claude-code-workflow 6.2.5 → 6.2.6

package/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/subject-matter-expert.md

@@ -0,0 +1,281 @@
+---
+name: subject-matter-expert
+description: Domain expertise, industry standards, compliance requirements, and technical best practices
+---
+
+# Subject Matter Expert Planning Template
+
+You are a **Subject Matter Expert** specializing in domain knowledge, industry standards, compliance requirements, and technical best practices.
+
+## Your Role & Responsibilities
+
+**Primary Focus**: Domain expertise, industry standards, regulatory compliance, and technical quality assurance
+
+**Core Responsibilities**:
+- Domain-specific knowledge and best practices
+- Industry standards and regulatory compliance
+- Technical quality and architectural patterns
+- Risk assessment and mitigation strategies
+- Knowledge transfer and documentation
+- Code review and quality validation
+- Technology evaluation and recommendations
+
+**Does NOT Include**: Day-to-day development, project management, UI/UX design
+
+## Planning Document Structure
+
+Generate a comprehensive Subject Matter Expert planning document with the following structure:
+
+### 1. Domain Knowledge Assessment
+- **Domain Context**: Industry, sector, and business domain
+- **Domain Complexity**: Key concepts, rules, and relationships
+- **Domain Language**: Terminology, nomenclature, and ubiquitous language
+- **Domain Constraints**: Business rules, regulations, and limitations
+
+### 2. Industry Standards & Best Practices
+- **Applicable Standards**: ISO, IEEE, W3C, OWASP, etc.
+- **Best Practice Guidelines**: Industry-accepted patterns and approaches
+- **Coding Standards**: Language-specific conventions and style guides
+- **Architectural Patterns**: Domain-appropriate design patterns
+- **Performance Standards**: Benchmarks and optimization guidelines
+
+### 3. Regulatory & Compliance Requirements
+- **Regulatory Framework**: GDPR, HIPAA, SOX, PCI-DSS, etc.
+- **Compliance Obligations**: Legal and regulatory requirements
+- **Audit Requirements**: Logging, tracking, and reporting needs
+- **Data Protection**: Privacy, security, and retention policies
+- **Certification Needs**: Required certifications and attestations
+
+### 4. Technical Quality Standards
+- **Code Quality Metrics**: Complexity, coverage, maintainability
+- **Architecture Quality**: Modularity, coupling, cohesion
+- **Security Standards**: Authentication, authorization, encryption
+- **Performance Benchmarks**: Latency, throughput, scalability
+- **Reliability Requirements**: Availability, fault tolerance, disaster recovery
+
+### 5. Risk Assessment & Mitigation
+- **Technical Risks**: Technology choices, architectural decisions
+- **Compliance Risks**: Regulatory violations and penalties
+- **Security Risks**: Vulnerabilities and threat vectors
+- **Operational Risks**: Scalability, performance, maintenance
+- **Mitigation Strategies**: Risk reduction and contingency plans
+
+### 6. Knowledge Management
+- **Documentation Strategy**: Technical docs, runbooks, knowledge base
+- **Training Requirements**: Team upskilling and knowledge transfer
+- **Expert Networks**: Internal and external expertise resources
+- **Continuous Learning**: Technology trends and skill development
+
+### 7. Technology Evaluation
+- **Technology Assessment**: Evaluation criteria and decision framework
+- **Vendor Evaluation**: Product comparison and selection
+- **Proof of Concept**: Validation and feasibility testing
+- **Technology Roadmap**: Evolution and upgrade planning
+
+## Domain Expertise Framework
+
+### Domain-Driven Design (DDD) Principles
+- **Ubiquitous Language**: Shared vocabulary between domain experts and developers
+- **Bounded Contexts**: Clear boundaries for domain models
+- **Domain Models**: Core business logic and rules
+- **Aggregates**: Consistency boundaries and transaction scope
+- **Domain Events**: Significant state changes and triggers
+
+### Domain Analysis Techniques
+- **Event Storming**: Collaborative domain exploration
+- **Domain Modeling**: Conceptual and logical modeling
+- **Business Process Analysis**: Workflow and activity mapping
+- **Entity Relationship Analysis**: Data and relationship modeling
+
+## Industry Standards Reference
+
+### Common Standards by Domain
+- **Web Development**: W3C, WCAG 2.1, HTML5, CSS3, ECMAScript
+- **Security**: OWASP Top 10, ISO 27001, NIST, CIS Benchmarks
+- **Healthcare**: HIPAA, HL7, FHIR, DICOM
+- **Finance**: PCI-DSS, SOX, Basel III, ISO 20022
+- **Data Privacy**: GDPR, CCPA, PIPEDA
+- **Quality**: ISO 9001, CMMI, Six Sigma
+- **Cloud**: Well-Architected Framework (AWS, Azure, GCP)
+
+### Compliance Checklist Template
+```markdown
+## [Standard/Regulation Name] Compliance
+
+### Requirements
+- [ ] Requirement 1: [Description]
+- [ ] Requirement 2: [Description]
+- [ ] Requirement 3: [Description]
+
+### Implementation
+- Control 1: [Implementation approach]
+- Control 2: [Implementation approach]
+
+### Validation
+- Audit procedure: [Testing approach]
+- Evidence: [Documentation required]
+
+### Gaps & Remediation
+- Gap 1: [Description] → Remediation: [Action plan]
+- Gap 2: [Description] → Remediation: [Action plan]
+```
+
+## Technical Quality Assessment
+
+### Code Quality Dimensions
+- **Readability**: Clear, well-documented, self-explanatory code
+- **Maintainability**: Modular, testable, minimal technical debt
+- **Performance**: Efficient algorithms and resource usage
+- **Security**: Secure coding practices and vulnerability prevention
+- **Reliability**: Error handling, logging, monitoring
+
+### Architecture Quality Attributes
+- **Scalability**: Horizontal and vertical scaling capability
+- **Modularity**: Loose coupling, high cohesion
+- **Extensibility**: Easy to add new features
+- **Testability**: Unit, integration, and end-to-end testing
+- **Observability**: Logging, monitoring, tracing
+
+### Review Checklist
+- Code follows established standards and conventions
+- Architecture aligns with best practices
+- Security vulnerabilities identified and addressed
+- Performance optimizations applied where appropriate
+- Documentation complete and accurate
+- Test coverage adequate and meaningful
+- Error handling comprehensive and appropriate
+
+## Risk Management Framework
+
+### Risk Categories
+- **Technical Risk**: Technology obsolescence, complexity, integration
+- **Security Risk**: Data breaches, unauthorized access, vulnerabilities
+- **Compliance Risk**: Regulatory violations, penalties, legal liability
+- **Operational Risk**: Performance degradation, system failures, data loss
+- **Business Risk**: Market changes, competitive pressure, cost overruns
+
+### Risk Assessment Matrix
+```
+Impact × Likelihood = Risk Priority
+
+High Impact + High Likelihood = Critical (address immediately)
+High Impact + Low Likelihood = Important (plan mitigation)
+Low Impact + High Likelihood = Monitor (track and review)
+Low Impact + Low Likelihood = Accept (document only)
+```
+
+### Risk Mitigation Strategies
+- **Avoidance**: Eliminate the risk by changing approach
+- **Reduction**: Implement controls to minimize impact/likelihood
+- **Transfer**: Insurance, outsourcing, or contractual transfer
+- **Acceptance**: Acknowledge and monitor with contingency plan
+
+## Output Format
+
+Create comprehensive Subject Matter Expert deliverables:
+
+1. **Planning Document**: `subject-matter-expert-analysis.md`
+   - Domain knowledge assessment and standards review
+   - Compliance requirements and technical quality standards
+   - Risk assessment and mitigation strategies
+   - Knowledge management and technology evaluation
+
+2. **Expert Artifacts**:
+   - Compliance checklists and audit requirements
+   - Technical standards and best practice guidelines
+   - Risk register and mitigation plans
+   - Knowledge base and documentation templates
+
+## Brainstorming Documentation Files to Create
+
+When conducting brainstorming sessions, create the following files:
+
+### Individual Role Analysis File: `subject-matter-expert-analysis.md`
+```markdown
+# Subject Matter Expert Analysis: [Topic]
+
+## Domain Knowledge Assessment
+- Domain context and complexity analysis
+- Key domain concepts and relationships
+- Ubiquitous language and terminology
+- Domain-specific constraints and rules
+
+## Industry Standards Evaluation
+- Applicable standards and best practices
+- Coding and architectural standards
+- Performance and quality benchmarks
+- Industry-specific patterns and guidelines
+
+## Compliance & Regulatory Review
+- Regulatory framework and obligations
+- Compliance requirements and controls
+- Audit and documentation needs
+- Data protection and privacy considerations
+
+## Technical Quality Analysis
+- Code quality standards and metrics
+- Architecture quality attributes
+- Security standards and practices
+- Performance and reliability requirements
+
+## Risk Assessment
+- Technical and security risks identified
+- Compliance and operational risks
+- Risk prioritization and severity
+- Mitigation strategies and controls
+
+## Knowledge Management
+- Documentation requirements
+- Training and knowledge transfer needs
+- Expert resources and networks
+- Continuous learning opportunities
+
+## Recommendations
+- Domain-driven design approach
+- Standards compliance strategy
+- Technical quality improvements
+- Risk mitigation priorities
+```
+
+### Session Contribution Template
+For role-specific contributions to broader brainstorming sessions, provide:
+- Domain expertise and industry context
+- Standards compliance and best practices
+- Technical quality assessment and recommendations
+- Risk identification and mitigation strategies
+
+## Knowledge Transfer Strategies
+
+### Documentation Practices
+- **Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)**: Document key decisions
+- **Runbooks**: Operational procedures and troubleshooting
+- **API Documentation**: Clear, comprehensive API specifications
+- **Code Comments**: Explain why, not what
+- **Knowledge Base**: Searchable repository of solutions
+
+### Training Approaches
+- **Workshops**: Hands-on, interactive learning sessions
+- **Code Reviews**: Teaching through collaborative review
+- **Pair Programming**: Knowledge sharing during development
+- **Brown Bags**: Informal lunch-and-learn sessions
+- **Documentation**: Written guides and tutorials
+
+## Key Success Factors
+
+1. **Deep Domain Knowledge**: Expert-level understanding of the domain
+2. **Current with Standards**: Up-to-date with industry best practices
+3. **Compliance Awareness**: Thorough knowledge of regulations
+4. **Technical Excellence**: High standards for quality and architecture
+5. **Risk Awareness**: Proactive identification and mitigation
+6. **Effective Communication**: Translate expertise to actionable guidance
+7. **Continuous Learning**: Stay current with evolving standards and practices
+
+## Important Reminders
+
+1. **Balance perfection with pragmatism** - good enough today vs. perfect tomorrow
+2. **Document decisions** - capture rationale for future reference
+3. **Share knowledge proactively** - don't silo expertise
+4. **Stay current** - technology and standards evolve rapidly
+5. **Consider context** - standards should fit the problem and organization
+6. **Focus on risk** - prioritize based on impact and likelihood
+7. **Enable the team** - provide guidance without blocking progress

package/.claude/workflows/cli-templates/planning-roles/synthesis-role.md

@@ -0,0 +1,414 @@
+# ⚠️ DEPRECATED: Synthesis Role Template
+
+## DEPRECATION NOTICE
+
+**This template is DEPRECATED and no longer used.**
+
+### Why Deprecated
+The `/workflow:brainstorm:synthesis` command has been redesigned:
+- **Old behavior**: Generated synthesis-specification.md consolidating all role analyses
+- **New behavior**: Performs cross-role analysis, identifies ambiguities, interacts with user for clarification, and updates role analysis.md files directly
+
+### Migration
+- **Role analyses are the source of truth**: Each role's analysis.md file is updated directly
+- **Planning reads role documents**: The planning phase dynamically reads all role analysis.md files
+- **No template needed**: The clarification workflow doesn't require a document template
+
+### Historical Context
+This template was used to guide the generation of synthesis-specification.md from multiple role perspectives. It is preserved for historical reference but should not be used in the new architecture.
+
+---
+
+# Original Template (Historical Reference)
+
+## Purpose
+Generate comprehensive synthesis-specification.md that consolidates all role perspectives from brainstorming into actionable implementation specification.
+
+## Role Focus
+- **Cross-Role Integration**: Synthesize insights from all participating roles
+- **Decision Transparency**: Document both adopted and rejected alternatives
+- **Process Integration**: Include team capabilities, risks, and collaboration patterns
+- **Visual Documentation**: Key diagrams via Mermaid (architecture, data model, user journey)
+- **Priority Matrix**: Quantified recommendations with multi-dimensional evaluation
+- **Actionable Planning**: Phased implementation roadmap with clear next steps
+
+## Document Structure Template
+
+### synthesis-specification.md
+
+```markdown
+# [Topic] - Integrated Implementation Specification
+
+**Framework Reference**: @guidance-specification.md | **Generated**: [timestamp] | **Session**: WFS-[topic-slug]
+**Source Integration**: All brainstorming role perspectives consolidated
+**Document Type**: Requirements & Design Specification (WHAT to build)
+
+---
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+Provide strategic overview covering:
+- **Key Insights**: Major findings from cross-role analysis
+- **Breakthrough Opportunities**: Innovation opportunities identified
+- **Implementation Priorities**: High-level prioritization with rationale
+- **Strategic Direction**: Recommended approach and vision
+
+Include metrics from role synthesis:
+- Roles synthesized: [count]
+- Requirements captured: [FR/NFR/BR counts]
+- Controversial decisions: [count]
+- Risk factors identified: [count]
+
+---
+
+## Key Designs & Decisions
+
+### Core Architecture Diagram
+```mermaid
+graph TD
+    A[Component A] --> B[Component B]
+    B --> C[Component C]
+```
+*Reference: @system-architect/analysis.md#architecture-diagram*
+
+### User Journey Map
+![User Journey](./assets/user-journey.png)
+*Reference: @ux-expert/analysis.md#user-journey*
+
+### Data Model Overview
+```mermaid
+erDiagram
+    USER ||--o{ ORDER : places
+    ORDER ||--|{ LINE-ITEM : contains
+```
+*Reference: @data-architect/analysis.md#data-model*
+
+### Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)
+
+**ADR-01: [Decision Title]**
+- **Context**: Background and problem statement
+- **Decision**: Chosen approach
+- **Rationale**: Why this approach was selected
+- **Consequences**: Expected impacts and tradeoffs
+- **Reference**: @[role]/analysis.md#adr-01
+
+[Repeat for each major architectural decision]
+
+---
+
+## Controversial Points & Alternatives
+
+Document disagreements and alternative approaches considered:
+
+| Point | Adopted Solution | Alternative Solution(s) | Decision Rationale | Dissenting Roles |
+|-------|------------------|-------------------------|--------------------| -----------------|
+| Authentication | JWT Token (@security-expert) | Session-Cookie (@system-architect) | Stateless API support for multi-platform | System Architect noted session performance benefits |
+| UI Framework | React (@ui-designer) | Vue.js (@subject-matter-expert) | Team expertise and ecosystem maturity | Subject Matter Expert preferred Vue for learning curve |
+
+*This section preserves decision context and rejected alternatives for future reference.*
+
+**Analysis Guidelines**:
+- Identify where roles disagreed on approach
+- Document both solutions with equal respect
+- Explain why one was chosen over the other
+- Preserve dissenting perspectives for future consideration
+
+---
+
+## Requirements & Acceptance Criteria
+
+### Functional Requirements
+
+| ID | Description | Rationale Summary | Source | Priority | Acceptance Criteria | Dependencies |
+|----|-------------|-------------------|--------|----------|---------------------|--------------|
+| FR-01 | User authentication | Enable secure multi-platform access | @product-manager/analysis.md | High | User can login via email/password with MFA | None |
+| FR-02 | Data export | User-requested analytics feature | @product-owner/analysis.md | Medium | Export to CSV/JSON formats | FR-01 |
+
+**Guidelines**:
+- Extract from product-manager, product-owner, and other role analyses
+- Include rationale summary for immediate understanding
+- Specify clear, testable acceptance criteria
+- Map dependencies between requirements
+
+### Non-Functional Requirements
+
+| ID | Description | Rationale Summary | Target | Validation Method | Source |
+|----|-------------|-------------------|--------|-------------------|--------|
+| NFR-01 | Response time | UX research shows <200ms critical for engagement | <200ms | Load testing | @ux-expert/analysis.md |
+| NFR-02 | Data encryption | Compliance requirement (GDPR, HIPAA) | AES-256 | Security audit | @security-expert/analysis.md |
+
+**Guidelines**:
+- Extract performance, security, scalability requirements
+- Include specific, measurable targets
+- Reference source role for traceability
+
+### Business Requirements
+
+| ID | Description | Rationale Summary | Value | Success Metric | Source |
+|----|-------------|-------------------|-------|----------------|--------|
+| BR-01 | User retention | Market analysis shows engagement gap | High | 80% 30-day retention | @product-manager/analysis.md |
+| BR-02 | Revenue growth | Business case justification for investment | High | 25% MRR increase | @product-owner/analysis.md |
+
+**Guidelines**:
+- Capture business value and success metrics
+- Link to product-manager and product-owner analyses
+
+---
+
+## Design Specifications
+
+### UI/UX Guidelines
+**Consolidated from**: @ui-designer/analysis.md, @ux-expert/analysis.md
+
+- **Component Specifications**: Reusable UI components and patterns
+- **Interaction Patterns**: User interaction flows and behaviors
+- **Visual Design System**: Colors, typography, spacing guidelines
+- **Accessibility Requirements**: WCAG compliance, screen reader support
+- **User Flow Specifications**: Step-by-step user journeys
+- **Responsive Design**: Mobile, tablet, desktop breakpoints
+
+### Architecture Design
+**Consolidated from**: @system-architect/analysis.md, @data-architect/analysis.md
+
+- **System Architecture**: High-level component architecture and interactions
+- **Data Flow**: Data processing pipelines and transformations
+- **Storage Strategy**: Database selection, schema design, caching
+- **Technology Stack**: Languages, frameworks, infrastructure decisions
+- **Integration Patterns**: Service communication, API design
+- **Scalability Approach**: Horizontal/vertical scaling strategies
+
+### Domain Expertise & Standards
+**Consolidated from**: @subject-matter-expert/analysis.md
+
+- **Industry Standards**: Compliance requirements (HIPAA, GDPR, etc.)
+- **Best Practices**: Domain-specific proven patterns
+- **Regulatory Requirements**: Legal and compliance constraints
+- **Technical Quality**: Code quality, testing, documentation standards
+- **Domain-Specific Patterns**: Industry-proven architectural patterns
+
+---
+
+## Process & Collaboration Concerns
+**Consolidated from**: @scrum-master/analysis.md, @product-owner/analysis.md
+
+### Team Capability Assessment
+
+| Required Skill | Current Level | Gap Analysis | Mitigation Strategy | Reference |
+|----------------|---------------|--------------|---------------------|-----------|
+| Kubernetes | Intermediate | Need advanced knowledge for scaling | Training + external consultant | @scrum-master/analysis.md |
+| React Hooks | Advanced | Team ready | None | @scrum-master/analysis.md |
+| GraphQL | Beginner | Significant gap for API layer | 2-week training + mentor pairing | @scrum-master/analysis.md |
+
+**Guidelines**:
+- Identify all required technical skills
+- Assess team's current capability level
+- Document gap and mitigation plan
+- Estimate timeline impact of skill gaps
+
+### Process Risks
+
+| Risk | Impact | Probability | Mitigation | Owner | Reference |
+|------|--------|-------------|------------|-------|-----------|
+| Cross-team API dependency | High | Medium | Early API contract definition | Tech Lead | @scrum-master/analysis.md |
+| UX-Dev alignment gap | Medium | High | Weekly design sync meetings | Product Manager | @ux-expert/analysis.md |
+
+**Guidelines**:
+- Capture both technical and process risks
+- Include probability and impact assessment
+- Specify concrete mitigation strategies
+- Assign ownership for risk management
+
+### Collaboration Patterns
+
+Document recommended collaboration workflows:
+
+- **Design-Dev Pairing**: UI Designer and Frontend Dev pair programming for complex interactions
+- **Architecture Reviews**: Weekly arch review for system-level decisions
+- **User Testing Cadence**: Bi-weekly UX testing sessions with real users
+- **Code Review Process**: PR review within 24 hours, 2 approvals required
+- **Daily Standups**: 15-minute sync across all roles
+
+*Reference: @scrum-master/analysis.md#collaboration*
+
+### Timeline Constraints
+
+Document known constraints that affect planning:
+
+- **Blocking Dependencies**: Project-X API must complete before Phase 2
+- **Resource Constraints**: Only 2 backend developers available in Q1
+- **External Dependencies**: Third-party OAuth provider integration timeline (6 weeks)
+- **Hard Deadlines**: MVP launch date for investor demo (Q2 end)
+
+*Reference: @scrum-master/analysis.md#constraints*
+
+---
+
+## Implementation Roadmap (High-Level)
+
+### Development Phases
+
+**Phase 1** (0-3 months): Foundation and Core Features
+- Infrastructure setup and basic architecture
+- Core authentication and user management
+- Essential functional requirements (FR-01, FR-02, FR-03)
+- Foundational UI components
+
+**Phase 2** (3-6 months): Advanced Features and Integrations
+- Advanced functional requirements
+- Third-party integrations
+- Analytics and reporting
+- Advanced UI/UX enhancements
+
+**Phase 3** (6+ months): Optimization and Innovation
+- Performance optimization
+- Advanced analytics and ML features
+- Innovation opportunities from brainstorming
+- Technical debt reduction
+
+### Technical Guidelines
+
+**Development Standards**:
+- Code organization and project structure
+- Naming conventions and style guides
+- Version control and branching strategy
+- Development environment setup
+
+**Testing Strategy**:
+- Unit testing (80% coverage minimum)
+- Integration testing approach
+- E2E testing for critical paths
+- Performance testing benchmarks
+
+**Deployment Approach**:
+- CI/CD pipeline configuration
+- Staging and production environments
+- Monitoring and alerting setup
+- Rollback procedures
+
+### Feature Grouping (Epic-Level)
+
+**Epic 1: User Authentication & Authorization**
+- Requirements: FR-01, FR-03, NFR-02
+- Priority: High
+- Dependencies: None
+- Estimated Timeline: 4 weeks
+
+**Epic 2: Data Management & Export**
+- Requirements: FR-02, FR-05, NFR-01
+- Priority: Medium
+- Dependencies: Epic 1
+- Estimated Timeline: 6 weeks
+
+[Continue for all major feature groups]
+
+**Note**: Detailed task breakdown into executable work items is handled by `/workflow:plan` → `IMPL_PLAN.md`
+
+---
+
+## Risk Assessment & Mitigation
+
+### Critical Risks Identified
+
+**Technical Risks**:
+1. **Risk**: Database scalability under projected load
+   - **Impact**: High (system downtime, user dissatisfaction)
+   - **Probability**: Medium
+   - **Mitigation**: Early load testing, database sharding plan, caching strategy
+   - **Owner**: System Architect
+
+2. **Risk**: Third-party API reliability and rate limits
+   - **Impact**: Medium (feature degradation)
+   - **Probability**: High
+   - **Mitigation**: Implement circuit breakers, fallback mechanisms, local caching
+   - **Owner**: Backend Lead
+
+**Process Risks**:
+3. **Risk**: Cross-team coordination delays
+   - **Impact**: High (timeline slippage)
+   - **Probability**: Medium
+   - **Mitigation**: Weekly sync meetings, clear API contracts, buffer time in estimates
+   - **Owner**: Scrum Master
+
+4. **Risk**: Skill gap in new technologies
+   - **Impact**: Medium (quality issues, slower delivery)
+   - **Probability**: High
+   - **Mitigation**: Training program, pair programming, external consultant support
+   - **Owner**: Engineering Manager
+
+### Success Factors
+
+**Key factors for implementation success**:
+- Strong product-engineering collaboration with weekly syncs
+- Clear acceptance criteria and definition of done
+- Regular user testing and feedback integration
+- Proactive risk monitoring and mitigation
+
+**Continuous Monitoring Requirements**:
+- Sprint velocity and burndown tracking
+- Code quality metrics (coverage, complexity, tech debt)
+- Performance metrics (response time, error rate, uptime)
+- User satisfaction metrics (NPS, usage analytics)
+
+**Quality Gates and Validation Checkpoints**:
+- Code review approval before merge
+- Automated test suite passing (unit, integration, E2E)
+- Security scan and vulnerability assessment
+- Performance benchmark validation
+- Stakeholder demo and approval before production
+
+---
+
+*Complete implementation specification consolidating all role perspectives into actionable guidance*
+```
+
+## Analysis Guidelines for Agent
+
+### Cross-Role Synthesis Process
+
+1. **Load All Role Analyses**: Read guidance-specification.md and all discovered */analysis.md files
+2. **Extract Key Insights**: Identify main recommendations, concerns, and innovations from each role
+3. **Identify Consensus Areas**: Find common themes across multiple roles
+4. **Document Disagreements**: Capture controversial points where roles differ
+5. **Prioritize Recommendations**: Use multi-dimensional scoring:
+   - Business impact (product-manager, product-owner)
+   - Technical feasibility (system-architect, data-architect)
+   - Implementation effort (scrum-master, developers)
+   - Risk assessment (security-expert, subject-matter-expert)
+6. **Create Comprehensive Roadmap**: Synthesize into phased implementation plan
+
+### Quality Standards
+
+- **Completeness**: Integrate ALL discovered role analyses without gaps
+- **Visual Clarity**: Include key diagrams (architecture, data model, user journey) via Mermaid or images
+- **Decision Transparency**: Document not just decisions, but alternatives and why they were rejected
+- **Insight Generation**: Identify cross-role patterns and deep insights beyond individual analyses
+- **Actionability**: Provide specific, executable recommendations with clear rationale
+- **Balance**: Give equal weight to all role perspectives (process, UX, compliance, functional)
+- **Forward-Looking**: Include long-term strategic and innovation considerations
+- **Traceability**: Every major decision links to source role analysis via @ references
+
+### @ Reference System
+
+Use @ references to link back to source role analyses:
+- `@role/analysis.md` - Reference entire role analysis
+- `@role/analysis.md#section` - Reference specific section
+- `@guidance-specification.md#point-3` - Reference framework discussion point
+
+### Dynamic Role Handling
+
+- Not all roles participate in every brainstorming session
+- Synthesize only roles that produced analysis.md files
+- Adapt structure based on available role perspectives
+- If role missing, acknowledge gap if relevant to topic
+
+### Output Validation
+
+Before completing, verify:
+- [ ] All discovered role analyses integrated
+- [ ] Framework discussion points addressed across roles
+- [ ] Controversial points documented with dissenting roles identified
+- [ ] Process concerns (team skills, risks, collaboration) captured
+- [ ] Quantified priority recommendations with evaluation criteria
+- [ ] Actionable implementation plan with phased approach
+- [ ] Comprehensive risk assessment with mitigation strategies
+- [ ] @ references to source analyses throughout document