siesa-agents 2.1.36 → 2.1.37

package/bmad-core/tasks/advanced-elicitation.md

@@ -1,119 +0,0 @@
-<!-- Powered by BMAD™ Core -->
-
-# Advanced Elicitation Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-- Provide optional reflective and brainstorming actions to enhance content quality
-- Enable deeper exploration of ideas through structured elicitation techniques
-- Support iterative refinement through multiple analytical perspectives
-- Usable during template-driven document creation or any chat conversation
-
-## Usage Scenarios
-
-### Scenario 1: Template Document Creation
-
-After outputting a section during document creation:
-
-1. **Section Review**: Ask user to review the drafted section
-2. **Offer Elicitation**: Present 9 carefully selected elicitation methods
-3. **Simple Selection**: User types a number (0-8) to engage method, or 9 to proceed
-4. **Execute & Loop**: Apply selected method, then re-offer choices until user proceeds
-
-### Scenario 2: General Chat Elicitation
-
-User can request advanced elicitation on any agent output:
-
-- User says "do advanced elicitation" or similar
-- Agent selects 9 relevant methods for the context
-- Same simple 0-9 selection process
-
-## Task Instructions
-
-### 1. Intelligent Method Selection
-
-**Context Analysis**: Before presenting options, analyze:
-
-- **Content Type**: Technical specs, user stories, architecture, requirements, etc.
-- **Complexity Level**: Simple, moderate, or complex content
-- **Stakeholder Needs**: Who will use this information
-- **Risk Level**: High-impact decisions vs routine items
-- **Creative Potential**: Opportunities for innovation or alternatives
-
-**Method Selection Strategy**:
-
-1. **Always Include Core Methods** (choose 3-4):
-   - Expand or Contract for Audience
-   - Critique and Refine
-   - Identify Potential Risks
-   - Assess Alignment with Goals
-
-2. **Context-Specific Methods** (choose 4-5):
-   - **Technical Content**: Tree of Thoughts, ReWOO, Meta-Prompting
-   - **User-Facing Content**: Agile Team Perspective, Stakeholder Roundtable
-   - **Creative Content**: Innovation Tournament, Escape Room Challenge
-   - **Strategic Content**: Red Team vs Blue Team, Hindsight Reflection
-
-3. **Always Include**: "Proceed / No Further Actions" as option 9
-
-### 2. Section Context and Review
-
-When invoked after outputting a section:
-
-1. **Provide Context Summary**: Give a brief 1-2 sentence summary of what the user should look for in the section just presented
-
-2. **Explain Visual Elements**: If the section contains diagrams, explain them briefly before offering elicitation options
-
-3. **Clarify Scope Options**: If the section contains multiple distinct items, inform the user they can apply elicitation actions to:
-   - The entire section as a whole
-   - Individual items within the section (specify which item when selecting an action)
-
-### 3. Present Elicitation Options
-
-**Review Request Process:**
-
-- Ask the user to review the drafted section
-- In the SAME message, inform them they can suggest direct changes OR select an elicitation method
-- Present 9 intelligently selected methods (0-8) plus "Proceed" (9)
-- Keep descriptions short - just the method name
-- Await simple numeric selection
-
-**Action List Presentation Format:**
-
-```text
-**Advanced Elicitation Options**
-Choose a number (0-8) or 9 to proceed:
-
-0. [Method Name]
-1. [Method Name]
-2. [Method Name]
-3. [Method Name]
-4. [Method Name]
-5. [Method Name]
-6. [Method Name]
-7. [Method Name]
-8. [Method Name]
-9. Proceed / No Further Actions
-```
-
-**Response Handling:**
-
-- **Numbers 0-8**: Execute the selected method, then re-offer the choice
-- **Number 9**: Proceed to next section or continue conversation
-- **Direct Feedback**: Apply user's suggested changes and continue
-
-### 4. Method Execution Framework
-
-**Execution Process:**
-
-1. **Retrieve Method**: Access the specific elicitation method from the elicitation-methods data file
-2. **Apply Context**: Execute the method from your current role's perspective
-3. **Provide Results**: Deliver insights, critiques, or alternatives relevant to the content
-4. **Re-offer Choice**: Present the same 9 options again until user selects 9 or gives direct feedback
-
-**Execution Guidelines:**
-
-- **Be Concise**: Focus on actionable insights, not lengthy explanations
-- **Stay Relevant**: Tie all elicitation back to the specific content being analyzed
-- **Identify Personas**: For multi-persona methods, clearly identify which viewpoint is speaking
-- **Maintain Flow**: Keep the process moving efficiently

package/bmad-core/tasks/apply-qa-fixes.md

@@ -1,150 +0,0 @@
-<!-- Powered by BMAD™ Core -->
-
-# apply-qa-fixes
-
-Implement fixes based on QA results (gate and assessments) for a specific story. This task is for the Dev agent to systematically consume QA outputs and apply code/test changes while only updating allowed sections in the story file.
-
-## Purpose
-
-- Read QA outputs for a story (gate YAML + assessment markdowns)
-- Create a prioritized, deterministic fix plan
-- Apply code and test changes to close gaps and address issues
-- Update only the allowed story sections for the Dev agent
-
-## Inputs
-
-```yaml
-required:
-  - story_id: '{epic}.{story}' # e.g., "2.2"
-  - qa_root: from `.bmad-core/core-config.yaml` key `qa.qaLocation` (e.g., `docs/project/qa`)
-  - story_root: from `.bmad-core/core-config.yaml` key `devStoryLocation` (e.g., `docs/project/stories`)
-
-optional:
-  - story_title: '{title}' # derive from story H1 if missing
-  - story_slug: '{slug}' # derive from title (lowercase, hyphenated) if missing
-```
-
-## QA Sources to Read
-
-- Gate (YAML): `{qa_root}/gates/{epic}.{story}-*.yml`
-  - If multiple, use the most recent by modified time
-- Assessments (Markdown):
-  - Test Design: `{qa_root}/assessments/{epic}.{story}-test-design-*.md`
-  - Traceability: `{qa_root}/assessments/{epic}.{story}-trace-*.md`
-  - Risk Profile: `{qa_root}/assessments/{epic}.{story}-risk-*.md`
-  - NFR Assessment: `{qa_root}/assessments/{epic}.{story}-nfr-*.md`
-
-## Prerequisites
-
-- Repository builds and tests run locally (Deno 2)
-- Lint and test commands available:
-  - `deno lint`
-  - `deno test -A`
-
-## Process (Do not skip steps)
-
-### 0) Load Core Config & Locate Story
-
-- Read `.bmad-core/core-config.yaml` and resolve `qa_root` and `story_root`
-- Locate story file in `{story_root}/{epic}.{story}.*.md`
-  - HALT if missing and ask for correct story id/path
-
-### 1) Collect QA Findings
-
-- Parse the latest gate YAML:
-  - `gate` (PASS|CONCERNS|FAIL|WAIVED)
-  - `top_issues[]` with `id`, `severity`, `finding`, `suggested_action`
-  - `nfr_validation.*.status` and notes
-  - `trace` coverage summary/gaps
-  - `test_design.coverage_gaps[]`
-  - `risk_summary.recommendations.must_fix[]` (if present)
-- Read any present assessment markdowns and extract explicit gaps/recommendations
-
-### 2) Build Deterministic Fix Plan (Priority Order)
-
-Apply in order, highest priority first:
-
-1. High severity items in `top_issues` (security/perf/reliability/maintainability)
-2. NFR statuses: all FAIL must be fixed → then CONCERNS
-3. Test Design `coverage_gaps` (prioritize P0 scenarios if specified)
-4. Trace uncovered requirements (AC-level)
-5. Risk `must_fix` recommendations
-6. Medium severity issues, then low
-
-Guidance:
-
-- Prefer tests closing coverage gaps before/with code changes
-- Keep changes minimal and targeted; follow project architecture and TS/Deno rules
-
-### 3) Apply Changes
-
-- Implement code fixes per plan
-- Add missing tests to close coverage gaps (unit first; integration where required by AC)
-- Keep imports centralized via `deps.ts` (see `docs/project/typescript-rules.md`)
-- Follow DI boundaries in `src/core/di.ts` and existing patterns
-
-### 4) Validate
-
-- Run `deno lint` and fix issues
-- Run `deno test -A` until all tests pass
-- Iterate until clean
-
-### 5) Update Story (Allowed Sections ONLY)
-
-CRITICAL: Dev agent is ONLY authorized to update these sections of the story file. Do not modify any other sections (e.g., QA Results, Story, Acceptance Criteria, Dev Notes, Testing):
-
-- Tasks / Subtasks Checkboxes (mark any fix subtask you added as done)
-- Dev Agent Record →
-  - Agent Model Used (if changed)
-  - Debug Log References (commands/results, e.g., lint/tests)
-  - Completion Notes List (what changed, why, how)
-  - File List (all added/modified/deleted files)
-- Change Log (new dated entry describing applied fixes)
-- Status (see Rule below)
-
-Status Rule:
-
-- If gate was PASS and all identified gaps are closed → set `Status: Ready for Done`
-- Otherwise → set `Status: Ready for Review` and notify QA to re-run the review
-
-### 6) Do NOT Edit Gate Files
-
-- Dev does not modify gate YAML. If fixes address issues, request QA to re-run `review-story` to update the gate
-
-## Blocking Conditions
-
-- Missing `.bmad-core/core-config.yaml`
-- Story file not found for `story_id`
-- No QA artifacts found (neither gate nor assessments)
-  - HALT and request QA to generate at least a gate file (or proceed only with clear developer-provided fix list)
-
-## Completion Checklist
-
-- deno lint: 0 problems
-- deno test -A: all tests pass
-- All high severity `top_issues` addressed
-- NFR FAIL → resolved; CONCERNS minimized or documented
-- Coverage gaps closed or explicitly documented with rationale
-- Story updated (allowed sections only) including File List and Change Log
-- Status set according to Status Rule
-
-## Example: Story 2.2
-
-Given gate `docs/project/qa/gates/2.2-*.yml` shows
-
-- `coverage_gaps`: Back action behavior untested (AC2)
-- `coverage_gaps`: Centralized dependencies enforcement untested (AC4)
-
-Fix plan:
-
-- Add a test ensuring the Toolkit Menu "Back" action returns to Main Menu
-- Add a static test verifying imports for service/view go through `deps.ts`
-- Re-run lint/tests and update Dev Agent Record + File List accordingly
-
-## Key Principles
-
-- Deterministic, risk-first prioritization
-- Minimal, maintainable changes
-- Tests validate behavior and close gaps
-- Strict adherence to allowed story update areas
-- Gate ownership remains with QA; Dev signals readiness via Status

package/bmad-core/tasks/brownfield-create-epic.md

@@ -1,162 +0,0 @@
-<!-- Powered by BMAD™ Core -->
-
-# Create Brownfield Epic Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-Create a single epic for smaller brownfield enhancements that don't require the full PRD and Architecture documentation process. This task is for isolated features or modifications that can be completed within a focused scope.
-
-## When to Use This Task
-
-**Use this task when:**
-
-- The enhancement can be completed in 1-3 stories
-- No significant architectural changes are required
-- The enhancement follows existing project patterns
-- Integration complexity is minimal
-- Risk to existing system is low
-
-**Use the full brownfield PRD/Architecture process when:**
-
-- The enhancement requires multiple coordinated stories
-- Architectural planning is needed
-- Significant integration work is required
-- Risk assessment and mitigation planning is necessary
-
-## Instructions
-
-### 1. Project Analysis (Required)
-
-Before creating the epic, gather essential information about the existing project:
-
-**Existing Project Context:**
-
-- [ ] Project purpose and current functionality understood
-- [ ] Existing technology stack identified
-- [ ] Current architecture patterns noted
-- [ ] Integration points with existing system identified
-
-**Enhancement Scope:**
-
-- [ ] Enhancement clearly defined and scoped
-- [ ] Impact on existing functionality assessed
-- [ ] Required integration points identified
-- [ ] Success criteria established
-
-### 2. Epic Creation
-
-Create a focused epic following this structure:
-
-#### Epic Title
-
-{{Enhancement Name}} - Brownfield Enhancement
-
-#### Epic Goal
-
-{{1-2 sentences describing what the epic will accomplish and why it adds value}}
-
-#### Epic Description
-
-**Existing System Context:**
-
-- Current relevant functionality: {{brief description}}
-- Technology stack: {{relevant existing technologies}}
-- Integration points: {{where new work connects to existing system}}
-
-**Enhancement Details:**
-
-- What's being added/changed: {{clear description}}
-- How it integrates: {{integration approach}}
-- Success criteria: {{measurable outcomes}}
-
-#### Stories
-
-List 1-3 focused stories that complete the epic:
-
-1. **Story 1:** {{Story title and brief description}}
-2. **Story 2:** {{Story title and brief description}}
-3. **Story 3:** {{Story title and brief description}}
-
-#### Compatibility Requirements
-
-- [ ] Existing APIs remain unchanged
-- [ ] Database schema changes are backward compatible
-- [ ] UI changes follow existing patterns
-- [ ] Performance impact is minimal
-
-#### Risk Mitigation
-
-- **Primary Risk:** {{main risk to existing system}}
-- **Mitigation:** {{how risk will be addressed}}
-- **Rollback Plan:** {{how to undo changes if needed}}
-
-#### Definition of Done
-
-- [ ] All stories completed with acceptance criteria met
-- [ ] Existing functionality verified through testing
-- [ ] Integration points working correctly
-- [ ] Documentation updated appropriately
-- [ ] No regression in existing features
-
-### 3. Validation Checklist
-
-Before finalizing the epic, ensure:
-
-**Scope Validation:**
-
-- [ ] Epic can be completed in 1-3 stories maximum
-- [ ] No architectural documentation is required
-- [ ] Enhancement follows existing patterns
-- [ ] Integration complexity is manageable
-
-**Risk Assessment:**
-
-- [ ] Risk to existing system is low
-- [ ] Rollback plan is feasible
-- [ ] Testing approach covers existing functionality
-- [ ] Team has sufficient knowledge of integration points
-
-**Completeness Check:**
-
-- [ ] Epic goal is clear and achievable
-- [ ] Stories are properly scoped
-- [ ] Success criteria are measurable
-- [ ] Dependencies are identified
-
-### 4. Handoff to Story Manager
-
-Once the epic is validated, provide this handoff to the Story Manager:
-
----
-
-**Story Manager Handoff:**
-
-"Please develop detailed user stories for this brownfield epic. Key considerations:
-
-- This is an enhancement to an existing system running {{technology stack}}
-- Integration points: {{list key integration points}}
-- Existing patterns to follow: {{relevant existing patterns}}
-- Critical compatibility requirements: {{key requirements}}
-- Each story must include verification that existing functionality remains intact
-
-The epic should maintain system integrity while delivering {{epic goal}}."
-
----
-
-## Success Criteria
-
-The epic creation is successful when:
-
-1. Enhancement scope is clearly defined and appropriately sized
-2. Integration approach respects existing system architecture
-3. Risk to existing functionality is minimized
-4. Stories are logically sequenced for safe implementation
-5. Compatibility requirements are clearly specified
-6. Rollback plan is feasible and documented
-
-## Important Notes
-
-- This task is specifically for SMALL brownfield enhancements
-- If the scope grows beyond 3 stories, consider the full brownfield PRD process
-- Always prioritize existing system integrity over new functionality
-- When in doubt about scope or complexity, escalate to full brownfield planning

package/bmad-core/tasks/brownfield-create-story.md

@@ -1,149 +0,0 @@
-<!-- Powered by BMAD™ Core -->
-
-# Create Brownfield Story Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-Create a single user story for very small brownfield enhancements that can be completed in one focused development session. This task is for minimal additions or bug fixes that require existing system integration awareness.
-
-## When to Use This Task
-
-**Use this task when:**
-
-- The enhancement can be completed in a single story
-- No new architecture or significant design is required
-- The change follows existing patterns exactly
-- Integration is straightforward with minimal risk
-- Change is isolated with clear boundaries
-
-**Use brownfield-create-epic when:**
-
-- The enhancement requires 2-3 coordinated stories
-- Some design work is needed
-- Multiple integration points are involved
-
-**Use the full brownfield PRD/Architecture process when:**
-
-- The enhancement requires multiple coordinated stories
-- Architectural planning is needed
-- Significant integration work is required
-
-## Instructions
-
-### 1. Quick Project Assessment
-
-Gather minimal but essential context about the existing project:
-
-**Current System Context:**
-
-- [ ] Relevant existing functionality identified
-- [ ] Technology stack for this area noted
-- [ ] Integration point(s) clearly understood
-- [ ] Existing patterns for similar work identified
-
-**Change Scope:**
-
-- [ ] Specific change clearly defined
-- [ ] Impact boundaries identified
-- [ ] Success criteria established
-
-### 2. Story Creation
-
-Create a single focused story following this structure:
-
-#### Story Title
-
-{{Specific Enhancement}} - Brownfield Addition
-
-#### User Story
-
-As a {{user type}},
-I want {{specific action/capability}},
-So that {{clear benefit/value}}.
-
-#### Story Context
-
-**Existing System Integration:**
-
-- Integrates with: {{existing component/system}}
-- Technology: {{relevant tech stack}}
-- Follows pattern: {{existing pattern to follow}}
-- Touch points: {{specific integration points}}
-
-#### Acceptance Criteria
-
-**Functional Requirements:**
-
-1. {{Primary functional requirement}}
-2. {{Secondary functional requirement (if any)}}
-3. {{Integration requirement}}
-
-**Integration Requirements:** 4. Existing {{relevant functionality}} continues to work unchanged 5. New functionality follows existing {{pattern}} pattern 6. Integration with {{system/component}} maintains current behavior
-
-**Quality Requirements:** 7. Change is covered by appropriate tests 8. Documentation is updated if needed 9. No regression in existing functionality verified
-
-#### Technical Notes
-
-- **Integration Approach:** {{how it connects to existing system}}
-- **Existing Pattern Reference:** {{link or description of pattern to follow}}
-- **Key Constraints:** {{any important limitations or requirements}}
-
-#### Definition of Done
-
-- [ ] Functional requirements met
-- [ ] Integration requirements verified
-- [ ] Existing functionality regression tested
-- [ ] Code follows existing patterns and standards
-- [ ] Tests pass (existing and new)
-- [ ] Documentation updated if applicable
-
-### 3. Risk and Compatibility Check
-
-**Minimal Risk Assessment:**
-
-- **Primary Risk:** {{main risk to existing system}}
-- **Mitigation:** {{simple mitigation approach}}
-- **Rollback:** {{how to undo if needed}}
-
-**Compatibility Verification:**
-
-- [ ] No breaking changes to existing APIs
-- [ ] Database changes (if any) are additive only
-- [ ] UI changes follow existing design patterns
-- [ ] Performance impact is negligible
-
-### 4. Validation Checklist
-
-Before finalizing the story, confirm:
-
-**Scope Validation:**
-
-- [ ] Story can be completed in one development session
-- [ ] Integration approach is straightforward
-- [ ] Follows existing patterns exactly
-- [ ] No design or architecture work required
-
-**Clarity Check:**
-
-- [ ] Story requirements are unambiguous
-- [ ] Integration points are clearly specified
-- [ ] Success criteria are testable
-- [ ] Rollback approach is simple
-
-## Success Criteria
-
-The story creation is successful when:
-
-1. Enhancement is clearly defined and appropriately scoped for single session
-2. Integration approach is straightforward and low-risk
-3. Existing system patterns are identified and will be followed
-4. Rollback plan is simple and feasible
-5. Acceptance criteria include existing functionality verification
-
-## Important Notes
-
-- This task is for VERY SMALL brownfield changes only
-- If complexity grows during analysis, escalate to brownfield-create-epic
-- Always prioritize existing system integrity
-- When in doubt about integration complexity, use brownfield-create-epic instead
-- Stories should take no more than 4 hours of focused development work

package/bmad-core/tasks/correct-course.md

@@ -1,72 +0,0 @@
-<!-- Powered by BMAD™ Core -->
-
-# Correct Course Task
-
-## Purpose
-
-- Guide a structured response to a change trigger using the `.bmad-core/checklists/change-checklist`.
-- Analyze the impacts of the change on epics, project artifacts, and the MVP, guided by the checklist's structure.
-- Explore potential solutions (e.g., adjust scope, rollback elements, re-scope features) as prompted by the checklist.
-- Draft specific, actionable proposed updates to any affected project artifacts (e.g., epics, user stories, PRD sections, architecture document sections) based on the analysis.
-- Produce a consolidated "Sprint Change Proposal" document that contains the impact analysis and the clearly drafted proposed edits for user review and approval.
-- Ensure a clear handoff path if the nature of the changes necessitates fundamental replanning by other core agents (like PM or Architect).
-
-## Instructions
-
-### 1. Initial Setup & Mode Selection
-
-- **Acknowledge Task & Inputs:**
-  - Confirm with the user that the "Correct Course Task" (Change Navigation & Integration) is being initiated.
-  - Verify the change trigger and ensure you have the user's initial explanation of the issue and its perceived impact.
-  - Confirm access to all relevant project artifacts (e.g., PRD, Epics/Stories, Architecture Documents, UI/UX Specifications) and, critically, the `.bmad-core/checklists/change-checklist`.
-- **Establish Interaction Mode:**
-  - Ask the user their preferred interaction mode for this task:
-    - **"Incrementally (Default & Recommended):** Shall we work through the change-checklist section by section, discussing findings and collaboratively drafting proposed changes for each relevant part before moving to the next? This allows for detailed, step-by-step refinement."
-    - **"YOLO Mode (Batch Processing):** Or, would you prefer I conduct a more batched analysis based on the checklist and then present a consolidated set of findings and proposed changes for a broader review? This can be quicker for initial assessment but might require more extensive review of the combined proposals."
-  - Once the user chooses, confirm the selected mode and then inform the user: "We will now use the change-checklist to analyze the change and draft proposed updates. I will guide you through the checklist items based on our chosen interaction mode."
-
-### 2. Execute Checklist Analysis (Iteratively or Batched, per Interaction Mode)
-
-- Systematically work through Sections 1-4 of the change-checklist (typically covering Change Context, Epic/Story Impact Analysis, Artifact Conflict Resolution, and Path Evaluation/Recommendation).
-- For each checklist item or logical group of items (depending on interaction mode):
-  - Present the relevant prompt(s) or considerations from the checklist to the user.
-  - Request necessary information and actively analyze the relevant project artifacts (PRD, epics, architecture documents, story history, etc.) to assess the impact.
-  - Discuss your findings for each item with the user.
-  - Record the status of each checklist item (e.g., `[x] Addressed`, `[N/A]`, `[!] Further Action Needed`) and any pertinent notes or decisions.
-  - Collaboratively agree on the "Recommended Path Forward" as prompted by Section 4 of the checklist.
-
-### 3. Draft Proposed Changes (Iteratively or Batched)
-
-- Based on the completed checklist analysis (Sections 1-4) and the agreed "Recommended Path Forward" (excluding scenarios requiring fundamental replans that would necessitate immediate handoff to PM/Architect):
-  - Identify the specific project artifacts that require updates (e.g., specific epics, user stories, PRD sections, architecture document components, diagrams).
-  - **Draft the proposed changes directly and explicitly for each identified artifact.** Examples include:
-    - Revising user story text, acceptance criteria, or priority.
-    - Adding, removing, reordering, or splitting user stories within epics.
-    - Proposing modified architecture diagram snippets (e.g., providing an updated Mermaid diagram block or a clear textual description of the change to an existing diagram).
-    - Updating technology lists, configuration details, or specific sections within the PRD or architecture documents.
-    - Drafting new, small supporting artifacts if necessary (e.g., a brief addendum for a specific decision).
-  - If in "Incremental Mode," discuss and refine these proposed edits for each artifact or small group of related artifacts with the user as they are drafted.
-  - If in "YOLO Mode," compile all drafted edits for presentation in the next step.
-
-### 4. Generate "Sprint Change Proposal" with Edits
-
-- Synthesize the complete change-checklist analysis (covering findings from Sections 1-4) and all the agreed-upon proposed edits (from Instruction 3) into a single document titled "Sprint Change Proposal." This proposal should align with the structure suggested by Section 5 of the change-checklist.
-- The proposal must clearly present:
-  - **Analysis Summary:** A concise overview of the original issue, its analyzed impact (on epics, artifacts, MVP scope), and the rationale for the chosen path forward.
-  - **Specific Proposed Edits:** For each affected artifact, clearly show or describe the exact changes (e.g., "Change Story X.Y from: [old text] To: [new text]", "Add new Acceptance Criterion to Story A.B: [new AC]", "Update Section 3.2 of Architecture Document as follows: [new/modified text or diagram description]").
-- Present the complete draft of the "Sprint Change Proposal" to the user for final review and feedback. Incorporate any final adjustments requested by the user.
-
-### 5. Finalize & Determine Next Steps
-
-- Obtain explicit user approval for the "Sprint Change Proposal," including all the specific edits documented within it.
-- Provide the finalized "Sprint Change Proposal" document to the user.
-- **Based on the nature of the approved changes:**
-  - **If the approved edits sufficiently address the change and can be implemented directly or organized by a PO/SM:** State that the "Correct Course Task" is complete regarding analysis and change proposal, and the user can now proceed with implementing or logging these changes (e.g., updating actual project documents, backlog items). Suggest handoff to a PO/SM agent for backlog organization if appropriate.
-  - **If the analysis and proposed path (as per checklist Section 4 and potentially Section 6) indicate that the change requires a more fundamental replan (e.g., significant scope change, major architectural rework):** Clearly state this conclusion. Advise the user that the next step involves engaging the primary PM or Architect agents, using the "Sprint Change Proposal" as critical input and context for that deeper replanning effort.
-
-## Output Deliverables
-
-- **Primary:** A "Sprint Change Proposal" document (in markdown format). This document will contain:
-  - A summary of the change-checklist analysis (issue, impact, rationale for the chosen path).
-  - Specific, clearly drafted proposed edits for all affected project artifacts.
-- **Implicit:** An annotated change-checklist (or the record of its completion) reflecting the discussions, findings, and decisions made during the process.