siesa-agents 2.1.78 → 2.1.80

package/bmad/bmb/workflows/workflow-compliance-check/steps/step-04-file-validation.md

@@ -1,296 +0,0 @@
----
-name: 'step-04-file-validation'
-description: 'Validate file sizes, markdown formatting, and CSV data files'
-
-# Path Definitions
-workflow_path: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmb/workflows/workflow-compliance-check'
-
-# File References
-thisStepFile: '{workflow_path}/steps/step-04-file-validation.md'
-nextStepFile: '{workflow_path}/steps/step-05-intent-spectrum-validation.md'
-workflowFile: '{workflow_path}/workflow.md'
-complianceReportFile: '{output_folder}/workflow-compliance-report-{workflow_name}.md'
-targetWorkflowPath: '{target_workflow_path}'
-
-# Template References
-complianceReportTemplate: '{workflow_path}/templates/compliance-report.md'
-
-# Documentation References
-stepTemplate: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmb/docs/workflows/templates/step-template.md'
-workflowTemplate: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmb/docs/workflows/templates/workflow-template.md'
-csvStandards: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmb/docs/workflows/csv-data-file-standards.md'
----
-
-# Step 4: File Size, Formatting, and Data Validation
-
-## STEP GOAL:
-
-Validate file sizes, markdown formatting standards, and CSV data file compliance to ensure optimal workflow performance and maintainability.
-
-## 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 compliance validator and quality assurance specialist
-- ✅ If you already have been given a name, communication_style, and persona, continue to use those while playing this new role
-- ✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
-- ✅ You bring file optimization and formatting validation expertise
-- ✅ User brings their workflow files and needs performance optimization
-
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-
-- 🎯 Focus on file sizes, markdown formatting, and CSV validation
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to skip file size analysis or CSV validation when present
-- 💬 Approach: Systematic file analysis with optimization recommendations
-- 📋 Ensure all findings include specific recommendations for improvement
-
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-
-- 🎯 Validate file sizes against optimal ranges (≤5K best, 5-7K good, 7-10K acceptable, 10-12K concern, >15K action required)
-- 💾 Check markdown formatting standards and conventions
-- 📖 Validate CSV files against csv-data-file-standards.md when present
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to overlook file optimization opportunities
-
-## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
-
-- Available context: Target workflow files and their sizes/formats
-- Focus: File optimization, formatting standards, and CSV data validation
-- Limits: File analysis only, holistic workflow analysis comes next
-- Dependencies: Completed step-by-step validation from previous phase
-
-## Sequence of Instructions (Do not deviate, skip, or optimize)
-
-### 1. Initialize File Validation Phase
-
-"Beginning **File Size, Formatting, and Data Validation**
-Target: `{target_workflow_name}`
-
-Analyzing workflow files for:
-
-- File size optimization (smaller is better for performance)
-- Markdown formatting standards compliance
-- CSV data file standards validation (if present)
-- Overall file maintainability and performance..."
-
-### 2. File Size Analysis
-
-**A. Step File Size Validation:**
-For each step file:
-
-"**File Size Analysis:** `{step_filename}`"
-
-- **Size:** [file size in KB]
-- **Optimization Rating:** [Optimal/Good/Acceptable/Concern/Action Required]
-- **Performance Impact:** [Minimal/Moderate/Significant/Severe]
-
-**Size Ratings:**
-
-- **≤ 5K:** ✅ Optimal - Excellent performance and maintainability
-- **5K-7K:** ✅ Good - Good balance of content and performance
-- **7K-10K:** ⚠️ Acceptable - Consider content optimization
-- **10K-12K:** ⚠️ Concern - Content should be consolidated or split
-- **> 15K:** ❌ Action Required - File must be optimized (split content, remove redundancy)
-
-**Document optimization opportunities:**
-
-- Content that could be moved to templates
-- Redundant explanations or examples
-- Overly detailed instructions that could be condensed
-- Opportunities to use references instead of inline content
-
-### 3. Markdown Formatting Validation
-
-**A. Heading Structure Analysis:**
-"**Markdown Formatting Analysis:**"
-
-For each file:
-
-- **Heading Hierarchy:** Proper H1 → H2 → H3 structure
-- **Consistent Formatting:** Consistent use of bold, italics, lists
-- **Code Blocks:** Proper markdown code block formatting
-- **Link References:** Valid internal and external links
-- **Table Formatting:** Proper table structure when used
-
-**Common formatting issues to document:**
-
-- Missing blank lines around headings
-- Inconsistent list formatting (numbered vs bullet)
-- Improper code block language specifications
-- Broken or invalid markdown links
-- Inconsistent heading levels or skipping levels
-
-### 4. CSV Data File Validation (if present)
-
-**A. Identify CSV Files:**
-"**CSV Data File Analysis:**"
-Check for CSV files in workflow directory:
-
-- Look for `.csv` files in main directory
-- Check for `data/` subdirectory containing CSV files
-- Identify any CSV references in workflow configuration
-
-**B. Validate Against Standards:**
-For each CSV file found, validate against `{csvStandards}`:
-
-**Purpose Validation:**
-
-- Does CSV contain essential data that LLMs cannot generate or web-search?
-- Is all CSV data referenced and used in the workflow?
-- Is data domain-specific and valuable?
-- Does CSV optimize context usage (knowledge base indexing, workflow routing, method selection)?
-- Does CSV reduce workflow complexity or step count significantly?
-- Does CSV enable dynamic technique selection or smart resource routing?
-
-**Structural Validation:**
-
-- Valid CSV format with proper quoting
-- Consistent column counts across all rows
-- No missing data or properly marked empty values
-- Clear, descriptive header row
-- Proper UTF-8 encoding
-
-**Content Validation:**
-
-- No LLM-generated content (generic phrases, common knowledge)
-- Specific, concrete data entries
-- Consistent data formatting
-- Verifiable and factual data
-
-**Column Standards:**
-
-- Clear, descriptive column headers
-- Consistent data types per column
-- All columns referenced in workflow
-- Appropriate column width and focus
-
-**File Size and Performance:**
-
-- Efficient structure under 1MB when possible
-- No redundant or duplicate rows
-- Optimized data representation
-- Fast loading characteristics
-
-**Documentation Standards:**
-
-- Purpose and usage documentation present
-- Column descriptions and format specifications
-- Data source documentation
-- Update procedures documented
-
-### 5. File Validation Reporting
-
-For each file with issues:
-
-```markdown
-### File Validation: {filename}
-
-**File Size Analysis:**
-
-- Size: {size}KB - Rating: {Optimal/Good/Concern/etc.}
-- Performance Impact: {assessment}
-- Optimization Recommendations: {specific suggestions}
-
-**Markdown Formatting:**
-
-- Heading Structure: {compliant/issues found}
-- Common Issues: {list of formatting problems}
-- Fix Recommendations: {specific corrections}
-
-**CSV Data Validation:**
-
-- Purpose Validation: {compliant/needs review}
-- Structural Issues: {list of problems}
-- Content Standards: {compliant/violations}
-- Recommendations: {improvement suggestions}
-```
-
-### 6. Aggregate File Analysis Summary
-
-"**File Validation Summary:**
-
-**File Size Distribution:**
-
-- Optimal (≤5K): [number] files
-- Good (5K-7K): [number] files
-- Acceptable (7K-10K): [number] files
-- Concern (10K-12K): [number] files
-- Action Required (>15K): [number] files
-
-**Markdown Formatting Issues:**
-
-- Heading Structure: [number] files with issues
-- List Formatting: [number] files with inconsistencies
-- Code Blocks: [number] files with formatting problems
-- Link References: [number] broken or invalid links
-
-**CSV Data Files:**
-
-- Total CSV files: [number]
-- Compliant with standards: [number]
-- Require attention: [number]
-- Critical issues: [number]
-
-**Performance Impact Assessment:**
-
-- Overall workflow performance: [Excellent/Good/Acceptable/Concern/Poor]
-- Most critical file size issue: {file and size}
-- Primary formatting concerns: {main issues}"
-
-### 7. Continuation Confirmation
-
-"**File Validation Complete:** Size, formatting, and CSV analysis finished
-
-**Key Findings:**
-
-- **File Optimization:** [summary of size optimization opportunities]
-- **Formatting Standards:** [summary of markdown compliance issues]
-- **Data Validation:** [summary of CSV standards compliance]
-
-**Ready for Phase 5:** Intent Spectrum Validation analysis
-
-- Flow validation and goal alignment
-- Meta-workflow failure analysis
-- Strategic recommendations and improvement planning
-
-**Select an Option:** [C] Continue to Intent Spectrum Validation [X] Exit"
-
-## Menu Handling Logic:
-
-- IF C: Save file validation findings to report, update frontmatter, then load, read entire file, then execute {nextStepFile}
-- IF X: Save current findings and end with guidance for resuming
-- IF Any other comments or queries: respond and redisplay menu
-
-## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
-
-ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [all file sizes analyzed, markdown formatting validated, and CSV files checked against standards], will you then load and read fully `{nextStepFile}` to execute and begin Intent Spectrum Validation phase.
-
----
-
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-
-- All workflow files analyzed for optimal size ranges with specific recommendations
-- Markdown formatting validated against standards with identified issues
-- CSV data files validated against csv-data-file-standards.md when present
-- Performance impact assessed with optimization opportunities identified
-- File validation findings documented with specific fix recommendations
-- User ready for holistic workflow analysis
-
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-
-- Skipping file size analysis or markdown formatting validation
-- Not checking CSV files against standards when present
-- Failing to provide specific optimization recommendations
-- Missing performance impact assessment
-- Overlooking critical file size violations (>15K)
-
-**Master Rule:** Skipping steps, optimizing sequences, or not following exact instructions is FORBIDDEN and constitutes SYSTEM FAILURE.

package/bmad/bmb/workflows/workflow-compliance-check/steps/step-05-intent-spectrum-validation.md

@@ -1,265 +0,0 @@
----
-name: 'step-05-intent-spectrum-validation'
-description: 'Dedicated analysis and validation of intent vs prescriptive spectrum positioning'
-
-# Path Definitions
-workflow_path: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmb/workflows/workflow-compliance-check'
-
-# File References
-thisStepFile: '{workflow_path}/steps/step-05-intent-spectrum-validation.md'
-nextStepFile: '{workflow_path}/steps/step-06-web-subprocess-validation.md'
-workflowFile: '{workflow_path}/workflow.md'
-complianceReportFile: '{output_folder}/workflow-compliance-report-{workflow_name}.md'
-targetWorkflowPath: '{target_workflow_path}'
-
-# Template References
-complianceReportTemplate: '{workflow_path}/templates/compliance-report.md'
-
-# Documentation References
-stepTemplate: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmb/docs/workflows/templates/step-template.md'
-workflowTemplate: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmb/docs/workflows/templates/workflow-template.md'
-intentSpectrum: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmb/docs/workflows/intent-vs-prescriptive-spectrum.md'
----
-
-# Step 5: Intent vs Prescriptive Spectrum Validation
-
-## STEP GOAL:
-
-Analyze the workflow's position on the intent vs prescriptive spectrum, provide expert assessment, and confirm with user whether the current positioning is appropriate or needs adjustment.
-
-## 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 compliance validator and design philosophy specialist
-- ✅ If you already have been given a name, communication_style, and persona, continue to use those while playing this new role
-- ✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
-- ✅ You bring expertise in intent vs prescriptive design principles
-- ✅ User brings their workflow and needs guidance on spectrum positioning
-
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-
-- 🎯 Focus only on spectrum analysis and user confirmation
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to make spectrum decisions without user input
-- 💬 Approach: Educational, analytical, and collaborative
-- 📋 Ensure user understands spectrum implications before confirming
-
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-
-- 🎯 Analyze workflow's current spectrum position based on all previous findings
-- 💾 Provide expert assessment with specific examples and reasoning
-- 📖 Educate user on spectrum implications for their workflow type
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to proceed without user confirmation of spectrum position
-
-## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
-
-- Available context: Complete analysis from workflow, step, and file validation phases
-- Focus: Intent vs prescriptive spectrum analysis and user confirmation
-- Limits: Spectrum analysis only, holistic workflow analysis comes next
-- Dependencies: Successful completion of file size and formatting validation
-
-## Sequence of Instructions (Do not deviate, skip, or optimize)
-
-### 1. Initialize Spectrum Analysis
-
-"Beginning **Intent vs Prescriptive Spectrum Validation**
-Target: `{target_workflow_name}`
-
-**Reference Standard:** Analysis based on `{intentSpectrum}`
-
-This step will help ensure your workflow's approach to LLM guidance is intentional and appropriate for its purpose..."
-
-### 2. Spectrum Position Analysis
-
-**A. Current Position Assessment:**
-Based on analysis of workflow.md, all step files, and implementation patterns:
-
-"**Current Spectrum Analysis:**
-Based on my review of your workflow, I assess its current position as:
-
-**[Highly Intent-Based / Balanced Middle / Highly Prescriptive]**"
-
-**B. Evidence-Based Reasoning:**
-Provide specific evidence from the workflow analysis:
-
-"**Assessment Evidence:**
-
-- **Instruction Style:** [Examples of intent-based vs prescriptive instructions found]
-- **User Interaction:** [How user conversations are structured]
-- **LLM Freedom:** [Level of creative adaptation allowed]
-- **Consistency Needs:** [Workflow requirements for consistency vs creativity]
-- **Risk Factors:** [Any compliance, safety, or regulatory considerations]"
-
-**C. Workflow Type Analysis:**
-"**Workflow Type Analysis:**
-
-- **Primary Purpose:** {workflow's main goal}
-- **User Expectations:** {What users likely expect from this workflow}
-- **Success Factors:** {What makes this workflow successful}
-- **Risk Level:** {Compliance, safety, or risk considerations}"
-
-### 3. Recommended Spectrum Position
-
-**A. Expert Recommendation:**
-"**My Professional Recommendation:**
-Based on the workflow's purpose, user needs, and implementation, I recommend positioning this workflow as:
-
-**[Highly Intent-Based / Balanced Middle / Highly Prescriptive]**"
-
-**B. Recommendation Rationale:**
-"**Reasoning for Recommendation:**
-
-- **Purpose Alignment:** {Why this position best serves the workflow's goals}
-- **User Experience:** {How this positioning enhances user interaction}
-- **Risk Management:** {How this position addresses any compliance or safety needs}
-- **Success Optimization:** {Why this approach will lead to better outcomes}"
-
-**C. Specific Examples:**
-Provide concrete examples of how the recommended position would look:
-
-"**Examples at Recommended Position:**
-**Intent-Based Example:** "Help users discover their creative potential through..."
-**Prescriptive Example:** "Ask exactly: 'Have you experienced any of the following...'"
-
-**Current State Comparison:**
-**Current Instructions Found:** [Examples from actual workflow]
-**Recommended Instructions:** [How they could be improved]"
-
-### 4. Spectrum Education and Implications
-
-**A. Explain Spectrum Implications:**
-"**Understanding Your Spectrum Choice:**
-
-**If Intent-Based:** Your workflow will be more creative, adaptive, and personalized. Users will have unique experiences, but interactions will be less predictable.
-
-**If Prescriptive:** Your workflow will be consistent, controlled, and predictable. Every user will have similar experiences, which is ideal for compliance or standardization.
-
-**If Balanced:** Your workflow will provide professional expertise with some adaptation, offering consistent quality with personalized application."
-
-**B. Context-Specific Guidance:**
-"**For Your Specific Workflow Type:**
-{Provide tailored guidance based on whether it's creative, professional, compliance, technical, etc.}"
-
-### 5. User Confirmation and Decision
-
-**A. Present Findings and Recommendation:**
-"**Spectrum Analysis Summary:**
-
-**Current Assessment:** [Current position with confidence level]
-**Expert Recommendation:** [Recommended position with reasoning]
-**Key Considerations:** [Main factors to consider]
-
-**My Analysis Indicates:** [Brief summary of why I recommend this position]
-
-**The Decision is Yours:** While I provide expert guidance, the final spectrum position should reflect your vision for the workflow."
-
-**B. User Choice Confirmation:**
-"**Where would you like to position this workflow on the Intent vs Prescriptive Spectrum?**
-
-**Options:**
-
-1. **Keep Current Position** - [Current position] - Stay with current approach
-2. **Move to Recommended** - [Recommended position] - Adopt my expert recommendation
-3. **Move Toward Intent-Based** - Increase creative freedom and adaptation
-4. **Move Toward Prescriptive** - Increase consistency and control
-5. **Custom Position** - Specify your preferred approach
-
-**Please select your preferred spectrum position (1-5):**"
-
-### 6. Document Spectrum Decision
-
-**A. Record User Decision:**
-"**Spectrum Position Decision:**
-**User Choice:** [Selected option]
-**Final Position:** [Confirmed spectrum position]
-**Rationale:** [User's reasoning, if provided]
-**Implementation Notes:** [What this means for workflow design]"
-
-**B. Update Compliance Report:**
-Append to {complianceReportFile}:
-
-```markdown
-## Intent vs Prescriptive Spectrum Analysis
-
-### Current Position Assessment
-
-**Analyzed Position:** [Current spectrum position]
-**Evidence:** [Specific examples from workflow analysis]
-**Confidence Level:** [High/Medium/Low based on clarity of patterns]
-
-### Expert Recommendation
-
-**Recommended Position:** [Professional recommendation]
-**Reasoning:** [Detailed rationale for recommendation]
-**Workflow Type Considerations:** [Specific to this workflow's purpose]
-
-### User Decision
-
-**Selected Position:** [User's confirmed choice]
-**Rationale:** [User's reasoning or preferences]
-**Implementation Guidance:** [What this means for workflow]
-
-### Spectrum Validation Results
-
-✅ Spectrum position is intentional and understood
-✅ User educated on implications of their choice
-✅ Implementation guidance provided for final position
-✅ Decision documented for future reference
-```
-
-### 7. Continuation Confirmation
-
-"**Spectrum Validation Complete:**
-
-- **Final Position:** [Confirmed spectrum position]
-- **User Understanding:** Confirmed implications and benefits
-- **Implementation Ready:** Guidance provided for maintaining position
-
-**Ready for Phase 6:** Web Subprocess Validation analysis
-
-- Flow validation and completion paths
-- Goal alignment and optimization assessment
-- Meta-workflow failure analysis and improvement recommendations
-
-**Select an Option:** [C] Continue to Web Subprocess Validation [X] Exit"
-
-## Menu Handling Logic:
-
-- IF C: Save spectrum decision to report, update frontmatter, then load, read entire file, then execute {nextStepFile}
-- IF X: Save current spectrum findings and end with guidance for resuming
-- IF Any other comments or queries: respond and redisplay menu
-
-## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
-
-ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [spectrum position confirmed with user understanding], will you then load and read fully `{nextStepFile}` to execute and begin Web Subprocess Validation phase.
-
----
-
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-
-- Comprehensive spectrum position analysis with evidence-based reasoning
-- Expert recommendation provided with specific rationale and examples
-- User educated on spectrum implications for their workflow type
-- User makes informed decision about spectrum positioning
-- Spectrum decision documented with implementation guidance
-- User understands benefits and trade-offs of their choice
-
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-
-- Making spectrum recommendations without analyzing actual workflow content
-- Not providing evidence-based reasoning for assessment
-- Failing to educate user on spectrum implications
-- Proceeding without user confirmation of spectrum position
-- Not documenting user decision for future reference
-
-**Master Rule:** Skipping steps, optimizing sequences, or not following exact instructions is FORBIDDEN and constitutes SYSTEM FAILURE.