siesa-agents 2.1.39 → 2.1.41

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/testarch/trace/checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,655 @@
+# Requirements Traceability & Gate Decision - Validation Checklist
+
+**Workflow:** `testarch-trace`
+**Purpose:** Ensure complete traceability matrix with actionable gap analysis AND make deployment readiness decision (PASS/CONCERNS/FAIL/WAIVED)
+
+This checklist covers **two sequential phases**:
+
+- **PHASE 1**: Requirements Traceability (always executed)
+- **PHASE 2**: Quality Gate Decision (executed if `enable_gate_decision: true`)
+
+---
+
+# PHASE 1: REQUIREMENTS TRACEABILITY
+
+## Prerequisites Validation
+
+- [ ] Acceptance criteria are available (from story file OR inline)
+- [ ] Test suite exists (or gaps are acknowledged and documented)
+- [ ] If tests are missing, recommend `*atdd` (trace does not run it automatically)
+- [ ] Test directory path is correct (`test_dir` variable)
+- [ ] Story file is accessible (if using BMad mode)
+- [ ] Knowledge base is loaded (test-priorities, traceability, risk-governance)
+
+---
+
+## Context Loading
+
+- [ ] Story file read successfully (if applicable)
+- [ ] Acceptance criteria extracted correctly
+- [ ] Story ID identified (e.g., 1.3)
+- [ ] `test-design.md` loaded (if available)
+- [ ] `tech-spec.md` loaded (if available)
+- [ ] `PRD.md` loaded (if available)
+- [ ] Relevant knowledge fragments loaded from `tea-index.csv`
+
+---
+
+## Test Discovery and Cataloging
+
+- [ ] Tests auto-discovered using multiple strategies (test IDs, describe blocks, file paths)
+- [ ] Tests categorized by level (E2E, API, Component, Unit)
+- [ ] Test metadata extracted:
+  - [ ] Test IDs (e.g., 1.3-E2E-001)
+  - [ ] Describe/context blocks
+  - [ ] It blocks (individual test cases)
+  - [ ] Given-When-Then structure (if BDD)
+  - [ ] Priority markers (P0/P1/P2/P3)
+- [ ] All relevant test files found (no tests missed due to naming conventions)
+
+---
+
+## Criteria-to-Test Mapping
+
+- [ ] Each acceptance criterion mapped to tests (or marked as NONE)
+- [ ] Explicit references found (test IDs, describe blocks mentioning criterion)
+- [ ] Test level documented (E2E, API, Component, Unit)
+- [ ] Given-When-Then narrative verified for alignment
+- [ ] Traceability matrix table generated:
+  - [ ] Criterion ID
+  - [ ] Description
+  - [ ] Test ID
+  - [ ] Test File
+  - [ ] Test Level
+  - [ ] Coverage Status
+
+---
+
+## Coverage Classification
+
+- [ ] Coverage status classified for each criterion:
+  - [ ] **FULL** - All scenarios validated at appropriate level(s)
+  - [ ] **PARTIAL** - Some coverage but missing edge cases or levels
+  - [ ] **NONE** - No test coverage at any level
+  - [ ] **UNIT-ONLY** - Only unit tests (missing integration/E2E validation)
+  - [ ] **INTEGRATION-ONLY** - Only API/Component tests (missing unit confidence)
+- [ ] Classification justifications provided
+- [ ] Edge cases considered in FULL vs PARTIAL determination
+
+---
+
+## Duplicate Coverage Detection
+
+- [ ] Duplicate coverage checked across test levels
+- [ ] Acceptable overlap identified (defense in depth for critical paths)
+- [ ] Unacceptable duplication flagged (same validation at multiple levels)
+- [ ] Recommendations provided for consolidation
+- [ ] Selective testing principles applied
+
+---
+
+## Gap Analysis
+
+- [ ] Coverage gaps identified:
+  - [ ] Criteria with NONE status
+  - [ ] Criteria with PARTIAL status
+  - [ ] Criteria with UNIT-ONLY status
+  - [ ] Criteria with INTEGRATION-ONLY status
+- [ ] Gaps prioritized by risk level using test-priorities framework:
+  - [ ] **CRITICAL** - P0 criteria without FULL coverage (BLOCKER)
+  - [ ] **HIGH** - P1 criteria without FULL coverage (PR blocker)
+  - [ ] **MEDIUM** - P2 criteria without FULL coverage (nightly gap)
+  - [ ] **LOW** - P3 criteria without FULL coverage (acceptable)
+- [ ] Specific test recommendations provided for each gap:
+  - [ ] Suggested test level (E2E, API, Component, Unit)
+  - [ ] Test description (Given-When-Then)
+  - [ ] Recommended test ID (e.g., 1.3-E2E-004)
+  - [ ] Explanation of why test is needed
+
+---
+
+## Coverage Metrics
+
+- [ ] Overall coverage percentage calculated (FULL coverage / total criteria)
+- [ ] P0 coverage percentage calculated
+- [ ] P1 coverage percentage calculated
+- [ ] P2 coverage percentage calculated (if applicable)
+- [ ] Coverage by level calculated:
+  - [ ] E2E coverage %
+  - [ ] API coverage %
+  - [ ] Component coverage %
+  - [ ] Unit coverage %
+
+---
+
+## Test Quality Verification
+
+For each mapped test, verify:
+
+- [ ] Explicit assertions are present (not hidden in helpers)
+- [ ] Test follows Given-When-Then structure
+- [ ] No hard waits or sleeps (deterministic waiting only)
+- [ ] Self-cleaning (test cleans up its data)
+- [ ] File size < 300 lines
+- [ ] Test duration < 90 seconds
+
+Quality issues flagged:
+
+- [ ] **BLOCKER** issues identified (missing assertions, hard waits, flaky patterns)
+- [ ] **WARNING** issues identified (large files, slow tests, unclear structure)
+- [ ] **INFO** issues identified (style inconsistencies, missing documentation)
+
+Knowledge fragments referenced:
+
+- [ ] `test-quality.md` for Definition of Done
+- [ ] `fixture-architecture.md` for self-cleaning patterns
+- [ ] `network-first.md` for Playwright best practices
+- [ ] `data-factories.md` for test data patterns
+
+---
+
+## Phase 1 Deliverables Generated
+
+### Traceability Matrix Markdown
+
+- [ ] File created at `{output_folder}/traceability-matrix.md`
+- [ ] Template from `trace-template.md` used
+- [ ] Full mapping table included
+- [ ] Coverage status section included
+- [ ] Gap analysis section included
+- [ ] Quality assessment section included
+- [ ] Recommendations section included
+
+### Coverage Badge/Metric (if enabled)
+
+- [ ] Badge markdown generated
+- [ ] Metrics exported to JSON for CI/CD integration
+
+### Updated Story File (if enabled)
+
+- [ ] "Traceability" section added to story markdown
+- [ ] Link to traceability matrix included
+- [ ] Coverage summary included
+
+---
+
+## Phase 1 Quality Assurance
+
+### Accuracy Checks
+
+- [ ] All acceptance criteria accounted for (none skipped)
+- [ ] Test IDs correctly formatted (e.g., 1.3-E2E-001)
+- [ ] File paths are correct and accessible
+- [ ] Coverage percentages calculated correctly
+- [ ] No false positives (tests incorrectly mapped to criteria)
+- [ ] No false negatives (existing tests missed in mapping)
+
+### Completeness Checks
+
+- [ ] All test levels considered (E2E, API, Component, Unit)
+- [ ] All priorities considered (P0, P1, P2, P3)
+- [ ] All coverage statuses used appropriately (FULL, PARTIAL, NONE, UNIT-ONLY, INTEGRATION-ONLY)
+- [ ] All gaps have recommendations
+- [ ] All quality issues have severity and remediation guidance
+
+### Actionability Checks
+
+- [ ] Recommendations are specific (not generic)
+- [ ] Test IDs suggested for new tests
+- [ ] Given-When-Then provided for recommended tests
+- [ ] Impact explained for each gap
+- [ ] Priorities clear (CRITICAL, HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW)
+
+---
+
+## Phase 1 Documentation
+
+- [ ] Traceability matrix is readable and well-formatted
+- [ ] Tables render correctly in markdown
+- [ ] Code blocks have proper syntax highlighting
+- [ ] Links are valid and accessible
+- [ ] Recommendations are clear and prioritized
+
+---
+
+# PHASE 2: QUALITY GATE DECISION
+
+**Note**: Phase 2 executes only if `enable_gate_decision: true` in workflow.yaml
+
+---
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+### Evidence Gathering
+
+- [ ] Test execution results obtained (CI/CD pipeline, test framework reports)
+- [ ] Story/epic/release file identified and read
+- [ ] Test design document discovered or explicitly provided (if available)
+- [ ] Traceability matrix discovered or explicitly provided (available from Phase 1)
+- [ ] NFR assessment discovered or explicitly provided (if available)
+- [ ] Code coverage report discovered or explicitly provided (if available)
+- [ ] Burn-in results discovered or explicitly provided (if available)
+
+### Evidence Validation
+
+- [ ] Evidence freshness validated (warn if >7 days old, recommend re-running workflows)
+- [ ] All required assessments available or user acknowledged gaps
+- [ ] Test results are complete (not partial or interrupted runs)
+- [ ] Test results match current codebase (not from outdated branch)
+
+### Knowledge Base Loading
+
+- [ ] `risk-governance.md` loaded successfully
+- [ ] `probability-impact.md` loaded successfully
+- [ ] `test-quality.md` loaded successfully
+- [ ] `test-priorities.md` loaded successfully
+- [ ] `ci-burn-in.md` loaded (if burn-in results available)
+
+---
+
+## Process Steps
+
+### Step 1: Context Loading
+
+- [ ] Gate type identified (story/epic/release/hotfix)
+- [ ] Target ID extracted (story_id, epic_num, or release_version)
+- [ ] Decision thresholds loaded from workflow variables
+- [ ] Risk tolerance configuration loaded
+- [ ] Waiver policy loaded
+
+### Step 2: Evidence Parsing
+
+**Test Results:**
+
+- [ ] Total test count extracted
+- [ ] Passed test count extracted
+- [ ] Failed test count extracted
+- [ ] Skipped test count extracted
+- [ ] Test duration extracted
+- [ ] P0 test pass rate calculated
+- [ ] P1 test pass rate calculated
+- [ ] Overall test pass rate calculated
+
+**Quality Assessments:**
+
+- [ ] P0/P1/P2/P3 scenarios extracted from test-design.md (if available)
+- [ ] Risk scores extracted from test-design.md (if available)
+- [ ] Coverage percentages extracted from traceability-matrix.md (available from Phase 1)
+- [ ] Coverage gaps extracted from traceability-matrix.md (available from Phase 1)
+- [ ] NFR status extracted from nfr-assessment.md (if available)
+- [ ] Security issues count extracted from nfr-assessment.md (if available)
+
+**Code Coverage:**
+
+- [ ] Line coverage percentage extracted (if available)
+- [ ] Branch coverage percentage extracted (if available)
+- [ ] Function coverage percentage extracted (if available)
+- [ ] Critical path coverage validated (if available)
+
+**Burn-in Results:**
+
+- [ ] Burn-in iterations count extracted (if available)
+- [ ] Flaky tests count extracted (if available)
+- [ ] Stability score calculated (if available)
+
+### Step 3: Decision Rules Application
+
+**P0 Criteria Evaluation:**
+
+- [ ] P0 test pass rate evaluated (must be 100%)
+- [ ] P0 acceptance criteria coverage evaluated (must be 100%)
+- [ ] Security issues count evaluated (must be 0)
+- [ ] Critical NFR failures evaluated (must be 0)
+- [ ] Flaky tests evaluated (must be 0 if burn-in enabled)
+- [ ] P0 decision recorded: PASS or FAIL
+
+**P1 Criteria Evaluation:**
+
+- [ ] P1 test pass rate evaluated (threshold: min_p1_pass_rate)
+- [ ] P1 acceptance criteria coverage evaluated (threshold: 95%)
+- [ ] Overall test pass rate evaluated (threshold: min_overall_pass_rate)
+- [ ] Code coverage evaluated (threshold: min_coverage)
+- [ ] P1 decision recorded: PASS or CONCERNS
+
+**P2/P3 Criteria Evaluation:**
+
+- [ ] P2 failures tracked (informational, don't block if allow_p2_failures: true)
+- [ ] P3 failures tracked (informational, don't block if allow_p3_failures: true)
+- [ ] Residual risks documented
+
+**Final Decision:**
+
+- [ ] Decision determined: PASS / CONCERNS / FAIL / WAIVED
+- [ ] Decision rationale documented
+- [ ] Decision is deterministic (follows rules, not arbitrary)
+
+### Step 4: Documentation
+
+**Gate Decision Document Created:**
+
+- [ ] Story/epic/release info section complete (ID, title, description, links)
+- [ ] Decision clearly stated (PASS / CONCERNS / FAIL / WAIVED)
+- [ ] Decision date recorded
+- [ ] Evaluator recorded (user or agent name)
+
+**Evidence Summary Documented:**
+
+- [ ] Test results summary complete (total, passed, failed, pass rates)
+- [ ] Coverage summary complete (P0/P1 criteria, code coverage)
+- [ ] NFR validation summary complete (security, performance, reliability, maintainability)
+- [ ] Flakiness summary complete (burn-in iterations, flaky test count)
+
+**Rationale Documented:**
+
+- [ ] Decision rationale clearly explained
+- [ ] Key evidence highlighted
+- [ ] Assumptions and caveats noted (if any)
+
+**Residual Risks Documented (if CONCERNS or WAIVED):**
+
+- [ ] Unresolved P1/P2 issues listed
+- [ ] Probability × impact estimated for each risk
+- [ ] Mitigations or workarounds described
+
+**Waivers Documented (if WAIVED):**
+
+- [ ] Waiver reason documented (business justification)
+- [ ] Waiver approver documented (name, role)
+- [ ] Waiver expiry date documented
+- [ ] Remediation plan documented (fix in next release, due date)
+- [ ] Monitoring plan documented
+
+**Critical Issues Documented (if FAIL or CONCERNS):**
+
+- [ ] Top 5-10 critical issues listed
+- [ ] Priority assigned to each issue (P0/P1/P2)
+- [ ] Owner assigned to each issue
+- [ ] Due date assigned to each issue
+
+**Recommendations Documented:**
+
+- [ ] Next steps clearly stated for decision type
+- [ ] Deployment recommendation provided
+- [ ] Monitoring recommendations provided (if applicable)
+- [ ] Remediation recommendations provided (if applicable)
+
+### Step 5: Status Updates and Notifications
+
+**Status File Updated:**
+
+- [ ] Gate decision appended to bmm-workflow-status.md (if append_to_history: true)
+- [ ] Format correct: `[DATE] Gate Decision: DECISION - Target {ID} - {rationale}`
+- [ ] Status file committed or staged for commit
+
+**Gate YAML Created:**
+
+- [ ] Gate YAML snippet generated with decision and criteria
+- [ ] Evidence references included in YAML
+- [ ] Next steps included in YAML
+- [ ] YAML file saved to output folder
+
+**Stakeholder Notification Generated:**
+
+- [ ] Notification subject line created
+- [ ] Notification body created with summary
+- [ ] Recipients identified (PM, SM, DEV lead, stakeholders)
+- [ ] Notification ready for delivery (if notify_stakeholders: true)
+
+**Outputs Saved:**
+
+- [ ] Gate decision document saved to `{output_file}`
+- [ ] Gate YAML saved to `{output_folder}/gate-decision-{target}.yaml`
+- [ ] All outputs are valid and readable
+
+---
+
+## Phase 2 Output Validation
+
+### Gate Decision Document
+
+**Completeness:**
+
+- [ ] All required sections present (info, decision, evidence, rationale, next steps)
+- [ ] No placeholder text or TODOs left in document
+- [ ] All evidence references are accurate and complete
+- [ ] All links to artifacts are valid
+
+**Accuracy:**
+
+- [ ] Decision matches applied criteria rules
+- [ ] Test results match CI/CD pipeline output
+- [ ] Coverage percentages match reports
+- [ ] NFR status matches assessment document
+- [ ] No contradictions or inconsistencies
+
+**Clarity:**
+
+- [ ] Decision rationale is clear and unambiguous
+- [ ] Technical jargon is explained or avoided
+- [ ] Stakeholders can understand next steps
+- [ ] Recommendations are actionable
+
+### Gate YAML
+
+**Format:**
+
+- [ ] YAML is valid (no syntax errors)
+- [ ] All required fields present (target, decision, date, evaluator, criteria, evidence)
+- [ ] Field values are correct data types (numbers, strings, dates)
+
+**Content:**
+
+- [ ] Criteria values match decision document
+- [ ] Evidence references are accurate
+- [ ] Next steps align with decision type
+
+---
+
+## Phase 2 Quality Checks
+
+### Decision Integrity
+
+- [ ] Decision is deterministic (follows rules, not arbitrary)
+- [ ] P0 failures result in FAIL decision (unless waived)
+- [ ] Security issues result in FAIL decision (unless waived - but should never be waived)
+- [ ] Waivers have business justification and approver (if WAIVED)
+- [ ] Residual risks are documented (if CONCERNS or WAIVED)
+
+### Evidence-Based
+
+- [ ] Decision is based on actual test results (not guesses)
+- [ ] All claims are supported by evidence
+- [ ] No assumptions without documentation
+- [ ] Evidence sources are cited (CI run IDs, report URLs)
+
+### Transparency
+
+- [ ] Decision rationale is transparent and auditable
+- [ ] Criteria evaluation is documented step-by-step
+- [ ] Any deviations from standard process are explained
+- [ ] Waiver justifications are clear (if applicable)
+
+### Consistency
+
+- [ ] Decision aligns with risk-governance knowledge fragment
+- [ ] Priority framework (P0/P1/P2/P3) applied consistently
+- [ ] Terminology consistent with test-quality knowledge fragment
+- [ ] Decision matrix followed correctly
+
+---
+
+## Phase 2 Integration Points
+
+### BMad Workflow Status
+
+- [ ] Gate decision added to `bmm-workflow-status.md`
+- [ ] Format matches existing gate history entries
+- [ ] Timestamp is accurate
+- [ ] Decision summary is concise (<80 chars)
+
+### CI/CD Pipeline
+
+- [ ] Gate YAML is CI/CD-compatible
+- [ ] YAML can be parsed by pipeline automation
+- [ ] Decision can be used to block/allow deployments
+- [ ] Evidence references are accessible to pipeline
+
+### Stakeholders
+
+- [ ] Notification message is clear and actionable
+- [ ] Decision is explained in non-technical terms
+- [ ] Next steps are specific and time-bound
+- [ ] Recipients are appropriate for decision type
+
+---
+
+## Phase 2 Compliance and Audit
+
+### Audit Trail
+
+- [ ] Decision date and time recorded
+- [ ] Evaluator identified (user or agent)
+- [ ] All evidence sources cited
+- [ ] Decision criteria documented
+- [ ] Rationale clearly explained
+
+### Traceability
+
+- [ ] Gate decision traceable to story/epic/release
+- [ ] Evidence traceable to specific test runs
+- [ ] Assessments traceable to workflows that created them
+- [ ] Waiver traceable to approver (if applicable)
+
+### Compliance
+
+- [ ] Security requirements validated (no unresolved vulnerabilities)
+- [ ] Quality standards met or waived with justification
+- [ ] Regulatory requirements addressed (if applicable)
+- [ ] Documentation sufficient for external audit
+
+---
+
+## Phase 2 Edge Cases and Exceptions
+
+### Missing Evidence
+
+- [ ] If test-design.md missing, decision still possible with test results + trace
+- [ ] If traceability-matrix.md missing, decision still possible with test results (but Phase 1 should provide it)
+- [ ] If nfr-assessment.md missing, NFR validation marked as NOT ASSESSED
+- [ ] If code coverage missing, coverage criterion marked as NOT ASSESSED
+- [ ] User acknowledged gaps in evidence or provided alternative proof
+
+### Stale Evidence
+
+- [ ] Evidence freshness checked (if validate_evidence_freshness: true)
+- [ ] Warnings issued for assessments >7 days old
+- [ ] User acknowledged stale evidence or re-ran workflows
+- [ ] Decision document notes any stale evidence used
+
+### Conflicting Evidence
+
+- [ ] Conflicts between test results and assessments resolved
+- [ ] Most recent/authoritative source identified
+- [ ] Conflict resolution documented in decision rationale
+- [ ] User consulted if conflict cannot be resolved
+
+### Waiver Scenarios
+
+- [ ] Waiver only used for FAIL decision (not PASS or CONCERNS)
+- [ ] Waiver has business justification (not technical convenience)
+- [ ] Waiver has named approver with authority (VP/CTO/PO)
+- [ ] Waiver has expiry date (does NOT apply to future releases)
+- [ ] Waiver has remediation plan with concrete due date
+- [ ] Security vulnerabilities are NOT waived (enforced)
+
+---
+
+# FINAL VALIDATION (Both Phases)
+
+## Non-Prescriptive Validation
+
+- [ ] Traceability format adapted to team needs (not rigid template)
+- [ ] Examples are minimal and focused on patterns
+- [ ] Teams can extend with custom classifications
+- [ ] Integration with external systems supported (JIRA, Azure DevOps)
+- [ ] Compliance requirements considered (if applicable)
+
+---
+
+## Documentation and Communication
+
+- [ ] All documents are readable and well-formatted
+- [ ] Tables render correctly in markdown
+- [ ] Code blocks have proper syntax highlighting
+- [ ] Links are valid and accessible
+- [ ] Recommendations are clear and prioritized
+- [ ] Gate decision is prominent and unambiguous (Phase 2)
+
+---
+
+## Final Validation
+
+**Phase 1 (Traceability):**
+
+- [ ] All prerequisites met
+- [ ] All acceptance criteria mapped or gaps documented
+- [ ] P0 coverage is 100% OR documented as BLOCKER
+- [ ] Gap analysis is complete and prioritized
+- [ ] Test quality issues identified and flagged
+- [ ] Deliverables generated and saved
+
+**Phase 2 (Gate Decision):**
+
+- [ ] All quality evidence gathered
+- [ ] Decision criteria applied correctly
+- [ ] Decision rationale documented
+- [ ] Gate YAML ready for CI/CD integration
+- [ ] Status file updated (if enabled)
+- [ ] Stakeholders notified (if enabled)
+
+**Workflow Complete:**
+
+- [ ] Phase 1 completed successfully
+- [ ] Phase 2 completed successfully (if enabled)
+- [ ] All outputs validated and saved
+- [ ] Ready to proceed based on gate decision
+
+---
+
+## Sign-Off
+
+**Phase 1 - Traceability Status:**
+
+- [ ] ✅ PASS - All quality gates met, no critical gaps
+- [ ] ⚠️ WARN - P1 gaps exist, address before PR merge
+- [ ] ❌ FAIL - P0 gaps exist, BLOCKER for release
+
+**Phase 2 - Gate Decision Status (if enabled):**
+
+- [ ] ✅ PASS - Deploy to production
+- [ ] ⚠️ CONCERNS - Deploy with monitoring
+- [ ] ❌ FAIL - Block deployment, fix issues
+- [ ] 🔓 WAIVED - Deploy with business approval and remediation plan
+
+**Next Actions:**
+
+- If PASS (both phases): Proceed to deployment
+- If WARN/CONCERNS: Address gaps/issues, proceed with monitoring
+- If FAIL (either phase): Run `*atdd` for missing tests, fix issues, re-run `*trace`
+- If WAIVED: Deploy with approved waiver, schedule remediation
+
+---
+
+## Notes
+
+Record any issues, deviations, or important observations during workflow execution:
+
+- **Phase 1 Issues**: [Note any traceability mapping challenges, missing tests, quality concerns]
+- **Phase 2 Issues**: [Note any missing, stale, or conflicting evidence]
+- **Decision Rationale**: [Document any nuanced reasoning or edge cases]
+- **Waiver Details**: [Document waiver negotiations or approvals]
+- **Follow-up Actions**: [List any actions required after gate decision]
+
+---
+
+<!-- Powered by BMAD-CORE™ -->