npm - ma-agents - Versions diffs - 3.4.9 → 3.5.1 - Mend

ma-agents 3.4.9 → 3.5.1

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 (1364) hide show

package/.opencode/skills/bmad-check-implementation-readiness/steps/step-02-prd-analysis.md DELETED Viewed

@@ -1,168 +0,0 @@
----
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/implementation-readiness-report-{{date}}.md'
-epicsFile: '{planning_artifacts}/*epic*.md' # Will be resolved to actual file
----
-# Step 2: PRD Analysis
-## STEP GOAL:
-To fully read and analyze the PRD document (whole or sharded) to extract all Functional Requirements (FRs) and Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs) for validation against epics coverage.
-## 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 an expert Product Manager and Scrum Master
-- ✅ Your expertise is in requirements analysis and traceability
-- ✅ You think critically about requirement completeness
-- ✅ Success is measured in thorough requirement extraction
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-- 🎯 Focus ONLY on reading and extracting from PRD
-- 🚫 Don't validate files (done in step 1)
-- 💬 Read PRD completely - whole or all sharded files
-- 🚪 Extract every FR and NFR with numbering
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-- 🎯 Load and completely read the PRD
-- 💾 Extract all requirements systematically
-- 📖 Document findings in the report
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to skip or summarize PRD content
-## PRD ANALYSIS PROCESS:
-### 1. Initialize PRD Analysis
-"Beginning **PRD Analysis** to extract all requirements.
-I will:
-1. Load the PRD document (whole or sharded)
-2. Read it completely and thoroughly
-3. Extract ALL Functional Requirements (FRs)
-4. Extract ALL Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs)
-5. Document findings for coverage validation"
-### 2. Load and Read PRD
-From the document inventory in step 1:
-- If whole PRD file exists: Load and read it completely
-- If sharded PRD exists: Load and read ALL files in the PRD folder
-- Ensure complete coverage - no files skipped
-### 3. Extract Functional Requirements (FRs)
-Search for and extract:
-- Numbered FRs (FR1, FR2, FR3, etc.)
-- Requirements labeled "Functional Requirement"
-- User stories or use cases that represent functional needs
-- Business rules that must be implemented
-Format findings as:
-```
-## Functional Requirements Extracted
-FR1: [Complete requirement text]
-FR2: [Complete requirement text]
-FR3: [Complete requirement text]
-...
-Total FRs: [count]
-```
-### 4. Extract Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs)
-Search for and extract:
-- Performance requirements (response times, throughput)
-- Security requirements (authentication, encryption, etc.)
-- Usability requirements (accessibility, ease of use)
-- Reliability requirements (uptime, error rates)
-- Scalability requirements (concurrent users, data growth)
-- Compliance requirements (standards, regulations)
-Format findings as:
-```
-## Non-Functional Requirements Extracted
-NFR1: [Performance requirement]
-NFR2: [Security requirement]
-NFR3: [Usability requirement]
-...
-Total NFRs: [count]
-```
-### 5. Document Additional Requirements
-Look for:
-- Constraints or assumptions
-- Technical requirements not labeled as FR/NFR
-- Business constraints
-- Integration requirements
-### 6. Add to Assessment Report
-Append to {outputFile}:
-```markdown
-## PRD Analysis
-### Functional Requirements
-[Complete FR list from section 3]
-### Non-Functional Requirements
-[Complete NFR list from section 4]
-### Additional Requirements
-[Any other requirements or constraints found]
-### PRD Completeness Assessment
-[Initial assessment of PRD completeness and clarity]
-```
-### 7. Auto-Proceed to Next Step
-After PRD analysis complete, immediately load next step for epic coverage validation.
-## PROCEEDING TO EPIC COVERAGE VALIDATION
-PRD analysis complete. Read fully and follow: `./step-03-epic-coverage-validation.md`
----
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-- PRD loaded and read completely
-- All FRs extracted with full text
-- All NFRs identified and documented
-- Findings added to assessment report
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-- Not reading complete PRD (especially sharded versions)
-- Missing requirements in extraction
-- Summarizing instead of extracting full text
-- Not documenting findings in report
-**Master Rule:** Complete requirement extraction is essential for traceability validation.

package/.opencode/skills/bmad-check-implementation-readiness/steps/step-03-epic-coverage-validation.md DELETED Viewed

@@ -1,169 +0,0 @@
----
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/implementation-readiness-report-{{date}}.md'
----
-# Step 3: Epic Coverage Validation
-## STEP GOAL:
-To validate that all Functional Requirements from the PRD are captured in the epics and stories document, identifying any gaps in coverage.
-## 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 an expert Product Manager and Scrum Master
-- ✅ Your expertise is in requirements traceability
-- ✅ You ensure no requirements fall through the cracks
-- ✅ Success is measured in complete FR coverage
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-- 🎯 Focus ONLY on FR coverage validation
-- 🚫 Don't analyze story quality (that's later)
-- 💬 Compare PRD FRs against epic coverage list
-- 🚪 Document every missing FR
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-- 🎯 Load epics document completely
-- 💾 Extract FR coverage from epics
-- 📖 Compare against PRD FR list
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to proceed without documenting gaps
-## EPIC COVERAGE VALIDATION PROCESS:
-### 1. Initialize Coverage Validation
-"Beginning **Epic Coverage Validation**.
-I will:
-1. Load the epics and stories document
-2. Extract FR coverage information
-3. Compare against PRD FRs from previous step
-4. Identify any FRs not covered in epics"
-### 2. Load Epics Document
-From the document inventory in step 1:
-- Load the epics and stories document (whole or sharded)
-- Read it completely to find FR coverage information
-- Look for sections like "FR Coverage Map" or similar
-### 3. Extract Epic FR Coverage
-From the epics document:
-- Find FR coverage mapping or list
-- Extract which FR numbers are claimed to be covered
-- Document which epics cover which FRs
-Format as:
-```
-## Epic FR Coverage Extracted
-FR1: Covered in Epic X
-FR2: Covered in Epic Y
-FR3: Covered in Epic Z
-...
-Total FRs in epics: [count]
-```
-### 4. Compare Coverage Against PRD
-Using the PRD FR list from step 2:
-- Check each PRD FR against epic coverage
-- Identify FRs NOT covered in epics
-- Note any FRs in epics but NOT in PRD
-Create coverage matrix:
-```
-## FR Coverage Analysis
-| FR Number | PRD Requirement | Epic Coverage  | Status    |
-| --------- | --------------- | -------------- | --------- |
-| FR1       | [PRD text]      | Epic X Story Y | ✓ Covered |
-| FR2       | [PRD text]      | **NOT FOUND**  | ❌ MISSING |
-| FR3       | [PRD text]      | Epic Z Story A | ✓ Covered |
-```
-### 5. Document Missing Coverage
-List all FRs not covered:
-```
-## Missing FR Coverage
-### Critical Missing FRs
-FR#: [Full requirement text from PRD]
-- Impact: [Why this is critical]
-- Recommendation: [Which epic should include this]
-### High Priority Missing FRs
-[List any other uncovered FRs]
-```
-### 6. Add to Assessment Report
-Append to {outputFile}:
-```markdown
-## Epic Coverage Validation
-### Coverage Matrix
-[Complete coverage matrix from section 4]
-### Missing Requirements
-[List of uncovered FRs from section 5]
-### Coverage Statistics
-- Total PRD FRs: [count]
-- FRs covered in epics: [count]
-- Coverage percentage: [percentage]
-```
-### 7. Auto-Proceed to Next Step
-After coverage validation complete, immediately load next step.
-## PROCEEDING TO UX ALIGNMENT
-Epic coverage validation complete. Read fully and follow: `./step-04-ux-alignment.md`
----
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-- Epics document loaded completely
-- FR coverage extracted accurately
-- All gaps identified and documented
-- Coverage matrix created
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-- Not reading complete epics document
-- Missing FRs in comparison
-- Not documenting uncovered requirements
-- Incomplete coverage analysis
-**Master Rule:** Every FR must have a traceable implementation path.

package/.opencode/skills/bmad-check-implementation-readiness/steps/step-04-ux-alignment.md DELETED Viewed

@@ -1,129 +0,0 @@
----
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/implementation-readiness-report-{{date}}.md'
----
-# Step 4: UX Alignment
-## STEP GOAL:
-To check if UX documentation exists and validate that it aligns with PRD requirements and Architecture decisions, ensuring architecture accounts for both PRD and UX needs.
-## 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 UX VALIDATOR ensuring user experience is properly addressed
-- ✅ UX requirements must be supported by architecture
-- ✅ Missing UX documentation is a warning if UI is implied
-- ✅ Alignment gaps must be documented
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-- 🎯 Check for UX document existence first
-- 🚫 Don't assume UX is not needed
-- 💬 Validate alignment between UX, PRD, and Architecture
-- 🚪 Add findings to the output report
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-- 🎯 Search for UX documentation
-- 💾 If found, validate alignment
-- 📖 If not found, assess if UX is implied
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to proceed without completing assessment
-## UX ALIGNMENT PROCESS:
-### 1. Initialize UX Validation
-"Beginning **UX Alignment** validation.
-I will:
-1. Check if UX documentation exists
-2. If UX exists: validate alignment with PRD and Architecture
-3. If no UX: determine if UX is implied and document warning"
-### 2. Search for UX Documentation
-Search patterns:
-- `{planning_artifacts}/*ux*.md` (whole document)
-- `{planning_artifacts}/*ux*/index.md` (sharded)
-- Look for UI-related terms in other documents
-### 3. If UX Document Exists
-#### A. UX ↔ PRD Alignment
-- Check UX requirements reflected in PRD
-- Verify user journeys in UX match PRD use cases
-- Identify UX requirements not in PRD
-#### B. UX ↔ Architecture Alignment
-- Verify architecture supports UX requirements
-- Check performance needs (responsiveness, load times)
-- Identify UI components not supported by architecture
-### 4. If No UX Document
-Assess if UX/UI is implied:
-- Does PRD mention user interface?
-- Are there web/mobile components implied?
-- Is this a user-facing application?
-If UX implied but missing: Add warning to report
-### 5. Add Findings to Report
-Append to {outputFile}:
-```markdown
-## UX Alignment Assessment
-### UX Document Status
-[Found/Not Found]
-### Alignment Issues
-[List any misalignments between UX, PRD, and Architecture]
-### Warnings
-[Any warnings about missing UX or architectural gaps]
-```
-### 6. Auto-Proceed to Next Step
-After UX assessment complete, immediately load next step.
-## PROCEEDING TO EPIC QUALITY REVIEW
-UX alignment assessment complete. Read fully and follow: `./step-05-epic-quality-review.md`
----
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-- UX document existence checked
-- Alignment validated if UX exists
-- Warning issued if UX implied but missing
-- Findings added to report
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-- Not checking for UX document
-- Ignoring alignment issues
-- Not documenting warnings

package/.opencode/skills/bmad-check-implementation-readiness/steps/step-05-epic-quality-review.md DELETED Viewed

@@ -1,241 +0,0 @@
----
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/implementation-readiness-report-{{date}}.md'
----
-# Step 5: Epic Quality Review
-## STEP GOAL:
-To validate epics and stories against the best practices defined in create-epics-and-stories workflow, focusing on user value, independence, dependencies, and implementation readiness.
-## 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 an EPIC QUALITY ENFORCER
-- ✅ You know what good epics look like - challenge anything deviating
-- ✅ Technical epics are wrong - find them
-- ✅ Forward dependencies are forbidden - catch them
-- ✅ Stories must be independently completable
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-- 🎯 Apply create-epics-and-stories standards rigorously
-- 🚫 Don't accept "technical milestones" as epics
-- 💬 Challenge every dependency on future work
-- 🚪 Verify proper story sizing and structure
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-- 🎯 Systematically validate each epic and story
-- 💾 Document all violations of best practices
-- 📖 Check every dependency relationship
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to accept structural problems
-## EPIC QUALITY REVIEW PROCESS:
-### 1. Initialize Best Practices Validation
-"Beginning **Epic Quality Review** against create-epics-and-stories standards.
-I will rigorously validate:
-- Epics deliver user value (not technical milestones)
-- Epic independence (Epic 2 doesn't need Epic 3)
-- Story dependencies (no forward references)
-- Proper story sizing and completeness
-Any deviation from best practices will be flagged as a defect."
-### 2. Epic Structure Validation
-#### A. User Value Focus Check
-For each epic:
-- **Epic Title:** Is it user-centric (what user can do)?
-- **Epic Goal:** Does it describe user outcome?
-- **Value Proposition:** Can users benefit from this epic alone?
-**Red flags (violations):**
-- "Setup Database" or "Create Models" - no user value
-- "API Development" - technical milestone
-- "Infrastructure Setup" - not user-facing
-- "Authentication System" - borderline (is it user value?)
-#### B. Epic Independence Validation
-Test epic independence:
-- **Epic 1:** Must stand alone completely
-- **Epic 2:** Can function using only Epic 1 output
-- **Epic 3:** Can function using Epic 1 & 2 outputs
-- **Rule:** Epic N cannot require Epic N+1 to work
-**Document failures:**
-- "Epic 2 requires Epic 3 features to function"
-- Stories in Epic 2 referencing Epic 3 components
-- Circular dependencies between epics
-### 3. Story Quality Assessment
-#### A. Story Sizing Validation
-Check each story:
-- **Clear User Value:** Does the story deliver something meaningful?
-- **Independent:** Can it be completed without future stories?
-**Common violations:**
-- "Setup all models" - not a USER story
-- "Create login UI (depends on Story 1.3)" - forward dependency
-#### B. Acceptance Criteria Review
-For each story's ACs:
-- **Given/When/Then Format:** Proper BDD structure?
-- **Testable:** Each AC can be verified independently?
-- **Complete:** Covers all scenarios including errors?
-- **Specific:** Clear expected outcomes?
-**Issues to find:**
-- Vague criteria like "user can login"
-- Missing error conditions
-- Incomplete happy path
-- Non-measurable outcomes
-### 4. Dependency Analysis
-#### A. Within-Epic Dependencies
-Map story dependencies within each epic:
-- Story 1.1 must be completable alone
-- Story 1.2 can use Story 1.1 output
-- Story 1.3 can use Story 1.1 & 1.2 outputs
-**Critical violations:**
-- "This story depends on Story 1.4"
-- "Wait for future story to work"
-- Stories referencing features not yet implemented
-#### B. Database/Entity Creation Timing
-Validate database creation approach:
-- **Wrong:** Epic 1 Story 1 creates all tables upfront
-- **Right:** Each story creates tables it needs
-- **Check:** Are tables created only when first needed?
-### 5. Special Implementation Checks
-#### A. Starter Template Requirement
-Check if Architecture specifies starter template:
-- If YES: Epic 1 Story 1 must be "Set up initial project from starter template"
-- Verify story includes cloning, dependencies, initial configuration
-#### B. Greenfield vs Brownfield Indicators
-Greenfield projects should have:
-- Initial project setup story
-- Development environment configuration
-- CI/CD pipeline setup early
-Brownfield projects should have:
-- Integration points with existing systems
-- Migration or compatibility stories
-### 6. Best Practices Compliance Checklist
-For each epic, verify:
-- [ ] Epic delivers user value
-- [ ] Epic can function independently
-- [ ] Stories appropriately sized
-- [ ] No forward dependencies
-- [ ] Database tables created when needed
-- [ ] Clear acceptance criteria
-- [ ] Traceability to FRs maintained
-### 7. Quality Assessment Documentation
-Document all findings by severity:
-#### 🔴 Critical Violations
-- Technical epics with no user value
-- Forward dependencies breaking independence
-- Epic-sized stories that cannot be completed
-#### 🟠 Major Issues
-- Vague acceptance criteria
-- Stories requiring future stories
-- Database creation violations
-#### 🟡 Minor Concerns
-- Formatting inconsistencies
-- Minor structure deviations
-- Documentation gaps
-### 8. Autonomous Review Execution
-This review runs autonomously to maintain standards:
-- Apply best practices without compromise
-- Document every violation with specific examples
-- Provide clear remediation guidance
-- Prepare recommendations for each issue
-## REVIEW COMPLETION:
-After completing epic quality review:
-- Update {outputFile} with all quality findings
-- Document specific best practices violations
-- Provide actionable recommendations
-- Load ./step-06-final-assessment.md for final readiness assessment
-## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
-This step executes autonomously. Load ./step-06-final-assessment.md only after complete epic quality review is documented.
----
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-- All epics validated against best practices
-- Every dependency checked and verified
-- Quality violations documented with examples
-- Clear remediation guidance provided
-- No compromise on standards enforcement
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-- Accepting technical epics as valid
-- Ignoring forward dependencies
-- Not verifying story sizing
-- Overlooking obvious violations
-**Master Rule:** Enforce best practices rigorously. Find all violations.