mirror of
https://github.com/bmadcode/BMAD-METHOD.git
synced 2025-12-29 16:14:59 +00:00
7eb52520fa
- Installation path is now fully configurable, allowing users to specify custom installation directories during setup
- Default installation location changed to .bmad (hidden directory) for cleaner project root organization
Web Bundle Improvements:
- All web bundles (single agent and team) now include party mode support for multi-agent collaboration!
- Advanced elicitation capabilities integrated into standalone agents
- All bundles enhanced with party mode agent manifests
- Added default-party.csv files to bmm, bmgd, and cis module teams
- The default party file is what will be used with single agent bundles. teams can customize for different party configurations before web bundling through a setting in the team yaml file
- New web bundle outputs for all agents (analyst, architect, dev, pm, sm, tea, tech-writer, ux-designer, game-*, creative-squad)
Phase 4 Workflow Updates (In Progress):
- Initiated shift to separate phase 4 implementation artifacts from documentation
- Phase 4 implementation artifacts (stories, code review, sprint plan, context files) will move to dedicated location outside docs folder
- Installer questions and configuration added for artifact path selection
- Updated workflow.yaml files for code-review, sprint-planning, story-context, epic-tech-context, and retrospective workflows to support this, but still might require some udpates
Additional Changes:
- New agent and action command header models for standardization
- Enhanced web-bundle-activation-steps fragment
- Updated web-bundler.js to support new structure
- VS Code settings updated for new .bmad directory
- Party mode instructions and workflow enhanced for better orchestration
IDE Installer Updates:
- Show version number of installer in cli
- improved Installer UX
- Gemini TOML Improved to have clear loading instructions with @ commands
- All tools agent launcher mds improved to use a central file template critical indication isntead of hardcoding in 2 different locations.
190 lines
6.1 KiB
YAML
190 lines
6.1 KiB
YAML
# Implementation Readiness Validation Criteria
|
|
# Defines systematic validation rules by project level
|
|
|
|
validation_rules:
|
|
# Level 0-1 Projects (Simple, minimal planning)
|
|
level_0_1:
|
|
required_documents:
|
|
- tech_spec
|
|
- stories_or_tasks
|
|
|
|
validations:
|
|
- name: "Tech Spec Completeness"
|
|
checks:
|
|
- "All features defined with implementation approach"
|
|
- "Technical dependencies identified"
|
|
- "API contracts defined if applicable"
|
|
- "Data models specified"
|
|
|
|
- name: "Story Coverage"
|
|
checks:
|
|
- "All tech spec features have corresponding stories"
|
|
- "Stories are sequenced logically"
|
|
- "Technical tasks are defined"
|
|
- "No critical gaps in coverage"
|
|
|
|
# Level 2 Projects (PRD + Tech Spec, no separate architecture)
|
|
level_2:
|
|
required_documents:
|
|
- prd
|
|
- tech_spec # Includes architecture decisions
|
|
- epics_and_stories
|
|
|
|
validations:
|
|
- name: "PRD to Tech Spec Alignment"
|
|
checks:
|
|
- "All PRD requirements addressed in tech spec"
|
|
- "Architecture embedded in tech spec covers PRD needs"
|
|
- "Non-functional requirements are specified"
|
|
- "Technical approach supports business goals"
|
|
|
|
- name: "Story Coverage and Alignment"
|
|
checks:
|
|
- "Every PRD requirement has story coverage"
|
|
- "Stories align with tech spec approach"
|
|
- "Epic breakdown is complete"
|
|
- "Acceptance criteria match PRD success criteria"
|
|
|
|
- name: "Sequencing Validation"
|
|
checks:
|
|
- "Foundation stories come first"
|
|
- "Dependencies are properly ordered"
|
|
- "Iterative delivery is possible"
|
|
- "No circular dependencies"
|
|
|
|
# Level 3-4 Projects (Full planning with separate architecture)
|
|
level_3_4:
|
|
required_documents:
|
|
- prd
|
|
- architecture
|
|
- epics_and_stories
|
|
|
|
validations:
|
|
- name: "PRD Completeness"
|
|
checks:
|
|
- "User requirements fully documented"
|
|
- "Success criteria are measurable"
|
|
- "Scope boundaries clearly defined"
|
|
- "Priorities are assigned"
|
|
|
|
- name: "Architecture Coverage"
|
|
checks:
|
|
- "All PRD requirements have architectural support"
|
|
- "System design is complete"
|
|
- "Integration points defined"
|
|
- "Security architecture specified"
|
|
- "Performance considerations addressed"
|
|
- "If architecture.md: Implementation patterns defined"
|
|
- "If architecture.md: Technology versions verified and current"
|
|
- "If architecture.md: Starter template command documented (if applicable)"
|
|
|
|
- name: "PRD-Architecture Alignment"
|
|
checks:
|
|
- "No architecture gold-plating beyond PRD"
|
|
- "NFRs from PRD reflected in architecture"
|
|
- "Technology choices support requirements"
|
|
- "Scalability matches expected growth"
|
|
- "If UX spec exists: Architecture supports UX requirements"
|
|
- "If UX spec exists: Component library supports interaction patterns"
|
|
|
|
- name: "Story Implementation Coverage"
|
|
checks:
|
|
- "All architectural components have stories"
|
|
- "Infrastructure setup stories exist"
|
|
- "Integration implementation planned"
|
|
- "Security implementation stories present"
|
|
|
|
- name: "Comprehensive Sequencing"
|
|
checks:
|
|
- "Infrastructure before features"
|
|
- "Authentication before protected resources"
|
|
- "Core features before enhancements"
|
|
- "Dependencies properly ordered"
|
|
- "Allows for iterative releases"
|
|
|
|
# Special validation contexts
|
|
special_contexts:
|
|
greenfield:
|
|
additional_checks:
|
|
- "Project initialization stories exist"
|
|
- "If using architecture.md: First story is starter template initialization"
|
|
- "Development environment setup documented"
|
|
- "CI/CD pipeline stories included"
|
|
- "Initial data/schema setup planned"
|
|
- "Deployment infrastructure stories present"
|
|
|
|
ux_workflow_active:
|
|
additional_checks:
|
|
- "UX requirements in PRD"
|
|
- "UX implementation stories exist"
|
|
- "Accessibility requirements covered"
|
|
- "Responsive design addressed"
|
|
- "User flow continuity maintained"
|
|
|
|
api_heavy:
|
|
additional_checks:
|
|
- "API contracts fully defined"
|
|
- "Versioning strategy documented"
|
|
- "Authentication/authorization specified"
|
|
- "Rate limiting considered"
|
|
- "API documentation stories included"
|
|
|
|
# Severity definitions
|
|
severity_levels:
|
|
critical:
|
|
description: "Must be resolved before implementation"
|
|
examples:
|
|
- "Missing stories for core requirements"
|
|
- "Conflicting technical approaches"
|
|
- "No infrastructure setup for greenfield"
|
|
- "Security requirements not addressed"
|
|
|
|
high:
|
|
description: "Should be addressed to reduce risk"
|
|
examples:
|
|
- "Incomplete acceptance criteria"
|
|
- "Unclear story dependencies"
|
|
- "Missing error handling coverage"
|
|
- "Performance requirements not validated"
|
|
|
|
medium:
|
|
description: "Consider addressing for smoother implementation"
|
|
examples:
|
|
- "Documentation gaps"
|
|
- "Test strategy not defined"
|
|
- "Monitoring approach unclear"
|
|
- "Minor sequencing improvements possible"
|
|
|
|
low:
|
|
description: "Minor improvements for consideration"
|
|
examples:
|
|
- "Formatting inconsistencies"
|
|
- "Optional enhancements identified"
|
|
- "Style guide compliance"
|
|
- "Nice-to-have features noted"
|
|
|
|
# Readiness decision criteria
|
|
readiness_decisions:
|
|
ready:
|
|
criteria:
|
|
- "No critical issues found"
|
|
- "All required documents present"
|
|
- "Core alignments validated"
|
|
- "Story sequencing logical"
|
|
- "Team can begin implementation"
|
|
|
|
ready_with_conditions:
|
|
criteria:
|
|
- "Only high/medium issues found"
|
|
- "Mitigation plans identified"
|
|
- "Core path to MVP clear"
|
|
- "Issues won't block initial stories"
|
|
|
|
not_ready:
|
|
criteria:
|
|
- "Critical issues identified"
|
|
- "Major gaps in coverage"
|
|
- "Conflicting approaches found"
|
|
- "Required documents missing"
|
|
- "Blocking dependencies unresolved"
|