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>

bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,349 @@
+# PRD + Epics + Stories Validation Checklist
+
+**Purpose**: Comprehensive validation that PRD, epics, and stories form a complete, implementable product plan.
+
+**Scope**: Validates the complete planning output (PRD.md + epics.md) for Levels 2-4 software projects
+
+**Expected Outputs**:
+
+- PRD.md with complete requirements
+- epics.md with detailed epic and story breakdown
+- Updated bmm-workflow-status.yaml
+
+---
+
+## 1. PRD Document Completeness
+
+### Core Sections Present
+
+- [ ] Executive Summary with vision alignment
+- [ ] Product magic essence clearly articulated
+- [ ] Project classification (type, domain, complexity)
+- [ ] Success criteria defined
+- [ ] Product scope (MVP, Growth, Vision) clearly delineated
+- [ ] Functional requirements comprehensive and numbered
+- [ ] Non-functional requirements (when applicable)
+- [ ] References section with source documents
+
+### Project-Specific Sections
+
+- [ ] **If complex domain:** Domain context and considerations documented
+- [ ] **If innovation:** Innovation patterns and validation approach documented
+- [ ] **If API/Backend:** Endpoint specification and authentication model included
+- [ ] **If Mobile:** Platform requirements and device features documented
+- [ ] **If SaaS B2B:** Tenant model and permission matrix included
+- [ ] **If UI exists:** UX principles and key interactions documented
+
+### Quality Checks
+
+- [ ] No unfilled template variables ({{variable}})
+- [ ] All variables properly populated with meaningful content
+- [ ] Product magic woven throughout (not just stated once)
+- [ ] Language is clear, specific, and measurable
+- [ ] Project type correctly identified and sections match
+- [ ] Domain complexity appropriately addressed
+
+---
+
+## 2. Functional Requirements Quality
+
+### FR Format and Structure
+
+- [ ] Each FR has unique identifier (FR-001, FR-002, etc.)
+- [ ] FRs describe WHAT capabilities, not HOW to implement
+- [ ] FRs are specific and measurable
+- [ ] FRs are testable and verifiable
+- [ ] FRs focus on user/business value
+- [ ] No technical implementation details in FRs (those belong in architecture)
+
+### FR Completeness
+
+- [ ] All MVP scope features have corresponding FRs
+- [ ] Growth features documented (even if deferred)
+- [ ] Vision features captured for future reference
+- [ ] Domain-mandated requirements included
+- [ ] Innovation requirements captured with validation needs
+- [ ] Project-type specific requirements complete
+
+### FR Organization
+
+- [ ] FRs organized by capability/feature area (not by tech stack)
+- [ ] Related FRs grouped logically
+- [ ] Dependencies between FRs noted when critical
+- [ ] Priority/phase indicated (MVP vs Growth vs Vision)
+
+---
+
+## 3. Epics Document Completeness
+
+### Required Files
+
+- [ ] epics.md exists in output folder
+- [ ] Epic list in PRD.md matches epics in epics.md (titles and count)
+- [ ] All epics have detailed breakdown sections
+
+### Epic Quality
+
+- [ ] Each epic has clear goal and value proposition
+- [ ] Each epic includes complete story breakdown
+- [ ] Stories follow proper user story format: "As a [role], I want [goal], so that [benefit]"
+- [ ] Each story has numbered acceptance criteria
+- [ ] Prerequisites/dependencies explicitly stated per story
+- [ ] Stories are AI-agent sized (completable in 2-4 hour session)
+
+---
+
+## 4. FR Coverage Validation (CRITICAL)
+
+### Complete Traceability
+
+- [ ] **Every FR from PRD.md is covered by at least one story in epics.md**
+- [ ] Each story references relevant FR numbers
+- [ ] No orphaned FRs (requirements without stories)
+- [ ] No orphaned stories (stories without FR connection)
+- [ ] Coverage matrix verified (can trace FR → Epic → Stories)
+
+### Coverage Quality
+
+- [ ] Stories sufficiently decompose FRs into implementable units
+- [ ] Complex FRs broken into multiple stories appropriately
+- [ ] Simple FRs have appropriately scoped single stories
+- [ ] Non-functional requirements reflected in story acceptance criteria
+- [ ] Domain requirements embedded in relevant stories
+
+---
+
+## 5. Story Sequencing Validation (CRITICAL)
+
+### Epic 1 Foundation Check
+
+- [ ] **Epic 1 establishes foundational infrastructure**
+- [ ] Epic 1 delivers initial deployable functionality
+- [ ] Epic 1 creates baseline for subsequent epics
+- [ ] Exception: If adding to existing app, foundation requirement adapted appropriately
+
+### Vertical Slicing
+
+- [ ] **Each story delivers complete, testable functionality** (not horizontal layers)
+- [ ] No "build database" or "create UI" stories in isolation
+- [ ] Stories integrate across stack (data + logic + presentation when applicable)
+- [ ] Each story leaves system in working/deployable state
+
+### No Forward Dependencies
+
+- [ ] **No story depends on work from a LATER story or epic**
+- [ ] Stories within each epic are sequentially ordered
+- [ ] Each story builds only on previous work
+- [ ] Dependencies flow backward only (can reference earlier stories)
+- [ ] Parallel tracks clearly indicated if stories are independent
+
+### Value Delivery Path
+
+- [ ] Each epic delivers significant end-to-end value
+- [ ] Epic sequence shows logical product evolution
+- [ ] User can see value after each epic completion
+- [ ] MVP scope clearly achieved by end of designated epics
+
+---
+
+## 6. Scope Management
+
+### MVP Discipline
+
+- [ ] MVP scope is genuinely minimal and viable
+- [ ] Core features list contains only true must-haves
+- [ ] Each MVP feature has clear rationale for inclusion
+- [ ] No obvious scope creep in "must-have" list
+
+### Future Work Captured
+
+- [ ] Growth features documented for post-MVP
+- [ ] Vision features captured to maintain long-term direction
+- [ ] Out-of-scope items explicitly listed
+- [ ] Deferred features have clear reasoning for deferral
+
+### Clear Boundaries
+
+- [ ] Stories marked as MVP vs Growth vs Vision
+- [ ] Epic sequencing aligns with MVP → Growth progression
+- [ ] No confusion about what's in vs out of initial scope
+
+---
+
+## 7. Research and Context Integration
+
+### Source Document Integration
+
+- [ ] **If product brief exists:** Key insights incorporated into PRD
+- [ ] **If domain brief exists:** Domain requirements reflected in FRs and stories
+- [ ] **If research documents exist:** Research findings inform requirements
+- [ ] **If competitive analysis exists:** Differentiation strategy clear in PRD
+- [ ] All source documents referenced in PRD References section
+
+### Research Continuity to Architecture
+
+- [ ] Domain complexity considerations documented for architects
+- [ ] Technical constraints from research captured
+- [ ] Regulatory/compliance requirements clearly stated
+- [ ] Integration requirements with existing systems documented
+- [ ] Performance/scale requirements informed by research data
+
+### Information Completeness for Next Phase
+
+- [ ] PRD provides sufficient context for architecture decisions
+- [ ] Epics provide sufficient detail for technical design
+- [ ] Stories have enough acceptance criteria for implementation
+- [ ] Non-obvious business rules documented
+- [ ] Edge cases and special scenarios captured
+
+---
+
+## 8. Cross-Document Consistency
+
+### Terminology Consistency
+
+- [ ] Same terms used across PRD and epics for concepts
+- [ ] Feature names consistent between documents
+- [ ] Epic titles match between PRD and epics.md
+- [ ] No contradictions between PRD and epics
+
+### Alignment Checks
+
+- [ ] Success metrics in PRD align with story outcomes
+- [ ] Product magic articulated in PRD reflected in epic goals
+- [ ] Technical preferences in PRD align with story implementation hints
+- [ ] Scope boundaries consistent across all documents
+
+---
+
+## 9. Readiness for Implementation
+
+### Architecture Readiness (Next Phase)
+
+- [ ] PRD provides sufficient context for architecture workflow
+- [ ] Technical constraints and preferences documented
+- [ ] Integration points identified
+- [ ] Performance/scale requirements specified
+- [ ] Security and compliance needs clear
+
+### Development Readiness
+
+- [ ] Stories are specific enough to estimate
+- [ ] Acceptance criteria are testable
+- [ ] Technical unknowns identified and flagged
+- [ ] Dependencies on external systems documented
+- [ ] Data requirements specified
+
+### Level-Appropriate Detail
+
+**If Level 2:**
+
+- [ ] PRD supports lightweight tech-spec workflow
+- [ ] 5-15 story scope reasonable for project size
+- [ ] Complexity appropriate for small team/solo dev
+
+**If Level 3-4:**
+
+- [ ] PRD supports full architecture workflow
+- [ ] Epic structure supports phased delivery
+- [ ] Scope appropriate for team-based development
+- [ ] Clear value delivery through epic sequence
+
+---
+
+## 10. Quality and Polish
+
+### Writing Quality
+
+- [ ] Language is clear and free of jargon (or jargon is defined)
+- [ ] Sentences are concise and specific
+- [ ] No vague statements ("should be fast", "user-friendly")
+- [ ] Measurable criteria used throughout
+- [ ] Professional tone appropriate for stakeholder review
+
+### Document Structure
+
+- [ ] Sections flow logically
+- [ ] Headers and numbering consistent
+- [ ] Cross-references accurate (FR numbers, section references)
+- [ ] Formatting consistent throughout
+- [ ] Tables/lists formatted properly
+
+### Completeness Indicators
+
+- [ ] No [TODO] or [TBD] markers remain
+- [ ] No placeholder text
+- [ ] All sections have substantive content
+- [ ] Optional sections either complete or omitted (not half-done)
+
+---
+
+## Critical Failures (Auto-Fail)
+
+If ANY of these are true, validation FAILS:
+
+- [ ] ❌ **No epics.md file exists** (two-file output required)
+- [ ] ❌ **Epic 1 doesn't establish foundation** (violates core sequencing principle)
+- [ ] ❌ **Stories have forward dependencies** (breaks sequential implementation)
+- [ ] ❌ **Stories not vertically sliced** (horizontal layers block value delivery)
+- [ ] ❌ **Epics don't cover all FRs** (orphaned requirements)
+- [ ] ❌ **FRs contain technical implementation details** (should be in architecture)
+- [ ] ❌ **No FR traceability to stories** (can't validate coverage)
+- [ ] ❌ **Template variables unfilled** (incomplete document)
+
+---
+
+## Validation Summary
+
+**Total Validation Points:** ~85
+
+### Scoring Guide
+
+- **Pass Rate ≥ 95% (81+/85):** ✅ EXCELLENT - Ready for architecture phase
+- **Pass Rate 85-94% (72-80/85):** ⚠️ GOOD - Minor fixes needed
+- **Pass Rate 70-84% (60-71/85):** ⚠️ FAIR - Important issues to address
+- **Pass Rate < 70% (<60/85):** ❌ POOR - Significant rework required
+
+### Critical Issue Threshold
+
+- **0 Critical Failures:** Proceed to fixes
+- **1+ Critical Failures:** STOP - Must fix critical issues first
+
+---
+
+## Validation Execution Notes
+
+**When validating:**
+
+1. **Load ALL documents:**
+   - PRD.md (required)
+   - epics.md (required)
+   - product-brief.md (if exists)
+   - domain-brief.md (if exists)
+   - research documents (if referenced)
+
+2. **Validate in order:**
+   - Check critical failures first (immediate stop if any found)
+   - Verify PRD completeness
+   - Verify epics completeness
+   - Cross-reference FR coverage (most important)
+   - Check sequencing (second most important)
+   - Validate research integration
+   - Check polish and quality
+
+3. **Report findings:**
+   - List critical failures prominently
+   - Group issues by severity
+   - Provide specific line numbers/sections
+   - Suggest concrete fixes
+   - Highlight what's working well
+
+4. **Provide actionable next steps:**
+   - If validation passes: "Ready for architecture workflow"
+   - If minor issues: "Fix [X] items then re-validate"
+   - If major issues: "Rework [sections] then re-validate"
+   - If critical failures: "Must fix critical items before proceeding"
+
+---
+
+**Remember:** This validation ensures the entire planning phase is complete and the implementation phase has everything needed to succeed. Be thorough but fair - the goal is quality, not perfection.

bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/create-epics-and-stories/epics-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
+# {{project_name}} - Epic Breakdown
+
+**Author:** {{user_name}}
+**Date:** {{date}}
+**Project Level:** {{project_level}}
+**Target Scale:** {{target_scale}}
+
+---
+
+## Overview
+
+This document provides the detailed epic breakdown for {{project_name}}, expanding on the high-level epic list in the [PRD](./PRD.md).
+
+Each epic includes:
+
+- Expanded goal and value proposition
+- Complete story breakdown with user stories
+- Acceptance criteria for each story
+- Story sequencing and dependencies
+
+**Epic Sequencing Principles:**
+
+- Epic 1 establishes foundational infrastructure and initial functionality
+- Subsequent epics build progressively, each delivering significant end-to-end value
+- Stories within epics are vertically sliced and sequentially ordered
+- No forward dependencies - each story builds only on previous work
+
+---
+
+{{epic_details}}
+
+---
+
+## Story Guidelines Reference
+
+**Story Format:**
+
+```
+**Story [EPIC.N]: [Story Title]**
+
+As a [user type],
+I want [goal/desire],
+So that [benefit/value].
+
+**Acceptance Criteria:**
+1. [Specific testable criterion]
+2. [Another specific criterion]
+3. [etc.]
+
+**Prerequisites:** [Dependencies on previous stories, if any]
+```
+
+**Story Requirements:**
+
+- **Vertical slices** - Complete, testable functionality delivery
+- **Sequential ordering** - Logical progression within epic
+- **No forward dependencies** - Only depend on previous work
+- **AI-agent sized** - Completable in 2-4 hour focused session
+- **Value-focused** - Integrate technical enablers into value-delivering stories
+
+---
+
+**For implementation:** Use the `create-story` workflow to generate individual story implementation plans from this epic breakdown.

bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/create-epics-and-stories/instructions.md

@@ -0,0 +1,395 @@
+# Epic and Story Decomposition - Bite-Sized Implementation Planning
+
+<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>This workflow transforms requirements into BITE-SIZED STORIES for limited context agents</critical>
+<critical>EVERY story must be completable by a single limited context window dev agent in one session</critical>
+<critical>Communicate all responses in {communication_language} and adapt deeply to {user_skill_level}</critical>
+<critical>Generate all documents in {document_output_language}</critical>
+<critical>LIVING DOCUMENT: Write to epics.md continuously as you work - never wait until the end</critical>
+
+<workflow>
+
+<step n="0" goal="Load context and requirements">
+<action>Welcome the {user_name} to the project inception high level epic and story planning.
+
+Load required documents:
+
+1. PRD.md (must exist - fuzzy match on name, might be a folder with an index and smaller sharded files also)
+2. domain-brief.md (if exists)
+3. product-brief.md (if exists)
+
+Extract from PRD:
+
+- Functional requirements
+- Non-functional requirements
+- Domain considerations
+- Project type
+- MVP scope vs growth features
+
+If continuing from PRD workflow:
+"Great! Now let's break down your requirements into actionable epics and bite-sized stories that development agents can implement independently."
+
+If starting fresh:
+"I'll help you transform your PRD into organized epics with implementable stories. Each story will be small enough for a single dev agent to complete in one session."</action>
+</step>
+
+<step n="1" goal="Form epics from natural groupings">
+<action>Transform requirements into epics organically
+
+INTENT: Find natural boundaries that make sense for THIS product
+
+Look at the requirements and find patterns:
+
+- Features that work together
+- User journeys that connect
+- Technical systems that relate
+- Business capabilities that group
+- Domain requirements that cluster (compliance, validation, etc.)
+
+Examples of natural epic formation:
+
+- Auth features → "User Management" epic
+- Payment features → "Monetization" epic
+- Social features → "Community" epic
+- Admin features → "Administration" epic
+- Compliance requirements → "Regulatory Compliance" epic
+- API endpoints → "API Infrastructure" epic
+
+But let the product guide you - don't force standard patterns
+
+Each epic should:
+
+- Have a clear business goal
+- Be independently valuable
+- Contain 3-8 related features
+- Be completable in 1-2 sprints
+
+Name epics based on value, not technical components:
+GOOD: "User Onboarding", "Content Discovery", "Team Collaboration"
+NOT: "Database", "Frontend", "API"
+
+If domain considerations exist:
+
+- Create dedicated compliance/validation epics
+- Note special expertise needed per epic
+- Flag epics with regulatory dependencies
+
+Present epic groupings conversationally:
+"Based on your requirements, I see these natural epic groupings:
+
+1. [Epic Name] - [Brief description]
+2. [Epic Name] - [Brief description]
+3. [Epic Name] - [Brief description]
+
+Does this organization make sense for how you think about the product?"</action>
+
+<template-output>epics_structure</template-output>
+</step>
+
+<step n="2" goal="Decompose into bite-sized stories">
+<critical>Small vertical sliced small stories are best for agentic dumb developers to implement without forgetting things</critical>
+
+<action>Break each epic into small, implementable stories
+
+INTENT: Create stories that one dev agent can complete independently
+
+For each epic, decompose into stories that are:
+
+- Small enough for single context window
+- Clear enough for autonomous implementation
+- Independent enough to develop in parallel when possible
+- Specific enough to have clear acceptance criteria
+
+GOOD story examples:
+
+- "Create login API endpoint that accepts email/password and returns JWT"
+- "Build user profile component with avatar upload to S3"
+- "Add password reset email template and sending logic"
+- "Implement rate limiting on auth endpoints (5 attempts per minute)"
+- "Create HIPAA-compliant audit log for patient data access"
+- "Build FDA 21 CFR Part 11 electronic signature component"
+
+BAD story examples:
+
+- "Build complete authentication system" (too big)
+- "Handle user management" (too vague)
+- "Make it secure" (not specific)
+- "Integrate everything" (requires multiple contexts)
+
+Story format:
+"As a [user type], I want [specific feature], so that [clear value]"
+
+Technical notes to include:
+
+- Affected files/components if known
+- Required endpoints/methods
+- Data structures needed
+- Specific validation rules
+- Compliance requirements if applicable
+- Dependencies on other stories
+
+Domain-aware story creation:
+
+- For healthcare: Include specific regulations per story
+- For fintech: Note PCI/security requirements per story
+- For govtech: Flag accessibility needs per story
+- For aerospace: Include safety/validation requirements
+
+Check each story:
+
+- Can this be explained in <1000 words?
+- Can one agent complete without another's output?
+- Is the scope crystal clear?
+- Are success criteria obvious?
+- Are domain requirements specified?
+
+If too big → split into smaller stories
+If too vague → add specifics
+If dependent → note the dependency clearly
+If domain-critical → flag compliance needs</action>
+
+<template-output>epic_1_stories</template-output>
+<template-output>epic_2_stories</template-output>
+<template-output>epic_3_stories</template-output>
+
+<!-- Continue for each epic discovered -->
+</step>
+
+<step n="3" goal="Sequence for smart implementation">
+<action>Order stories for successful development
+
+INTENT: Create a logical flow that minimizes blockers and maximizes progress
+
+Consider dependencies:
+TECHNICAL:
+
+- Authentication before protected features
+- Data models before business logic
+- Core features before enhancements
+- API before frontend that uses it
+
+DOMAIN:
+
+- Compliance infrastructure before features
+- Validation framework before clinical features
+- Audit logging before financial transactions
+- Safety systems before operational features
+
+PRACTICAL:
+
+- What gives visible progress early?
+- What reduces risk soonest?
+- What enables parallel work?
+- What delivers value fastest?
+
+Create implementation phases:
+
+Phase 1 - Foundation:
+
+- Core data models
+- Authentication/authorization
+- Basic infrastructure
+- Essential APIs
+- Compliance foundation (if domain requires)
+
+Phase 2 - Core Features:
+
+- MVP functionality
+- Key user flows
+- Basic UI/UX
+- Critical integrations
+- Domain validations (if applicable)
+
+Phase 3 - Enhancement:
+
+- Polish and refinement
+- Additional features
+- Performance optimization
+- Extended functionality
+- Advanced compliance features
+
+Phase 4 - Growth:
+
+- Analytics and monitoring
+- Advanced features
+- Scaling preparations
+- Nice-to-have additions
+
+For complex domains, add gates:
+
+- "Gate: Security audit before payment processing"
+- "Gate: Clinical validation before patient features"
+- "Gate: Compliance review before launch"
+
+Present the sequencing conversationally:
+"Here's a smart implementation order:
+
+**Phase 1 (Foundation) - Week 1-2:**
+
+- Story 1.1: [Description]
+- Story 1.2: [Description] (can parallel with 1.1)
+- Story 1.3: [Description] (depends on 1.1)
+
+**Phase 2 (Core) - Week 3-4:**
+[Continue...]
+
+This gives you something working by [milestone] and allows [X] stories to run in parallel."</action>
+
+<template-output>implementation_sequence</template-output>
+<template-output>development_phases</template-output>
+<template-output>dependency_graph</template-output>
+</step>
+
+<step n="4" goal="Validate story sizing and clarity">
+<action>Review all stories for dev agent compatibility
+
+Run through each story and verify:
+
+SIZE CHECK:
+
+- Story description < 500 words
+- Clear inputs and outputs defined
+- Single responsibility principle
+- No hidden complexity
+
+CLARITY CHECK:
+
+- Acceptance criteria explicit
+- Technical approach clear
+- No ambiguous requirements
+- Success measurable
+
+DEPENDENCY CHECK:
+
+- Dependencies documented
+- Can start with clear inputs
+- Outputs well-defined
+- Parallel opportunities noted
+
+DOMAIN CHECK (if applicable):
+
+- Compliance requirements stated
+- Validation criteria defined
+- Regulatory references included
+- Special expertise noted
+
+If any issues found:
+"Story [X] seems too large. Let me split it:
+
+- [Smaller story 1]
+- [Smaller story 2]"
+
+"Story [Y] needs clarification on [aspect]. How should we handle [specific question]?"
+
+Final validation:
+"All stories are now sized for 200k context limits.
+
+- Total stories: [count]
+- Can run in parallel: [count]
+- Sequential dependencies: [count]
+- Estimated completion: [timeframe]"</action>
+
+<template-output>story_validation</template-output>
+</step>
+
+<step n="5" goal="Create development guidance">
+<action>Add practical guidance for implementation teams
+
+Create quick reference for development:
+
+GETTING STARTED:
+"Start with Phase 1 stories - multiple can run in parallel.
+Key files to create first: [list]
+Recommended agent allocation: [suggestion]"
+
+DOMAIN GUIDANCE (if applicable):
+"Critical compliance checkpoints:
+
+- After story [X]: Run [validation]
+- Before story [Y]: Review [regulation]
+- Throughout: Maintain [audit trail]"
+
+TECHNICAL NOTES:
+"Architecture decisions needed:
+
+- [Decision 1] affects stories [A, B, C]
+- [Decision 2] blocks story [D]
+
+Consider these patterns:
+
+- [Pattern] for [epic]
+- [Pattern] for [requirement]"
+
+RISK MITIGATION:
+"Watch out for:
+
+- [Risk] in story [X]
+- [Complexity] in epic [Y]
+- [Dependency] between [A] and [B]"
+
+SUCCESS METRICS:
+"You'll know Phase 1 is complete when:
+
+- [Measurable outcome]
+- [Testable feature]
+- [Validation passed]"</action>
+
+<template-output>implementation_guidance</template-output>
+</step>
+
+<step n="6" goal="Finalize and prepare handoff">
+<action>Complete the epics document and prepare for development
+
+Review what we've created:
+"We've successfully decomposed your requirements into:
+
+- [x] epics
+- [Y] total stories
+- [Z] phases of development
+
+Every story is sized for a single dev agent to complete independently."
+
+Highlight key achievements:
+
+- Stories respect 200k context limit
+- Dependencies clearly mapped
+- Domain requirements integrated
+- Parallel development enabled
+
+Save completed epics.md with:
+
+- Full epic descriptions
+- All stories with acceptance criteria
+- Implementation sequence
+- Development phases
+- Dependency notes
+- Domain compliance requirements (if applicable)</action>
+
+<output>**✅ Epic Decomposition Complete, {user_name}!**
+
+Your requirements are now organized into **{epic_count} epics** with **{story_count} bite-sized stories**.
+
+**Created:**
+
+- **epics.md** - Complete epic breakdown with implementable stories
+
+**Key Stats:**
+
+- Average story size: Fits in 200k context
+- Parallel stories: {parallel_count} can run simultaneously
+- Sequential chains: {sequential_count} dependency chains
+- Estimated velocity: {velocity_estimate}
+
+**Next Steps:**
+
+1. Review epics.md for the complete breakdown
+2. Start Phase 1 implementation with parallel stories
+3. Use story IDs for tracking progress
+
+Each story is crafted for a single dev agent to complete autonomously. No monoliths, no confusion, just clear implementation paths.
+
+Ready to begin development with any story marked "can start immediately"!</output>
+</step>
+
+</workflow>

bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/create-epics-and-stories/workflow.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+# Epic and Story Decomposition Workflow
+name: create-epics-and-stories
+description: "Transform PRD requirements into bite-sized stories organized in epics for 200k context dev agents"
+author: "BMad"
+
+# Critical variables from config
+config_source: "{project-root}/bmad/bmm/config.yaml"
+project_name: "{config_source}:project_name"
+output_folder: "{config_source}:output_folder"
+user_name: "{config_source}:user_name"
+communication_language: "{config_source}:communication_language"
+document_output_language: "{config_source}:document_output_language"
+user_skill_level: "{config_source}:user_skill_level"
+date: system-generated
+
+# Workflow components
+installed_path: "{project-root}/bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/create-epics-and-stories"
+instructions: "{installed_path}/instructions.md"
+template: "{installed_path}/epics-template.md"
+
+# Input files (from parent PRD workflow)
+prd_file: "{output_folder}/PRD.md"
+
+# Output files
+default_output_file: "{output_folder}/epics.md"
+
+# Optional input documents
+recommended_inputs:
+  - prd: "{output_folder}/PRD.md"
+  - product_brief: "{output_folder}/product-brief.md"
+  - domain_brief: "{output_folder}/domain-brief.md"
+
+standalone: true

bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/domain-complexity.csv

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+domain,signals,complexity,key_concerns,required_knowledge,suggested_workflow,web_searches,special_sections
+healthcare,"medical,diagnostic,clinical,FDA,patient,treatment,HIPAA,therapy,pharma,drug",high,"FDA approval;Clinical validation;HIPAA compliance;Patient safety;Medical device classification;Liability","Regulatory pathways;Clinical trial design;Medical standards;Data privacy;Integration requirements","domain-research","FDA software medical device guidance {date};HIPAA compliance software requirements;Medical software standards {date};Clinical validation software","clinical_requirements;regulatory_pathway;validation_methodology;safety_measures"
+fintech,"payment,banking,trading,investment,crypto,wallet,transaction,KYC,AML,funds,fintech",high,"Regional compliance;Security standards;Audit requirements;Fraud prevention;Data protection","KYC/AML requirements;PCI DSS;Open banking;Regional laws (US/EU/APAC);Crypto regulations","domain-research","fintech regulations {date};payment processing compliance {date};open banking API standards;cryptocurrency regulations {date}","compliance_matrix;security_architecture;audit_requirements;fraud_prevention"
+govtech,"government,federal,civic,public sector,citizen,municipal,voting",high,"Procurement rules;Security clearance;Accessibility (508);FedRAMP;Privacy;Transparency","Government procurement;Security frameworks;Accessibility standards;Privacy laws;Open data requirements","domain-research","government software procurement {date};FedRAMP compliance requirements;section 508 accessibility;government security standards","procurement_compliance;security_clearance;accessibility_standards;transparency_requirements"
+edtech,"education,learning,student,teacher,curriculum,assessment,K-12,university,LMS",medium,"Student privacy (COPPA/FERPA);Accessibility;Content moderation;Age verification;Curriculum standards","Educational privacy laws;Learning standards;Accessibility requirements;Content guidelines;Assessment validity","domain-research","educational software privacy {date};COPPA FERPA compliance;WCAG education requirements;learning management standards","privacy_compliance;content_guidelines;accessibility_features;curriculum_alignment"
+aerospace,"aircraft,spacecraft,aviation,drone,satellite,propulsion,flight,radar,navigation",high,"Safety certification;DO-178C compliance;Performance validation;Simulation accuracy;Export controls","Aviation standards;Safety analysis;Simulation validation;ITAR/export controls;Performance requirements","domain-research + technical-model","DO-178C software certification;aerospace simulation standards {date};ITAR export controls software;aviation safety requirements","safety_certification;simulation_validation;performance_requirements;export_compliance"
+automotive,"vehicle,car,autonomous,ADAS,automotive,driving,EV,charging",high,"Safety standards;ISO 26262;V2X communication;Real-time requirements;Certification","Automotive standards;Functional safety;V2X protocols;Real-time systems;Testing requirements","domain-research","ISO 26262 automotive software;automotive safety standards {date};V2X communication protocols;EV charging standards","safety_standards;functional_safety;communication_protocols;certification_requirements"
+scientific,"research,algorithm,simulation,modeling,computational,analysis,data science,ML,AI",medium,"Reproducibility;Validation methodology;Peer review;Performance;Accuracy;Computational resources","Scientific method;Statistical validity;Computational requirements;Domain expertise;Publication standards","technical-model","scientific computing best practices {date};research reproducibility standards;computational modeling validation;peer review software","validation_methodology;accuracy_metrics;reproducibility_plan;computational_requirements"
+legaltech,"legal,law,contract,compliance,litigation,patent,attorney,court",high,"Legal ethics;Bar regulations;Data retention;Attorney-client privilege;Court system integration","Legal practice rules;Ethics requirements;Court filing systems;Document standards;Confidentiality","domain-research","legal technology ethics {date};law practice management software requirements;court filing system standards;attorney client privilege technology","ethics_compliance;data_retention;confidentiality_measures;court_integration"
+insuretech,"insurance,claims,underwriting,actuarial,policy,risk,premium",high,"Insurance regulations;Actuarial standards;Data privacy;Fraud detection;State compliance","Insurance regulations by state;Actuarial methods;Risk modeling;Claims processing;Regulatory reporting","domain-research","insurance software regulations {date};actuarial standards software;insurance fraud detection;state insurance compliance","regulatory_requirements;risk_modeling;fraud_detection;reporting_compliance"
+energy,"energy,utility,grid,solar,wind,power,electricity,oil,gas",high,"Grid compliance;NERC standards;Environmental regulations;Safety requirements;Real-time operations","Energy regulations;Grid standards;Environmental compliance;Safety protocols;SCADA systems","domain-research","energy sector software compliance {date};NERC CIP standards;smart grid requirements;renewable energy software standards","grid_compliance;safety_protocols;environmental_compliance;operational_requirements"
+gaming,"game,player,gameplay,level,character,multiplayer,quest",redirect,"REDIRECT TO GAME WORKFLOWS","Game design","game-brief","NA","NA"
+general,"",low,"Standard requirements;Basic security;User experience;Performance","General software practices","continue","software development best practices {date}","standard_requirements"

bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/instructions.md

@@ -0,0 +1,423 @@
+# PRD Workflow - Intent-Driven Product Planning
+
+<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>This workflow uses INTENT-DRIVEN PLANNING - adapt organically to product type and context</critical>
+<critical>Communicate all responses in {communication_language} and adapt deeply to {user_skill_level}</critical>
+<critical>Generate all documents in {document_output_language}</critical>
+<critical>LIVING DOCUMENT: Write to PRD.md continuously as you discover - never wait until the end</critical>
+<critical>GUIDING PRINCIPLE: Find and weave the product's magic throughout - what makes it special should inspire every section</critical>
+
+## 📚 Input Document Discovery
+
+This workflow requires: product brief, and may reference market research or brownfield project documentation.
+
+**Discovery Process** (execute for each referenced document):
+
+1. **Search for whole document first** - Use fuzzy file matching to find the complete document
+2. **Check for sharded version** - If whole document not found, look for `{doc-name}/index.md`
+3. **If sharded version found**:
+   - Read `index.md` to understand the document structure
+   - Read ALL section files listed in the index
+   - Treat the combined content as if it were a single document
+4. **Brownfield projects**: The `document-project` workflow always creates `{output_folder}/docs/index.md`
+
+**Priority**: If both whole and sharded versions exist, use the whole document.
+
+**Fuzzy matching**: Be flexible with document names - users may use variations in naming conventions.
+
+<workflow>
+
+<step n="0" goal="Validate workflow readiness" tag="workflow-status">
+<action>Check if {status_file} exists</action>
+
+<action if="status file not found">Set standalone_mode = true</action>
+
+<check if="status file found">
+  <action>Load the FULL file: {status_file}</action>
+  <action>Parse workflow_status section</action>
+  <action>Check status of "prd" workflow</action>
+  <action>Get project_level from YAML metadata</action>
+  <action>Find first non-completed workflow (next expected workflow)</action>
+
+  <check if="project_level < 2">
+    <output>**Level {{project_level}} Project - Redirecting**
+
+Level 0-1 projects use tech-spec workflow for simpler planning.
+PRD is for Level 2-4 projects that need comprehensive requirements.</output>
+<action>Exit and suggest tech-spec workflow</action>
+</check>
+
+  <check if="prd status is file path (already completed)">
+    <output>⚠️ PRD already completed: {{prd status}}</output>
+    <ask>Re-running will overwrite the existing PRD. Continue? (y/n)</ask>
+    <check if="n">
+      <output>Exiting. Use workflow-status to see your next step.</output>
+      <action>Exit workflow</action>
+    </check>
+  </check>
+
+<action>Set standalone_mode = false</action>
+</check>
+</step>
+
+<step n="1" goal="Discovery - Project, Domain, and Vision">
+<action>Welcome {user_name} and begin comprehensive discovery, and then start to GATHER ALL CONTEXT:
+1. Check workflow-status.yaml for project_context (if exists)
+2. Look for existing documents (Product Brief, Domain Brief, research)
+3. Detect project type AND domain complexity
+
+Load references:
+{installed_path}/project-types.csv
+{installed_path}/domain-complexity.csv
+
+Through natural conversation:
+"Tell me about what you want to build - what problem does it solve and for whom?"
+
+DUAL DETECTION:
+Project type signals: API, mobile, web, CLI, SDK, SaaS
+Domain complexity signals: medical, finance, government, education, aerospace
+
+SPECIAL ROUTING:
+If game detected → Suggest game-brief and GDD workflows
+If complex domain detected → Offer domain research options:
+A) Run domain-research workflow (thorough)
+B) Quick web search (basic)
+C) User provides context
+D) Continue with general knowledge
+
+CAPTURE THE MAGIC EARLY with a few questions such as for example: "What excites you most about this product?", "What would make users love this?", "What's the moment that will make people go 'wow'?"
+
+This excitement becomes the thread woven throughout the PRD.</action>
+
+<template-output>vision_alignment</template-output>
+<template-output>project_classification</template-output>
+<template-output>project_type</template-output>
+<template-output>domain_type</template-output>
+<template-output>complexity_level</template-output>
+<check if="complex domain">
+<template-output>domain_context_summary</template-output>
+</check>
+<template-output>product_magic_essence</template-output>
+<template-output>product_brief_path</template-output>
+<template-output>domain_brief_path</template-output>
+<template-output>research_documents</template-output>
+</step>
+
+<step n="2" goal="Success Definition">
+<action>Define what winning looks like for THIS specific product
+
+INTENT: Meaningful success criteria, not generic metrics
+
+Adapt to context:
+
+- Consumer: User love, engagement, retention
+- B2B: ROI, efficiency, adoption
+- Developer tools: Developer experience, community
+- Regulated: Compliance, safety, validation
+
+Make it specific:
+
+- NOT: "10,000 users"
+- BUT: "100 power users who rely on it daily"
+
+- NOT: "99.9% uptime"
+- BUT: "Zero data loss during critical operations"
+
+Weave in the magic:
+
+- "Success means users experience [that special moment] and [desired outcome]"</action>
+
+<template-output>success_criteria</template-output>
+<check if="business focus">
+<template-output>business_metrics</template-output>
+</check>
+</step>
+
+<step n="3" goal="Scope Definition">
+<action>Smart scope negotiation - find the sweet spot
+
+The Scoping Game:
+
+1. "What must work for this to be useful?" → MVP
+2. "What makes it competitive?" → Growth
+3. "What's the dream version?" → Vision
+
+Challenge scope creep conversationally:
+
+- "Could that wait until after launch?"
+- "Is that essential for proving the concept?"
+
+For complex domains:
+
+- Include compliance minimums in MVP
+- Note regulatory gates between phases</action>
+
+<template-output>mvp_scope</template-output>
+<template-output>growth_features</template-output>
+<template-output>vision_features</template-output>
+</step>
+
+<step n="4" goal="Domain-Specific Exploration" optional="true">
+<action>Only if complex domain detected or domain-brief exists
+
+Synthesize domain requirements that will shape everything:
+
+- Regulatory requirements
+- Compliance needs
+- Industry standards
+- Safety/risk factors
+- Required validations
+- Special expertise needed
+
+These inform:
+
+- What features are mandatory
+- What NFRs are critical
+- How to sequence development
+- What validation is required</action>
+
+<check if="complex domain">
+  <template-output>domain_considerations</template-output>
+</check>
+</step>
+
+<step n="5" goal="Innovation Discovery" optional="true">
+<action>Identify truly novel patterns if applicable
+
+Listen for innovation signals:
+
+- "Nothing like this exists"
+- "We're rethinking how [X] works"
+- "Combining [A] with [B] for the first time"
+
+Explore deeply:
+
+- What makes it unique?
+- What assumption are you challenging?
+- How do we validate it?
+- What's the fallback?
+
+<WebSearch if="novel">{concept} innovations {date}</WebSearch></action>
+
+<check if="innovation detected">
+  <template-output>innovation_patterns</template-output>
+  <template-output>validation_approach</template-output>
+</check>
+</step>
+
+<step n="6" goal="Project-Specific Deep Dive">
+<action>Based on detected project type, dive deep into specific needs
+
+Load project type requirements from CSV and expand naturally.
+
+FOR API/BACKEND:
+
+- Map out endpoints, methods, parameters
+- Define authentication and authorization
+- Specify error codes and rate limits
+- Document data schemas
+
+FOR MOBILE:
+
+- Platform requirements (iOS/Android/both)
+- Device features needed
+- Offline capabilities
+- Store compliance
+
+FOR SAAS B2B:
+
+- Multi-tenant architecture
+- Permission models
+- Subscription tiers
+- Critical integrations
+
+[Continue for other types...]
+
+Always relate back to the product magic:
+"How does [requirement] enhance [the special thing]?"</action>
+
+<template-output>project_type_requirements</template-output>
+
+<!-- Dynamic sections based on project type -->
+<check if="API/Backend project">
+  <template-output>endpoint_specification</template-output>
+  <template-output>authentication_model</template-output>
+</check>
+
+<check if="Mobile project">
+  <template-output>platform_requirements</template-output>
+  <template-output>device_features</template-output>
+</check>
+
+<check if="SaaS B2B project">
+  <template-output>tenant_model</template-output>
+  <template-output>permission_matrix</template-output>
+</check>
+</step>
+
+<step n="7" goal="UX Principles" optional="true">
+<action>Only if product has a UI
+
+Light touch on UX - not full design:
+
+- Visual personality
+- Key interaction patterns
+- Critical user flows
+
+"How should this feel to use?"
+"What's the vibe - professional, playful, minimal?"
+
+Connect to the magic:
+"The UI should reinforce [the special moment] through [design approach]"</action>
+
+<check if="has UI">
+  <template-output>ux_principles</template-output>
+  <template-output>key_interactions</template-output>
+</check>
+</step>
+
+<step n="8" goal="Functional Requirements Synthesis">
+<action>Transform everything discovered into clear functional requirements
+
+Pull together:
+
+- Core features from scope
+- Domain-mandated features
+- Project-type specific needs
+- Innovation requirements
+
+Organize by capability, not technology:
+
+- User Management (not "auth system")
+- Content Discovery (not "search algorithm")
+- Team Collaboration (not "websockets")
+
+Each requirement should:
+
+- Be specific and measurable
+- Connect to user value
+- Include acceptance criteria
+- Note domain constraints
+
+The magic thread:
+Highlight which requirements deliver the special experience</action>
+
+<template-output>functional_requirements_complete</template-output>
+</step>
+
+<step n="9" goal="Non-Functional Requirements Discovery">
+<action>Only document NFRs that matter for THIS product
+
+Performance: Only if user-facing impact
+Security: Only if handling sensitive data
+Scale: Only if growth expected
+Accessibility: Only if broad audience
+Integration: Only if connecting systems
+
+For each NFR:
+
+- Why it matters for THIS product
+- Specific measurable criteria
+- Domain-driven requirements
+
+Skip categories that don't apply!</action>
+
+<!-- Only output sections that were discussed -->
+<check if="performance matters">
+  <template-output>performance_requirements</template-output>
+</check>
+<check if="security matters">
+  <template-output>security_requirements</template-output>
+</check>
+<check if="scale matters">
+  <template-output>scalability_requirements</template-output>
+</check>
+<check if="accessibility matters">
+  <template-output>accessibility_requirements</template-output>
+</check>
+<check if="integration matters">
+  <template-output>integration_requirements</template-output>
+</check>
+<check if="no NFRs discussed">
+  <template-output>no_nfrs</template-output>
+</check>
+</step>
+
+<step n="10" goal="Review PRD and transition to epics">
+<action>Review the PRD we've built together
+
+"Let's review what we've captured:
+
+- Vision: [summary]
+- Success: [key metrics]
+- Scope: [MVP highlights]
+- Requirements: [count] functional, [count] non-functional
+- Special considerations: [domain/innovation]
+
+Does this capture your product vision?"
+
+After confirmation:
+"Excellent! Now we need to break these requirements into implementable epics and stories.
+
+For the epic breakdown, you have two options:
+
+1. Start a new session focused on epics (recommended for complex projects)
+2. Continue here (I'll transform requirements into epics now)
+
+Which would you prefer?"
+
+If new session:
+"To start epic planning in a new session:
+
+1. Save your work here
+2. Start fresh and run: workflow epics-stories
+3. It will load your PRD and create the epic breakdown
+
+This keeps each session focused and manageable."
+
+If continue:
+"Let's continue with epic breakdown here..."
+[Proceed with epics-stories subworkflow]
+Set project_level and target_scale based on project analysis
+Generate epic_details for the epics breakdown document</action>
+
+<template-output>prd_summary</template-output>
+<template-output>project_level</template-output>
+<template-output>target_scale</template-output>
+<template-output>epic_details</template-output>
+</step>
+
+<step n="11" goal="Complete PRD and suggest next steps">
+<template-output>product_magic_summary</template-output>
+
+<check if="standalone_mode != true">
+  <action>Load the FULL file: {status_file}</action>
+  <action>Update workflow_status["prd"] = "{default_output_file}"</action>
+  <action>Save file, preserving ALL comments and structure</action>
+</check>
+
+<output>**✅ PRD Complete, {user_name}!**
+
+Your product requirements are documented and ready for implementation.
+
+**Created:**
+
+- **PRD.md** - Complete requirements adapted to {project_type} and {domain}
+
+**Next Steps:**
+
+1. **Epic Breakdown** (Required)
+   Run: `workflow create-epics-and-stories` to decompose requirements into implementable stories
+
+2. **UX Design** (If UI exists)
+   Run: `workflow ux-design` for detailed user experience design
+
+3. **Architecture** (Recommended)
+   Run: `workflow create-architecture` for technical architecture decisions
+
+The magic of your product - {product_magic_summary} - is woven throughout the PRD and will guide all subsequent work.
+</output>
+</step>
+
+</workflow>

bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/prd-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,237 @@
+# {{project_name}} - Product Requirements Document
+
+**Author:** {{user_name}}
+**Date:** {{date}}
+**Version:** 1.0
+
+---
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+{{vision_alignment}}
+
+### What Makes This Special
+
+{{product_magic_essence}}
+
+---
+
+## Project Classification
+
+**Technical Type:** {{project_type}}
+**Domain:** {{domain_type}}
+**Complexity:** {{complexity_level}}
+
+{{project_classification}}
+
+{{#if domain_context_summary}}
+
+### Domain Context
+
+{{domain_context_summary}}
+{{/if}}
+
+---
+
+## Success Criteria
+
+{{success_criteria}}
+
+{{#if business_metrics}}
+
+### Business Metrics
+
+{{business_metrics}}
+{{/if}}
+
+---
+
+## Product Scope
+
+### MVP - Minimum Viable Product
+
+{{mvp_scope}}
+
+### Growth Features (Post-MVP)
+
+{{growth_features}}
+
+### Vision (Future)
+
+{{vision_features}}
+
+---
+
+{{#if domain_considerations}}
+
+## Domain-Specific Requirements
+
+{{domain_considerations}}
+
+This section shapes all functional and non-functional requirements below.
+{{/if}}
+
+---
+
+{{#if innovation_patterns}}
+
+## Innovation & Novel Patterns
+
+{{innovation_patterns}}
+
+### Validation Approach
+
+{{validation_approach}}
+{{/if}}
+
+---
+
+{{#if project_type_requirements}}
+
+## {{project_type}} Specific Requirements
+
+{{project_type_requirements}}
+
+{{#if endpoint_specification}}
+
+### API Specification
+
+{{endpoint_specification}}
+{{/if}}
+
+{{#if authentication_model}}
+
+### Authentication & Authorization
+
+{{authentication_model}}
+{{/if}}
+
+{{#if platform_requirements}}
+
+### Platform Support
+
+{{platform_requirements}}
+{{/if}}
+
+{{#if device_features}}
+
+### Device Capabilities
+
+{{device_features}}
+{{/if}}
+
+{{#if tenant_model}}
+
+### Multi-Tenancy Architecture
+
+{{tenant_model}}
+{{/if}}
+
+{{#if permission_matrix}}
+
+### Permissions & Roles
+
+{{permission_matrix}}
+{{/if}}
+{{/if}}
+
+---
+
+{{#if ux_principles}}
+
+## User Experience Principles
+
+{{ux_principles}}
+
+### Key Interactions
+
+{{key_interactions}}
+{{/if}}
+
+---
+
+## Functional Requirements
+
+{{functional_requirements_complete}}
+
+---
+
+## Non-Functional Requirements
+
+{{#if performance_requirements}}
+
+### Performance
+
+{{performance_requirements}}
+{{/if}}
+
+{{#if security_requirements}}
+
+### Security
+
+{{security_requirements}}
+{{/if}}
+
+{{#if scalability_requirements}}
+
+### Scalability
+
+{{scalability_requirements}}
+{{/if}}
+
+{{#if accessibility_requirements}}
+
+### Accessibility
+
+{{accessibility_requirements}}
+{{/if}}
+
+{{#if integration_requirements}}
+
+### Integration
+
+{{integration_requirements}}
+{{/if}}
+
+{{#if no_nfrs}}
+_No specific non-functional requirements identified for this project type._
+{{/if}}
+
+---
+
+## Implementation Planning
+
+### Epic Breakdown Required
+
+Requirements must be decomposed into epics and bite-sized stories (200k context limit).
+
+**Next Step:** Run `workflow epics-stories` to create the implementation breakdown.
+
+---
+
+## References
+
+{{#if product_brief_path}}
+
+- Product Brief: {{product_brief_path}}
+  {{/if}}
+  {{#if domain_brief_path}}
+- Domain Brief: {{domain_brief_path}}
+  {{/if}}
+  {{#if research_documents}}
+- Research: {{research_documents}}
+  {{/if}}
+
+---
+
+## Next Steps
+
+1. **Epic & Story Breakdown** - Run: `workflow epics-stories`
+2. **UX Design** (if UI) - Run: `workflow ux-design`
+3. **Architecture** - Run: `workflow create-architecture`
+
+---
+
+_This PRD captures the essence of {{project_name}} - {{product_magic_summary}}_
+
+_Created through collaborative discovery between {{user_name}} and AI facilitator._

bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/project-types.csv

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+project_type,detection_signals,key_questions,required_sections,skip_sections,web_search_triggers,innovation_signals
+api_backend,"API,REST,GraphQL,backend,service,endpoints","Endpoints needed?;Authentication method?;Data formats?;Rate limits?;Versioning?;SDK needed?","endpoint_specs;auth_model;data_schemas;error_codes;rate_limits;api_docs","ux_ui;visual_design;user_journeys","framework best practices;OpenAPI standards","API composition;New protocol"
+mobile_app,"iOS,Android,app,mobile,iPhone,iPad","Native or cross-platform?;Offline needed?;Push notifications?;Device features?;Store compliance?","platform_reqs;device_permissions;offline_mode;push_strategy;store_compliance","desktop_features;cli_commands","app store guidelines;platform requirements","Gesture innovation;AR/VR features"
+saas_b2b,"SaaS,B2B,platform,dashboard,teams,enterprise","Multi-tenant?;Permission model?;Subscription tiers?;Integrations?;Compliance?","tenant_model;rbac_matrix;subscription_tiers;integration_list;compliance_reqs","cli_interface;mobile_first","compliance requirements;integration guides","Workflow automation;AI agents"
+developer_tool,"SDK,library,package,npm,pip,framework","Language support?;Package managers?;IDE integration?;Documentation?;Examples?","language_matrix;installation_methods;api_surface;code_examples;migration_guide","visual_design;store_compliance","package manager best practices;API design patterns","New paradigm;DSL creation"
+cli_tool,"CLI,command,terminal,bash,script","Interactive or scriptable?;Output formats?;Config method?;Shell completion?","command_structure;output_formats;config_schema;scripting_support","visual_design;ux_principles;touch_interactions","CLI design patterns;shell integration","Natural language CLI;AI commands"
+web_app,"website,webapp,browser,SPA,PWA","SPA or MPA?;Browser support?;SEO needed?;Real-time?;Accessibility?","browser_matrix;responsive_design;performance_targets;seo_strategy;accessibility_level","native_features;cli_commands","web standards;WCAG guidelines","New interaction;WebAssembly use"
+game,"game,player,gameplay,level,character","REDIRECT TO GAME WORKFLOWS","game-brief;GDD","most_sections","game design patterns","Novel mechanics;Genre mixing"
+desktop_app,"desktop,Windows,Mac,Linux,native","Cross-platform?;Auto-update?;System integration?;Offline?","platform_support;system_integration;update_strategy;offline_capabilities","web_seo;mobile_features","desktop guidelines;platform requirements","Desktop AI;System automation"
+iot_embedded,"IoT,embedded,device,sensor,hardware","Hardware specs?;Connectivity?;Power constraints?;Security?;OTA updates?","hardware_reqs;connectivity_protocol;power_profile;security_model;update_mechanism","visual_ui;browser_support","IoT standards;protocol specs","Edge AI;New sensors"
+blockchain_web3,"blockchain,crypto,DeFi,NFT,smart contract","Chain selection?;Wallet integration?;Gas optimization?;Security audit?","chain_specs;wallet_support;smart_contracts;security_audit;gas_optimization","traditional_auth;centralized_db","blockchain standards;security patterns","Novel tokenomics;DAO structure"

bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/workflow.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
+# Product Requirements Document (PRD) Workflow
+name: prd
+description: "Unified PRD workflow for project levels 2-4. Produces strategic PRD and tactical epic breakdown. Hands off to architecture workflow for technical design. Note: Level 0-1 use tech-spec workflow."
+author: "BMad"
+
+# Critical variables from config
+config_source: "{project-root}/bmad/bmm/config.yaml"
+project_name: "{config_source}:project_name"
+output_folder: "{config_source}:output_folder"
+user_name: "{config_source}:user_name"
+communication_language: "{config_source}:communication_language"
+document_output_language: "{config_source}:document_output_language"
+user_skill_level: "{config_source}:user_skill_level"
+date: system-generated
+
+# Workflow components
+installed_path: "{project-root}/bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd"
+instructions: "{installed_path}/instructions.md"
+
+# Templates
+prd_template: "{installed_path}/prd-template.md"
+
+# Output files
+status_file: "{output_folder}/bmm-workflow-status.yaml"
+default_output_file: "{output_folder}/PRD.md"
+
+# Recommended input documents
+recommended_inputs:
+  - product_brief: "{output_folder}/product-brief.md"
+  - market_research: "{output_folder}/market-research.md"
+
+# Smart input file references - handles both whole docs and sharded docs
+# Priority: Whole document first, then sharded version
+input_file_patterns:
+  product_brief:
+    whole: "{output_folder}/*brief*.md"
+    sharded: "{output_folder}/*brief*/index.md"
+
+  research:
+    whole: "{output_folder}/*research*.md"
+    sharded: "{output_folder}/*research*/index.md"
+
+  document_project:
+    sharded: "{output_folder}/docs/index.md"
+
+standalone: true