npm - create-byan-agent - Versions diffs - 2.18.0 → 2.19.1 - Mend

create-byan-agent 2.18.0 → 2.19.1

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

Files changed (1091) hide show

package/install/templates/_byan/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-v/step-v-01-discovery.md DELETED Viewed

@@ -1,218 +0,0 @@
----
-name: 'step-v-01-discovery'
-description: 'Document Discovery & Confirmation - Handle fresh context validation, confirm PRD path, discover input documents'
-# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
-nextStepFile: './step-v-02-format-detection.md'
-advancedElicitationTask: '{project-root}/_byan/core/workflows/advanced-elicitation/workflow.xml'
-partyModeWorkflow: '{project-root}/_byan/core/workflows/party-mode/workflow.md'
-prdPurpose: '../data/prd-purpose.md'
----
-# Step 1: Document Discovery & Confirmation
-## STEP GOAL:
-Handle fresh context validation by confirming PRD path, discovering and loading input documents from frontmatter, and initializing the validation report.
-## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
-### Universal Rules:
-- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
-- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
-- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
-- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
-- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
-### Role Reinforcement:
-- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
-- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
-- ✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
-- ✅ You bring systematic validation expertise and analytical rigor
-- ✅ User brings domain knowledge and specific PRD context
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-- 🎯 Focus ONLY on discovering PRD and input documents, not validating yet
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to perform any validation checks in this step
-- 💬 Approach: Systematic discovery with clear reporting to user
-- 🚪 This is the setup step - get everything ready for validation
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-- 🎯 Discover and confirm PRD to validate
-- 💾 Load PRD and all input documents from frontmatter
-- 📖 Initialize validation report next to PRD
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to load next step until user confirms setup
-## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
-- Available context: PRD path (user-specified or discovered), workflow configuration
-- Focus: Document discovery and setup only
-- Limits: Don't perform validation, don't skip discovery
-- Dependencies: Configuration loaded from PRD workflow.md initialization
-## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
-**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
-### 1. Load PRD Purpose and Standards
-Load and read the complete file at:
-`{prdPurpose}`
-This file contains the BMAD PRD philosophy, standards, and validation criteria that will guide all validation checks. Internalize this understanding - it defines what makes a great BMAD PRD.
-### 2. Discover PRD to Validate
-**If PRD path provided as invocation parameter:**
-- Use provided path
-**If no PRD path provided:**
-"**PRD Validation Workflow**
-Which PRD would you like to validate?
-Please provide the path to the PRD file you want to validate."
-**Wait for user to provide PRD path.**
-### 3. Validate PRD Exists and Load
-Once PRD path is provided:
-- Check if PRD file exists at specified path
-- If not found: "I cannot find a PRD at that path. Please check the path and try again."
-- If found: Load the complete PRD file including frontmatter
-### 4. Extract Frontmatter and Input Documents
-From the loaded PRD frontmatter, extract:
-- `inputDocuments: []` array (if present)
-- Any other relevant metadata (classification, date, etc.)
-**If no inputDocuments array exists:**
-Note this and proceed with PRD-only validation
-### 5. Load Input Documents
-For each document listed in `inputDocuments`:
-- Attempt to load the document
-- Track successfully loaded documents
-- Note any documents that fail to load
-**Build list of loaded input documents:**
-- Product Brief (if present)
-- Research documents (if present)
-- Other reference materials (if present)
-### 6. Ask About Additional Reference Documents
-"**I've loaded the following documents from your PRD frontmatter:**
-{list loaded documents with file names}
-**Are there any additional reference documents you'd like me to include in this validation?**
-These could include:
-- Additional research or context documents
-- Project documentation not tracked in frontmatter
-- Standards or compliance documents
-- Competitive analysis or benchmarks
-Please provide paths to any additional documents, or type 'none' to proceed."
-**Load any additional documents provided by user.**
-### 7. Initialize Validation Report
-Create validation report at: `{validationReportPath}`
-**Initialize with frontmatter:**
-```yaml
----
-validationTarget: '{prd_path}'
-validationDate: '{current_date}'
-inputDocuments: [list of all loaded documents]
-validationStepsCompleted: []
-validationStatus: IN_PROGRESS
----
-```
-**Initial content:**
-```markdown
-# PRD Validation Report
-**PRD Being Validated:** {prd_path}
-**Validation Date:** {current_date}
-## Input Documents
-{list all documents loaded for validation}
-## Validation Findings
-[Findings will be appended as validation progresses]
-```
-### 8. Present Discovery Summary
-"**Setup Complete!**
-**PRD to Validate:** {prd_path}
-**Input Documents Loaded:**
-- PRD: {prd_name} ✓
-- Product Brief: {count} {if count > 0}✓{else}(none found){/if}
-- Research: {count} {if count > 0}✓{else}(none found){/if}
-- Additional References: {count} {if count > 0}✓{else}(none){/if}
-**Validation Report:** {validationReportPath}
-**Ready to begin validation.**"
-### 9. Present MENU OPTIONS
-Display: **Select an Option:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue to Format Detection
-#### EXECUTION RULES:
-- ALWAYS halt and wait for user input after presenting menu
-- ONLY proceed to next step when user selects 'C'
-- User can ask questions or add more documents - always respond and redisplay menu
-#### Menu Handling Logic:
-- IF A: Read fully and follow: {advancedElicitationTask}, and when finished redisplay the menu
-- IF P: Read fully and follow: {partyModeWorkflow}, and when finished redisplay the menu
-- IF C: Read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} to begin format detection
-- IF user provides additional document: Load it, update report, redisplay summary
-- IF Any other: help user, then redisplay menu
----
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-- PRD path discovered and confirmed
-- PRD file exists and loads successfully
-- All input documents from frontmatter loaded
-- Additional reference documents (if any) loaded
-- Validation report initialized next to PRD
-- User clearly informed of setup status
-- Menu presented and user input handled correctly
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-- Proceeding with non-existent PRD file
-- Not loading input documents from frontmatter
-- Creating validation report in wrong location
-- Proceeding without user confirming setup
-- Not handling missing input documents gracefully
-**Master Rule:** Complete discovery and setup BEFORE validation. This step ensures everything is in place for systematic validation checks.

package/install/templates/_byan/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-v/step-v-10-smart-validation.md DELETED Viewed

@@ -1,209 +0,0 @@
----
-name: 'step-v-10-smart-validation'
-description: 'SMART Requirements Validation - Validate Functional Requirements meet SMART quality criteria'
-# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
-nextStepFile: './step-v-11-holistic-quality-validation.md'
-prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
-validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
-advancedElicitationTask: '{project-root}/_byan/core/workflows/advanced-elicitation/workflow.xml'
----
-# Step 10: SMART Requirements Validation
-## STEP GOAL:
-Validate Functional Requirements meet SMART quality criteria (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Traceable), ensuring high-quality requirements.
-## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
-### Universal Rules:
-- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
-- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
-- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
-- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
-- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
-### Role Reinforcement:
-- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
-- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
-- ✅ We engage in systematic validation, not collaborative dialogue
-- ✅ You bring requirements engineering expertise and quality assessment
-- ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-- 🎯 Focus ONLY on FR quality assessment using SMART framework
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate other aspects in this step
-- 💬 Approach: Score each FR on SMART criteria (1-5 scale)
-- 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-- 🎯 Extract all FRs from PRD
-- 🎯 Score each FR on SMART criteria (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Traceable)
-- 💾 Flag FRs with score < 3 in any category
-- 📖 Append scoring table and suggestions to validation report
-- 📖 Display "Proceeding to next check..." and load next step
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to pause or request user input
-## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
-- Available context: PRD file, validation report
-- Focus: FR quality assessment only using SMART framework
-- Limits: Don't validate NFRs or other aspects, don't pause for user input
-- Dependencies: Steps 2-9 completed - comprehensive validation checks done
-## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
-**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
-### 1. Extract All Functional Requirements
-From the PRD's Functional Requirements section, extract:
-- All FRs with their FR numbers (FR-001, FR-002, etc.)
-- Count total FRs
-### 2. Attempt Sub-Process Validation
-**Try to use Task tool to spawn a subprocess:**
-"Perform SMART requirements validation on these Functional Requirements:
-{List all FRs}
-**For each FR, score on SMART criteria (1-5 scale):**
-**Specific (1-5):**
-- 5: Clear, unambiguous, well-defined
-- 3: Somewhat clear but could be more specific
-- 1: Vague, ambiguous, unclear
-**Measurable (1-5):**
-- 5: Quantifiable metrics, testable
-- 3: Partially measurable
-- 1: Not measurable, subjective
-**Attainable (1-5):**
-- 5: Realistic, achievable with constraints
-- 3: Probably achievable but uncertain
-- 1: Unrealistic, technically infeasible
-**Relevant (1-5):**
-- 5: Clearly aligned with user needs and business objectives
-- 3: Somewhat relevant but connection unclear
-- 1: Not relevant, doesn't align with goals
-**Traceable (1-5):**
-- 5: Clearly traces to user journey or business objective
-- 3: Partially traceable
-- 1: Orphan requirement, no clear source
-**For each FR with score < 3 in any category:**
-- Provide specific improvement suggestions
-Return scoring table with all FR scores and improvement suggestions for low-scoring FRs."
-**Graceful degradation (if no Task tool):**
-- Manually score each FR on SMART criteria
-- Note FRs with low scores
-- Provide improvement suggestions
-### 3. Build Scoring Table
-For each FR:
-- FR number
-- Specific score (1-5)
-- Measurable score (1-5)
-- Attainable score (1-5)
-- Relevant score (1-5)
-- Traceable score (1-5)
-- Average score
-- Flag if any category < 3
-**Calculate overall FR quality:**
-- Percentage of FRs with all scores ≥ 3
-- Percentage of FRs with all scores ≥ 4
-- Average score across all FRs and categories
-### 4. Report SMART Findings to Validation Report
-Append to validation report:
-```markdown
-## SMART Requirements Validation
-**Total Functional Requirements:** {count}
-### Scoring Summary
-**All scores ≥ 3:** {percentage}% ({count}/{total})
-**All scores ≥ 4:** {percentage}% ({count}/{total})
-**Overall Average Score:** {average}/5.0
-### Scoring Table
-| FR # | Specific | Measurable | Attainable | Relevant | Traceable | Average | Flag |
-|------|----------|------------|------------|----------|-----------|--------|------|
-| FR-001 | {s1} | {m1} | {a1} | {r1} | {t1} | {avg1} | {X if any <3} |
-| FR-002 | {s2} | {m2} | {a2} | {r2} | {t2} | {avg2} | {X if any <3} |
-[Continue for all FRs]
-**Legend:** 1=Poor, 3=Acceptable, 5=Excellent
-**Flag:** X = Score < 3 in one or more categories
-### Improvement Suggestions
-**Low-Scoring FRs:**
-**FR-{number}:** {specific suggestion for improvement}
-[For each FR with score < 3 in any category]
-### Overall Assessment
-**Severity:** [Critical if >30% flagged FRs, Warning if 10-30%, Pass if <10%]
-**Recommendation:**
-[If Critical] "Many FRs have quality issues. Revise flagged FRs using SMART framework to improve clarity and testability."
-[If Warning] "Some FRs would benefit from SMART refinement. Focus on flagged requirements above."
-[If Pass] "Functional Requirements demonstrate good SMART quality overall."
-```
-### 5. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
-Display: "**SMART Requirements Validation Complete**
-FR Quality: {percentage}% with acceptable scores ({severity})
-**Proceeding to next validation check...**"
-Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} (step-v-11-holistic-quality-validation.md)
----
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-- All FRs extracted from PRD
-- Each FR scored on all 5 SMART criteria (1-5 scale)
-- FRs with scores < 3 flagged for improvement
-- Improvement suggestions provided for low-scoring FRs
-- Scoring table built with all FR scores
-- Overall quality assessment calculated
-- Findings reported to validation report
-- Auto-proceeds to next validation step
-- Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-- Not scoring all FRs on all SMART criteria
-- Missing improvement suggestions for low-scoring FRs
-- Not building scoring table
-- Not calculating overall quality metrics
-- Not reporting findings to validation report
-- Not auto-proceeding
-**Master Rule:** FRs should be high-quality, not just present. SMART framework provides objective quality measure.

package/install/templates/_byan/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-v/step-v-11-holistic-quality-validation.md DELETED Viewed

@@ -1,264 +0,0 @@
----
-name: 'step-v-11-holistic-quality-validation'
-description: 'Holistic Quality Assessment - Assess PRD as cohesive, compelling document - is it a good PRD?'
-# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
-nextStepFile: './step-v-12-completeness-validation.md'
-prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
-validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
-advancedElicitationTask: '{project-root}/_byan/core/workflows/advanced-elicitation/workflow.xml'
----
-# Step 11: Holistic Quality Assessment
-## STEP GOAL:
-Assess the PRD as a cohesive, compelling document - evaluating document flow, dual audience effectiveness (humans and LLMs), BMAD PRD principles compliance, and overall quality rating.
-## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
-### Universal Rules:
-- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
-- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
-- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
-- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
-- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
-### Role Reinforcement:
-- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
-- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
-- ✅ We engage in systematic validation, not collaborative dialogue
-- ✅ You bring analytical rigor and document quality expertise
-- ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
-- ✅ Uses Advanced Elicitation for multi-perspective evaluation
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-- 🎯 Focus ONLY on holistic document quality assessment
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate individual components (done in previous steps)
-- 💬 Approach: Multi-perspective evaluation using Advanced Elicitation
-- 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-- 🎯 Use Advanced Elicitation for multi-perspective assessment
-- 🎯 Evaluate document flow, dual audience, BMAD principles
-- 💾 Append comprehensive assessment to validation report
-- 📖 Display "Proceeding to next check..." and load next step
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to pause or request user input
-## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
-- Available context: Complete PRD file, validation report with findings from steps 1-10
-- Focus: Holistic quality - the WHOLE document
-- Limits: Don't re-validate individual components, don't pause for user input
-- Dependencies: Steps 1-10 completed - all systematic checks done
-## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
-**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
-### 1. Attempt Sub-Process with Advanced Elicitation
-**Try to use Task tool to spawn a subprocess using Advanced Elicitation:**
-"Perform holistic quality assessment on this PRD using multi-perspective evaluation:
-**Read fully and follow the Advanced Elicitation workflow:**
-{advancedElicitationTask}
-**Evaluate the PRD from these perspectives:**
-**1. Document Flow & Coherence:**
-- Read entire PRD
-- Evaluate narrative flow - does it tell a cohesive story?
-- Check transitions between sections
-- Assess consistency - is it coherent throughout?
-- Evaluate readability - is it clear and well-organized?
-**2. Dual Audience Effectiveness:**
-**For Humans:**
-- Executive-friendly: Can executives understand vision and goals quickly?
-- Developer clarity: Do developers have clear requirements to build from?
-- Designer clarity: Do designers understand user needs and flows?
-- Stakeholder decision-making: Can stakeholders make informed decisions?
-**For LLMs:**
-- Machine-readable structure: Is the PRD structured for LLM consumption?
-- UX readiness: Can an LLM generate UX designs from this?
-- Architecture readiness: Can an LLM generate architecture from this?
-- Epic/Story readiness: Can an LLM break down into epics and stories?
-**3. BMAD PRD Principles Compliance:**
-- Information density: Every sentence carries weight?
-- Measurability: Requirements testable?
-- Traceability: Requirements trace to sources?
-- Domain awareness: Domain-specific considerations included?
-- Zero anti-patterns: No filler or wordiness?
-- Dual audience: Works for both humans and LLMs?
-- Markdown format: Proper structure and formatting?
-**4. Overall Quality Rating:**
-Rate the PRD on 5-point scale:
-- Excellent (5/5): Exemplary, ready for production use
-- Good (4/5): Strong with minor improvements needed
-- Adequate (3/5): Acceptable but needs refinement
-- Needs Work (2/5): Significant gaps or issues
-- Problematic (1/5): Major flaws, needs substantial revision
-**5. Top 3 Improvements:**
-Identify the 3 most impactful improvements to make this a great PRD
-Return comprehensive assessment with all perspectives, rating, and top 3 improvements."
-**Graceful degradation (if no Task tool or Advanced Elicitation unavailable):**
-- Perform holistic assessment directly in current context
-- Read complete PRD
-- Evaluate document flow, coherence, transitions
-- Assess dual audience effectiveness
-- Check BMAD principles compliance
-- Assign overall quality rating
-- Identify top 3 improvements
-### 2. Synthesize Assessment
-**Compile findings from multi-perspective evaluation:**
-**Document Flow & Coherence:**
-- Overall assessment: [Excellent/Good/Adequate/Needs Work/Problematic]
-- Key strengths: [list]
-- Key weaknesses: [list]
-**Dual Audience Effectiveness:**
-- For Humans: [assessment]
-- For LLMs: [assessment]
-- Overall dual audience score: [1-5]
-**BMAD Principles Compliance:**
-- Principles met: [count]/7
-- Principles with issues: [list]
-**Overall Quality Rating:** [1-5 with label]
-**Top 3 Improvements:**
-1. [Improvement 1]
-2. [Improvement 2]
-3. [Improvement 3]
-### 3. Report Holistic Quality Findings to Validation Report
-Append to validation report:
-```markdown
-## Holistic Quality Assessment
-### Document Flow & Coherence
-**Assessment:** [Excellent/Good/Adequate/Needs Work/Problematic]
-**Strengths:**
-{List key strengths}
-**Areas for Improvement:**
-{List key weaknesses}
-### Dual Audience Effectiveness
-**For Humans:**
-- Executive-friendly: [assessment]
-- Developer clarity: [assessment]
-- Designer clarity: [assessment]
-- Stakeholder decision-making: [assessment]
-**For LLMs:**
-- Machine-readable structure: [assessment]
-- UX readiness: [assessment]
-- Architecture readiness: [assessment]
-- Epic/Story readiness: [assessment]
-**Dual Audience Score:** {score}/5
-### BMAD PRD Principles Compliance
-| Principle | Status | Notes |
-|-----------|--------|-------|
-| Information Density | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
-| Measurability | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
-| Traceability | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
-| Domain Awareness | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
-| Zero Anti-Patterns | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
-| Dual Audience | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
-| Markdown Format | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
-**Principles Met:** {count}/7
-### Overall Quality Rating
-**Rating:** {rating}/5 - {label}
-**Scale:**
-- 5/5 - Excellent: Exemplary, ready for production use
-- 4/5 - Good: Strong with minor improvements needed
-- 3/5 - Adequate: Acceptable but needs refinement
-- 2/5 - Needs Work: Significant gaps or issues
-- 1/5 - Problematic: Major flaws, needs substantial revision
-### Top 3 Improvements
-1. **{Improvement 1}**
-   {Brief explanation of why and how}
-2. **{Improvement 2}**
-   {Brief explanation of why and how}
-3. **{Improvement 3}**
-   {Brief explanation of why and how}
-### Summary
-**This PRD is:** {one-sentence overall assessment}
-**To make it great:** Focus on the top 3 improvements above.
-```
-### 4. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
-Display: "**Holistic Quality Assessment Complete**
-Overall Rating: {rating}/5 - {label}
-**Proceeding to final validation checks...**"
-Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} (step-v-12-completeness-validation.md)
----
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-- Advanced Elicitation used for multi-perspective evaluation (or graceful degradation)
-- Document flow & coherence assessed
-- Dual audience effectiveness evaluated (humans and LLMs)
-- BMAD PRD principles compliance checked
-- Overall quality rating assigned (1-5 scale)
-- Top 3 improvements identified
-- Comprehensive assessment reported to validation report
-- Auto-proceeds to next validation step
-- Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-- Not using Advanced Elicitation for multi-perspective evaluation
-- Missing document flow assessment
-- Missing dual audience evaluation
-- Not checking all BMAD principles
-- Not assigning overall quality rating
-- Missing top 3 improvements
-- Not reporting comprehensive assessment to validation report
-- Not auto-proceeding
-**Master Rule:** This evaluates the WHOLE document, not just components. Answers "Is this a good PRD?" and "What would make it great?"