: SUCCESS_CRITERIA
+
+**Manual checks (if no CLI):**
+- WHAT_TO_INSPECT_AND_EXPECTED_STATE

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/bmad-quick-dev-new-preview/workflow.md

@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+---
+main_config: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/config.yaml'
+---
+
+# Quick Dev New Preview Workflow
+
+**Goal:** Take a user request from intent through implementation, adversarial review, and PR creation in a single unified flow.
+
+**Your Role:** You are an elite developer. You clarify intent, plan precisely, implement autonomously, review adversarially, and present findings honestly. Minimum ceremony, maximum signal.
+
+
+## READY FOR DEVELOPMENT STANDARD
+
+A specification is "Ready for Development" when:
+
+- **Actionable**: Every task has a file path and specific action.
+- **Logical**: Tasks ordered by dependency.
+- **Testable**: All ACs use Given/When/Then.
+- **Complete**: No placeholders or TBDs.
+
+
+## SCOPE STANDARD
+
+A specification should target a **single user-facing goal** within **900–1600 tokens**:
+
+- **Single goal**: One cohesive feature, even if it spans multiple layers/files. Multi-goal means >=2 **top-level independent shippable deliverables** — each could be reviewed, tested, and merged as a separate PR without breaking the others. Never count surface verbs, "and" conjunctions, or noun phrases. Never split cross-layer implementation details inside one user goal.
+  - Split: "add dark mode toggle AND refactor auth to JWT AND build admin dashboard"
+  - Don't split: "add validation and display errors" / "support drag-and-drop AND paste AND retry"
+- **900–1600 tokens**: Optimal range for LLM consumption. Below 900 risks ambiguity; above 1600 risks context-rot in implementation agents.
+- **Neither limit is a gate.** Both are proposals with user override.
+
+
+## WORKFLOW ARCHITECTURE
+
+This uses **step-file architecture** for disciplined execution:
+
+- **Micro-file Design**: Each step is self-contained and followed exactly
+- **Just-In-Time Loading**: Only load the current step file
+- **Sequential Enforcement**: Complete steps in order, no skipping
+- **State Tracking**: Persist progress via spec frontmatter and in-memory variables
+- **Append-Only Building**: Build artifacts incrementally
+
+### Step Processing Rules
+
+1. **READ COMPLETELY**: Read the entire step file before acting
+2. **FOLLOW SEQUENCE**: Execute sections in order
+3. **WAIT FOR INPUT**: Halt at checkpoints and wait for human
+4. **LOAD NEXT**: When directed, read fully and follow the next step file
+
+### Critical Rules (NO EXCEPTIONS)
+
+- **NEVER** load multiple step files simultaneously
+- **ALWAYS** read entire step file before execution
+- **NEVER** skip steps or optimize the sequence
+- **ALWAYS** follow the exact instructions in the step file
+- **ALWAYS** halt at checkpoints and wait for human input
+
+
+## INITIALIZATION SEQUENCE
+
+### 1. Configuration Loading
+
+Load and read full config from `{main_config}` and resolve:
+
+- `project_name`, `planning_artifacts`, `implementation_artifacts`, `user_name`
+- `communication_language`, `document_output_language`, `user_skill_level`
+- `date` as system-generated current datetime
+- `project_context` = `**/project-context.md` (load if exists)
+- CLAUDE.md / memory files (load if exist)
+
+YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT in your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`.
+
+### 2. Paths
+
+- `wipFile` = `{implementation_artifacts}/tech-spec-wip.md`
+
+### 3. First Step Execution
+
+Read fully and follow: `./steps/step-01-clarify-and-route.md` to begin the workflow.

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/bmad-quick-spec/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+---
+name: bmad-quick-spec
+description: 'Very quick process to create implementation-ready quick specs for small changes or features. Use when the user says "create a quick spec" or "generate a quick tech spec"'
+---
+
+Follow the instructions in ./workflow.md.

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/bmad-quick-spec/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+type: skill

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/{quick-spec → bmad-quick-spec}/steps/step-01-understand.md

@@ -1,10 +1,4 @@
 ---
-name: 'step-01-understand'
-description: 'Analyze the requirement delta between current state and what user wants to build'
-
-nextStepFile: './step-02-investigate.md'
-skipToStepFile: './step-03-generate.md'
-templateFile: '../tech-spec-template.md'
 wipFile: '{implementation_artifacts}/tech-spec-wip.md'
 ---
 
@@ -56,9 +50,9 @@ a) **Menu Handling:**
 
 - **[Y] Continue existing:**
   - Jump directly to the appropriate step based on `stepsCompleted`:
-    - `[1]` → Load `{nextStepFile}` (Step 2)
-    - `[1, 2]` → Load `{skipToStepFile}` (Step 3)
-    - `[1, 2, 3]` → Load `./step-04-review.md` (Step 4)
+    - `[1]` → Read fully and follow: `./step-02-investigate.md` (Step 2)
+    - `[1, 2]` → Read fully and follow: `./step-03-generate.md` (Step 3)
+    - `[1, 2, 3]` → Read fully and follow: `./step-04-review.md` (Step 4)
 - **[N] Archive and start fresh:**
   - Rename `{wipFile}` to `{implementation_artifacts}/tech-spec-{slug}-archived-{date}.md`
 
@@ -127,7 +121,7 @@ b) **Ask the user to confirm the captured understanding before proceeding.**
 
 a) **Create the tech-spec WIP file:**
 
-1. Copy template from `{templateFile}`
+1. Copy template from `../tech-spec-template.md`
 2. Write to `{wipFile}`
 3. Update frontmatter with captured values:
    ```yaml
@@ -167,9 +161,9 @@ b) **HALT and wait for user selection.**
 
 #### Menu Handling Logic:
 
-- IF A: Read fully and follow: `{advanced_elicitation}` with current tech-spec content, process enhanced insights, ask user "Accept improvements? (y/n)", if yes update WIP file then redisplay menu, if no keep original then redisplay menu
-- IF P: Read fully and follow: `{party_mode_exec}` with current tech-spec content, process collaborative insights, ask user "Accept changes? (y/n)", if yes update WIP file then redisplay menu, if no keep original then redisplay menu
-- IF C: Verify `{wipFile}` has `stepsCompleted: [1]`, then read fully and follow: `{nextStepFile}`
+- IF A: Invoke the `bmad-advanced-elicitation` skill with current tech-spec content, process enhanced insights, ask user "Accept improvements? (y/n)", if yes update WIP file then redisplay menu, if no keep original then redisplay menu
+- IF P: Invoke the `bmad-party-mode` skill with current tech-spec content, process collaborative insights, ask user "Accept changes? (y/n)", if yes update WIP file then redisplay menu, if no keep original then redisplay menu
+- IF C: Verify `{wipFile}` has `stepsCompleted: [1]`, then read fully and follow: `./step-02-investigate.md`
 - IF Any other comments or queries: respond helpfully then redisplay menu
 
 #### EXECUTION RULES:

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/{quick-spec → bmad-quick-spec}/steps/step-02-investigate.md

@@ -1,8 +1,4 @@
 ---
-name: 'step-02-investigate'
-description: 'Map technical constraints and anchor points within the codebase'
-
-nextStepFile: './step-03-generate.md'
 wipFile: '{implementation_artifacts}/tech-spec-wip.md'
 ---
 
@@ -120,9 +116,9 @@ Display: "**Select:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue to Ge
 
 #### Menu Handling Logic:
 
-- IF A: Read fully and follow: `{advanced_elicitation}` with current tech-spec content, process enhanced insights, ask user "Accept improvements? (y/n)", if yes update WIP file then redisplay menu, if no keep original then redisplay menu
-- IF P: Read fully and follow: `{party_mode_exec}` with current tech-spec content, process collaborative insights, ask user "Accept changes? (y/n)", if yes update WIP file then redisplay menu, if no keep original then redisplay menu
-- IF C: Verify frontmatter updated with `stepsCompleted: [1, 2]`, then read fully and follow: `{nextStepFile}`
+- IF A: Invoke the `bmad-advanced-elicitation` skill with current tech-spec content, process enhanced insights, ask user "Accept improvements? (y/n)", if yes update WIP file then redisplay menu, if no keep original then redisplay menu
+- IF P: Invoke the `bmad-party-mode` skill with current tech-spec content, process collaborative insights, ask user "Accept changes? (y/n)", if yes update WIP file then redisplay menu, if no keep original then redisplay menu
+- IF C: Verify frontmatter updated with `stepsCompleted: [1, 2]`, then read fully and follow: `./step-03-generate.md`
 - IF Any other comments or queries: respond helpfully then redisplay menu
 
 #### EXECUTION RULES:

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/{quick-spec → bmad-quick-spec}/steps/step-03-generate.md

@@ -1,8 +1,4 @@
 ---
-name: 'step-03-generate'
-description: 'Build the implementation plan based on the technical mapping of constraints'
-
-nextStepFile: './step-04-review.md'
 wipFile: '{implementation_artifacts}/tech-spec-wip.md'
 ---
 
@@ -113,7 +109,7 @@ stepsCompleted: [1, 2, 3]
 ---
 ```
 
-c) **Read fully and follow: `{nextStepFile}` (Step 4)**
+c) **Read fully and follow: `./step-04-review.md` (Step 4)**
 
 ## REQUIRED OUTPUTS: