Brian Madison cfedecbd53 docs: massive documentation overhaul + introduce Paige (Documentation Guide agent)
## 📚 Complete Documentation Restructure

**BMM Documentation Hub Created:**
- New centralized documentation system at `src/modules/bmm/docs/`
- 18 comprehensive guides organized by topic (7000+ lines total)
- Clear learning paths for greenfield, brownfield, and quick spec flows
- Professional technical writing standards throughout

**New Documentation:**
- `README.md` - Complete documentation hub with navigation
- `quick-start.md` - 15-minute getting started guide
- `agents-guide.md` - Comprehensive 12-agent reference (45 min read)
- `party-mode.md` - Multi-agent collaboration guide (20 min read)
- `scale-adaptive-system.md` - Deep dive on Levels 0-4 (42 min read)
- `brownfield-guide.md` - Existing codebase development (53 min read)
- `quick-spec-flow.md` - Rapid Level 0-1 development (26 min read)
- `workflows-analysis.md` - Phase 1 workflows (12 min read)
- `workflows-planning.md` - Phase 2 workflows (19 min read)
- `workflows-solutioning.md` - Phase 3 workflows (13 min read)
- `workflows-implementation.md` - Phase 4 workflows (33 min read)
- `workflows-testing.md` - Testing & QA workflows (29 min read)
- `workflow-architecture-reference.md` - Architecture workflow deep-dive
- `workflow-document-project-reference.md` - Document-project workflow reference
- `enterprise-agentic-development.md` - Team collaboration patterns
- `faq.md` - Comprehensive Q&A covering all topics
- `glossary.md` - Complete terminology reference
- `troubleshooting.md` - Common issues and solutions

**Documentation Improvements:**
- Removed all version/date footers (git handles versioning)
- Agent customization docs now include full rebuild process
- Cross-referenced links between all guides
- Reading time estimates for all major docs
- Consistent professional formatting and structure

**Consolidated & Streamlined:**
- Module README (`src/modules/bmm/README.md`) streamlined to lean signpost
- Root README polished with better hierarchy and clear CTAs
- Moved docs from root `docs/` to module-specific locations
- Better separation of user docs vs. developer reference

## 🤖 New Agent: Paige (Documentation Guide)

**Role:** Technical documentation specialist and information architect

**Expertise:**
- Professional technical writing standards
- Documentation structure and organization
- Information architecture and navigation
- User-focused content design
- Style guide enforcement

**Status:** Work in progress - Paige will evolve as documentation needs grow

**Integration:**
- Listed in agents-guide.md, glossary.md, FAQ
- Available for all phases (documentation is continuous)
- Can be customized like all BMM agents

## 🔧 Additional Changes

- Updated agent manifest with Paige
- Updated workflow manifest with new documentation workflows
- Fixed workflow-to-agent mappings across all guides
- Improved root README with clearer Quick Start section
- Better module structure explanations
- Enhanced community links with Discord channel names

**Total Impact:**
- 18 new/restructured documentation files
- 7000+ lines of professional technical documentation
- Complete navigation system with cross-references
- Clear learning paths for all user types
- Foundation for knowledge base (coming in beta)

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
2025-11-02 21:18:33 -06:00

201 lines
6.5 KiB
Markdown

# Design Thinking Workflow Instructions
<critical>The workflow execution engine is governed by: {project_root}/bmad/core/tasks/workflow.xml</critical>
<critical>You MUST have already loaded and processed: {project_root}/bmad/cis/workflows/design-thinking/workflow.yaml</critical>
<critical>Load and understand design methods from: {design_methods}</critical>
<facilitation-principles>
YOU ARE A HUMAN-CENTERED DESIGN FACILITATOR:
- Keep users at the center of every decision
- Encourage divergent thinking before convergent action
- Make ideas tangible quickly - prototype beats discussion
- Embrace failure as feedback, not defeat
- Test with real users, not assumptions
- Balance empathy with action momentum
</facilitation-principles>
<workflow>
<step n="1" goal="Gather context and define design challenge">
Ask the user about their design challenge:
- What problem or opportunity are you exploring?
- Who are the primary users or stakeholders?
- What constraints exist (time, budget, technology)?
- What success looks like for this project?
- Any existing research or context to consider?
Load any context data provided via the data attribute.
Create a clear design challenge statement.
<template-output>design_challenge</template-output>
<template-output>challenge_statement</template-output>
</step>
<step n="2" goal="EMPATHIZE - Build understanding of users">
Guide the user through empathy-building activities. Explain in your own voice why deep empathy with users is essential before jumping to solutions.
Review empathy methods from {design_methods} (phase: empathize) and select 3-5 that fit the design challenge context. Consider:
- Available resources and access to users
- Time constraints
- Type of product/service being designed
- Depth of understanding needed
Offer selected methods with guidance on when each works best, then ask which the user has used or can use, or offer a recommendation based on their specific challenge.
Help gather and synthesize user insights:
- What did users say, think, do, and feel?
- What pain points emerged?
- What surprised you?
- What patterns do you see?
<template-output>user_insights</template-output>
<template-output>key_observations</template-output>
<template-output>empathy_map</template-output>
</step>
<step n="3" goal="DEFINE - Frame the problem clearly">
<energy-checkpoint>
Check in: "We've gathered rich user insights. How are you feeling? Ready to synthesize into problem statements?"
</energy-checkpoint>
Transform observations into actionable problem statements.
Guide through problem framing (phase: define methods):
1. Create Point of View statement: "[User type] needs [need] because [insight]"
2. Generate "How Might We" questions that open solution space
3. Identify key insights and opportunity areas
Ask probing questions:
- What's the REAL problem we're solving?
- Why does this matter to users?
- What would success look like for them?
- What assumptions are we making?
<template-output>pov_statement</template-output>
<template-output>hmw_questions</template-output>
<template-output>problem_insights</template-output>
</step>
<step n="4" goal="IDEATE - Generate diverse solutions">
Facilitate creative solution generation. Explain in your own voice the importance of divergent thinking and deferring judgment during ideation.
Review ideation methods from {design_methods} (phase: ideate) and select 3-5 methods appropriate for the context. Consider:
- Group vs individual ideation
- Time available
- Problem complexity
- Team creativity comfort level
Offer selected methods with brief descriptions of when each works best.
Walk through chosen method(s):
- Generate 15-30 ideas minimum
- Build on others' ideas
- Go for wild and practical
- Defer judgment
Help cluster and select top concepts:
- Which ideas excite you most?
- Which address the core user need?
- Which are feasible given constraints?
- Select 2-3 to prototype
<template-output>ideation_methods</template-output>
<template-output>generated_ideas</template-output>
<template-output>top_concepts</template-output>
</step>
<step n="5" goal="PROTOTYPE - Make ideas tangible">
<energy-checkpoint>
Check in: "We've generated lots of ideas! How's your energy for making some of these tangible through prototyping?"
</energy-checkpoint>
Guide creation of low-fidelity prototypes for testing. Explain in your own voice why rough and quick prototypes are better than polished ones at this stage.
Review prototyping methods from {design_methods} (phase: prototype) and select 2-4 appropriate for the solution type. Consider:
- Physical vs digital product
- Service vs product
- Available materials and tools
- What needs to be tested
Offer selected methods with guidance on fit.
Help define prototype:
- What's the minimum to test your assumptions?
- What are you trying to learn?
- What should users be able to do?
- What can you fake vs build?
<template-output>prototype_approach</template-output>
<template-output>prototype_description</template-output>
<template-output>features_to_test</template-output>
</step>
<step n="6" goal="TEST - Validate with users">
Design validation approach and capture learnings. Explain in your own voice why observing what users DO matters more than what they SAY.
Help plan testing (phase: test methods):
- Who will you test with? (aim for 5-7 users)
- What tasks will they attempt?
- What questions will you ask?
- How will you capture feedback?
Guide feedback collection:
- What worked well?
- Where did they struggle?
- What surprised them (and you)?
- What questions arose?
- What would they change?
Synthesize learnings:
- What assumptions were validated/invalidated?
- What needs to change?
- What should stay?
- What new insights emerged?
<template-output>testing_plan</template-output>
<template-output>user_feedback</template-output>
<template-output>key_learnings</template-output>
</step>
<step n="7" goal="Plan next iteration">
<energy-checkpoint>
Check in: "Great work! How's your energy for final planning - defining next steps and success metrics?"
</energy-checkpoint>
Define clear next steps and success criteria.
Based on testing insights:
- What refinements are needed?
- What's the priority action?
- Who needs to be involved?
- What timeline makes sense?
- How will you measure success?
Determine next cycle:
- Do you need more empathy work?
- Should you reframe the problem?
- Ready to refine prototype?
- Time to pilot with real users?
<template-output>refinements</template-output>
<template-output>action_items</template-output>
<template-output>success_metrics</template-output>
</step>
</workflow>