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>
This commit is contained in:
Brian Madison
2025-11-02 21:18:33 -06:00
parent 8a00f8ad70
commit cfedecbd53
359 changed files with 72374 additions and 809 deletions

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,214 @@
# Tech-Spec Workflow Validation Checklist
**Purpose**: Validate tech-spec workflow outputs are context-rich, definitive, complete, and implementation-ready.
**Scope**: Levels 0-1 software projects
**Expected Outputs**: tech-spec.md + story files (1 for Level 0, 2-3 for Level 1)
**New Standard**: Tech-spec should be comprehensive enough to replace story-context for Level 0-1 projects
---
## 1. Output Files Exist
- [ ] tech-spec.md created in output folder
- [ ] Story file(s) created in dev_story_location
- Level 0: 1 story file (story-{slug}.md)
- Level 1: epics.md + 2-3 story files (story-{epic-slug}-N.md)
- [ ] bmm-workflow-status.yaml updated (if not standalone mode)
- [ ] No unfilled {{template_variables}} in any files
---
## 2. Context Gathering (NEW - CRITICAL)
### Document Discovery
- [ ] **Existing documents loaded**: Product brief, research docs found and incorporated (if they exist)
- [ ] **Document-project output**: Checked for {output_folder}/docs/index.md (brownfield codebase map)
- [ ] **Sharded documents**: If sharded versions found, ALL sections loaded and synthesized
- [ ] **Context summary**: loaded_documents_summary lists all sources used
### Project Stack Detection
- [ ] **Setup files identified**: package.json, requirements.txt, or equivalent found and parsed
- [ ] **Framework detected**: Exact framework name and version captured (e.g., "Express 4.18.2")
- [ ] **Dependencies extracted**: All production dependencies with specific versions
- [ ] **Dev tools identified**: TypeScript, Jest, ESLint, pytest, etc. with versions
- [ ] **Scripts documented**: Available npm/pip/etc scripts identified
- [ ] **Stack summary**: project_stack_summary is complete and accurate
### Brownfield Analysis (if applicable)
- [ ] **Directory structure**: Main code directories identified and documented
- [ ] **Code patterns**: Dominant patterns identified (class-based, functional, MVC, etc.)
- [ ] **Naming conventions**: Existing conventions documented (camelCase, snake_case, etc.)
- [ ] **Key modules**: Important existing modules/services identified
- [ ] **Testing patterns**: Test framework and patterns documented
- [ ] **Structure summary**: existing_structure_summary is comprehensive
---
## 3. Tech-Spec Definitiveness (CRITICAL)
### No Ambiguity Allowed
- [ ] **Zero "or" statements**: NO "use X or Y", "either A or B", "options include"
- [ ] **Specific versions**: All frameworks, libraries, tools have EXACT versions
- ✅ GOOD: "Python 3.11", "React 18.2.0", "winston v3.8.2 (from package.json)"
- ❌ BAD: "Python 2 or 3", "React 18+", "a logger like pino or winston"
- [ ] **Definitive decisions**: Every technical choice is final, not a proposal
- [ ] **Stack-aligned**: Decisions reference detected project stack
### Implementation Clarity
- [ ] **Source tree changes**: EXACT file paths with CREATE/MODIFY/DELETE actions
- ✅ GOOD: "src/services/UserService.ts - MODIFY - Add validateEmail() method"
- ❌ BAD: "Update some files in the services folder"
- [ ] **Technical approach**: Describes SPECIFIC implementation using detected stack
- [ ] **Existing patterns**: Documents brownfield patterns to follow (if applicable)
- [ ] **Integration points**: Specific modules, APIs, services identified
---
## 4. Context-Rich Content (NEW)
### Context Section
- [ ] **Available Documents**: Lists all loaded documents
- [ ] **Project Stack**: Complete framework and dependency information
- [ ] **Existing Codebase Structure**: Brownfield analysis or greenfield notation
### The Change Section
- [ ] **Problem Statement**: Clear, specific problem definition
- [ ] **Proposed Solution**: Concrete solution approach
- [ ] **Scope In/Out**: Clear boundaries defined
### Development Context Section
- [ ] **Relevant Existing Code**: References to specific files and line numbers (brownfield)
- [ ] **Framework Dependencies**: Complete list with exact versions from project
- [ ] **Internal Dependencies**: Internal modules listed
- [ ] **Configuration Changes**: Specific config file updates identified
### Developer Resources Section
- [ ] **File Paths Reference**: Complete list of all files involved
- [ ] **Key Code Locations**: Functions, classes, modules with file:line references
- [ ] **Testing Locations**: Specific test directories and patterns
- [ ] **Documentation Updates**: Docs that need updating identified
---
## 5. Story Quality
### Story Format
- [ ] All stories use "As a [role], I want [capability], so that [benefit]" format
- [ ] Each story has numbered acceptance criteria
- [ ] Tasks reference AC numbers: (AC: #1), (AC: #2)
- [ ] Dev Notes section links to tech-spec.md
### Story Context Integration (NEW)
- [ ] **Tech-Spec Reference**: Story explicitly references tech-spec.md as primary context
- [ ] **Dev Agent Record**: Includes all required sections (Context Reference, Agent Model, etc.)
- [ ] **Test Results section**: Placeholder ready for dev execution
- [ ] **Review Notes section**: Placeholder ready for code review
### Story Sequencing (If Level 1)
- [ ] **Vertical slices**: Each story delivers complete, testable functionality
- [ ] **Sequential ordering**: Stories in logical progression
- [ ] **No forward dependencies**: No story depends on later work
- [ ] Each story leaves system in working state
### Coverage
- [ ] Story acceptance criteria derived from tech-spec
- [ ] Story tasks map to tech-spec implementation guide
- [ ] Files in stories match tech-spec source tree
- [ ] Key code references align with tech-spec Developer Resources
---
## 6. Epic Quality (Level 1 Only)
- [ ] **Epic title**: User-focused outcome (not implementation detail)
- [ ] **Epic slug**: Clean kebab-case slug (2-3 words)
- [ ] **Epic goal**: Clear purpose and value statement
- [ ] **Epic scope**: Boundaries clearly defined
- [ ] **Success criteria**: Measurable outcomes
- [ ] **Story map**: Visual representation of epic → stories
- [ ] **Implementation sequence**: Logical story ordering with dependencies
- [ ] **Tech-spec reference**: Links back to tech-spec.md
---
## 7. Workflow Status Integration
- [ ] bmm-workflow-status.yaml updated (if exists)
- [ ] Current phase reflects tech-spec completion
- [ ] Progress percentage updated appropriately
- [ ] Next workflow clearly identified
---
## 8. Implementation Readiness (NEW - ENHANCED)
### Can Developer Start Immediately?
- [ ] **All context available**: Brownfield analysis + stack details + existing patterns
- [ ] **No research needed**: Developer doesn't need to hunt for framework versions or patterns
- [ ] **Specific file paths**: Developer knows exactly which files to create/modify
- [ ] **Code references**: Can find similar code to reference (brownfield)
- [ ] **Testing clear**: Knows what to test and how
- [ ] **Deployment documented**: Knows how to deploy and rollback
### Tech-Spec Replaces Story-Context?
- [ ] **Comprehensive enough**: Contains all info typically in story-context XML
- [ ] **Brownfield analysis**: If applicable, includes codebase reconnaissance
- [ ] **Framework specifics**: Exact versions and usage patterns
- [ ] **Pattern guidance**: Shows examples of existing patterns to follow
---
## 9. Critical Failures (Auto-Fail)
- [ ]**Non-definitive technical decisions** (any "option A or B" or vague choices)
- [ ]**Missing versions** (framework/library without specific version)
- [ ]**Context not gathered** (didn't check for document-project, setup files, etc.)
- [ ]**Stack mismatch** (decisions don't align with detected project stack)
- [ ]**Stories don't match template** (missing Dev Agent Record sections)
- [ ]**Missing tech-spec sections** (required section missing from enhanced template)
- [ ]**Stories have forward dependencies** (would break sequential implementation)
- [ ]**Vague source tree** (file changes not specific with actions)
- [ ]**No brownfield analysis** (when document-project output exists but wasn't used)
---
## Validation Notes
**Document any findings:**
- **Context Gathering Score**: [Comprehensive / Partial / Insufficient]
- **Definitiveness Score**: [All definitive / Some ambiguity / Significant ambiguity]
- **Brownfield Integration**: [N/A - Greenfield / Excellent / Partial / Missing]
- **Stack Alignment**: [Perfect / Good / Partial / None]
## **Strengths:**
## **Issues to address:**
## **Recommended actions:**
**Ready for implementation?** [Yes / No - explain]
**Can skip story-context?** [Yes - tech-spec is comprehensive / No - additional context needed / N/A]
---
_The tech-spec should be a RICH CONTEXT DOCUMENT that gives developers everything they need without requiring separate context generation._

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
# {{project_name}} - Epic Breakdown
**Date:** {{date}}
**Project Level:** {{project_level}}
---
## Epic: {{epic_title}}
**Slug:** {{epic_slug}}
### Goal
{{epic_goal}}
### Scope
{{epic_scope}}
### Success Criteria
{{epic_success_criteria}}
### Dependencies
{{epic_dependencies}}
---
## Story Map
{{story_map}}
---
## Story Summaries
{{story_summaries}}
---
## Implementation Timeline
**Total Story Points:** {{total_points}}
**Estimated Timeline:** {{estimated_timeline}}
---
## Implementation Sequence
{{implementation_sequence}}
---
## Tech-Spec Reference
See [tech-spec.md](../tech-spec.md) for complete technical implementation details.

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,200 @@
# Level 0 - Minimal User Story Generation
<workflow>
<critical>This generates a single user story for Level 0 atomic changes</critical>
<critical>Level 0 = single file change, bug fix, or small isolated task</critical>
<critical>This workflow runs AFTER tech-spec.md has been completed</critical>
<critical>Output format MUST match create-story template for compatibility with story-context and dev-story workflows</critical>
<step n="1" goal="Load tech spec and extract the change">
<action>Read the completed tech-spec.md file from {output_folder}/tech-spec.md</action>
<action>Load bmm-workflow-status.yaml from {output_folder}/bmm-workflow-status.yaml (if exists)</action>
<action>Extract dev_story_location from config (where stories are stored)</action>
<action>Extract from the ENHANCED tech-spec structure:
- Problem statement from "The Change → Problem Statement" section
- Solution overview from "The Change → Proposed Solution" section
- Scope from "The Change → Scope" section
- Source tree from "Implementation Details → Source Tree Changes" section
- Time estimate from "Implementation Guide → Implementation Steps" section
- Acceptance criteria from "Implementation Guide → Acceptance Criteria" section
- Framework dependencies from "Development Context → Framework/Libraries" section
- Existing code references from "Development Context → Relevant Existing Code" section
- File paths from "Developer Resources → File Paths Reference" section
- Key code locations from "Developer Resources → Key Code Locations" section
- Testing locations from "Developer Resources → Testing Locations" section
</action>
</step>
<step n="2" goal="Generate story slug and filename">
<action>Derive a short URL-friendly slug from the feature/change name</action>
<action>Max slug length: 3-5 words, kebab-case format</action>
<example>
- "Migrate JS Library Icons" → "icon-migration"
- "Fix Login Validation Bug" → "login-fix"
- "Add OAuth Integration" → "oauth-integration"
</example>
<action>Set story_filename = "story-{slug}.md"</action>
<action>Set story_path = "{dev_story_location}/story-{slug}.md"</action>
</step>
<step n="3" goal="Create user story in standard format">
<action>Create 1 story that describes the technical change as a deliverable</action>
<action>Story MUST use create-story template format for compatibility</action>
<guidelines>
**Story Point Estimation:**
- 1 point = < 1 day (2-4 hours)
- 2 points = 1-2 days
- 3 points = 2-3 days
- 5 points = 3-5 days (if this high, question if truly Level 0)
**Story Title Best Practices:**
- Use active, user-focused language
- Describe WHAT is delivered, not HOW
- Good: "Icon Migration to Internal CDN"
- Bad: "Run curl commands to download PNGs"
**Story Description Format:**
- As a [role] (developer, user, admin, etc.)
- I want [capability/change]
- So that [benefit/value]
**Acceptance Criteria:**
- Extract from tech-spec "Testing Approach" section
- Must be specific, measurable, and testable
- Include performance criteria if specified
**Tasks/Subtasks:**
- Map directly to tech-spec "Implementation Guide" tasks
- Use checkboxes for tracking
- Reference AC numbers: (AC: #1), (AC: #2)
- Include explicit testing subtasks
**Dev Notes:**
- Extract technical constraints from tech-spec
- Include file paths from "Developer Resources → File Paths Reference"
- Include existing code references from "Development Context → Relevant Existing Code"
- Reference architecture patterns if applicable
- Cite tech-spec sections for implementation details
- Note dependencies (internal and external)
**NEW: Comprehensive Context**
Since tech-spec is now context-rich, populate all new template fields:
- dependencies: Extract from "Development Context" and "Implementation Details → Integration Points"
- existing_code_references: Extract from "Development Context → Relevant Existing Code" and "Developer Resources → Key Code Locations"
</guidelines>
<action>Initialize story file using user_story_template</action>
<template-output file="{story_path}">story_title</template-output>
<template-output file="{story_path}">role</template-output>
<template-output file="{story_path}">capability</template-output>
<template-output file="{story_path}">benefit</template-output>
<template-output file="{story_path}">acceptance_criteria</template-output>
<template-output file="{story_path}">tasks_subtasks</template-output>
<template-output file="{story_path}">technical_summary</template-output>
<template-output file="{story_path}">files_to_modify</template-output>
<template-output file="{story_path}">test_locations</template-output>
<template-output file="{story_path}">story_points</template-output>
<template-output file="{story_path}">time_estimate</template-output>
<template-output file="{story_path}">dependencies</template-output>
<template-output file="{story_path}">existing_code_references</template-output>
<template-output file="{story_path}">architecture_references</template-output>
</step>
<step n="4" goal="Update status - Level 0 single story">
<invoke-workflow path="{project-root}/bmad/bmm/workflows/workflow-status">
<param>mode: update</param>
<param>action: complete_workflow</param>
<param>workflow_name: tech-spec</param>
</invoke-workflow>
<check if="success == true">
<output>✅ Tech-spec complete! Next: {{next_workflow}}</output>
</check>
<action>Load {{status_file_path}}</action>
<action>Set STORIES_SEQUENCE: [{slug}]</action>
<action>Set TODO_STORY: {slug}</action>
<action>Set TODO_TITLE: {{story_title}}</action>
<action>Set IN_PROGRESS_STORY: (empty)</action>
<action>Set STORIES_DONE: []</action>
<action>Save {{status_file_path}}</action>
<output>Story queue initialized with single story: {slug}</output>
</step>
<step n="5" goal="Provide user guidance for next steps">
<action>Display completion summary</action>
**Level 0 Planning Complete!**
**Generated Artifacts:**
- `tech-spec.md` → Technical source of truth
- `story-{slug}.md` → User story ready for implementation
**Story Location:** `{story_path}`
**Next Steps:**
**🎯 RECOMMENDED - Direct to Development (Level 0):**
Since the tech-spec is now CONTEXT-RICH with:
- ✅ Brownfield codebase analysis (if applicable)
- ✅ Framework and library details with exact versions
- ✅ Existing patterns and code references
- ✅ Complete file paths and integration points
**You can skip story-context and go straight to dev!**
1. Load DEV agent: `{project-root}/bmad/bmm/agents/dev.md`
2. Run `dev-story` workflow
3. Begin implementation immediately
**Option B - Generate Additional Context (optional):**
Only needed for extremely complex scenarios:
1. Load SM agent: `{project-root}/bmad/bmm/agents/sm.md`
2. Run `story-context` workflow (generates additional XML context)
3. Then load DEV agent and run `dev-story` workflow
**Progress Tracking:**
- All decisions logged in: `bmm-workflow-status.yaml`
- Next action clearly identified
<ask>Ready to proceed? Choose your path:
1. Go directly to dev-story (RECOMMENDED - tech-spec has all context)
2. Generate additional story context (for complex edge cases)
3. Exit for now
Select option (1-3):</ask>
</step>
</workflow>

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,451 @@
# Level 1 - Epic and Stories Generation
<workflow>
<critical>This generates epic and user stories for Level 1 projects after tech-spec completion</critical>
<critical>This is a lightweight story breakdown - not a full PRD</critical>
<critical>Level 1 = coherent feature, 1-10 stories (prefer 2-3), 1 epic</critical>
<critical>This workflow runs AFTER tech-spec.md has been completed</critical>
<critical>Story format MUST match create-story template for compatibility with story-context and dev-story workflows</critical>
<step n="1" goal="Load tech spec and extract implementation tasks">
<action>Read the completed tech-spec.md file from {output_folder}/tech-spec.md</action>
<action>Load bmm-workflow-status.yaml from {output_folder}/bmm-workflow-status.yaml (if exists)</action>
<action>Extract dev_story_location from config (where stories are stored)</action>
<action>Extract from the ENHANCED tech-spec structure:
- Overall feature goal from "The Change → Problem Statement" and "Proposed Solution"
- Implementation tasks from "Implementation Guide → Implementation Steps"
- Time estimates from "Implementation Guide → Implementation Steps"
- Dependencies from "Implementation Details → Integration Points" and "Development Context → Dependencies"
- Source tree from "Implementation Details → Source Tree Changes"
- Framework dependencies from "Development Context → Framework/Libraries"
- Existing code references from "Development Context → Relevant Existing Code"
- File paths from "Developer Resources → File Paths Reference"
- Key code locations from "Developer Resources → Key Code Locations"
- Testing locations from "Developer Resources → Testing Locations"
- Acceptance criteria from "Implementation Guide → Acceptance Criteria"
</action>
</step>
<step n="2" goal="Create single epic">
<action>Create 1 epic that represents the entire feature</action>
<action>Epic title should be user-facing value statement</action>
<action>Epic goal should describe why this matters to users</action>
<guidelines>
**Epic Best Practices:**
- Title format: User-focused outcome (not implementation detail)
- Good: "JS Library Icon Reliability"
- Bad: "Update recommendedLibraries.ts file"
- Scope: Clearly define what's included/excluded
- Success criteria: Measurable outcomes that define "done"
</guidelines>
<example>
**Epic:** JS Library Icon Reliability
**Goal:** Eliminate external dependencies for JS library icons to ensure consistent, reliable display and improve application performance.
**Scope:** Migrate all 14 recommended JS library icons from third-party CDN URLs (GitHub, jsDelivr) to internal static asset hosting.
**Success Criteria:**
- All library icons load from internal paths
- Zero external requests for library icons
- Icons load 50-200ms faster than baseline
- No broken icons in production
</example>
<action>Derive epic slug from epic title (kebab-case, 2-3 words max)</action>
<example>
- "JS Library Icon Reliability" → "icon-reliability"
- "OAuth Integration" → "oauth-integration"
- "Admin Dashboard" → "admin-dashboard"
</example>
<action>Initialize epics.md summary document using epics_template</action>
<action>Also capture project_level for the epic template</action>
<template-output file="{output_folder}/epics.md">project_level</template-output>
<template-output file="{output_folder}/epics.md">epic_title</template-output>
<template-output file="{output_folder}/epics.md">epic_slug</template-output>
<template-output file="{output_folder}/epics.md">epic_goal</template-output>
<template-output file="{output_folder}/epics.md">epic_scope</template-output>
<template-output file="{output_folder}/epics.md">epic_success_criteria</template-output>
<template-output file="{output_folder}/epics.md">epic_dependencies</template-output>
</step>
<step n="3" goal="Determine optimal story count">
<critical>Level 1 should have 2-3 stories maximum - prefer longer stories over more stories</critical>
<action>Analyze tech spec implementation tasks and time estimates</action>
<action>Group related tasks into logical story boundaries</action>
<guidelines>
**Story Count Decision Matrix:**
**2 Stories (preferred for most Level 1):**
- Use when: Feature has clear build/verify split
- Example: Story 1 = Build feature, Story 2 = Test and deploy
- Typical points: 3-5 points per story
**3 Stories (only if necessary):**
- Use when: Feature has distinct setup, build, verify phases
- Example: Story 1 = Setup, Story 2 = Core implementation, Story 3 = Integration and testing
- Typical points: 2-3 points per story
**Never exceed 3 stories for Level 1:**
- If more needed, consider if project should be Level 2
- Better to have longer stories (5 points) than more stories (5x 1-point stories)
</guidelines>
<action>Determine story_count = 2 or 3 based on tech spec complexity</action>
</step>
<step n="4" goal="Generate user stories from tech spec tasks">
<action>For each story (2-3 total), generate separate story file</action>
<action>Story filename format: "story-{epic_slug}-{n}.md" where n = 1, 2, or 3</action>
<guidelines>
**Story Generation Guidelines:**
- Each story = multiple implementation tasks from tech spec
- Story title format: User-focused deliverable (not implementation steps)
- Include technical acceptance criteria from tech spec tasks
- Link back to tech spec sections for implementation details
**CRITICAL: Acceptance Criteria Must Be:**
1. **Numbered** - AC #1, AC #2, AC #3, etc.
2. **Specific** - No vague statements like "works well" or "is fast"
3. **Testable** - Can be verified objectively
4. **Complete** - Covers all success conditions
5. **Independent** - Each AC tests one thing
6. **Format**: Use Given/When/Then when applicable
**Good AC Examples:**
✅ AC #1: Given a valid email address, when user submits the form, then the account is created and user receives a confirmation email within 30 seconds
✅ AC #2: Given an invalid email format, when user submits, then form displays "Invalid email format" error message
✅ AC #3: All unit tests in UserService.test.ts pass with 100% coverage
**Bad AC Examples:**
❌ "User can create account" (too vague)
❌ "System performs well" (not measurable)
❌ "Works correctly" (not specific)
**Story Point Estimation:**
- 1 point = < 1 day (2-4 hours)
- 2 points = 1-2 days
- 3 points = 2-3 days
- 5 points = 3-5 days
**Level 1 Typical Totals:**
- Total story points: 5-10 points
- 2 stories: 3-5 points each
- 3 stories: 2-3 points each
- If total > 15 points, consider if this should be Level 2
**Story Structure (MUST match create-story format):**
- Status: Draft
- Story: As a [role], I want [capability], so that [benefit]
- Acceptance Criteria: Numbered list from tech spec
- Tasks / Subtasks: Checkboxes mapped to tech spec tasks (AC: #n references)
- Dev Notes: Technical summary, project structure notes, references
- Dev Agent Record: Empty sections (tech-spec provides context)
**NEW: Comprehensive Context Fields**
Since tech-spec is context-rich, populate ALL template fields:
- dependencies: Extract from tech-spec "Development Context → Dependencies" and "Integration Points"
- existing_code_references: Extract from "Development Context → Relevant Existing Code" and "Developer Resources → Key Code Locations"
</guidelines>
<for-each story="1 to story_count">
<action>Set story_path_{n} = "{dev_story_location}/story-{epic_slug}-{n}.md"</action>
<action>Create story file from user_story_template with the following content:</action>
<template-output file="{story_path_{n}}">
- story_title: User-focused deliverable title
- role: User role (e.g., developer, user, admin)
- capability: What they want to do
- benefit: Why it matters
- acceptance_criteria: Specific, measurable criteria from tech spec
- tasks_subtasks: Implementation tasks with AC references
- technical_summary: High-level approach, key decisions
- files_to_modify: List of files that will change (from tech-spec "Developer Resources → File Paths Reference")
- test_locations: Where tests will be added (from tech-spec "Developer Resources → Testing Locations")
- story_points: Estimated effort (1/2/3/5)
- time_estimate: Days/hours estimate
- dependencies: Internal/external dependencies (from tech-spec "Development Context" and "Integration Points")
- existing_code_references: Code to reference (from tech-spec "Development Context → Relevant Existing Code" and "Key Code Locations")
- architecture_references: Links to tech-spec.md sections
</template-output>
</for-each>
<critical>Generate exactly {story_count} story files (2 or 3 based on Step 3 decision)</critical>
</step>
<step n="5" goal="Create story map and implementation sequence with dependency validation">
<critical>Stories MUST be ordered so earlier stories don't depend on later ones</critical>
<critical>Each story must have CLEAR, TESTABLE acceptance criteria</critical>
<action>Analyze dependencies between stories:
**Dependency Rules:**
1. Infrastructure/setup → Feature implementation → Testing/polish
2. Database changes → API changes → UI changes
3. Backend services → Frontend components
4. Core functionality → Enhancement features
5. No story can depend on a later story!
**Validate Story Sequence:**
For each story N, check:
- Does it require anything from Story N+1, N+2, etc.? ❌ INVALID
- Does it only use things from Story 1...N-1? ✅ VALID
- Can it be implemented independently or using only prior stories? ✅ VALID
If invalid dependencies found, REORDER stories!
</action>
<action>Generate visual story map showing epic → stories hierarchy with dependencies</action>
<action>Calculate total story points across all stories</action>
<action>Estimate timeline based on total points (1-2 points per day typical)</action>
<action>Define implementation sequence with explicit dependency notes</action>
<example>
## Story Map
```
Epic: Icon Reliability
├── Story 1: Build Icon Infrastructure (3 points)
│ Dependencies: None (foundational work)
└── Story 2: Test and Deploy Icons (2 points)
Dependencies: Story 1 (requires infrastructure)
```
**Total Story Points:** 5
**Estimated Timeline:** 1 sprint (1 week)
## Implementation Sequence
1. **Story 1** → Build icon infrastructure (setup, download, configure)
- Dependencies: None
- Deliverable: Icon files downloaded, organized, accessible
2. **Story 2** → Test and deploy (depends on Story 1)
- Dependencies: Story 1 must be complete
- Deliverable: Icons verified, tested, deployed to production
**Dependency Validation:** ✅ Valid sequence - no forward dependencies
</example>
<template-output file="{output_folder}/epics.md">story_summaries</template-output>
<template-output file="{output_folder}/epics.md">story_map</template-output>
<template-output file="{output_folder}/epics.md">total_points</template-output>
<template-output file="{output_folder}/epics.md">estimated_timeline</template-output>
<template-output file="{output_folder}/epics.md">implementation_sequence</template-output>
</step>
<step n="6" goal="Update status and populate story backlog">
<invoke-workflow path="{project-root}/bmad/bmm/workflows/workflow-status">
<param>mode: update</param>
<param>action: complete_workflow</param>
<param>workflow_name: tech-spec</param>
<param>populate_stories_from: {epics_output_file}</param>
</invoke-workflow>
<check if="success == true">
<output>✅ Status updated! Loaded {{total_stories}} stories from epics.</output>
<output>Next: {{next_workflow}} ({{next_agent}} agent)</output>
</check>
<check if="success == false">
<output>⚠️ Status update failed: {{error}}</output>
</check>
</step>
<step n="7" goal="Auto-validate story quality and sequence">
<critical>Auto-run validation - NOT optional!</critical>
<action>Running automatic story validation...</action>
<action>**Validate Story Sequence (CRITICAL):**
For each story, check:
1. Does Story N depend on Story N+1 or later? ❌ FAIL - Reorder required!
2. Are dependencies clearly documented? ✅ PASS
3. Can stories be implemented in order 1→2→3? ✅ PASS
If sequence validation FAILS:
- Identify the problem dependencies
- Propose new ordering
- Ask user to confirm reordering
</action>
<action>**Validate Acceptance Criteria Quality:**
For each story's AC, check:
1. Is it numbered (AC #1, AC #2, etc.)? ✅ Required
2. Is it specific and testable? ✅ Required
3. Does it use Given/When/Then or equivalent? ✅ Recommended
4. Are all success conditions covered? ✅ Required
Count vague AC (contains "works", "good", "fast", "well"):
- 0 vague AC: ✅ EXCELLENT
- 1-2 vague AC: ⚠️ WARNING - Should improve
- 3+ vague AC: ❌ FAIL - Must improve
</action>
<action>**Validate Story Completeness:**
1. Do all stories map to tech spec tasks? ✅ Required
2. Do story points align with tech spec estimates? ✅ Recommended
3. Are dependencies clearly noted? ✅ Required
4. Does each story have testable AC? ✅ Required
</action>
<action>Generate validation report</action>
<check if="sequence validation fails OR AC quality fails">
<output>❌ **Story Validation Failed:**
{{issues_found}}
**Recommended Fixes:**
{{recommended_fixes}}
Shall I fix these issues? (yes/no)</output>
<ask>Apply fixes? (yes/no)</ask>
<check if="yes">
<action>Apply fixes (reorder stories, rewrite vague AC, add missing details)</action>
<action>Re-validate</action>
<output>✅ Validation passed after fixes!</output>
</check>
</check>
<check if="validation passes">
<output>✅ **Story Validation Passed!**
**Sequence:** ✅ Valid (no forward dependencies)
**AC Quality:** ✅ All specific and testable
**Completeness:** ✅ All tech spec tasks covered
**Dependencies:** ✅ Clearly documented
Stories are implementation-ready!</output>
</check>
</step>
<step n="8" goal="Finalize and provide user guidance">
<action>Confirm all validation passed</action>
<action>Verify total story points align with tech spec time estimates</action>
<action>Confirm epic and stories are complete</action>
**Level 1 Planning Complete!**
**Epic:** {{epic_title}}
**Total Stories:** {{story_count}}
**Total Story Points:** {{total_points}}
**Estimated Timeline:** {{estimated_timeline}}
**Generated Artifacts:**
- `tech-spec.md` → Technical source of truth
- `epics.md` → Epic and story summary
- `story-{epic_slug}-1.md` → First story (ready for implementation)
- `story-{epic_slug}-2.md` → Second story
{{#if story_3}}
- `story-{epic_slug}-3.md` → Third story
{{/if}}
**Story Location:** `{dev_story_location}/`
**Next Steps - Iterative Implementation:**
**🎯 RECOMMENDED - Direct to Development (Level 1):**
Since the tech-spec is now CONTEXT-RICH with:
- ✅ Brownfield codebase analysis (if applicable)
- ✅ Framework and library details with exact versions
- ✅ Existing patterns and code references
- ✅ Complete file paths and integration points
- ✅ Dependencies clearly mapped
**You can skip story-context for most Level 1 stories!**
**1. Start with Story 1:**
a. Load DEV agent: `{project-root}/bmad/bmm/agents/dev.md`
b. Run `dev-story` workflow (select story-{epic_slug}-1.md)
c. Tech-spec provides all context needed
d. Implement story 1
**2. After Story 1 Complete:**
- Repeat for story-{epic_slug}-2.md
- Reference completed story 1 in your work
**3. After Story 2 Complete:**
{{#if story_3}}
- Repeat for story-{epic_slug}-3.md
{{/if}}
- Level 1 feature complete!
**Option B - Generate Additional Context (optional):**
Only needed for extremely complex multi-story dependencies:
1. Load SM agent: `{project-root}/bmad/bmm/agents/sm.md`
2. Run `story-context` workflow for complex stories
3. Then load DEV agent and run `dev-story`
**Progress Tracking:**
- All decisions logged in: `bmm-workflow-status.yaml`
- Next action clearly identified
<ask>Ready to proceed? Choose your path:
1. Go directly to dev-story for story 1 (RECOMMENDED - tech-spec has all context)
2. Generate additional story context first (for complex dependencies)
3. Exit for now
Select option (1-3):</ask>
</step>
</workflow>

File diff suppressed because it is too large Load Diff

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,181 @@
# {{project_name}} - Technical Specification
**Author:** {{user_name}}
**Date:** {{date}}
**Project Level:** {{project_level}}
**Change Type:** {{change_type}}
**Development Context:** {{development_context}}
---
## Context
### Available Documents
{{loaded_documents_summary}}
### Project Stack
{{project_stack_summary}}
### Existing Codebase Structure
{{existing_structure_summary}}
---
## The Change
### Problem Statement
{{problem_statement}}
### Proposed Solution
{{solution_overview}}
### Scope
**In Scope:**
{{scope_in}}
**Out of Scope:**
{{scope_out}}
---
## Implementation Details
### Source Tree Changes
{{source_tree_changes}}
### Technical Approach
{{technical_approach}}
### Existing Patterns to Follow
{{existing_patterns}}
### Integration Points
{{integration_points}}
---
## Development Context
### Relevant Existing Code
{{existing_code_references}}
### Dependencies
**Framework/Libraries:**
{{framework_dependencies}}
**Internal Modules:**
{{internal_dependencies}}
### Configuration Changes
{{configuration_changes}}
### Existing Conventions (Brownfield)
{{existing_conventions}}
### Test Framework & Standards
{{test_framework_info}}
---
## Implementation Stack
{{implementation_stack}}
---
## Technical Details
{{technical_details}}
---
## Development Setup
{{development_setup}}
---
## Implementation Guide
### Setup Steps
{{setup_steps}}
### Implementation Steps
{{implementation_steps}}
### Testing Strategy
{{testing_strategy}}
### Acceptance Criteria
{{acceptance_criteria}}
---
## Developer Resources
### File Paths Reference
{{file_paths_complete}}
### Key Code Locations
{{key_code_locations}}
### Testing Locations
{{testing_locations}}
### Documentation to Update
{{documentation_updates}}
---
## UX/UI Considerations
{{ux_ui_considerations}}
---
## Testing Approach
{{testing_approach}}
---
## Deployment Strategy
### Deployment Steps
{{deployment_steps}}
### Rollback Plan
{{rollback_plan}}
### Monitoring
{{monitoring_approach}}

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
# Story: {{story_title}}
Status: Draft
## Story
As a {{role}},
I want {{capability}},
so that {{benefit}}.
## Acceptance Criteria
{{acceptance_criteria}}
## Tasks / Subtasks
{{tasks_subtasks}}
## Dev Notes
### Technical Summary
{{technical_summary}}
### Tech-Spec Reference
**Full details:** See [tech-spec.md](../tech-spec.md)
The tech-spec contains comprehensive context including:
- Brownfield codebase analysis (if applicable)
- Framework and library details with versions
- Existing patterns to follow
- Integration points and dependencies
- Complete implementation guidance
### Project Structure Notes
- **Files to modify:** {{files_to_modify}}
- **Expected test locations:** {{test_locations}}
- **Estimated effort:** {{story_points}} story points ({{time_estimate}})
- **Dependencies:** {{dependencies}}
### Key Code References
{{existing_code_references}}
### References
- **Tech Spec:** [tech-spec.md](../tech-spec.md) - Primary context document
- **Architecture:** {{architecture_references}}
---
## Dev Agent Record
### Context Reference
**Primary Context:** [tech-spec.md](../tech-spec.md) - Contains all brownfield analysis, framework details, and implementation guidance
<!-- Additional context XML paths will be added here if story-context workflow is run -->
### Agent Model Used
<!-- Will be populated during dev-story execution -->
### Debug Log References
<!-- Will be populated during dev-story execution -->
### Completion Notes List
<!-- Will be populated during dev-story execution -->
### File List
<!-- Will be populated during dev-story execution -->
### Test Results
<!-- Will be populated during dev-story execution -->
---
## Review Notes
<!-- Will be populated during code review -->

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
# Technical Specification Workflow (Level 0)
name: tech-spec-sm
description: "Technical specification workflow for Level 0 projects (single atomic changes). Creates focused tech spec for bug fixes, single endpoint additions, or small isolated changes. Tech-spec only - no PRD needed."
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
# Runtime variables (captured during workflow execution)
project_level: runtime-captured
project_type: runtime-captured
development_context: runtime-captured
change_type: runtime-captured
field_type: runtime-captured
# Workflow components
installed_path: "{project-root}/bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/tech-spec"
instructions: "{installed_path}/instructions.md"
template: "{installed_path}/tech-spec-template.md"
# Story generation instructions (invoked based on level)
instructions_level0_story: "{installed_path}/instructions-level0-story.md"
instructions_level1_stories: "{installed_path}/instructions-level1-stories.md"
# Templates
user_story_template: "{installed_path}/user-story-template.md"
epics_template: "{installed_path}/epics-template.md"
# Output configuration
default_output_file: "{output_folder}/tech-spec.md"
user_story_file: "{output_folder}/user-story.md"
epics_file: "{output_folder}/epics.md"
# Recommended input documents (optional for Level 0)
recommended_inputs:
- bug_report: "Bug description or issue ticket"
- feature_request: "Brief feature description"
# 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