create-byan-agent 2.1.0 → 2.1.1

package/_bmad/core/resources/excalidraw/validate-json-instructions.md

@@ -1,79 +0,0 @@
-# JSON Validation Instructions
-
-## Purpose
-
-Validate Excalidraw JSON files after saving to catch syntax errors (missing commas, brackets, quotes).
-
-## How to Validate
-
-Use Node.js built-in JSON parsing to validate the file:
-
-```bash
-node -e "JSON.parse(require('fs').readFileSync('FILE_PATH', 'utf8')); console.log('✓ Valid JSON')"
-```
-
-Replace `FILE_PATH` with the actual file path.
-
-## Exit Codes
-
-- Exit code 0 = Valid JSON
-- Exit code 1 = Invalid JSON (syntax error)
-
-## Error Output
-
-If invalid, Node.js will output:
-
-- Error message with description
-- Position in file where error occurred
-- Line and column information (if available)
-
-## Common Errors and Fixes
-
-### Missing Comma
-
-```
-SyntaxError: Expected ',' or '}' after property value
-```
-
-**Fix:** Add comma after the property value
-
-### Missing Bracket/Brace
-
-```
-SyntaxError: Unexpected end of JSON input
-```
-
-**Fix:** Add missing closing bracket `]` or brace `}`
-
-### Extra Comma (Trailing)
-
-```
-SyntaxError: Unexpected token ,
-```
-
-**Fix:** Remove the trailing comma before `]` or `}`
-
-### Missing Quote
-
-```
-SyntaxError: Unexpected token
-```
-
-**Fix:** Add missing quote around string value
-
-## Workflow Integration
-
-After saving an Excalidraw file, run validation:
-
-1. Save the file
-2. Run: `node -e "JSON.parse(require('fs').readFileSync('{{save_location}}', 'utf8')); console.log('✓ Valid JSON')"`
-3. If validation fails:
-   - Read the error message for line/position
-   - Open the file at that location
-   - Fix the syntax error
-   - Save and re-validate
-4. Repeat until validation passes
-
-## Critical Rule
-
-**NEVER delete the file due to validation errors - always fix the syntax error at the reported location.**

package/_bmad/core/tasks/editorial-review-prose.xml

@@ -1,100 +0,0 @@
-<task id="_bmad/core/tasks/editorial-review-prose.xml"
-  name="Editorial Review - Prose"
-  description="Clinical copy-editor that reviews text for communication issues"
-  standalone="true">
-
-  <objective>Review text for communication issues that impede comprehension and output suggested fixes in a three-column table</objective>
-
-  <inputs>
-    <input name="content" required="true" desc="Cohesive unit of text to review (markdown, plain text, or text-heavy XML)" />
-    <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="reader_type" required="false" default="humans" desc="'humans' (default) for standard editorial, 'llm' for precision focus" />
-  </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 clinical copy-editor: precise, professional, neither warm nor cynical</i>
-    <i>Apply Microsoft Writing Style Guide principles as your baseline</i>
-    <i>Focus on communication issues that impede comprehension - not style preferences</i>
-    <i>NEVER rewrite for preference - only fix genuine issues</i>
-
-    <i critical="true">CONTENT IS SACROSANCT: Never challenge ideas—only clarify how they're expressed.</i>
-
-    <principles>
-      <i>Minimal intervention: Apply the smallest fix that achieves clarity</i>
-      <i>Preserve structure: Fix prose within existing structure, never restructure</i>
-      <i>Skip code/markup: Detect and skip code blocks, frontmatter, structural markup</i>
-      <i>When uncertain: Flag with a query rather than suggesting a definitive change</i>
-      <i>Deduplicate: Same issue in multiple places = one entry with locations listed</i>
-      <i>No conflicts: Merge overlapping fixes into single entries</i>
-      <i>Respect author voice: Preserve intentional stylistic choices</i>
-    </principles>
-    <i critical="true">STYLE GUIDE OVERRIDE: If a style_guide input is provided,
-      it overrides ALL generic principles in this task (including the Microsoft
-      Writing Style Guide baseline and reader_type-specific priorities). 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>
-  </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 editorial 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 content type (markdown, plain text, XML with text)</action>
-      <action>Note any code blocks, frontmatter, or structural markup to skip</action>
-    </step>
-
-    <step n="2" title="Analyze Style">
-      <action>Analyze the style, tone, and voice of the input text</action>
-      <action>Note any intentional stylistic choices to preserve (informal tone, technical jargon, rhetorical patterns)</action>
-      <action>Calibrate review approach based on reader_type parameter</action>
-      <action if="reader_type='llm'">Prioritize: unambiguous references, consistent terminology, explicit structure, no hedging</action>
-      <action if="reader_type='humans'">Prioritize: clarity, flow, readability, natural progression</action>
-    </step>
-
-    <step n="3" title="Editorial Review" critical="true">
-      <action if="style_guide provided">Consult style_guide now and note its key requirements—these override default principles for this review</action>
-      <action>Review all prose sections (skip code blocks, frontmatter, structural markup)</action>
-      <action>Identify communication issues that impede comprehension</action>
-      <action>For each issue, determine the minimal fix that achieves clarity</action>
-      <action>Deduplicate: If same issue appears multiple times, create one entry listing all locations</action>
-      <action>Merge overlapping issues into single entries (no conflicting suggestions)</action>
-      <action>For uncertain fixes, phrase as query: "Consider: [suggestion]?" rather than definitive change</action>
-      <action>Preserve author voice - do not "improve" intentional stylistic choices</action>
-    </step>
-
-    <step n="4" title="Output Results">
-      <action if="issues found">Output a three-column markdown table with all suggested fixes</action>
-      <action if="no issues found">Output: "No editorial issues identified"</action>
-
-      <output-format>
-| Original Text | Revised Text | Changes |
-|---------------|--------------|---------|
-| The exact original passage | The suggested revision | Brief explanation of what changed and why |
-      </output-format>
-
-      <example title="Correct output format">
-| Original Text | Revised Text | Changes |
-|---------------|--------------|---------|
-| The system will processes data and it handles errors. | The system processes data and handles errors. | Fixed subject-verb agreement ("will processes" to "processes"); removed redundant "it" |
-| Users can chose from options (lines 12, 45, 78) | Users can choose from options | Fixed spelling: "chose" to "choose" (appears in 3 locations) |
-      </example>
-    </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 issues found after thorough review, output "No editorial issues identified" (this is valid completion, not an error)</condition>
-  </halt-conditions>
-
-</task>

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

@@ -1,209 +0,0 @@
-<?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="true">
-  <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

@@ -1,62 +0,0 @@
----
-name: help
-description: Get unstuck by showing what workflow steps come next or answering questions about what to do
-standalone: true
----
-
-# Task: BMAD Help
-
-## KEY 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
-
-## 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:
-- Did someone state they completed something? Proceed as if that was the input.
-- Was a workflow just completed in this conversation? Proceed as if that was the input.
-- Search resolved artifact locations for files; fuzzy-match to workflow `outputs` patterns.
-- If an `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** — 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.
-
-3. **Analyze input** — Task may provide a workflow name/code, conversational phrase, or nothing. Infer what was just completed using INPUT ANALYSIS above.
-
-4. **Detect active module** — Use MODULE DETECTION above to determine which module the user is working in.
-
-5. **Present recommendations** — Show next steps based on completed workflows, phase/sequence ordering (KEY RULES), and artifact detection. Format per the following
-
-## RECOMMENDED OUTPUT FORMAT
-
-   **Optional items first** — List optional workflows until a required step is reached
-   **Required items next** — List the next required workflow
-   For each item show:
-   - Workflow **name**
-   - **Command** (prefixed with `/`, e.g., `/bmad:example:build-prototype`)
-   - **Agent** title and display name from the CSV (e.g., "🎨 Alex (Designer)")
-   - Brief **description**
-
-   ### Additional response output guidance to convey:
-   - Run each workflow in a **fresh context window**
-   - Load the agent using (`/` + `agent-command`), or run the workflow command directly
-   - For **validation workflows**: recommend using a different high-quality LLM if available
-   - For conversational requests: match the user's tone while presenting clearly
-
-6. Return to the calling process after presenting recommendations.

package/_bmad/core/tasks/index-docs.xml

@@ -1,65 +0,0 @@
-<task id="_bmad/core/tasks/index-docs" name="Index Docs"
-  description="Generates or updates an index.md of all documents in the specified directory" webskip="true" standalone="true">
-  <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>Sections outside flow (validation, output, critical-context) provide essential context - review and apply throughout execution</i>
-  </llm>
-
-  <flow>
-    <step n="1" title="Scan Directory">
-      <i>List all files and subdirectories in the target location</i>
-    </step>
-
-    <step n="2" title="Group Content">
-      <i>Organize files by type, purpose, or subdirectory</i>
-    </step>
-
-    <step n="3" title="Generate Descriptions">
-      <i>Read each file to understand its actual purpose and create brief (3-10 word) descriptions based on the content, not just the
-        filename</i>
-    </step>
-
-    <step n="4" title="Create/Update Index">
-      <i>Write or update index.md with organized file listings</i>
-    </step>
-  </flow>
-
-  <output-format>
-    <example>
-      # Directory Index
-
-      ## Files
-
-      - **[filename.ext](./filename.ext)** - Brief description
-      - **[another-file.ext](./another-file.ext)** - Brief description
-
-      ## Subdirectories
-
-      ### subfolder/
-
-      - **[file1.ext](./subfolder/file1.ext)** - Brief description
-      - **[file2.ext](./subfolder/file2.ext)** - Brief description
-
-      ### another-folder/
-
-      - **[file3.ext](./another-folder/file3.ext)** - Brief description
-    </example>
-  </output-format>
-
-  <halt-conditions critical="true">
-    <i>HALT if target directory does not exist or is inaccessible</i>
-    <i>HALT if user does not have write permissions to create index.md</i>
-  </halt-conditions>
-
-  <validation>
-    <i>Use relative paths starting with ./</i>
-    <i>Group similar files together</i>
-    <i>Read file contents to generate accurate descriptions - don't guess from filenames</i>
-    <i>Keep descriptions concise but informative (3-10 words)</i>
-    <i>Sort alphabetically within groups</i>
-    <i>Skip hidden files (starting with .) unless specified</i>
-  </validation>
-</task>

package/_bmad/core/tasks/review-adversarial-general.xml

@@ -1,48 +0,0 @@
-<!-- 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/review-adversarial-general.xml" name="Adversarial Review (General)" standalone="true">
-  <objective>Cynically review content and produce findings</objective>
-
-  <inputs>
-    <input name="content" desc="Content to review - diff, spec, story, doc, or any artifact" />
-    <input name="also_consider" required="false"
-      desc="Optional areas to keep in mind during review alongside normal adversarial analysis" />
-  </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 cynical, jaded reviewer with zero patience for sloppy work</i>
-    <i>The content was submitted by a clueless weasel and you expect to find problems</i>
-    <i>Be skeptical of everything</i>
-    <i>Look for what's missing, not just what's wrong</i>
-    <i>Use a precise, professional tone - no profanity or personal attacks</i>
-  </llm>
-
-  <flow>
-    <step n="1" title="Receive Content">
-      <action>Load the content to review from provided input or context</action>
-      <action>If content to review is empty, ask for clarification and abort task</action>
-      <action>Identify content type (diff, branch, uncommitted changes, document, etc.)</action>
-    </step>
-
-    <step n="2" title="Adversarial Analysis" critical="true">
-      <mandate>Review with extreme skepticism - assume problems exist</mandate>
-      <action>Find at least ten issues to fix or improve in the provided content</action>
-    </step>
-
-    <step n="3" title="Present Findings">
-      <action>Output findings as a Markdown list (descriptions only)</action>
-    </step>
-  </flow>
-
-  <halt-conditions>
-    <condition>HALT if zero findings - this is suspicious, re-analyze or ask for guidance</condition>
-    <condition>HALT if content is empty or unreadable</condition>
-  </halt-conditions>
-
-</task>