176 lines
5.8 KiB
Markdown
Raw Normal View History

docs: massive documentation overhaul + introduce Paige (Documentation Guide agent) ## 📚 Complete Documentation Restructure **BMM Documentation Hub Created:** - New centralized documentation system at `src/modules/bmm/docs/` - 18 comprehensive guides organized by topic (7000+ lines total) - Clear learning paths for greenfield, brownfield, and quick spec flows - Professional technical writing standards throughout **New Documentation:** - `README.md` - Complete documentation hub with navigation - `quick-start.md` - 15-minute getting started guide - `agents-guide.md` - Comprehensive 12-agent reference (45 min read) - `party-mode.md` - Multi-agent collaboration guide (20 min read) - `scale-adaptive-system.md` - Deep dive on Levels 0-4 (42 min read) - `brownfield-guide.md` - Existing codebase development (53 min read) - `quick-spec-flow.md` - Rapid Level 0-1 development (26 min read) - `workflows-analysis.md` - Phase 1 workflows (12 min read) - `workflows-planning.md` - Phase 2 workflows (19 min read) - `workflows-solutioning.md` - Phase 3 workflows (13 min read) - `workflows-implementation.md` - Phase 4 workflows (33 min read) - `workflows-testing.md` - Testing & QA workflows (29 min read) - `workflow-architecture-reference.md` - Architecture workflow deep-dive - `workflow-document-project-reference.md` - Document-project workflow reference - `enterprise-agentic-development.md` - Team collaboration patterns - `faq.md` - Comprehensive Q&A covering all topics - `glossary.md` - Complete terminology reference - `troubleshooting.md` - Common issues and solutions **Documentation Improvements:** - Removed all version/date footers (git handles versioning) - Agent customization docs now include full rebuild process - Cross-referenced links between all guides - Reading time estimates for all major docs - Consistent professional formatting and structure **Consolidated & Streamlined:** - Module README (`src/modules/bmm/README.md`) streamlined to lean signpost - Root README polished with better hierarchy and clear CTAs - Moved docs from root `docs/` to module-specific locations - Better separation of user docs vs. developer reference ## 🤖 New Agent: Paige (Documentation Guide) **Role:** Technical documentation specialist and information architect **Expertise:** - Professional technical writing standards - Documentation structure and organization - Information architecture and navigation - User-focused content design - Style guide enforcement **Status:** Work in progress - Paige will evolve as documentation needs grow **Integration:** - Listed in agents-guide.md, glossary.md, FAQ - Available for all phases (documentation is continuous) - Can be customized like all BMM agents ## 🔧 Additional Changes - Updated agent manifest with Paige - Updated workflow manifest with new documentation workflows - Fixed workflow-to-agent mappings across all guides - Improved root README with clearer Quick Start section - Better module structure explanations - Enhanced community links with Discord channel names **Total Impact:** - 18 new/restructured documentation files - 7000+ lines of professional technical documentation - Complete navigation system with cross-references - Clear learning paths for all user types - Foundation for knowledge base (coming in beta) Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
2025-11-02 21:18:33 -06:00
# Implementation Readiness Validation Checklist
## Document Completeness
### Core Planning Documents
- [ ] PRD exists and is complete (Level 2-4 projects)
- [ ] PRD contains measurable success criteria
- [ ] PRD defines clear scope boundaries and exclusions
- [ ] Architecture document exists (architecture\*.md) (Level 3-4 projects)
- [ ] Technical Specification exists with implementation details
- [ ] Epic and story breakdown document exists
- [ ] All documents are dated and versioned
### Document Quality
- [ ] No placeholder sections remain in any document
- [ ] All documents use consistent terminology
- [ ] Technical decisions include rationale and trade-offs
- [ ] Assumptions and risks are explicitly documented
- [ ] Dependencies are clearly identified and documented
## Alignment Verification
### PRD to Architecture Alignment (Level 3-4)
- [ ] Every functional requirement in PRD has architectural support documented
- [ ] All non-functional requirements from PRD are addressed in architecture
- [ ] Architecture doesn't introduce features beyond PRD scope
- [ ] Performance requirements from PRD match architecture capabilities
- [ ] Security requirements from PRD are fully addressed in architecture
- [ ] If architecture.md: Implementation patterns are defined for consistency
- [ ] If architecture.md: All technology choices have verified versions
- [ ] If UX spec exists: Architecture supports UX requirements
### PRD to Stories Coverage (Level 2-4)
- [ ] Every PRD requirement maps to at least one story
- [ ] All user journeys in PRD have complete story coverage
- [ ] Story acceptance criteria align with PRD success criteria
- [ ] Priority levels in stories match PRD feature priorities
- [ ] No stories exist without PRD requirement traceability
### Architecture to Stories Implementation
- [ ] All architectural components have implementation stories
- [ ] Infrastructure setup stories exist for each architectural layer
- [ ] Integration points defined in architecture have corresponding stories
- [ ] Data migration/setup stories exist if required by architecture
- [ ] Security implementation stories cover all architecture security decisions
## Story and Sequencing Quality
### Story Completeness
- [ ] All stories have clear acceptance criteria
- [ ] Technical tasks are defined within relevant stories
- [ ] Stories include error handling and edge cases
- [ ] Each story has clear definition of done
- [ ] Stories are appropriately sized (no epic-level stories remaining)
### Sequencing and Dependencies
- [ ] Stories are sequenced in logical implementation order
- [ ] Dependencies between stories are explicitly documented
- [ ] No circular dependencies exist
- [ ] Prerequisite technical tasks precede dependent stories
- [ ] Foundation/infrastructure stories come before feature stories
### Greenfield Project Specifics
- [ ] Initial project setup and configuration stories exist
- [ ] If using architecture.md: First story is starter template initialization command
- [ ] Development environment setup is documented
- [ ] CI/CD pipeline stories are included early in sequence
- [ ] Database/storage initialization stories are properly placed
- [ ] Authentication/authorization stories precede protected features
## Risk and Gap Assessment
### Critical Gaps
- [ ] No core PRD requirements lack story coverage
- [ ] No architectural decisions lack implementation stories
- [ ] All integration points have implementation plans
- [ ] Error handling strategy is defined and implemented
- [ ] Security concerns are all addressed
### Technical Risks
- [ ] No conflicting technical approaches between stories
- [ ] Technology choices are consistent across all documents
- [ ] Performance requirements are achievable with chosen architecture
- [ ] Scalability concerns are addressed if applicable
- [ ] Third-party dependencies are identified with fallback plans
## UX and Special Concerns (if applicable)
### UX Coverage
- [ ] UX requirements are documented in PRD
- [ ] UX implementation tasks exist in relevant stories
- [ ] Accessibility requirements have story coverage
- [ ] Responsive design requirements are addressed
- [ ] User flow continuity is maintained across stories
### Special Considerations
- [ ] Compliance requirements are fully addressed
- [ ] Internationalization needs are covered if required
- [ ] Performance benchmarks are defined and measurable
- [ ] Monitoring and observability stories exist
- [ ] Documentation stories are included where needed
## Overall Readiness
### Ready to Proceed Criteria
- [ ] All critical issues have been resolved
- [ ] High priority concerns have mitigation plans
- [ ] Story sequencing supports iterative delivery
- [ ] Team has necessary skills for implementation
- [ ] No blocking dependencies remain unresolved
### Quality Indicators
- [ ] Documents demonstrate thorough analysis
- [ ] Clear traceability exists across all artifacts
- [ ] Consistent level of detail throughout documents
- [ ] Risks are identified with mitigation strategies
- [ ] Success criteria are measurable and achievable
## Assessment Completion
### Report Quality
- [ ] All findings are supported by specific examples
- [ ] Recommendations are actionable and specific
- [ ] Severity levels are appropriately assigned
- [ ] Positive findings are highlighted
- [ ] Next steps are clearly defined
### Process Validation
- [ ] All expected documents were reviewed
- [ ] Cross-references were systematically checked
- [ ] Project level considerations were applied correctly
- [ ] Workflow status was checked and considered
- [ ] Output folder was thoroughly searched for artifacts
---
## Issue Log
### Critical Issues Found
- [ ] ***
- [ ] ***
- [ ] ***
### High Priority Issues Found
- [ ] ***
- [ ] ***
- [ ] ***
### Medium Priority Issues Found
- [ ] ***
- [ ] ***
- [ ] ***
---
_Use this checklist to ensure comprehensive validation of implementation readiness_