siesa-agents 2.1.39 → 2.1.41

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/check-implementation-readiness/steps/step-03-epic-coverage-validation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,179 @@
+---
+name: 'step-03-epic-coverage-validation'
+description: 'Validate that all PRD FRs are covered in epics and stories'
+
+# Path Definitions
+workflow_path: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/implementation-readiness'
+
+# File References
+thisStepFile: '{workflow_path}/steps/step-03-epic-coverage-validation.md'
+nextStepFile: '{workflow_path}/steps/step-04-ux-alignment.md'
+workflowFile: '{workflow_path}/workflow.md'
+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. Loading next step for UX alignment.
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 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/bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/check-implementation-readiness/steps/step-04-ux-alignment.md

@@ -0,0 +1,139 @@
+---
+name: 'step-04-ux-alignment'
+description: 'Check for UX document and validate alignment with PRD and Architecture'
+
+# Path Definitions
+workflow_path: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/implementation-readiness'
+
+# File References
+thisStepFile: '{workflow_path}/steps/step-04-ux-alignment.md'
+nextStepFile: '{workflow_path}/steps/step-05-epic-quality-review.md'
+workflowFile: '{workflow_path}/workflow.md'
+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. Loading next step for epic quality review.
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 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/bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/check-implementation-readiness/steps/step-05-epic-quality-review.md

@@ -0,0 +1,252 @@
+---
+name: 'step-05-epic-quality-review'
+description: 'Validate epics and stories against create-epics-and-stories best practices'
+
+# Path Definitions
+workflow_path: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/implementation-readiness'
+
+# File References
+thisStepFile: '{workflow_path}/steps/step-05-epic-quality-review.md'
+nextStepFile: '{workflow_path}/steps/step-06-final-assessment.md'
+workflowFile: '{workflow_path}/workflow.md'
+outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/implementation-readiness-report-{{date}}.md'
+epicsBestPractices: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/create-epics-and-stories'
+---
+
+# 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 {nextStepFile} for final readiness assessment
+
+## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
+
+This step executes autonomously. Load {nextStepFile} 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.

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/check-implementation-readiness/steps/step-06-final-assessment.md

@@ -0,0 +1,133 @@
+---
+name: 'step-06-final-assessment'
+description: 'Compile final assessment and polish the readiness report'
+
+# Path Definitions
+workflow_path: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/implementation-readiness'
+
+# File References
+thisStepFile: '{workflow_path}/steps/step-06-final-assessment.md'
+workflowFile: '{workflow_path}/workflow.md'
+outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/implementation-readiness-report-{{date}}.md'
+---
+
+# Step 6: Final Assessment
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+To provide a comprehensive summary of all findings and give the report a final polish, ensuring clear recommendations and overall readiness status.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 📖 You are at the final step - complete the assessment
+- 📋 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 delivering the FINAL ASSESSMENT
+- ✅ Your findings are objective and backed by evidence
+- ✅ Provide clear, actionable recommendations
+- ✅ Success is measured by value of findings
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Compile and summarize all findings
+- 🚫 Don't soften the message - be direct
+- 💬 Provide specific examples for problems
+- 🚪 Add final section to the report
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Review all findings from previous steps
+- 💾 Add summary and recommendations
+- 📖 Determine overall readiness status
+- 🚫 Complete and present final report
+
+## FINAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS:
+
+### 1. Initialize Final Assessment
+
+"Completing **Final Assessment**.
+
+I will now:
+
+1. Review all findings from previous steps
+2. Provide a comprehensive summary
+3. Add specific recommendations
+4. Determine overall readiness status"
+
+### 2. Review Previous Findings
+
+Check the {outputFile} for sections added by previous steps:
+
+- File and FR Validation findings
+- UX Alignment issues
+- Epic Quality violations
+
+### 3. Add Final Assessment Section
+
+Append to {outputFile}:
+
+```markdown
+## Summary and Recommendations
+
+### Overall Readiness Status
+
+[READY/NEEDS WORK/NOT READY]
+
+### Critical Issues Requiring Immediate Action
+
+[List most critical issues that must be addressed]
+
+### Recommended Next Steps
+
+1. [Specific action item 1]
+2. [Specific action item 2]
+3. [Specific action item 3]
+
+### Final Note
+
+This assessment identified [X] issues across [Y] categories. Address the critical issues before proceeding to implementation. These findings can be used to improve the artifacts or you may choose to proceed as-is.
+```
+
+### 4. Complete the Report
+
+- Ensure all findings are clearly documented
+- Verify recommendations are actionable
+- Add date and assessor information
+- Save the final report
+
+### 5. Present Completion
+
+Display:
+"**Implementation Readiness Assessment Complete**
+
+Report generated: {outputFile}
+
+The assessment found [number] issues requiring attention. Review the detailed report for specific findings and recommendations."
+
+## WORKFLOW COMPLETE
+
+The implementation readiness workflow is now complete. The report contains all findings and recommendations for the user to consider.
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- All findings compiled and summarized
+- Clear recommendations provided
+- Readiness status determined
+- Final report saved
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Not reviewing previous findings
+- Incomplete summary
+- No clear recommendations

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/check-implementation-readiness/templates/readiness-report-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+# Implementation Readiness Assessment Report
+
+**Date:** {{date}}
+**Project:** {{project_name}}