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

intent based workflow

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Brian Madison
2025-10-16 07:58:28 -05:00
parent a28a350e14
commit 516fa1a917
4 changed files with 276 additions and 317 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

137
src/modules/bmb/workflows/create-workflow/instructions.md
View File

@@ -91,6 +91,27 @@ Work with user to outline the workflow steps:
- Which steps should repeat?
- What variables/outputs does each step produce?
<ask>What instruction style should this workflow favor?
**1. Intent-Based (Recommended)** - Guide the LLM with goals and principles, let it adapt conversations naturally
- More flexible and conversational
- LLM chooses appropriate questions based on context
- Better for complex discovery and iterative refinement
- Example: `<action>Guide user to define their target audience with specific demographics and needs</action>`
**2. Prescriptive** - Provide exact wording for questions and options
- More controlled and predictable
- Ensures consistency across runs
- Better for simple data collection or specific compliance needs
- Example: `<ask>What is your target platform? Choose: PC, Console, Mobile, Web</ask>`
Note: Your choice will be the _primary_ style, but we'll use the other when it makes more sense for specific steps.</ask>
<action>Store instruction_style preference (intent-based or prescriptive)</action>
<action>Explain that both styles have value and will be mixed appropriately</action>
Create a step outline with clear goals and outputs.
</step>
@@ -188,6 +209,122 @@ Example usage in instructions:
<output>Hello {user_name}, the workflow is complete!</output>
```
<critical>Applying instruction style preference:</critical>
Based on the {{instruction_style}} preference from Step 3, generate instructions using these patterns:
**Intent-Based Instructions (Recommended for most workflows):**
Focus on goals, principles, and desired outcomes. Let the LLM adapt the conversation naturally.
✅ **Good Examples:**
```xml
<!-- Discovery and exploration -->
<action>Guide user to define their target audience with specific demographics, psychographics, and behavioral characteristics</action>
<action>Explore the user's vision for the product, asking probing questions to uncover core motivations and success criteria</action>
<action>Help user identify and prioritize key features based on user value and technical feasibility</action>
<!-- Validation and refinement -->
<action>Validate that the technical approach aligns with project constraints and team capabilities</action>
<action>Challenge assumptions about user needs and market fit with thought-provoking questions</action>
<!-- Complex iterative work -->
<action>Collaborate with user to refine the architecture, iterating until they're satisfied with the design</action>
```
❌ **Avoid (too prescriptive):**
```xml
<ask>What is your target audience age range? Choose: 18-24, 25-34, 35-44, 45+</ask>
<ask>List exactly 3 key features in priority order</ask>
```
**When to use Intent-Based:**
- Complex discovery processes (user research, requirements gathering)
- Creative brainstorming and ideation
- Iterative refinement workflows
- When user input quality matters more than consistency
- Workflows requiring adaptation to context
**Prescriptive Instructions (Use selectively):**
Provide exact wording, specific options, and controlled interactions.
✅ **Good Examples:**
```xml
<!-- Simple data collection -->
<ask>What is your target platform? Choose: PC, Console, Mobile, Web</ask>
<ask>Select monetization model: Premium, Free-to-Play, Subscription, Ad-Supported</ask>
<!-- Compliance and standards -->
<ask>Does this comply with GDPR requirements? [yes/no]</ask>
<ask>Choose documentation standard: JSDoc, TypeDoc, TSDoc</ask>
<!-- Binary decisions -->
<ask>Do you want to generate test cases? [yes/no]</ask>
<ask>Include performance benchmarks? [yes/no]</ask>
```
❌ **Avoid (too rigid for complex tasks):**
```xml
<ask>What are your product goals? List exactly 5 goals, each 10-15 words</ask>
<ask>Describe your user persona in exactly 3 sentences</ask>
```
**When to use Prescriptive:**
- Simple data collection (platform, format, yes/no choices)
- Compliance verification and standards adherence
- Configuration with finite options
- When consistency is critical across all executions
- Quick setup wizards
**Mixing Both Styles (Best Practice):**
Even if user chose a primary style, use the other when appropriate:
```xml
<!-- Intent-based workflow with prescriptive moments -->
<step n="1" goal="Understand user vision">
<action>Explore the user's vision for their game, uncovering their creative intent and target experience</action>
<action>Ask probing questions about genre, themes, and emotional tone they want to convey</action>
</step>
<step n="2" goal="Capture basic metadata">
<ask>What is your target platform? Choose: PC, Console, Mobile, Web</ask> <!-- Prescriptive for simple choice -->
<ask>Select primary genre: Action, RPG, Strategy, Puzzle, Simulation, Other</ask>
</step>
<step n="3" goal="Deep dive into gameplay">
<action>Guide user to articulate their core gameplay loop, exploring mechanics and player agency</action> <!-- Back to intent-based -->
<action>Help them identify what makes their game unique and compelling</action>
</step>
```
**Guidelines for the chosen style:**
If user chose **Intent-Based**:
- Default to goal-oriented <action> tags
- Use open-ended guidance language
- Save prescriptive <ask> tags for simple data/choices
- Focus on "guide", "explore", "help user", "validate"
- Allow LLM to adapt questions to user responses
If user chose **Prescriptive**:
- Default to explicit <ask> tags with clear options
- Use precise wording for consistency
- Save intent-based <action> tags for complex discovery
- Focus on "choose", "select", "specify", "confirm"
- Provide structured choices when possible
**Remember:** The goal is optimal human-AI collaboration. Use whichever style best serves the user at each step.
<critical>Save location:</critical>
- Write to {{output_folder}}/instructions.md

385
src/modules/bmm/workflows/1-analysis/game-brief/instructions.md
View File

@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
<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}</critical>
<workflow>
@@ -34,33 +35,18 @@ What would you like to do?</ask>
</step>
<step n="1" goal="Initialize game brief session">
<action>Welcome the user to the Game Brief creation process</action>
<action>Explain this is a collaborative process to define their game vision</action>
<ask>What is the working title for your game?</ask>
<action>Welcome the user in {communication_language} to the Game Brief creation process</action>
<action>Explain this is a collaborative process to define their game vision, capturing the essence of what they want to create</action>
<action>Ask for the working title of their game</action>
<template-output>game_name</template-output>
</step>
<step n="1" goal="Gather available inputs and context">
<action>Check what inputs the user has available:</action>
<ask>Do you have any of these documents to help inform the brief?
1. Market research or player data
2. Brainstorming results or game jam prototypes
3. Competitive game analysis
4. Initial game ideas or design notes
5. Reference games list
6. None - let's start fresh
Please share any documents you have or select option 6.</ask>
<action>Load and analyze any provided documents</action>
<action>Extract key insights and themes from input documents</action>
<ask>Based on what you've shared (or if starting fresh), tell me:
- What's the core gameplay experience you want to create?
- What emotion or feeling should players have?
- What sparked this game idea?</ask>
<action>Explore what existing materials the user has available to inform the brief</action>
<action>Offer options for input sources: market research, brainstorming results, competitive analysis, design notes, reference games, or starting fresh</action>
<action>If documents are provided, load and analyze them to extract key insights, themes, and patterns</action>
<action>Engage the user about their core vision: what gameplay experience they want to create, what emotions players should feel, and what sparked this game idea</action>
<action>Build initial understanding through conversational exploration rather than rigid questioning</action>
<template-output>initial_context</template-output>
</step>
@@ -78,22 +64,11 @@ Which approach works best for you?</ask>
</step>
<step n="3" goal="Define game vision" if="collaboration_mode == 'interactive'">
<ask>Let's capture your game vision.
**Core Concept** - What is your game in one sentence?
Example: "A roguelike deck-builder where you climb a mysterious spire"
**Elevator Pitch** - Describe your game in 2-3 sentences as if pitching to a publisher or player.
Example: "Slay the Spire fuses card games and roguelikes together. Craft a unique deck, encounter bizarre creatures, discover relics of immense power, and kill the Spire."
**Vision Statement** - What is the aspirational goal for this game? What experience do you want to create?
Example: "Create a deeply replayable tactical card game that rewards strategic thinking while maintaining the excitement of randomness. Every run should feel unique but fair."
Your answers:</ask>
<action>Help refine the core concept to be clear and compelling</action>
<action>Ensure elevator pitch is concise but captures the hook</action>
<action>Guide vision statement to be aspirational but achievable</action>
<action>Guide user to articulate their game vision across three levels of depth</action>
<action>Help them craft a one-sentence core concept that captures the essence (reference successful games like "A roguelike deck-builder where you climb a mysterious spire" as examples)</action>
<action>Develop an elevator pitch (2-3 sentences) that would compel a publisher or player - refine until it's concise but hooks attention</action>
<action>Explore their aspirational vision statement: the experience they want to create and what makes it meaningful - ensure it's ambitious yet achievable</action>
<action>Refine through conversation, challenging vague language and elevating compelling ideas</action>
<template-output>core_concept</template-output>
<template-output>elevator_pitch</template-output>
@@ -101,32 +76,11 @@ Your answers:</ask>
</step>
<step n="4" goal="Identify target market" if="collaboration_mode == 'interactive'">
<ask>Who will play your game?
**Primary Audience:**
- Age range
- Gaming experience level (casual, core, hardcore)
- Preferred genres
- Platform preferences
- Typical play session length
- Why will THIS game appeal to them?
**Secondary Audience** (if applicable):
- Who else might enjoy this game?
- How might their needs differ?
**Market Context:**
- What's the market opportunity?
- Are there similar successful games?
- What's the competitive landscape?
- Why is now the right time for this game?</ask>
<action>Push for specificity beyond "people who like fun games"</action>
<action>Help identify a realistic and reachable audience</action>
<action>Document market evidence or assumptions</action>
<action>Guide user to define their primary target audience with specific demographics, gaming preferences, and behavioral characteristics</action>
<action>Push for specificity beyond generic descriptions like "people who like fun games" - challenge vague answers</action>
<action>Explore secondary audiences if applicable and how their needs might differ</action>
<action>Investigate the market context: opportunity size, competitive landscape, similar successful games, and why now is the right time</action>
<action>Help identify a realistic and reachable audience segment based on evidence or well-reasoned assumptions</action>
<template-output>primary_audience</template-output>
<template-output>secondary_audience</template-output>
@@ -134,32 +88,12 @@ Your answers:</ask>
</step>
<step n="5" goal="Define game fundamentals" if="collaboration_mode == 'interactive'">
<ask>Let's define your core gameplay.
**Core Gameplay Pillars (2-4 fundamental elements):**
These are the pillars that define your game. Everything should support these.
Examples:
- "Tight controls + challenging combat + rewarding exploration" (Hollow Knight)
- "Emergent stories + survival tension + creative problem solving" (RimWorld)
- "Strategic depth + quick sessions + massive replayability" (Into the Breach)
**Primary Mechanics:**
What does the player actually DO?
- Core actions (jump, shoot, build, manage, etc.)
- Key systems (combat, resource management, progression, etc.)
- Interaction model (real-time, turn-based, etc.)
**Player Experience Goals:**
What emotions and experiences are you designing for?
Examples: tension and relief, mastery and growth, creativity and expression, discovery and surprise
Your game fundamentals:</ask>
<action>Ensure pillars are specific and measurable</action>
<action>Focus on player actions, not implementation details</action>
<action>Connect mechanics to emotional experience</action>
<action>Help user identify 2-4 core gameplay pillars that fundamentally define their game - everything should support these pillars</action>
<action>Provide examples from successful games for inspiration (Hollow Knight's "tight controls + challenging combat + rewarding exploration")</action>
<action>Explore what the player actually DOES - core actions, key systems, and interaction models</action>
<action>Define the emotional experience goals: what feelings are you designing for (tension/relief, mastery/growth, creativity/expression, discovery/surprise)</action>
<action>Ensure pillars are specific and measurable, focusing on player actions rather than implementation details</action>
<action>Connect mechanics directly to emotional experiences through guided discussion</action>
<template-output>core_gameplay_pillars</template-output>
<template-output>primary_mechanics</template-output>
@@ -167,46 +101,13 @@ Your game fundamentals:</ask>
</step>
<step n="6" goal="Define scope and constraints" if="collaboration_mode == 'interactive'">
<ask>Let's establish realistic constraints.
**Target Platforms:**
- PC (Steam, itch.io, Epic)?
- Console (which ones)?
- Mobile (iOS, Android)?
- Web browser?
- Priority order if multiple?
**Development Timeline:**
- Target release date or timeframe?
- Are there fixed deadlines (game jams, funding milestones)?
- Phased release (early access, beta)?
**Budget Considerations:**
- Self-funded, grant-funded, publisher-backed?
- Asset creation budget (art, audio, voice)?
- Marketing budget?
- Tools and software costs?
**Team Resources:**
- Team size and roles?
- Full-time or part-time?
- Skills available vs. skills needed?
- Outsourcing plans?
**Technical Constraints:**
- Engine preference or requirement?
- Performance targets (frame rate, load times)?
- File size limits?
- Accessibility requirements?</ask>
<action>Help user be realistic about scope</action>
<action>Identify potential blockers early</action>
<action>Document assumptions about resources</action>
<action>Help user establish realistic project constraints across all key dimensions</action>
<action>Explore target platforms and prioritization (PC, console, mobile, web)</action>
<action>Discuss development timeline: release targets, fixed deadlines, phased release strategies</action>
<action>Investigate budget reality: funding source, asset creation costs, marketing, tools and software</action>
<action>Assess team resources: size, roles, availability, skills gaps, outsourcing needs</action>
<action>Define technical constraints: engine choice, performance targets, file size limits, accessibility requirements</action>
<action>Push for realism about scope - identify potential blockers early and document resource assumptions</action>
<template-output>target_platforms</template-output>
<template-output>development_timeline</template-output>
@@ -216,34 +117,11 @@ Your game fundamentals:</ask>
</step>
<step n="7" goal="Establish reference framework" if="collaboration_mode == 'interactive'">
<ask>Let's identify your reference games and position.
**Inspiration Games:**
List 3-5 games that inspire this project. For each:
- Game name
- What you're drawing from it (mechanic, feel, art style, etc.)
- What you're NOT taking from it
**Competitive Analysis:**
What games are most similar to yours?
- Direct competitors (very similar games)
- Indirect competitors (solve same player need differently)
- What they do well
- What they do poorly
- What your game will do differently
**Key Differentiators:**
What makes your game unique?
- What's your hook?
- Why will players choose your game over alternatives?
- What can you do that others can't or won't?</ask>
<action>Help identify genuine differentiation vs. "just better"</action>
<action>Look for specific, concrete differences</action>
<action>Validate differentiators are actually valuable to players</action>
<action>Guide user to identify 3-5 inspiration games and articulate what they're drawing from each (mechanics, feel, art style) and explicitly what they're NOT taking</action>
<action>Conduct competitive analysis: identify direct and indirect competitors, analyze what they do well and poorly, and define how this game will differ</action>
<action>Explore key differentiators and unique value proposition - what's the hook that makes players choose this game over alternatives</action>
<action>Challenge "just better" thinking - push for genuine, specific differentiation that's actually valuable to players</action>
<action>Validate that differentiators are concrete, achievable, and compelling</action>
<template-output>inspiration_games</template-output>
<template-output>competitive_analysis</template-output>
@@ -251,33 +129,11 @@ What makes your game unique?
</step>
<step n="8" goal="Define content framework" if="collaboration_mode == 'interactive'">
<ask>Let's scope your content needs.
**World and Setting:**
- Where/when does your game take place?
- How much world-building is needed?
- Is narrative important (critical, supporting, minimal)?
- Real-world or fantasy/sci-fi?
**Narrative Approach:**
- Story-driven, story-light, or no story?
- Linear, branching, or emergent narrative?
- Cutscenes, dialogue, environmental storytelling?
- How much writing is needed?
**Content Volume:**
Estimate the scope:
- How long is a typical playthrough?
- How many levels/stages/areas?
- Replayability approach (procedural, unlocks, multiple paths)?
- Asset volume (characters, enemies, items, environments)?</ask>
<action>Help estimate content realistically</action>
<action>Identify if narrative workflow will be needed later</action>
<action>Flag content-heavy areas that need planning</action>
<action>Explore the game's world and setting: location, time period, world-building depth, narrative importance, and genre context</action>
<action>Define narrative approach: story-driven/light/absent, linear/branching/emergent, delivery methods (cutscenes, dialogue, environmental), writing scope</action>
<action>Estimate content volume realistically: playthrough length, level/stage count, replayability strategy, total asset volume</action>
<action>Identify if a dedicated narrative workflow will be needed later based on story complexity</action>
<action>Flag content-heavy areas that require detailed planning and resource allocation</action>
<template-output>world_setting</template-output>
<template-output>narrative_approach</template-output>
@@ -285,33 +141,11 @@ Estimate the scope:
</step>
<step n="9" goal="Define art and audio direction" if="collaboration_mode == 'interactive'">
<ask>What should your game look and sound like?
**Visual Style:**
- Art style (pixel art, low-poly, hand-drawn, realistic, etc.)
- Color palette and mood
- Reference images or games with similar aesthetics
- 2D or 3D?
- Animation requirements
**Audio Style:**
- Music genre and mood
- SFX approach (realistic, stylized, retro)
- Voice acting needs (full, partial, none)?
- Audio importance to gameplay (critical or supporting)
**Production Approach:**
- Creating assets in-house or outsourcing?
- Asset store usage?
- Generative/AI tools?
- Style complexity vs. team capability?</ask>
<action>Ensure art/audio vision aligns with budget and team skills</action>
<action>Identify potential production bottlenecks</action>
<action>Note if style guide will be needed</action>
<action>Explore visual style direction: art style preference, color palette and mood, reference games/images, 2D vs 3D, animation requirements</action>
<action>Define audio style: music genre and mood, SFX approach, voice acting scope, audio's importance to gameplay</action>
<action>Discuss production approach: in-house creation vs outsourcing, asset store usage, AI/generative tools, style complexity vs team capability</action>
<action>Ensure art and audio vision aligns realistically with budget and team skills - identify potential production bottlenecks early</action>
<action>Note if a comprehensive style guide will be needed for consistent production</action>
<template-output>visual_style</template-output>
<template-output>audio_style</template-output>
@@ -319,38 +153,11 @@ Estimate the scope:
</step>
<step n="10" goal="Assess risks" if="collaboration_mode == 'interactive'">
<ask>Let's identify potential risks honestly.
**Key Risks:**
- What could prevent this game from being completed?
- What could make it not fun?
- What assumptions are you making that might be wrong?
**Technical Challenges:**
- Any unproven technical elements?
- Performance concerns?
- Platform-specific challenges?
- Middleware or tool dependencies?
**Market Risks:**
- Is the market saturated?
- Are you dependent on a trend or platform?
- Competition concerns?
- Discoverability challenges?
**Mitigation Strategies:**
For each major risk, what's your plan?
- How will you validate assumptions?
- What's the backup plan?
- Can you prototype risky elements early?</ask>
<action>Encourage honest risk assessment</action>
<action>Focus on actionable mitigation, not just worry</action>
<action>Prioritize risks by impact and likelihood</action>
<action>Facilitate honest risk assessment across all dimensions - what could prevent completion, what could make it unfun, what assumptions might be wrong</action>
<action>Identify technical challenges: unproven elements, performance concerns, platform-specific issues, tool dependencies</action>
<action>Explore market risks: saturation, trend dependency, competition intensity, discoverability challenges</action>
<action>For each major risk, develop actionable mitigation strategies - how to validate assumptions, backup plans, early prototyping opportunities</action>
<action>Prioritize risks by impact and likelihood, focusing on proactive mitigation rather than passive worry</action>
<template-output>key_risks</template-output>
<template-output>technical_challenges</template-output>
@@ -359,38 +166,11 @@ For each major risk, what's your plan?
</step>
<step n="11" goal="Define success criteria" if="collaboration_mode == 'interactive'">
<ask>What does success look like?
**MVP Definition:**
What's the absolute minimum playable version?
- Core loop must be fun and complete
- Essential content only
- What can be added later?
- When do you know MVP is "done"?
**Success Metrics:**
How will you measure success?
- Players acquired
- Retention rate (daily, weekly)
- Session length
- Completion rate
- Review scores
- Revenue targets (if commercial)
- Community engagement
**Launch Goals:**
What are your concrete targets for launch?
- Sales/downloads in first month?
- Review score target?
- Streamer/press coverage goals?
- Community size goals?</ask>
<action>Push for specific, measurable goals</action>
<action>Distinguish between MVP and full release</action>
<action>Ensure goals are realistic given resources</action>
<action>Define the MVP (Minimum Playable Version) - what's the absolute minimum where the core loop is fun and complete, with essential content only</action>
<action>Establish specific, measurable success metrics: player acquisition, retention rates, session length, completion rate, review scores, revenue targets, community engagement</action>
<action>Set concrete launch goals: first-month sales/downloads, review score targets, streamer/press coverage, community size</action>
<action>Push for specificity and measurability - challenge vague aspirations with "how will you measure that?"</action>
<action>Clearly distinguish between MVP milestones and full release goals, ensuring all targets are realistic given resources</action>
<template-output>mvp_definition</template-output>
<template-output>success_metrics</template-output>
@@ -398,36 +178,11 @@ What are your concrete targets for launch?
</step>
<step n="12" goal="Identify immediate next steps" if="collaboration_mode == 'interactive'">
<ask>What needs to happen next?
**Immediate Actions:**
What should you do right after this brief?
- Prototype a core mechanic?
- Create art style test?
- Validate technical feasibility?
- Build vertical slice?
- Playtest with target audience?
**Research Needs:**
What do you still need to learn?
- Market validation?
- Technical proof of concept?
- Player interest testing?
- Competitive deep-dive?
**Open Questions:**
What are you still uncertain about?
- Design questions to resolve
- Technical unknowns
- Market validation needs
- Resource/budget questions</ask>
<action>Create actionable next steps</action>
<action>Prioritize by importance and dependency</action>
<action>Identify blockers that need resolution</action>
<action>Identify immediate actions to take right after this brief: prototype core mechanics, create art style tests, validate technical feasibility, build vertical slice, playtest with target audience</action>
<action>Determine research needs: market validation, technical proof of concept, player interest testing, competitive deep-dive</action>
<action>Document open questions and uncertainties: unresolved design questions, technical unknowns, market validation needs, resource/budget questions</action>
<action>Create actionable, specific next steps - prioritize by importance and dependency</action>
<action>Identify blockers that must be resolved before moving forward</action>
<template-output>immediate_actions</template-output>
<template-output>research_needs</template-output>
@@ -529,7 +284,8 @@ What are you still uncertain about?
1. Review the entire document
2. Make final adjustments
3. Save and prepare for GDD creation
3. Generate an executive summary version (3-page limit)
4. Save and prepare for GDD creation
This brief will serve as the primary input for creating the Game Design Document (GDD).
@@ -539,7 +295,12 @@ This brief will serve as the primary input for creating the Game Design Document
- Proceed to GDD workflow: `workflow gdd`
- Validate assumptions with target players</ask>
<check>If user chooses option 3 (executive summary):</check>
<action>Create condensed 3-page executive brief focusing on: core concept, target market, gameplay pillars, key differentiators, and success criteria</action>
<action>Save as: {output_folder}/game-brief-executive-{{game_name}}-{{date}}.md</action>
<template-output>final_brief</template-output>
<template-output>executive_brief</template-output>
</step>
<step n="16" goal="Update status file on completion">
@@ -565,11 +326,11 @@ This brief will serve as the primary input for creating the Game Design Document
- **{{date}}**: Completed game-brief workflow. Game brief document generated and saved. Next: Proceed to plan-project workflow to create Game Design Document (GDD).
```
<output>**✅ Game Brief Complete**
<output>**✅ Game Brief Complete, {user_name}!**
**Brief Document:**
- Game brief saved and ready for GDD creation
- Game brief saved to {output_folder}/game-brief-{{game_name}}-{{date}}.md
**Status file updated:**
@@ -588,11 +349,11 @@ Check status anytime with: `workflow-status`
</check>
<check if="status file not found">
<output>**✅ Game Brief Complete**
<output>**✅ Game Brief Complete, {user_name}!**
**Brief Document:**
- Game brief saved and ready for GDD creation
- Game brief saved to {output_folder}/game-brief-{{game_name}}-{{date}}.md
Note: Running in standalone mode (no status file).

7
src/modules/bmm/workflows/1-analysis/game-brief/workflow.yaml
View File

@@ -29,16 +29,15 @@ default_output_file: "{output_folder}/game-brief-{{game_name}}-{{date}}.md"
# Workflow settings
autonomous: false # This is an interactive workflow requiring user collaboration
brief_format: "comprehensive" # Options: "comprehensive" (full detail) or "executive" (3-page limit)
web_bundle:
name: "game-brief"
description: "Interactive game brief creation workflow that guides users through defining their game vision with multiple input sources and conversational collaboration"
author: "BMad"
instructions: "bmad/bmm/workflows/1-analysis/product-brief/instructions.md"
validation: "bmad/bmm/workflows/1-analysis/product-brief/checklist.md"
instructions: "bmad/bmm/workflows/1-analysis/game-brief/instructions.md"
validation: "bmad/bmm/workflows/1-analysis/game-brief/checklist.md"
template: "bmad/bmm/workflows/1-analysis/game-brief/template.md"
web_bundle_files:
- "bmad/bmm/workflows/1-analysis/game-brief/template.md"
- "bmad/bmm/workflows/1-analysis/game-brief/instructions.md"
- "bmad/bmm/workflows/1-analysis/game-brief/checklist.md"
- "bmad/bmm/workflows/1-analysis/game-brief/template.md"

64
workflow-cleanup-progress.md
View File

@@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ date: system-generated
3. ✅ design-thinking - Fixed: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat, removed duplicate design_methods
4. ✅ innovation-strategy - Fixed: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat, removed duplicate innovation_frameworks
**BMM Module (10/30 cleaned so far):** 5. ✅ brainstorm-game - Fixed: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat 6. ✅ brainstorm-project - Fixed: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat 7. ✅ game-brief - Fixed: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat 8. ✅ product-brief - Fixed: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat 9. ✅ research - Fixed: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat 10. ✅ gdd - Fixed: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat 11. ✅ narrative - Fixed: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat 12. ✅ prd - Fixed: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat 13. ✅ tech-spec (2-plan) - Fixed: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat 14. ✅ ux - Fixed: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat
**BMM Module (2/30 fully audited, 8/30 surface cleaned):** 5. ✅ **brainstorm-game** - FULL AUDIT: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat, restored existing_workflows (critical), added {communication_language} and {user_name} 6. ✅ **brainstorm-project** - FULL AUDIT: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat, restored existing_workflows (critical), added {communication_language} and {user_name} 7. ⚠️ game-brief - Surface clean only: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat (needs full audit) 8. ⚠️ product-brief - Surface clean only: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat (needs full audit) 9. ⚠️ research - Surface clean only: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat (needs full audit) 10. ⚠️ gdd - Surface clean only: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat (needs full audit) 11. ⚠️ narrative - Surface clean only: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat (needs full audit) 12. ⚠️ prd - Surface clean only: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat (needs full audit) 13. ⚠️ tech-spec (2-plan) - Surface clean only: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat (needs full audit) 14. ⚠️ ux - Surface clean only: removed use_advanced_elicitation bloat (needs full audit)
**Common Issues Found:**
@@ -151,6 +151,68 @@ date: system-generated
7. Comprehensive audit report generation
8. Integration with edit-workflow for fixes
### 2025-10-16: Added Instruction Style Philosophy to create-workflow
- **Enhancement:** Added comprehensive guidance on intent-based vs prescriptive instruction patterns
- **Location:** `/src/modules/bmb/workflows/create-workflow/instructions.md` Step 5
- **Changes:**
- Added instruction style choice in Step 3 (intent-based vs prescriptive)
- Added 100+ line section in Step 5 with examples and best practices
- Documented when to use each style and how to mix both effectively
- Provided clear "good" and "bad" examples for each pattern
- Emphasized goal-oriented collaboration over rigid prescriptive wording
**Key Philosophy Shift:**
- **Intent-Based (Recommended):** Guide LLM with goals and principles, let it adapt conversations naturally
- Better for complex discovery, creative work, iterative refinement
- Example: `<action>Guide user to define their target audience with specific demographics and needs</action>`
- **Prescriptive (Selective Use):** Provide exact wording for questions and options
- Better for simple data collection, compliance, binary choices
- Example: `<ask>What is your target platform? Choose: PC, Console, Mobile, Web</ask>`
**Impact:** Future workflows will be more conversational and adaptive, improving human-AI collaboration quality
### 2025-10-16: Transformed game-brief to Intent-Based Style
- **Transformation:** Converted game-brief from prescriptive to intent-based instructions
- **Location:** `/src/modules/bmm/workflows/1-analysis/game-brief/instructions.md`
- **Results:**
- **Before:** 617 lines (heavily prescriptive with hardcoded question templates)
- **After:** 370 lines (intent-based with goal-oriented guidance)
- **Reduction:** 247 lines removed (40% reduction)
**Changes Made:**
- Step 1: Converted hardcoded "What is the working title?" to intent-based "Ask for the working title"
- Step 1b: Transformed 7 prescriptive bullet points to 5 action-based guidance lines
- Steps 3-12 (Interactive Mode): Replaced massive <ask> blocks with compact <action> guidance
- Step 4 (Target Market): 31 lines → 8 lines
- Step 5 (Game Fundamentals): 33 lines → 10 lines
- Step 6 (Scope/Constraints): 47 lines → 11 lines
- Step 7 (Reference Framework): 33 lines → 8 lines
- Step 8 (Content Framework): 32 lines → 9 lines
- Step 9 (Art/Audio): 32 lines → 8 lines
- Step 10 (Risks): 38 lines → 9 lines
- Step 11 (Success): 37 lines → 9 lines
- Step 12 (Next Steps): 35 lines → 9 lines
**Pattern Applied:**
- **Old (Prescriptive):** `<ask>Who will play your game? **Primary Audience:** - Age range - Gaming experience level...</ask>`
- **New (Intent-Based):** `<action>Guide user to define their primary target audience with specific demographics, gaming preferences, and behavioral characteristics</action>`
**Benefits:**
- More conversational and adaptive LLM behavior
- Cleaner, more maintainable instructions
- Better human-AI collaboration
- LLM can adapt questions to user context naturally
- Demonstrates the philosophy shift documented in create-workflow
**This serves as the reference implementation for converting prescriptive workflows to intent-based style.**
---
## Summary Statistics