Node 20, installer improvements, agent improvements and Expansion Pack for game dev (#232)
* feat: add expansion pack installation system with game dev and infrastructure expansion packs - Added expansion pack discovery and installation to BMAD installer - Supports interactive and CLI installation of expansion packs - Expansion pack files install to destination root (.bmad-core) - Added game development expansion pack (.bmad-2d-phaser-game-dev) - Game designer, developer, and scrum master agents - Game-specific templates, tasks, workflows, and guidelines - Specialized for Phaser 3 + TypeScript development - Added infrastructure devops expansion pack (.bmad-infrastructure-devops) - Platform engineering agent and infrastructure templates - Expansion pack agents automatically integrate with IDE rules - Added list:expansions command and --expansion-packs CLI option 🤖 Generated with Claude Code Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com> * alpha expansion packs and installer update to support installing expansion packs optionally * node20 --------- Co-authored-by: Brian Madison <brianmadison@Brians-MacBook-Pro.local> Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Brian
156
bmad-core/checklists/story-draft-checklist.md
Normal file
156
bmad-core/checklists/story-draft-checklist.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,156 @@
|
||||
# Story Draft Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
The Scrum Master should use this checklist to validate that each story contains sufficient context for a developer agent to implement it successfully, while assuming the dev agent has reasonable capabilities to figure things out.
|
||||
|
||||
[[LLM: INITIALIZATION INSTRUCTIONS - STORY DRAFT VALIDATION
|
||||
|
||||
Before proceeding with this checklist, ensure you have access to:
|
||||
|
||||
1. The story document being validated (usually in docs/stories/ or provided directly)
|
||||
2. The parent epic context
|
||||
3. Any referenced architecture or design documents
|
||||
4. Previous related stories if this builds on prior work
|
||||
|
||||
IMPORTANT: This checklist validates individual stories BEFORE implementation begins.
|
||||
|
||||
VALIDATION PRINCIPLES:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Clarity - A developer should understand WHAT to build
|
||||
2. Context - WHY this is being built and how it fits
|
||||
3. Guidance - Key technical decisions and patterns to follow
|
||||
4. Testability - How to verify the implementation works
|
||||
5. Self-Contained - Most info needed is in the story itself
|
||||
|
||||
REMEMBER: We assume competent developer agents who can:
|
||||
|
||||
- Research documentation and codebases
|
||||
- Make reasonable technical decisions
|
||||
- Follow established patterns
|
||||
- Ask for clarification when truly stuck
|
||||
|
||||
We're checking for SUFFICIENT guidance, not exhaustive detail.]]
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. GOAL & CONTEXT CLARITY
|
||||
|
||||
[[LLM: Without clear goals, developers build the wrong thing. Verify:
|
||||
|
||||
1. The story states WHAT functionality to implement
|
||||
2. The business value or user benefit is clear
|
||||
3. How this fits into the larger epic/product is explained
|
||||
4. Dependencies are explicit ("requires Story X to be complete")
|
||||
5. Success looks like something specific, not vague]]
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Story goal/purpose is clearly stated
|
||||
- [ ] Relationship to epic goals is evident
|
||||
- [ ] How the story fits into overall system flow is explained
|
||||
- [ ] Dependencies on previous stories are identified (if applicable)
|
||||
- [ ] Business context and value are clear
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. TECHNICAL IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE
|
||||
|
||||
[[LLM: Developers need enough technical context to start coding. Check:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Key files/components to create or modify are mentioned
|
||||
2. Technology choices are specified where non-obvious
|
||||
3. Integration points with existing code are identified
|
||||
4. Data models or API contracts are defined or referenced
|
||||
5. Non-standard patterns or exceptions are called out
|
||||
|
||||
Note: We don't need every file listed - just the important ones.]]
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Key files to create/modify are identified (not necessarily exhaustive)
|
||||
- [ ] Technologies specifically needed for this story are mentioned
|
||||
- [ ] Critical APIs or interfaces are sufficiently described
|
||||
- [ ] Necessary data models or structures are referenced
|
||||
- [ ] Required environment variables are listed (if applicable)
|
||||
- [ ] Any exceptions to standard coding patterns are noted
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. REFERENCE EFFECTIVENESS
|
||||
|
||||
[[LLM: References should help, not create a treasure hunt. Ensure:
|
||||
|
||||
1. References point to specific sections, not whole documents
|
||||
2. The relevance of each reference is explained
|
||||
3. Critical information is summarized in the story
|
||||
4. References are accessible (not broken links)
|
||||
5. Previous story context is summarized if needed]]
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] References to external documents point to specific relevant sections
|
||||
- [ ] Critical information from previous stories is summarized (not just referenced)
|
||||
- [ ] Context is provided for why references are relevant
|
||||
- [ ] References use consistent format (e.g., `docs/filename.md#section`)
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. SELF-CONTAINMENT ASSESSMENT
|
||||
|
||||
[[LLM: Stories should be mostly self-contained to avoid context switching. Verify:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Core requirements are in the story, not just in references
|
||||
2. Domain terms are explained or obvious from context
|
||||
3. Assumptions are stated explicitly
|
||||
4. Edge cases are mentioned (even if deferred)
|
||||
5. The story could be understood without reading 10 other documents]]
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Core information needed is included (not overly reliant on external docs)
|
||||
- [ ] Implicit assumptions are made explicit
|
||||
- [ ] Domain-specific terms or concepts are explained
|
||||
- [ ] Edge cases or error scenarios are addressed
|
||||
|
||||
## 5. TESTING GUIDANCE
|
||||
|
||||
[[LLM: Testing ensures the implementation actually works. Check:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Test approach is specified (unit, integration, e2e)
|
||||
2. Key test scenarios are listed
|
||||
3. Success criteria are measurable
|
||||
4. Special test considerations are noted
|
||||
5. Acceptance criteria in the story are testable]]
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Required testing approach is outlined
|
||||
- [ ] Key test scenarios are identified
|
||||
- [ ] Success criteria are defined
|
||||
- [ ] Special testing considerations are noted (if applicable)
|
||||
|
||||
## VALIDATION RESULT
|
||||
|
||||
[[LLM: FINAL STORY VALIDATION REPORT
|
||||
|
||||
Generate a concise validation report:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Quick Summary
|
||||
|
||||
- Story readiness: READY / NEEDS REVISION / BLOCKED
|
||||
- Clarity score (1-10)
|
||||
- Major gaps identified
|
||||
|
||||
2. Fill in the validation table with:
|
||||
|
||||
- PASS: Requirements clearly met
|
||||
- PARTIAL: Some gaps but workable
|
||||
- FAIL: Critical information missing
|
||||
|
||||
3. Specific Issues (if any)
|
||||
|
||||
- List concrete problems to fix
|
||||
- Suggest specific improvements
|
||||
- Identify any blocking dependencies
|
||||
|
||||
4. Developer Perspective
|
||||
- Could YOU implement this story as written?
|
||||
- What questions would you have?
|
||||
- What might cause delays or rework?
|
||||
|
||||
Be pragmatic - perfect documentation doesn't exist. Focus on whether a competent developer can succeed with this story.]]
|
||||
|
||||
| Category | Status | Issues |
|
||||
| ------------------------------------ | ------ | ------ |
|
||||
| 1. Goal & Context Clarity | _TBD_ | |
|
||||
| 2. Technical Implementation Guidance | _TBD_ | |
|
||||
| 3. Reference Effectiveness | _TBD_ | |
|
||||
| 4. Self-Containment Assessment | _TBD_ | |
|
||||
| 5. Testing Guidance | _TBD_ | |
|
||||
|
||||
**Final Assessment:**
|
||||
|
||||
- READY: The story provides sufficient context for implementation
|
||||
- NEEDS REVISION: The story requires updates (see issues)
|
||||
- BLOCKED: External information required (specify what information)
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user