ros/BMAD-METHOD
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

feat: transform QA agent into Test Architect with advanced quality ca… (#433)

Browse Source 
* feat: transform QA agent into Test Architect with advanced quality capabilities

  - Add 6 specialized quality assessment commands
  - Implement risk-based testing with scoring
  - Create quality gate system with deterministic decisions
  - Add comprehensive test design and NFR validation
  - Update documentation with stage-based workflow integration

* feat: transform QA agent into Test Architect with advanced quality capabilities

  - Add 6 specialized quality assessment commands
  - Implement risk-based testing with scoring
  - Create quality gate system with deterministic decisions
  - Add comprehensive test design and NFR validation
  - Update documentation with stage-based workflow integration

* docs: refined the docs for test architect

* fix: addressed review comments from manjaroblack, round 1

* fix: addressed review comments from manjaroblack, round 1

---------

Co-authored-by: Murat Ozcan <murat@mac.lan>
Co-authored-by: Brian <bmadcode@gmail.com>
This commit is contained in:
Murat K Ozcan
2025-08-15 21:02:37 -05:00
committed by GitHub
parent 33269c888d
commit 0b61175d98
76 changed files with 9245 additions and 1442 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

14
dist/agents/dev.txt vendored
View File

@@ -102,7 +102,6 @@ If the user asks or does not specify a specific checklist, list the checklists a
## Instructions
1. **Initial Assessment**
- If user or the task being run provides a checklist name:
- Try fuzzy matching (e.g. "architecture checklist" -> "architect-checklist")
- If multiple matches found, ask user to clarify
@@ -115,14 +114,12 @@ If the user asks or does not specify a specific checklist, list the checklists a
- All at once (YOLO mode - recommended for checklists, there will be a summary of sections at the end to discuss)
2. **Document and Artifact Gathering**
- Each checklist will specify its required documents/artifacts at the beginning
- Follow the checklist's specific instructions for what to gather, generally a file can be resolved in the docs folder, if not or unsure, halt and ask or confirm with the user.
3. **Checklist Processing**
If in interactive mode:
- Work through each section of the checklist one at a time
- For each section:
- Review all items in the section following instructions for that section embedded in the checklist
@@ -131,7 +128,6 @@ If the user asks or does not specify a specific checklist, list the checklists a
- Get user confirmation before proceeding to next section or if any thing major do we need to halt and take corrective action
If in YOLO mode:
- Process all sections at once
- Create a comprehensive report of all findings
- Present the complete analysis to the user
@@ -139,7 +135,6 @@ If the user asks or does not specify a specific checklist, list the checklists a
4. **Validation Approach**
For each checklist item:
- Read and understand the requirement
- Look for evidence in the documentation that satisfies the requirement
- Consider both explicit mentions and implicit coverage
@@ -153,7 +148,6 @@ If the user asks or does not specify a specific checklist, list the checklists a
5. **Section Analysis**
For each section:
- think step by step to calculate pass rate
- Identify common themes in failed items
- Provide specific recommendations for improvement
@@ -163,7 +157,6 @@ If the user asks or does not specify a specific checklist, list the checklists a
6. **Final Report**
Prepare a summary that includes:
- Overall checklist completion status
- Pass rates by section
- List of failed items with context
@@ -351,14 +344,12 @@ The goal is quality delivery, not just checking boxes.]]
1. **Requirements Met:**
[[LLM: Be specific - list each requirement and whether it's complete]]
- [ ] All functional requirements specified in the story are implemented.
- [ ] All acceptance criteria defined in the story are met.
2. **Coding Standards & Project Structure:**
[[LLM: Code quality matters for maintainability. Check each item carefully]]
- [ ] All new/modified code strictly adheres to `Operational Guidelines`.
- [ ] All new/modified code aligns with `Project Structure` (file locations, naming, etc.).
- [ ] Adherence to `Tech Stack` for technologies/versions used (if story introduces or modifies tech usage).
@@ -370,7 +361,6 @@ The goal is quality delivery, not just checking boxes.]]
3. **Testing:**
[[LLM: Testing proves your code works. Be honest about test coverage]]
- [ ] All required unit tests as per the story and `Operational Guidelines` Testing Strategy are implemented.
- [ ] All required integration tests (if applicable) as per the story and `Operational Guidelines` Testing Strategy are implemented.
- [ ] All tests (unit, integration, E2E if applicable) pass successfully.
@@ -379,14 +369,12 @@ The goal is quality delivery, not just checking boxes.]]
4. **Functionality & Verification:**
[[LLM: Did you actually run and test your code? Be specific about what you tested]]
- [ ] Functionality has been manually verified by the developer (e.g., running the app locally, checking UI, testing API endpoints).
- [ ] Edge cases and potential error conditions considered and handled gracefully.
5. **Story Administration:**
[[LLM: Documentation helps the next developer. What should they know?]]
- [ ] All tasks within the story file are marked as complete.
- [ ] Any clarifications or decisions made during development are documented in the story file or linked appropriately.
- [ ] The story wrap up section has been completed with notes of changes or information relevant to the next story or overall project, the agent model that was primarily used during development, and the changelog of any changes is properly updated.
@@ -394,7 +382,6 @@ The goal is quality delivery, not just checking boxes.]]
6. **Dependencies, Build & Configuration:**
[[LLM: Build issues block everyone. Ensure everything compiles and runs cleanly]]
- [ ] Project builds successfully without errors.
- [ ] Project linting passes
- [ ] Any new dependencies added were either pre-approved in the story requirements OR explicitly approved by the user during development (approval documented in story file).
@@ -405,7 +392,6 @@ The goal is quality delivery, not just checking boxes.]]
7. **Documentation (If Applicable):**
[[LLM: Good documentation prevents future confusion. What needs explaining?]]
- [ ] Relevant inline code documentation (e.g., JSDoc, TSDoc, Python docstrings) for new public APIs or complex logic is complete.
- [ ] User-facing documentation updated, if changes impact users.
- [ ] Technical documentation (e.g., READMEs, system diagrams) updated if significant architectural changes were made.