235 lines
7.0 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
# Test Design and Risk Assessment - Validation Checklist
## Prerequisites
- [ ] Story markdown with clear acceptance criteria exists
- [ ] PRD or epic documentation available
- [ ] Architecture documents available (optional)
- [ ] Requirements are testable and unambiguous
## Process Steps
### Step 1: Context Loading
- [ ] PRD.md read and requirements extracted
- [ ] Epics.md or specific epic documentation loaded
- [ ] Story markdown with acceptance criteria analyzed
- [ ] Architecture documents reviewed (if available)
- [ ] Existing test coverage analyzed
- [ ] Knowledge base fragments loaded (risk-governance, probability-impact, test-levels, test-priorities)
### Step 2: Risk Assessment
- [ ] Genuine risks identified (not just features)
- [ ] Risks classified by category (TECH/SEC/PERF/DATA/BUS/OPS)
- [ ] Probability scored (1-3 for each risk)
- [ ] Impact scored (1-3 for each risk)
- [ ] Risk scores calculated (probability × impact)
- [ ] High-priority risks (score ≥6) flagged
- [ ] Mitigation plans defined for high-priority risks
- [ ] Owners assigned for each mitigation
- [ ] Timelines set for mitigations
- [ ] Residual risk documented
### Step 3: Coverage Design
- [ ] Acceptance criteria broken into atomic scenarios
- [ ] Test levels selected (E2E/API/Component/Unit)
- [ ] No duplicate coverage across levels
- [ ] Priority levels assigned (P0/P1/P2/P3)
- [ ] P0 scenarios meet strict criteria (blocks core + high risk + no workaround)
- [ ] Data prerequisites identified
- [ ] Tooling requirements documented
- [ ] Execution order defined (smoke → P0 → P1 → P2/P3)
### Step 4: Deliverables Generation
- [ ] Risk assessment matrix created
- [ ] Coverage matrix created
- [ ] Execution order documented
- [ ] Resource estimates calculated
- [ ] Quality gate criteria defined
- [ ] Output file written to correct location
- [ ] Output file uses template structure
## Output Validation
### Risk Assessment Matrix
- [ ] All risks have unique IDs (R-001, R-002, etc.)
- [ ] Each risk has category assigned
- [ ] Probability values are 1, 2, or 3
- [ ] Impact values are 1, 2, or 3
- [ ] Scores calculated correctly (P × I)
- [ ] High-priority risks (≥6) clearly marked
- [ ] Mitigation strategies specific and actionable
### Coverage Matrix
- [ ] All requirements mapped to test levels
- [ ] Priorities assigned to all scenarios
- [ ] Risk linkage documented
- [ ] Test counts realistic
- [ ] Owners assigned where applicable
- [ ] No duplicate coverage (same behavior at multiple levels)
### Execution Order
- [ ] Smoke tests defined (<5 min target)
- [ ] P0 tests listed (<10 min target)
- [ ] P1 tests listed (<30 min target)
- [ ] P2/P3 tests listed (<60 min target)
- [ ] Order optimizes for fast feedback
### Resource Estimates
- [ ] P0 hours calculated (count × 2 hours)
- [ ] P1 hours calculated (count × 1 hour)
- [ ] P2 hours calculated (count × 0.5 hours)
- [ ] P3 hours calculated (count × 0.25 hours)
- [ ] Total hours summed
- [ ] Days estimate provided (hours / 8)
- [ ] Estimates include setup time
### Quality Gate Criteria
- [ ] P0 pass rate threshold defined (should be 100%)
- [ ] P1 pass rate threshold defined (typically ≥95%)
- [ ] High-risk mitigation completion required
- [ ] Coverage targets specified (≥80% recommended)
## Quality Checks
### Evidence-Based Assessment
- [ ] Risk assessment based on documented evidence
- [ ] No speculation on business impact
- [ ] Assumptions clearly documented
- [ ] Clarifications requested where needed
- [ ] Historical data referenced where available
### Risk Classification Accuracy
- [ ] TECH risks are architecture/integration issues
- [ ] SEC risks are security vulnerabilities
- [ ] PERF risks are performance/scalability concerns
- [ ] DATA risks are data integrity issues
- [ ] BUS risks are business/revenue impacts
- [ ] OPS risks are deployment/operational issues
### Priority Assignment Accuracy
- [ ] P0: Truly blocks core functionality
- [ ] P0: High-risk (score ≥6)
- [ ] P0: No workaround exists
- [ ] P1: Important but not blocking
- [ ] P2/P3: Nice-to-have or edge cases
### Test Level Selection
- [ ] E2E used only for critical paths
- [ ] API tests cover complex business logic
- [ ] Component tests for UI interactions
- [ ] Unit tests for edge cases and algorithms
- [ ] No redundant coverage
## Integration Points
### Knowledge Base Integration
- [ ] risk-governance.md consulted
- [ ] probability-impact.md applied
- [ ] test-levels-framework.md referenced
- [ ] test-priorities-matrix.md used
- [ ] Additional fragments loaded as needed
### Status File Integration
- [ ] bmm-workflow-status.md exists
- [ ] Test design logged in Quality & Testing Progress
- [ ] Epic number and scope documented
- [ ] Completion timestamp recorded
### Workflow Dependencies
- [ ] Can proceed to `atdd` workflow with P0 scenarios
- [ ] Can proceed to `automate` workflow with full coverage plan
- [ ] Risk assessment informs `gate` workflow criteria
- [ ] Integrates with `ci` workflow execution order
## Completion Criteria
**All must be true:**
- [ ] All prerequisites met
- [ ] All process steps completed
- [ ] All output validations passed
- [ ] All quality checks passed
- [ ] All integration points verified
- [ ] Output file complete and well-formatted
- [ ] Team review scheduled (if required)
## Post-Workflow Actions
**User must complete:**
1. [ ] Review risk assessment with team
2. [ ] Prioritize mitigation for high-priority risks (score ≥6)
3. [ ] Allocate resources per estimates
4. [ ] Run `atdd` workflow to generate P0 tests
5. [ ] Set up test data factories and fixtures
6. [ ] Schedule team review of test design document
**Recommended next workflows:**
1. [ ] Run `atdd` workflow for P0 test generation
2. [ ] Run `framework` workflow if not already done
3. [ ] Run `ci` workflow to configure pipeline stages
## Rollback Procedure
If workflow fails:
1. [ ] Delete output file
2. [ ] Review error logs
3. [ ] Fix missing context (PRD, architecture docs)
4. [ ] Clarify ambiguous requirements
5. [ ] Retry workflow
## Notes
### Common Issues
**Issue**: Too many P0 tests
- **Solution**: Apply strict P0 criteria - must block core AND high risk AND no workaround
**Issue**: Risk scores all high
- **Solution**: Differentiate between high-impact (3) and degraded (2) impacts
**Issue**: Duplicate coverage across levels
- **Solution**: Use test pyramid - E2E for critical paths only
**Issue**: Resource estimates too high
- **Solution**: Invest in fixtures/factories to reduce per-test setup time
### Best Practices
- Base risk assessment on evidence, not assumptions
- High-priority risks (≥6) require immediate mitigation
- P0 tests should cover <10% of total scenarios
- Avoid testing same behavior at multiple levels
- Include smoke tests (P0 subset) for fast feedback
---
**Checklist Complete**: Sign off when all items validated.
**Completed by:** **\*\***\_\_\_**\*\***
**Date:** **\*\***\_\_\_**\*\***
**Epic:** **\*\***\_\_\_**\*\***
**Notes:** \***\*\*\*\*\***\*\*\***\*\*\*\*\***\_\_\_\***\*\*\*\*\***\*\*\***\*\*\*\*\***