mirror of
https://github.com/bmadcode/BMAD-METHOD.git
synced 2025-12-29 16:14:59 +00:00
feat: major overhaul of BMM planning workflows with intent-driven discovery
This comprehensive update transforms the Product Brief and PRD workflows from rigid template-filling exercises into adaptive, context-aware discovery processes. Changes span workflow instructions, templates, agent configurations, and supporting infrastructure. ## Product Brief Workflow (96% audit compliance) ### Intent-Driven Facilitation - Transform from linear Q&A to natural conversational discovery - Adaptive questioning based on project context (hobby/startup/enterprise) - Real-time document building instead of end-of-session generation - Skill-level aware facilitation (expert/intermediate/beginner) - Context detection from user responses to guide exploration depth ### Living Document Approach - Continuous template updates throughout conversation - Progressive refinement vs batch generation - Template-output tags aligned with discovery flow - Better variable mapping between instructions and template ### Enhanced Discovery Areas - Problem exploration with context-appropriate probing - Solution vision shaping based on user's mental model - User understanding through storytelling vs demographics - Success metrics tailored to project type - Ruthless MVP scope management with feature prioritization ### Template Improvements - Added context-aware conditional sections - Better organization of optional vs required content - Clearer structure for different project types - Improved reference material handling ## PRD Workflow (improved from 65% to 85%+ compliance) ### Critical Fixes - Add missing `date: system-generated` config variable - Fix status file extension mismatch (.yaml not .md) - Remove 38% bloat (unused technical_decisions variables) - Add explicit template-output tags for runtime variables ### Scale-Adaptive Intelligence - Project type detection (API/Web App/Mobile/SaaS/etc) - Domain complexity mapping (14 domain types) - Automatic requirement tailoring based on detected context - CSV-driven project type and domain knowledge base ### Separated Epic Planning - Move epic/story breakdown to dedicated child workflow - Create create-epics-and-stories workflow for Phase 2 - Cleaner separation: PRD defines WHAT, epics define HOW - Updated PM agent menu with new workflow triggers ### Enhanced Requirements Coverage - Project-type specific requirement sections (endpoints, auth, platform) - Domain-specific considerations (healthcare compliance, fintech security) - UX principles with interaction patterns - Non-functional requirements with integration needs - Technical preferences capture ### Template Restructuring - Separate PRD template from epic planning - Context-aware conditional sections - Better scale level indicators (L0-L4) - Improved reference document handling - Clearer success criteria sections ## Architecture Workflow Updates ### Template Enhancements - Add domain complexity context support - Better integration with PRD outputs - Improved technical decision capture - Enhanced system architecture sections ### Instruction Improvements - Reference new domain-research workflow - Better handling of PRD inputs - Clearer architectural decision framework ## Agent Configuration Updates ### BMad Master Agent - Fix workflow invocation instructions - Better fuzzy matching guidance - Clearer menu handler documentation - Remove workflow invention warnings ### PM Agent - Add create-prd trigger (renamed from 'prd') - Add create-epics-and-stories workflow trigger - Add validate-prd workflow trigger with checklist - Better workflow status integration ### Game Designer Agent - Rename triggers for consistency (create-game-brief, create-gdd) - Align with PM agent naming conventions ## New Supporting Infrastructure ### Domain Research Workflow - New discovery workflow for domain-specific research - Complements product brief for complex domains - Web research integration for domain insights ### Create Epics and Stories Workflow - Dedicated epic/story breakdown process - Separates planning (PRD) from decomposition - Better Epic → Story → Task hierarchy - Acceptance criteria generation ### Data Files - project-types.csv: 12 project type definitions with requirements - domain-complexity.csv: 14 domain types with complexity indicators ## Quality Improvements ### Validation & Compliance - Product Brief: 96% BMAD v6 compliance (EXCELLENT rating) - PRD: Improved from 65% to ~85% after critical fixes - Zero bloat in Product Brief (0%) - Reduced PRD bloat from 38% to ~15% ### Template Variable Mapping - All template variables explicitly populated via template-output tags - Runtime variables properly tracked - Config variables consistently used - Better separation of concerns ### Web Bundle Configuration - Complete web_bundle sections for all workflows - Proper child workflow references - Data file inclusions (CSV files) - Correct bmad/-relative paths ## Breaking Changes ### File Removals - Delete src/modules/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/epics-template.md (replaced by create-epics-and-stories child workflow) ### Workflow Trigger Changes - PM agent: 'prd' → 'create-prd' - PM agent: 'gdd' → 'create-gdd' - New: 'create-epics-and-stories' - New: 'validate-prd' ## Impact This update significantly improves the BMM module's ability to: - Adapt to different project types and scales - Guide users through discovery naturally vs mechanically - Generate higher quality planning documents - Support complex domains with specialized knowledge - Scale from Level 0 quick changes to Level 4 enterprise projects The workflows now feel like collaborative discovery sessions with an expert consultant rather than form-filling exercises.
This commit is contained in:
Brian Madison
@@ -1,117 +1,349 @@
|
||||
# PRD Workflow Validation Checklist
|
||||
# PRD + Epics + Stories Validation Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose**: Validate PRD workflow outputs are complete, consistent, and ready for next phase.
|
||||
**Purpose**: Comprehensive validation that PRD, epics, and stories form a complete, implementable product plan.
|
||||
|
||||
**Scope**: Levels 2-4 software projects
|
||||
**Scope**: Validates the complete planning output (PRD.md + epics.md) for Levels 2-4 software projects
|
||||
|
||||
**Expected Outputs**: PRD.md, epics.md, updated bmm-workflow-status.md
|
||||
**Expected Outputs**:
|
||||
|
||||
- PRD.md with complete requirements
|
||||
- epics.md with detailed epic and story breakdown
|
||||
- Updated bmm-workflow-status.yaml
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Output Files Exist
|
||||
## 1. PRD Document Completeness
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] PRD.md created in output folder
|
||||
- [ ] epics.md created in output folder (separate file)
|
||||
- [ ] bmm-workflow-status.md updated
|
||||
- [ ] No unfilled {{template_variables}}
|
||||
### 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. PRD.md Core Quality
|
||||
## 2. Functional Requirements Quality
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirements Coverage
|
||||
### FR Format and Structure
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Functional requirements describe WHAT capabilities (not HOW to implement)
|
||||
- [ ] Each FR has unique identifier (FR001, FR002, etc.)
|
||||
- [ ] Non-functional requirements (if any) have business justification
|
||||
- [ ] Requirements are testable and verifiable
|
||||
- [ ] 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)
|
||||
|
||||
### User Journeys
|
||||
### FR Completeness
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] User journeys reference specific FR numbers
|
||||
- [ ] Journeys show complete user paths through system
|
||||
- [ ] Success outcomes are clear
|
||||
- [ ] 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
|
||||
|
||||
### Strategic Focus
|
||||
### FR Organization
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] PRD focuses on WHAT and WHY (not technical HOW)
|
||||
- [ ] No specific technology choices in PRD (those belong in technical-decisions.md)
|
||||
- [ ] Goals are outcome-focused, not implementation-focused
|
||||
- [ ] 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.md Story Quality
|
||||
## 3. Epics Document Completeness
|
||||
|
||||
### Story Format
|
||||
### Required Files
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] All stories follow user story format: "As a [role], I want [capability], so that [benefit]"
|
||||
- [ ] Each story has numbered acceptance criteria
|
||||
- [ ] Prerequisites/dependencies explicitly stated
|
||||
|
||||
### Story Sequencing (CRITICAL)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] **Epic 1 establishes foundation** (infrastructure, initial deployable functionality)
|
||||
- Exception noted if adding to existing app
|
||||
- [ ] **Vertical slices**: Each story delivers complete, testable functionality (not horizontal layers)
|
||||
- [ ] **No forward dependencies**: No story depends on work from a LATER story or epic
|
||||
- [ ] Stories are sequentially ordered within each epic
|
||||
- [ ] Each story leaves system in working state
|
||||
|
||||
### Coverage
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] All FRs from PRD.md are covered by stories in epics.md
|
||||
- [ ] 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. Cross-Document Consistency
|
||||
## 4. FR Coverage Validation (CRITICAL)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Epic titles consistent between PRD.md and epics.md
|
||||
- [ ] FR references in user journeys exist in requirements section
|
||||
- [ ] Terminology consistent across documents
|
||||
### 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
|
||||
|
||||
## 5. Readiness for Next Phase
|
||||
|
||||
**Adapt based on project level from bmm-workflow-status.md:**
|
||||
|
||||
### If Level 2:
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] PRD provides sufficient context for tech-spec workflow (lightweight solutioning)
|
||||
- [ ] Epic structure supports 5-15 story implementation scope
|
||||
|
||||
### If Level 3-4:
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] PRD provides sufficient context for create-architecture workflow
|
||||
- [ ] Epic structure supports phased delivery approach
|
||||
- [ ] Clear value delivery path through epic sequence
|
||||
- [ ] 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
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 6. Critical Failures (Auto-Fail)
|
||||
## 9. Readiness for Implementation
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] ❌ **No epics.md file** (two-file output is required)
|
||||
- [ ] ❌ **Epic 1 doesn't establish foundation** (violates core principle)
|
||||
- [ ] ❌ **Stories have forward dependencies** (would break sequential 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)
|
||||
- [ ] ❌ **Technical decisions in PRD** (should be in technical-decisions.md)
|
||||
- [ ] ❌ **Epics don't cover all FRs** (orphaned requirements)
|
||||
- [ ] ❌ **User journeys don't reference FR numbers** (missing traceability)
|
||||
- [ ] ❌ **FRs contain technical implementation details** (should be in architecture)
|
||||
- [ ] ❌ **No FR traceability to stories** (can't validate coverage)
|
||||
- [ ] ❌ **Template variables unfilled** (incomplete document)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Validation Notes
|
||||
## Validation Summary
|
||||
|
||||
**Document any findings:**
|
||||
**Total Validation Points:** ~85
|
||||
|
||||
- Strengths:
|
||||
- Issues to address:
|
||||
- Recommended actions:
|
||||
### Scoring Guide
|
||||
|
||||
**Ready for next phase?** [Yes / No - explain]
|
||||
- **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
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
_Adapt this checklist based on actual outputs. Not all sections may apply to every project._
|
||||
## 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.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -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>
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
|
||||
# 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
|
||||
|
||||
web_bundle:
|
||||
name: "create-epics-and-stories"
|
||||
description: "Transform PRD requirements into bite-sized stories organized in epics for 200k context dev agents"
|
||||
author: "BMad"
|
||||
instructions: "bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/create-epics-and-stories/instructions.md"
|
||||
template: "bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/create-epics-and-stories/epics-template.md"
|
||||
web_bundle_files:
|
||||
- "bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/create-epics-and-stories/instructions.md"
|
||||
- "bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/create-epics-and-stories/epics-template.md"
|
||||
@@ -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"
|
||||
|
@@ -1,47 +1,33 @@
|
||||
# PRD Workflow Instructions
|
||||
# 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>Communicate all responses in {communication_language} and language MUST be tailored to {user_skill_level}</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>This workflow is for Level 2-4 projects. Level 0-1 use tech-spec workflow.</critical>
|
||||
<critical>Produces TWO outputs: PRD.md (strategic) and epics.md (tactical implementation)</critical>
|
||||
<critical>TECHNICAL NOTES: If ANY technical details, preferences, or constraints are mentioned during PRD discussions, append them to {technical_decisions_file}. If file doesn't exist, create it from {technical_decisions_template}</critical>
|
||||
|
||||
<critical>DOCUMENT OUTPUT: Concise, clear, actionable requirements. Use tables/lists over prose. User skill level ({user_skill_level}) affects conversation style ONLY, not document content.</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>
|
||||
|
||||
<workflow>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="0" goal="Validate workflow readiness" tag="workflow-status">
|
||||
<action>Check if {output_folder}/bmm-workflow-status.yaml exists</action>
|
||||
<action>Check if {status_file} exists</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<check if="status file not found">
|
||||
<output>No workflow status file found. PRD workflow can run standalone or as part of BMM workflow path.</output>
|
||||
<output>**Recommended:** Run `workflow-init` first for project context tracking and workflow sequencing.</output>
|
||||
<ask>Continue in standalone mode or exit to run workflow-init? (continue/exit)</ask>
|
||||
<check if="continue">
|
||||
<action>Set standalone_mode = true</action>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
<check if="exit">
|
||||
<action>Exit workflow</action>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
<action if="status file not found">Set standalone_mode = true</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<check if="status file found">
|
||||
<action>Load the FULL file: {output_folder}/bmm-workflow-status.yaml</action>
|
||||
<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>**Incorrect Workflow for Level {{project_level}}**
|
||||
<output>**Level {{project_level}} Project - Redirecting**
|
||||
|
||||
PRD is for Level 2-4 projects. Level 0-1 should use tech-spec directly.
|
||||
|
||||
**Correct workflow:** `tech-spec` (Architect agent)
|
||||
</output>
|
||||
<action>Exit and redirect to tech-spec</action>
|
||||
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)">
|
||||
@@ -53,379 +39,367 @@ PRD is for Level 2-4 projects. Level 0-1 should use tech-spec directly.
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
|
||||
<check if="prd is not the next expected workflow">
|
||||
<output>⚠️ Next expected workflow: {{next_workflow}}. PRD is out of sequence.</output>
|
||||
<ask>Continue with PRD anyway? (y/n)</ask>
|
||||
<check if="n">
|
||||
<output>Exiting. Run {{next_workflow}} instead.</output>
|
||||
<action>Exit workflow</action>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Set standalone_mode = false</action>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="1" goal="Initialize PRD context">
|
||||
<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
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Use {{project_level}} from status data</action>
|
||||
<action>Check for existing PRD.md in {output_folder}</action>
|
||||
Load references:
|
||||
{installed_path}/project-types.csv
|
||||
{installed_path}/domain-complexity.csv
|
||||
|
||||
<check if="PRD.md exists">
|
||||
<ask>Found existing PRD.md. Would you like to:
|
||||
1. Continue where you left off
|
||||
2. Modify existing sections
|
||||
3. Start fresh (will archive existing file)
|
||||
</ask>
|
||||
<action if="option 1">Load existing PRD and skip to first incomplete section</action>
|
||||
<action if="option 2">Load PRD and ask which section to modify</action>
|
||||
<action if="option 3">Archive existing PRD and start fresh</action>
|
||||
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>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Load PRD template: {prd_template}</action>
|
||||
<action>Load epics template: {epics_template}</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<ask>Do you have a Product Brief? (Strongly recommended for Level 3-4, helpful for Level 2)</ask>
|
||||
|
||||
<check if="yes">
|
||||
<action>Load and review product brief: {output_folder}/product-brief.md</action>
|
||||
<action>Extract key elements: problem statement, target users, success metrics, MVP scope, constraints</action>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
|
||||
<check if="no and level >= 3">
|
||||
<warning>Product Brief is strongly recommended for Level 3-4 projects. Consider running the product-brief workflow first.</warning>
|
||||
<ask>Continue without Product Brief? (y/n)</ask>
|
||||
<action if="no">Exit to allow Product Brief creation</action>
|
||||
</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="Goals and Background Context">
|
||||
<step n="2" goal="Success Definition">
|
||||
<action>Define what winning looks like for THIS specific product
|
||||
|
||||
**Goals** - What success looks like for this project
|
||||
INTENT: Meaningful success criteria, not generic metrics
|
||||
|
||||
<check if="product brief exists">
|
||||
<action>Review goals from product brief and refine for PRD context</action>
|
||||
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>
|
||||
|
||||
<check if="no product brief">
|
||||
<action>Gather goals through discussion with user, use probing questions and converse until you are ready to propose that you have enough information to proceed</action>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
|
||||
Create a bullet list of single-line desired outcomes that capture user and project goals.
|
||||
|
||||
**Scale guidance:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Level 2: 2-3 core goals
|
||||
- Level 3: 3-5 strategic goals
|
||||
- Level 4: 5-7 comprehensive goals
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>goals</template-output>
|
||||
|
||||
**Background Context** - Why this matters now
|
||||
|
||||
<check if="product brief exists">
|
||||
<action>Summarize key context from brief without redundancy</action>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
|
||||
<check if="no product brief">
|
||||
<action>Gather context through discussion</action>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
|
||||
Write 1-2 paragraphs covering:
|
||||
|
||||
- What problem this solves and why
|
||||
- Current landscape or need
|
||||
- Key insights from discovery/brief (if available)
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>background_context</template-output>
|
||||
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="3" goal="Requirements - Functional and Non-Functional">
|
||||
<step n="3" goal="Scope Definition">
|
||||
<action>Smart scope negotiation - find the sweet spot
|
||||
|
||||
**Functional Requirements** - What the system must do
|
||||
The Scoping Game:
|
||||
|
||||
Draft functional requirements as numbered items with FR prefix.
|
||||
1. "What must work for this to be useful?" → MVP
|
||||
2. "What makes it competitive?" → Growth
|
||||
3. "What's the dream version?" → Vision
|
||||
|
||||
**Scale guidance:**
|
||||
Challenge scope creep conversationally:
|
||||
|
||||
- Level 2: 8-15 FRs (focused MVP set)
|
||||
- Level 3: 12-25 FRs (comprehensive product)
|
||||
- Level 4: 20-35 FRs (enterprise platform)
|
||||
- "Could that wait until after launch?"
|
||||
- "Is that essential for proving the concept?"
|
||||
|
||||
**Format:**
|
||||
For complex domains:
|
||||
|
||||
- FR001: [Clear capability statement]
|
||||
- FR002: [Another capability]
|
||||
|
||||
**Focus on:**
|
||||
|
||||
- User-facing capabilities
|
||||
- Core system behaviors
|
||||
- Integration requirements
|
||||
- Data management needs
|
||||
|
||||
Group related requirements logically.
|
||||
|
||||
<invoke-task halt="true">{project-root}/bmad/core/tasks/adv-elicit.xml</invoke-task>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>functional_requirements</template-output>
|
||||
|
||||
**Non-Functional Requirements** - How the system must perform
|
||||
|
||||
Draft non-functional requirements with NFR prefix.
|
||||
|
||||
**Scale guidance:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Level 2: 1-3 NFRs (critical MVP only)
|
||||
- Level 3: 2-5 NFRs (production quality)
|
||||
- Level 4: 3-7+ NFRs (enterprise grade)
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>non_functional_requirements</template-output>
|
||||
- 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="User Journeys - scale-adaptive" optional="level == 2">
|
||||
<step n="4" goal="Domain-Specific Exploration" optional="true">
|
||||
<action>Only if complex domain detected or domain-brief exists
|
||||
|
||||
**Journey Guidelines (scale-adaptive):**
|
||||
Synthesize domain requirements that will shape everything:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Level 2:** 1 simple journey (primary use case happy path)
|
||||
- **Level 3:** 2-3 detailed journeys (complete flows with decision points)
|
||||
- **Level 4:** 3-5 comprehensive journeys (all personas and edge cases)
|
||||
- Regulatory requirements
|
||||
- Compliance needs
|
||||
- Industry standards
|
||||
- Safety/risk factors
|
||||
- Required validations
|
||||
- Special expertise needed
|
||||
|
||||
<check if="level == 2">
|
||||
<ask>Would you like to document a user journey for the primary use case? (recommended but optional)</ask>
|
||||
<check if="yes">
|
||||
Create 1 simple journey showing the happy path.
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
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="level >= 3">
|
||||
Map complete user flows with decision points, alternatives, and edge cases.
|
||||
<check if="Mobile project">
|
||||
<template-output>platform_requirements</template-output>
|
||||
<template-output>device_features</template-output>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>user_journeys</template-output>
|
||||
|
||||
<check if="level >= 3">
|
||||
<invoke-task halt="true">{project-root}/bmad/core/tasks/adv-elicit.xml</invoke-task>
|
||||
<check if="SaaS B2B project">
|
||||
<template-output>tenant_model</template-output>
|
||||
<template-output>permission_matrix</template-output>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="5" goal="UX and UI Vision - high-level overview" optional="level == 2 and minimal UI">
|
||||
<step n="7" goal="UX Principles" optional="true">
|
||||
<action>Only if product has a UI
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose:** Capture essential UX/UI information needed for epic and story planning. A dedicated UX workflow will provide deeper design detail later.
|
||||
Light touch on UX - not full design:
|
||||
|
||||
<check if="level == 2 and minimal UI">
|
||||
<action>For backend-heavy or minimal UI projects, keep this section very brief or skip</action>
|
||||
- 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>
|
||||
|
||||
**Gather high-level UX/UI information:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **UX Principles** (2-4 key principles that guide design decisions)
|
||||
- What core experience qualities matter most?
|
||||
- Any critical accessibility or usability requirements?
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Platform & Screens**
|
||||
- Target platforms (web, mobile, desktop)
|
||||
- Core screens/views users will interact with
|
||||
- Key interaction patterns or navigation approach
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Design Constraints**
|
||||
- Existing design systems or brand guidelines
|
||||
- Technical UI constraints (browser support, etc.)
|
||||
|
||||
<note>Keep responses high-level. Detailed UX planning happens in the UX workflow after PRD completion.</note>
|
||||
|
||||
<invoke-task halt="true">{project-root}/bmad/core/tasks/adv-elicit.xml</invoke-task>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>ux_principles</template-output>
|
||||
<template-output>ui_design_goals</template-output>
|
||||
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="6" goal="Epic List - High-level delivery sequence">
|
||||
<step n="8" goal="Functional Requirements Synthesis">
|
||||
<action>Transform everything discovered into clear functional requirements
|
||||
|
||||
**Epic Structure** - Major delivery milestones
|
||||
Pull together:
|
||||
|
||||
Create high-level epic list showing logical delivery sequence.
|
||||
- Core features from scope
|
||||
- Domain-mandated features
|
||||
- Project-type specific needs
|
||||
- Innovation requirements
|
||||
|
||||
**Epic Sequencing Rules:**
|
||||
Organize by capability, not technology:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Epic 1 MUST establish foundation**
|
||||
- Project infrastructure (repo, CI/CD, core setup)
|
||||
- Initial deployable functionality
|
||||
- Development workflow established
|
||||
- Exception: If adding to existing app, Epic 1 can be first major feature
|
||||
- User Management (not "auth system")
|
||||
- Content Discovery (not "search algorithm")
|
||||
- Team Collaboration (not "websockets")
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Subsequent Epics:**
|
||||
- Each delivers significant, end-to-end, fully deployable increment
|
||||
- Build upon previous epics (no forward dependencies)
|
||||
- Represent major functional blocks
|
||||
- Prefer fewer, larger epics over fragmentation
|
||||
Each requirement should:
|
||||
|
||||
**Scale guidance:**
|
||||
- Be specific and measurable
|
||||
- Connect to user value
|
||||
- Include acceptance criteria
|
||||
- Note domain constraints
|
||||
|
||||
- Level 2: 1-2 epics, 5-15 stories total
|
||||
- Level 3: 2-5 epics, 15-40 stories total
|
||||
- Level 4: 5-10 epics, 40-100+ stories total
|
||||
|
||||
**For each epic provide:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Epic number and title
|
||||
- Single-sentence goal statement
|
||||
- Estimated story count
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Epic 1: Project Foundation & User Authentication**
|
||||
- **Epic 2: Core Task Management**
|
||||
|
||||
<ask>Review the epic list. Does the sequence make sense? Any epics to add, remove, or resequence?</ask>
|
||||
<action>Refine epic list based on feedback</action>
|
||||
<invoke-task halt="true">{project-root}/bmad/core/tasks/adv-elicit.xml</invoke-task>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>epic_list</template-output>
|
||||
The magic thread:
|
||||
Highlight which requirements deliver the special experience</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>functional_requirements_complete</template-output>
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="7" goal="Out of Scope - Clear boundaries and future additions">
|
||||
<step n="9" goal="Non-Functional Requirements Discovery">
|
||||
<action>Only document NFRs that matter for THIS product
|
||||
|
||||
**Out of Scope** - What we're NOT doing (now)
|
||||
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
|
||||
|
||||
Document what is explicitly excluded from this project:
|
||||
For each NFR:
|
||||
|
||||
- Features/capabilities deferred to future phases
|
||||
- Adjacent problems not being solved
|
||||
- Integrations or platforms not supported
|
||||
- Scope boundaries that need clarification
|
||||
- Why it matters for THIS product
|
||||
- Specific measurable criteria
|
||||
- Domain-driven requirements
|
||||
|
||||
This helps prevent scope creep and sets clear expectations.
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>out_of_scope</template-output>
|
||||
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="8" goal="Finalize PRD.md">
|
||||
<step n="10" goal="Review PRD and transition to epics">
|
||||
<action>Review the PRD we've built together
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Review all PRD sections for completeness and consistency</action>
|
||||
<action>Ensure all placeholders are filled</action>
|
||||
<action>Save final PRD.md to {default_output_file}</action>
|
||||
"Let's review what we've captured:
|
||||
|
||||
**PRD.md is complete!** Strategic document ready.
|
||||
- Vision: [summary]
|
||||
- Success: [key metrics]
|
||||
- Scope: [MVP highlights]
|
||||
- Requirements: [count] functional, [count] non-functional
|
||||
- Special considerations: [domain/innovation]
|
||||
|
||||
Now we'll create the tactical implementation guide in epics.md.
|
||||
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="9" goal="Epic Details - Full story breakdown in epics.md">
|
||||
|
||||
<critical>Now we create epics.md - the tactical implementation roadmap</critical>
|
||||
<critical>This is a SEPARATE FILE from PRD.md</critical>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Load epics template: {epics_template}</action>
|
||||
<action>Initialize epics.md with project metadata</action>
|
||||
|
||||
For each epic from the epic list, expand with full story details:
|
||||
|
||||
**Epic Expansion Process:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Expanded Goal** (2-3 sentences)
|
||||
- Describe the epic's objective and value delivery
|
||||
- Explain how it builds on previous work
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Story Breakdown**
|
||||
|
||||
**Critical Story Requirements:**
|
||||
- **Vertical slices** - Each story delivers complete, testable functionality
|
||||
- **Sequential** - Stories must be logically ordered within epic
|
||||
- **No forward dependencies** - No story depends on work from a later story/epic
|
||||
- **AI-agent sized** - Completable in single focused session (2-4 hours)
|
||||
- **Value-focused** - Minimize pure enabler stories; integrate technical work into value delivery
|
||||
|
||||
**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:** [Any dependencies on previous stories]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Story Sequencing Within Epic:**
|
||||
- Start with foundational/setup work if needed
|
||||
- Build progressively toward epic goal
|
||||
- Each story should leave system in working state
|
||||
- Final stories complete the epic's value delivery
|
||||
|
||||
**Process each epic:**
|
||||
|
||||
<repeat for-each="epic in epic_list">
|
||||
|
||||
<ask>Ready to break down {{epic_title}}? (y/n)</ask>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Discuss epic scope and story ideas with user</action>
|
||||
<action>Draft story list ensuring vertical slices and proper sequencing</action>
|
||||
<action>For each story, write user story format and acceptance criteria</action>
|
||||
<action>Verify no forward dependencies exist</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output file="epics.md">{{epic_title}}\_details</template-output>
|
||||
|
||||
<ask>Review {{epic_title}} stories. Any adjustments needed?</ask>
|
||||
|
||||
<action if="yes">Refine stories based on feedback</action>
|
||||
|
||||
</repeat>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Save complete epics.md to {epics_output_file}</action>
|
||||
|
||||
**Epic Details complete!** Implementation roadmap ready.
|
||||
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="10" goal="Update status and complete" tag="workflow-status">
|
||||
<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: {output_folder}/bmm-workflow-status.yaml</action>
|
||||
<action>Find workflow_status key "prd"</action>
|
||||
<critical>ONLY write the file path as the status value - no other text, notes, or metadata</critical>
|
||||
<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 including STATUS DEFINITIONS</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Find first non-completed workflow in workflow_status (next workflow to do)</action>
|
||||
<action>Determine next agent from path file based on next workflow</action>
|
||||
<action>Save file, preserving ALL comments and structure</action>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
|
||||
<output>**✅ PRD Workflow Complete, {user_name}!**
|
||||
<output>**✅ PRD Complete, {user_name}!**
|
||||
|
||||
**Deliverables Created:**
|
||||
Your product requirements are documented and ready for implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
1. ✅ bmm-PRD.md - Strategic product requirements document
|
||||
2. ✅ bmm-epics.md - Tactical implementation roadmap with story breakdown
|
||||
**Created:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **PRD.md** - Complete requirements adapted to {project_type} and {domain}
|
||||
|
||||
**Next Steps:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Next required:** {{next_workflow}} ({{next_agent}} agent)
|
||||
- **Optional:** Review PRD and epics with stakeholders, or run `create-design` if you have UI requirements
|
||||
1. **Epic Breakdown** (Required)
|
||||
Run: `workflow create-epics-and-stories` to decompose requirements into implementable stories
|
||||
|
||||
Check status anytime with: `workflow-status`
|
||||
2. **UX Design** (If UI exists)
|
||||
Run: `workflow ux-design` for detailed user experience design
|
||||
|
||||
Would you like to:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Review/refine any section
|
||||
2. Proceed to next phase
|
||||
3. Exit and review documents
|
||||
</output>
|
||||
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>
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1,62 +1,237 @@
|
||||
# {{project_name}} Product Requirements Document (PRD)
|
||||
# {{project_name}} - Product Requirements Document
|
||||
|
||||
**Author:** {{user_name}}
|
||||
**Date:** {{date}}
|
||||
**Project Level:** {{project_level}}
|
||||
**Target Scale:** {{target_scale}}
|
||||
**Version:** 1.0
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Goals and Background Context
|
||||
## Executive Summary
|
||||
|
||||
### Goals
|
||||
{{vision_alignment}}
|
||||
|
||||
{{goals}}
|
||||
### What Makes This Special
|
||||
|
||||
### Background Context
|
||||
|
||||
{{background_context}}
|
||||
{{product_magic_essence}}
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Requirements
|
||||
## Project Classification
|
||||
|
||||
### Functional Requirements
|
||||
**Technical Type:** {{project_type}}
|
||||
**Domain:** {{domain_type}}
|
||||
**Complexity:** {{complexity_level}}
|
||||
|
||||
{{functional_requirements}}
|
||||
{{project_classification}}
|
||||
|
||||
### Non-Functional Requirements
|
||||
{{#if domain_context_summary}}
|
||||
|
||||
{{non_functional_requirements}}
|
||||
### Domain Context
|
||||
|
||||
{{domain_context_summary}}
|
||||
{{/if}}
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## User Journeys
|
||||
## Success Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
{{user_journeys}}
|
||||
{{success_criteria}}
|
||||
|
||||
{{#if business_metrics}}
|
||||
|
||||
### Business Metrics
|
||||
|
||||
{{business_metrics}}
|
||||
{{/if}}
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## UX Design Principles
|
||||
## 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
|
||||
|
||||
## User Interface Design Goals
|
||||
|
||||
{{ui_design_goals}}
|
||||
{{key_interactions}}
|
||||
{{/if}}
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Epic List
|
||||
## Functional Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
{{epic_list}}
|
||||
|
||||
> **Note:** Detailed epic breakdown with full story specifications is available in [epics.md](./epics.md)
|
||||
{{functional_requirements_complete}}
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Out of Scope
|
||||
## Non-Functional Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
{{out_of_scope}}
|
||||
{{#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._
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -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"
|
||||
|
@@ -19,14 +19,10 @@ instructions: "{installed_path}/instructions.md"
|
||||
|
||||
# Templates
|
||||
prd_template: "{installed_path}/prd-template.md"
|
||||
epics_template: "{installed_path}/epics-template.md"
|
||||
|
||||
# Output files
|
||||
status_file: "{output_folder}/bmm-workflow-status.md"
|
||||
status_file: "{output_folder}/bmm-workflow-status.yaml"
|
||||
default_output_file: "{output_folder}/PRD.md"
|
||||
epics_output_file: "{output_folder}/epics.md"
|
||||
technical_decisions_file: "{output_folder}/technical-decisions.md"
|
||||
technical_decisions_template: "{project-root}/bmad/bmm/_module-installer/assets/technical-decisions.md"
|
||||
|
||||
# Recommended input documents
|
||||
recommended_inputs:
|
||||
@@ -40,7 +36,15 @@ web_bundle:
|
||||
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"
|
||||
instructions: "bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/instructions.md"
|
||||
validation: "bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/checklist.md"
|
||||
web_bundle_files:
|
||||
- "bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/instructions.md"
|
||||
- "bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/prd-template.md"
|
||||
- "bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/epics-template.md"
|
||||
- "bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/project-types.csv"
|
||||
- "bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/domain-complexity.csv"
|
||||
- "bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/checklist.md"
|
||||
- "bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/create-epics-and-stories/workflow.yaml"
|
||||
- "bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/create-epics-and-stories/instructions.md"
|
||||
- "bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/create-epics-and-stories/epics-template.md"
|
||||
child_workflows:
|
||||
- create-epics-and-stories: "bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/prd/create-epics-and-stories/workflow.yaml"
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user