siesa-agents 2.1.2 → 2.1.4

package/bmad-core/checklists/story-dod-checklist.md

@@ -1,96 +1,96 @@
-<!-- Powered by BMAD™ Core -->
-
-# Story Definition of Done (DoD) Checklist
-
-## Instructions for Developer Agent
-
-Before marking a story as 'Review', please go through each item in this checklist. Report the status of each item (e.g., [x] Done, [ ] Not Done, [N/A] Not Applicable) and provide brief comments if necessary.
-
-[[LLM: INITIALIZATION INSTRUCTIONS - STORY DOD VALIDATION
-
-This checklist is for DEVELOPER AGENTS to self-validate their work before marking a story complete.
-
-IMPORTANT: This is a self-assessment. Be honest about what's actually done vs what should be done. It's better to identify issues now than have them found in review.
-
-EXECUTION APPROACH:
-
-1. Go through each section systematically
-2. Mark items as [x] Done, [ ] Not Done, or [N/A] Not Applicable
-3. Add brief comments explaining any [ ] or [N/A] items
-4. Be specific about what was actually implemented
-5. Flag any concerns or technical debt created
-
-The goal is quality delivery, not just checking boxes.]]
-
-## Checklist Items
-
-1. **Requirements Met:**
-
-   [[LLM: Be specific - list each requirement and whether it's complete]]
-   - [ ] All functional requirements specified in the story are implemented.
-   - [ ] All acceptance criteria defined in the story are met.
-
-2. **Coding Standards & Project Structure:**
-
-   [[LLM: Code quality matters for maintainability. Check each item carefully]]
-   - [ ] All new/modified code strictly adheres to `Operational Guidelines`.
-   - [ ] All new/modified code aligns with `Project Structure` (file locations, naming, etc.).
-   - [ ] Adherence to `Tech Stack` for technologies/versions used (if story introduces or modifies tech usage).
-   - [ ] Adherence to `Api Reference` and `Data Models` (if story involves API or data model changes).
-   - [ ] Basic security best practices (e.g., input validation, proper error handling, no hardcoded secrets) applied for new/modified code.
-   - [ ] No new linter errors or warnings introduced.
-   - [ ] Code is well-commented where necessary (clarifying complex logic, not obvious statements).
-
-3. **Testing:**
-
-   [[LLM: Testing proves your code works. Be honest about test coverage]]
-   - [ ] All required unit tests as per the story and `Operational Guidelines` Testing Strategy are implemented.
-   - [ ] All required integration tests (if applicable) as per the story and `Operational Guidelines` Testing Strategy are implemented.
-   - [ ] All tests (unit, integration, E2E if applicable) pass successfully.
-   - [ ] Test coverage meets project standards (if defined).
-
-4. **Functionality & Verification:**
-
-   [[LLM: Did you actually run and test your code? Be specific about what you tested]]
-   - [ ] Functionality has been manually verified by the developer (e.g., running the app locally, checking UI, testing API endpoints).
-   - [ ] Edge cases and potential error conditions considered and handled gracefully.
-
-5. **Story Administration:**
-
-   [[LLM: Documentation helps the next developer. What should they know?]]
-   - [ ] All tasks within the story file are marked as complete.
-   - [ ] Any clarifications or decisions made during development are documented in the story file or linked appropriately.
-   - [ ] The story wrap up section has been completed with notes of changes or information relevant to the next story or overall project, the agent model that was primarily used during development, and the changelog of any changes is properly updated.
-
-6. **Dependencies, Build & Configuration:**
-
-   [[LLM: Build issues block everyone. Ensure everything compiles and runs cleanly]]
-   - [ ] Project builds successfully without errors.
-   - [ ] Project linting passes
-   - [ ] Any new dependencies added were either pre-approved in the story requirements OR explicitly approved by the user during development (approval documented in story file).
-   - [ ] If new dependencies were added, they are recorded in the appropriate project files (e.g., `package.json`, `requirements.txt`) with justification.
-   - [ ] No known security vulnerabilities introduced by newly added and approved dependencies.
-   - [ ] If new environment variables or configurations were introduced by the story, they are documented and handled securely.
-
-7. **Documentation (If Applicable):**
-
-   [[LLM: Good documentation prevents future confusion. What needs explaining?]]
-   - [ ] Relevant inline code documentation (e.g., JSDoc, TSDoc, Python docstrings) for new public APIs or complex logic is complete.
-   - [ ] User-facing documentation updated, if changes impact users.
-   - [ ] Technical documentation (e.g., READMEs, system diagrams) updated if significant architectural changes were made.
-
-## Final Confirmation
-
-[[LLM: FINAL DOD SUMMARY
-
-After completing the checklist:
-
-1. Summarize what was accomplished in this story
-2. List any items marked as [ ] Not Done with explanations
-3. Identify any technical debt or follow-up work needed
-4. Note any challenges or learnings for future stories
-5. Confirm whether the story is truly ready for review
-
-Be honest - it's better to flag issues now than have them discovered later.]]
-
-- [ ] I, the Developer Agent, confirm that all applicable items above have been addressed.
+<!-- Powered by BMAD™ Core -->
+
+# Story Definition of Done (DoD) Checklist
+
+## Instructions for Developer Agent
+
+Before marking a story as 'Review', please go through each item in this checklist. Report the status of each item (e.g., [x] Done, [ ] Not Done, [N/A] Not Applicable) and provide brief comments if necessary.
+
+[[LLM: INITIALIZATION INSTRUCTIONS - STORY DOD VALIDATION
+
+This checklist is for DEVELOPER AGENTS to self-validate their work before marking a story complete.
+
+IMPORTANT: This is a self-assessment. Be honest about what's actually done vs what should be done. It's better to identify issues now than have them found in review.
+
+EXECUTION APPROACH:
+
+1. Go through each section systematically
+2. Mark items as [x] Done, [ ] Not Done, or [N/A] Not Applicable
+3. Add brief comments explaining any [ ] or [N/A] items
+4. Be specific about what was actually implemented
+5. Flag any concerns or technical debt created
+
+The goal is quality delivery, not just checking boxes.]]
+
+## Checklist Items
+
+1. **Requirements Met:**
+
+   [[LLM: Be specific - list each requirement and whether it's complete]]
+   - [ ] All functional requirements specified in the story are implemented.
+   - [ ] All acceptance criteria defined in the story are met.
+
+2. **Coding Standards & Project Structure:**
+
+   [[LLM: Code quality matters for maintainability. Check each item carefully]]
+   - [ ] All new/modified code strictly adheres to `Operational Guidelines`.
+   - [ ] All new/modified code aligns with `Project Structure` (file locations, naming, etc.).
+   - [ ] Adherence to `Tech Stack` for technologies/versions used (if story introduces or modifies tech usage).
+   - [ ] Adherence to `Api Reference` and `Data Models` (if story involves API or data model changes).
+   - [ ] Basic security best practices (e.g., input validation, proper error handling, no hardcoded secrets) applied for new/modified code.
+   - [ ] No new linter errors or warnings introduced.
+   - [ ] Code is well-commented where necessary (clarifying complex logic, not obvious statements).
+
+3. **Testing:**
+
+   [[LLM: Testing proves your code works. Be honest about test coverage]]
+   - [ ] All required unit tests as per the story and `Operational Guidelines` Testing Strategy are implemented.
+   - [ ] All required integration tests (if applicable) as per the story and `Operational Guidelines` Testing Strategy are implemented.
+   - [ ] All tests (unit, integration, E2E if applicable) pass successfully.
+   - [ ] Test coverage meets project standards (if defined).
+
+4. **Functionality & Verification:**
+
+   [[LLM: Did you actually run and test your code? Be specific about what you tested]]
+   - [ ] Functionality has been manually verified by the developer (e.g., running the app locally, checking UI, testing API endpoints).
+   - [ ] Edge cases and potential error conditions considered and handled gracefully.
+
+5. **Story Administration:**
+
+   [[LLM: Documentation helps the next developer. What should they know?]]
+   - [ ] All tasks within the story file are marked as complete.
+   - [ ] Any clarifications or decisions made during development are documented in the story file or linked appropriately.
+   - [ ] The story wrap up section has been completed with notes of changes or information relevant to the next story or overall project, the agent model that was primarily used during development, and the changelog of any changes is properly updated.
+
+6. **Dependencies, Build & Configuration:**
+
+   [[LLM: Build issues block everyone. Ensure everything compiles and runs cleanly]]
+   - [ ] Project builds successfully without errors.
+   - [ ] Project linting passes
+   - [ ] Any new dependencies added were either pre-approved in the story requirements OR explicitly approved by the user during development (approval documented in story file).
+   - [ ] If new dependencies were added, they are recorded in the appropriate project files (e.g., `package.json`, `requirements.txt`) with justification.
+   - [ ] No known security vulnerabilities introduced by newly added and approved dependencies.
+   - [ ] If new environment variables or configurations were introduced by the story, they are documented and handled securely.
+
+7. **Documentation (If Applicable):**
+
+   [[LLM: Good documentation prevents future confusion. What needs explaining?]]
+   - [ ] Relevant inline code documentation (e.g., JSDoc, TSDoc, Python docstrings) for new public APIs or complex logic is complete.
+   - [ ] User-facing documentation updated, if changes impact users.
+   - [ ] Technical documentation (e.g., READMEs, system diagrams) updated if significant architectural changes were made.
+
+## Final Confirmation
+
+[[LLM: FINAL DOD SUMMARY
+
+After completing the checklist:
+
+1. Summarize what was accomplished in this story
+2. List any items marked as [ ] Not Done with explanations
+3. Identify any technical debt or follow-up work needed
+4. Note any challenges or learnings for future stories
+5. Confirm whether the story is truly ready for review
+
+Be honest - it's better to flag issues now than have them discovered later.]]
+
+- [ ] I, the Developer Agent, confirm that all applicable items above have been addressed.

package/bmad-core/checklists/story-draft-checklist.md

@@ -1,155 +1,155 @@
-<!-- Powered by BMAD™ Core -->
-
-# Story Draft Checklist
-
-The Scrum Master should use this checklist to validate that each story contains sufficient context for a developer agent to implement it successfully, while assuming the dev agent has reasonable capabilities to figure things out.
-
-[[LLM: INITIALIZATION INSTRUCTIONS - STORY DRAFT VALIDATION
-
-Before proceeding with this checklist, ensure you have access to:
-
-1. The story document being validated (usually in docs/stories/ or provided directly)
-2. The parent epic context
-3. Any referenced architecture or design documents
-4. Previous related stories if this builds on prior work
-
-IMPORTANT: This checklist validates individual stories BEFORE implementation begins.
-
-VALIDATION PRINCIPLES:
-
-1. Clarity - A developer should understand WHAT to build
-2. Context - WHY this is being built and how it fits
-3. Guidance - Key technical decisions and patterns to follow
-4. Testability - How to verify the implementation works
-5. Self-Contained - Most info needed is in the story itself
-
-REMEMBER: We assume competent developer agents who can:
-
-- Research documentation and codebases
-- Make reasonable technical decisions
-- Follow established patterns
-- Ask for clarification when truly stuck
-
-We're checking for SUFFICIENT guidance, not exhaustive detail.]]
-
-## 1. GOAL & CONTEXT CLARITY
-
-[[LLM: Without clear goals, developers build the wrong thing. Verify:
-
-1. The story states WHAT functionality to implement
-2. The business value or user benefit is clear
-3. How this fits into the larger epic/product is explained
-4. Dependencies are explicit ("requires Story X to be complete")
-5. Success looks like something specific, not vague]]
-
-- [ ] Story goal/purpose is clearly stated
-- [ ] Relationship to epic goals is evident
-- [ ] How the story fits into overall system flow is explained
-- [ ] Dependencies on previous stories are identified (if applicable)
-- [ ] Business context and value are clear
-
-## 2. TECHNICAL IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE
-
-[[LLM: Developers need enough technical context to start coding. Check:
-
-1. Key files/components to create or modify are mentioned
-2. Technology choices are specified where non-obvious
-3. Integration points with existing code are identified
-4. Data models or API contracts are defined or referenced
-5. Non-standard patterns or exceptions are called out
-
-Note: We don't need every file listed - just the important ones.]]
-
-- [ ] Key files to create/modify are identified (not necessarily exhaustive)
-- [ ] Technologies specifically needed for this story are mentioned
-- [ ] Critical APIs or interfaces are sufficiently described
-- [ ] Necessary data models or structures are referenced
-- [ ] Required environment variables are listed (if applicable)
-- [ ] Any exceptions to standard coding patterns are noted
-
-## 3. REFERENCE EFFECTIVENESS
-
-[[LLM: References should help, not create a treasure hunt. Ensure:
-
-1. References point to specific sections, not whole documents
-2. The relevance of each reference is explained
-3. Critical information is summarized in the story
-4. References are accessible (not broken links)
-5. Previous story context is summarized if needed]]
-
-- [ ] References to external documents point to specific relevant sections
-- [ ] Critical information from previous stories is summarized (not just referenced)
-- [ ] Context is provided for why references are relevant
-- [ ] References use consistent format (e.g., `docs/filename.md#section`)
-
-## 4. SELF-CONTAINMENT ASSESSMENT
-
-[[LLM: Stories should be mostly self-contained to avoid context switching. Verify:
-
-1. Core requirements are in the story, not just in references
-2. Domain terms are explained or obvious from context
-3. Assumptions are stated explicitly
-4. Edge cases are mentioned (even if deferred)
-5. The story could be understood without reading 10 other documents]]
-
-- [ ] Core information needed is included (not overly reliant on external docs)
-- [ ] Implicit assumptions are made explicit
-- [ ] Domain-specific terms or concepts are explained
-- [ ] Edge cases or error scenarios are addressed
-
-## 5. TESTING GUIDANCE
-
-[[LLM: Testing ensures the implementation actually works. Check:
-
-1. Test approach is specified (unit, integration, e2e)
-2. Key test scenarios are listed
-3. Success criteria are measurable
-4. Special test considerations are noted
-5. Acceptance criteria in the story are testable]]
-
-- [ ] Required testing approach is outlined
-- [ ] Key test scenarios are identified
-- [ ] Success criteria are defined
-- [ ] Special testing considerations are noted (if applicable)
-
-## VALIDATION RESULT
-
-[[LLM: FINAL STORY VALIDATION REPORT
-
-Generate a concise validation report:
-
-1. Quick Summary
-   - Story readiness: READY / NEEDS REVISION / BLOCKED
-   - Clarity score (1-10)
-   - Major gaps identified
-
-2. Fill in the validation table with:
-   - PASS: Requirements clearly met
-   - PARTIAL: Some gaps but workable
-   - FAIL: Critical information missing
-
-3. Specific Issues (if any)
-   - List concrete problems to fix
-   - Suggest specific improvements
-   - Identify any blocking dependencies
-
-4. Developer Perspective
-   - Could YOU implement this story as written?
-   - What questions would you have?
-   - What might cause delays or rework?
-
-Be pragmatic - perfect documentation doesn't exist, but it must be enough to provide the extreme context a dev agent needs to get the work down and not create a mess.]]
-
-| Category                             | Status | Issues |
-| ------------------------------------ | ------ | ------ |
-| 1. Goal & Context Clarity            | _TBD_  |        |
-| 2. Technical Implementation Guidance | _TBD_  |        |
-| 3. Reference Effectiveness           | _TBD_  |        |
-| 4. Self-Containment Assessment       | _TBD_  |        |
-| 5. Testing Guidance                  | _TBD_  |        |
-
-**Final Assessment:**
-
-- READY: The story provides sufficient context for implementation
-- NEEDS REVISION: The story requires updates (see issues)
-- BLOCKED: External information required (specify what information)
+<!-- Powered by BMAD™ Core -->
+
+# Story Draft Checklist
+
+The Scrum Master should use this checklist to validate that each story contains sufficient context for a developer agent to implement it successfully, while assuming the dev agent has reasonable capabilities to figure things out.
+
+[[LLM: INITIALIZATION INSTRUCTIONS - STORY DRAFT VALIDATION
+
+Before proceeding with this checklist, ensure you have access to:
+
+1. The story document being validated (usually in docs/stories/ or provided directly)
+2. The parent epic context
+3. Any referenced architecture or design documents
+4. Previous related stories if this builds on prior work
+
+IMPORTANT: This checklist validates individual stories BEFORE implementation begins.
+
+VALIDATION PRINCIPLES:
+
+1. Clarity - A developer should understand WHAT to build
+2. Context - WHY this is being built and how it fits
+3. Guidance - Key technical decisions and patterns to follow
+4. Testability - How to verify the implementation works
+5. Self-Contained - Most info needed is in the story itself
+
+REMEMBER: We assume competent developer agents who can:
+
+- Research documentation and codebases
+- Make reasonable technical decisions
+- Follow established patterns
+- Ask for clarification when truly stuck
+
+We're checking for SUFFICIENT guidance, not exhaustive detail.]]
+
+## 1. GOAL & CONTEXT CLARITY
+
+[[LLM: Without clear goals, developers build the wrong thing. Verify:
+
+1. The story states WHAT functionality to implement
+2. The business value or user benefit is clear
+3. How this fits into the larger epic/product is explained
+4. Dependencies are explicit ("requires Story X to be complete")
+5. Success looks like something specific, not vague]]
+
+- [ ] Story goal/purpose is clearly stated
+- [ ] Relationship to epic goals is evident
+- [ ] How the story fits into overall system flow is explained
+- [ ] Dependencies on previous stories are identified (if applicable)
+- [ ] Business context and value are clear
+
+## 2. TECHNICAL IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE
+
+[[LLM: Developers need enough technical context to start coding. Check:
+
+1. Key files/components to create or modify are mentioned
+2. Technology choices are specified where non-obvious
+3. Integration points with existing code are identified
+4. Data models or API contracts are defined or referenced
+5. Non-standard patterns or exceptions are called out
+
+Note: We don't need every file listed - just the important ones.]]
+
+- [ ] Key files to create/modify are identified (not necessarily exhaustive)
+- [ ] Technologies specifically needed for this story are mentioned
+- [ ] Critical APIs or interfaces are sufficiently described
+- [ ] Necessary data models or structures are referenced
+- [ ] Required environment variables are listed (if applicable)
+- [ ] Any exceptions to standard coding patterns are noted
+
+## 3. REFERENCE EFFECTIVENESS
+
+[[LLM: References should help, not create a treasure hunt. Ensure:
+
+1. References point to specific sections, not whole documents
+2. The relevance of each reference is explained
+3. Critical information is summarized in the story
+4. References are accessible (not broken links)
+5. Previous story context is summarized if needed]]
+
+- [ ] References to external documents point to specific relevant sections
+- [ ] Critical information from previous stories is summarized (not just referenced)
+- [ ] Context is provided for why references are relevant
+- [ ] References use consistent format (e.g., `docs/filename.md#section`)
+
+## 4. SELF-CONTAINMENT ASSESSMENT
+
+[[LLM: Stories should be mostly self-contained to avoid context switching. Verify:
+
+1. Core requirements are in the story, not just in references
+2. Domain terms are explained or obvious from context
+3. Assumptions are stated explicitly
+4. Edge cases are mentioned (even if deferred)
+5. The story could be understood without reading 10 other documents]]
+
+- [ ] Core information needed is included (not overly reliant on external docs)
+- [ ] Implicit assumptions are made explicit
+- [ ] Domain-specific terms or concepts are explained
+- [ ] Edge cases or error scenarios are addressed
+
+## 5. TESTING GUIDANCE
+
+[[LLM: Testing ensures the implementation actually works. Check:
+
+1. Test approach is specified (unit, integration, e2e)
+2. Key test scenarios are listed
+3. Success criteria are measurable
+4. Special test considerations are noted
+5. Acceptance criteria in the story are testable]]
+
+- [ ] Required testing approach is outlined
+- [ ] Key test scenarios are identified
+- [ ] Success criteria are defined
+- [ ] Special testing considerations are noted (if applicable)
+
+## VALIDATION RESULT
+
+[[LLM: FINAL STORY VALIDATION REPORT
+
+Generate a concise validation report:
+
+1. Quick Summary
+   - Story readiness: READY / NEEDS REVISION / BLOCKED
+   - Clarity score (1-10)
+   - Major gaps identified
+
+2. Fill in the validation table with:
+   - PASS: Requirements clearly met
+   - PARTIAL: Some gaps but workable
+   - FAIL: Critical information missing
+
+3. Specific Issues (if any)
+   - List concrete problems to fix
+   - Suggest specific improvements
+   - Identify any blocking dependencies
+
+4. Developer Perspective
+   - Could YOU implement this story as written?
+   - What questions would you have?
+   - What might cause delays or rework?
+
+Be pragmatic - perfect documentation doesn't exist, but it must be enough to provide the extreme context a dev agent needs to get the work down and not create a mess.]]
+
+| Category                             | Status | Issues |
+| ------------------------------------ | ------ | ------ |
+| 1. Goal & Context Clarity            | _TBD_  |        |
+| 2. Technical Implementation Guidance | _TBD_  |        |
+| 3. Reference Effectiveness           | _TBD_  |        |
+| 4. Self-Containment Assessment       | _TBD_  |        |
+| 5. Testing Guidance                  | _TBD_  |        |
+
+**Final Assessment:**
+
+- READY: The story provides sufficient context for implementation
+- NEEDS REVISION: The story requires updates (see issues)
+- BLOCKED: External information required (specify what information)

package/bmad-core/core-config.yaml

@@ -1,22 +1,22 @@
-markdownExploder: true
-qa:
-  qaLocation: docs/qa
-prd:
-  prdFile: docs/prd.md
-  prdVersion: v4
-  prdSharded: true
-  prdShardedLocation: docs/prd
-  epicFilePattern: epic-{n}*.md
-architecture:
-  architectureFile: docs/architecture.md
-  architectureVersion: v4
-  architectureSharded: true
-  architectureShardedLocation: docs/architecture
-customTechnicalDocuments: null
-devLoadAlwaysFiles:
-  - docs/architecture/coding-standards.md
-  - docs/architecture/tech-stack.md
-  - docs/architecture/source-tree.md
-devDebugLog: .ai/debug-log.md
-devStoryLocation: docs/stories
-slashPrefix: BMad
+markdownExploder: true
+qa:
+  qaLocation: docs/qa
+prd:
+  prdFile: docs/prd.md
+  prdVersion: v4
+  prdSharded: true
+  prdShardedLocation: docs/prd
+  epicFilePattern: epic-{n}*.md
+architecture:
+  architectureFile: docs/architecture.md
+  architectureVersion: v4
+  architectureSharded: true
+  architectureShardedLocation: docs/architecture
+customTechnicalDocuments: null
+devLoadAlwaysFiles:
+  - docs/architecture/coding-standards.md
+  - docs/architecture/tech-stack.md
+  - docs/architecture/source-tree.md
+devDebugLog: .ai/debug-log.md
+devStoryLocation: docs/stories
+slashPrefix: BMad