architecture reorganization in preparation of architecture solutioning rework
This commit is contained in:
Brian Madison
@@ -0,0 +1,262 @@
|
||||
# Implementation Ready Check - 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/bmm/workflows/3-solutioning/solutioning-gate-check/workflow.yaml</critical>
|
||||
<critical>Communicate all findings and analysis in {communication_language} throughout the assessment</critical>
|
||||
|
||||
<workflow>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="0" goal="Initialize and understand project context">
|
||||
<invoke-workflow path="{workflow_status_workflow}">
|
||||
<param>mode: data</param>
|
||||
<param>data_request: project_config</param>
|
||||
</invoke-workflow>
|
||||
|
||||
<check if="status_exists == false">
|
||||
<output>**⚠️ No Workflow Status File Found**
|
||||
|
||||
The Implementation Ready Check requires a status file to understand your project context.
|
||||
|
||||
Please run `workflow-init` first to establish your project configuration.
|
||||
|
||||
After setup, return here to validate implementation readiness.
|
||||
</output>
|
||||
<action>Exit workflow - cannot proceed without status file</action>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
|
||||
<check if="status_exists == true">
|
||||
<action>Store {{status_file_path}} for later updates</action>
|
||||
<action>Store {{project_level}}, {{active_path}}, and {{workflow_phase}} for validation context</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Based on the project_level, understand what artifacts should exist:
|
||||
|
||||
- Level 0-1: Tech spec and simple stories only (no PRD, minimal solutioning)
|
||||
- Level 2: PRD, tech spec, epics/stories (no separate architecture doc)
|
||||
- Level 3-4: Full suite - PRD, solution architecture, epics/stories, possible UX artifacts
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<critical>The validation approach must adapt to the project level - don't look for documents that shouldn't exist at lower levels</critical>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>project_context</template-output>
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="1" goal="Discover and inventory project artifacts">
|
||||
<action>Search the {output_folder} for relevant planning and solutioning documents based on project level identified in Step 0</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>For Level 0-1 projects, locate:
|
||||
|
||||
- Technical specification document(s)
|
||||
- Story/task lists or simple epic breakdowns
|
||||
- Any API or interface definitions
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>For Level 2-4 projects, locate:
|
||||
|
||||
- Product Requirements Document (PRD)
|
||||
- Solution Architecture document (Level 3-4 only)
|
||||
- Technical Specification (Level 2 includes architecture within)
|
||||
- Epic and story breakdowns
|
||||
- UX artifacts if the active path includes UX workflow
|
||||
- Any supplementary planning documents
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Create an inventory of found documents with:
|
||||
|
||||
- Document type and purpose
|
||||
- File path and last modified date
|
||||
- Brief description of what each contains
|
||||
- Any missing expected documents flagged as potential issues
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>document_inventory</template-output>
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="2" goal="Deep analysis of core planning documents">
|
||||
<action>Load and thoroughly analyze each discovered document to extract:
|
||||
- Core requirements and success criteria
|
||||
- Architectural decisions and constraints
|
||||
- Technical implementation approaches
|
||||
- User stories and acceptance criteria
|
||||
- Dependencies and sequencing requirements
|
||||
- Any assumptions or risks documented
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>For PRD analysis (Level 2-4), focus on:
|
||||
|
||||
- User requirements and use cases
|
||||
- Functional and non-functional requirements
|
||||
- Success metrics and acceptance criteria
|
||||
- Scope boundaries and explicitly excluded items
|
||||
- Priority levels for different features
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>For Architecture/Tech Spec analysis, focus on:
|
||||
|
||||
- System design decisions and rationale
|
||||
- Technology stack and framework choices
|
||||
- Integration points and APIs
|
||||
- Data models and storage decisions
|
||||
- Security and performance considerations
|
||||
- Any architectural constraints that might affect story implementation
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>For Epic/Story analysis, focus on:
|
||||
|
||||
- Coverage of PRD requirements
|
||||
- Story sequencing and dependencies
|
||||
- Acceptance criteria completeness
|
||||
- Technical tasks within stories
|
||||
- Estimated complexity and effort indicators
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>document_analysis</template-output>
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="3" goal="Cross-reference validation and alignment check">
|
||||
<action>Systematically validate alignment between all artifacts, adapting validation based on project level</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>PRD ↔ Architecture Alignment (Level 3-4):
|
||||
|
||||
- Verify every PRD requirement has corresponding architectural support
|
||||
- Check that architecture decisions don't contradict PRD constraints
|
||||
- Identify any architecture additions beyond PRD scope (potential gold-plating)
|
||||
- Ensure non-functional requirements from PRD are addressed in architecture
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>PRD ↔ Stories Coverage (Level 2-4):
|
||||
|
||||
- Map each PRD requirement to implementing stories
|
||||
- Identify any PRD requirements without story coverage
|
||||
- Find stories that don't trace back to PRD requirements
|
||||
- Validate that story acceptance criteria align with PRD success criteria
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Architecture ↔ Stories Implementation Check:
|
||||
|
||||
- Verify architectural decisions are reflected in relevant stories
|
||||
- Check that story technical tasks align with architectural approach
|
||||
- Identify any stories that might violate architectural constraints
|
||||
- Ensure infrastructure and setup stories exist for architectural components
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>For Level 0-1 projects (Tech Spec only):
|
||||
|
||||
- Validate internal consistency within tech spec
|
||||
- Check that all specified features have corresponding stories
|
||||
- Verify story sequencing matches technical dependencies
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>alignment_validation</template-output>
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="4" goal="Gap and risk analysis">
|
||||
<action>Identify and categorize all gaps, risks, and potential issues discovered during validation</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Check for Critical Gaps:
|
||||
|
||||
- Missing stories for core requirements
|
||||
- Unaddressed architectural concerns
|
||||
- Absent infrastructure or setup stories for greenfield projects
|
||||
- Missing error handling or edge case coverage
|
||||
- Security or compliance requirements not addressed
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Identify Sequencing Issues:
|
||||
|
||||
- Dependencies not properly ordered
|
||||
- Stories that assume components not yet built
|
||||
- Parallel work that should be sequential
|
||||
- Missing prerequisite technical tasks
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Detect Potential Contradictions:
|
||||
|
||||
- Conflicts between PRD and architecture approaches
|
||||
- Stories with conflicting technical approaches
|
||||
- Acceptance criteria that contradict requirements
|
||||
- Resource or technology conflicts
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Find Gold-Plating and Scope Creep:
|
||||
|
||||
- Features in architecture not required by PRD
|
||||
- Stories implementing beyond requirements
|
||||
- Technical complexity beyond project needs
|
||||
- Over-engineering indicators
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>gap_risk_analysis</template-output>
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="5" goal="UX and special concerns validation" optional="true">
|
||||
<check if="UX artifacts exist or UX workflow in active path">
|
||||
<action>Review UX artifacts and validate integration:
|
||||
- Check that UX requirements are reflected in PRD
|
||||
- Verify stories include UX implementation tasks
|
||||
- Ensure architecture supports UX requirements (performance, responsiveness)
|
||||
- Identify any UX concerns not addressed in stories
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Validate accessibility and usability coverage:
|
||||
|
||||
- Check for accessibility requirement coverage in stories
|
||||
- Verify responsive design considerations if applicable
|
||||
- Ensure user flow completeness across stories
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
</check>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>ux_validation</template-output>
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="6" goal="Generate comprehensive readiness assessment">
|
||||
<action>Compile all findings into a structured readiness report with:
|
||||
- Executive summary of readiness status
|
||||
- Project context and validation scope
|
||||
- Document inventory and coverage assessment
|
||||
- Detailed findings organized by severity (Critical, High, Medium, Low)
|
||||
- Specific recommendations for each issue
|
||||
- Overall readiness recommendation (Ready, Ready with Conditions, Not Ready)
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Provide actionable next steps:
|
||||
|
||||
- List any critical issues that must be resolved
|
||||
- Suggest specific document updates needed
|
||||
- Recommend additional stories or tasks required
|
||||
- Propose sequencing adjustments if needed
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Include positive findings:
|
||||
|
||||
- Highlight well-aligned areas
|
||||
- Note particularly thorough documentation
|
||||
- Recognize good architectural decisions
|
||||
- Commend comprehensive story coverage where found
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>readiness_assessment</template-output>
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="7" goal="Workflow status update offer" optional="true">
|
||||
<ask>The readiness assessment is complete. Would you like to update the workflow status to proceed to the next phase? [yes/no]
|
||||
|
||||
Note: This will advance the project workflow to the next phase in your current path.</ask>
|
||||
|
||||
<action if="user_response == 'yes'">
|
||||
Determine the next workflow phase based on current status:
|
||||
- If Level 0-1: Advance to implementation phase
|
||||
- If Level 2-4 in solutioning: Advance to Phase 4 (Implementation)
|
||||
- Update the workflow status configuration accordingly
|
||||
- Confirm the update with the user
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action if="user_response == 'no'">
|
||||
Acknowledge that the workflow status remains unchanged.
|
||||
Remind user they can manually update when ready.
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>status_update_result</template-output>
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
</workflow>
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user