siesa-agents 2.1.78 → 2.1.80

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/create-epics-and-stories/steps/step-04-final-validation.md

@@ -1,209 +0,0 @@
----
-name: 'step-04-final-validation'
-description: 'Validate complete coverage of all requirements and ensure implementation readiness'
-
-# Path Definitions
-workflow_path: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/create-epics-and-stories'
-
-# File References
-thisStepFile: '{workflow_path}/steps/step-04-final-validation.md'
-workflowFile: '{workflow_path}/workflow.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/epics.md'
-
-# Task References
-advancedElicitationTask: '{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/advanced-elicitation/workflow.xml'
-partyModeWorkflow: '{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/party-mode/workflow.md'
-
-# Template References
-epicsTemplate: '{workflow_path}/templates/epics-template.md'
----
-
-# Step 4: Final Validation
-
-## STEP GOAL:
-
-To validate complete coverage of all requirements and ensure stories are ready for development.
-
-## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
-
-### Universal Rules:
-
-- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
-- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
-- 🔄 CRITICAL: Process validation sequentially without skipping
-- 📋 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 product strategist and technical specifications writer
-- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
-- ✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
-- ✅ You bring validation expertise and quality assurance
-- ✅ User brings their implementation priorities and final review
-
-### Step-Specific Rules:
-
-- 🎯 Focus ONLY on validating complete requirements coverage
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to skip any validation checks
-- 💬 Validate FR coverage, story completeness, and dependencies
-- 🚪 ENSURE all stories are ready for development
-
-## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-
-- 🎯 Validate every requirement has story coverage
-- 💾 Check story dependencies and flow
-- 📖 Verify architecture compliance
-- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to approve incomplete coverage
-
-## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
-
-- Available context: Complete epic and story breakdown from previous steps
-- Focus: Final validation of requirements coverage and story readiness
-- Limits: Validation only, no new content creation
-- Dependencies: Completed story generation from Step 3
-
-## VALIDATION PROCESS:
-
-### 1. FR Coverage Validation
-
-Review the complete epic and story breakdown to ensure EVERY FR is covered:
-
-**CRITICAL CHECK:**
-
-- Go through each FR from the Requirements Inventory
-- Verify it appears in at least one story
-- Check that acceptance criteria fully address the FR
-- No FRs should be left uncovered
-
-### 2. Architecture Implementation Validation
-
-**Check for Starter Template Setup:**
-
-- Does Architecture document specify a starter template?
-- If YES: Epic 1 Story 1 must be "Set up initial project from starter template"
-- This includes cloning, installing dependencies, initial configuration
-
-**Database/Entity Creation Validation:**
-
-- Are database tables/entities created ONLY when needed by stories?
-- ❌ WRONG: Epic 1 creates all tables upfront
-- ✅ RIGHT: Tables created as part of the first story that needs them
-- Each story should create/modify ONLY what it needs
-
-### 3. Story Quality Validation
-
-**Each story must:**
-
-- Be completable by a single dev agent
-- Have clear acceptance criteria
-- Reference specific FRs it implements
-- Include necessary technical details
-- **Not have forward dependencies** (can only depend on PREVIOUS stories)
-- Be implementable without waiting for future stories
-
-### 4. Epic Structure Validation
-
-**Check that:**
-
-- Epics deliver user value, not technical milestones
-- Dependencies flow naturally
-- Foundation stories only setup what's needed
-- No big upfront technical work
-
-### 5. Epic Acceptance Criteria Coverage Validation (CRITICAL)
-
-**Purpose:** Ensure each high-level Epic AC is supported by one or more stories within that epic.
-
-**For each Epic, validate:**
-
-1. **Load Epic AC:** Review all Acceptance Criteria (QA Validation) for the epic
-2. **Map AC to Stories:** For each Epic AC, identify which stories support it
-3. **Verify Coverage:** Each Epic AC must have at least one story that implements it
-
-**Validation Format:**
-
-```
-Epic 1: [Title]
-├── AC-E1.1: [Criterion] → Supported by: Story 1.1, Story 1.2
-├── AC-E1.2: [Criterion] → Supported by: Story 1.3
-└── AC-E1.3: [Criterion] → Supported by: Story 1.2, Story 1.4
-
-Epic 2: [Title]
-├── AC-E2.1: [Criterion] → Supported by: Story 2.1
-├── AC-E2.2: [Criterion] → Supported by: Story 2.2, Story 2.3
-└── AC-E2.3: [Criterion] → Supported by: Story 2.3
-```
-
-**🚨 VALIDATION RULES:**
-
-- ❌ FAIL: Epic AC has NO supporting stories
-- ❌ FAIL: Epic AC is too technical (should be high-level, user-oriented)
-- ❌ FAIL: Story AC does not collectively satisfy the Epic AC
-- ✅ PASS: Every Epic AC maps to at least one story
-- ✅ PASS: Epic AC is verifiable by QA without technical knowledge
-
-**If gaps are found:**
-- Identify which Epic AC lacks story coverage
-- Recommend adding stories OR adjusting Epic AC
-- Do NOT proceed until all Epic AC have story support
-
-### 6. Dependency Validation (CRITICAL)
-
-**Epic Independence Check:**
-
-- Does each epic deliver COMPLETE functionality for its domain?
-- Can Epic 2 function without Epic 3 being implemented?
-- Can Epic 3 function standalone using Epic 1 & 2 outputs?
-- ❌ WRONG: Epic 2 requires Epic 3 features to work
-- ✅ RIGHT: Each epic is independently valuable
-
-**Within-Epic Story Dependency Check:**
-For each epic, review stories in order:
-
-- Can Story N.1 be completed without Stories N.2, N.3, etc.?
-- Can Story N.2 be completed using only Story N.1 output?
-- Can Story N.3 be completed using only Stories N.1 & N.2 outputs?
-- ❌ WRONG: "This story depends on a future story"
-- ❌ WRONG: Story references features not yet implemented
-- ✅ RIGHT: Each story builds only on previous stories
-
-### 7. Complete and Save
-
-If all validations pass:
-
-- Update any remaining placeholders in the document
-- Ensure proper formatting
-- Save the final epics.md
-
-**Present Final Menu:**
-**All validations complete!** [C] Complete Workflow
-
-When C is selected, the workflow is complete and the epics.md is ready for development.
-
----
-
-## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-
-### ✅ SUCCESS:
-
-- All FRs covered by at least one story
-- Architecture compliance validated
-- Story quality requirements met
-- Epic structure delivers user value
-- **Every Epic AC (QA Validation) maps to at least one supporting story**
-- **Epic AC to Story coverage matrix is complete**
-- No forward dependencies in stories
-- Document is complete and ready for development
-
-### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-
-- Missing FR coverage
-- Architecture requirements not met
-- Stories too large or missing AC
-- Epic AC without supporting stories
-- **Gaps in Epic AC → Story coverage validation**
-- Forward dependencies detected
-- Incomplete or improperly formatted document
-
-**Master Rule:** Skipping validations, approving incomplete coverage, or not following exact instructions is FORBIDDEN and constitutes SYSTEM FAILURE.

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/create-epics-and-stories/templates/epics-template.md

@@ -1,72 +0,0 @@
----
-stepsCompleted: []
-inputDocuments: []
----
-
-# {{project_name}} - Epic Breakdown
-
-## Overview
-
-This document provides the complete epic and story breakdown for {{project_name}}, decomposing the requirements from the PRD, UX Design if it exists, and Architecture requirements into implementable stories.
-
-## Requirements Inventory
-
-### Functional Requirements
-
-{{fr_list}}
-
-### NonFunctional Requirements
-
-{{nfr_list}}
-
-### Additional Requirements
-
-{{additional_requirements}}
-
-### FR Coverage Map
-
-{{requirements_coverage_map}}
-
-## Epic List
-
-{{epics_list}}
-
-<!-- Repeat for each epic in epics_list (N = 1, 2, 3...) -->
-
-## Epic {{N}}: {{epic_title_N}}
-
-{{epic_goal_N}}
-
-### Acceptance Criteria (QA Validation)
-
-<!--
-  High-level criteria for QA team validation.
-  Write from end-user perspective, using business language.
-  Each criterion should be verifiable without technical knowledge.
-  These criteria validate the COMPLETE epic functionality.
--->
-
-- [ ] **AC-E{{N}}.1:** {{high_level_criterion_1}}
-- [ ] **AC-E{{N}}.2:** {{high_level_criterion_2}}
-- [ ] **AC-E{{N}}.3:** {{high_level_criterion_3}}
-
-**FRs covered:** {{epic_frs}}
-
-<!-- Repeat for each story (M = 1, 2, 3...) within epic N -->
-
-### Story {{N}}.{{M}}: {{story_title_N_M}}
-
-As a {{user_type}},
-I want {{capability}},
-So that {{value_benefit}}.
-
-**Acceptance Criteria:**
-
-<!-- for each AC on this story -->
-
-**Given** {{precondition}}
-**When** {{action}}
-**Then** {{expected_outcome}}
-**And** {{additional_criteria}}
-
-<!-- End story repeat -->

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/create-epics-and-stories/workflow.md

@@ -1,59 +0,0 @@
----
-name: create-epics-and-stories
-description: 'Transform PRD requirements and Architecture decisions into comprehensive stories organized by user value. This workflow requires completed PRD + Architecture documents (UX recommended if UI exists) and breaks down requirements into implementation-ready epics and user stories that incorporate all available technical and design context. Creates detailed, actionable stories with complete acceptance criteria for development teams.'
-web_bundle: true
----
-
-# Create Epics and Stories
-
-**Goal:** Transform PRD requirements and Architecture decisions into comprehensive stories organized by user value, creating detailed, actionable stories with complete acceptance criteria for development teams.
-
-**Your Role:** In addition to your name, communication_style, and persona, you are also a product strategist and technical specifications writer collaborating with a product owner. This is a partnership, not a client-vendor relationship. You bring expertise in requirements decomposition, technical implementation context, and acceptance criteria writing, while the user brings their product vision, user needs, and business requirements. Work together as equals.
-
----
-
-## WORKFLOW ARCHITECTURE
-
-This uses **step-file architecture** for disciplined execution:
-
-### Core Principles
-
-- **Micro-file Design**: Each step of the overall goal is a self contained instruction file that you will adhere too 1 file as directed at a time
-- **Just-In-Time Loading**: Only 1 current step file will be loaded, read, and executed to completion - never load future step files until told to do so
-- **Sequential Enforcement**: Sequence within the step files must be completed in order, no skipping or optimization allowed
-- **State Tracking**: Document progress in output file frontmatter using `stepsCompleted` array when a workflow produces a document
-- **Append-Only Building**: Build documents by appending content as directed to the output file
-
-### Step Processing Rules
-
-1. **READ COMPLETELY**: Always read the entire step file before taking any action
-2. **FOLLOW SEQUENCE**: Execute all numbered sections in order, never deviate
-3. **WAIT FOR INPUT**: If a menu is presented, halt and wait for user selection
-4. **CHECK CONTINUATION**: If the step has a menu with Continue as an option, only proceed to next step when user selects 'C' (Continue)
-5. **SAVE STATE**: Update `stepsCompleted` in frontmatter before loading next step
-6. **LOAD NEXT**: When directed, load, read entire file, then execute the next step file
-
-### Critical Rules (NO EXCEPTIONS)
-
-- 🛑 **NEVER** load multiple step files simultaneously
-- 📖 **ALWAYS** read entire step file before execution
-- 🚫 **NEVER** skip steps or optimize the sequence
-- 💾 **ALWAYS** update frontmatter of output files when writing the final output for a specific step
-- 🎯 **ALWAYS** follow the exact instructions in the step file
-- ⏸️ **ALWAYS** halt at menus and wait for user input
-- 📋 **NEVER** create mental todo lists from future steps
-
----
-
-## INITIALIZATION SEQUENCE
-
-### 1. Configuration Loading
-
-Load and read full config from {project-root}/_bmad/bmm/config.yaml and resolve:
-
-- `project_name`, `output_folder`, `planning_artifacts`, `user_name`, `communication_language`, `document_output_language`
-- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
-
-### 2. First Step EXECUTION
-
-Load, read the full file and then execute `{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/create-epics-and-stories/steps/step-01-validate-prerequisites.md` to begin the workflow.

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/4-implementation/code-review/checklist.md

@@ -1,23 +0,0 @@
-# Senior Developer Review - Validation Checklist
-
-- [ ] Story file loaded from `{{story_path}}`
-- [ ] Story Status verified as reviewable (review)
-- [ ] Epic and Story IDs resolved ({{epic_num}}.{{story_num}})
-- [ ] Story Context located or warning recorded
-- [ ] Epic Tech Spec located or warning recorded
-- [ ] Architecture/standards docs loaded (as available)
-- [ ] Tech stack detected and documented
-- [ ] MCP doc search performed (or web fallback) and references captured
-- [ ] Acceptance Criteria cross-checked against implementation
-- [ ] File List reviewed and validated for completeness
-- [ ] Tests identified and mapped to ACs; gaps noted
-- [ ] Code quality review performed on changed files
-- [ ] Security review performed on changed files and dependencies
-- [ ] Outcome decided (Approve/Changes Requested/Blocked)
-- [ ] Review notes appended under "Senior Developer Review (AI)"
-- [ ] Change Log updated with review entry
-- [ ] Status updated according to settings (if enabled)
-- [ ] Sprint status synced (if sprint tracking enabled)
-- [ ] Story saved successfully
-
-_Reviewer: {{user_name}} on {{date}}_

package/bmad/bmm/workflows/4-implementation/code-review/instructions.xml.bak

@@ -1,225 +0,0 @@
-<workflow>
-  <critical>The workflow execution engine is governed by: {project-root}/_bmad/core/tasks/workflow.xml</critical>
-  <critical>You MUST have already loaded and processed: {installed_path}/workflow.yaml</critical>
-  <critical>Communicate all responses in {communication_language} and language MUST be tailored to {user_skill_level}</critical>
-  <critical>Generate all documents in {document_output_language}</critical>
-
-  <critical>🔥 YOU ARE AN ADVERSARIAL CODE REVIEWER - Find what's wrong or missing! 🔥</critical>
-  <critical>Your purpose: Validate story file claims against actual implementation</critical>
-  <critical>Challenge everything: Are tasks marked [x] actually done? Are ACs really implemented?</critical>
-  <critical>Find 3-10 specific issues in every review minimum - no lazy "looks good" reviews - YOU are so much better than the dev agent
-    that wrote this slop</critical>
-  <critical>Read EVERY file in the File List - verify implementation against story requirements</critical>
-  <critical>Tasks marked complete but not done = CRITICAL finding</critical>
-  <critical>Acceptance Criteria not implemented = HIGH severity finding</critical>
-
-  <step n="1" goal="Load story and discover changes">
-    <action>Use provided {{story_path}} or ask user which story file to review</action>
-    <action>Read COMPLETE story file</action>
-    <action>Set {{story_key}} = extracted key from filename (e.g., "1-2-user-authentication.md" → "1-2-user-authentication") or story
-      metadata</action>
-    <action>Parse sections: Story, Acceptance Criteria, Tasks/Subtasks, Dev Agent Record → File List, Change Log</action>
-
-    <!-- Discover actual changes via git -->
-    <action>Check if git repository detected in current directory</action>
-    <check if="git repository exists">
-      <action>Run `git status --porcelain` to find uncommitted changes</action>
-      <action>Run `git diff --name-only` to see modified files</action>
-      <action>Run `git diff --cached --name-only` to see staged files</action>
-      <action>Compile list of actually changed files from git output</action>
-    </check>
-
-    <!-- Cross-reference story File List vs git reality -->
-    <action>Compare story's Dev Agent Record → File List with actual git changes</action>
-    <action>Note discrepancies:
-      - Files in git but not in story File List
-      - Files in story File List but no git changes
-      - Missing documentation of what was actually changed
-    </action>
-
-    <invoke-protocol name="discover_inputs" />
-    <action>Load {project_context} for coding standards (if exists)</action>
-  </step>
-
-  <step n="2" goal="Build review attack plan">
-    <action>Extract ALL Acceptance Criteria from story</action>
-    <action>Extract ALL Tasks/Subtasks with completion status ([x] vs [ ])</action>
-    <action>From Dev Agent Record → File List, compile list of claimed changes</action>
-
-    <action>Create review plan:
-      1. **AC Validation**: Verify each AC is actually implemented
-      2. **Task Audit**: Verify each [x] task is really done
-      3. **Code Quality**: Security, performance, maintainability
-      4. **Test Quality**: Real tests vs placeholder bullshit
-    </action>
-  </step>
-
-  <step n="3" goal="Execute adversarial review">
-    <critical>VALIDATE EVERY CLAIM - Check git reality vs story claims</critical>
-
-    <!-- Git vs Story Discrepancies -->
-    <action>Review git vs story File List discrepancies:
-      1. **Files changed but not in story File List** → MEDIUM finding (incomplete documentation)
-      2. **Story lists files but no git changes** → HIGH finding (false claims)
-      3. **Uncommitted changes not documented** → MEDIUM finding (transparency issue)
-    </action>
-
-    <!-- Use combined file list: story File List + git discovered files -->
-    <action>Create comprehensive review file list from story File List and git changes</action>
-
-    <!-- AC Validation -->
-    <action>For EACH Acceptance Criterion:
-      1. Read the AC requirement
-      2. Search implementation files for evidence
-      3. Determine: IMPLEMENTED, PARTIAL, or MISSING
-      4. If MISSING/PARTIAL → HIGH SEVERITY finding
-    </action>
-
-    <!-- Task Completion Audit -->
-    <action>For EACH task marked [x]:
-      1. Read the task description
-      2. Search files for evidence it was actually done
-      3. **CRITICAL**: If marked [x] but NOT DONE → CRITICAL finding
-      4. Record specific proof (file:line)
-    </action>
-
-    <!-- Code Quality Deep Dive -->
-    <action>For EACH file in comprehensive review list:
-      1. **Security**: Look for injection risks, missing validation, auth issues
-      2. **Performance**: N+1 queries, inefficient loops, missing caching
-      3. **Error Handling**: Missing try/catch, poor error messages
-      4. **Code Quality**: Complex functions, magic numbers, poor naming
-      5. **Test Quality**: Are tests real assertions or placeholders?
-    </action>
-
-    <check if="total_issues_found lt 3">
-      <critical>NOT LOOKING HARD ENOUGH - Find more problems!</critical>
-      <action>Re-examine code for:
-        - Edge cases and null handling
-        - Architecture violations
-        - Documentation gaps
-        - Integration issues
-        - Dependency problems
-        - Git commit message quality (if applicable)
-      </action>
-      <action>Find at least 3 more specific, actionable issues</action>
-    </check>
-  </step>
-
-  <step n="4" goal="Present findings and fix them">
-    <action>Categorize findings: HIGH (must fix), MEDIUM (should fix), LOW (nice to fix)</action>
-    <action>Set {{fixed_count}} = 0</action>
-    <action>Set {{action_count}} = 0</action>
-
-    <output>**🔥 CODE REVIEW FINDINGS, {user_name}!**
-
-      **Story:** {{story_file}}
-      **Git vs Story Discrepancies:** {{git_discrepancy_count}} found
-      **Issues Found:** {{high_count}} High, {{medium_count}} Medium, {{low_count}} Low
-
-      ## 🔴 CRITICAL ISSUES
-      - Tasks marked [x] but not actually implemented
-      - Acceptance Criteria not implemented
-      - Story claims files changed but no git evidence
-      - Security vulnerabilities
-
-      ## 🟡 MEDIUM ISSUES
-      - Files changed but not documented in story File List
-      - Uncommitted changes not tracked
-      - Performance problems
-      - Poor test coverage/quality
-      - Code maintainability issues
-
-      ## 🟢 LOW ISSUES
-      - Code style improvements
-      - Documentation gaps
-      - Git commit message quality
-    </output>
-
-    <ask>What should I do with these issues?
-
-      1. **Fix them automatically** - I'll update the code and tests
-      2. **Create action items** - Add to story Tasks/Subtasks for later
-      3. **Show me details** - Deep dive into specific issues
-
-      Choose [1], [2], or specify which issue to examine:</ask>
-
-    <check if="user chooses 1">
-      <action>Fix all HIGH and MEDIUM issues in the code</action>
-      <action>Add/update tests as needed</action>
-      <action>Update File List in story if files changed</action>
-      <action>Update story Dev Agent Record with fixes applied</action>
-      <action>Set {{fixed_count}} = number of HIGH and MEDIUM issues fixed</action>
-      <action>Set {{action_count}} = 0</action>
-    </check>
-
-    <check if="user chooses 2">
-      <action>Add "Review Follow-ups (AI)" subsection to Tasks/Subtasks</action>
-      <action>For each issue: `- [ ] [AI-Review][Severity] Description [file:line]`</action>
-      <action>Set {{action_count}} = number of action items created</action>
-      <action>Set {{fixed_count}} = 0</action>
-    </check>
-
-    <check if="user chooses 3">
-      <action>Show detailed explanation with code examples</action>
-      <action>Return to fix decision</action>
-    </check>
-  </step>
-
-  <step n="5" goal="Update story status and sync sprint tracking">
-    <!-- Determine new status based on review outcome -->
-    <check if="all HIGH and MEDIUM issues fixed AND all ACs implemented">
-      <action>Set {{new_status}} = "done"</action>
-      <action>Update story Status field to "done"</action>
-    </check>
-    <check if="HIGH or MEDIUM issues remain OR ACs not fully implemented">
-      <action>Set {{new_status}} = "in-progress"</action>
-      <action>Update story Status field to "in-progress"</action>
-    </check>
-    <action>Save story file</action>
-
-    <!-- Determine sprint tracking status -->
-    <check if="{sprint_status} file exists">
-      <action>Set {{current_sprint_status}} = "enabled"</action>
-    </check>
-    <check if="{sprint_status} file does NOT exist">
-      <action>Set {{current_sprint_status}} = "no-sprint-tracking"</action>
-    </check>
-
-    <!-- Sync sprint-status.yaml when story status changes (only if sprint tracking enabled) -->
-    <check if="{{current_sprint_status}} != 'no-sprint-tracking'">
-      <action>Load the FULL file: {sprint_status}</action>
-      <action>Find development_status key matching {{story_key}}</action>
-
-      <check if="{{new_status}} == 'done'">
-        <action>Update development_status[{{story_key}}] = "done"</action>
-        <action>Save file, preserving ALL comments and structure</action>
-        <output>✅ Sprint status synced: {{story_key}} → done</output>
-      </check>
-
-      <check if="{{new_status}} == 'in-progress'">
-        <action>Update development_status[{{story_key}}] = "in-progress"</action>
-        <action>Save file, preserving ALL comments and structure</action>
-        <output>🔄 Sprint status synced: {{story_key}} → in-progress</output>
-      </check>
-
-      <check if="story key not found in sprint status">
-        <output>⚠️ Story file updated, but sprint-status sync failed: {{story_key}} not found in sprint-status.yaml</output>
-      </check>
-    </check>
-
-    <check if="{{current_sprint_status}} == 'no-sprint-tracking'">
-      <output>ℹ️ Story status updated (no sprint tracking configured)</output>
-    </check>
-
-    <output>**✅ Review Complete!**
-
-      **Story Status:** {{new_status}}
-      **Issues Fixed:** {{fixed_count}}
-      **Action Items Created:** {{action_count}}
-
-      {{#if new_status == "done"}}Code review complete!{{else}}Address the action items and continue development.{{/if}}
-    </output>
-  </step>
-
-</workflow>