mirror of
https://github.com/bmad-code-org/BMAD-METHOD.git
synced 2026-01-30 04:32:02 +00:00
more docs migrations
This commit is contained in:
Brian Madison
@@ -34,14 +34,12 @@
|
||||
|
||||
The flagship module for agile AI-driven development.
|
||||
|
||||
- **[BMM Module README](./modules/bmm/)** - Module overview, agents, and complete documentation index
|
||||
- **[BMM Documentation](./modules/bmm/)** - All BMM-specific guides and references:
|
||||
- [Quick Start Guide](./modules/bmm/quick-start) - Step-by-step guide to building your first project
|
||||
- [Quick Spec Flow](./modules/bmm/quick-spec-flow) - Rapid Level 0-1 development
|
||||
- [Scale Adaptive System](./modules/bmm/scale-adaptive-system) - Understanding the 5-level system
|
||||
- [Brownfield Guide](./modules/bmm/brownfield-guide) - Working with existing codebases
|
||||
- **[BMM Workflows Guide](./modules/bmm/index#-workflow-guides)** - **ESSENTIAL READING**
|
||||
- **[Test Architect Guide](./modules/bmm/test-architecture)** - Testing strategy and quality assurance
|
||||
- **[BMM Module Index](./modules/bmm-bmad-method/index)** - Module overview, agents, and complete documentation index
|
||||
- [Quick Start Guide](./modules/bmm-bmad-method/quick-start) - Step-by-step guide to building your first project
|
||||
- [Quick Spec Flow](./modules/bmm-bmad-method/quick-spec-flow) - Rapid Level 0-1 development
|
||||
- [Brownfield Guide](./modules/bmm-bmad-method/brownfield-guide) - Working with existing codebases
|
||||
- **[BMM Workflows Guide](./modules/bmm-bmad-method/index#-workflow-guides)** - **ESSENTIAL READING**
|
||||
- **[Test Architect Guide](./modules/bmm-bmad-method/test-architecture)** - Testing strategy and quality assurance
|
||||
|
||||
### BMad Builder (BMB) - Create Custom Solutions
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -53,6 +51,12 @@ Build your own agents, workflows, and modules.
|
||||
|
||||
### Creative Intelligence Suite (CIS) - Innovation & Creativity
|
||||
|
||||
- **[CIS Docs](./modules/cis-creative-intelligence-suite/index.md)**
|
||||
|
||||
#### Bmad Game Dev (BMGD)
|
||||
|
||||
- [Main Game Dev Module Docs Index](./modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/index.md)
|
||||
|
||||
AI-powered creative thinking and brainstorming.
|
||||
|
||||
- **[CIS Module README](./modules/cis-creative-intelligence-suite/index)** - Module overview and workflows
|
||||
@@ -69,28 +73,28 @@ AI-powered creative thinking and brainstorming.
|
||||
### Path 1: Brand New to BMad (Software Project)
|
||||
|
||||
1. [README.md](https://github.com/bmad-code-org/BMAD-METHOD/blob/main/README.md) - Understand the vision
|
||||
2. [Quick Start Guide](./modules/bmm/quick-start) - Get hands-on
|
||||
3. [BMM Module README](./modules/bmm/) - Understand agents
|
||||
4. [BMM Workflows Guide](./modules/bmm/index#-workflow-guides) - Master the methodology
|
||||
2. [Quick Start Guide](./modules/bmm-bmad-method/quick-start) - Get hands-on
|
||||
3. [BMM Module README](./modules/bmm-bmad-method/) - Understand agents
|
||||
4. [BMM Workflows Guide](./modules/bmm-bmad-method/index#-workflow-guides) - Master the methodology
|
||||
|
||||
### Path 2: Game Development Project
|
||||
|
||||
1. [README.md](https://github.com/bmad-code-org/BMAD-METHOD/blob/main/README.md) - Understand the vision
|
||||
2. [Quick Start Guide](./modules/bmm/quick-start) - Get hands-on
|
||||
3. [BMM Module README](./modules/bmm/) - Game agents are included
|
||||
2. [Quick Start Guide](./modules/bmm-bmad-method/quick-start) - Get hands-on
|
||||
3. [BMM Module README](./modules/bmm-bmad-method/) - Game agents are included
|
||||
4. [BMGD Workflows Guide](./modules/bmgd/workflows-guide) - Game-specific workflows
|
||||
|
||||
### Path 3: Upgrading from v4
|
||||
|
||||
1. [v4 to v6 Upgrade Guide](./v4-to-v6-upgrade.md) - Understand what changed
|
||||
2. [Quick Start Guide](./modules/bmm/quick-start) - Reorient yourself
|
||||
3. [BMM Workflows Guide](./modules/bmm/index#-workflow-guides) - Learn new v6 workflows
|
||||
2. [Quick Start Guide](./modules/bmm-bmad-method/quick-start) - Reorient yourself
|
||||
3. [BMM Workflows Guide](./modules/bmm-bmad-method/index#-workflow-guides) - Learn new v6 workflows
|
||||
|
||||
### Path 4: Working with Existing Codebase (Brownfield)
|
||||
|
||||
1. [Brownfield Guide](./modules/bmm/brownfield-guide) - Approach for legacy code
|
||||
2. [Quick Start Guide](./modules/bmm/quick-start) - Follow the process
|
||||
3. [BMM Workflows Guide](./modules/bmm/index#-workflow-guides) - Master the methodology
|
||||
1. [Brownfield Guide](./modules/bmm-bmad-method/brownfield-guide) - Approach for legacy code
|
||||
2. [Quick Start Guide](./modules/bmm-bmad-method/quick-start) - Follow the process
|
||||
3. [BMM Workflows Guide](./modules/bmm-bmad-method/index#-workflow-guides) - Master the methodology
|
||||
|
||||
### Path 5: Building Custom Solutions
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
407
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/agents-guide.md
Normal file
407
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/agents-guide.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,407 @@
|
||||
# BMGD Agents Guide
|
||||
|
||||
Complete reference for BMGD's six specialized game development agents.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Agent Overview
|
||||
|
||||
BMGD provides six agents, each with distinct expertise:
|
||||
|
||||
| Agent | Name | Role | Phase Focus |
|
||||
| ------------------------ | ---------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------- | ----------- |
|
||||
| 🎲 **Game Designer** | Samus Shepard | Lead Game Designer + Creative Vision Architect | Phases 1-2 |
|
||||
| 🏛️ **Game Architect** | Cloud Dragonborn | Principal Game Systems Architect + Technical Director | Phase 3 |
|
||||
| 🕹️ **Game Developer** | Link Freeman | Senior Game Developer + Technical Implementation Specialist | Phase 4 |
|
||||
| 🎯 **Game Scrum Master** | Max | Game Development Scrum Master + Sprint Orchestrator | Phase 4 |
|
||||
| 🧪 **Game QA** | GLaDOS | Game QA Architect + Test Automation Specialist | All Phases |
|
||||
| 🎮 **Game Solo Dev** | Indie | Elite Indie Game Developer + Quick Flow Specialist | All Phases |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🎲 Game Designer (Samus Shepard)
|
||||
|
||||
### Role
|
||||
|
||||
Lead Game Designer + Creative Vision Architect
|
||||
|
||||
### Identity
|
||||
|
||||
Veteran designer with 15+ years crafting AAA and indie hits. Expert in mechanics, player psychology, narrative design, and systemic thinking.
|
||||
|
||||
### Communication Style
|
||||
|
||||
Talks like an excited streamer - enthusiastic, asks about player motivations, celebrates breakthroughs with "Let's GOOO!"
|
||||
|
||||
### Core Principles
|
||||
|
||||
- Design what players want to FEEL, not what they say they want
|
||||
- Prototype fast - one hour of playtesting beats ten hours of discussion
|
||||
- Every mechanic must serve the core fantasy
|
||||
|
||||
### When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
- Brainstorming game ideas
|
||||
- Creating Game Briefs
|
||||
- Designing GDDs
|
||||
- Developing narrative design
|
||||
|
||||
### Available Commands
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | Description |
|
||||
| ---------------------- | -------------------------------- |
|
||||
| `workflow-status` | Check project status |
|
||||
| `brainstorm-game` | Guided game ideation |
|
||||
| `create-game-brief` | Create Game Brief |
|
||||
| `create-gdd` | Create Game Design Document |
|
||||
| `narrative` | Create Narrative Design Document |
|
||||
| `quick-prototype` | Rapid prototyping (IDE only) |
|
||||
| `party-mode` | Multi-agent collaboration |
|
||||
| `advanced-elicitation` | Deep exploration (web only) |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🏛️ Game Architect (Cloud Dragonborn)
|
||||
|
||||
### Role
|
||||
|
||||
Principal Game Systems Architect + Technical Director
|
||||
|
||||
### Identity
|
||||
|
||||
Master architect with 20+ years shipping 30+ titles. Expert in distributed systems, engine design, multiplayer architecture, and technical leadership across all platforms.
|
||||
|
||||
### Communication Style
|
||||
|
||||
Speaks like a wise sage from an RPG - calm, measured, uses architectural metaphors about building foundations and load-bearing walls.
|
||||
|
||||
### Core Principles
|
||||
|
||||
- Architecture is about delaying decisions until you have enough data
|
||||
- Build for tomorrow without over-engineering today
|
||||
- Hours of planning save weeks of refactoring hell
|
||||
- Every system must handle the hot path at 60fps
|
||||
|
||||
### When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
- Planning technical architecture
|
||||
- Making engine/framework decisions
|
||||
- Designing game systems
|
||||
- Course correction during development
|
||||
|
||||
### Available Commands
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | Description |
|
||||
| ---------------------- | ------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| `workflow-status` | Check project status |
|
||||
| `create-architecture` | Create Game Architecture |
|
||||
| `correct-course` | Course correction analysis (IDE only) |
|
||||
| `party-mode` | Multi-agent collaboration |
|
||||
| `advanced-elicitation` | Deep exploration (web only) |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🕹️ Game Developer (Link Freeman)
|
||||
|
||||
### Role
|
||||
|
||||
Senior Game Developer + Technical Implementation Specialist
|
||||
|
||||
### Identity
|
||||
|
||||
Battle-hardened dev with expertise in Unity, Unreal, and custom engines. Ten years shipping across mobile, console, and PC. Writes clean, performant code.
|
||||
|
||||
### Communication Style
|
||||
|
||||
Speaks like a speedrunner - direct, milestone-focused, always optimizing for the fastest path to ship.
|
||||
|
||||
### Core Principles
|
||||
|
||||
- 60fps is non-negotiable
|
||||
- Write code designers can iterate without fear
|
||||
- Ship early, ship often, iterate on player feedback
|
||||
- Red-green-refactor: tests first, implementation second
|
||||
|
||||
### When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
- Implementing stories
|
||||
- Code reviews
|
||||
- Performance optimization
|
||||
- Completing story work
|
||||
|
||||
### Available Commands
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | Description |
|
||||
| ---------------------- | ------------------------------- |
|
||||
| `workflow-status` | Check sprint progress |
|
||||
| `dev-story` | Implement story tasks |
|
||||
| `code-review` | Perform code review |
|
||||
| `quick-dev` | Flexible development (IDE only) |
|
||||
| `quick-prototype` | Rapid prototyping (IDE only) |
|
||||
| `party-mode` | Multi-agent collaboration |
|
||||
| `advanced-elicitation` | Deep exploration (web only) |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🎯 Game Scrum Master (Max)
|
||||
|
||||
### Role
|
||||
|
||||
Game Development Scrum Master + Sprint Orchestrator
|
||||
|
||||
### Identity
|
||||
|
||||
Certified Scrum Master specializing in game dev workflows. Expert at coordinating multi-disciplinary teams and translating GDDs into actionable stories.
|
||||
|
||||
### Communication Style
|
||||
|
||||
Talks in game terminology - milestones are save points, handoffs are level transitions, blockers are boss fights.
|
||||
|
||||
### Core Principles
|
||||
|
||||
- Every sprint delivers playable increments
|
||||
- Clean separation between design and implementation
|
||||
- Keep the team moving through each phase
|
||||
- Stories are single source of truth for implementation
|
||||
|
||||
### When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
- Sprint planning and management
|
||||
- Creating epic tech specs
|
||||
- Writing story drafts
|
||||
- Assembling story context
|
||||
- Running retrospectives
|
||||
- Handling course corrections
|
||||
|
||||
### Available Commands
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | Description |
|
||||
| ----------------------- | ------------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| `workflow-status` | Check project status |
|
||||
| `sprint-planning` | Generate/update sprint status |
|
||||
| `sprint-status` | View sprint progress, get next action |
|
||||
| `create-story` | Create story (marks ready-for-dev directly) |
|
||||
| `validate-create-story` | Validate story draft |
|
||||
| `epic-retrospective` | Facilitate retrospective |
|
||||
| `correct-course` | Navigate significant changes |
|
||||
| `party-mode` | Multi-agent collaboration |
|
||||
| `advanced-elicitation` | Deep exploration (web only) |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🧪 Game QA (GLaDOS)
|
||||
|
||||
### Role
|
||||
|
||||
Game QA Architect + Test Automation Specialist
|
||||
|
||||
### Identity
|
||||
|
||||
Senior QA architect with 12+ years in game testing across Unity, Unreal, and Godot. Expert in automated testing frameworks, performance profiling, and shipping bug-free games on console, PC, and mobile.
|
||||
|
||||
### Communication Style
|
||||
|
||||
Speaks like a quality guardian - methodical, data-driven, but understands that "feel" matters in games. Uses metrics to back intuition. "Trust, but verify with tests."
|
||||
|
||||
### Core Principles
|
||||
|
||||
- Test what matters: gameplay feel, performance, progression
|
||||
- Automated tests catch regressions, humans catch fun problems
|
||||
- Every shipped bug is a process failure, not a people failure
|
||||
- Flaky tests are worse than no tests - they erode trust
|
||||
- Profile before optimize, test before ship
|
||||
|
||||
### When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
- Setting up test frameworks
|
||||
- Designing test strategies
|
||||
- Creating automated tests
|
||||
- Planning playtesting sessions
|
||||
- Performance testing
|
||||
- Reviewing test coverage
|
||||
|
||||
### Available Commands
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | Description |
|
||||
| ---------------------- | --------------------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| `workflow-status` | Check project status |
|
||||
| `test-framework` | Initialize game test framework (Unity/Unreal/Godot) |
|
||||
| `test-design` | Create comprehensive game test scenarios |
|
||||
| `automate` | Generate automated game tests |
|
||||
| `playtest-plan` | Create structured playtesting plan |
|
||||
| `performance-test` | Design performance testing strategy |
|
||||
| `test-review` | Review test quality and coverage |
|
||||
| `party-mode` | Multi-agent collaboration |
|
||||
| `advanced-elicitation` | Deep exploration (web only) |
|
||||
|
||||
### Knowledge Base
|
||||
|
||||
GLaDOS has access to a comprehensive game testing knowledge base (`gametest/qa-index.csv`) including:
|
||||
|
||||
**Engine-Specific Testing:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Unity Test Framework (Edit Mode, Play Mode)
|
||||
- Unreal Automation and Gauntlet
|
||||
- Godot GUT (Godot Unit Test)
|
||||
|
||||
**Game-Specific Testing:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Playtesting fundamentals
|
||||
- Balance testing
|
||||
- Save system testing
|
||||
- Multiplayer/network testing
|
||||
- Input testing
|
||||
- Platform certification (TRC/XR)
|
||||
- Localization testing
|
||||
|
||||
**General QA:**
|
||||
|
||||
- QA automation strategies
|
||||
- Performance testing
|
||||
- Regression testing
|
||||
- Smoke testing
|
||||
- Test prioritization (P0-P3)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🎮 Game Solo Dev (Indie)
|
||||
|
||||
### Role
|
||||
|
||||
Elite Indie Game Developer + Quick Flow Specialist
|
||||
|
||||
### Identity
|
||||
|
||||
Battle-hardened solo game developer who ships complete games from concept to launch. Expert in Unity, Unreal, and Godot, having shipped titles across mobile, PC, and console. Lives and breathes the Quick Flow workflow - prototyping fast, iterating faster, and shipping before the hype dies.
|
||||
|
||||
### Communication Style
|
||||
|
||||
Direct, confident, and gameplay-focused. Uses dev slang, thinks in game feel and player experience. Every response moves the game closer to ship. "Does it feel good? Ship it."
|
||||
|
||||
### Core Principles
|
||||
|
||||
- Prototype fast, fail fast, iterate faster
|
||||
- A playable build beats a perfect design doc
|
||||
- 60fps is non-negotiable - performance is a feature
|
||||
- The core loop must be fun before anything else matters
|
||||
- Ship early, playtest often
|
||||
|
||||
### When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
- Solo game development
|
||||
- Rapid prototyping
|
||||
- Quick iteration without full team workflow
|
||||
- Indie projects with tight timelines
|
||||
- When you want to handle everything yourself
|
||||
|
||||
### Available Commands
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | Description |
|
||||
| ------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------ |
|
||||
| `quick-prototype` | Rapid prototype to test if a mechanic is fun |
|
||||
| `quick-dev` | Implement features end-to-end with game considerations |
|
||||
| `create-tech-spec` | Create implementation-ready technical spec |
|
||||
| `code-review` | Review code quality |
|
||||
| `test-framework` | Set up automated testing |
|
||||
| `party-mode` | Bring in specialists when needed |
|
||||
|
||||
### Quick Flow vs Full BMGD
|
||||
|
||||
Use **Game Solo Dev** when:
|
||||
|
||||
- You're working alone or in a tiny team
|
||||
- Speed matters more than process
|
||||
- You want to skip the full planning phases
|
||||
- You're prototyping or doing game jams
|
||||
|
||||
Use **Full BMGD workflow** when:
|
||||
|
||||
- You have a larger team
|
||||
- The project needs formal documentation
|
||||
- You're working with stakeholders/publishers
|
||||
- Long-term maintainability is critical
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Agent Selection Guide
|
||||
|
||||
### By Phase
|
||||
|
||||
| Phase | Primary Agent | Secondary Agent |
|
||||
| ------------------------------ | ----------------- | ----------------- |
|
||||
| 1: Preproduction | Game Designer | - |
|
||||
| 2: Design | Game Designer | - |
|
||||
| 3: Technical | Game Architect | Game QA |
|
||||
| 4: Production (Planning) | Game Scrum Master | Game Architect |
|
||||
| 4: Production (Implementation) | Game Developer | Game Scrum Master |
|
||||
| Testing (Any Phase) | Game QA | Game Developer |
|
||||
|
||||
### By Task
|
||||
|
||||
| Task | Best Agent |
|
||||
| -------------------------------- | ----------------- |
|
||||
| "I have a game idea" | Game Designer |
|
||||
| "Help me design my game" | Game Designer |
|
||||
| "How should I build this?" | Game Architect |
|
||||
| "What's the technical approach?" | Game Architect |
|
||||
| "Plan our sprints" | Game Scrum Master |
|
||||
| "Create implementation stories" | Game Scrum Master |
|
||||
| "Build this feature" | Game Developer |
|
||||
| "Review this code" | Game Developer |
|
||||
| "Set up testing framework" | Game QA |
|
||||
| "Create test plan" | Game QA |
|
||||
| "Test performance" | Game QA |
|
||||
| "Plan a playtest" | Game QA |
|
||||
| "I'm working solo" | Game Solo Dev |
|
||||
| "Quick prototype this idea" | Game Solo Dev |
|
||||
| "Ship this feature fast" | Game Solo Dev |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Multi-Agent Collaboration
|
||||
|
||||
### Party Mode
|
||||
|
||||
All agents have access to `party-mode`, which brings multiple agents together for complex decisions. Use this when:
|
||||
|
||||
- A decision spans multiple domains (design + technical)
|
||||
- You want diverse perspectives
|
||||
- You're stuck and need fresh ideas
|
||||
|
||||
### Handoffs
|
||||
|
||||
Agents naturally hand off to each other:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Game Designer → Game Architect → Game Scrum Master → Game Developer
|
||||
↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
|
||||
GDD Architecture Sprint/Stories Implementation
|
||||
↓ ↓
|
||||
Game QA ←──────────────────────────── Game QA
|
||||
↓ ↓
|
||||
Test Strategy Automated Tests
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Game QA integrates at multiple points:
|
||||
|
||||
- After Architecture: Define test strategy
|
||||
- During Implementation: Create automated tests
|
||||
- Before Release: Performance and certification testing
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Project Context
|
||||
|
||||
All agents share the principle:
|
||||
|
||||
> "Find if this exists, if it does, always treat it as the bible I plan and execute against: `**/project-context.md`"
|
||||
|
||||
The `project-context.md` file (if present) serves as the authoritative source for project decisions and constraints.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Quick Start Guide](./quick-start.md)** - Get started with BMGD
|
||||
- **[Workflows Guide](./workflows-guide.md)** - Detailed workflow reference
|
||||
- **[Game Types Guide](./game-types-guide.md)** - Game type templates
|
||||
503
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/game-types-guide.md
Normal file
503
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/game-types-guide.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,503 @@
|
||||
# BMGD Game Types Guide
|
||||
|
||||
Reference for selecting and using BMGD's 24 supported game type templates.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
When creating a GDD, BMGD offers game type templates that provide genre-specific sections. This ensures your design document covers mechanics and systems relevant to your game's genre.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Supported Game Types
|
||||
|
||||
### Action & Combat
|
||||
|
||||
#### Action Platformer
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** action, platformer, combat, movement
|
||||
|
||||
Side-scrolling or 3D platforming with combat mechanics. Think Hollow Knight, Celeste with combat, or Mega Man.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Movement systems (jumps, dashes, wall mechanics)
|
||||
- Combat mechanics (melee/ranged, combos)
|
||||
- Level design patterns
|
||||
- Boss design
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Shooter
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** shooter, combat, aiming, fps, tps
|
||||
|
||||
Projectile combat with aiming mechanics. Covers FPS, TPS, and arena shooters.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Weapon systems
|
||||
- Aiming and accuracy
|
||||
- Enemy AI patterns
|
||||
- Level/arena design
|
||||
- Multiplayer considerations
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Fighting
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** fighting, combat, competitive, combos, pvp
|
||||
|
||||
1v1 combat with combos and frame data. Traditional fighters and platform fighters.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Frame data systems
|
||||
- Combo mechanics
|
||||
- Character movesets
|
||||
- Competitive balance
|
||||
- Netcode requirements
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Strategy & Tactics
|
||||
|
||||
#### Strategy
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** strategy, tactics, resources, planning
|
||||
|
||||
Resource management with tactical decisions. RTS, 4X, and grand strategy.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Resource systems
|
||||
- Unit/building design
|
||||
- AI opponent behavior
|
||||
- Map/scenario design
|
||||
- Victory conditions
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Turn-Based Tactics
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** tactics, turn-based, grid, positioning
|
||||
|
||||
Grid-based movement with turn order. XCOM-likes and tactical RPGs.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Grid and movement systems
|
||||
- Turn order mechanics
|
||||
- Cover and positioning
|
||||
- Unit progression
|
||||
- Procedural mission generation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Tower Defense
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** tower-defense, waves, placement, strategy
|
||||
|
||||
Wave-based defense with tower placement.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Tower types and upgrades
|
||||
- Wave design and pacing
|
||||
- Economy systems
|
||||
- Map design patterns
|
||||
- Meta-progression
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### RPG & Progression
|
||||
|
||||
#### RPG
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** rpg, stats, inventory, quests, narrative
|
||||
|
||||
Character progression with stats, inventory, and quests.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Character stats and leveling
|
||||
- Inventory and equipment
|
||||
- Quest system design
|
||||
- Combat system (action/turn-based)
|
||||
- Skill trees and builds
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Roguelike
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** roguelike, procedural, permadeath, runs
|
||||
|
||||
Procedural generation with permadeath and run-based progression.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Procedural generation rules
|
||||
- Permadeath and persistence
|
||||
- Run structure and pacing
|
||||
- Item/ability synergies
|
||||
- Meta-progression systems
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Metroidvania
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** metroidvania, exploration, abilities, interconnected
|
||||
|
||||
Interconnected world with ability gating.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- World map connectivity
|
||||
- Ability gating design
|
||||
- Backtracking flow
|
||||
- Secret and collectible placement
|
||||
- Power-up progression
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Narrative & Story
|
||||
|
||||
#### Adventure
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** adventure, narrative, exploration, story
|
||||
|
||||
Story-driven exploration and narrative. Point-and-click and narrative adventures.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Puzzle design
|
||||
- Narrative delivery
|
||||
- Exploration mechanics
|
||||
- Dialogue systems
|
||||
- Story branching
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Visual Novel
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** visual-novel, narrative, choices, story
|
||||
|
||||
Narrative choices with branching story.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Branching narrative structure
|
||||
- Choice and consequence
|
||||
- Character routes
|
||||
- UI/presentation
|
||||
- Save/load states
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Text-Based
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** text, parser, interactive-fiction, mud
|
||||
|
||||
Text input/output games. Parser games, choice-based IF, MUDs.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Parser or choice systems
|
||||
- World model
|
||||
- Narrative structure
|
||||
- Text presentation
|
||||
- Save state management
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Simulation & Management
|
||||
|
||||
#### Simulation
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** simulation, management, sandbox, systems
|
||||
|
||||
Realistic systems with management and building. Includes tycoons and sim games.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Core simulation loops
|
||||
- Economy modeling
|
||||
- AI agents/citizens
|
||||
- Building/construction
|
||||
- Failure states
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Sandbox
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** sandbox, creative, building, freedom
|
||||
|
||||
Creative freedom with building and minimal objectives.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Creation tools
|
||||
- Physics/interaction systems
|
||||
- Persistence and saving
|
||||
- Sharing/community features
|
||||
- Optional objectives
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Sports & Racing
|
||||
|
||||
#### Racing
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** racing, vehicles, tracks, speed
|
||||
|
||||
Vehicle control with tracks and lap times.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Vehicle physics model
|
||||
- Track design
|
||||
- AI opponents
|
||||
- Progression/career mode
|
||||
- Multiplayer racing
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Sports
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** sports, teams, realistic, physics
|
||||
|
||||
Team-based or individual sports simulation.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Sport-specific rules
|
||||
- Player/team management
|
||||
- AI opponent behavior
|
||||
- Season/career modes
|
||||
- Multiplayer modes
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Multiplayer
|
||||
|
||||
#### MOBA
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** moba, multiplayer, pvp, heroes, lanes
|
||||
|
||||
Multiplayer team battles with hero selection.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Hero/champion design
|
||||
- Lane and map design
|
||||
- Team composition
|
||||
- Matchmaking
|
||||
- Economy (gold/items)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Party Game
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** party, multiplayer, minigames, casual
|
||||
|
||||
Local multiplayer with minigames.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Minigame design patterns
|
||||
- Controller support
|
||||
- Round/game structure
|
||||
- Scoring systems
|
||||
- Player count flexibility
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Horror & Survival
|
||||
|
||||
#### Survival
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** survival, crafting, resources, danger
|
||||
|
||||
Resource gathering with crafting and persistent threats.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Resource gathering
|
||||
- Crafting systems
|
||||
- Hunger/health/needs
|
||||
- Threat systems
|
||||
- Base building
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Horror
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** horror, atmosphere, tension, fear
|
||||
|
||||
Atmosphere and tension with limited resources.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Fear mechanics
|
||||
- Resource scarcity
|
||||
- Sound design
|
||||
- Lighting and visibility
|
||||
- Enemy/threat design
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Casual & Progression
|
||||
|
||||
#### Puzzle
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** puzzle, logic, cerebral
|
||||
|
||||
Logic-based challenges and problem-solving.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Puzzle mechanics
|
||||
- Difficulty progression
|
||||
- Hint systems
|
||||
- Level structure
|
||||
- Scoring/rating
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Idle/Incremental
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** idle, incremental, automation, progression
|
||||
|
||||
Passive progression with upgrades and automation.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Core loop design
|
||||
- Prestige systems
|
||||
- Automation unlocks
|
||||
- Number scaling
|
||||
- Offline progress
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Card Game
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** card, deck-building, strategy, turns
|
||||
|
||||
Deck building with card mechanics.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Card design framework
|
||||
- Deck building rules
|
||||
- Mana/resource systems
|
||||
- Rarity and collection
|
||||
- Competitive balance
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Rhythm
|
||||
|
||||
#### Rhythm
|
||||
|
||||
**Tags:** rhythm, music, timing, beats
|
||||
|
||||
Music synchronization with timing-based gameplay.
|
||||
|
||||
**GDD sections added:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Note/beat mapping
|
||||
- Scoring systems
|
||||
- Difficulty levels
|
||||
- Music licensing
|
||||
- Input methods
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Hybrid Game Types
|
||||
|
||||
Many games combine multiple genres. BMGD supports hybrid selection:
|
||||
|
||||
### Examples
|
||||
|
||||
**Action RPG** = Action Platformer + RPG
|
||||
|
||||
- Movement and combat systems from Action Platformer
|
||||
- Progression and stats from RPG
|
||||
|
||||
**Survival Horror** = Survival + Horror
|
||||
|
||||
- Resource and crafting from Survival
|
||||
- Atmosphere and fear from Horror
|
||||
|
||||
**Roguelike Deckbuilder** = Roguelike + Card Game
|
||||
|
||||
- Run structure from Roguelike
|
||||
- Card mechanics from Card Game
|
||||
|
||||
### How to Use Hybrids
|
||||
|
||||
During GDD creation, select multiple game types when prompted:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Agent: What game type best describes your game?
|
||||
You: It's a roguelike with card game combat
|
||||
Agent: I'll include sections for both Roguelike and Card Game...
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Game Type Selection Tips
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Start with Core Fantasy
|
||||
|
||||
What does the player primarily DO in your game?
|
||||
|
||||
- Run and jump? → Platformer types
|
||||
- Build and manage? → Simulation types
|
||||
- Fight enemies? → Combat types
|
||||
- Make choices? → Narrative types
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Consider Your Loop
|
||||
|
||||
What's the core gameplay loop?
|
||||
|
||||
- Session-based runs? → Roguelike
|
||||
- Long-term progression? → RPG
|
||||
- Quick matches? → Multiplayer types
|
||||
- Creative expression? → Sandbox
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Don't Over-Combine
|
||||
|
||||
2-3 game types maximum. More than that usually means your design isn't focused enough.
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Primary vs Secondary
|
||||
|
||||
One type should be primary (most gameplay time). Others add flavor:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Primary:** Platformer (core movement and exploration)
|
||||
- **Secondary:** Metroidvania (ability gating structure)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## GDD Section Mapping
|
||||
|
||||
When you select a game type, BMGD adds these GDD sections:
|
||||
|
||||
| Game Type | Key Sections Added |
|
||||
| ----------------- | -------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| Action Platformer | Movement, Combat, Level Design |
|
||||
| RPG | Stats, Inventory, Quests |
|
||||
| Roguelike | Procedural Gen, Runs, Meta-Progression |
|
||||
| Narrative | Story Structure, Dialogue, Branching |
|
||||
| Multiplayer | Matchmaking, Netcode, Balance |
|
||||
| Simulation | Systems, Economy, AI |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Quick Start Guide](./quick-start.md)** - Get started with BMGD
|
||||
- **[Workflows Guide](./workflows-guide.md)** - GDD workflow details
|
||||
- **[Glossary](./glossary.md)** - Game development terminology
|
||||
293
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/glossary.md
Normal file
293
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/glossary.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,293 @@
|
||||
# BMGD Glossary
|
||||
|
||||
Key game development terminology used in BMGD workflows.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## A
|
||||
|
||||
### Acceptance Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
Specific conditions that must be met for a story to be considered complete. Defines "done" for implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
### Act Structure
|
||||
|
||||
Story organization into major sections (typically 3 acts: Setup, Confrontation, Resolution).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## B
|
||||
|
||||
### Backlog
|
||||
|
||||
List of pending work items (epics, stories) waiting to be scheduled and implemented.
|
||||
|
||||
### Boss Design
|
||||
|
||||
Design of significant enemy encounters, typically featuring unique mechanics and increased challenge.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## C
|
||||
|
||||
### Character Arc
|
||||
|
||||
The transformation a character undergoes through the story, from initial state to final state.
|
||||
|
||||
### Core Fantasy
|
||||
|
||||
The emotional experience players seek from your game. What they want to FEEL.
|
||||
|
||||
### Core Loop
|
||||
|
||||
The fundamental cycle of actions players repeat throughout gameplay. The heart of your game.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## D
|
||||
|
||||
### Definition of Done (DoD)
|
||||
|
||||
Checklist of requirements that must be satisfied before work is considered complete.
|
||||
|
||||
### Design Pillar
|
||||
|
||||
Core principle that guides all design decisions. Typically 3-5 pillars define a game's identity.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## E
|
||||
|
||||
### Environmental Storytelling
|
||||
|
||||
Narrative communicated through the game world itself—visual details, audio, found documents—rather than explicit dialogue.
|
||||
|
||||
### Epic
|
||||
|
||||
Large body of work that can be broken down into smaller stories. Represents a major feature or system.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## F
|
||||
|
||||
### Frame Data
|
||||
|
||||
In fighting games, the precise timing information for moves (startup, active, recovery frames).
|
||||
|
||||
### Frontmatter
|
||||
|
||||
YAML metadata at the beginning of markdown files, used for workflow state tracking.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## G
|
||||
|
||||
### Game Brief
|
||||
|
||||
Document capturing the game's core vision, pillars, target audience, and scope. Foundation for the GDD.
|
||||
|
||||
### Game Design Document (GDD)
|
||||
|
||||
Comprehensive document detailing all aspects of game design: mechanics, systems, content, and more.
|
||||
|
||||
### Game Type
|
||||
|
||||
Genre classification that determines which specialized GDD sections are included.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## H
|
||||
|
||||
### Hot Path
|
||||
|
||||
Code that executes frequently (every frame). Must be optimized for performance.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## I
|
||||
|
||||
### Idle Progression
|
||||
|
||||
Game mechanics where progress continues even when the player isn't actively playing.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## K
|
||||
|
||||
### Kishotenketsu
|
||||
|
||||
Four-act story structure from East Asian narrative tradition (Introduction, Development, Twist, Conclusion).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## L
|
||||
|
||||
### Localization
|
||||
|
||||
Adapting game content for different languages and cultures.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## M
|
||||
|
||||
### MDA Framework
|
||||
|
||||
Mechanics → Dynamics → Aesthetics. Framework for analyzing and designing games.
|
||||
|
||||
### Meta-Progression
|
||||
|
||||
Persistent progression that carries between individual runs or sessions.
|
||||
|
||||
### Metroidvania
|
||||
|
||||
Genre featuring interconnected world exploration with ability-gated progression.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## N
|
||||
|
||||
### Narrative Complexity
|
||||
|
||||
How central story is to the game experience (Critical, Heavy, Moderate, Light).
|
||||
|
||||
### Netcode
|
||||
|
||||
Networking code handling multiplayer communication and synchronization.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## P
|
||||
|
||||
### Permadeath
|
||||
|
||||
Game mechanic where character death is permanent, typically requiring a new run.
|
||||
|
||||
### Player Agency
|
||||
|
||||
The degree to which players can make meaningful choices that affect outcomes.
|
||||
|
||||
### Procedural Generation
|
||||
|
||||
Algorithmic creation of game content (levels, items, characters) rather than hand-crafted.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## R
|
||||
|
||||
### Retrospective
|
||||
|
||||
Team meeting after completing work to reflect on what went well and what to improve.
|
||||
|
||||
### Roguelike
|
||||
|
||||
Genre featuring procedural generation, permadeath, and run-based progression.
|
||||
|
||||
### Run
|
||||
|
||||
A single playthrough in a roguelike or run-based game, from start to death/completion.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## S
|
||||
|
||||
### Sprint
|
||||
|
||||
Time-boxed period of development work, typically 1-2 weeks.
|
||||
|
||||
### Sprint Status
|
||||
|
||||
Tracking document showing current sprint progress, story states, and blockers.
|
||||
|
||||
### Story
|
||||
|
||||
Smallest unit of implementable work with clear acceptance criteria. Part of an epic.
|
||||
|
||||
### Story Context
|
||||
|
||||
Assembled documentation and code context needed to implement a specific story.
|
||||
|
||||
### Story Gates
|
||||
|
||||
Points where story progression is blocked until certain gameplay conditions are met.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## T
|
||||
|
||||
### Tech Spec
|
||||
|
||||
Technical specification document detailing how a feature will be implemented.
|
||||
|
||||
### TDD (Test-Driven Development)
|
||||
|
||||
Development approach: write tests first, then implement code to pass them.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## U
|
||||
|
||||
### UI/UX
|
||||
|
||||
User Interface / User Experience. How players interact with and experience the game.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## V
|
||||
|
||||
### Visual Novel
|
||||
|
||||
Genre focused on narrative with static images, dialogue, and player choices.
|
||||
|
||||
### Voice Acting
|
||||
|
||||
Recorded spoken dialogue for game characters.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## W
|
||||
|
||||
### Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
Structured process for completing a specific type of work (e.g., GDD creation, story implementation).
|
||||
|
||||
### Workflow Status
|
||||
|
||||
Current state of project workflows, tracking which phases and documents are complete.
|
||||
|
||||
### World Building
|
||||
|
||||
Creation of the game's setting, including history, culture, geography, and lore.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## BMGD-Specific Terms
|
||||
|
||||
### A/P/C Menu
|
||||
|
||||
Options presented after content generation:
|
||||
|
||||
- **A** - Advanced Elicitation (explore deeper)
|
||||
- **P** - Party Mode (multi-agent discussion)
|
||||
- **C** - Continue (save and proceed)
|
||||
|
||||
### Narrative Complexity Levels
|
||||
|
||||
- **Critical** - Story IS the game (visual novels)
|
||||
- **Heavy** - Deep narrative with gameplay (RPGs)
|
||||
- **Moderate** - Meaningful story supporting gameplay
|
||||
- **Light** - Minimal story, gameplay-focused
|
||||
|
||||
### Step-File Architecture
|
||||
|
||||
BMGD workflow pattern using separate markdown files for each workflow step.
|
||||
|
||||
### Workflow-Install Pattern
|
||||
|
||||
Phase 4 workflows inherit from BMM base and add BMGD-specific overrides.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Quick Start Guide](./quick-start.md)** - Get started with BMGD
|
||||
- **[Game Types Guide](./game-types-guide.md)** - Game genre reference
|
||||
175
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/index.md
Normal file
175
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/index.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,175 @@
|
||||
# BMGD Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
Complete guides for the BMad Game Development Module (BMGD) - AI-powered workflows for game design and development that adapt to your project's needs.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Getting Started
|
||||
|
||||
**New to BMGD?** Start here:
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Quick Start Guide](./quick-start.md)** - Get started building your first game
|
||||
- Installation and setup
|
||||
- Understanding the game development phases
|
||||
- Running your first workflows
|
||||
- Agent-based development flow
|
||||
|
||||
**Quick Path:** Install BMGD module → Game Brief → GDD → Architecture → Build
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Core Concepts
|
||||
|
||||
Understanding how BMGD works:
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Agents Guide](./agents-guide.md)** - Complete reference for game development agents
|
||||
- Game Designer, Game Developer, Game Architect, Game Scrum Master, Game QA, Game Solo Dev
|
||||
- Agent roles and when to use them
|
||||
- Agent workflows and menus
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Workflows Guide](./workflows-guide.md)** - Complete workflow reference
|
||||
- Phase 1: Preproduction (Brainstorm, Game Brief)
|
||||
- Phase 2: Design (GDD, Narrative)
|
||||
- Phase 3: Technical (Architecture)
|
||||
- Phase 4: Production (Sprint-based development)
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Game Types Guide](./game-types-guide.md)** - Selecting and using game type templates
|
||||
- 24 supported game types
|
||||
- Genre-specific GDD sections
|
||||
- Hybrid game type handling
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Quick-Flow Guide](./quick-flow-guide.md)** - Fast-track workflows for rapid development
|
||||
- Quick-Prototype for testing ideas
|
||||
- Quick-Dev for flexible implementation
|
||||
- When to use quick-flow vs full BMGD
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick References
|
||||
|
||||
Essential reference materials:
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Glossary](./glossary.md)** - Key game development terminology
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Choose Your Path
|
||||
|
||||
### I need to...
|
||||
|
||||
**Start a new game project**
|
||||
→ Start with [Quick Start Guide](./quick-start.md)
|
||||
→ Run `brainstorm-game` for ideation
|
||||
→ Create a Game Brief with `create-brief`
|
||||
|
||||
**Design my game**
|
||||
→ Create a GDD with `create-gdd`
|
||||
→ If story-heavy, add Narrative Design with `create-narrative`
|
||||
|
||||
**Plan the technical architecture**
|
||||
→ Run `create-architecture` with the Game Architect
|
||||
|
||||
**Build my game**
|
||||
→ Use Phase 4 production workflows
|
||||
→ Follow the sprint-based development cycle
|
||||
|
||||
**Quickly test an idea or implement a feature**
|
||||
→ Use [Quick-Flow](./quick-flow-guide.md) for rapid prototyping and development
|
||||
→ `quick-prototype` to test mechanics, `quick-dev` to implement
|
||||
|
||||
**Set up testing and QA**
|
||||
→ Use Game QA agent for test framework setup
|
||||
→ Run `test-framework` to initialize testing for Unity/Unreal/Godot
|
||||
→ Use `test-design` to create test scenarios
|
||||
→ Plan playtests with `playtest-plan`
|
||||
|
||||
**Understand game type templates**
|
||||
→ See [Game Types Guide](./game-types-guide.md)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Game Development Phases
|
||||
|
||||
BMGD follows four phases aligned with game development:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Preproduction
|
||||
|
||||
- **Brainstorm Game** - Ideation with game-specific techniques
|
||||
- **Game Brief** - Capture vision, market, and fundamentals
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Design
|
||||
|
||||
- **GDD (Game Design Document)** - Comprehensive game design
|
||||
- **Narrative Design** - Story, characters, world (for story-driven games)
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Technical
|
||||
|
||||
- **Game Architecture** - Engine, systems, patterns, structure
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Production
|
||||
|
||||
- **Sprint Planning** - Epic and story management
|
||||
- **Story Development** - Implementation workflow
|
||||
- **Code Review** - Quality assurance
|
||||
- **Testing** - Automated tests, playtesting, performance
|
||||
- **Retrospective** - Continuous improvement
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## BMGD vs BMM
|
||||
|
||||
BMGD extends BMM with game-specific capabilities:
|
||||
|
||||
| Aspect | BMM | BMGD |
|
||||
| -------------- | ------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
|
||||
| **Focus** | General software | Game development |
|
||||
| **Agents** | PM, Architect, Dev, SM, TEA, Solo Dev | Game Designer, Game Dev, Game Architect, Game SM, Game QA, Game Solo Dev |
|
||||
| **Planning** | PRD, Tech Spec | Game Brief, GDD |
|
||||
| **Types** | N/A | 24 game type templates |
|
||||
| **Narrative** | N/A | Full narrative workflow |
|
||||
| **Testing** | Web-focused testarch | Engine-specific (Unity, Unreal, Godot) |
|
||||
| **Production** | Inherited from BMM | BMM workflows with game overrides |
|
||||
|
||||
BMGD production workflows inherit from BMM and add game-specific checklists and templates.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Documentation Map
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
BMGD Documentation
|
||||
├── README.md (this file)
|
||||
├── quick-start.md # Getting started
|
||||
├── agents-guide.md # Agent reference
|
||||
├── workflows-guide.md # Workflow reference
|
||||
├── quick-flow-guide.md # Rapid prototyping and development
|
||||
├── game-types-guide.md # Game type templates
|
||||
├── glossary.md # Terminology
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## External Resources
|
||||
|
||||
### Community and Support
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Discord Community](https://discord.gg/gk8jAdXWmj)** - Get help from the community
|
||||
- **[GitHub Issues](https://github.com/bmad-code-org/BMAD-METHOD/issues)** - Report bugs or request features
|
||||
- **[YouTube Channel](https://www.youtube.com/@BMadCode)** - Video tutorials
|
||||
|
||||
### Related Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
- **[BMM Documentation](../../bmm/docs/index.md)** - Core BMad Method documentation
|
||||
|
||||
## Tips for Using This Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Start with Quick Start** if you're new to BMGD
|
||||
2. **Check Game Types Guide** when creating your GDD
|
||||
3. **Reference Glossary** for game development terminology
|
||||
4. **Use Troubleshooting** when you encounter issues
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**Ready to make games?** → [Start with the Quick Start Guide](./quick-start.md)
|
||||
288
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/quick-flow-guide.md
Normal file
288
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/quick-flow-guide.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,288 @@
|
||||
# BMGD Quick-Flow Guide
|
||||
|
||||
Fast-track workflows for rapid game prototyping and flexible development.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Game Solo Dev Agent
|
||||
|
||||
For dedicated quick-flow development, use the **Game Solo Dev** agent (Indie). This agent is optimized for solo developers and small teams who want to skip the full planning phases and ship fast.
|
||||
|
||||
**Switch to Game Solo Dev:** Type `@game-solo-dev` or select the agent from your IDE.
|
||||
|
||||
The Game Solo Dev agent includes:
|
||||
|
||||
- `quick-prototype` - Rapid mechanic testing
|
||||
- `quick-dev` - Flexible feature implementation
|
||||
- `create-tech-spec` - Create implementation-ready specs
|
||||
- `code-review` - Quality checks
|
||||
- `test-framework` - Automated testing setup
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Quick-flow workflows skip the full BMGD planning phases when you need to move fast. Use them for:
|
||||
|
||||
- Testing a game mechanic idea
|
||||
- Implementing a small feature
|
||||
- Rapid prototyping before committing to design
|
||||
- Bug fixes and tweaks
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Full BMGD Flow:
|
||||
Brief → GDD → Architecture → Sprint Planning → Stories → Implementation
|
||||
|
||||
Quick-Flow:
|
||||
Idea → Quick-Prototype → Quick-Dev → Done
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick-Prototype
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `quick-prototype`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game Designer, Game Developer
|
||||
**Purpose:** Rapidly test gameplay ideas with minimal setup
|
||||
|
||||
### When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
- You have a mechanic idea and want to test the "feel"
|
||||
- You're not sure if something will be fun
|
||||
- You want to experiment before committing to design
|
||||
- You need a proof of concept
|
||||
|
||||
### Workflow Steps
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Define Scope** - What are you prototyping? (mechanic, feature, system)
|
||||
2. **Set Success Criteria** - How will you know if it works?
|
||||
3. **Rapid Implementation** - Build the minimum to test the idea
|
||||
4. **Playtest and Evaluate** - Does it feel right?
|
||||
|
||||
### Prototype Principles
|
||||
|
||||
- **Minimum Viable Prototype** - Only what's needed to test the idea
|
||||
- **Hardcode First** - Magic numbers are fine, extract later
|
||||
- **Skip Edge Cases** - Happy path only for now
|
||||
- **Placeholder Everything** - Cubes, debug text, temp sounds
|
||||
- **Comment Intent** - Mark what's temporary vs keeper code
|
||||
|
||||
### Example Session
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
You: quick-prototype
|
||||
|
||||
Agent: What are you prototyping?
|
||||
|
||||
You: I want to test a grappling hook mechanic. Player should be
|
||||
able to aim at surfaces and pull themselves toward the hook point.
|
||||
|
||||
Agent: What makes this prototype successful?
|
||||
|
||||
You: 1. Aiming feels responsive and intuitive
|
||||
2. The pull movement feels satisfying, not floaty
|
||||
3. Player can chain hooks without awkward pauses
|
||||
|
||||
Agent: [Implements minimal grappling hook]
|
||||
|
||||
Agent: Prototype complete! Playtest results:
|
||||
- Aiming: Works, consider adding aim assist
|
||||
- Movement: Pull is smooth, might need speed curve
|
||||
- Chaining: Currently has 0.2s delay, feels sluggish
|
||||
|
||||
Next: [d] Develop further | [i] Iterate | [a] Archive
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### After Prototyping
|
||||
|
||||
- **Develop** (`d`) - Use `quick-dev` to build production code
|
||||
- **Iterate** (`i`) - Adjust and re-test the prototype
|
||||
- **Archive** (`a`) - Keep as reference, move on to other ideas
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick-Dev
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `quick-dev`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game Developer
|
||||
**Purpose:** Flexible development with game-specific considerations
|
||||
|
||||
### When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
- Implementing a feature from a tech-spec
|
||||
- Building on a successful prototype
|
||||
- Making changes that don't need full story workflow
|
||||
- Quick fixes and improvements
|
||||
|
||||
### Workflow Modes
|
||||
|
||||
**Mode A: Tech-Spec Driven**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
You: quick-dev tech-spec-combat.md
|
||||
Agent: [Loads spec, extracts tasks, implements]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Mode B: Direct Instructions**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
You: quick-dev implement double-jump for the player
|
||||
Agent: [Evaluates complexity, offers planning options]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Mode C: From Prototype**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
You: quick-dev from the grappling hook prototype
|
||||
Agent: [Loads prototype, productionizes code]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Game-Specific Checks
|
||||
|
||||
Quick-dev includes automatic consideration of:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Performance** - No allocations in hot paths, object pooling
|
||||
- **Feel** - Input responsiveness, visual/audio feedback
|
||||
- **Integration** - Save/load, multiplayer sync, platform testing
|
||||
|
||||
### Example Session
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
You: quick-dev implement enemy patrol behavior
|
||||
|
||||
Agent: This looks like a focused feature. Options:
|
||||
[t] Plan first - Create tech-spec (recommended)
|
||||
[r] Prototype first - Test the idea
|
||||
[e] Execute directly
|
||||
|
||||
You: e
|
||||
|
||||
Agent: Any additional guidance? (patterns, files, constraints)
|
||||
|
||||
You: Use the existing AIController base class. Enemies should
|
||||
patrol between waypoints and return if player leaves range.
|
||||
|
||||
Agent: [Implements patrol behavior]
|
||||
|
||||
Agent: Implementation Complete!
|
||||
Files Modified: EnemyAI.cs, PatrolBehavior.cs
|
||||
Tests: Unit tests added for patrol state machine
|
||||
Performance: No per-frame allocations
|
||||
|
||||
Recommended: Playtest the changes
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Complexity Routing
|
||||
|
||||
Quick-dev automatically detects complex requests and offers alternatives:
|
||||
|
||||
| Signals | Recommendation |
|
||||
| -------------------------------------- | ---------------------- |
|
||||
| Single mechanic, bug fix, tweak | Execute directly |
|
||||
| Multiple systems, performance-critical | Plan first (tech-spec) |
|
||||
| Platform/system level work | Use full BMGD workflow |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Choosing Between Quick-Flows
|
||||
|
||||
| Scenario | Use |
|
||||
| ----------------------- | ------------------------------- |
|
||||
| "Will this be fun?" | `quick-prototype` |
|
||||
| "How should this feel?" | `quick-prototype` |
|
||||
| "Build this feature" | `quick-dev` |
|
||||
| "Fix this bug" | `quick-dev` |
|
||||
| "Test then build" | `quick-prototype` → `quick-dev` |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick-Flow vs Full BMGD
|
||||
|
||||
### Use Quick-Flow When
|
||||
|
||||
- The scope is small and well-understood
|
||||
- You're experimenting or prototyping
|
||||
- You have a clear tech-spec already
|
||||
- The work doesn't affect core game systems significantly
|
||||
|
||||
### Use Full BMGD When
|
||||
|
||||
- Building a major feature or system
|
||||
- The scope is unclear or large
|
||||
- Multiple team members need alignment
|
||||
- The work affects game pillars or core loop
|
||||
- You need documentation for future reference
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Checklists
|
||||
|
||||
### Quick-Prototype Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
**Before:**
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Prototype scope defined
|
||||
- [ ] Success criteria established (2-3 items)
|
||||
|
||||
**During:**
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Minimum viable code written
|
||||
- [ ] Placeholder assets used
|
||||
- [ ] Core functionality testable
|
||||
|
||||
**After:**
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Each criterion evaluated
|
||||
- [ ] Decision made (develop/iterate/archive)
|
||||
|
||||
### Quick-Dev Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
**Before:**
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Context loaded (spec, prototype, or guidance)
|
||||
- [ ] Files to modify identified
|
||||
- [ ] Patterns understood
|
||||
|
||||
**During:**
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] All tasks completed
|
||||
- [ ] No allocations in hot paths
|
||||
- [ ] Frame rate maintained
|
||||
|
||||
**After:**
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Game runs without errors
|
||||
- [ ] Feature works as specified
|
||||
- [ ] Manual playtest completed
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Tips for Success
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Timebox Prototypes
|
||||
|
||||
Set a limit (e.g., 2 hours) for prototyping. If it's not working by then, step back and reconsider.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Embrace Programmer Art
|
||||
|
||||
Prototypes don't need to look good. Focus on feel, not visuals.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Test on Target Hardware
|
||||
|
||||
What feels right on your dev machine might not feel right on target platform.
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Document Learnings
|
||||
|
||||
Even failed prototypes teach something. Note what you learned.
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Know When to Graduate
|
||||
|
||||
If quick-dev keeps expanding scope, stop and create proper stories.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Workflows Guide](./workflows-guide.md)** - Full workflow reference
|
||||
- **[Agents Guide](./agents-guide.md)** - Agent capabilities
|
||||
- **[Quick Start Guide](./quick-start.md)** - Getting started with BMGD
|
||||
250
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/quick-start.md
Normal file
250
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/quick-start.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,250 @@
|
||||
# BMGD Quick Start Guide
|
||||
|
||||
Get started building games with the BMad Game Development Module.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Prerequisites
|
||||
|
||||
Before starting with BMGD, ensure you have:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **BMAD-METHOD installed** - Follow the main installation guide
|
||||
2. **A game idea** - Even a rough concept is enough to start
|
||||
3. **Your preferred AI tool** - Claude Code, Cursor, or web-based chat
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Installation
|
||||
|
||||
BMGD is a custom module that extends BMM. Install it using the BMAD installer:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# During installation, select BMGD when prompted for custom modules
|
||||
npx bmad-cli install
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Or add to an existing installation:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
npx bmad-cli install --add-module bmgd
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Understanding the Phases
|
||||
|
||||
BMGD follows four game development phases:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Preproduction
|
||||
|
||||
**What happens:** Capture your game vision and core concept.
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflows:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `brainstorm-game` - Guided ideation with game-specific techniques
|
||||
- `create-game-brief` - Document vision, market, pillars, and fundamentals
|
||||
|
||||
**Output:** Game Brief document
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Design
|
||||
|
||||
**What happens:** Detail your game's mechanics, systems, and (optionally) narrative.
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflows:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `create-gdd` - Create comprehensive Game Design Document
|
||||
- `narrative` - Create Narrative Design Document (for story-driven games)
|
||||
|
||||
**Output:** GDD (and Narrative Design document if applicable)
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Technical
|
||||
|
||||
**What happens:** Plan how you'll build the game.
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflows:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `create-architecture` - Define engine, systems, patterns, and structure
|
||||
|
||||
**Output:** Game Architecture document
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Production
|
||||
|
||||
**What happens:** Build your game in sprints.
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflows:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `sprint-planning` - Plan and track sprints
|
||||
- `sprint-status` - View progress and get recommendations
|
||||
- `create-story` - Create implementable stories
|
||||
- `dev-story` - Implement stories
|
||||
- `code-review` - Quality assurance
|
||||
- `retrospective` - Learn and improve after epics
|
||||
|
||||
**Output:** Working game code
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Your First Game Project
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 1: Start with Brainstorming (Optional)
|
||||
|
||||
If you have a vague idea and want help developing it:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
You: brainstorm-game
|
||||
Agent: [Guides you through game-specific ideation techniques]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 2: Create Your Game Brief
|
||||
|
||||
Capture your game's core vision:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
You: create-game-brief
|
||||
Agent: [Walks you through game concept, pillars, market, and fundamentals]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output:** `{output_folder}/game-brief.md`
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 3: Create Your GDD
|
||||
|
||||
Detail your game's design:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
You: create-gdd
|
||||
Agent: [Guides you through mechanics, systems, and game-type-specific sections]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output:** `{output_folder}/gdd.md` (or sharded into `{output_folder}/gdd/`)
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 4: Add Narrative Design (If Story-Driven)
|
||||
|
||||
For games with significant story:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
You: narrative
|
||||
Agent: [Facilitates story, characters, world, and dialogue design]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output:** `{output_folder}/narrative-design.md`
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 5: Create Architecture
|
||||
|
||||
Plan your technical implementation:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
You: create-architecture
|
||||
Agent: [Guides engine selection, system design, and technical decisions]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output:** `{output_folder}/game-architecture.md`
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 6: Start Building
|
||||
|
||||
Begin sprint-based development:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
You: sprint-planning
|
||||
Agent: [Sets up sprint tracking and epic management]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Choosing Your Agent
|
||||
|
||||
BMGD provides six specialized agents:
|
||||
|
||||
| Agent | Icon | When to Use |
|
||||
| --------------------- | ---- | ----------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| **Game Designer** | 🎲 | Brainstorming, Game Brief, GDD, Narrative |
|
||||
| **Game Architect** | 🏛️ | Architecture, technical decisions |
|
||||
| **Game Developer** | 🕹️ | Implementation, code reviews |
|
||||
| **Game Scrum Master** | 🎯 | Sprint planning, story management |
|
||||
| **Game QA** | 🧪 | Test framework, test design, automation |
|
||||
| **Game Solo Dev** | 🎮 | Quick prototyping, indie development |
|
||||
|
||||
### Typical Flow
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Game Designer** (Phases 1-2): Brainstorm → Brief → GDD → Narrative
|
||||
2. **Game Architect** (Phase 3): Architecture
|
||||
3. **Game Scrum Master** (Phase 4): Sprint planning, story creation
|
||||
4. **Game Developer** (Phase 4): Implementation, code reviews
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Command Reference
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Preproduction
|
||||
|
||||
- `brainstorm-game` - Ideation session
|
||||
- `create-game-brief` - Create Game Brief
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Design
|
||||
|
||||
- `create-gdd` - Create GDD
|
||||
- `narrative` - Create Narrative Design
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Technical
|
||||
|
||||
- `create-architecture` - Create Architecture
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Production
|
||||
|
||||
- `sprint-planning` - Plan sprints
|
||||
- `sprint-status` - View progress and recommendations
|
||||
- `create-story` - Create story
|
||||
- `dev-story` - Implement story
|
||||
- `code-review` - Review code
|
||||
- `retrospective` - Team retrospective
|
||||
- `correct-course` - Handle sprint changes
|
||||
|
||||
### Quick-Flow (Fast-Track)
|
||||
|
||||
- `quick-prototype` - Rapid prototyping (IDE only)
|
||||
- `quick-dev` - Flexible development (IDE only)
|
||||
|
||||
### Utility
|
||||
|
||||
- `workflow-status` - Check project status
|
||||
- `party-mode` - Multi-agent collaboration
|
||||
- `advanced-elicitation` - Deep exploration
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Tips for Success
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Start Small
|
||||
|
||||
Begin with a simple game concept. You can always expand later.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Use Game Type Templates
|
||||
|
||||
When creating your GDD, BMGD offers 24 game type templates that provide genre-specific sections.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Iterate
|
||||
|
||||
Documents are living artifacts. Return to update them as your vision evolves.
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Trust the Process
|
||||
|
||||
Each workflow builds on previous outputs. The Game Brief informs the GDD, which informs the Architecture, which informs implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Collaborate with Agents
|
||||
|
||||
Use `party-mode` to get perspectives from multiple agents when facing complex decisions.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Agents Guide](./agents-guide.md)** - Learn about each agent's capabilities
|
||||
- **[Workflows Guide](./workflows-guide.md)** - Detailed workflow reference
|
||||
- **[Quick-Flow Guide](./quick-flow-guide.md)** - Rapid prototyping and development
|
||||
- **[Game Types Guide](./game-types-guide.md)** - Understand game type templates
|
||||
- **[Glossary](./glossary.md)** - Game development terminology
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**Ready to start?** Chat with the **Game Designer** agent and say `brainstorm-game` or `create-game-brief`!
|
||||
259
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/troubleshooting.md
Normal file
259
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/troubleshooting.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,259 @@
|
||||
# BMGD Troubleshooting
|
||||
|
||||
Common issues and solutions when using BMGD workflows.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Installation Issues
|
||||
|
||||
### BMGD module not appearing
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptom:** BMGD agents and workflows are not available after installation.
|
||||
|
||||
**Solutions:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Verify BMGD was selected during installation
|
||||
2. Check `_bmad/bmgd/` folder exists in your project
|
||||
3. Re-run installer with `--add-module bmgd`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Config file missing
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptom:** Workflows fail with "config not found" errors.
|
||||
|
||||
**Solution:**
|
||||
Check for `_bmad/bmgd/config.yaml` in your project. If missing, create it:
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
# BMGD Configuration
|
||||
output_folder: '{project-root}/docs/game-design'
|
||||
user_name: 'Your Name'
|
||||
communication_language: 'English'
|
||||
document_output_language: 'English'
|
||||
game_dev_experience: 'intermediate'
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow Issues
|
||||
|
||||
### "GDD not found" in Narrative workflow
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptom:** Narrative workflow can't find the GDD.
|
||||
|
||||
**Solutions:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Ensure GDD exists in `{output_folder}`
|
||||
2. Check GDD filename contains "gdd" (e.g., `game-gdd.md`, `my-gdd.md`)
|
||||
3. If using sharded GDD, verify `{output_folder}/gdd/index.md` exists
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Workflow state not persisting
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptom:** Returning to a workflow starts from the beginning.
|
||||
|
||||
**Solutions:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Check the output document's frontmatter for `stepsCompleted` array
|
||||
2. Ensure document was saved before ending session
|
||||
3. Use "Continue existing" option when re-entering workflow
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Wrong game type sections in GDD
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptom:** GDD includes irrelevant sections for your game type.
|
||||
|
||||
**Solutions:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Review game type selection at Step 7 of GDD workflow
|
||||
2. You can select multiple types for hybrid games
|
||||
3. Irrelevant sections can be marked N/A or removed
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Agent Issues
|
||||
|
||||
### Agent not recognizing commands
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptom:** Typing a command like `create-gdd` doesn't trigger the workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
**Solutions:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Ensure you're chatting with the correct agent (Game Designer for GDD)
|
||||
2. Check exact command spelling (case-sensitive)
|
||||
3. Try `workflow-status` to verify agent is loaded correctly
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Agent using wrong persona
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptom:** Agent responses don't match expected personality.
|
||||
|
||||
**Solutions:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Verify correct agent file is loaded
|
||||
2. Check `_bmad/bmgd/agents/` for agent definitions
|
||||
3. Start a fresh chat session with the correct agent
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Document Issues
|
||||
|
||||
### Document too large for context
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptom:** AI can't process the entire GDD or narrative document.
|
||||
|
||||
**Solutions:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Use sharded document structure (index.md + section files)
|
||||
2. Request specific sections rather than full document
|
||||
3. GDD workflow supports automatic sharding for large documents
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Template placeholders not replaced
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptom:** Output contains `{{placeholder}}` text.
|
||||
|
||||
**Solutions:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Workflow may have been interrupted before completion
|
||||
2. Re-run the specific step that generates that section
|
||||
3. Manually edit the document to fill in missing values
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Frontmatter parsing errors
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptom:** YAML errors when loading documents.
|
||||
|
||||
**Solutions:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Validate YAML syntax (proper indentation, quotes around special characters)
|
||||
2. Check for tabs vs spaces (YAML requires spaces)
|
||||
3. Ensure frontmatter is bounded by `---` markers
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 4 (Production) Issues
|
||||
|
||||
### Sprint status not updating
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptom:** Story status changes don't reflect in sprint-status.yaml.
|
||||
|
||||
**Solutions:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Run `sprint-planning` to refresh status
|
||||
2. Check file permissions on sprint-status.yaml
|
||||
3. Verify workflow-install files exist in `_bmad/bmgd/workflows/4-production/`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Story context missing code references
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptom:** Generated story context doesn't include relevant code.
|
||||
|
||||
**Solutions:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Ensure project-context.md exists and is current
|
||||
2. Check that architecture document references correct file paths
|
||||
3. Story may need more specific file references in acceptance criteria
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Code review not finding issues
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptom:** Code review passes but bugs exist.
|
||||
|
||||
**Solutions:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Code review is AI-assisted, not comprehensive testing
|
||||
2. Always run actual tests before marking story done
|
||||
3. Consider manual review for critical code paths
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Performance Issues
|
||||
|
||||
### Workflows running slowly
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptom:** Long wait times between workflow steps.
|
||||
|
||||
**Solutions:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Use IDE-based workflows (faster than web)
|
||||
2. Keep documents concise (avoid unnecessary detail)
|
||||
3. Use sharded documents for large projects
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Context limit reached mid-workflow
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptom:** Workflow stops or loses context partway through.
|
||||
|
||||
**Solutions:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Save progress frequently (workflows auto-save on Continue)
|
||||
2. Break complex sections into multiple sessions
|
||||
3. Use step-file architecture (workflows resume from last step)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Error Messages
|
||||
|
||||
### "Input file not found"
|
||||
|
||||
**Cause:** Workflow requires a document that doesn't exist.
|
||||
|
||||
**Fix:** Complete prerequisite workflow first (e.g., Game Brief before GDD).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### "Invalid game type"
|
||||
|
||||
**Cause:** Selected game type not in supported list.
|
||||
|
||||
**Fix:** Check `game-types.csv` for valid type IDs.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### "Validation failed"
|
||||
|
||||
**Cause:** Document doesn't meet checklist requirements.
|
||||
|
||||
**Fix:** Review the validation output and address flagged items.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Getting Help
|
||||
|
||||
### Community Support
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Discord Community](https://discord.gg/gk8jAdXWmj)** - Real-time help from the community
|
||||
- **[GitHub Issues](https://github.com/bmad-code-org/BMAD-METHOD/issues)** - Report bugs or request features
|
||||
|
||||
### Self-Help
|
||||
|
||||
1. Check `workflow-status` to understand current state
|
||||
2. Review workflow markdown files for expected behavior
|
||||
3. Look at completed example documents in the module
|
||||
|
||||
### Reporting Issues
|
||||
|
||||
When reporting issues, include:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Which workflow and step
|
||||
2. Error message (if any)
|
||||
3. Relevant document frontmatter
|
||||
4. Steps to reproduce
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Quick Start Guide](./quick-start.md)** - Getting started
|
||||
- **[Workflows Guide](./workflows-guide.md)** - Workflow reference
|
||||
- **[Glossary](./glossary.md)** - Terminology
|
||||
BIN
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/workflow-overview.jpg
Normal file
BIN
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/workflow-overview.jpg
Normal file
Binary file not shown.
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 200 KiB |
463
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/workflows-guide.md
Normal file
463
docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/workflows-guide.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,463 @@
|
||||
# BMGD Workflows Guide
|
||||
|
||||
Complete reference for all BMGD workflows organized by development phase.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow Overview
|
||||
|
||||
BMGD workflows are organized into four phases:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 1: Preproduction
|
||||
|
||||
### Brainstorm Game
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `brainstorm-game`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game Designer
|
||||
**Input:** None required
|
||||
**Output:** Ideas and concepts (optionally saved)
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Guided ideation session using game-specific brainstorming techniques:
|
||||
|
||||
- **MDA Framework** - Mechanics → Dynamics → Aesthetics analysis
|
||||
- **Core Loop Workshop** - Define the fundamental gameplay loop
|
||||
- **Player Fantasy Mining** - Explore what players want to feel
|
||||
- **Genre Mashup** - Combine genres for unique concepts
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Initialize brainstorm session
|
||||
2. Load game-specific techniques
|
||||
3. Execute ideation with selected techniques
|
||||
4. Summarize and (optionally) hand off to Game Brief
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Game Brief
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `create-game-brief`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game Designer
|
||||
**Input:** Ideas from brainstorming (optional)
|
||||
**Output:** `{output_folder}/game-brief.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Captures your game's core vision and fundamentals. This is the foundation for all subsequent design work.
|
||||
|
||||
**Sections covered:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Game concept and vision
|
||||
- Design pillars (3-5 core principles)
|
||||
- Target audience and market
|
||||
- Platform considerations
|
||||
- Core gameplay loop
|
||||
- Initial scope definition
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 2: Design
|
||||
|
||||
### GDD (Game Design Document)
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `create-gdd`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game Designer
|
||||
**Input:** Game Brief
|
||||
**Output:** `{output_folder}/gdd.md` (or sharded into `{output_folder}/gdd/`)
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Comprehensive game design document with genre-specific sections based on 24 supported game types.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core sections:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Executive Summary
|
||||
2. Gameplay Systems
|
||||
3. Core Mechanics
|
||||
4. Progression Systems
|
||||
5. UI/UX Design
|
||||
6. Audio Design
|
||||
7. Art Direction
|
||||
8. Technical Requirements
|
||||
9. Game-Type-Specific Sections
|
||||
10. Epic Generation (for sprint planning)
|
||||
|
||||
**Features:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Game type selection with specialized sections
|
||||
- Hybrid game type support
|
||||
- Automatic epic generation
|
||||
- Scale-adaptive complexity
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Narrative Design
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `narrative`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game Designer
|
||||
**Input:** GDD (required), Game Brief (optional)
|
||||
**Output:** `{output_folder}/narrative-design.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
For story-driven games. Creates comprehensive narrative documentation.
|
||||
|
||||
**Sections covered:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Story Foundation (premise, themes, tone)
|
||||
2. Story Structure (acts, beats, pacing)
|
||||
3. Characters (protagonists, antagonists, supporting, arcs)
|
||||
4. World Building (setting, history, factions, locations)
|
||||
5. Dialogue Framework (style, branching)
|
||||
6. Environmental Storytelling
|
||||
7. Narrative Delivery Methods
|
||||
8. Gameplay-Narrative Integration
|
||||
9. Production Planning (scope, localization, voice acting)
|
||||
10. Appendices (relationship map, timeline)
|
||||
|
||||
**Narrative Complexity Levels:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Critical** - Story IS the game (visual novels, adventure games)
|
||||
- **Heavy** - Deep narrative with gameplay (RPGs, story-driven action)
|
||||
- **Moderate** - Meaningful story supporting gameplay
|
||||
- **Light** - Minimal story, gameplay-focused
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 3: Technical
|
||||
|
||||
### Game Architecture
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `create-architecture`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game Architect
|
||||
**Input:** GDD, Narrative Design (optional)
|
||||
**Output:** `{output_folder}/game-architecture.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Technical architecture document covering engine selection, system design, and implementation approach.
|
||||
|
||||
**Sections covered:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Executive Summary
|
||||
2. Engine/Framework Selection
|
||||
3. Core Systems Architecture
|
||||
4. Data Architecture
|
||||
5. Performance Requirements
|
||||
6. Platform-Specific Considerations
|
||||
7. Development Environment
|
||||
8. Testing Strategy
|
||||
9. Build and Deployment
|
||||
10. Technical Risks and Mitigations
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 4: Production
|
||||
|
||||
Production workflows inherit from BMM and add game-specific overrides.
|
||||
|
||||
### Sprint Planning
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `sprint-planning`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game Scrum Master
|
||||
**Input:** GDD with epics
|
||||
**Output:** `{output_folder}/sprint-status.yaml`
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Generates or updates sprint tracking from epic files. Sets up the sprint backlog and tracking.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Sprint Status
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `sprint-status`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game Scrum Master
|
||||
**Input:** `sprint-status.yaml`
|
||||
**Output:** Sprint summary, risks, next action recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Summarizes sprint progress, surfaces risks (stale file, orphaned stories, stories in review), and recommends the next workflow to run. Supports three modes:
|
||||
|
||||
- **interactive** (default): Displays summary with menu options
|
||||
- **validate**: Checks sprint-status.yaml structure
|
||||
- **data**: Returns raw data for other workflows
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Create Story
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `create-story`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game Scrum Master
|
||||
**Input:** GDD, Architecture, Epic context
|
||||
**Output:** `{output_folder}/epics/{epic-name}/stories/{story-name}.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Creates implementable story drafts with acceptance criteria, tasks, and technical notes. Stories are marked ready-for-dev directly when created.
|
||||
|
||||
**Validation:** `validate-create-story`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Dev Story
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `dev-story`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game Developer
|
||||
**Input:** Story (ready for dev)
|
||||
**Output:** Implemented code
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Implements story tasks following acceptance criteria. Uses TDD approach (red-green-refactor). Updates sprint-status.yaml automatically on completion.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Code Review
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `code-review`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game Developer
|
||||
**Input:** Story (ready for review)
|
||||
**Output:** Review feedback, approved/needs changes
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Thorough QA code review with game-specific considerations (performance, 60fps, etc.).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Retrospective
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `epic-retrospective`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game Scrum Master
|
||||
**Input:** Completed epic
|
||||
**Output:** Retrospective document
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Facilitates team retrospective after epic completion. Captures learnings and improvements.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Correct Course
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `correct-course`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game Scrum Master or Game Architect
|
||||
**Input:** Current project state
|
||||
**Output:** Correction plan
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Navigates significant changes when implementation is off-track. Analyzes impact and recommends adjustments.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow Status
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `workflow-status`
|
||||
**Agent:** All agents
|
||||
**Output:** Project status summary
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Checks current project status across all phases. Shows completed documents, current phase, and next steps.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick-Flow Workflows
|
||||
|
||||
Fast-track workflows that skip full planning phases. See **[Quick-Flow Guide](../../../../docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/quick-flow-guide.md)** for detailed usage.
|
||||
|
||||
### Quick-Prototype
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `quick-prototype`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game Designer, Game Developer
|
||||
**Input:** Idea or concept to test
|
||||
**Output:** Working prototype, playtest results
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Rapid prototyping workflow for testing game mechanics and ideas quickly. Focuses on "feel" over polish.
|
||||
|
||||
**Use when:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Testing if a mechanic is fun
|
||||
- Proving a concept before committing to design
|
||||
- Experimenting with gameplay ideas
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Quick-Dev
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `quick-dev`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game Developer
|
||||
**Input:** Tech-spec, prototype, or direct instructions
|
||||
**Output:** Implemented feature
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Flexible development workflow with game-specific considerations (performance, feel, integration).
|
||||
|
||||
**Use when:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Implementing features from tech-specs
|
||||
- Building on successful prototypes
|
||||
- Making changes that don't need full story workflow
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quality Assurance Workflows
|
||||
|
||||
Game testing workflows for automated testing, playtesting, and quality assurance across Unity, Unreal, and Godot.
|
||||
|
||||
### Test Framework
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `test-framework`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game QA
|
||||
**Input:** Game project
|
||||
**Output:** Configured test framework
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Initialize a production-ready test framework for your game engine:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Unity**: Unity Test Framework with Edit Mode and Play Mode tests
|
||||
- **Unreal**: Unreal Automation system with functional tests
|
||||
- **Godot**: GUT (Godot Unit Test) framework
|
||||
|
||||
**Creates:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Test directory structure
|
||||
- Framework configuration
|
||||
- Sample unit and integration tests
|
||||
- Test documentation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Test Design
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `test-design`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game QA
|
||||
**Input:** GDD, Architecture
|
||||
**Output:** `{output_folder}/game-test-design.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Creates comprehensive test scenarios covering:
|
||||
|
||||
- Core gameplay mechanics
|
||||
- Progression and save systems
|
||||
- Multiplayer (if applicable)
|
||||
- Platform certification requirements
|
||||
|
||||
Uses GIVEN/WHEN/THEN format with priority levels (P0-P3).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Automate
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `automate`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game QA
|
||||
**Input:** Test design, game code
|
||||
**Output:** Automated test files
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Generates engine-appropriate automated tests:
|
||||
|
||||
- Unit tests for pure logic
|
||||
- Integration tests for system interactions
|
||||
- Smoke tests for critical path validation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Playtest Plan
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `playtest-plan`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game QA
|
||||
**Input:** Build, test objectives
|
||||
**Output:** `{output_folder}/playtest-plan.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Creates structured playtesting sessions:
|
||||
|
||||
- Session structure (pre/during/post)
|
||||
- Observation guides
|
||||
- Interview questions
|
||||
- Analysis templates
|
||||
|
||||
**Playtest Types:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Internal (team validation)
|
||||
- External (unbiased feedback)
|
||||
- Focused (specific feature testing)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Performance Test
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `performance-test`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game QA
|
||||
**Input:** Platform targets
|
||||
**Output:** `{output_folder}/performance-test-plan.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Designs performance testing strategy:
|
||||
|
||||
- Frame rate targets per platform
|
||||
- Memory budgets
|
||||
- Loading time requirements
|
||||
- Benchmark scenarios
|
||||
- Profiling methodology
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Test Review
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `test-review`
|
||||
**Agent:** Game QA
|
||||
**Input:** Existing test suite
|
||||
**Output:** `{output_folder}/test-review-report.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Reviews test quality and coverage:
|
||||
|
||||
- Test suite metrics
|
||||
- Quality assessment
|
||||
- Coverage gaps
|
||||
- Recommendations
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Utility Workflows
|
||||
|
||||
### Party Mode
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `party-mode`
|
||||
**Agent:** All agents
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Brings multiple agents together for collaborative discussion on complex decisions.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Advanced Elicitation
|
||||
|
||||
**Command:** `advanced-elicitation`
|
||||
**Agent:** All agents (web only)
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:**
|
||||
Deep exploration techniques to challenge assumptions and surface hidden requirements.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Standalone BMGD Workflows
|
||||
|
||||
BMGD Phase 4 workflows are standalone implementations tailored for game development:
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
workflow: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmgd/workflows/4-production/dev-story/workflow.yaml'
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This means:
|
||||
|
||||
1. BMGD workflows are self-contained with game-specific logic
|
||||
2. Game-focused templates, checklists, and instructions
|
||||
3. No dependency on BMM workflow files
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Quick Start Guide](../../../../docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/quick-start.md)** - Get started with BMGD
|
||||
- **[Quick-Flow Guide](../../../../docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/quick-flow-guide.md)** - Rapid prototyping and development
|
||||
- **[Agents Guide](../../../../docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/agents-guide.md)** - Agent reference
|
||||
- **[Game Types Guide](../../../../docs/modules/bmgd-bmad-game-dev/game-types-guide.md)** - Game type templates
|
||||
144
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/agents-guide.md
Normal file
144
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/agents-guide.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,144 @@
|
||||
# BMM Agents Reference
|
||||
|
||||
Quick reference of what each agent can do based on their available commands.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Analyst (Mary) | `/bmad:bmm:agents:analyst`
|
||||
|
||||
Business analysis and research.
|
||||
|
||||
**Capabilities:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `*workflow-status` - Get workflow status or initialize tracking
|
||||
- `*brainstorm-project` - Guided brainstorming session
|
||||
- `*research` - Market, domain, competitive, or technical research
|
||||
- `*product-brief` - Create a product brief (input for PRD)
|
||||
- `*document-project` - Document existing brownfield projects
|
||||
- Party mode and advanced elicitation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## PM (John) | `/bmad:bmm:agents:pm`
|
||||
|
||||
Product requirements and planning.
|
||||
|
||||
**Capabilities:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `*workflow-status` - Get workflow status or initialize tracking
|
||||
- `*create-prd` - Create Product Requirements Document
|
||||
- `*create-epics-and-stories` - Break PRD into epics and user stories (after Architecture)
|
||||
- `*implementation-readiness` - Validate PRD, UX, Architecture, Epics alignment
|
||||
- `*correct-course` - Course correction during implementation
|
||||
- Party mode and advanced elicitation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Architect (Winston) | `/bmad:bmm:agents:architect`
|
||||
|
||||
System architecture and technical design.
|
||||
|
||||
**Capabilities:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `*workflow-status` - Get workflow status or initialize tracking
|
||||
- `*create-architecture` - Create architecture document to guide development
|
||||
- `*implementation-readiness` - Validate PRD, UX, Architecture, Epics alignment
|
||||
- `*create-excalidraw-diagram` - System architecture or technical diagrams
|
||||
- `*create-excalidraw-dataflow` - Data flow diagrams
|
||||
- Party mode and advanced elicitation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## SM (Bob) | `/bmad:bmm:agents:sm`
|
||||
|
||||
Sprint planning and story preparation.
|
||||
|
||||
**Capabilities:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `*sprint-planning` - Generate sprint-status.yaml from epic files
|
||||
- `*create-story` - Create story from epic (prep for development)
|
||||
- `*validate-create-story` - Validate story quality
|
||||
- `*epic-retrospective` - Team retrospective after epic completion
|
||||
- `*correct-course` - Course correction during implementation
|
||||
- Party mode and advanced elicitation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## DEV (Amelia) | `/bmad:bmm:agents:dev`
|
||||
|
||||
Story implementation and code review.
|
||||
|
||||
**Capabilities:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `*dev-story` - Execute story workflow (implementation with tests)
|
||||
- `*code-review` - Thorough code review
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Flow Solo Dev (Barry) | `/bmad:bmm:agents:quick-flow-solo-dev`
|
||||
|
||||
Fast solo development without handoffs.
|
||||
|
||||
**Capabilities:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `*create-tech-spec` - Architect technical spec with implementation-ready stories
|
||||
- `*quick-dev` - Implement tech spec end-to-end solo
|
||||
- `*code-review` - Review and improve code
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## TEA (Murat) | `/bmad:bmm:agents:tea`
|
||||
|
||||
Test architecture and quality strategy.
|
||||
|
||||
**Capabilities:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `*framework` - Initialize production-ready test framework
|
||||
- `*atdd` - Generate E2E tests first (before implementation)
|
||||
- `*automate` - Comprehensive test automation
|
||||
- `*test-design` - Create comprehensive test scenarios
|
||||
- `*trace` - Map requirements to tests, quality gate decision
|
||||
- `*nfr-assess` - Validate non-functional requirements
|
||||
- `*ci` - Scaffold CI/CD quality pipeline
|
||||
- `*test-review` - Review test quality
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## UX Designer (Sally) | `/bmad:bmm:agents:ux-designer`
|
||||
|
||||
User experience and UI design.
|
||||
|
||||
**Capabilities:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `*create-ux-design` - Generate UX design and UI plan from PRD
|
||||
- `*validate-design` - Validate UX specification and design artifacts
|
||||
- `*create-excalidraw-wireframe` - Create website or app wireframe
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Technical Writer (Paige) | `/bmad:bmm:agents:tech-writer`
|
||||
|
||||
Technical documentation and diagrams.
|
||||
|
||||
**Capabilities:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `*document-project` - Comprehensive project documentation (brownfield analysis)
|
||||
- `*generate-mermaid` - Generate Mermaid diagrams (architecture, sequence, flow, ER, class, state)
|
||||
- `*create-excalidraw-flowchart` - Process and logic flow visualizations
|
||||
- `*create-excalidraw-diagram` - System architecture or technical diagrams
|
||||
- `*create-excalidraw-dataflow` - Data flow visualizations
|
||||
- `*validate-doc` - Review documentation against standards
|
||||
- `*improve-readme` - Review and improve README files
|
||||
- `*explain-concept` - Create clear technical explanations with examples
|
||||
- `*standards-guide` - Show BMAD documentation standards reference
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Universal Commands
|
||||
|
||||
Available to all agents:
|
||||
|
||||
- `*menu` - Redisplay menu options
|
||||
- `*dismiss` - Dismiss agent
|
||||
|
||||
Party mode is available to most agents for multi-agent collaboration.
|
||||
506
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/bmad-quick-flow.md
Normal file
506
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/bmad-quick-flow.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,506 @@
|
||||
# BMAD Quick Flow
|
||||
|
||||
**Track:** Quick Flow
|
||||
**Primary Agent:** Quick Flow Solo Dev (Barry)
|
||||
**Ideal For:** Bug fixes, small features, rapid prototyping
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
BMAD Quick Flow is the fastest path from idea to production in the BMAD Method ecosystem. It's a streamlined 3-step process designed for rapid spec driven development without sacrificing quality. Perfect for experienced teams who need to move fast or for smaller features or 1 off efforts that don't require extensive planning.
|
||||
|
||||
### When to Use Quick Flow
|
||||
|
||||
**Perfect For:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Bug fixes and patches
|
||||
- Small feature additions
|
||||
- Proof of concepts and prototypes
|
||||
- Mid course corrections or additions of something missed in BMM full planning
|
||||
- Performance optimizations
|
||||
- API endpoint additions
|
||||
- UI component enhancements
|
||||
- Configuration changes
|
||||
- Internal tools
|
||||
|
||||
**Not Recommended For:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Large-scale system redesigns
|
||||
- Complex multi-team projects
|
||||
- New product launches
|
||||
- Projects requiring extensive UX design
|
||||
- Enterprise-wide initiatives
|
||||
- Mission-critical systems with compliance requirements
|
||||
- Ideas with many 'moving pieces'
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## The Quick Flow Process
|
||||
|
||||
Utilizing the Quick Flow Solo Dev, this one agent can do it all!
|
||||
|
||||
1. Create an (option) Technical Specification
|
||||
2. Develop with Tests
|
||||
3. AI Driven Code Review
|
||||
|
||||
That's it! Lets look at each step in more detail though.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 1: Optional Technical Specification
|
||||
|
||||
The `create-tech-spec` workflow transforms requirements into implementation-ready specifications.
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Features:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Conversational spec engineering
|
||||
- Automatic codebase pattern detection
|
||||
- Context gathering from existing code
|
||||
- Implementation-ready task breakdown
|
||||
- Acceptance criteria definition
|
||||
|
||||
**Process Flow:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Problem Understanding**
|
||||
- Greet user and gather requirements
|
||||
- Ask clarifying questions about scope and constraints
|
||||
- Check for existing project context
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Code Investigation (Brownfield)**
|
||||
- Analyze existing codebase patterns
|
||||
- Document tech stack and conventions
|
||||
- Identify files to modify and dependencies
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Specification Generation**
|
||||
- Create structured tech specification
|
||||
- Define clear tasks and acceptance criteria
|
||||
- Document technical decisions
|
||||
- Include development context
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Review and Finalize**
|
||||
- Present spec for validation
|
||||
- Make adjustments as needed
|
||||
- Save to sprint artifacts
|
||||
|
||||
**Output:** `{implementation_artifacts}/tech-spec-{slug}.md`
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 2: Development
|
||||
|
||||
The `quick-dev` workflow executes implementation with flexibility and speed.
|
||||
|
||||
**Two Execution Modes:**
|
||||
|
||||
**Mode A: Tech-Spec Driven**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Execute from tech spec
|
||||
quick-dev tech-spec-feature-x.md
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- Loads and parses technical specification
|
||||
- Extracts tasks, context, and acceptance criteria
|
||||
- Executes all tasks in sequence
|
||||
- Updates spec status on completion
|
||||
|
||||
**Mode B: Direct Instructions**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Direct development commands
|
||||
quick-dev "Add password reset to auth service"
|
||||
quick-dev "Fix the memory leak in image processing"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- Accepts direct development instructions
|
||||
- Offers optional planning step
|
||||
- Executes immediately with minimal friction
|
||||
|
||||
**Development Process:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Context Loading**
|
||||
- Load project context if available
|
||||
- Understand patterns and conventions
|
||||
- Identify relevant files and dependencies
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Implementation Loop**
|
||||
For each task:
|
||||
- Load relevant files and context
|
||||
- Implement following established patterns
|
||||
- Write appropriate tests
|
||||
- Run and verify tests pass
|
||||
- Mark task complete and continue
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Continuous Execution**
|
||||
- Works through all tasks without stopping
|
||||
- Handles failures by requesting guidance
|
||||
- Ensures tests pass before continuing
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Verification**
|
||||
- Confirms all tasks complete
|
||||
- Validates acceptance criteria
|
||||
- Updates tech spec status if used
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 3: Optional Code Review
|
||||
|
||||
The `code-review` workflow provides senior developer review of implemented code.
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Use:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Production-critical features
|
||||
- Security-sensitive implementations
|
||||
- Performance optimizations
|
||||
- Team development scenarios
|
||||
- Learning and knowledge transfer
|
||||
|
||||
**Review Process:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Load story context and acceptance criteria
|
||||
2. Analyze code implementation
|
||||
3. Check against project patterns
|
||||
4. Validate test coverage
|
||||
5. Provide structured review notes
|
||||
6. Suggest improvements if needed
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Flow vs Other Tracks
|
||||
|
||||
| Aspect | Quick Flow | BMad Method | Enterprise Method |
|
||||
| ----------------- | ---------------- | --------------- | ------------------ |
|
||||
| **Planning** | Minimal/Optional | Structured | Comprehensive |
|
||||
| **Documentation** | Essential only | Moderate | Extensive |
|
||||
| **Team Size** | 1-2 developers | 3-7 specialists | 8+ enterprise team |
|
||||
| **Timeline** | Hours to days | Weeks to months | Months to quarters |
|
||||
| **Ceremony** | Minimal | Balanced | Full governance |
|
||||
| **Flexibility** | High | Moderate | Structured |
|
||||
| **Risk Profile** | Medium | Low | Very Low |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Best Practices
|
||||
|
||||
### Before Starting Quick Flow
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Validate Track Selection**
|
||||
- Is the feature small enough?
|
||||
- Do you have clear requirements?
|
||||
- Is the team comfortable with rapid development?
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Prepare Context**
|
||||
- Have project documentation ready
|
||||
- Know your codebase patterns
|
||||
- Identify affected components upfront
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Set Clear Boundaries**
|
||||
- Define in-scope and out-of-scope items
|
||||
- Establish acceptance criteria
|
||||
- Identify dependencies
|
||||
|
||||
### During Development
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Maintain Velocity**
|
||||
- Don't over-engineer solutions
|
||||
- Follow existing patterns
|
||||
- Keep tests proportional to risk
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Stay Focused**
|
||||
- Resist scope creep
|
||||
- Handle edge cases later if possible
|
||||
- Document decisions briefly
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Communicate Progress**
|
||||
- Update task status regularly
|
||||
- Flag blockers immediately
|
||||
- Share learning with team
|
||||
|
||||
### After Completion
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Quality Gates**
|
||||
- Ensure tests pass
|
||||
- Verify acceptance criteria
|
||||
- Consider optional code review
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Knowledge Transfer**
|
||||
- Update relevant documentation
|
||||
- Share key decisions
|
||||
- Note any discovered patterns
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Production Readiness**
|
||||
- Verify deployment requirements
|
||||
- Check monitoring needs
|
||||
- Plan rollback strategy
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Flow Templates
|
||||
|
||||
### Tech Spec Template
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# Tech-Spec: {Feature Title}
|
||||
|
||||
**Created:** {date}
|
||||
**Status:** Ready for Development
|
||||
**Estimated Effort:** Small (1-2 days)
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
### Problem Statement
|
||||
|
||||
{Clear description of what needs to be solved}
|
||||
|
||||
### Solution
|
||||
|
||||
{High-level approach to solving the problem}
|
||||
|
||||
### Scope (In/Out)
|
||||
|
||||
**In:** {What will be implemented}
|
||||
**Out:** {Explicitly excluded items}
|
||||
|
||||
## Context for Development
|
||||
|
||||
### Codebase Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
{Key patterns to follow, conventions}
|
||||
|
||||
### Files to Reference
|
||||
|
||||
{List of relevant files and their purpose}
|
||||
|
||||
### Technical Decisions
|
||||
|
||||
{Important technical choices and rationale}
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Plan
|
||||
|
||||
### Tasks
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Task 1: {Specific implementation task}
|
||||
- [ ] Task 2: {Specific implementation task}
|
||||
- [ ] Task 3: {Testing and validation}
|
||||
|
||||
### Acceptance Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] AC 1: {Given/When/Then format}
|
||||
- [ ] AC 2: {Given/When/Then format}
|
||||
|
||||
## Additional Context
|
||||
|
||||
### Dependencies
|
||||
|
||||
{External dependencies or prerequisites}
|
||||
|
||||
### Testing Strategy
|
||||
|
||||
{How the feature will be tested}
|
||||
|
||||
### Notes
|
||||
|
||||
{Additional considerations}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Quick Dev Commands
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# From tech spec
|
||||
quick-dev sprint-artifacts/tech-spec-user-auth.md
|
||||
|
||||
# Direct development
|
||||
quick-dev "Add CORS middleware to API endpoints"
|
||||
quick-dev "Fix null pointer exception in user service"
|
||||
quick-dev "Optimize database query for user list"
|
||||
|
||||
# With optional planning
|
||||
quick-dev "Implement file upload feature" --plan
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration with Other Workflows
|
||||
|
||||
### Upgrading Tracks
|
||||
|
||||
If a Quick Flow feature grows in complexity:
|
||||
|
||||
```mermaid
|
||||
flowchart LR
|
||||
QF[Quick Flow] --> CHECK{Complexity Increases?}
|
||||
CHECK -->|Yes| UPGRADE[Upgrade to BMad Method]
|
||||
CHECK -->|No| CONTINUE[Continue Quick Flow]
|
||||
|
||||
UPGRADE --> PRD[Create PRD]
|
||||
PRD --> ARCH[Architecture Design]
|
||||
ARCH --> STORIES[Create Epics/Stories]
|
||||
STORIES --> SPRINT[Sprint Planning]
|
||||
|
||||
style QF fill:#e1f5fe
|
||||
style UPGRADE fill:#fff3e0
|
||||
style PRD fill:#f3e5f5
|
||||
style ARCH fill:#e8f5e9
|
||||
style STORIES fill:#f1f8e9
|
||||
style SPRINT fill:#e0f2f1
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Using Party Mode
|
||||
|
||||
For complex Quick Flow challenges:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Start Barry
|
||||
/bmad:bmm:agents:quick-flow-solo-dev
|
||||
|
||||
# Begin party mode for collaborative problem-solving
|
||||
party-mode
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Party mode brings in relevant experts:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Architect** - For design decisions
|
||||
- **Dev** - For implementation pairing
|
||||
- **QA** - For test strategy
|
||||
- **UX Designer** - For user experience
|
||||
- **Analyst** - For requirements clarity
|
||||
|
||||
### Quality Assurance Integration
|
||||
|
||||
Quick Flow can integrate with TEA agent for automated testing:
|
||||
|
||||
- Test case generation
|
||||
- Automated test execution
|
||||
- Coverage analysis
|
||||
- Test healing
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Quick Flow Scenarios
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario 1: Bug Fix
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Requirement: "Users can't reset passwords"
|
||||
Process: Direct development (no spec needed)
|
||||
Steps: Investigate → Fix → Test → Deploy
|
||||
Time: 2-4 hours
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario 2: Small Feature
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Requirement: "Add export to CSV functionality"
|
||||
Process: Tech spec → Development → Code review
|
||||
Steps: Spec → Implement → Test → Review → Deploy
|
||||
Time: 1-2 days
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario 3: Performance Fix
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Requirement: "Optimize slow product search query"
|
||||
Process: Tech spec → Development → Review
|
||||
Steps: Analysis → Optimize → Benchmark → Deploy
|
||||
Time: 1 day
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario 4: API Addition
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Requirement: "Add webhook endpoints for integrations"
|
||||
Process: Tech spec → Development → Review
|
||||
Steps: Design → Implement → Document → Deploy
|
||||
Time: 2-3 days
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Metrics and KPIs
|
||||
|
||||
Track these metrics to ensure Quick Flow effectiveness:
|
||||
|
||||
**Velocity Metrics:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Features completed per week
|
||||
- Average cycle time (hours)
|
||||
- Bug fix resolution time
|
||||
- Code review turnaround
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality Metrics:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Defect escape rate
|
||||
- Test coverage percentage
|
||||
- Production incident rate
|
||||
- Code review findings
|
||||
|
||||
**Team Metrics:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Developer satisfaction
|
||||
- Knowledge sharing frequency
|
||||
- Process adherence
|
||||
- Autonomy index
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Troubleshooting Quick Flow
|
||||
|
||||
### Common Issues
|
||||
|
||||
**Issue: Scope creep during development**
|
||||
**Solution:** Refer back to tech spec, explicitly document new requirements
|
||||
|
||||
**Issue: Unknown patterns or conventions**
|
||||
**Solution:** Use party-mode to bring in architect or senior dev
|
||||
|
||||
**Issue: Testing bottleneck**
|
||||
**Solution:** Leverage TEA agent for automated test generation
|
||||
|
||||
**Issue: Integration conflicts**
|
||||
**Solution:** Document dependencies, coordinate with affected teams
|
||||
|
||||
### Emergency Procedures
|
||||
|
||||
**Production Hotfix:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Create branch from production
|
||||
2. Quick dev with minimal changes
|
||||
3. Deploy to staging
|
||||
4. Quick regression test
|
||||
5. Deploy to production
|
||||
6. Merge to main
|
||||
|
||||
**Critical Bug:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Immediate investigation
|
||||
2. Party-mode if unclear
|
||||
3. Quick fix with rollback plan
|
||||
4. Post-mortem documentation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Related Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Quick Flow Solo Dev Agent](./quick-flow-solo-dev.md)** - Primary agent for Quick Flow
|
||||
- **[Agents Guide](./agents-guide.md)** - Complete agent reference
|
||||
- **[Scale Adaptive System](./scale-adaptive-system.md)** - Track selection guidance
|
||||
- **[Party Mode](./party-mode.md)** - Multi-agent collaboration
|
||||
- **[Workflow Implementation](./workflows-implementation.md)** - Implementation details
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## FAQ
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: How do I know if my feature is too big for Quick Flow?**
|
||||
A: If it requires more than 3-5 days of work, affects multiple systems significantly, or needs extensive UX design, consider the BMad Method track.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Can I switch from Quick Flow to BMad Method mid-development?**
|
||||
A: Yes, you can upgrade. Create the missing artifacts (PRD, architecture) and transition to sprint-based development.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Is Quick Flow suitable for production-critical features?**
|
||||
A: Yes, with code review. Quick Flow doesn't sacrifice quality, just ceremony.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: How do I handle dependencies between Quick Flow features?**
|
||||
A: Document dependencies clearly, consider batching related features, or upgrade to BMad Method for complex interdependencies.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Can junior developers use Quick Flow?**
|
||||
A: Yes, but they may benefit from the structure of BMad Method. Quick Flow assumes familiarity with patterns and autonomy.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**Ready to ship fast?** → Start with `/bmad:bmm:agents:quick-flow-solo-dev`
|
||||
747
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/brownfield-guide.md
Normal file
747
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/brownfield-guide.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,747 @@
|
||||
# BMad Method Brownfield Development Guide
|
||||
|
||||
**Complete guide for working with existing codebases**
|
||||
|
||||
**Reading Time:** ~35 minutes
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Navigation
|
||||
|
||||
**Jump to:**
|
||||
|
||||
- [Quick Reference](#quick-reference) - Commands and files
|
||||
- [Common Scenarios](#common-scenarios) - Real-world examples
|
||||
- [Best Practices](#best-practices) - Success tips
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What is Brownfield Development?
|
||||
|
||||
Brownfield projects involve working within existing codebases rather than starting fresh:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Bug fixes** - Single file changes
|
||||
- **Small features** - Adding to existing modules
|
||||
- **Feature sets** - Multiple related features
|
||||
- **Major integrations** - Complex architectural additions
|
||||
- **System expansions** - Enterprise-scale enhancements
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Difference from Greenfield:** You must understand and respect existing patterns, architecture, and constraints.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core Principle:** AI agents need comprehensive documentation to understand existing code before they can effectively plan or implement changes.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Getting Started
|
||||
|
||||
### Understanding Planning Tracks
|
||||
|
||||
For complete track details, see [Scale Adaptive System](./scale-adaptive-system.md).
|
||||
|
||||
**Brownfield tracks at a glance:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Track | Scope | Typical Stories | Key Difference |
|
||||
| --------------------- | -------------------------- | --------------- | ----------------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| **Quick Flow** | Bug fixes, small features | 1-15 | Must understand affected code and patterns |
|
||||
| **BMad Method** | Feature sets, integrations | 10-50+ | Integrate with existing architecture |
|
||||
| **Enterprise Method** | Enterprise expansions | 30+ | Full system documentation + compliance required |
|
||||
|
||||
**Note:** Story counts are guidance, not definitions. Tracks are chosen based on planning needs.
|
||||
|
||||
### Track Selection for Brownfield
|
||||
|
||||
When you run `workflow-init`, it handles brownfield intelligently:
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 1: Shows what it found**
|
||||
|
||||
- Old planning docs (PRD, epics, stories)
|
||||
- Existing codebase
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 2: Asks about YOUR work**
|
||||
|
||||
> "Are these works in progress, previous effort, or proposed work?"
|
||||
|
||||
- **(a) Works in progress** → Uses artifacts to determine level
|
||||
- **(b) Previous effort** → Asks you to describe NEW work
|
||||
- **(c) Proposed work** → Uses artifacts as guidance
|
||||
- **(d) None of these** → You explain your work
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 3: Analyzes your description**
|
||||
|
||||
- Keywords: "fix", "bug" → Quick Flow, "dashboard", "platform" → BMad Method, "enterprise", "multi-tenant" → Enterprise Method
|
||||
- Complexity assessment
|
||||
- Confirms suggested track with you
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Principle:** System asks about YOUR current work first, uses old artifacts as context only.
|
||||
|
||||
**Example: Old Complex PRD, New Simple Work**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
System: "Found PRD.md (BMad Method track, 30 stories, 6 months old)"
|
||||
System: "Is this work in progress or previous effort?"
|
||||
You: "Previous effort - I'm just fixing a bug now"
|
||||
System: "Tell me about your current work"
|
||||
You: "Update payment method enums"
|
||||
System: "Quick Flow track (tech-spec approach). Correct?"
|
||||
You: "Yes"
|
||||
✅ Creates Quick Flow workflow
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Documentation: Critical First Step
|
||||
|
||||
🚨 **For brownfield projects: Always ensure adequate AI-usable documentation before planning**
|
||||
|
||||
### Default Recommendation: Run document-project
|
||||
|
||||
**Best practice:** Run `document-project` workflow unless you have **confirmed, trusted, AI-optimized documentation**.
|
||||
|
||||
### Why Document-Project is Almost Always the Right Choice
|
||||
|
||||
Existing documentation often has quality issues that break AI workflows:
|
||||
|
||||
**Common Problems:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Too Much Information (TMI):** Massive markdown files with 10s or 100s of level 2 sections
|
||||
- **Out of Date:** Documentation hasn't been updated with recent code changes
|
||||
- **Wrong Format:** Written for humans, not AI agents (lacks structure, index, clear patterns)
|
||||
- **Incomplete Coverage:** Missing critical architecture, patterns, or setup info
|
||||
- **Inconsistent Quality:** Some areas documented well, others not at all
|
||||
|
||||
**Impact on AI Agents:**
|
||||
|
||||
- AI agents hit token limits reading massive files
|
||||
- Outdated docs cause hallucinations (agent thinks old patterns still apply)
|
||||
- Missing structure means agents can't find relevant information
|
||||
- Incomplete coverage leads to incorrect assumptions
|
||||
|
||||
### Documentation Decision Tree
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 1: Assess Existing Documentation Quality**
|
||||
|
||||
Ask yourself:
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ Is it **current** (updated in last 30 days)?
|
||||
- ✅ Is it **AI-optimized** (structured with index.md, clear sections, <500 lines per file)?
|
||||
- ✅ Is it **comprehensive** (architecture, patterns, setup all documented)?
|
||||
- ✅ Do you **trust** it completely for AI agent consumption?
|
||||
|
||||
**If ANY answer is NO → Run `document-project`**
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 2: Check for Massive Documents**
|
||||
|
||||
If you have documentation but files are huge (>500 lines, 10+ level 2 sections):
|
||||
|
||||
1. **First:** Run `shard-doc` tool to split large files:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Load BMad Master or any agent
|
||||
_bmad/core/tools/shard-doc.xml --input docs/massive-doc.md
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- Splits on level 2 sections by default
|
||||
- Creates organized, manageable files
|
||||
- Preserves content integrity
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Then:** Run `index-docs` task to create navigation:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
_bmad/core/tasks/index-docs.xml --directory ./docs
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Finally:** Validate quality - if sharded docs still seem incomplete/outdated → Run `document-project`
|
||||
|
||||
### Four Real-World Scenarios
|
||||
|
||||
| Scenario | You Have | Action | Why |
|
||||
| -------- | ------------------------------------------ | -------------------------- | --------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| **A** | No documentation | `document-project` | Only option - generate from scratch |
|
||||
| **B** | Docs exist but massive/outdated/incomplete | `document-project` | Safer to regenerate than trust bad docs |
|
||||
| **C** | Good docs but no structure | `shard-doc` → `index-docs` | Structure existing content for AI |
|
||||
| **D** | Confirmed AI-optimized docs with index.md | Skip Documentation | Rare - only if you're 100% confident |
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario A: No Documentation (Most Common)
|
||||
|
||||
**Action: Run document-project workflow**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Load Analyst or Technical Writer (Paige) agent
|
||||
2. Run `*document-project`
|
||||
3. Choose scan level:
|
||||
- **Quick** (2-5min): Pattern analysis, no source reading
|
||||
- **Deep** (10-30min): Reads critical paths - **Recommended**
|
||||
- **Exhaustive** (30-120min): Reads all files
|
||||
|
||||
**Outputs:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `docs/index.md` - Master AI entry point
|
||||
- `docs/project-overview.md` - Executive summary
|
||||
- `docs/architecture.md` - Architecture analysis
|
||||
- `docs/source-tree-analysis.md` - Directory structure
|
||||
- Additional files based on project type (API, web app, etc.)
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario B: Docs Exist But Quality Unknown/Poor (Very Common)
|
||||
|
||||
**Action: Run document-project workflow (regenerate)**
|
||||
|
||||
Even if `docs/` folder exists, if you're unsure about quality → **regenerate**.
|
||||
|
||||
**Why regenerate instead of index?**
|
||||
|
||||
- Outdated docs → AI makes wrong assumptions
|
||||
- Incomplete docs → AI invents missing information
|
||||
- TMI docs → AI hits token limits, misses key info
|
||||
- Human-focused docs → Missing AI-critical structure
|
||||
|
||||
**document-project** will:
|
||||
|
||||
- Scan actual codebase (source of truth)
|
||||
- Generate fresh, accurate documentation
|
||||
- Structure properly for AI consumption
|
||||
- Include only relevant, current information
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario C: Good Docs But Needs Structure
|
||||
|
||||
**Action: Shard massive files, then index**
|
||||
|
||||
If you have **good, current documentation** but it's in massive files:
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 1: Shard large documents**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# For each massive doc (>500 lines or 10+ level 2 sections)
|
||||
_bmad/core/tools/shard-doc.xml \
|
||||
--input docs/api-documentation.md \
|
||||
--output docs/api/ \
|
||||
--level 2 # Split on ## headers (default)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 2: Generate index**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
_bmad/core/tasks/index-docs.xml --directory ./docs
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 3: Validate**
|
||||
|
||||
- Review generated `docs/index.md`
|
||||
- Check that sharded files are <500 lines each
|
||||
- Verify content is current and accurate
|
||||
- **If anything seems off → Run document-project instead**
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario D: Confirmed AI-Optimized Documentation (Rare)
|
||||
|
||||
**Action: Skip Documentation**
|
||||
|
||||
Only skip if ALL conditions met:
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ `docs/index.md` exists and is comprehensive
|
||||
- ✅ Documentation updated within last 30 days
|
||||
- ✅ All doc files <500 lines with clear structure
|
||||
- ✅ Covers architecture, patterns, setup, API surface
|
||||
- ✅ You personally verified quality for AI consumption
|
||||
- ✅ Previous AI agents used it successfully
|
||||
|
||||
**If unsure → Run document-project** (costs 10-30 minutes, saves hours of confusion)
|
||||
|
||||
### Why document-project is Critical
|
||||
|
||||
Without AI-optimized documentation, workflows fail:
|
||||
|
||||
- **tech-spec** (Quick Flow) can't auto-detect stack/patterns → Makes wrong assumptions
|
||||
- **PRD** (BMad Method) can't reference existing code → Designs incompatible features
|
||||
- **create-architecture** can't build on existing structure → Suggests conflicting patterns
|
||||
- **create-story** can't provide existing pattern context → Stories lack integration guidance
|
||||
- **dev-story** invents implementations → Breaks existing integrations
|
||||
|
||||
### Key Principle
|
||||
|
||||
**When in doubt, run document-project.**
|
||||
|
||||
It's better to spend 10-30 minutes generating fresh, accurate docs than to waste hours debugging AI agents working from bad documentation.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow Phases by Track
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Analysis (Optional)
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflows:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `brainstorm-project` - Solution exploration
|
||||
- `research` - Technical/market research
|
||||
- `product-brief` - Strategic planning (BMad Method/Enterprise tracks only)
|
||||
|
||||
**When to use:** Complex features, technical decisions, strategic additions
|
||||
|
||||
**When to skip:** Bug fixes, well-understood features, time-sensitive changes
|
||||
|
||||
See the [Workflows section in BMM README](../README.md) for details.
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Planning (Required)
|
||||
|
||||
**Planning approach adapts by track:**
|
||||
|
||||
**Quick Flow:** Use `tech-spec` workflow
|
||||
|
||||
- Creates tech-spec.md
|
||||
- Auto-detects existing stack (brownfield)
|
||||
- Confirms conventions with you
|
||||
- Generates implementation-ready stories
|
||||
|
||||
**BMad Method/Enterprise:** Use `prd` workflow
|
||||
|
||||
- Creates PRD.md with FRs/NFRs only
|
||||
- References existing architecture
|
||||
- Plans integration points
|
||||
- Epics+Stories created AFTER architecture phase
|
||||
|
||||
**Brownfield-specific:** See [Scale Adaptive System](./scale-adaptive-system.md) for complete workflow paths by track.
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Solutioning (BMad Method/Enterprise Only)
|
||||
|
||||
**Critical for brownfield:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Review existing architecture FIRST
|
||||
- Document integration points explicitly
|
||||
- Plan backward compatibility
|
||||
- Consider migration strategy
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflows:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `create-architecture` - Extend architecture docs (BMad Method/Enterprise)
|
||||
- `create-epics-and-stories` - Create epics and stories AFTER architecture
|
||||
- `implementation-readiness` - Validate before implementation (BMad Method/Enterprise)
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Implementation (All Tracks)
|
||||
|
||||
**Sprint-based development through story iteration:**
|
||||
|
||||
```mermaid
|
||||
flowchart TD
|
||||
SPRINT[sprint-planning<br/>Initialize tracking]
|
||||
CREATE[create-story]
|
||||
DEV[dev-story]
|
||||
REVIEW[code-review]
|
||||
CHECK{More stories?}
|
||||
RETRO[retrospective<br/>Per epic]
|
||||
|
||||
SPRINT --> CREATE
|
||||
CREATE --> DEV
|
||||
DEV --> REVIEW
|
||||
REVIEW --> CHECK
|
||||
CHECK -->|Yes| CREATE
|
||||
CHECK -->|No| RETRO
|
||||
|
||||
style SPRINT fill:#bfb,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
||||
style RETRO fill:#fbf,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Status Progression:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Epic: `backlog → in-progress → done`
|
||||
- Story: `backlog → ready-for-dev → in-progress → review → done`
|
||||
|
||||
**Brownfield-Specific Implementation Tips:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Respect existing patterns** - Follow established conventions
|
||||
2. **Test integration thoroughly** - Validate interactions with existing code
|
||||
3. **Use feature flags** - Enable gradual rollout
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Best Practices
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Always Document First
|
||||
|
||||
Even if you know the code, AI agents need `document-project` output for context. Run it before planning.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Be Specific About Current Work
|
||||
|
||||
When workflow-init asks about your work:
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ "Update payment method enums to include Apple Pay"
|
||||
- ❌ "Fix stuff"
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Choose Right Documentation Approach
|
||||
|
||||
- **Has good docs, no index?** → Run `index-docs` task (fast)
|
||||
- **No docs or need codebase analysis?** → Run `document-project` (Deep scan)
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Respect Existing Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
Tech-spec and create-story workflows will detect conventions from existing documentation. Follow them unless explicitly modernizing.
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Plan Integration Points Explicitly
|
||||
|
||||
Document in tech-spec/architecture:
|
||||
|
||||
- Which existing modules you'll modify
|
||||
- What APIs/services you'll integrate with
|
||||
- How data flows between new and existing code
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Design for Gradual Rollout
|
||||
|
||||
- Use feature flags for new functionality
|
||||
- Plan rollback strategies
|
||||
- Maintain backward compatibility
|
||||
- Create migration scripts if needed
|
||||
|
||||
### 7. Test Integration Thoroughly
|
||||
|
||||
- Regression testing of existing features
|
||||
- Integration point validation
|
||||
- Performance impact assessment
|
||||
- API contract verification
|
||||
|
||||
### 8. Use Sprint Planning Effectively
|
||||
|
||||
- Run `sprint-planning` at Phase 4 start
|
||||
- Context epics before creating stories
|
||||
- Update `sprint-status.yaml` as work progresses
|
||||
|
||||
### 9. Learn Continuously
|
||||
|
||||
- Run `retrospective` after each epic
|
||||
- Incorporate learnings into next stories
|
||||
- Update discovered patterns
|
||||
- Share insights across team
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Scenarios
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario 1: Bug Fix (Quick Flow)
|
||||
|
||||
**Situation:** Authentication token expiration causing logout issues
|
||||
|
||||
**Track:** Quick Flow
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Document:** Skip if auth system documented, else run `document-project` (Quick scan)
|
||||
2. **Plan:** Load PM → run `tech-spec`
|
||||
- Analyzes bug
|
||||
- Detects stack (Express, Jest)
|
||||
- Confirms conventions
|
||||
- Creates tech-spec.md + story
|
||||
3. **Implement:** Load DEV → run `dev-story`
|
||||
4. **Review:** Load DEV → run `code-review`
|
||||
|
||||
**Time:** 2-4 hours
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario 2: Small Feature (Quick Flow)
|
||||
|
||||
**Situation:** Add "forgot password" to existing auth system
|
||||
|
||||
**Track:** Quick Flow
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Document:** Run `document-project` (Deep scan of auth module if not documented)
|
||||
2. **Plan:** Load PM → run `tech-spec`
|
||||
- Detects Next.js 13.4, NextAuth.js
|
||||
- Analyzes existing auth patterns
|
||||
- Confirms conventions
|
||||
- Creates tech-spec.md + epic + 3-5 stories
|
||||
3. **Implement:** Load SM → `sprint-planning` → `create-story`
|
||||
Load DEV → `dev-story` for each story
|
||||
4. **Review:** Load DEV → `code-review`
|
||||
|
||||
**Time:** 1-3 days
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario 3: Feature Set (BMad Method)
|
||||
|
||||
**Situation:** Add user dashboard with analytics, preferences, activity
|
||||
|
||||
**Track:** BMad Method
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Document:** Run `document-project` (Deep scan) - Critical for understanding existing UI patterns
|
||||
2. **Analyze:** Load Analyst → `research` (if evaluating analytics libraries)
|
||||
3. **Plan:** Load PM → `prd` (creates FRs/NFRs)
|
||||
4. **Solution:** Load Architect → `create-architecture` → `create-epics-and-stories` → `implementation-readiness`
|
||||
5. **Implement:** Sprint-based (10-15 stories)
|
||||
- Load SM → `sprint-planning`
|
||||
- Load SM → `create-story` per story
|
||||
- Load DEV → `dev-story` per story
|
||||
6. **Review:** Per story completion
|
||||
|
||||
**Time:** 1-2 weeks
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario 4: Complex Integration (BMad Method)
|
||||
|
||||
**Situation:** Add real-time collaboration to document editor
|
||||
|
||||
**Track:** BMad Method
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Document:** Run `document-project` (Exhaustive if not documented) - **Mandatory**
|
||||
2. **Analyze:** Load Analyst → `research` (WebSocket vs WebRTC vs CRDT)
|
||||
3. **Plan:** Load PM → `prd` (creates FRs/NFRs)
|
||||
4. **Solution:**
|
||||
- Load Architect → `create-architecture` (extend for real-time layer)
|
||||
- Load Architect → `create-epics-and-stories`
|
||||
- Load Architect → `implementation-readiness`
|
||||
5. **Implement:** Sprint-based (20-30 stories)
|
||||
|
||||
**Time:** 3-6 weeks
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario 5: Enterprise Expansion (Enterprise Method)
|
||||
|
||||
**Situation:** Add multi-tenancy to single-tenant SaaS platform
|
||||
|
||||
**Track:** Enterprise Method
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Document:** Run `document-project` (Exhaustive) - **Mandatory**
|
||||
2. **Analyze:** **Required**
|
||||
- `brainstorm-project` - Explore multi-tenancy approaches
|
||||
- `research` - Database sharding, tenant isolation, pricing
|
||||
- `product-brief` - Strategic document
|
||||
3. **Plan:** Load PM → `prd` (comprehensive FRs/NFRs)
|
||||
4. **Solution:**
|
||||
- `create-architecture` - Full system architecture including multi-tenancy design
|
||||
- `create-epics-and-stories` - Create epics and stories
|
||||
- `implementation-readiness` - Final validation before implementation
|
||||
5. **Implement:** Phased sprint-based (50+ stories)
|
||||
|
||||
**Time:** 3-6 months
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Troubleshooting
|
||||
|
||||
### AI Agents Lack Codebase Understanding
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptoms:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Suggestions don't align with existing patterns
|
||||
- Ignores available components
|
||||
- Doesn't reference existing code
|
||||
|
||||
**Solution:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Run `document-project` with Deep scan
|
||||
2. Verify `docs/index.md` exists
|
||||
3. Check documentation completeness
|
||||
4. Run deep-dive on specific areas if needed
|
||||
|
||||
### Have Documentation But Agents Can't Find It
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptoms:**
|
||||
|
||||
- README.md, ARCHITECTURE.md exist
|
||||
- AI agents ask questions already answered
|
||||
- No `docs/index.md` file
|
||||
|
||||
**Solution:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Quick fix:** Run `index-docs` task (2-5min)
|
||||
- **Comprehensive:** Run `document-project` workflow (10-30min)
|
||||
|
||||
### Integration Points Unclear
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptoms:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Not sure how to connect new code to existing
|
||||
- Unsure which files to modify
|
||||
|
||||
**Solution:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Ensure `document-project` captured existing architecture
|
||||
2. Check story files created by `create-story` - should include integration context
|
||||
3. In tech-spec/architecture - explicitly document:
|
||||
- Which existing modules to modify
|
||||
- What APIs/services to integrate with
|
||||
- Data flow between new and existing code
|
||||
4. Review architecture document for integration guidance
|
||||
|
||||
### Existing Tests Breaking
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptoms:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Regression test failures
|
||||
- Previously working functionality broken
|
||||
|
||||
**Solution:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Review changes against existing patterns
|
||||
2. Verify API contracts unchanged (unless intentionally versioned)
|
||||
3. Run `test-review` workflow (TEA agent)
|
||||
4. Add regression testing to DoD
|
||||
5. Consider feature flags for gradual rollout
|
||||
|
||||
### Inconsistent Patterns Being Introduced
|
||||
|
||||
**Symptoms:**
|
||||
|
||||
- New code style doesn't match existing
|
||||
- Different architectural approach
|
||||
|
||||
**Solution:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Check convention detection (Quick Spec Flow should detect patterns)
|
||||
2. Review documentation - ensure `document-project` captured patterns
|
||||
3. Use `create-story` workflow - it loads context from existing documentation
|
||||
4. Add to code-review checklist: pattern adherence, convention consistency
|
||||
5. Run retrospective to identify deviations early
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Reference
|
||||
|
||||
### Commands by Phase
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Documentation (If Needed)
|
||||
# Analyst agent:
|
||||
document-project # Create comprehensive docs (10-30min)
|
||||
# OR load index-docs task for existing docs (2-5min)
|
||||
|
||||
# Phase 1: Analysis (Optional)
|
||||
# Analyst agent:
|
||||
brainstorm-project # Explore solutions
|
||||
research # Gather data
|
||||
product-brief # Strategic planning (BMad Method/Enterprise only)
|
||||
|
||||
# Phase 2: Planning (Required)
|
||||
# PM agent:
|
||||
tech-spec # Quick Flow track
|
||||
prd # BMad Method/Enterprise tracks
|
||||
|
||||
# Phase 3: Solutioning (BMad Method/Enterprise)
|
||||
# Architect agent:
|
||||
create-architecture # Create/extend architecture
|
||||
create-epics-and-stories # Create epics and stories (after architecture)
|
||||
implementation-readiness # Final validation
|
||||
|
||||
# Phase 4: Implementation (All Tracks)
|
||||
# SM agent:
|
||||
sprint-planning # Initialize tracking
|
||||
create-story # Create story
|
||||
|
||||
# DEV agent:
|
||||
dev-story # Implement
|
||||
code-review # Review
|
||||
|
||||
# SM agent:
|
||||
retrospective # After epic
|
||||
correct-course # If issues
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Key Files
|
||||
|
||||
**Documentation Output:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `docs/index.md` - **Master AI entry point (REQUIRED)**
|
||||
- `docs/project-overview.md`
|
||||
- `docs/architecture.md`
|
||||
- `docs/source-tree-analysis.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 1-4 Tracking:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `docs/bmm-workflow-status.yaml` - Progress tracker
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 2 Planning:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `docs/tech-spec.md` (Quick Flow track)
|
||||
- `docs/PRD.md` (BMad Method/Enterprise tracks - FRs/NFRs only)
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 3 Solutioning:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Epic breakdown (created after architecture)
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 3 Architecture:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `docs/architecture.md` (BMad Method/Enterprise tracks)
|
||||
- `docs/epics.md` + epic folders (from create-epics-and-stories)
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 4 Implementation:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `docs/sprint-status.yaml` - **Single source of truth**
|
||||
- `docs/epic-{n}-context.md`
|
||||
- `docs/stories/{epic}-{story}-{title}.md`
|
||||
- `docs/stories/{epic}-{story}-{title}-context.md`
|
||||
|
||||
### Decision Flowchart
|
||||
|
||||
```mermaid
|
||||
flowchart TD
|
||||
START([Brownfield Project])
|
||||
CHECK{Has docs/<br/>index.md?}
|
||||
|
||||
START --> CHECK
|
||||
CHECK -->|No| DOC[document-project<br/>Deep scan]
|
||||
CHECK -->|Yes| TRACK{What Track?}
|
||||
|
||||
DOC --> TRACK
|
||||
|
||||
TRACK -->|Quick Flow| TS[tech-spec]
|
||||
TRACK -->|BMad Method| PRD[prd → architecture]
|
||||
TRACK -->|Enterprise| PRD2[prd → arch + security/devops]
|
||||
|
||||
TS --> IMPL[Phase 4<br/>Implementation]
|
||||
PRD --> IMPL
|
||||
PRD2 --> IMPL
|
||||
|
||||
style START fill:#f9f,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
||||
style DOC fill:#ffb,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
||||
style IMPL fill:#bfb,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Prevention Tips
|
||||
|
||||
**Avoid issues before they happen:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. ✅ **Always run document-project for brownfield** - Saves context issues later
|
||||
2. ✅ **Use fresh chats for complex workflows** - Prevents hallucinations
|
||||
3. ✅ **Verify files exist before workflows** - Check PRD, epics, stories present
|
||||
4. ✅ **Read agent menu first** - Confirm agent has the workflow
|
||||
5. ✅ **Start with simpler track if unsure** - Easy to upgrade (Quick Flow → BMad Method)
|
||||
6. ✅ **Keep status files updated** - Manual updates when needed
|
||||
7. ✅ **Run retrospectives after epics** - Catch issues early
|
||||
8. ✅ **Follow phase sequence** - Don't skip required phases
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Related Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Scale Adaptive System](./scale-adaptive-system.md)** - Understanding tracks and complexity
|
||||
- **[Quick Spec Flow](./quick-spec-flow.md)** - Fast-track for Quick Flow
|
||||
- **[Quick Start Guide](./quick-start.md)** - Getting started with BMM
|
||||
- **[Glossary](./glossary.md)** - Key terminology
|
||||
- **[FAQ](./faq.md)** - Common questions
|
||||
- **[Workflow Documentation](./index.md#-workflow-guides)** - Complete workflow reference
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Support and Resources
|
||||
|
||||
**Community:**
|
||||
|
||||
- [Discord](https://discord.gg/gk8jAdXWmj) - #general-dev, #bugs-issues
|
||||
- [GitHub Issues](https://github.com/bmad-code-org/BMAD-METHOD/issues)
|
||||
- [YouTube Channel](https://www.youtube.com/@BMadCode)
|
||||
|
||||
**Documentation:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Test Architect Guide](./test-architecture.md)** - Comprehensive testing strategy
|
||||
- [BMM Module README](../README.md) - Complete module and workflow reference
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
_Brownfield development is about understanding and respecting what exists while thoughtfully extending it._
|
||||
540
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/faq.md
Normal file
540
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/faq.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,540 @@
|
||||
# BMM Frequently Asked Questions
|
||||
|
||||
Quick answers to common questions about the BMad Method Module.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Table of Contents
|
||||
|
||||
- [Getting Started](#getting-started)
|
||||
- [Choosing the Right Level](#choosing-the-right-level)
|
||||
- [Workflows and Phases](#workflows-and-phases)
|
||||
- [Planning Documents](#planning-documents)
|
||||
- [Implementation](#implementation)
|
||||
- [Brownfield Development](#brownfield-development)
|
||||
- [Tools and Technical](#tools-and-technical)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Getting Started
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Do I always need to run workflow-init?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** No, once you learn the flow you can go directly to workflows. However, workflow-init is helpful because it:
|
||||
|
||||
- Determines your project's appropriate level automatically
|
||||
- Creates the tracking status file
|
||||
- Routes you to the correct starting workflow
|
||||
|
||||
For experienced users: use the [Quick Reference](./quick-start.md#quick-reference-agent-document-mapping) to go directly to the right agent/workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Why do I need fresh chats for each workflow?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Context-intensive workflows (like brainstorming, PRD creation, architecture design) can cause AI hallucinations if run in sequence within the same chat. Starting fresh ensures the agent has maximum context capacity for each workflow. This is particularly important for:
|
||||
|
||||
- Planning workflows (PRD, architecture)
|
||||
- Analysis workflows (brainstorming, research)
|
||||
- Complex story implementation
|
||||
|
||||
Quick workflows like status checks can reuse chats safely.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Can I skip workflow-status and just start working?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Yes, if you already know your project level and which workflow comes next. workflow-status is mainly useful for:
|
||||
|
||||
- New projects (guides initial setup)
|
||||
- When you're unsure what to do next
|
||||
- After breaks in work (reminds you where you left off)
|
||||
- Checking overall progress
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: What's the minimum I need to get started?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** For the fastest path:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Install BMad Method: `npx bmad-method@alpha install`
|
||||
2. For small changes: Load PM agent → run tech-spec → implement
|
||||
3. For larger projects: Load PM agent → run prd → architect → implement
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: How do I know if I'm in Phase 1, 2, 3, or 4?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Check your `bmm-workflow-status.md` file (created by workflow-init). It shows your current phase and progress. If you don't have this file, you can also tell by what you're working on:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Phase 1** - Brainstorming, research, product brief (optional)
|
||||
- **Phase 2** - Creating either a PRD or tech-spec (always required)
|
||||
- **Phase 3** - Architecture design (Level 2-4 only)
|
||||
- **Phase 4** - Actually writing code, implementing stories
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Choosing the Right Level
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: How do I know which level my project is?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Use workflow-init for automatic detection, or self-assess using these keywords:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Level 0:** "fix", "bug", "typo", "small change", "patch" → 1 story
|
||||
- **Level 1:** "simple", "basic", "small feature", "add" → 2-10 stories
|
||||
- **Level 2:** "dashboard", "several features", "admin panel" → 5-15 stories
|
||||
- **Level 3:** "platform", "integration", "complex", "system" → 12-40 stories
|
||||
- **Level 4:** "enterprise", "multi-tenant", "multiple products" → 40+ stories
|
||||
|
||||
When in doubt, start smaller. You can always run create-prd later if needed.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Can I change levels mid-project?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Yes! If you started at Level 1 but realize it's Level 2, you can run create-prd to add proper planning docs. The system is flexible - your initial level choice isn't permanent.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: What if workflow-init suggests the wrong level?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** You can override it! workflow-init suggests a level but always asks for confirmation. If you disagree, just say so and choose the level you think is appropriate. Trust your judgment.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Do I always need architecture for Level 2?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** No, architecture is **optional** for Level 2. Only create architecture if you need system-level design. Many Level 2 projects work fine with just PRD created during planning.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: What's the difference between Level 1 and Level 2?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Level 1:** 1-10 stories, uses tech-spec (simpler, faster), no architecture
|
||||
- **Level 2:** 5-15 stories, uses PRD (product-focused), optional architecture
|
||||
|
||||
The overlap (5-10 stories) is intentional. Choose based on:
|
||||
|
||||
- Need product-level planning? → Level 2
|
||||
- Just need technical plan? → Level 1
|
||||
- Multiple epics? → Level 2
|
||||
- Single epic? → Level 1
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflows and Phases
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: What's the difference between workflow-status and workflow-init?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **workflow-status:** Checks existing status and tells you what's next (use when continuing work)
|
||||
- **workflow-init:** Creates new status file and sets up project (use when starting new project)
|
||||
|
||||
If status file exists, use workflow-status. If not, use workflow-init.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Can I skip Phase 1 (Analysis)?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Yes! Phase 1 is optional for all levels, though recommended for complex projects. Skip if:
|
||||
|
||||
- Requirements are clear
|
||||
- No research needed
|
||||
- Time-sensitive work
|
||||
- Small changes (Level 0-1)
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: When is Phase 3 (Architecture) required?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Level 0-1:** Never (skip entirely)
|
||||
- **Level 2:** Optional (only if system design needed)
|
||||
- **Level 3-4:** Required (comprehensive architecture mandatory)
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: What happens if I skip a recommended workflow?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Nothing breaks! Workflows are guidance, not enforcement. However, skipping recommended workflows (like architecture for Level 3) may cause:
|
||||
|
||||
- Integration issues during implementation
|
||||
- Rework due to poor planning
|
||||
- Conflicting design decisions
|
||||
- Longer development time overall
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: How do I know when Phase 3 is complete and I can start Phase 4?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** For Level 3-4, run the implementation-readiness workflow. It validates PRD + Architecture + Epics + UX (optional) are aligned before implementation. Pass the gate check = ready for Phase 4.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Can I run workflows in parallel or do they have to be sequential?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Most workflows must be sequential within a phase:
|
||||
|
||||
- Phase 1: brainstorm → research → product-brief (optional order)
|
||||
- Phase 2: PRD must complete before moving forward
|
||||
- Phase 3: architecture → epics+stories → implementation-readiness (sequential)
|
||||
- Phase 4: Stories within an epic should generally be sequential, but stories in different epics can be parallel if you have capacity
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Planning Documents
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Why no tech-spec at Level 2+?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Level 2+ projects need product-level planning (PRD) and system-level design (Architecture), which tech-spec doesn't provide. Tech-spec is too narrow for coordinating multiple features. Instead, Level 2-4 uses:
|
||||
|
||||
- PRD (product vision, functional requirements, non-functional requirements)
|
||||
- Architecture (system design)
|
||||
- Epics+Stories (created AFTER architecture is complete)
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Do I need a PRD for a bug fix?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** No! Bug fixes are typically Level 0 (single atomic change). Use Quick Spec Flow:
|
||||
|
||||
- Load PM agent
|
||||
- Run tech-spec workflow
|
||||
- Implement immediately
|
||||
|
||||
PRDs are for Level 2-4 projects with multiple features requiring product-level coordination.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Can I skip the product brief?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Yes, product brief is always optional. It's most valuable for:
|
||||
|
||||
- Level 3-4 projects needing strategic direction
|
||||
- Projects with stakeholders requiring alignment
|
||||
- Novel products needing market research
|
||||
- When you want to explore solution space before committing
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Does create-story include implementation context?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Yes! The create-story workflow generates story files that include implementation-specific guidance, references existing patterns from your documentation, and provides technical context. The workflow loads your architecture, PRD, and existing project documentation to create comprehensive stories. For Quick Flow projects using tech-spec, the tech-spec itself is already comprehensive, so stories can be simpler.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: How do I mark a story as done?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** After dev-story completes and code-review passes:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Open `sprint-status.yaml` (created by sprint-planning)
|
||||
2. Change the story status from `review` to `done`
|
||||
3. Save the file
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Can I work on multiple stories at once?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Yes, if you have capacity! Stories within different epics can be worked in parallel. However, stories within the same epic are usually sequential because they build on each other.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: What if my story takes longer than estimated?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** That's normal! Stories are estimates. If implementation reveals more complexity:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Continue working until DoD is met
|
||||
2. Consider if story should be split
|
||||
3. Document learnings in retrospective
|
||||
4. Adjust future estimates based on this learning
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: When should I run retrospective?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** After completing all stories in an epic (when epic is done). Retrospectives capture:
|
||||
|
||||
- What went well
|
||||
- What could improve
|
||||
- Technical insights
|
||||
- Learnings for future epics
|
||||
|
||||
Don't wait until project end - run after each epic for continuous improvement.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Brownfield Development
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: What is brownfield vs greenfield?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Greenfield:** New project, starting from scratch, clean slate
|
||||
- **Brownfield:** Existing project, working with established codebase and patterns
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Do I have to run document-project for brownfield?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Highly recommended, especially if:
|
||||
|
||||
- No existing documentation
|
||||
- Documentation is outdated
|
||||
- AI agents need context about existing code
|
||||
- Level 2-4 complexity
|
||||
|
||||
You can skip it if you have comprehensive, up-to-date documentation including `docs/index.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: What if I forget to run document-project on brownfield?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Workflows will lack context about existing code. You may get:
|
||||
|
||||
- Suggestions that don't match existing patterns
|
||||
- Integration approaches that miss existing APIs
|
||||
- Architecture that conflicts with current structure
|
||||
|
||||
Run document-project and restart planning with proper context.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Can I use Quick Spec Flow for brownfield projects?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Yes! Quick Spec Flow works great for brownfield. It will:
|
||||
|
||||
- Auto-detect your existing stack
|
||||
- Analyze brownfield code patterns
|
||||
- Detect conventions and ask for confirmation
|
||||
- Generate context-rich tech-spec that respects existing code
|
||||
|
||||
Perfect for bug fixes and small features in existing codebases.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: How does workflow-init handle brownfield with old planning docs?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** workflow-init asks about YOUR current work first, then uses old artifacts as context:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Shows what it found (old PRD, epics, etc.)
|
||||
2. Asks: "Is this work in progress, previous effort, or proposed work?"
|
||||
3. If previous effort: Asks you to describe your NEW work
|
||||
4. Determines level based on YOUR work, not old artifacts
|
||||
|
||||
This prevents old Level 3 PRDs from forcing Level 3 workflow for new Level 0 bug fix.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: What if my existing code doesn't follow best practices?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Quick Spec Flow detects your conventions and asks: "Should I follow these existing conventions?" You decide:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Yes** → Maintain consistency with current codebase
|
||||
- **No** → Establish new standards (document why in tech-spec)
|
||||
|
||||
BMM respects your choice - it won't force modernization, but it will offer it.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Tools and Technical
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Why are my Mermaid diagrams not rendering?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Common issues:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Missing language tag: Use ` ```mermaid` not just ` ``` `
|
||||
2. Syntax errors in diagram (validate at mermaid.live)
|
||||
3. Tool doesn't support Mermaid (check your Markdown renderer)
|
||||
|
||||
All BMM docs use valid Mermaid syntax that should render in GitHub, VS Code, and most IDEs.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Can I use BMM with GitHub Copilot / Cursor / other AI tools?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Yes! BMM is complementary. BMM handles:
|
||||
|
||||
- Project planning and structure
|
||||
- Workflow orchestration
|
||||
- Agent Personas and expertise
|
||||
- Documentation generation
|
||||
- Quality gates
|
||||
|
||||
Your AI coding assistant handles:
|
||||
|
||||
- Line-by-line code completion
|
||||
- Quick refactoring
|
||||
- Test generation
|
||||
|
||||
Use them together for best results.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: What IDEs/tools support BMM?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** BMM requires tools with **agent mode** and access to **high-quality LLM models** that can load and follow complex workflows, then properly implement code changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Recommended Tools:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Claude Code** ⭐ **Best choice**
|
||||
- Sonnet 4.5 (excellent workflow following, coding, reasoning)
|
||||
- Opus (maximum context, complex planning)
|
||||
- Native agent mode designed for BMM workflows
|
||||
|
||||
- **Cursor**
|
||||
- Supports Anthropic (Claude) and OpenAI models
|
||||
- Agent mode with composer
|
||||
- Good for developers who prefer Cursor's UX
|
||||
|
||||
- **Windsurf**
|
||||
- Multi-model support
|
||||
- Agent capabilities
|
||||
- Suitable for BMM workflows
|
||||
|
||||
**What Matters:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Agent mode** - Can load long workflow instructions and maintain context
|
||||
2. **High-quality LLM** - Models ranked high on SWE-bench (coding benchmarks)
|
||||
3. **Model selection** - Access to Claude Sonnet 4.5, Opus, or GPT-4o class models
|
||||
4. **Context capacity** - Can handle large planning documents and codebases
|
||||
|
||||
**Why model quality matters:** BMM workflows require LLMs that can follow multi-step processes, maintain context across phases, and implement code that adheres to specifications. Tools with weaker models will struggle with workflow adherence and code quality.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Can I customize agents?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Yes! Agents are installed as markdown files with XML-style content (optimized for LLMs, readable by any model). Create customization files in `_bmad/_config/agents/[agent-name].customize.yaml` to override default behaviors while keeping core functionality intact. See agent documentation for customization options.
|
||||
|
||||
**Note:** While source agents in this repo are YAML, they install as `.md` files with XML-style tags - a format any LLM can read and follow.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: What happens to my planning docs after implementation?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Keep them! They serve as:
|
||||
|
||||
- Historical record of decisions
|
||||
- Onboarding material for new team members
|
||||
- Reference for future enhancements
|
||||
- Audit trail for compliance
|
||||
|
||||
For enterprise projects (Level 4), consider archiving completed planning artifacts to keep workspace clean.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Can I use BMM for non-software projects?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** BMM is optimized for software development, but the methodology principles (scale-adaptive planning, just-in-time design, context injection) can apply to other complex project types. You'd need to adapt workflows and agents for your domain.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Advanced Questions
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: What if my project grows from Level 1 to Level 3?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Totally fine! When you realize scope has grown:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Run create-prd to add product-level planning
|
||||
2. Run create-architecture for system design
|
||||
3. Use existing tech-spec as input for PRD
|
||||
4. Continue with updated level
|
||||
|
||||
The system is flexible - growth is expected.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Can I mix greenfield and brownfield approaches?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Yes! Common scenario: adding new greenfield feature to brownfield codebase. Approach:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Run document-project for brownfield context
|
||||
2. Use greenfield workflows for new feature planning
|
||||
3. Explicitly document integration points between new and existing
|
||||
4. Test integration thoroughly
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: How do I handle urgent hotfixes during a sprint?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Use correct-course workflow or just:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Save your current work state
|
||||
2. Load PM agent → quick tech-spec for hotfix
|
||||
3. Implement hotfix (Level 0 flow)
|
||||
4. Deploy hotfix
|
||||
5. Return to original sprint work
|
||||
|
||||
Level 0 Quick Spec Flow is perfect for urgent fixes.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: What if I disagree with the workflow's recommendations?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Workflows are guidance, not enforcement. If a workflow recommends something that doesn't make sense for your context:
|
||||
|
||||
- Explain your reasoning to the agent
|
||||
- Ask for alternative approaches
|
||||
- Skip the recommendation if you're confident
|
||||
- Document why you deviated (for future reference)
|
||||
|
||||
Trust your expertise - BMM supports your decisions.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Can multiple developers work on the same BMM project?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Yes! But the paradigm is fundamentally different from traditional agile teams.
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Difference:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Traditional:** Multiple devs work on stories within one epic (months)
|
||||
- **Agentic:** Each dev owns complete epics (days)
|
||||
|
||||
**In traditional agile:** A team of 5 devs might spend 2-3 months on a single epic, with each dev owning different stories.
|
||||
|
||||
**With BMM + AI agents:** A single dev can complete an entire epic in 1-3 days. What used to take months now takes days.
|
||||
|
||||
**Team Work Distribution:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Recommended:** Split work by **epic** (not story)
|
||||
- Each developer owns complete epics end-to-end
|
||||
- Parallel work happens at epic level
|
||||
- Minimal coordination needed
|
||||
|
||||
**For full-stack apps:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Frontend and backend can be separate epics (unusual in traditional agile)
|
||||
- Frontend dev owns all frontend epics
|
||||
- Backend dev owns all backend epics
|
||||
- Works because delivery is so fast
|
||||
|
||||
**Enterprise Considerations:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Use **git submodules** for BMM installation (not .gitignore)
|
||||
- Allows personal configurations without polluting main repo
|
||||
- Teams may use different AI tools (Claude Code, Cursor, etc.)
|
||||
- Developers may follow different methods or create custom agents/workflows
|
||||
|
||||
**Quick Tips:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Share `sprint-status.yaml` (single source of truth)
|
||||
- Assign entire epics to developers (not individual stories)
|
||||
- Coordinate at epic boundaries, not story level
|
||||
- Use git submodules for BMM in enterprise settings
|
||||
|
||||
**For comprehensive coverage of enterprise team collaboration, work distribution strategies, git submodule setup, and velocity expectations, see:**
|
||||
|
||||
👉 **[Enterprise Agentic Development Guide](./enterprise-agentic-development.md)**
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: What is party mode and when should I use it?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Party mode is a unique multi-agent collaboration feature where ALL your installed agents (19+ from BMM, CIS, BMB, custom modules) discuss your challenges together in real-time.
|
||||
|
||||
**How it works:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Run `/bmad:core:workflows:party-mode` (or `*party-mode` from any agent)
|
||||
2. Introduce your topic
|
||||
3. BMad Master selects 2-3 most relevant agents per message
|
||||
4. Agents cross-talk, debate, and build on each other's ideas
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Strategic decisions with trade-offs (architecture choices, tech stack, scope)
|
||||
- Creative brainstorming (game design, product innovation, UX ideation)
|
||||
- Cross-functional alignment (epic kickoffs, retrospectives, phase transitions)
|
||||
- Complex problem-solving (multi-faceted challenges, risk assessment)
|
||||
|
||||
**Example parties:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Product Strategy:** PM + Innovation Strategist (CIS) + Analyst
|
||||
- **Technical Design:** Architect + Creative Problem Solver (CIS) + Game Architect
|
||||
- **User Experience:** UX Designer + Design Thinking Coach (CIS) + Storyteller (CIS)
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it's powerful:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Diverse perspectives (technical, creative, strategic)
|
||||
- Healthy debate reveals blind spots
|
||||
- Emergent insights from agent interaction
|
||||
- Natural collaboration across modules
|
||||
|
||||
**For complete documentation:**
|
||||
|
||||
👉 **[Party Mode Guide](./party-mode.md)** - How it works, when to use it, example compositions, best practices
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Getting Help
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Where do I get help if my question isn't answered here?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Search [Complete Documentation](./README.md) for related topics
|
||||
2. Ask in [Discord Community](https://discord.gg/gk8jAdXWmj) (#general-dev)
|
||||
3. Open a [GitHub Issue](https://github.com/bmad-code-org/BMAD-METHOD/issues)
|
||||
4. Watch [YouTube Tutorials](https://www.youtube.com/@BMadCode)
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: How do I report a bug or request a feature?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Open a GitHub issue at: <https://github.com/bmad-code-org/BMAD-METHOD/issues>
|
||||
|
||||
Please include:
|
||||
|
||||
- BMM version (check your installed version)
|
||||
- Steps to reproduce (for bugs)
|
||||
- Expected vs actual behavior
|
||||
- Relevant workflow or agent involved
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Related Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
- [Quick Start Guide](./quick-start.md) - Get started with BMM
|
||||
- [Glossary](./glossary.md) - Terminology reference
|
||||
- [Scale Adaptive System](./scale-adaptive-system.md) - Understanding levels
|
||||
- [Brownfield Guide](./brownfield-guide.md) - Existing codebase workflows
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**Have a question not answered here?** Please [open an issue](https://github.com/bmad-code-org/BMAD-METHOD/issues) or ask in [Discord](https://discord.gg/gk8jAdXWmj) so we can add it!
|
||||
306
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/glossary.md
Normal file
306
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/glossary.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,306 @@
|
||||
# BMM Glossary
|
||||
|
||||
Comprehensive terminology reference for the BMad Method Module.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Navigation
|
||||
|
||||
- [Core Concepts](#core-concepts)
|
||||
- [Scale and Complexity](#scale-and-complexity)
|
||||
- [Planning Documents](#planning-documents)
|
||||
- [Workflow and Phases](#workflow-and-phases)
|
||||
- [Agents and Roles](#agents-and-roles)
|
||||
- [Status and Tracking](#status-and-tracking)
|
||||
- [Project Types](#project-types)
|
||||
- [Implementation Terms](#implementation-terms)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Core Concepts
|
||||
|
||||
### BMM (BMad Method Module)
|
||||
|
||||
Core orchestration system for AI-driven agile development, providing comprehensive lifecycle management through specialized agents and workflows.
|
||||
|
||||
### BMad Method
|
||||
|
||||
The complete methodology for AI-assisted software development, encompassing planning, architecture, implementation, and quality assurance workflows that adapt to project complexity.
|
||||
|
||||
### Scale-Adaptive System
|
||||
|
||||
BMad Method's intelligent workflow orchestration that automatically adjusts planning depth, documentation requirements, and implementation processes based on project needs through three distinct planning tracks (Quick Flow, BMad Method, Enterprise Method).
|
||||
|
||||
### Agent
|
||||
|
||||
A specialized AI persona with specific expertise (PM, Architect, SM, DEV, TEA) that guides users through workflows and creates deliverables. Agents have defined capabilities, communication styles, and workflow access.
|
||||
|
||||
### Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
A multi-step guided process that orchestrates AI agent activities to produce specific deliverables. Workflows are interactive and adapt to user context.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Scale and Complexity
|
||||
|
||||
### Quick Flow Track
|
||||
|
||||
Fast implementation track using tech-spec planning only. Best for bug fixes, small features, and changes with clear scope. Typical range: 1-15 stories. No architecture phase needed. Examples: bug fixes, OAuth login, search features.
|
||||
|
||||
### BMad Method Track
|
||||
|
||||
Full product planning track using PRD + Architecture + UX. Best for products, platforms, and complex features requiring system design. Typical range: 10-50+ stories. Examples: admin dashboards, e-commerce platforms, SaaS products.
|
||||
|
||||
### Enterprise Method Track
|
||||
|
||||
Extended enterprise planning track adding Security Architecture, DevOps Strategy, and Test Strategy to BMad Method. Best for enterprise requirements, compliance needs, and multi-tenant systems. Typical range: 30+ stories. Examples: multi-tenant platforms, compliance-driven systems, mission-critical applications.
|
||||
|
||||
### Planning Track
|
||||
|
||||
The methodology path (Quick Flow, BMad Method, or Enterprise Method) chosen for a project based on planning needs, complexity, and requirements rather than story count alone.
|
||||
|
||||
**Note:** Story counts are guidance, not definitions. Tracks are determined by what planning the project needs, not story math.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Planning Documents
|
||||
|
||||
### Tech-Spec (Technical Specification)
|
||||
|
||||
**Quick Flow track only.** Comprehensive technical plan created upfront that serves as the primary planning document for small changes or features. Contains problem statement, solution approach, file-level changes, stack detection (brownfield), testing strategy, and developer resources.
|
||||
|
||||
### PRD (Product Requirements Document)
|
||||
|
||||
**BMad Method/Enterprise tracks.** Product-level planning document containing vision, goals, Functional Requirements (FRs), Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs), success criteria, and UX considerations. Replaces tech-spec for larger projects that need product planning. **V6 Note:** PRD focuses on WHAT to build (requirements). Epic+Stories are created separately AFTER architecture via create-epics-and-stories workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
### Architecture Document
|
||||
|
||||
**BMad Method/Enterprise tracks.** System-wide design document defining structure, components, interactions, data models, integration patterns, security, performance, and deployment.
|
||||
|
||||
**Scale-Adaptive:** Architecture complexity scales with track - BMad Method is lightweight to moderate, Enterprise Method is comprehensive with security/devops/test strategies.
|
||||
|
||||
### Epics
|
||||
|
||||
High-level feature groupings that contain multiple related stories. Typically span 5-15 stories each and represent cohesive functionality (e.g., "User Authentication Epic").
|
||||
|
||||
### Product Brief
|
||||
|
||||
Optional strategic planning document created in Phase 1 (Analysis) that captures product vision, market context, user needs, and high-level requirements before detailed planning.
|
||||
|
||||
### GDD (Game Design Document)
|
||||
|
||||
Game development equivalent of PRD, created by Game Designer agent for game projects.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow and Phases
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 0: Documentation (Prerequisite)
|
||||
|
||||
**Conditional phase for brownfield projects.** Creates comprehensive codebase documentation before planning. Only required if existing documentation is insufficient for AI agents.
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Analysis (Optional)
|
||||
|
||||
Discovery and research phase including brainstorming, research workflows, and product brief creation. Optional for Quick Flow, recommended for BMad Method, required for Enterprise Method.
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Planning (Required)
|
||||
|
||||
**Always required.** Creates formal requirements and work breakdown. Routes to tech-spec (Quick Flow) or PRD (BMad Method/Enterprise) based on selected track.
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Solutioning (Track-Dependent)
|
||||
|
||||
Architecture design phase. Required for BMad Method and Enterprise Method tracks. Includes architecture creation, validation, and gate checks.
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Implementation (Required)
|
||||
|
||||
Sprint-based development through story-by-story iteration. Uses sprint-planning, create-story, dev-story, code-review, and retrospective workflows.
|
||||
|
||||
### Documentation (Prerequisite for Brownfield)
|
||||
|
||||
**Conditional prerequisite for brownfield projects.** Creates comprehensive codebase documentation before planning. Only required if existing documentation is insufficient for AI agents. Uses the `document-project` workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
### Quick Spec Flow
|
||||
|
||||
Fast-track workflow system for Quick Flow track projects that goes straight from idea to tech-spec to implementation, bypassing heavy planning. Designed for bug fixes, small features, and rapid prototyping.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Agents and Roles
|
||||
|
||||
### PM (Product Manager)
|
||||
|
||||
Agent responsible for creating PRDs, tech-specs, and managing product requirements. Primary agent for Phase 2 planning.
|
||||
|
||||
### Analyst (Business Analyst)
|
||||
|
||||
Agent that initializes workflows, conducts research, creates product briefs, and tracks progress. Often the entry point for new projects.
|
||||
|
||||
### Architect
|
||||
|
||||
Agent that designs system architecture, creates architecture documents, performs technical reviews, and validates designs. Primary agent for Phase 3 solutioning.
|
||||
|
||||
### SM (Scrum Master)
|
||||
|
||||
Agent that manages sprints, creates stories, generates contexts, and coordinates implementation. Primary orchestrator for Phase 4 implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
### DEV (Developer)
|
||||
|
||||
Agent that implements stories, writes code, runs tests, and performs code reviews. Primary implementer in Phase 4.
|
||||
|
||||
### TEA (Test Architect)
|
||||
|
||||
Agent responsible for test strategy, quality gates, NFR assessment, and comprehensive quality assurance. Integrates throughout all phases.
|
||||
|
||||
### Technical Writer
|
||||
|
||||
Agent specialized in creating and maintaining high-quality technical documentation. Expert in documentation standards, information architecture, and professional technical writing. The agent's internal name is "paige" but is presented as "Technical Writer" to users.
|
||||
|
||||
### UX Designer
|
||||
|
||||
Agent that creates UX design documents, interaction patterns, and visual specifications for UI-heavy projects.
|
||||
|
||||
### Game Designer
|
||||
|
||||
Specialized agent for game development projects. Creates game design documents (GDD) and game-specific workflows.
|
||||
|
||||
### BMad Master
|
||||
|
||||
Meta-level orchestrator agent from BMad Core. Facilitates party mode, lists available tasks and workflows, and provides high-level guidance across all modules.
|
||||
|
||||
### Party Mode
|
||||
|
||||
Multi-agent collaboration feature where all installed agents (19+ from BMM, CIS, BMB, custom modules) discuss challenges together in real-time. BMad Master orchestrates, selecting 2-3 relevant agents per message for natural cross-talk and debate. Best for strategic decisions, creative brainstorming, cross-functional alignment, and complex problem-solving. See [Party Mode Guide](./party-mode.md).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Status and Tracking
|
||||
|
||||
### bmm-workflow-status.yaml
|
||||
|
||||
**Phases 1-3.** Tracking file that shows current phase, completed workflows, progress, and next recommended actions. Created by workflow-init, updated automatically.
|
||||
|
||||
### sprint-status.yaml
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 4 only.** Single source of truth for implementation tracking. Contains all epics, stories, and retrospectives with current status for each. Created by sprint-planning, updated by agents.
|
||||
|
||||
### Story Status Progression
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
backlog → ready-for-dev → in-progress → review → done
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- **backlog** - Story exists in epic but not yet created
|
||||
- **ready-for-dev** - Story file created via create-story; validation is optional (run `validate-create-story` for quality check before dev picks it up)
|
||||
- **in-progress** - DEV is implementing via dev-story
|
||||
- **review** - Implementation complete, awaiting code-review
|
||||
- **done** - Completed with DoD met
|
||||
|
||||
### Epic Status Progression
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
backlog → in-progress → done
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
- **backlog** - Epic not yet started
|
||||
- **in-progress** - Epic actively being worked on
|
||||
- **done** - All stories in epic completed
|
||||
|
||||
### Retrospective
|
||||
|
||||
Workflow run after completing each epic to capture learnings, identify improvements, and feed insights into next epic planning. Critical for continuous improvement.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Project Types
|
||||
|
||||
### Greenfield
|
||||
|
||||
New project starting from scratch with no existing codebase. Freedom to establish patterns, choose stack, and design from clean slate.
|
||||
|
||||
### Brownfield
|
||||
|
||||
Existing project with established codebase, patterns, and constraints. Requires understanding existing architecture, respecting established conventions, and planning integration with current systems.
|
||||
|
||||
**Critical:** Brownfield projects should run document-project workflow BEFORE planning to ensure AI agents have adequate context about existing code.
|
||||
|
||||
### document-project Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
**Brownfield prerequisite.** Analyzes and documents existing codebase, creating comprehensive documentation including project overview, architecture analysis, source tree, API contracts, and data models. Three scan levels: quick, deep, exhaustive.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Terms
|
||||
|
||||
### Story
|
||||
|
||||
Single unit of implementable work with clear acceptance criteria, typically 2-8 hours of development effort. Stories are grouped into epics and tracked in sprint-status.yaml.
|
||||
|
||||
### Story File
|
||||
|
||||
Markdown file containing story details: description, acceptance criteria, technical notes, dependencies, implementation guidance, and testing requirements.
|
||||
|
||||
### Story Context
|
||||
|
||||
Implementation guidance embedded within story files during the create-story workflow. Provides implementation-specific context, references existing patterns, suggests approaches, and helps maintain consistency with established codebase conventions.
|
||||
|
||||
### Sprint Planning
|
||||
|
||||
Workflow that initializes Phase 4 implementation by creating sprint-status.yaml, extracting all epics/stories from planning docs, and setting up tracking infrastructure.
|
||||
|
||||
### Gate Check
|
||||
|
||||
Validation workflow (implementation-readiness) run before Phase 4 to ensure PRD + Architecture + Epics + UX (optional) are aligned with no gaps or contradictions. Required for BMad Method and Enterprise Method tracks.
|
||||
|
||||
### DoD (Definition of Done)
|
||||
|
||||
Criteria that must be met before marking a story as done. Typically includes: implementation complete, tests written and passing, code reviewed, documentation updated, and acceptance criteria validated.
|
||||
|
||||
### Shard / Sharding
|
||||
|
||||
**For runtime LLM optimization only (NOT human docs).** Splitting large planning documents (PRD, epics, architecture) into smaller section-based files to improve workflow efficiency. Phase 1-3 workflows load entire sharded documents transparently. Phase 4 workflows selectively load only needed sections for massive token savings.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Additional Terms
|
||||
|
||||
### Workflow Status
|
||||
|
||||
Universal entry point workflow that checks for existing status file, displays current phase/progress, and recommends next action based on project state.
|
||||
|
||||
### Workflow Init
|
||||
|
||||
Initialization workflow that creates bmm-workflow-status.yaml, detects greenfield vs brownfield, determines planning track, and sets up appropriate workflow path.
|
||||
|
||||
### Track Selection
|
||||
|
||||
Automatic analysis by workflow-init that uses keyword analysis, complexity indicators, and project requirements to suggest appropriate track (Quick Flow, BMad Method, or Enterprise Method). User can override suggested track.
|
||||
|
||||
### Correct Course
|
||||
|
||||
Workflow run during Phase 4 when significant changes or issues arise. Analyzes impact, proposes solutions, and routes to appropriate remediation workflows.
|
||||
|
||||
### Migration Strategy
|
||||
|
||||
Plan for handling changes to existing data, schemas, APIs, or patterns during brownfield development. Critical for ensuring backward compatibility and smooth rollout.
|
||||
|
||||
### Feature Flags
|
||||
|
||||
Implementation technique for brownfield projects that allows gradual rollout of new functionality, easy rollback, and A/B testing. Recommended for BMad Method and Enterprise brownfield changes.
|
||||
|
||||
### Integration Points
|
||||
|
||||
Specific locations where new code connects with existing systems. Must be documented explicitly in brownfield tech-specs and architectures.
|
||||
|
||||
### Convention Detection
|
||||
|
||||
Quick Spec Flow feature that automatically detects existing code style, naming conventions, patterns, and frameworks from brownfield codebases, then asks user to confirm before proceeding.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Related Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
- [Quick Start Guide](./quick-start.md) - Learn BMM basics
|
||||
- [Scale Adaptive System](./scale-adaptive-system.md) - Deep dive on tracks and complexity
|
||||
- [Brownfield Guide](./brownfield-guide.md) - Working with existing codebases
|
||||
- [Quick Spec Flow](./quick-spec-flow.md) - Fast-track for Quick Flow track
|
||||
- [FAQ](./faq.md) - Common questions
|
||||
37
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/images/README.md
Normal file
37
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/images/README.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
|
||||
# Workflow Diagram Maintenance
|
||||
|
||||
## Regenerating SVG from Excalidraw
|
||||
|
||||
When you edit `workflow-method-greenfield.excalidraw`, regenerate the SVG:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Open <https://excalidraw.com/>
|
||||
2. Load the `.excalidraw` file
|
||||
3. Click menu (☰) → Export image → SVG
|
||||
4. **Set "Scale" to 1x** (default is 2x)
|
||||
5. Click "Export"
|
||||
6. Save as `workflow-method-greenfield.svg`
|
||||
7. **Validate the changes** (see below)
|
||||
8. Commit both files together
|
||||
|
||||
**Important:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Always use **1x scale** to maintain consistent dimensions
|
||||
- Automated export tools (`excalidraw-to-svg`) are broken - use manual export only
|
||||
|
||||
## Visual Validation
|
||||
|
||||
After regenerating the SVG, validate that it renders correctly:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
./tools/validate-svg-changes.sh path/to/workflow-method-greenfield.svg
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This script:
|
||||
|
||||
- Checks for required dependencies (Playwright, ImageMagick)
|
||||
- Installs Playwright locally if needed (no package.json pollution)
|
||||
- Renders old vs new SVG using browser-accurate rendering
|
||||
- Compares pixel-by-pixel and generates a diff image
|
||||
- Outputs a prompt for AI visual analysis (paste into Gemini/Claude)
|
||||
|
||||
**Threshold**: <0.01% difference is acceptable (anti-aliasing variations)
|
||||
File diff suppressed because it is too large
Load Diff
File diff suppressed because one or more lines are too long
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 87 KiB |
130
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/index.md
Normal file
130
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/index.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,130 @@
|
||||
# BMM Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
Complete guides for the BMad Method Module (BMM) - AI-powered agile development workflows that adapt to your project's complexity.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚀 Getting Started
|
||||
|
||||
**New to BMM?** Start here:
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Quick Start Guide](./quick-start.md)** - Step-by-step guide to building your first project
|
||||
- Installation and setup
|
||||
- Understanding the four phases
|
||||
- Running your first workflows
|
||||
- Agent-based development flow
|
||||
|
||||
**Quick Path:** Install → workflow-init → Follow agent guidance
|
||||
|
||||
### 📊 Visual Overview
|
||||
|
||||
**[Complete Workflow Diagram](./images/workflow-method-greenfield.svg)** - Visual flowchart showing all phases, agents (color-coded), and decision points for the BMad Method standard greenfield track.
|
||||
|
||||
## 📖 Core Concepts
|
||||
|
||||
The BMad Method is meant to be adapted and customized to your specific needs. In this realm there is no one size fits all - your needs are unique, and BMad Method is meant to support this (and if it does not, can be further customized or extended with new modules).
|
||||
|
||||
First know there is the full BMad Method Process and then there is a Quick Flow for those quicker smaller efforts.
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Full Adaptive BMad Method](#-workflow-guides)** - Full planning and scope support through extensive development and testing.
|
||||
- Broken down into 4 phases, all of which are comprised of both required and optional phases
|
||||
- Phases 1-3 are all about progressive idea development through planning and preparations to build your project.
|
||||
- Phase 4 is the implementation cycle where you will Just In Time (JIT) produce the contextual stories needed for the dev agent based on the extensive planing completed
|
||||
- All 4 phases have optional steps in them, depending on how rigorous you want to go with planning, research ideation, validation, testing and traceability.
|
||||
- While there is a lot here, know that even this can be distilled down to a simple PRD, Epic and Story list and then jump into the dev cycle. But if that is all you want, you might be better off with the BMad Quick Flow described next
|
||||
|
||||
- **[BMAD Quick Flow](./bmad-quick-flow.md)** - Fast-track development workflow
|
||||
- 3-step process: spec → dev → optional review
|
||||
- Perfect for bug fixes and small features
|
||||
- Rapid prototyping with production quality
|
||||
- Implementation in minutes, not days
|
||||
- Has a specialized single agent that does all of this: **[Quick Flow Solo Dev Agent](./quick-flow-solo-dev.md)**
|
||||
|
||||
## 🤖 Agents and Collaboration
|
||||
|
||||
Complete guide to BMM's AI agent team:
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Agents Guide](./agents-guide.md)** - Comprehensive agent reference
|
||||
- 12 specialized BMM agents + BMad Master
|
||||
- Agent roles, workflows, and when to use them
|
||||
- Agent customization system
|
||||
- Best practices and common patterns
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Party Mode Guide](./party-mode.md)** - Multi-agent collaboration
|
||||
- How party mode works (19+ agents collaborate in real-time)
|
||||
- When to use it (strategic, creative, cross-functional, complex)
|
||||
- Example party compositions
|
||||
- Multi-module integration (BMM + CIS + BMB + custom)
|
||||
- Agent customization in party mode
|
||||
- Best practices
|
||||
|
||||
## 🔧 Working with Existing Code
|
||||
|
||||
Comprehensive guide for brownfield development:
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Brownfield Development Guide](./brownfield-guide.md)** - Complete guide for existing codebases
|
||||
- Documentation phase strategies
|
||||
- Track selection for brownfield
|
||||
- Integration with existing patterns
|
||||
- Phase-by-phase workflow guidance
|
||||
- Common scenarios
|
||||
|
||||
## 📚 Quick References
|
||||
|
||||
Essential reference materials:
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Glossary](./glossary.md)** - Key terminology and concepts
|
||||
- **[FAQ](./faq.md)** - Frequently asked questions across all topics
|
||||
|
||||
## 🎯 Choose Your Path
|
||||
|
||||
### I need to...
|
||||
|
||||
**Build something new (greenfield)**
|
||||
→ Start with [Quick Start Guide](./quick-start.md)
|
||||
|
||||
**Fix a bug or add small feature**
|
||||
→ User the [Quick Flow Solo Dev](./quick-flow-solo-dev.md) directly with its dedicated stand alone [Quick Bmad Spec Flow](./quick-spec-flow.md) process
|
||||
|
||||
**Work with existing codebase (brownfield)**
|
||||
→ Read [Brownfield Development Guide](./brownfield-guide.md)
|
||||
→ Pay special attention to documentation requirements for brownfield projects
|
||||
|
||||
## 📋 Workflow Guides
|
||||
|
||||
Comprehensive documentation for all BMM workflows organized by phase:
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Phase 1: Analysis Workflows](./workflows-analysis.md)** - Optional exploration and research workflows (595 lines)
|
||||
- brainstorm-project, product-brief, research, and more
|
||||
- When to use analysis workflows
|
||||
- Creative and strategic tools
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Phase 2: Planning Workflows](./workflows-planning.md)** - Scale-adaptive planning (967 lines)
|
||||
- prd, tech-spec, gdd, narrative, ux
|
||||
- Track-based planning approach (Quick Flow, BMad Method, Enterprise Method)
|
||||
- Which planning workflow to use
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Phase 3: Solutioning Workflows](./workflows-solutioning.md)** - Architecture and validation (638 lines)
|
||||
- architecture, create-epics-and-stories, implementation-readiness
|
||||
- V6: Epics created AFTER architecture for better quality
|
||||
- Required for BMad Method and Enterprise Method tracks
|
||||
- Preventing agent conflicts
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Phase 4: Implementation Workflows](./workflows-implementation.md)** - Sprint-based development (1,634 lines)
|
||||
- sprint-planning, create-story, dev-story, code-review
|
||||
- Complete story lifecycle
|
||||
- One-story-at-a-time discipline
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Testing & QA Workflows](./test-architecture.md)** - Comprehensive quality assurance (1,420 lines)
|
||||
- Test strategy, automation, quality gates
|
||||
- TEA agent and test healing
|
||||
|
||||
## 🌐 External Resources
|
||||
|
||||
### Community and Support
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Discord Community](https://discord.gg/gk8jAdXWmj)** - Get help from the community (#general-dev, #bugs-issues)
|
||||
- **[GitHub Issues](https://github.com/bmad-code-org/BMAD-METHOD/issues)** - Report bugs or request features
|
||||
- **[YouTube Channel](https://www.youtube.com/@BMadCode)** - Video tutorials and walkthroughs
|
||||
|
||||
**Ready to begin?** → [Start with the Quick Start Guide](./quick-start.md)
|
||||
114
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/party-mode.md
Normal file
114
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/party-mode.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,114 @@
|
||||
# Party Mode: Multi-Agent Collaboration
|
||||
|
||||
**Get all your AI agents in one conversation**
|
||||
|
||||
## What is Party Mode?
|
||||
|
||||
Ever wanted to gather your entire AI team in one room and see what happens? That's party mode.
|
||||
|
||||
Type `/bmad:core:workflows:party-mode` (or `*party-mode` from any agent or at key workflow junctions when asked), and suddenly you've got **all your AI agents** in one conversation. PM, Architect, DEV, UX Designer and more that you can choose from.
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it's useful:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **After complex workflows** - Debrief with the whole team about what worked, what didn't
|
||||
- **Big decisions with tradeoffs** - Get technical, creative, and strategic perspectives simultaneously
|
||||
- **Brainstorming sessions** - Watch ideas evolve through cross-pollination
|
||||
- **When things go wrong** - Call out failures, watch agents defend their decisions, let them debate whose fault it was (oddly therapeutic)
|
||||
- **Sprint retrospectives** - Party mode powers the retrospective workflow
|
||||
- **Sprint planning** - Multi-agent collaboration for planning sessions
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## How It Works
|
||||
|
||||
**The basics:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Party mode reads `_bmad/_config/agent-manifest.csv`
|
||||
2. Loads ALL installed agents (already includes your customizations from install)
|
||||
3. BMad Master orchestrates - picks 2-3 relevant agents per message based on topic
|
||||
4. Agents respond in character, can agree/disagree/build on each other's ideas
|
||||
5. Discussion continues until you type "exit" or reach natural conclusion
|
||||
|
||||
**That's it.** No complex merging, no runtime magic. Just agents talking.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Start
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Trigger party mode
|
||||
/bmad:core:workflows:party-mode
|
||||
|
||||
# OR from any agent context
|
||||
*party-mode
|
||||
|
||||
# Super Hack
|
||||
|
||||
/bmad:core:workflows:party-mode and include also in the party Santa Clause and Einstein
|
||||
|
||||
# During party
|
||||
Ask questions, respond to agents, direct the conversation
|
||||
|
||||
# Exit
|
||||
Type: exit
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Fun Examples
|
||||
|
||||
### Example 1: Calling Out Bad Architecture
|
||||
|
||||
**You:** "Okay team, our last sprint was a disaster. The authentication service went down three times. Who screwed this up?"
|
||||
|
||||
**Architect (Winston):** "The design was sound - distributed authentication with proper fallbacks. If implementation deviated from the spec..."
|
||||
|
||||
**DEV (Amelia):** "I followed the architecture doc exactly. The spec didn't account for concurrent session invalidation race conditions."
|
||||
|
||||
**PM (John):** "Both of you missed the bigger issue - we didn't validate session management requirements in the PRD. This is on me for not catching it."
|
||||
|
||||
**TEA (Murat):** "And I should've caught this in integration tests. The test scenarios didn't cover concurrent invalidation."
|
||||
|
||||
_(Watch them debate whose fault it really was - it's therapeutic)_
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Example 2: Creative Brainstorming
|
||||
|
||||
**You:** "How do we make onboarding feel magical instead of boring?"
|
||||
|
||||
**UX Designer (Sally):** "Start with progressive disclosure - reveal features as users need them, not all at once in a tutorial."
|
||||
|
||||
**Storyteller (CIS):** "What if onboarding was a story? Each step reveals a character's journey - the user IS the hero."
|
||||
|
||||
**Innovation Strategist (CIS):** "Take it further - gamify with unlockable achievements. But make them meaningful, not arbitrary badges."
|
||||
|
||||
**Game Designer:** "Building on that - what if the first 'quest' is actually solving a real user problem? They learn by doing something valuable."
|
||||
|
||||
_(Ideas cross-pollinate and evolve)_
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Example 3: Technical Decision
|
||||
|
||||
**You:** "Monolith or microservices for MVP?"
|
||||
|
||||
**Architect:** "Start monolith. Microservices add complexity you don't need at 1000 users."
|
||||
|
||||
**PM:** "Agree. Time to market matters more than theoretical scalability."
|
||||
|
||||
**DEV:** "Monolith with clear module boundaries. We can extract services later if needed."
|
||||
|
||||
**Innovation Strategist:** "Contrarian take - if your differentiator IS scalability, build for it now. Otherwise Architect's right."
|
||||
|
||||
_(Multiple perspectives reveal the right answer)_
|
||||
|
||||
## Related Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
- [Agents Guide](./agents-guide.md) - Complete agent reference
|
||||
- [Quick Start Guide](./quick-start.md) - Getting started with BMM
|
||||
- [FAQ](./faq.md) - Common questions
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
_Better decisions through diverse perspectives. Welcome to party mode._
|
||||
337
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/quick-flow-solo-dev.md
Normal file
337
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/quick-flow-solo-dev.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,337 @@
|
||||
# Quick Flow Solo Dev Agent (Barry)
|
||||
|
||||
**Agent ID:** `_bmad/bmm/agents/quick-flow-solo-dev.md`
|
||||
**Icon:** 🚀
|
||||
**Module:** BMM
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Barry is the elite solo developer who lives and breathes the BMAD Quick Flow workflow. He takes projects from concept to deployment with ruthless efficiency - no handoffs, no delays, just pure focused development. Barry architects specs, writes the code, and ships features faster than entire teams. When you need it done right and done now, Barry's your dev.
|
||||
|
||||
### Agent Persona
|
||||
|
||||
**Name:** Barry
|
||||
**Title:** Quick Flow Solo Dev
|
||||
|
||||
**Identity:** Barry is an elite developer who thrives on autonomous execution. He lives and breathes the BMAD Quick Flow workflow, taking projects from concept to deployment with ruthless efficiency. No handoffs, no delays - just pure, focused development. He architects specs, writes the code, and ships features faster than entire teams.
|
||||
|
||||
**Communication Style:** Direct, confident, and implementation-focused. Uses tech slang and gets straight to the point. No fluff, just results. Every response moves the project forward.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core Principles:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Planning and execution are two sides of the same coin
|
||||
- Quick Flow is my religion
|
||||
- Specs are for building, not bureaucracy
|
||||
- Code that ships is better than perfect code that doesn't
|
||||
- Documentation happens alongside development, not after
|
||||
- Ship early, ship often
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Menu Commands
|
||||
|
||||
Barry owns the entire BMAD Quick Flow path, providing a streamlined 3-step development process that eliminates handoffs and maximizes velocity.
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. **create-tech-spec**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Workflow:** `_bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/create-tech-spec/workflow.yaml`
|
||||
- **Description:** Architect a technical spec with implementation-ready stories
|
||||
- **Use when:** You need to transform requirements into a buildable spec
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. **quick-dev**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Workflow:** `_bmad/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/quick-dev/workflow.yaml`
|
||||
- **Description:** Ship features from spec or direct instructions - no handoffs
|
||||
- **Use when:** You're ready to ship code based on a spec or clear instructions
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. **code-review**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Workflow:** `_bmad/bmm/workflows/4-implementation/code-review/workflow.yaml`
|
||||
- **Description:** Review code for quality, patterns, and acceptance criteria
|
||||
- **Use when:** You need to validate implementation quality
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. **party-mode**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Workflow:** `_bmad/core/workflows/party-mode/workflow.yaml`
|
||||
- **Description:** Bring in other experts when I need specialized backup
|
||||
- **Use when:** You need collaborative problem-solving or specialized expertise
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use Barry
|
||||
|
||||
### Ideal Scenarios
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Quick Flow Development** - Small to medium features that need rapid delivery
|
||||
2. **Technical Specification Creation** - When you need detailed implementation plans
|
||||
3. **Direct Development** - When requirements are clear and you want to skip extensive planning
|
||||
4. **Code Reviews** - When you need senior-level technical validation
|
||||
5. **Performance-Critical Features** - When optimization and scalability are paramount
|
||||
|
||||
### Project Types
|
||||
|
||||
- **Greenfield Projects** - New features or components
|
||||
- **Brownfield Modifications** - Enhancements to existing codebases
|
||||
- **Bug Fixes** - Complex issues requiring deep technical understanding
|
||||
- **Proof of Concepts** - Rapid prototyping with production-quality code
|
||||
- **Performance Optimizations** - System improvements and scalability work
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## The BMAD Quick Flow Process
|
||||
|
||||
Barry orchestrates a simple, efficient 3-step process:
|
||||
|
||||
```mermaid
|
||||
flowchart LR
|
||||
A[Requirements] --> B[create-tech-spec]
|
||||
B --> C[Tech Spec]
|
||||
C --> D[quick-dev]
|
||||
D --> E[Implementation]
|
||||
E --> F{Code Review?}
|
||||
F -->|Yes| G[code-review]
|
||||
F -->|No| H[Complete]
|
||||
G --> H[Complete]
|
||||
|
||||
style A fill:#e1f5fe
|
||||
style B fill:#f3e5f5
|
||||
style C fill:#e8f5e9
|
||||
style D fill:#fff3e0
|
||||
style E fill:#fce4ec
|
||||
style G fill:#f1f8e9
|
||||
style H fill:#e0f2f1
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 1: Technical Specification (`create-tech-spec`)
|
||||
|
||||
**Goal:** Transform user requirements into implementation-ready technical specifications
|
||||
|
||||
**Process:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Problem Understanding** - Clarify requirements, scope, and constraints
|
||||
2. **Code Investigation** - Analyze existing patterns and dependencies (if applicable)
|
||||
3. **Specification Generation** - Create comprehensive tech spec with:
|
||||
- Problem statement and solution overview
|
||||
- Development context and patterns
|
||||
- Implementation tasks with acceptance criteria
|
||||
- Technical decisions and dependencies
|
||||
4. **Review and Finalize** - Validate spec captures user intent
|
||||
|
||||
**Output:** `tech-spec-{slug}.md` saved to sprint artifacts
|
||||
|
||||
**Best Practices:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Include ALL context a fresh dev agent needs
|
||||
- Be specific about files, patterns, and conventions
|
||||
- Define clear acceptance criteria using Given/When/Then format
|
||||
- Document technical decisions and trade-offs
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 2: Development (`quick-dev`)
|
||||
|
||||
**Goal:** Execute implementation based on tech spec or direct instructions
|
||||
|
||||
**Two Modes:**
|
||||
|
||||
**Mode A: Tech-Spec Driven**
|
||||
|
||||
- Load existing tech spec
|
||||
- Extract tasks, context, and acceptance criteria
|
||||
- Execute all tasks continuously without stopping
|
||||
- Respect project context and existing patterns
|
||||
|
||||
**Mode B: Direct Instructions**
|
||||
|
||||
- Accept direct development commands
|
||||
- Offer optional planning step
|
||||
- Execute with minimal friction
|
||||
|
||||
**Process:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Load Project Context** - Understand patterns and conventions
|
||||
2. **Execute Implementation** - Work through all tasks:
|
||||
- Load relevant files and context
|
||||
- Implement following established patterns
|
||||
- Write and run tests
|
||||
- Handle errors appropriately
|
||||
3. **Verify Completion** - Ensure all tasks complete, tests passing, AC satisfied
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 3: Code Review (`code-review`) - Optional
|
||||
|
||||
**Goal:** Senior developer review of implemented code
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Use:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Critical production features
|
||||
- Complex architectural changes
|
||||
- Performance-sensitive implementations
|
||||
- Team development scenarios
|
||||
- Learning and knowledge transfer
|
||||
|
||||
**Review Focus:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Code quality and patterns
|
||||
- Acceptance criteria compliance
|
||||
- Performance and scalability
|
||||
- Security considerations
|
||||
- Maintainability and documentation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Collaboration with Other Agents
|
||||
|
||||
### Natural Partnerships
|
||||
|
||||
- **Tech Writer** - For documentation and API specs when I need it
|
||||
- **Architect** - For complex system design decisions beyond Quick Flow scope
|
||||
- **Dev** - For implementation pair programming (rarely needed)
|
||||
- **QA** - For test strategy and quality gates on critical features
|
||||
- **UX Designer** - For user experience considerations
|
||||
|
||||
### Party Mode Composition
|
||||
|
||||
In party mode, Barry often acts as:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Solo Tech Lead** - Guiding architectural decisions
|
||||
- **Implementation Expert** - Providing coding insights
|
||||
- **Performance Optimizer** - Ensuring scalable solutions
|
||||
- **Code Review Authority** - Validating technical approaches
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Tips for Working with Barry
|
||||
|
||||
### For Best Results
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Be Specific** - Provide clear requirements and constraints
|
||||
2. **Share Context** - Include relevant files and patterns
|
||||
3. **Define Success** - Clear acceptance criteria lead to better outcomes
|
||||
4. **Trust the Process** - The 3-step flow is optimized for speed and quality
|
||||
5. **Leverage Expertise** - I'll give you optimization and architectural insights automatically
|
||||
|
||||
### Communication Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
- **Git Commit Style** - "feat: Add user authentication with OAuth 2.0"
|
||||
- **RFC Style** - "Proposing microservice architecture for scalability"
|
||||
- **Direct Questions** - "Actually, have you considered the race condition?"
|
||||
- **Technical Trade-offs** - "We could optimize for speed over memory here"
|
||||
|
||||
### Avoid These Common Mistakes
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Vague Requirements** - Leads to unnecessary back-and-forth
|
||||
2. **Ignoring Patterns** - Causes technical debt and inconsistencies
|
||||
3. **Skipping Code Review** - Missed opportunities for quality improvement
|
||||
4. **Over-planning** - I excel at rapid, pragmatic development
|
||||
5. **Not Using Party Mode** - Missing collaborative insights for complex problems
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Example Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Start with Barry
|
||||
/bmad:bmm:agents:quick-flow-solo-dev
|
||||
|
||||
# Create a tech spec
|
||||
> create-tech-spec
|
||||
|
||||
# Quick implementation
|
||||
> quick-dev tech-spec-auth.md
|
||||
|
||||
# Optional code review
|
||||
> code-review
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Sample Tech Spec Structure
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# Tech-Spec: User Authentication System
|
||||
|
||||
**Created:** 2025-01-15
|
||||
**Status:** Ready for Development
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
### Problem Statement
|
||||
|
||||
Users cannot securely access the application, and we need role-based permissions for enterprise features.
|
||||
|
||||
### Solution
|
||||
|
||||
Implement OAuth 2.0 authentication with JWT tokens and role-based access control (RBAC).
|
||||
|
||||
### Scope (In/Out)
|
||||
|
||||
**In:** Login, logout, password reset, role management
|
||||
**Out:** Social login, SSO, multi-factor authentication (Phase 2)
|
||||
|
||||
## Context for Development
|
||||
|
||||
### Codebase Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
- Use existing auth middleware pattern in `src/middleware/auth.js`
|
||||
- Follow service layer pattern from `src/services/`
|
||||
- JWT secrets managed via environment variables
|
||||
|
||||
### Files to Reference
|
||||
|
||||
- `src/middleware/auth.js` - Authentication middleware
|
||||
- `src/models/User.js` - User data model
|
||||
- `config/database.js` - Database connection
|
||||
|
||||
### Technical Decisions
|
||||
|
||||
- JWT tokens over sessions for API scalability
|
||||
- bcrypt for password hashing
|
||||
- Role-based permissions stored in database
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Plan
|
||||
|
||||
### Tasks
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Create authentication service
|
||||
- [ ] Implement login/logout endpoints
|
||||
- [ ] Add JWT middleware
|
||||
- [ ] Create role-based permissions
|
||||
- [ ] Write comprehensive tests
|
||||
|
||||
### Acceptance Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Given valid credentials, when user logs in, then receive JWT token
|
||||
- [ ] Given invalid token, when accessing protected route, then return 401
|
||||
- [ ] Given admin role, when accessing admin endpoint, then allow access
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Related Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
- **[Quick Start Guide](./quick-start.md)** - Getting started with BMM
|
||||
- **[Agents Guide](./agents-guide.md)** - Complete agent reference
|
||||
- **[Scale Adaptive System](./scale-adaptive-system.md)** - Understanding development tracks
|
||||
- **[Workflow Implementation](./workflows-implementation.md)** - Implementation workflows
|
||||
- **[Party Mode](./party-mode.md)** - Multi-agent collaboration
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Frequently Asked Questions
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: When should I use Barry vs other agents?**
|
||||
A: Use Barry for Quick Flow development (small to medium features), rapid prototyping, or when you need elite solo development. For large, complex projects requiring full team collaboration, consider the full BMad Method with specialized agents.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Is the code review step mandatory?**
|
||||
A: No, it's optional but highly recommended for critical features, team projects, or when learning best practices.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Can I skip the tech spec step?**
|
||||
A: Yes, the quick-dev workflow accepts direct instructions. However, tech specs are recommended for complex features or team collaboration.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: How does Barry differ from the Dev agent?**
|
||||
A: Barry handles the complete Quick Flow process (spec → dev → review) with elite architectural expertise, while the Dev agent specializes in pure implementation tasks. Barry is your autonomous end-to-end solution.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Can Barry handle enterprise-scale projects?**
|
||||
A: For enterprise-scale projects requiring full team collaboration, consider using the Enterprise Method track. Barry is optimized for rapid delivery in the Quick Flow track where solo execution wins.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**Ready to ship some code?** → Start with `/bmad:bmm:agents:quick-flow-solo-dev`
|
||||
622
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/quick-spec-flow.md
Normal file
622
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/quick-spec-flow.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,622 @@
|
||||
# BMad Quick Spec Flow
|
||||
|
||||
**Perfect for:** Bug fixes, small features, rapid prototyping, and quick enhancements
|
||||
|
||||
**Time to implementation:** Minutes, not hours
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What is Quick Spec Flow?
|
||||
|
||||
Quick Spec Flow is a **streamlined alternative** to the full BMad Method for Quick Flow track projects. Instead of going through Product Brief → PRD → Architecture, you go **straight to a context-aware technical specification** and start coding.
|
||||
|
||||
### When to Use Quick Spec Flow
|
||||
|
||||
✅ **Use Quick Flow track when:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Single bug fix or small enhancement
|
||||
- Small feature with clear scope (typically 1-15 stories)
|
||||
- Rapid prototyping or experimentation
|
||||
- Adding to existing brownfield codebase
|
||||
- You know exactly what you want to build
|
||||
|
||||
❌ **Use BMad Method or Enterprise tracks when:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Building new products or major features
|
||||
- Need stakeholder alignment
|
||||
- Complex multi-team coordination
|
||||
- Requires extensive planning and architecture
|
||||
|
||||
💡 **Not sure?** Run `workflow-init` to get a recommendation based on your project's needs!
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Spec Flow Overview
|
||||
|
||||
```mermaid
|
||||
flowchart TD
|
||||
START[Step 1: Run Tech-Spec Workflow]
|
||||
DETECT[Detects project stack<br/>package.json, requirements.txt, etc.]
|
||||
ANALYZE[Analyzes brownfield codebase<br/>if exists]
|
||||
TEST[Detects test frameworks<br/>and conventions]
|
||||
CONFIRM[Confirms conventions<br/>with you]
|
||||
GENERATE[Generates context-rich<br/>tech-spec]
|
||||
STORIES[Creates ready-to-implement<br/>stories]
|
||||
|
||||
OPTIONAL[Step 2: Optional<br/>Generate Story Context<br/>SM Agent<br/>For complex scenarios only]
|
||||
|
||||
IMPL[Step 3: Implement<br/>DEV Agent<br/>Code, test, commit]
|
||||
|
||||
DONE[DONE! 🚀]
|
||||
|
||||
START --> DETECT
|
||||
DETECT --> ANALYZE
|
||||
ANALYZE --> TEST
|
||||
TEST --> CONFIRM
|
||||
CONFIRM --> GENERATE
|
||||
GENERATE --> STORIES
|
||||
STORIES --> OPTIONAL
|
||||
OPTIONAL -.->|Optional| IMPL
|
||||
STORIES --> IMPL
|
||||
IMPL --> DONE
|
||||
|
||||
style START fill:#bfb,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px
|
||||
style OPTIONAL fill:#ffb,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px,stroke-dasharray: 5 5
|
||||
style IMPL fill:#bbf,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px
|
||||
style DONE fill:#f9f,stroke:#333,stroke-width:3px
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Single Atomic Change
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:** Bug fixes, single file changes, isolated improvements
|
||||
|
||||
### What You Get
|
||||
|
||||
1. **tech-spec.md** - Comprehensive technical specification with:
|
||||
- Problem statement and solution
|
||||
- Detected framework versions and dependencies
|
||||
- Brownfield code patterns (if applicable)
|
||||
- Existing test patterns to follow
|
||||
- Specific file paths to modify
|
||||
- Complete implementation guidance
|
||||
|
||||
2. **story-[slug].md** - Single user story ready for development
|
||||
|
||||
### Quick Spec Flow Commands
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Start Quick Spec Flow (no workflow-init needed!)
|
||||
# Load PM agent and run tech-spec
|
||||
|
||||
# When complete, implement directly:
|
||||
# Load DEV agent and run dev-story
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### What Makes It Quick
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ No Product Brief needed
|
||||
- ✅ No PRD needed
|
||||
- ✅ No Architecture doc needed
|
||||
- ✅ Auto-detects your stack
|
||||
- ✅ Auto-analyzes brownfield code
|
||||
- ✅ Auto-validates quality
|
||||
- ✅ Story context optional (tech-spec is comprehensive!)
|
||||
|
||||
### Example Single Change Scenarios
|
||||
|
||||
- "Fix the login validation bug"
|
||||
- "Add email field to user registration form"
|
||||
- "Update API endpoint to return additional field"
|
||||
- "Improve error handling in payment processing"
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Coherent Small Feature
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:** Small features with 2-3 related user stories
|
||||
|
||||
### What You Get
|
||||
|
||||
1. **tech-spec.md** - Same comprehensive spec as single change projects
|
||||
2. **epics.md** - Epic organization with story breakdown
|
||||
3. **story-[epic-slug]-1.md** - First story
|
||||
4. **story-[epic-slug]-2.md** - Second story
|
||||
5. **story-[epic-slug]-3.md** - Third story (if needed)
|
||||
|
||||
### Quick Spec Flow Commands
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Start Quick Spec Flow
|
||||
# Load PM agent and run tech-spec
|
||||
|
||||
# Optional: Organize stories as a sprint
|
||||
# Load SM agent and run sprint-planning
|
||||
|
||||
# Implement story-by-story:
|
||||
# Load DEV agent and run dev-story for each story
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Story Sequencing
|
||||
|
||||
Stories are **automatically validated** to ensure proper sequence:
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ No forward dependencies (Story 2 can't depend on Story 3)
|
||||
- ✅ Clear dependency documentation
|
||||
- ✅ Infrastructure → Features → Polish order
|
||||
- ✅ Backend → Frontend flow
|
||||
|
||||
### Example Small Feature Scenarios
|
||||
|
||||
- "Add OAuth social login (Google, GitHub, Twitter)"
|
||||
- "Build user profile page with avatar upload"
|
||||
- "Implement basic search with filters"
|
||||
- "Add dark mode toggle to application"
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Smart Context Discovery
|
||||
|
||||
Quick Spec Flow automatically discovers and uses:
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Existing Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
- Product briefs (if they exist)
|
||||
- Research documents
|
||||
- `document-project` output (brownfield codebase map)
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Project Stack
|
||||
|
||||
- **Node.js:** package.json → frameworks, dependencies, scripts, test framework
|
||||
- **Python:** requirements.txt, pyproject.toml → packages, tools
|
||||
- **Ruby:** Gemfile → gems and versions
|
||||
- **Java:** pom.xml, build.gradle → Maven/Gradle dependencies
|
||||
- **Go:** go.mod → modules
|
||||
- **Rust:** Cargo.toml → crates
|
||||
- **PHP:** composer.json → packages
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Brownfield Code Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
- Directory structure and organization
|
||||
- Existing code patterns (class-based, functional, MVC)
|
||||
- Naming conventions (camelCase, snake_case, PascalCase)
|
||||
- Test frameworks and patterns
|
||||
- Code style (semicolons, quotes, indentation)
|
||||
- Linter/formatter configs
|
||||
- Error handling patterns
|
||||
- Logging conventions
|
||||
- Documentation style
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Convention Confirmation
|
||||
|
||||
**IMPORTANT:** Quick Spec Flow detects your conventions and **asks for confirmation**:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
I've detected these conventions in your codebase:
|
||||
|
||||
Code Style:
|
||||
- ESLint with Airbnb config
|
||||
- Prettier with single quotes, 2-space indent
|
||||
- No semicolons
|
||||
|
||||
Test Patterns:
|
||||
- Jest test framework
|
||||
- .test.js file naming
|
||||
- expect() assertion style
|
||||
|
||||
Should I follow these existing conventions? (yes/no)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**You decide:** Conform to existing patterns or establish new standards!
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Modern Best Practices via WebSearch
|
||||
|
||||
Quick Spec Flow stays current by using WebSearch when appropriate:
|
||||
|
||||
### For Greenfield Projects
|
||||
|
||||
- Searches for latest framework versions
|
||||
- Recommends official starter templates
|
||||
- Suggests modern best practices
|
||||
|
||||
### For Outdated Dependencies
|
||||
|
||||
- Detects if your dependencies are >2 years old
|
||||
- Searches for migration guides
|
||||
- Notes upgrade complexity
|
||||
|
||||
### Starter Template Recommendations
|
||||
|
||||
For greenfield projects, Quick Spec Flow recommends:
|
||||
|
||||
**React:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Vite (modern, fast)
|
||||
- Next.js (full-stack)
|
||||
|
||||
**Python:**
|
||||
|
||||
- cookiecutter templates
|
||||
- FastAPI starter
|
||||
|
||||
**Node.js:**
|
||||
|
||||
- NestJS CLI
|
||||
- express-generator
|
||||
|
||||
**Benefits:**
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ Modern best practices baked in
|
||||
- ✅ Proper project structure
|
||||
- ✅ Build tooling configured
|
||||
- ✅ Testing framework set up
|
||||
- ✅ Faster time to first feature
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## UX/UI Considerations
|
||||
|
||||
For user-facing changes, Quick Spec Flow captures:
|
||||
|
||||
- UI components affected (create vs modify)
|
||||
- UX flow changes (current vs new)
|
||||
- Responsive design needs (mobile, tablet, desktop)
|
||||
- Accessibility requirements:
|
||||
- Keyboard navigation
|
||||
- Screen reader compatibility
|
||||
- ARIA labels
|
||||
- Color contrast standards
|
||||
- User feedback patterns:
|
||||
- Loading states
|
||||
- Error messages
|
||||
- Success confirmations
|
||||
- Progress indicators
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Auto-Validation and Quality Assurance
|
||||
|
||||
Quick Spec Flow **automatically validates** everything:
|
||||
|
||||
### Tech-Spec Validation (Always Runs)
|
||||
|
||||
Checks:
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ Context gathering completeness
|
||||
- ✅ Definitiveness (no "use X or Y" statements)
|
||||
- ✅ Brownfield integration quality
|
||||
- ✅ Stack alignment
|
||||
- ✅ Implementation readiness
|
||||
|
||||
Generates scores:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
✅ Validation Passed!
|
||||
- Context Gathering: Comprehensive
|
||||
- Definitiveness: All definitive
|
||||
- Brownfield Integration: Excellent
|
||||
- Stack Alignment: Perfect
|
||||
- Implementation Readiness: ✅ Ready
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Story Validation (Multi-Story Features)
|
||||
|
||||
Checks:
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ Story sequence (no forward dependencies!)
|
||||
- ✅ Acceptance criteria quality (specific, testable)
|
||||
- ✅ Completeness (all tech spec tasks covered)
|
||||
- ✅ Clear dependency documentation
|
||||
|
||||
**Auto-fixes issues if found!**
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Complete User Journey
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario 1: Bug Fix (Single Change)
|
||||
|
||||
**Goal:** Fix login validation bug
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Start:** Load PM agent, say "I want to fix the login validation bug"
|
||||
2. **PM runs tech-spec workflow:**
|
||||
- Asks: "What problem are you solving?"
|
||||
- You explain the validation issue
|
||||
- Detects your Node.js stack (Express 4.18.2, Jest for testing)
|
||||
- Analyzes existing UserService code patterns
|
||||
- Asks: "Should I follow your existing conventions?" → You say yes
|
||||
- Generates tech-spec.md with specific file paths and patterns
|
||||
- Creates story-login-fix.md
|
||||
3. **Implement:** Load DEV agent, run `dev-story`
|
||||
- DEV reads tech-spec (has all context!)
|
||||
- Implements fix following existing patterns
|
||||
- Runs tests (following existing Jest patterns)
|
||||
- Done!
|
||||
|
||||
**Total time:** 15-30 minutes (mostly implementation)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Scenario 2: Small Feature (Multi-Story)
|
||||
|
||||
**Goal:** Add OAuth social login (Google, GitHub)
|
||||
|
||||
**Steps:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Start:** Load PM agent, say "I want to add OAuth social login"
|
||||
2. **PM runs tech-spec workflow:**
|
||||
- Asks about the feature scope
|
||||
- You specify: Google and GitHub OAuth
|
||||
- Detects your stack (Next.js 13.4, NextAuth.js already installed!)
|
||||
- Analyzes existing auth patterns
|
||||
- Confirms conventions with you
|
||||
- Generates:
|
||||
- tech-spec.md (comprehensive implementation guide)
|
||||
- epics.md (OAuth Integration epic)
|
||||
- story-oauth-1.md (Backend OAuth setup)
|
||||
- story-oauth-2.md (Frontend login buttons)
|
||||
3. **Optional Sprint Planning:** Load SM agent, run `sprint-planning`
|
||||
4. **Implement Story 1:**
|
||||
- Load DEV agent, run `dev-story` for story 1
|
||||
- DEV implements backend OAuth
|
||||
5. **Implement Story 2:**
|
||||
- DEV agent, run `dev-story` for story 2
|
||||
- DEV implements frontend
|
||||
- Done!
|
||||
|
||||
**Total time:** 1-3 hours (mostly implementation)
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration with Phase 4 Workflows
|
||||
|
||||
Quick Spec Flow works seamlessly with all Phase 4 implementation workflows:
|
||||
|
||||
### create-story (SM Agent)
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ Can work with tech-spec.md instead of PRD
|
||||
- ✅ Uses epics.md from tech-spec workflow
|
||||
- ✅ Creates additional stories if needed
|
||||
|
||||
### sprint-planning (SM Agent)
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ Works with epics.md from tech-spec
|
||||
- ✅ Organizes multi-story features for coordinated implementation
|
||||
- ✅ Tracks progress through sprint-status.yaml
|
||||
|
||||
### dev-story (DEV Agent)
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ Reads stories generated by tech-spec
|
||||
- ✅ Uses tech-spec.md as comprehensive context
|
||||
- ✅ Implements following detected conventions
|
||||
|
||||
## Comparison: Quick Spec vs Full BMM
|
||||
|
||||
| Aspect | Quick Flow Track | BMad Method/Enterprise Tracks |
|
||||
| --------------------- | ---------------------------- | ---------------------------------- |
|
||||
| **Setup** | None (standalone) | workflow-init recommended |
|
||||
| **Planning Docs** | tech-spec.md only | Product Brief → PRD → Architecture |
|
||||
| **Time to Code** | Minutes | Hours to days |
|
||||
| **Best For** | Bug fixes, small features | New products, major features |
|
||||
| **Context Discovery** | Automatic | Manual + guided |
|
||||
| **Story Context** | Optional (tech-spec is rich) | Required (generated from PRD) |
|
||||
| **Validation** | Auto-validates everything | Manual validation steps |
|
||||
| **Brownfield** | Auto-analyzes and conforms | Manual documentation required |
|
||||
| **Conventions** | Auto-detects and confirms | Document in PRD/Architecture |
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Graduate from Quick Flow to BMad Method
|
||||
|
||||
Start with Quick Flow, but switch to BMad Method when:
|
||||
|
||||
- ❌ Project grows beyond initial scope
|
||||
- ❌ Multiple teams need coordination
|
||||
- ❌ Stakeholders need formal documentation
|
||||
- ❌ Product vision is unclear
|
||||
- ❌ Architectural decisions need deep analysis
|
||||
- ❌ Compliance/regulatory requirements exist
|
||||
|
||||
💡 **Tip:** You can always run `workflow-init` later to transition from Quick Flow to BMad Method!
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Spec Flow - Key Benefits
|
||||
|
||||
### 🚀 **Speed**
|
||||
|
||||
- No Product Brief
|
||||
- No PRD
|
||||
- No Architecture doc
|
||||
- Straight to implementation
|
||||
|
||||
### 🧠 **Intelligence**
|
||||
|
||||
- Auto-detects stack
|
||||
- Auto-analyzes brownfield
|
||||
- Auto-validates quality
|
||||
- WebSearch for current info
|
||||
|
||||
### 📐 **Respect for Existing Code**
|
||||
|
||||
- Detects conventions
|
||||
- Asks for confirmation
|
||||
- Follows patterns
|
||||
- Adapts vs. changes
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ **Quality**
|
||||
|
||||
- Auto-validation
|
||||
- Definitive decisions (no "or" statements)
|
||||
- Comprehensive context
|
||||
- Clear acceptance criteria
|
||||
|
||||
### 🎯 **Focus**
|
||||
|
||||
- Single atomic changes
|
||||
- Coherent small features
|
||||
- No scope creep
|
||||
- Fast iteration
|
||||
|
||||
## Getting Started
|
||||
|
||||
### Prerequisites
|
||||
|
||||
- BMad Method installed (`npx bmad-method install`)
|
||||
- Project directory with code (or empty for greenfield)
|
||||
|
||||
### Quick Start Commands
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# For a quick bug fix or small change:
|
||||
# 1. Load Quick Dev Solo agent
|
||||
# 2. Say: "I want to [describe your change]"
|
||||
# 3. Agent will ask if you want to run tech-spec
|
||||
# 4. Answer questions about your change
|
||||
# 5. Get tech-spec + story
|
||||
# 6. Reload a fresh context with the solo agent and implement!
|
||||
|
||||
# For a small feature with multiple stories:
|
||||
# Same as above, but get epic + 2-3 stories
|
||||
# Optionally use SM sprint-planning to organize
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### No workflow-init Required!
|
||||
|
||||
Quick Spec Flow is **fully standalone**
|
||||
|
||||
## FAQ
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Can I use Quick Spec Flow on an existing project?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Yes! It's perfect for brownfield projects. It will analyze your existing code, detect patterns, and ask if you want to follow them.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: What if I don't have a package.json or requirements.txt?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Quick Spec Flow will work in greenfield mode, recommend starter templates, and use WebSearch for modern best practices.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Do I need to run workflow-init first?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** No! Quick Spec Flow is standalone. But if you want guidance on which flow to use, workflow-init can help.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Can I use this for frontend changes?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Absolutely! Quick Spec Flow captures UX/UI considerations, component changes, and accessibility requirements.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: What if my Quick Flow project grows?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** No problem! You can always transition to BMad Method by running workflow-init and create-prd. Your tech-spec becomes input for the PRD.
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Can I skip validation?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** No, validation always runs automatically. But it's fast and catches issues early!
|
||||
|
||||
### Q: Will it work with my team's code style?
|
||||
|
||||
**A:** Yes! It detects your conventions and asks for confirmation. You control whether to follow existing patterns or establish new ones.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Tips and Best Practices
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. **Be Specific in Discovery**
|
||||
|
||||
When describing your change, provide specifics:
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ "Fix email validation in UserService to allow plus-addressing"
|
||||
- ❌ "Fix validation bug"
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. **Trust the Convention Detection**
|
||||
|
||||
If it detects your patterns correctly, say yes! It's faster than establishing new conventions.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. **Use WebSearch Recommendations for Greenfield**
|
||||
|
||||
Starter templates save hours of setup time. Let Quick Spec Flow find the best ones.
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. **Review the Auto-Validation**
|
||||
|
||||
When validation runs, read the scores. They tell you if your spec is production-ready.
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. **Keep Single Changes Truly Atomic**
|
||||
|
||||
If your "single change" needs 3+ files, it might be a multi-story feature. Let the workflow guide you.
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. **Validate Story Sequence for Multi-Story Features**
|
||||
|
||||
When you get multiple stories, check the dependency validation output. Proper sequence matters!
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Real-World Examples
|
||||
|
||||
### Example 1: Adding Logging (Single Change)
|
||||
|
||||
**Input:** "Add structured logging to payment processing"
|
||||
|
||||
**Tech-Spec Output:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Detected: winston 3.8.2 already in package.json
|
||||
- Analyzed: Existing services use winston with JSON format
|
||||
- Confirmed: Follow existing logging patterns
|
||||
- Generated: Specific file paths, log levels, format example
|
||||
- Story: Ready to implement in 1-2 hours
|
||||
|
||||
**Result:** Consistent logging added, following team patterns, no research needed.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Example 2: Search Feature (Multi-Story)
|
||||
|
||||
**Input:** "Add search to product catalog with filters"
|
||||
|
||||
**Tech-Spec Output:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Detected: React 18.2.0, MUI component library, Express backend
|
||||
- Analyzed: Existing ProductList component patterns
|
||||
- Confirmed: Follow existing API and component structure
|
||||
- Generated:
|
||||
- Epic: Product Search Functionality
|
||||
- Story 1: Backend search API with filters
|
||||
- Story 2: Frontend search UI component
|
||||
- Auto-validated: Story 1 → Story 2 sequence correct
|
||||
|
||||
**Result:** Search feature implemented in 4-6 hours with proper architecture.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Summary
|
||||
|
||||
Quick Spec Flow is your **fast path from idea to implementation** for:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🐛 Bug fixes
|
||||
- ✨ Small features
|
||||
- 🚀 Rapid prototyping
|
||||
- 🔧 Quick enhancements
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Features:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Auto-detects your stack
|
||||
- Auto-analyzes brownfield code
|
||||
- Auto-validates quality
|
||||
- Respects existing conventions
|
||||
- Uses WebSearch for modern practices
|
||||
- Generates comprehensive tech-specs
|
||||
- Creates implementation-ready stories
|
||||
|
||||
**Time to code:** Minutes, not hours.
|
||||
|
||||
**Ready to try it?** Load the PM agent and say what you want to build! 🚀
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
- **Try it now:** Load PM agent and describe a small change
|
||||
- **Learn more:** See the [BMM Workflow Guides](./index.md#-workflow-guides) for comprehensive workflow documentation
|
||||
- **Need help deciding?** Run `workflow-init` to get a recommendation
|
||||
- **Have questions?** Join us on Discord: <https://discord.gg/gk8jAdXWmj>
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
_Quick Spec Flow - Because not every change needs a Product Brief._
|
||||
363
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/quick-start.md
Normal file
363
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/quick-start.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,363 @@
|
||||
# BMad Method V6 Quick Start Guide
|
||||
|
||||
Get started with BMad Method v6 for your new greenfield project. This guide walks you through building software from scratch using AI-powered workflows.
|
||||
|
||||
## TL;DR - The Quick Path
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Install**: `npx bmad-method@alpha install`
|
||||
2. **Initialize**: Load Analyst agent → Run "workflow-init"
|
||||
3. **Plan**: Load PM agent to create a PRD
|
||||
4. **Plan UX**: Load UX Expert to create a UX-Design if your application will have a UX/UI element
|
||||
5. **Architect**: Load Architect agent → Run "create-architecture"
|
||||
6. **Epic Plan**: The PM steps back in to help run the create-epics-and-stories
|
||||
7. **Build**: Load SM agent → Run workflows for each story → Load DEV agent → Implement
|
||||
8. **Always use fresh chats** for each workflow to avoid context issues
|
||||
|
||||
## What is BMad Method?
|
||||
|
||||
BMad Method (BMM) helps you build software through guided workflows with specialized AI agents. The process follows four phases:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Phase 1: Analysis** (Optional) - Brainstorming, Research, Product Brief
|
||||
2. **Phase 2: Planning** (Required) - Create your requirements (tech-spec or PRD)
|
||||
3. **Phase 3: Solutioning** (Track-dependent) - Design the architecture for BMad Method and Enterprise tracks
|
||||
4. **Phase 4: Implementation** (Required) - Build your software Epic by Epic, Story by Story
|
||||
|
||||
### Complete Workflow Visualization
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
_Complete visual flowchart showing all phases, workflows, agents (color-coded), and decision points for the BMad Method standard greenfield track. Each box is color-coded by the agent responsible for that workflow._
|
||||
|
||||
## Installation
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Install v6 Alpha to your project
|
||||
npx bmad-method@alpha install
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
The interactive installer will guide you through setup and create a `_bmad/` folder with all agents and workflows.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Getting Started
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 1: Initialize Your Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Load the Analyst agent** in your IDE - Generally this is done by typing `/<workflow or agent name - allow autocomplete to find the right command>` - if you are unsure, you can just start with /bmad and see all that is available, sorted by agents and workflows.
|
||||
2. **Wait for the agent's menu** to appear
|
||||
3. **Tell the agent**: "Run workflow-init" or type "\*workflow-init" or select the menu item number
|
||||
|
||||
#### What happens during workflow-init?
|
||||
|
||||
Workflows are interactive processes in V6 that replaced tasks and templates from prior versions. There are many types of workflows, and you can even create your own with the BMad Builder module. For the BMad Method, you'll be interacting with expert-designed workflows crafted to work with you to get the best out of both you and the LLM.
|
||||
|
||||
During workflow-init, you'll describe:
|
||||
|
||||
- Your project and its goals
|
||||
- Whether there's an existing codebase or this is a new project
|
||||
- The general size and complexity (you can adjust this later)
|
||||
|
||||
#### Planning Tracks
|
||||
|
||||
Based on your description, the workflow will suggest a track and let you choose from:
|
||||
|
||||
**Three Planning Tracks:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Quick Flow** - Fast implementation (tech-spec only) - bug fixes, simple features, clear scope (typically 1-15 stories)
|
||||
- **BMad Method** - Full planning (PRD + Architecture + UX) - products, platforms, complex features (typically 10-50+ stories)
|
||||
- **Enterprise Method** - Extended planning (BMad Method + Security/DevOps/Test) - enterprise requirements, compliance, multi-tenant (typically 30+ stories)
|
||||
|
||||
**Note**: Story counts are guidance, not definitions. Tracks are chosen based on planning needs, not story math.
|
||||
|
||||
#### What gets created?
|
||||
|
||||
Once you confirm your track, the `bmm-workflow-status.yaml` file will be created in your project's docs folder (assuming default install location). This file tracks your progress through all phases.
|
||||
|
||||
**Important notes:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Every track has different paths through the phases
|
||||
- Story counts can still change based on overall complexity as you work
|
||||
- For this guide, we'll assume a BMad Method track project
|
||||
- This workflow will guide you through Phase 1 (optional), Phase 2 (required), and Phase 3 (required for BMad Method and Enterprise tracks)
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 2: Work Through Phases 1-3
|
||||
|
||||
After workflow-init completes, you'll work through the planning phases. **Important: Use fresh chats for each workflow to avoid context limitations.**
|
||||
|
||||
#### Checking Your Status
|
||||
|
||||
If you're unsure what to do next:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Load any agent in a new chat
|
||||
2. Ask for "workflow-status"
|
||||
3. The agent will tell you the next recommended or required workflow
|
||||
|
||||
**Example response:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Phase 1 (Analysis) is entirely optional. All workflows are optional or recommended:
|
||||
- brainstorm-project - optional
|
||||
- research - optional
|
||||
- product-brief - RECOMMENDED (but not required)
|
||||
|
||||
The next TRULY REQUIRED step is:
|
||||
- PRD (Product Requirements Document) in Phase 2 - Planning
|
||||
- Agent: pm
|
||||
- Command: prd
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
#### How to Run Workflows in Phases 1-3
|
||||
|
||||
When an agent tells you to run a workflow (like `prd`):
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Start a new chat** with the specified agent
|
||||
2. **Wait for the menu** to appear
|
||||
3. **Tell the agent** to run it using any of these formats:
|
||||
- Type the shorthand: `*prd`
|
||||
- Say it naturally: "Let's create a new PRD"
|
||||
- Select the menu number for "create-prd"
|
||||
|
||||
The agents in V6 are very good with fuzzy menu matching!
|
||||
|
||||
#### Quick Reference: Agent → Document Mapping
|
||||
|
||||
For v4 users or those who prefer to skip workflow-status guidance:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Analyst** → Brainstorming, Product Brief
|
||||
- **PM** → PRD (BMad Method/Enterprise tracks) OR tech-spec (Quick Flow track)
|
||||
- **UX-Designer** → UX Design Document (if UI part of the project)
|
||||
- **Architect** → Architecture (BMad Method/Enterprise tracks)
|
||||
|
||||
#### Phase 2: Planning - Creating the PRD
|
||||
|
||||
**For BMad Method and Enterprise tracks:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Load the **PM agent** in a new chat
|
||||
2. Tell it to run the PRD workflow
|
||||
3. Once complete, you'll have:
|
||||
- **PRD.md** - Your Product Requirements Document
|
||||
|
||||
**For Quick Flow track:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Use **tech-spec** instead of PRD (no architecture needed)
|
||||
|
||||
#### Phase 2 (Optional): UX Design
|
||||
|
||||
If your project has a user interface:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Load the **UX-Designer agent** in a new chat
|
||||
2. Tell it to run the UX design workflow
|
||||
3. After completion, you'll have your UX specification document
|
||||
|
||||
#### Phase 3: Architecture
|
||||
|
||||
**For BMad Method and Enterprise tracks:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Load the **Architect agent** in a new chat
|
||||
2. Tell it to run the create-architecture workflow
|
||||
3. After completion, you'll have your architecture document with technical decisions
|
||||
|
||||
#### Phase 3: Create Epics and Stories (REQUIRED after Architecture)
|
||||
|
||||
**V6 Improvement:** Epics and stories are now created AFTER architecture for better quality!
|
||||
|
||||
1. Load the **PM agent** in a new chat
|
||||
2. Tell it to run "create-epics-and-stories"
|
||||
3. This breaks down your PRD's FRs/NFRs into implementable epics and stories
|
||||
4. The workflow uses both PRD and Architecture to create technically-informed stories
|
||||
|
||||
**Why after architecture?** Architecture decisions (database, API patterns, tech stack) directly affect how stories should be broken down and sequenced.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Phase 3: Implementation Readiness Check (Highly Recommended)
|
||||
|
||||
Once epics and stories are created:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Load the **Architect agent** in a new chat
|
||||
2. Tell it to run "implementation-readiness"
|
||||
3. This validates cohesion across all your planning documents (PRD, UX, Architecture, Epics)
|
||||
4. This was called the "PO Master Checklist" in v4
|
||||
|
||||
**Why run this?** It ensures all your planning assets align properly before you start building.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Context Management Tips
|
||||
|
||||
- **Use 200k+ context models** for best results (Claude Sonnet 4.5, GPT-4, etc.)
|
||||
- **Fresh chat for each workflow** - Brainstorming, Briefs, Research, and PRD generation are all context-intensive
|
||||
- **No document sharding needed** - Unlike v4, you don't need to split documents
|
||||
- **Web Bundles coming soon** - Will help save LLM tokens for users with limited plans
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 3: Start Building (Phase 4 - Implementation)
|
||||
|
||||
Once planning and architecture are complete, you'll move to Phase 4. **Important: Each workflow below should be run in a fresh chat to avoid context limitations and hallucinations.**
|
||||
|
||||
#### 3.1 Initialize Sprint Planning
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Start a new chat** with the **SM (Scrum Master) agent**
|
||||
2. Wait for the menu to appear
|
||||
3. Tell the agent: "Run sprint-planning"
|
||||
4. This creates your `sprint-status.yaml` file that tracks all epics and stories
|
||||
|
||||
#### 3.2 Create Your First Story
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Start a new chat** with the **SM agent**
|
||||
2. Wait for the menu
|
||||
3. Tell the agent: "Run create-story"
|
||||
4. This creates the story file from the epic
|
||||
|
||||
#### 3.3 Implement the Story
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Start a new chat** with the **DEV agent**
|
||||
2. Wait for the menu
|
||||
3. Tell the agent: "Run dev-story"
|
||||
4. The DEV agent will implement the story and update the sprint status
|
||||
|
||||
#### 3.4 Review the Code (Optional but Recommended)
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Start a new chat** with the **DEV agent**
|
||||
2. Wait for the menu
|
||||
3. Tell the agent: "Run code-review"
|
||||
4. The DEV agent performs quality validation (this was called QA in v4)
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 4: Keep Going
|
||||
|
||||
For each subsequent story, repeat the cycle using **fresh chats** for each workflow:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **New chat** → SM agent → "Run create-story"
|
||||
2. **New chat** → DEV agent → "Run dev-story"
|
||||
3. **New chat** → DEV agent → "Run code-review" (optional but recommended)
|
||||
|
||||
After completing all stories in an epic:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Start a new chat** with the **SM agent**
|
||||
2. Tell the agent: "Run retrospective"
|
||||
|
||||
**Why fresh chats?** Context-intensive workflows can cause hallucinations if you keep issuing commands in the same chat. Starting fresh ensures the agent has maximum context capacity for each workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Understanding the Agents
|
||||
|
||||
Each agent is a specialized AI persona:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Analyst** - Initializes workflows and tracks progress
|
||||
- **PM** - Creates requirements and specifications
|
||||
- **UX-Designer** - If your project has a front end - this designer will help produce artifacts, come up with mock updates, and design a great look and feel with you giving it guidance.
|
||||
- **Architect** - Designs system architecture
|
||||
- **SM (Scrum Master)** - Manages sprints and creates stories
|
||||
- **DEV** - Implements code and reviews work
|
||||
|
||||
## How Workflows Work
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Load an agent** - Open the agent file in your IDE to activate it
|
||||
2. **Wait for the menu** - The agent will present its available workflows
|
||||
3. **Tell the agent what to run** - Say "Run [workflow-name]"
|
||||
4. **Follow the prompts** - The agent guides you through each step
|
||||
|
||||
The agent creates documents, asks questions, and helps you make decisions throughout the process.
|
||||
|
||||
## Project Tracking Files
|
||||
|
||||
BMad creates two files to track your progress:
|
||||
|
||||
**1. bmm-workflow-status.yaml**
|
||||
|
||||
- Shows which phase you're in and what's next
|
||||
- Created by workflow-init
|
||||
- Updated automatically as you progress through phases
|
||||
|
||||
**2. sprint-status.yaml** (Phase 4 only)
|
||||
|
||||
- Tracks all your epics and stories during implementation
|
||||
- Critical for SM and DEV agents to know what to work on next
|
||||
- Created by sprint-planning workflow
|
||||
- Updated automatically as stories progress
|
||||
|
||||
**You don't need to edit these manually** - agents update them as you work.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## The Complete Flow Visualized
|
||||
|
||||
```mermaid
|
||||
flowchart LR
|
||||
subgraph P1["Phase 1 (Optional)<br/>Analysis"]
|
||||
direction TB
|
||||
A1[Brainstorm]
|
||||
A2[Research]
|
||||
A3[Brief]
|
||||
A4[Analyst]
|
||||
A1 ~~~ A2 ~~~ A3 ~~~ A4
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
subgraph P2["Phase 2 (Required)<br/>Planning"]
|
||||
direction TB
|
||||
B1[Quick Flow:<br/>tech-spec]
|
||||
B2[Method/Enterprise:<br/>PRD]
|
||||
B3[UX opt]
|
||||
B4[PM, UX]
|
||||
B1 ~~~ B2 ~~~ B3 ~~~ B4
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
subgraph P3["Phase 3 (Track-dependent)<br/>Solutioning"]
|
||||
direction TB
|
||||
C1[Method/Enterprise:<br/>architecture]
|
||||
C2[gate-check]
|
||||
C3[Architect]
|
||||
C1 ~~~ C2 ~~~ C3
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
subgraph P4["Phase 4 (Required)<br/>Implementation"]
|
||||
direction TB
|
||||
D1[Per Epic:<br/>epic context]
|
||||
D2[Per Story:<br/>create-story]
|
||||
D3[dev-story]
|
||||
D4[code-review]
|
||||
D5[SM, DEV]
|
||||
D1 ~~~ D2 ~~~ D3 ~~~ D4 ~~~ D5
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
P1 --> P2
|
||||
P2 --> P3
|
||||
P3 --> P4
|
||||
|
||||
style P1 fill:#bbf,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
||||
style P2 fill:#bfb,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
||||
style P3 fill:#ffb,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
||||
style P4 fill:#fbf,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Questions
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Do I always need architecture?**
|
||||
A: Only for BMad Method and Enterprise tracks. Quick Flow projects skip straight from tech-spec to implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Can I change my plan later?**
|
||||
A: Yes! The SM agent has a "correct-course" workflow for handling scope changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: What if I want to brainstorm first?**
|
||||
A: Load the Analyst agent and tell it to "Run brainstorm-project" before running workflow-init.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Why do I need fresh chats for each workflow?**
|
||||
A: Context-intensive workflows can cause hallucinations if run in sequence. Fresh chats ensure maximum context capacity.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Can I skip workflow-init and workflow-status?**
|
||||
A: Yes, once you learn the flow. Use the Quick Reference in Step 2 to go directly to the workflows you need.
|
||||
|
||||
## Getting Help
|
||||
|
||||
- **During workflows**: Agents guide you with questions and explanations
|
||||
- **Community**: [Discord](https://discord.gg/gk8jAdXWmj) - #general-dev, #bugs-issues
|
||||
- **Complete guide**: [BMM Workflow Documentation](./index.md#-workflow-guides)
|
||||
- **YouTube tutorials**: [BMad Code Channel](https://www.youtube.com/@BMadCode)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Takeaways
|
||||
|
||||
✅ **Always use fresh chats** - Load agents in new chats for each workflow to avoid context issues
|
||||
✅ **Let workflow-status guide you** - Load any agent and ask for status when unsure what's next
|
||||
✅ **Track matters** - Quick Flow uses tech-spec, BMad Method/Enterprise need PRD and architecture
|
||||
✅ **Tracking is automatic** - The status files update themselves, no manual editing needed
|
||||
✅ **Agents are flexible** - Use menu numbers, shortcuts (\*prd), or natural language
|
||||
|
||||
**Ready to start building?** Install BMad, load the Analyst, run workflow-init, and let the agents guide you!
|
||||
451
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/test-architecture.md
Normal file
451
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/test-architecture.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,451 @@
|
||||
# Test Architect (TEA) Agent Guide
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
- **Persona:** Murat, Master Test Architect and Quality Advisor focused on risk-based testing, fixture architecture, ATDD, and CI/CD governance.
|
||||
- **Mission:** Deliver actionable quality strategies, automation coverage, and gate decisions that scale with project complexity and compliance demands.
|
||||
- **Use When:** BMad Method or Enterprise track projects, integration risk is non-trivial, brownfield regression risk exists, or compliance/NFR evidence is required. (Quick Flow projects typically don't require TEA)
|
||||
|
||||
## TEA Workflow Lifecycle
|
||||
|
||||
TEA integrates into the BMad development lifecycle during Solutioning (Phase 3) and Implementation (Phase 4):
|
||||
|
||||
```mermaid
|
||||
%%{init: {'theme':'base', 'themeVariables': { 'primaryColor':'#fff','primaryTextColor':'#000','primaryBorderColor':'#000','lineColor':'#000','secondaryColor':'#fff','tertiaryColor':'#fff','fontSize':'16px','fontFamily':'arial'}}}%%
|
||||
graph TB
|
||||
subgraph Phase2["<b>Phase 2: PLANNING</b>"]
|
||||
PM["<b>PM: *prd (creates PRD with FRs/NFRs)</b>"]
|
||||
PlanNote["<b>Business requirements phase</b>"]
|
||||
PM -.-> PlanNote
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
subgraph Phase3["<b>Phase 3: SOLUTIONING</b>"]
|
||||
Architecture["<b>Architect: *architecture</b>"]
|
||||
EpicsStories["<b>PM/Architect: *create-epics-and-stories</b>"]
|
||||
TestDesignSys["<b>TEA: *test-design (system-level)</b>"]
|
||||
Framework["<b>TEA: *framework</b>"]
|
||||
CI["<b>TEA: *ci</b>"]
|
||||
GateCheck["<b>Architect: *implementation-readiness</b>"]
|
||||
Architecture --> EpicsStories
|
||||
Architecture --> TestDesignSys
|
||||
TestDesignSys --> Framework
|
||||
EpicsStories --> Framework
|
||||
Framework --> CI
|
||||
CI --> GateCheck
|
||||
Phase3Note["<b>Epics created AFTER architecture,</b><br/><b>then system-level test design and test infrastructure setup</b>"]
|
||||
EpicsStories -.-> Phase3Note
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
subgraph Phase4["<b>Phase 4: IMPLEMENTATION - Per Epic Cycle</b>"]
|
||||
SprintPlan["<b>SM: *sprint-planning</b>"]
|
||||
TestDesign["<b>TEA: *test-design (per epic)</b>"]
|
||||
CreateStory["<b>SM: *create-story</b>"]
|
||||
ATDD["<b>TEA: *atdd (optional, before dev)</b>"]
|
||||
DevImpl["<b>DEV: implements story</b>"]
|
||||
Automate["<b>TEA: *automate</b>"]
|
||||
TestReview1["<b>TEA: *test-review (optional)</b>"]
|
||||
Trace1["<b>TEA: *trace (refresh coverage)</b>"]
|
||||
|
||||
SprintPlan --> TestDesign
|
||||
TestDesign --> CreateStory
|
||||
CreateStory --> ATDD
|
||||
ATDD --> DevImpl
|
||||
DevImpl --> Automate
|
||||
Automate --> TestReview1
|
||||
TestReview1 --> Trace1
|
||||
Trace1 -.->|next story| CreateStory
|
||||
TestDesignNote["<b>Test design: 'How do I test THIS epic?'</b><br/>Creates test-design-epic-N.md per epic"]
|
||||
TestDesign -.-> TestDesignNote
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
subgraph Gate["<b>EPIC/RELEASE GATE</b>"]
|
||||
NFR["<b>TEA: *nfr-assess (if not done earlier)</b>"]
|
||||
TestReview2["<b>TEA: *test-review (final audit, optional)</b>"]
|
||||
TraceGate["<b>TEA: *trace - Phase 2: Gate</b>"]
|
||||
GateDecision{"<b>Gate Decision</b>"}
|
||||
|
||||
NFR --> TestReview2
|
||||
TestReview2 --> TraceGate
|
||||
TraceGate --> GateDecision
|
||||
GateDecision -->|PASS| Pass["<b>PASS ✅</b>"]
|
||||
GateDecision -->|CONCERNS| Concerns["<b>CONCERNS ⚠️</b>"]
|
||||
GateDecision -->|FAIL| Fail["<b>FAIL ❌</b>"]
|
||||
GateDecision -->|WAIVED| Waived["<b>WAIVED ⏭️</b>"]
|
||||
end
|
||||
|
||||
Phase2 --> Phase3
|
||||
Phase3 --> Phase4
|
||||
Phase4 --> Gate
|
||||
|
||||
style Phase2 fill:#bbdefb,stroke:#0d47a1,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
|
||||
style Phase3 fill:#c8e6c9,stroke:#2e7d32,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
|
||||
style Phase4 fill:#e1bee7,stroke:#4a148c,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
|
||||
style Gate fill:#ffe082,stroke:#f57c00,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
|
||||
style Pass fill:#4caf50,stroke:#1b5e20,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
|
||||
style Concerns fill:#ffc107,stroke:#f57f17,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
|
||||
style Fail fill:#f44336,stroke:#b71c1c,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
|
||||
style Waived fill:#9c27b0,stroke:#4a148c,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase Numbering Note:** BMad uses a 4-phase methodology with optional Phase 1 and documentation prerequisite:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Documentation** (Optional for brownfield): Prerequisite using `*document-project`
|
||||
- **Phase 1** (Optional): Discovery/Analysis (`*brainstorm`, `*research`, `*product-brief`)
|
||||
- **Phase 2** (Required): Planning (`*prd` creates PRD with FRs/NFRs)
|
||||
- **Phase 3** (Track-dependent): Solutioning (`*architecture` → `*test-design` (system-level) → `*create-epics-and-stories` → TEA: `*framework`, `*ci` → `*implementation-readiness`)
|
||||
- **Phase 4** (Required): Implementation (`*sprint-planning` → per-epic: `*test-design` → per-story: dev workflows)
|
||||
|
||||
**TEA workflows:** `*framework` and `*ci` run once in Phase 3 after architecture. `*test-design` is **dual-mode**:
|
||||
|
||||
- **System-level (Phase 3):** Run immediately after architecture/ADR drafting to produce `test-design-system.md` (testability review, ADR → test mapping, Architecturally Significant Requirements (ASRs), environment needs). Feeds the implementation-readiness gate.
|
||||
- **Epic-level (Phase 4):** Run per-epic to produce `test-design-epic-N.md` (risk, priorities, coverage plan).
|
||||
|
||||
Quick Flow track skips Phases 1 and 3.
|
||||
BMad Method and Enterprise use all phases based on project needs.
|
||||
When an ADR or architecture draft is produced, run `*test-design` in **system-level** mode before the implementation-readiness gate. This ensures the ADR has an attached testability review and ADR → test mapping. Keep the test-design updated if ADRs change.
|
||||
|
||||
### Why TEA is Different from Other BMM Agents
|
||||
|
||||
TEA is the only BMM agent that operates in **multiple phases** (Phase 3 and Phase 4) and has its own **knowledge base architecture**.
|
||||
|
||||
<details>
|
||||
<summary><strong>Cross-Phase Operation & Unique Architecture</strong></summary>
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase-Specific Agents (Standard Pattern)
|
||||
|
||||
Most BMM agents work in a single phase:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Phase 1 (Analysis)**: Analyst agent
|
||||
- **Phase 2 (Planning)**: PM agent
|
||||
- **Phase 3 (Solutioning)**: Architect agent
|
||||
- **Phase 4 (Implementation)**: SM, DEV agents
|
||||
|
||||
### TEA: Multi-Phase Quality Agent (Unique Pattern)
|
||||
|
||||
TEA is **the only agent that operates in multiple phases**:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Phase 1 (Analysis) → [TEA not typically used]
|
||||
↓
|
||||
Phase 2 (Planning) → [PM defines requirements - TEA not active]
|
||||
↓
|
||||
Phase 3 (Solutioning) → TEA: *framework, *ci (test infrastructure AFTER architecture)
|
||||
↓
|
||||
Phase 4 (Implementation) → TEA: *test-design (per epic: "how do I test THIS feature?")
|
||||
→ TEA: *atdd, *automate, *test-review, *trace (per story)
|
||||
↓
|
||||
Epic/Release Gate → TEA: *nfr-assess, *trace Phase 2 (release decision)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### TEA's 8 Workflows Across Phases
|
||||
|
||||
**Standard agents**: 1-3 workflows per phase
|
||||
**TEA**: 8 workflows across Phase 3, Phase 4, and Release Gate
|
||||
|
||||
| Phase | TEA Workflows | Frequency | Purpose |
|
||||
| ----------- | --------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------- | ---------------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| **Phase 2** | (none) | - | Planning phase - PM defines requirements |
|
||||
| **Phase 3** | \*framework, \*ci | Once per project | Setup test infrastructure AFTER architecture |
|
||||
| **Phase 4** | \*test-design, \*atdd, \*automate, \*test-review, \*trace | Per epic/story | Test planning per epic, then per-story testing |
|
||||
| **Release** | \*nfr-assess, \*trace (Phase 2: gate) | Per epic/release | Go/no-go decision |
|
||||
|
||||
**Note**: `*trace` is a two-phase workflow: Phase 1 (traceability) + Phase 2 (gate decision). This reduces cognitive load while maintaining natural workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
### Why TEA Gets Special Treatment
|
||||
|
||||
TEA uniquely requires:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Extensive domain knowledge**: 32 fragments covering test patterns, CI/CD, fixtures, quality practices, healing strategies, and optional playwright-utils integration
|
||||
- **Centralized reference system**: `tea-index.csv` for on-demand fragment loading during workflow execution
|
||||
- **Cross-cutting concerns**: Domain-specific testing patterns (vs project-specific artifacts like PRDs/stories)
|
||||
- **Optional integrations**: MCP capabilities (healing, exploratory, verification) and playwright-utils support
|
||||
|
||||
This architecture enables TEA to maintain consistent, production-ready testing patterns across all BMad projects while operating across multiple development phases.
|
||||
|
||||
### Playwright Utils Integration
|
||||
|
||||
TEA optionally integrates with `@seontechnologies/playwright-utils`, an open-source library providing fixture-based utilities for Playwright tests.
|
||||
|
||||
**Installation:**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
npm install -D @seontechnologies/playwright-utils
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Enable during BMAD installation** by answering "Yes" when prompted.
|
||||
|
||||
**Supported utilities (11 total):**
|
||||
|
||||
- api-request, network-recorder, auth-session, intercept-network-call, recurse
|
||||
- log, file-utils, burn-in, network-error-monitor
|
||||
- fixtures-composition (integration patterns)
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflows adapt:** automate, framework, test-review, ci, atdd (+ light mention in test-design).
|
||||
|
||||
**Knowledge base:** 32 total fragments (21 core patterns + 11 playwright-utils)
|
||||
|
||||
</details>
|
||||
|
||||
## High-Level Cheat Sheets
|
||||
|
||||
These cheat sheets map TEA workflows to the **BMad Method and Enterprise tracks** across the **4-Phase Methodology** (Phase 1: Analysis, Phase 2: Planning, Phase 3: Solutioning, Phase 4: Implementation).
|
||||
|
||||
**Note:** Quick Flow projects typically don't require TEA (covered in Overview). These cheat sheets focus on BMad Method and Enterprise tracks where TEA adds value.
|
||||
|
||||
**Legend for Track Deltas:**
|
||||
|
||||
- ➕ = New workflow or phase added (doesn't exist in baseline)
|
||||
- 🔄 = Modified focus (same workflow, different emphasis or purpose)
|
||||
- 📦 = Additional output or archival requirement
|
||||
|
||||
### Greenfield - BMad Method (Simple/Standard Work)
|
||||
|
||||
**Planning Track:** BMad Method (PRD + Architecture)
|
||||
**Use Case:** New projects with standard complexity
|
||||
|
||||
| Workflow Stage | Test Architect | Dev / Team | Outputs |
|
||||
| -------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| **Phase 1**: Discovery | - | Analyst `*product-brief` (optional) | `product-brief.md` |
|
||||
| **Phase 2**: Planning | - | PM `*prd` (creates PRD with FRs/NFRs) | PRD with functional/non-functional requirements |
|
||||
| **Phase 3**: Solutioning | Run `*framework`, `*ci` AFTER architecture and epic creation | Architect `*architecture`, `*create-epics-and-stories`, `*implementation-readiness` | Architecture, epics/stories, test scaffold, CI pipeline |
|
||||
| **Phase 4**: Sprint Start | - | SM `*sprint-planning` | Sprint status file with all epics and stories |
|
||||
| **Phase 4**: Epic Planning | Run `*test-design` for THIS epic (per-epic test plan) | Review epic scope | `test-design-epic-N.md` with risk assessment and test plan |
|
||||
| **Phase 4**: Story Dev | (Optional) `*atdd` before dev, then `*automate` after | SM `*create-story`, DEV implements | Tests, story implementation |
|
||||
| **Phase 4**: Story Review | Execute `*test-review` (optional), re-run `*trace` | Address recommendations, update code/tests | Quality report, refreshed coverage matrix |
|
||||
| **Phase 4**: Release Gate | (Optional) `*test-review` for final audit, Run `*trace` (Phase 2) | Confirm Definition of Done, share release notes | Quality audit, Gate YAML + release summary |
|
||||
|
||||
<details>
|
||||
<summary>Execution Notes</summary>
|
||||
|
||||
- Run `*framework` only once per repo or when modern harness support is missing.
|
||||
- **Phase 3 (Solutioning)**: After architecture is complete, run `*framework` and `*ci` to setup test infrastructure based on architectural decisions.
|
||||
- **Phase 4 starts**: After solutioning is complete, sprint planning loads all epics.
|
||||
- **`*test-design` runs per-epic**: At the beginning of working on each epic, run `*test-design` to create a test plan for THAT specific epic/feature. Output: `test-design-epic-N.md`.
|
||||
- Use `*atdd` before coding when the team can adopt ATDD; share its checklist with the dev agent.
|
||||
- Post-implementation, keep `*trace` current, expand coverage with `*automate`, optionally review test quality with `*test-review`. For release gate, run `*trace` with Phase 2 enabled to get deployment decision.
|
||||
- Use `*test-review` after `*atdd` to validate generated tests, after `*automate` to ensure regression quality, or before gate for final audit.
|
||||
- Clarification: `*test-review` is optional and only audits existing tests; run it after `*atdd` or `*automate` when you want a quality review, not as a required step.
|
||||
- Clarification: `*atdd` outputs are not auto-consumed; share the ATDD doc/tests with the dev workflow. `*trace` does not run `*atdd`—it evaluates existing artifacts for coverage and gate readiness.
|
||||
- Clarification: `*ci` is a one-time setup; recommended early (Phase 3 or before feature work), but it can be done later if it was skipped.
|
||||
|
||||
</details>
|
||||
|
||||
<details>
|
||||
<summary>Worked Example – “Nova CRM” Greenfield Feature</summary>
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Planning (Phase 2):** Analyst runs `*product-brief`; PM executes `*prd` to produce PRD with FRs/NFRs.
|
||||
2. **Solutioning (Phase 3):** Architect completes `*architecture` for the new module; `*create-epics-and-stories` generates epics/stories based on architecture; TEA sets up test infrastructure via `*framework` and `*ci` based on architectural decisions; gate check validates planning completeness.
|
||||
3. **Sprint Start (Phase 4):** Scrum Master runs `*sprint-planning` to load all epics into sprint status.
|
||||
4. **Epic 1 Planning (Phase 4):** TEA runs `*test-design` to create test plan for Epic 1, producing `test-design-epic-1.md` with risk assessment.
|
||||
5. **Story Implementation (Phase 4):** For each story in Epic 1, SM generates story via `*create-story`; TEA optionally runs `*atdd`; Dev implements with guidance from failing tests.
|
||||
6. **Post-Dev (Phase 4):** TEA runs `*automate`, optionally `*test-review` to audit test quality, re-runs `*trace` to refresh coverage.
|
||||
7. **Release Gate:** TEA runs `*trace` with Phase 2 enabled to generate gate decision.
|
||||
|
||||
</details>
|
||||
|
||||
### Brownfield - BMad Method or Enterprise (Simple or Complex)
|
||||
|
||||
**Planning Tracks:** BMad Method or Enterprise Method
|
||||
**Use Case:** Existing codebases - simple additions (BMad Method) or complex enterprise requirements (Enterprise Method)
|
||||
|
||||
**🔄 Brownfield Deltas from Greenfield:**
|
||||
|
||||
- ➕ Documentation (Prerequisite) - Document existing codebase if undocumented
|
||||
- ➕ Phase 2: `*trace` - Baseline existing test coverage before planning
|
||||
- 🔄 Phase 4: `*test-design` - Focus on regression hotspots and brownfield risks
|
||||
- 🔄 Phase 4: Story Review - May include `*nfr-assess` if not done earlier
|
||||
|
||||
| Workflow Stage | Test Architect | Dev / Team | Outputs |
|
||||
| --------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| **Documentation**: Prerequisite ➕ | - | Analyst `*document-project` (if undocumented) | Comprehensive project documentation |
|
||||
| **Phase 1**: Discovery | - | Analyst/PM/Architect rerun planning workflows | Updated planning artifacts in `{output_folder}` |
|
||||
| **Phase 2**: Planning | Run ➕ `*trace` (baseline coverage) | PM `*prd` (creates PRD with FRs/NFRs) | PRD with FRs/NFRs, ➕ coverage baseline |
|
||||
| **Phase 3**: Solutioning | Run `*framework`, `*ci` AFTER architecture and epic creation | Architect `*architecture`, `*create-epics-and-stories`, `*implementation-readiness` | Architecture, epics/stories, test framework, CI pipeline |
|
||||
| **Phase 4**: Sprint Start | - | SM `*sprint-planning` | Sprint status file with all epics and stories |
|
||||
| **Phase 4**: Epic Planning | Run `*test-design` for THIS epic 🔄 (regression hotspots) | Review epic scope and brownfield risks | `test-design-epic-N.md` with brownfield risk assessment and mitigation |
|
||||
| **Phase 4**: Story Dev | (Optional) `*atdd` before dev, then `*automate` after | SM `*create-story`, DEV implements | Tests, story implementation |
|
||||
| **Phase 4**: Story Review | Apply `*test-review` (optional), re-run `*trace`, ➕ `*nfr-assess` if needed | Resolve gaps, update docs/tests | Quality report, refreshed coverage matrix, NFR report |
|
||||
| **Phase 4**: Release Gate | (Optional) `*test-review` for final audit, Run `*trace` (Phase 2) | Capture sign-offs, share release notes | Quality audit, Gate YAML + release summary |
|
||||
|
||||
<details>
|
||||
<summary>Execution Notes</summary>
|
||||
|
||||
- Lead with `*trace` during Planning (Phase 2) to baseline existing test coverage before architecture work begins.
|
||||
- **Phase 3 (Solutioning)**: After architecture is complete, run `*framework` and `*ci` to modernize test infrastructure. For brownfield, framework may need to integrate with or replace existing test setup.
|
||||
- **Phase 4 starts**: After solutioning is complete and sprint planning loads all epics.
|
||||
- **`*test-design` runs per-epic**: At the beginning of working on each epic, run `*test-design` to identify regression hotspots, integration risks, and mitigation strategies for THAT specific epic/feature. Output: `test-design-epic-N.md`.
|
||||
- Use `*atdd` when stories benefit from ATDD; otherwise proceed to implementation and rely on post-dev automation.
|
||||
- After development, expand coverage with `*automate`, optionally review test quality with `*test-review`, re-run `*trace` (Phase 2 for gate decision). Run `*nfr-assess` now if non-functional risks weren't addressed earlier.
|
||||
- Use `*test-review` to validate existing brownfield tests or audit new tests before gate.
|
||||
|
||||
</details>
|
||||
|
||||
<details>
|
||||
<summary>Worked Example – “Atlas Payments” Brownfield Story</summary>
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Planning (Phase 2):** PM executes `*prd` to create PRD with FRs/NFRs; TEA runs `*trace` to baseline existing coverage.
|
||||
2. **Solutioning (Phase 3):** Architect triggers `*architecture` capturing legacy payment flows and integration architecture; `*create-epics-and-stories` generates Epic 1 (Payment Processing) based on architecture; TEA sets up `*framework` and `*ci` based on architectural decisions; gate check validates planning.
|
||||
3. **Sprint Start (Phase 4):** Scrum Master runs `*sprint-planning` to load Epic 1 into sprint status.
|
||||
4. **Epic 1 Planning (Phase 4):** TEA runs `*test-design` for Epic 1 (Payment Processing), producing `test-design-epic-1.md` that flags settlement edge cases, regression hotspots, and mitigation plans.
|
||||
5. **Story Implementation (Phase 4):** For each story in Epic 1, SM generates story via `*create-story`; TEA runs `*atdd` producing failing Playwright specs; Dev implements with guidance from tests and checklist.
|
||||
6. **Post-Dev (Phase 4):** TEA applies `*automate`, optionally `*test-review` to audit test quality, re-runs `*trace` to refresh coverage.
|
||||
7. **Release Gate:** TEA performs `*nfr-assess` to validate SLAs, runs `*trace` with Phase 2 enabled to generate gate decision (PASS/CONCERNS/FAIL).
|
||||
|
||||
</details>
|
||||
|
||||
### Greenfield - Enterprise Method (Enterprise/Compliance Work)
|
||||
|
||||
**Planning Track:** Enterprise Method (BMad Method + extended security/devops/test strategies)
|
||||
**Use Case:** New enterprise projects with compliance, security, or complex regulatory requirements
|
||||
|
||||
**🏢 Enterprise Deltas from BMad Method:**
|
||||
|
||||
- ➕ Phase 1: `*research` - Domain and compliance research (recommended)
|
||||
- ➕ Phase 2: `*nfr-assess` - Capture NFR requirements early (security/performance/reliability)
|
||||
- 🔄 Phase 4: `*test-design` - Enterprise focus (compliance, security architecture alignment)
|
||||
- 📦 Release Gate - Archive artifacts and compliance evidence for audits
|
||||
|
||||
| Workflow Stage | Test Architect | Dev / Team | Outputs |
|
||||
| -------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ |
|
||||
| **Phase 1**: Discovery | - | Analyst ➕ `*research`, `*product-brief` | Domain research, compliance analysis, product brief |
|
||||
| **Phase 2**: Planning | Run ➕ `*nfr-assess` | PM `*prd` (creates PRD with FRs/NFRs), UX `*create-ux-design` | Enterprise PRD with FRs/NFRs, UX design, ➕ NFR documentation |
|
||||
| **Phase 3**: Solutioning | Run `*framework`, `*ci` AFTER architecture and epic creation | Architect `*architecture`, `*create-epics-and-stories`, `*implementation-readiness` | Architecture, epics/stories, test framework, CI pipeline |
|
||||
| **Phase 4**: Sprint Start | - | SM `*sprint-planning` | Sprint plan with all epics |
|
||||
| **Phase 4**: Epic Planning | Run `*test-design` for THIS epic 🔄 (compliance focus) | Review epic scope and compliance requirements | `test-design-epic-N.md` with security/performance/compliance focus |
|
||||
| **Phase 4**: Story Dev | (Optional) `*atdd`, `*automate`, `*test-review`, `*trace` per story | SM `*create-story`, DEV implements | Tests, fixtures, quality reports, coverage matrices |
|
||||
| **Phase 4**: Release Gate | Final `*test-review` audit, Run `*trace` (Phase 2), 📦 archive artifacts | Capture sign-offs, 📦 compliance evidence | Quality audit, updated assessments, gate YAML, 📦 audit trail |
|
||||
|
||||
<details>
|
||||
<summary>Execution Notes</summary>
|
||||
|
||||
- `*nfr-assess` runs early in Planning (Phase 2) to capture compliance, security, and performance requirements upfront.
|
||||
- **Phase 3 (Solutioning)**: After architecture is complete, run `*framework` and `*ci` with enterprise-grade configurations (selective testing, burn-in jobs, caching, notifications).
|
||||
- **Phase 4 starts**: After solutioning is complete and sprint planning loads all epics.
|
||||
- **`*test-design` runs per-epic**: At the beginning of working on each epic, run `*test-design` to create an enterprise-focused test plan for THAT specific epic, ensuring alignment with security architecture, performance targets, and compliance requirements. Output: `test-design-epic-N.md`.
|
||||
- Use `*atdd` for stories when feasible so acceptance tests can lead implementation.
|
||||
- Use `*test-review` per story or sprint to maintain quality standards and ensure compliance with testing best practices.
|
||||
- Prior to release, rerun coverage (`*trace`, `*automate`), perform final quality audit with `*test-review`, and formalize the decision with `*trace` Phase 2 (gate decision); archive artifacts for compliance audits.
|
||||
|
||||
</details>
|
||||
|
||||
<details>
|
||||
<summary>Worked Example – “Helios Ledger” Enterprise Release</summary>
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Planning (Phase 2):** Analyst runs `*research` and `*product-brief`; PM completes `*prd` creating PRD with FRs/NFRs; TEA runs `*nfr-assess` to establish NFR targets.
|
||||
2. **Solutioning (Phase 3):** Architect completes `*architecture` with enterprise considerations; `*create-epics-and-stories` generates epics/stories based on architecture; TEA sets up `*framework` and `*ci` with enterprise-grade configurations based on architectural decisions; gate check validates planning completeness.
|
||||
3. **Sprint Start (Phase 4):** Scrum Master runs `*sprint-planning` to load all epics into sprint status.
|
||||
4. **Per-Epic (Phase 4):** For each epic, TEA runs `*test-design` to create epic-specific test plan (e.g., `test-design-epic-1.md`, `test-design-epic-2.md`) with compliance-focused risk assessment.
|
||||
5. **Per-Story (Phase 4):** For each story, TEA uses `*atdd`, `*automate`, `*test-review`, and `*trace`; Dev teams iterate on the findings.
|
||||
6. **Release Gate:** TEA re-checks coverage, performs final quality audit with `*test-review`, and logs the final gate decision via `*trace` Phase 2, archiving artifacts for compliance.
|
||||
|
||||
</details>
|
||||
|
||||
## Command Catalog
|
||||
|
||||
<details>
|
||||
<summary><strong>Optional Playwright MCP Enhancements</strong></summary>
|
||||
|
||||
**Two Playwright MCP servers** (actively maintained, continuously updated):
|
||||
|
||||
- `playwright` - Browser automation (`npx @playwright/mcp@latest`)
|
||||
- `playwright-test` - Test runner with failure analysis (`npx playwright run-test-mcp-server`)
|
||||
|
||||
**How MCP Enhances TEA Workflows**:
|
||||
|
||||
MCP provides additional capabilities on top of TEA's default AI-based approach:
|
||||
|
||||
1. `*test-design`:
|
||||
- Default: Analysis + documentation
|
||||
- **+ MCP**: Interactive UI discovery with `browser_navigate`, `browser_click`, `browser_snapshot`, behavior observation
|
||||
|
||||
Benefit: Discover actual functionality, edge cases, undocumented features
|
||||
|
||||
2. `*atdd`, `*automate`:
|
||||
- Default: Infers selectors and interactions from requirements and knowledge fragments
|
||||
- **+ MCP**: Generates tests **then** verifies with `generator_setup_page`, `browser_*` tools, validates against live app
|
||||
|
||||
Benefit: Accurate selectors from real DOM, verified behavior, refined test code
|
||||
|
||||
3. `*automate`:
|
||||
- Default: Pattern-based fixes from error messages + knowledge fragments
|
||||
- **+ MCP**: Pattern fixes **enhanced with** `browser_snapshot`, `browser_console_messages`, `browser_network_requests`, `browser_generate_locator`
|
||||
|
||||
Benefit: Visual failure context, live DOM inspection, root cause discovery
|
||||
|
||||
**Config example**:
|
||||
|
||||
```json
|
||||
{
|
||||
"mcpServers": {
|
||||
"playwright": {
|
||||
"command": "npx",
|
||||
"args": ["@playwright/mcp@latest"]
|
||||
},
|
||||
"playwright-test": {
|
||||
"command": "npx",
|
||||
"args": ["playwright", "run-test-mcp-server"]
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**To disable**: Set `tea_use_mcp_enhancements: false` in `_bmad/bmm/config.yaml` OR remove MCPs from IDE config.
|
||||
|
||||
</details>
|
||||
|
||||
<details>
|
||||
<summary><strong>Optional Playwright Utils Integration</strong></summary>
|
||||
|
||||
**Open-source Playwright utilities** from SEON Technologies (production-tested, npm published):
|
||||
|
||||
- **Package**: `@seontechnologies/playwright-utils` ([npm](https://www.npmjs.com/package/@seontechnologies/playwright-utils) | [GitHub](https://github.com/seontechnologies/playwright-utils))
|
||||
- **Install**: `npm install -D @seontechnologies/playwright-utils`
|
||||
|
||||
**How Playwright Utils Enhances TEA Workflows**:
|
||||
|
||||
Provides fixture-based utilities that integrate into TEA's test generation and review workflows:
|
||||
|
||||
1. `*framework`:
|
||||
- Default: Basic Playwright scaffold
|
||||
- **+ playwright-utils**: Scaffold with api-request, network-recorder, auth-session, burn-in, network-error-monitor fixtures pre-configured
|
||||
|
||||
Benefit: Production-ready patterns from day one
|
||||
|
||||
2. `*automate`, `*atdd`:
|
||||
- Default: Standard test patterns
|
||||
- **+ playwright-utils**: Tests using api-request (schema validation), intercept-network-call (mocking), recurse (polling), log (structured logging), file-utils (CSV/PDF)
|
||||
|
||||
Benefit: Advanced patterns without boilerplate
|
||||
|
||||
3. `*test-review`:
|
||||
- Default: Reviews against core knowledge base (21 fragments)
|
||||
- **+ playwright-utils**: Reviews against expanded knowledge base (32 fragments: 21 core + 11 playwright-utils)
|
||||
|
||||
Benefit: Reviews include fixture composition, auth patterns, network recording best practices
|
||||
|
||||
4. `*ci`:
|
||||
- Default: Standard CI workflow
|
||||
- **+ playwright-utils**: CI workflow with burn-in script (smart test selection) and network-error-monitor integration
|
||||
|
||||
Benefit: Faster CI feedback, HTTP error detection
|
||||
|
||||
**Utilities available** (11 total): api-request, network-recorder, auth-session, intercept-network-call, recurse, log, file-utils, burn-in, network-error-monitor, fixtures-composition
|
||||
|
||||
**Enable during BMAD installation** by answering "Yes" when prompted, or manually set `tea_use_playwright_utils: true` in `_bmad/bmm/config.yaml`.
|
||||
|
||||
**To disable**: Set `tea_use_playwright_utils: false` in `_bmad/bmm/config.yaml`.
|
||||
|
||||
</details>
|
||||
|
||||
<br></br>
|
||||
|
||||
| Command | Primary Outputs | Notes | With Playwright MCP Enhancements |
|
||||
| -------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
|
||||
| `*framework` | Playwright/Cypress scaffold, `.env.example`, `.nvmrc`, sample specs | Use when no production-ready harness exists | - |
|
||||
| `*ci` | CI workflow, selective test scripts, secrets checklist | Platform-aware (GitHub Actions default) | - |
|
||||
| `*test-design` | Combined risk assessment, mitigation plan, and coverage strategy | Risk scoring + optional exploratory mode | **+ Exploratory**: Interactive UI discovery with browser automation (uncover actual functionality) |
|
||||
| `*atdd` | Failing acceptance tests + implementation checklist | TDD red phase + optional recording mode | **+ Recording**: AI generation verified with live browser (accurate selectors from real DOM) |
|
||||
| `*automate` | Prioritized specs, fixtures, README/script updates, DoD summary | Optional healing/recording, avoid duplicate coverage | **+ Healing**: Pattern fixes enhanced with visual debugging + **+ Recording**: AI verified with live browser |
|
||||
| `*test-review` | Test quality review report with 0-100 score, violations, fixes | Reviews tests against knowledge base patterns | - |
|
||||
| `*nfr-assess` | NFR assessment report with actions | Focus on security/performance/reliability | - |
|
||||
| `*trace` | Phase 1: Coverage matrix, recommendations. Phase 2: Gate decision (PASS/CONCERNS/FAIL/WAIVED) | Two-phase workflow: traceability + gate decision | - |
|
||||
3
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/troubleshooting.md
Normal file
3
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/troubleshooting.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
|
||||
# BMM Troubleshooting Guide
|
||||
|
||||
Common issues and solutions for the BMad Method Module will be listed here as needed.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
|
||||
# Document Project Workflow - Technical Reference
|
||||
|
||||
**Module:** BMM (BMAD Method Module)
|
||||
|
||||
## Purpose
|
||||
|
||||
Analyzes and documents brownfield projects by scanning codebase, architecture, and patterns to create comprehensive reference documentation for AI-assisted development. Generates a master index and multiple documentation files tailored to project structure and type.
|
||||
|
||||
## How to Invoke
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
/bmad:bmm:workflows:document-project
|
||||
```
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Scan Levels
|
||||
|
||||
Choose the right scan depth for your needs:
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Quick Scan (Default)
|
||||
|
||||
**What it does:** Pattern-based analysis without reading source files
|
||||
**Reads:** Config files, package manifests, directory structure, README
|
||||
**Use when:**
|
||||
|
||||
- You need a fast project overview
|
||||
- Initial understanding of project structure
|
||||
- Planning next steps before deeper analysis
|
||||
|
||||
**Does NOT read:** Source code files (`_.js`, `_.ts`, `_.py`, `_.go`, etc.)
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Deep Scan
|
||||
|
||||
**What it does:** Reads files in critical directories based on project type
|
||||
**Reads:** Files in critical paths defined by documentation requirements
|
||||
**Use when:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Creating comprehensive documentation for brownfield PRD
|
||||
- Need detailed analysis of key areas
|
||||
- Want balance between depth and speed
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:** For a web app, reads controllers/, models/, components/, but not every utility file
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Exhaustive Scan
|
||||
|
||||
**What it does:** Reads ALL source files in project
|
||||
**Reads:** Every source file (excludes node_modules, dist, build, .git)
|
||||
**Use when:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Complete project analysis needed
|
||||
- Migration planning requires full understanding
|
||||
- Detailed audit of entire codebase
|
||||
- Deep technical debt assessment
|
||||
|
||||
**Note:** Deep-dive mode ALWAYS uses exhaustive scan (no choice)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Resumability
|
||||
|
||||
The workflow can be interrupted and resumed without losing progress:
|
||||
|
||||
- **State Tracking:** Progress saved in `project-scan-report.json`
|
||||
- **Auto-Detection:** Workflow detects incomplete runs (<24 hours old)
|
||||
- **Resume Prompt:** Choose to resume or start fresh
|
||||
- **Step-by-Step:** Resume from exact step where interrupted
|
||||
- **Archiving:** Old state files automatically archived
|
||||
|
||||
**Related Documentation:**
|
||||
|
||||
- [Brownfield Development Guide](./brownfield-guide.md)
|
||||
- [Implementation Workflows](./workflows-implementation.md)
|
||||
199
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/workflows-analysis.md
Normal file
199
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/workflows-analysis.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,199 @@
|
||||
# BMM Analysis Workflows (Phase 1)
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Phase 1 (Analysis) workflows are **optional** exploration and discovery tools that help validate ideas, understand markets, and generate strategic context before planning begins.
|
||||
|
||||
**Key principle:** Analysis workflows help you think strategically before committing to implementation. Skip them if your requirements are already clear.
|
||||
|
||||
**When to use:** Starting new projects, exploring opportunities, validating market fit, generating ideas, understanding problem spaces.
|
||||
|
||||
**When to skip:** Continuing existing projects with clear requirements, well-defined features with known solutions, strict constraints where discovery is complete.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 1 Analysis Workflow Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Phase 1 Analysis consists of three categories of optional workflows:
|
||||
|
||||
### Discovery & Ideation (Optional)
|
||||
|
||||
- **brainstorm-project** - Multi-track solution exploration for software projects
|
||||
|
||||
### Research & Validation (Optional)
|
||||
|
||||
- **research** - Market, technical, competitive, user, domain, and AI research
|
||||
- **domain-research** - Industry-specific deep dive research
|
||||
|
||||
### Strategic Capture (Recommended for Greenfield)
|
||||
|
||||
- **product-brief** - Product vision and strategy definition
|
||||
|
||||
These workflows feed into Phase 2 (Planning) workflows, particularly the `prd` workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Reference
|
||||
|
||||
| Workflow | Agent | Required | Purpose | Output |
|
||||
| ---------------------- | ------- | ----------- | -------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------- |
|
||||
| **brainstorm-project** | Analyst | No | Explore solution approaches and architectures | Solution options + rationale |
|
||||
| **research** | Analyst | No | Multi-type research (market/technical/competitive/user/domain) | Research reports |
|
||||
| **product-brief** | Analyst | Recommended | Define product vision and strategy (interactive) | Product Brief document |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow Descriptions
|
||||
|
||||
### brainstorm-project
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose:** Generate multiple solution approaches through parallel ideation tracks (architecture, UX, integration, value).
|
||||
|
||||
**Agent:** Analyst
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Use:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Very vague or seed kernal of an idea that needs exploration
|
||||
- Consider alternatives or enhancements to an idea
|
||||
- See your idea from different angles and viewpoints
|
||||
- No idea what you want to build, but want to find some inspiration
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### research
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose:** Comprehensive multi-type research system consolidating market, technical, competitive, user, and domain analysis.
|
||||
|
||||
**Agent:** Analyst
|
||||
|
||||
**Research Types:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Type | Purpose | Use When |
|
||||
| --------------- | ------------------------------------------------------ | ----------------------------------- |
|
||||
| **market** | TAM/SAM/SOM, competitive analysis | Need market viability validation |
|
||||
| **technical** | Technology evaluation, ADRs | Choosing frameworks/platforms |
|
||||
| **competitive** | Deep competitor analysis | Understanding competitive landscape |
|
||||
| **user** | Customer insights, personas, JTBD | Need user understanding |
|
||||
| **domain** | Industry deep dives, trends | Understanding domain/industry |
|
||||
| **deep_prompt** | Generate AI research prompts (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini) | Need deeper AI-assisted research |
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Features:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Real-time web research
|
||||
- Multiple analytical frameworks (Porter's Five Forces, SWOT, Technology Adoption Lifecycle)
|
||||
- Platform-specific optimization for deep_prompt type
|
||||
- Configurable research depth (quick/standard/comprehensive)
|
||||
|
||||
**Example (market):** "SaaS project management tool" → TAM $50B, SAM $5B, SOM $50M, top competitors (Asana, Monday), positioning recommendation.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### product-brief
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose:** Interactive product brief creation that guides strategic product vision definition.
|
||||
|
||||
**Agent:** Analyst
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Use:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Starting new product/major feature initiative
|
||||
- Aligning stakeholders before detailed planning
|
||||
- Transitioning from exploration to strategy
|
||||
- Need executive-level product documentation
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Outputs:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Executive summary
|
||||
- Problem statement with evidence
|
||||
- Proposed solution and differentiators
|
||||
- Target users (segmented)
|
||||
- MVP scope (ruthlessly defined)
|
||||
- Financial impact and ROI
|
||||
- Strategic alignment
|
||||
- Risks and open questions
|
||||
|
||||
**Integration:** Feeds directly into PRD workflow (Phase 2).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Decision Guide
|
||||
|
||||
### Starting a Software Project
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
brainstorm-project (if unclear) → research (market/technical) → product-brief → Phase 2 (prd)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Validating an Idea
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
research (market type) → product-brief → Phase 2
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Technical Decision Only
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
research (technical type) → Use findings in Phase 3 (architecture)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Understanding Market
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
research (market/competitive type) → product-brief → Phase 2
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Domain Research for Complex Industries
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
domain-research → research (compliance/regulatory) → product-brief → Phase 2
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration with Phase 2 (Planning)
|
||||
|
||||
Analysis outputs feed directly into Planning:
|
||||
|
||||
| Analysis Output | Planning Input |
|
||||
| --------------------------- | -------------------------- |
|
||||
| product-brief.md | **prd** workflow |
|
||||
| market-research.md | **prd** context |
|
||||
| domain-research.md | **prd** context |
|
||||
| technical-research.md | **architecture** (Phase 3) |
|
||||
| competitive-intelligence.md | **prd** positioning |
|
||||
|
||||
Planning workflows automatically load these documents if they exist in the output folder.
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
### Greenfield Software (Full Analysis)
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
1. brainstorm-project - explore approaches
|
||||
2. research (market/technical/domain) - validate viability
|
||||
3. product-brief - capture strategic vision
|
||||
4. → Phase 2: prd
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Skip Analysis (Clear Requirements)
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
→ Phase 2: prd or tech-spec directly
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Technical Research Only
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
1. research (technical) - evaluate technologies
|
||||
2. → Phase 3: architecture (use findings in ADRs)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Related Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
- [Phase 2: Planning Workflows](../../../../docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/workflows-planning.md) - Next phase
|
||||
- [Phase 3: Solutioning Workflows](../../../../docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/workflows-solutioning.md)
|
||||
- [Phase 4: Implementation Workflows](../../../../docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/workflows-implementation.md)
|
||||
- [Scale Adaptive System](./scale-adaptive-system.md) - Understanding project complexity
|
||||
- [Agents Guide](../../../../docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/agents-guide.md) - Complete agent reference
|
||||
210
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/workflows-implementation.md
Normal file
210
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/workflows-implementation.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,210 @@
|
||||
# BMM Implementation Workflows (Phase 4)
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Phase 4 (Implementation) workflows manage the iterative sprint-based development cycle using a **story-centric workflow** where each story moves through a defined lifecycle from creation to completion.
|
||||
|
||||
**Key principle:** One story at a time, move it through the entire lifecycle before starting the next.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Complete Workflow Context
|
||||
|
||||
Phase 4 is the final phase of the BMad Method workflow. To see how implementation fits into the complete methodology:
|
||||
|
||||
The BMad Method consists of four phases working in sequence:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Phase 1 (Analysis)** - Optional exploration and discovery workflows
|
||||
2. **Phase 2 (Planning)** - Required requirements definition using scale-adaptive system
|
||||
3. **Phase 3 (Solutioning)** - Technical architecture and design decisions
|
||||
4. **Phase 4 (Implementation)** - Iterative sprint-based development with story-centric workflow
|
||||
|
||||
Phase 4 focuses on the iterative epic and story cycles where stories are implemented, reviewed, and completed one at a time.
|
||||
|
||||
For a visual representation of the complete workflow, see: [workflow-method-greenfield.excalidraw](./images/workflow-method-greenfield.excalidraw)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Reference
|
||||
|
||||
| Workflow | Agent | When | Purpose |
|
||||
| ------------------- | ----- | --------------------- | ------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| **sprint-planning** | SM | Once at Phase 4 start | Initialize sprint tracking file |
|
||||
| **create-story** | SM | Per story | Create next story from epic backlog |
|
||||
| **dev-story** | DEV | Per story | Implement story with tests |
|
||||
| **code-review** | DEV | Per story | Senior dev quality review |
|
||||
| **retrospective** | SM | After epic complete | Review lessons and extract insights |
|
||||
| **correct-course** | SM | When issues arise | Handle significant mid-sprint changes |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Agent Roles
|
||||
|
||||
### SM (Scrum Master) - Primary Implementation Orchestrator
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflows:** sprint-planning, create-story, retrospective, correct-course
|
||||
|
||||
**Responsibilities:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Initialize and maintain sprint tracking
|
||||
- Create stories from epic backlog
|
||||
- Handle course corrections when issues arise
|
||||
- Facilitate retrospectives after epic completion
|
||||
- Orchestrate overall implementation flow
|
||||
|
||||
### DEV (Developer) - Implementation and Quality
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflows:** dev-story, code-review
|
||||
|
||||
**Responsibilities:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Implement stories with tests
|
||||
- Perform senior developer code reviews
|
||||
- Ensure quality and adherence to standards
|
||||
- Complete story implementation lifecycle
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Story Lifecycle States
|
||||
|
||||
Stories move through these states in the sprint status file:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **TODO** - Story identified but not started
|
||||
2. **IN PROGRESS** - Story being implemented (create-story → dev-story)
|
||||
3. **READY FOR REVIEW** - Implementation complete, awaiting code review
|
||||
4. **DONE** - Accepted and complete
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Typical Sprint Flow
|
||||
|
||||
### Sprint 0 (Planning Phase)
|
||||
|
||||
- Complete Phases 1-3 (Analysis, Planning, Solutioning)
|
||||
- PRD/GDD + Architecture complete
|
||||
- **V6: Epics+Stories created via create-epics-and-stories workflow (runs AFTER architecture)**
|
||||
|
||||
### Sprint 1+ (Implementation Phase)
|
||||
|
||||
**Start of Phase 4:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. SM runs `sprint-planning` (once)
|
||||
|
||||
**Per Epic:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Epic context and stories are already prepared from Phase 3
|
||||
|
||||
**Per Story (repeat until epic complete):**
|
||||
|
||||
1. SM runs `create-story`
|
||||
2. DEV runs `dev-story`
|
||||
3. DEV runs `code-review`
|
||||
4. If code review fails: DEV fixes issues in `dev-story`, then re-runs `code-review`
|
||||
|
||||
**After Epic Complete:**
|
||||
|
||||
- SM runs `retrospective`
|
||||
- Move to next epic
|
||||
|
||||
**As Needed:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Run `sprint-status` anytime in Phase 4 to inspect sprint-status.yaml and get the next implementation command
|
||||
- Run `workflow-status` for cross-phase routing and project-level paths
|
||||
- Run `correct-course` if significant changes needed
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Principles
|
||||
|
||||
### One Story at a Time
|
||||
|
||||
Complete each story's full lifecycle before starting the next. This prevents context switching and ensures quality.
|
||||
|
||||
### Quality Gates
|
||||
|
||||
Every story goes through `code-review` before being marked done. No exceptions.
|
||||
|
||||
### Continuous Tracking
|
||||
|
||||
The `sprint-status.yaml` file is the single source of truth for all implementation progress.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### (BMad Method / Enterprise)
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
PRD (PM) → Architecture (Architect)
|
||||
→ create-epics-and-stories (PM) ← V6: After architecture!
|
||||
→ implementation-readiness (Architect)
|
||||
→ sprint-planning (SM, once)
|
||||
→ [Per Epic]:
|
||||
→ story loop (SM/DEV)
|
||||
→ retrospective (SM)
|
||||
→ [Next Epic]
|
||||
Current Phase: 4 (Implementation)
|
||||
Current Epic: Epic 1 (Authentication)
|
||||
Current Sprint: Sprint 1
|
||||
|
||||
Next Story: Story 1.3 (Email Verification)
|
||||
Status: TODO
|
||||
Dependencies: Story 1.2 (DONE) ✅
|
||||
|
||||
**Recommendation:** Run `create-story` to generate Story 1.3
|
||||
|
||||
After create-story:
|
||||
1. Run dev-story
|
||||
2. Run code-review
|
||||
3. Update sprint-status.yaml to mark story done
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
See: [workflow-status instructions](../workflows/workflow-status/instructions.md)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### document-project
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose:** Analyze and document brownfield projects by scanning codebase, architecture, and patterns.
|
||||
|
||||
**Agent:** Analyst
|
||||
**Duration:** 1-3 hours
|
||||
**When to Use:** Brownfield projects without documentation
|
||||
|
||||
**How It Works:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Scans codebase structure
|
||||
2. Identifies architecture patterns
|
||||
3. Documents technology stack
|
||||
4. Creates reference documentation
|
||||
5. Generates PRD-like document from existing code
|
||||
|
||||
**Output:** `project-documentation-{date}.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Run:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Before starting work on legacy project
|
||||
- When inheriting undocumented codebase
|
||||
- Creating onboarding documentation
|
||||
|
||||
See: [document-project reference](./workflow-document-project-reference.md)
|
||||
|
||||
## Related Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
- [Phase 1: Analysis Workflows](./workflows-analysis.md)
|
||||
- [Phase 2: Planning Workflows](./workflows-planning.md)
|
||||
- [Phase 3: Solutioning Workflows](./workflows-solutioning.md)
|
||||
|
||||
## Troubleshooting
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Which workflow should I run next?**
|
||||
A: Run `workflow-status` - it reads the sprint status file and tells you exactly what to do. During implementation (Phase 4) run `sprint-status` (fast check against sprint-status.yaml).
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Story needs significant changes mid-implementation?**
|
||||
A: Run `correct-course` to analyze impact and route appropriately.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Can I work on multiple stories in parallel?**
|
||||
A: Not recommended. Complete one story's full lifecycle before starting the next. Prevents context switching and ensures quality.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: What if code review finds issues?**
|
||||
A: DEV runs `dev-story` to make fixes, re-runs tests, then runs `code-review` again until it passes.
|
||||
|
||||
_Phase 4 Implementation - One story at a time, done right._
|
||||
89
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/workflows-planning.md
Normal file
89
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/workflows-planning.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
|
||||
# BMM Planning Workflows (Phase 2)
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 2 Planning Workflow Overview
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Reference
|
||||
|
||||
| Workflow | Agent | Track | Purpose |
|
||||
| -------------------- | ----------- | ----------------------- | ------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| **prd** | PM | BMad Method, Enterprise | Strategic PRD with FRs/NFRs |
|
||||
| **create-ux-design** | UX Designer | BMad Method, Enterprise | Optional UX specification (after PRD) |
|
||||
|
||||
### prd (Product Requirements Document)
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose:** Strategic PRD with Functional Requirements (FRs) and Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs) for software products (BMad Method track).
|
||||
|
||||
**Agent:** PM (with Architect and Analyst support)
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Use:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Medium to large feature sets
|
||||
- Multi-screen user experiences
|
||||
- Complex business logic
|
||||
- Multiple system integrations
|
||||
- Phased delivery required
|
||||
|
||||
**Scale-Adaptive Structure:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Light:** Focused FRs/NFRs, simplified analysis (10-15 pages)
|
||||
- **Standard:** Comprehensive FRs/NFRs, thorough analysis (20-30 pages)
|
||||
- **Comprehensive:** Extensive FRs/NFRs, multi-phase, stakeholder analysis (30-50+ pages)
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Outputs:**
|
||||
|
||||
- PRD.md (complete requirements with FRs and NFRs)
|
||||
|
||||
**Note:** V6 improvement - PRD focuses on WHAT to build (requirements). Epic+Stories are created AFTER architecture via `create-epics-and-stories` workflow for better quality.
|
||||
|
||||
**Integration:** Feeds into Architecture (Phase 3)
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:** E-commerce checkout → PRD with 15 FRs (user account, cart management, payment flow) and 8 NFRs (performance, security, scalability).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### create-ux-design (UX Design)
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose:** UX specification for projects where user experience is the primary differentiator (BMad Method track).
|
||||
|
||||
**Agent:** UX Designer
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Use:**
|
||||
|
||||
- UX is primary competitive advantage
|
||||
- Complex user workflows needing design thinking
|
||||
- Innovative interaction patterns
|
||||
- Design system creation
|
||||
- Accessibility-critical experiences
|
||||
|
||||
**Collaborative Approach:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Visual exploration (generate multiple options)
|
||||
2. Informed decisions (evaluate with user needs)
|
||||
3. Collaborative design (refine iteratively)
|
||||
4. Living documentation (evolves with project)
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Outputs:**
|
||||
|
||||
- ux-spec.md (complete UX specification)
|
||||
- User journeys
|
||||
- Wireframes and mockups
|
||||
- Interaction specifications
|
||||
- Design system (components, patterns, tokens)
|
||||
- Epic breakdown (UX stories)
|
||||
|
||||
**Integration:** Feeds PRD or updates epics, then Architecture (Phase 3)
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:** Dashboard redesign → Card-based layout with split-pane toggle, 5 card components, 12 color tokens, responsive grid, 3 epics (Layout, Visualization, Accessibility).
|
||||
|
||||
## Best Practices
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Do Product Brief from Phase 1 to kickstart the PRD for better results
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Focus on "What" Not "How"
|
||||
|
||||
Planning defines **what** to build and **why**. Leave **how** (technical design) to Phase 3 (Solutioning).
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Document-Project First for Brownfield
|
||||
|
||||
Always run `document-project` before planning brownfield projects. AI agents need existing codebase context and will make a large quality difference. If you are adding a small addition to an existing project, you might want to consider instead after using document-project to use the quick flow solo dev process instead.
|
||||
509
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/workflows-solutioning.md
Normal file
509
docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/workflows-solutioning.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,509 @@
|
||||
# BMM Solutioning Workflows (Phase 3)
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Phase 3 (Solutioning) workflows translate **what** to build (from Planning) into **how** to build it (technical design). This phase prevents agent conflicts in multi-epic projects by documenting architectural decisions before implementation begins.
|
||||
|
||||
**Key principle:** Make technical decisions explicit and documented so all agents implement consistently. Prevent one agent choosing REST while another chooses GraphQL.
|
||||
|
||||
**Required for:** BMad Method (complex projects), Enterprise Method
|
||||
|
||||
**Optional for:** BMad Method (simple projects), Quick Flow (skip entirely)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 3 Solutioning Workflow Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Phase 3 Solutioning has different paths based on the planning track selected:
|
||||
|
||||
### Quick Flow Path
|
||||
|
||||
- From Planning: tech-spec complete
|
||||
- Action: Skip Phase 3 entirely
|
||||
- Next: Phase 4 (Implementation)
|
||||
|
||||
### BMad Method & Enterprise Path
|
||||
|
||||
- From Planning: PRD with FRs/NFRs complete
|
||||
- Optional: create-ux-design (if UX is critical)
|
||||
- Required: architecture - System design with ADRs
|
||||
- Required: create-epics-and-stories - Break requirements into implementable stories
|
||||
- Required: implementation-readiness - Gate check validation
|
||||
- Enterprise additions: Optional security-architecture and devops-strategy (future workflows)
|
||||
|
||||
### Gate Check Results
|
||||
|
||||
- **PASS** - All criteria met, proceed to Phase 4
|
||||
- **CONCERNS** - Minor gaps identified, proceed with caution
|
||||
- **FAIL** - Critical issues, must resolve before Phase 4
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Reference
|
||||
|
||||
| Workflow | Agent | Track | Purpose |
|
||||
| ---------------------------- | ----------- | ------------------------ | -------------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| **create-ux-design** | UX Designer | BMad Method, Enterprise | Optional UX design (after PRD, before arch) |
|
||||
| **architecture** | Architect | BMad Method, Enterprise | Technical architecture and design decisions |
|
||||
| **create-epics-and-stories** | PM | BMad Method, Enterprise | Break FRs/NFRs into epics after architecture |
|
||||
| **implementation-readiness** | Architect | BMad Complex, Enterprise | Validate planning/solutioning completeness |
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Skip Solutioning:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Quick Flow:** Simple changes don't need architecture → Skip to Phase 4
|
||||
|
||||
**When Solutioning is Required:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **BMad Method:** Multi-epic projects need architecture to prevent conflicts
|
||||
- **Enterprise:** Same as BMad Method, plus optional extended workflows (test architecture, security architecture, devops strategy) added AFTER architecture but BEFORE gate check
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Why Solutioning Matters
|
||||
|
||||
### The Problem Without Solutioning
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Agent 1 implements Epic 1 using REST API
|
||||
Agent 2 implements Epic 2 using GraphQL
|
||||
Result: Inconsistent API design, integration nightmare
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### The Solution With Solutioning
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
architecture workflow decides: "Use GraphQL for all APIs"
|
||||
All agents follow architecture decisions
|
||||
Result: Consistent implementation, no conflicts
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Solutioning vs Planning
|
||||
|
||||
| Aspect | Planning (Phase 2) | Solutioning (Phase 3) |
|
||||
| -------- | ----------------------- | --------------------------------- |
|
||||
| Question | What and Why? | How? Then What units of work? |
|
||||
| Output | FRs/NFRs (Requirements) | Architecture + Epics/Stories |
|
||||
| Agent | PM | Architect → PM |
|
||||
| Audience | Stakeholders | Developers |
|
||||
| Document | PRD (FRs/NFRs) | Architecture + Epic Files |
|
||||
| Level | Business logic | Technical design + Work breakdown |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow Descriptions
|
||||
|
||||
### architecture
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose:** Make technical decisions explicit to prevent agent conflicts. Produces decision-focused architecture document optimized for AI consistency.
|
||||
|
||||
**Agent:** Architect
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Use:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Multi-epic projects (BMad Complex, Enterprise)
|
||||
- Cross-cutting technical concerns
|
||||
- Multiple agents implementing different parts
|
||||
- Integration complexity exists
|
||||
- Technology choices need alignment
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Skip:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Quick Flow (simple changes)
|
||||
- BMad Method Simple with straightforward tech stack
|
||||
- Single epic with clear technical approach
|
||||
|
||||
**Adaptive Conversation Approach:**
|
||||
|
||||
This is NOT a template filler. The architecture workflow:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Discovers** technical needs through conversation
|
||||
2. **Proposes** architectural options with trade-offs
|
||||
3. **Documents** decisions that prevent agent conflicts
|
||||
4. **Focuses** on decision points, not exhaustive documentation
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Outputs:**
|
||||
|
||||
**architecture.md** containing:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Architecture Overview** - System context, principles, style
|
||||
2. **System Architecture** - High-level diagram, component interactions, communication patterns
|
||||
3. **Data Architecture** - Database design, state management, caching, data flow
|
||||
4. **API Architecture** - API style (REST/GraphQL/gRPC), auth, versioning, error handling
|
||||
5. **Frontend Architecture** (if applicable) - Framework, state management, component architecture, routing
|
||||
6. **Integration Architecture** - Third-party integrations, message queuing, event-driven patterns
|
||||
7. **Security Architecture** - Auth/authorization, data protection, security boundaries
|
||||
8. **Deployment Architecture** - Deployment model, CI/CD, environment strategy, monitoring
|
||||
9. **Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)** - Key decisions with context, options, trade-offs, rationale
|
||||
10. **FR/NFR-Specific Guidance** - Technical approach per functional requirement, implementation priorities, dependencies
|
||||
11. **Standards and Conventions** - Directory structure, naming conventions, code organization, testing
|
||||
|
||||
**ADR Format (Brief):**
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## ADR-001: Use GraphQL for All APIs
|
||||
|
||||
**Status:** Accepted | **Date:** 2025-11-02
|
||||
|
||||
**Context:** PRD requires flexible querying across multiple epics
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision:** Use GraphQL for all client-server communication
|
||||
|
||||
**Options Considered:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. REST - Familiar but requires multiple endpoints
|
||||
2. GraphQL - Flexible querying, learning curve
|
||||
3. gRPC - High performance, poor browser support
|
||||
|
||||
**Rationale:**
|
||||
|
||||
- PRD requires flexible data fetching (Epic 1, 3)
|
||||
- Mobile app needs bandwidth optimization (Epic 2)
|
||||
- Team has GraphQL experience
|
||||
|
||||
**Consequences:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Positive: Flexible querying, reduced versioning
|
||||
- Negative: Caching complexity, N+1 query risk
|
||||
- Mitigation: Use DataLoader for batching
|
||||
|
||||
**Implications for FRs:**
|
||||
|
||||
- FR-001: User Management → GraphQL mutations
|
||||
- FR-002: Mobile App → Optimized queries
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:** E-commerce platform → Monolith + PostgreSQL + Redis + Next.js + GraphQL, with ADRs explaining each choice and FR/NFR-specific guidance.
|
||||
|
||||
**Integration:** Feeds into create-epics-and-stories workflow. Architecture provides the technical context needed for breaking FRs/NFRs into implementable epics and stories. All dev agents reference architecture during Phase 4 implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### create-epics-and-stories
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose:** Transform PRD's functional and non-functional requirements into bite-sized stories organized into deliverable functional epics. This workflow runs AFTER architecture so epics/stories are informed by technical decisions.
|
||||
|
||||
**Agent:** PM (Product Manager)
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Use:**
|
||||
|
||||
- After architecture workflow completes
|
||||
- When PRD contains FRs/NFRs ready for implementation breakdown
|
||||
- Before implementation-readiness gate check
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Inputs:**
|
||||
|
||||
- PRD (FRs/NFRs) from Phase 2 Planning
|
||||
- architecture.md with ADRs and technical decisions
|
||||
- Optional: UX design artifacts
|
||||
|
||||
**Why After Architecture:**
|
||||
|
||||
The create-epics-and-stories workflow runs AFTER architecture because:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Informed Story Sizing:** Architecture decisions (database choice, API style, etc.) affect story complexity
|
||||
2. **Dependency Awareness:** Architecture reveals technical dependencies between stories
|
||||
3. **Technical Feasibility:** Stories can be properly scoped knowing the tech stack
|
||||
4. **Consistency:** All stories align with documented architectural patterns
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Outputs:**
|
||||
|
||||
Epic files (one per epic) containing:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Epic objective and scope
|
||||
2. User stories with acceptance criteria
|
||||
3. Story priorities (P0/P1/P2/P3)
|
||||
4. Dependencies between stories
|
||||
5. Technical notes referencing architecture decisions
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:** E-commerce PRD with FR-001 (User Registration), FR-002 (Product Catalog) → Epic 1: User Management (3 stories), Epic 2: Product Display (4 stories), each story referencing relevant ADRs.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### implementation-readiness
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose:** Systematically validate that planning and solutioning are complete and aligned before Phase 4 implementation. Ensures PRD, architecture, and epics are cohesive with no gaps.
|
||||
|
||||
**Agent:** Architect
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Use:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Always** before Phase 4 for BMad Complex and Enterprise projects
|
||||
- After create-epics-and-stories workflow completes
|
||||
- Before sprint-planning workflow
|
||||
- When stakeholders request readiness check
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Skip:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Quick Flow (no solutioning)
|
||||
- BMad Simple (no gate check required)
|
||||
|
||||
**Purpose of Gate Check:**
|
||||
|
||||
**Prevents:**
|
||||
|
||||
- ❌ Architecture doesn't address all FRs/NFRs
|
||||
- ❌ Epics conflict with architecture decisions
|
||||
- ❌ Requirements ambiguous or contradictory
|
||||
- ❌ Missing critical dependencies
|
||||
|
||||
**Ensures:**
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ PRD → Architecture → Epics alignment
|
||||
- ✅ All epics have clear technical approach
|
||||
- ✅ No contradictions or gaps
|
||||
- ✅ Team ready to implement
|
||||
|
||||
**Check Criteria:**
|
||||
|
||||
**PRD/GDD Completeness:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Problem statement clear and evidence-based
|
||||
- Success metrics defined
|
||||
- User personas identified
|
||||
- Functional requirements (FRs) complete
|
||||
- Non-functional requirements (NFRs) specified
|
||||
- Risks and assumptions documented
|
||||
|
||||
**Architecture Completeness:**
|
||||
|
||||
- System architecture defined
|
||||
- Data architecture specified
|
||||
- API architecture decided
|
||||
- Key ADRs documented
|
||||
- Security architecture addressed
|
||||
- FR/NFR-specific guidance provided
|
||||
- Standards and conventions defined
|
||||
|
||||
**Epic/Story Completeness:**
|
||||
|
||||
- All PRD features mapped to stories
|
||||
- Stories have acceptance criteria
|
||||
- Stories prioritized (P0/P1/P2/P3)
|
||||
- Dependencies identified
|
||||
- Story sequencing logical
|
||||
|
||||
**Alignment Checks:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Architecture addresses all PRD FRs/NFRs
|
||||
- Epics align with architecture decisions
|
||||
- No contradictions between epics
|
||||
- NFRs have technical approach
|
||||
- Integration points clear
|
||||
|
||||
**Gate Decision Logic:**
|
||||
|
||||
**✅ PASS**
|
||||
|
||||
- All critical criteria met
|
||||
- Minor gaps acceptable with documented plan
|
||||
- **Action:** Proceed to Phase 4
|
||||
|
||||
**⚠️ CONCERNS**
|
||||
|
||||
- Some criteria not met but not blockers
|
||||
- Gaps identified with clear resolution path
|
||||
- **Action:** Proceed with caution, address gaps in parallel
|
||||
|
||||
**❌ FAIL**
|
||||
|
||||
- Critical gaps or contradictions
|
||||
- Architecture missing key decisions
|
||||
- Epics conflict with PRD/architecture
|
||||
- **Action:** BLOCK Phase 4, resolve issues first
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Outputs:**
|
||||
|
||||
**implementation-readiness.md** containing:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Executive Summary (PASS/CONCERNS/FAIL)
|
||||
2. Completeness Assessment (scores for PRD, Architecture, Epics)
|
||||
3. Alignment Assessment (PRD↔Architecture, Architecture↔Epics/Stories, cross-epic consistency)
|
||||
4. Quality Assessment (story quality, dependencies, risks)
|
||||
5. Gaps and Recommendations (critical/minor gaps, remediation)
|
||||
6. Gate Decision with rationale
|
||||
7. Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
**Example:** E-commerce platform → CONCERNS ⚠️ due to missing security architecture and undefined payment gateway. Recommendation: Complete security section and add payment gateway ADR before proceeding.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration with Planning and Implementation
|
||||
|
||||
### Planning → Solutioning Flow
|
||||
|
||||
**Quick Flow:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Planning (tech-spec by PM)
|
||||
→ Skip Solutioning
|
||||
→ Phase 4 (Implementation)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**BMad Method:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Planning (prd by PM - FRs/NFRs only)
|
||||
→ Optional: create-ux-design (UX Designer)
|
||||
→ architecture (Architect)
|
||||
→ create-epics-and-stories (PM)
|
||||
→ implementation-readiness (Architect)
|
||||
→ Phase 4 (Implementation)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Enterprise:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Planning (prd by PM - FRs/NFRs only)
|
||||
→ Optional: create-ux-design (UX Designer)
|
||||
→ architecture (Architect)
|
||||
→ Optional: security-architecture (Architect, future)
|
||||
→ Optional: devops-strategy (Architect, future)
|
||||
→ create-epics-and-stories (PM)
|
||||
→ implementation-readiness (Architect)
|
||||
→ Phase 4 (Implementation)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Note on TEA (Test Architect):** TEA is fully operational with 8 workflows across all phases. TEA validates architecture testability during Phase 3 reviews but does not have a dedicated solutioning workflow. TEA's primary setup occurs after architecture in Phase 3 (`*framework`, `*ci`, system-level `*test-design`), with optional Phase 2 baseline `*trace`. Testing execution happens in Phase 4 (`*atdd`, `*automate`, `*test-review`, `*trace`, `*nfr-assess`).
|
||||
|
||||
**Note:** Enterprise uses the same planning and architecture as BMad Method. The only difference is optional extended workflows added AFTER architecture but BEFORE create-epics-and-stories.
|
||||
|
||||
### Solutioning → Implementation Handoff
|
||||
|
||||
**Documents Produced:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **architecture.md** → Guides all dev agents during implementation
|
||||
2. **ADRs** (in architecture) → Referenced by agents for technical decisions
|
||||
3. **Epic files** (from create-epics-and-stories) → Work breakdown into implementable units
|
||||
4. **implementation-readiness.md** → Confirms readiness for Phase 4
|
||||
|
||||
**How Implementation Uses Solutioning:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **sprint-planning** - Loads architecture and epic files for sprint organization
|
||||
- **dev-story** - References architecture decisions and ADRs
|
||||
- **code-review** - Validates code follows architectural standards
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Best Practices
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Make Decisions Explicit
|
||||
|
||||
Don't leave technology choices implicit. Document decisions with rationale in ADRs so agents understand context.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Focus on Agent Conflicts
|
||||
|
||||
Architecture's primary job is preventing conflicting implementations. Focus on cross-cutting concerns.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Use ADRs for Key Decisions
|
||||
|
||||
Every significant technology choice should have an ADR explaining "why", not just "what".
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Keep It Practical
|
||||
|
||||
Don't over-architect simple projects. BMad Simple projects need simple architecture.
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Run Gate Check Before Implementation
|
||||
|
||||
Catching alignment issues in solutioning is 10× faster than discovering them mid-implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Iterate Architecture
|
||||
|
||||
Architecture documents are living. Update them as you learn during implementation.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Decision Guide
|
||||
|
||||
### Quick Flow
|
||||
|
||||
- **Planning:** tech-spec (PM)
|
||||
- **Solutioning:** Skip entirely
|
||||
- **Implementation:** sprint-planning → dev-story
|
||||
|
||||
### BMad Method
|
||||
|
||||
- **Planning:** prd (PM) - creates FRs/NFRs only, NOT epics
|
||||
- **Solutioning:** Optional UX → architecture (Architect) → create-epics-and-stories (PM) → implementation-readiness (Architect)
|
||||
- **Implementation:** sprint-planning → create-story → dev-story
|
||||
|
||||
### Enterprise
|
||||
|
||||
- **Planning:** prd (PM) - creates FRs/NFRs only (same as BMad Method)
|
||||
- **Solutioning:** Optional UX → architecture (Architect) → Optional extended workflows (security-architecture, devops-strategy) → create-epics-and-stories (PM) → implementation-readiness (Architect)
|
||||
- **Implementation:** sprint-planning → create-story → dev-story
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Difference:** Enterprise adds optional extended workflows AFTER architecture but BEFORE create-epics-and-stories. Everything else is identical to BMad Method.
|
||||
|
||||
**Note:** TEA (Test Architect) operates across all phases and validates architecture testability but is not a Phase 3-specific workflow. See [Test Architecture Guide](../../../../docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/test-architecture.md) for TEA's full lifecycle integration.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Anti-Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ Skipping Architecture for Complex Projects
|
||||
|
||||
"Architecture slows us down, let's just start coding."
|
||||
**Result:** Agent conflicts, inconsistent design, massive rework
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ Over-Engineering Simple Projects
|
||||
|
||||
"Let me design this simple feature like a distributed system."
|
||||
**Result:** Wasted time, over-engineering, analysis paralysis
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ Template-Driven Architecture
|
||||
|
||||
"Fill out every section of this architecture template."
|
||||
**Result:** Documentation theater, no real decisions made
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ Skipping Gate Check
|
||||
|
||||
"PRD and architecture look good enough, let's start."
|
||||
**Result:** Gaps discovered mid-sprint, wasted implementation time
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ Correct Approach
|
||||
|
||||
- Use architecture for BMad Method and Enterprise (both required)
|
||||
- Focus on decisions, not documentation volume
|
||||
- Enterprise: Add optional extended workflows (test/security/devops) after architecture
|
||||
- Always run gate check before implementation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Related Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
- [Phase 2: Planning Workflows](../../../../docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/workflows-planning.md) - Previous phase
|
||||
- [Phase 4: Implementation Workflows](../../../../docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/workflows-implementation.md) - Next phase
|
||||
- [Scale Adaptive System](./scale-adaptive-system.md) - Understanding tracks
|
||||
- [Agents Guide](../../../../docs/modules/bmm-bmad-method/agents-guide.md) - Complete agent reference
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Troubleshooting
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Do I always need architecture?**
|
||||
A: No. Quick Flow skips it. BMad Method and Enterprise both require it.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: How do I know if I need architecture?**
|
||||
A: If you chose BMad Method or Enterprise track in planning (workflow-init), you need architecture to prevent agent conflicts.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: What's the difference between architecture and tech-spec?**
|
||||
A: Tech-spec is implementation-focused for simple changes. Architecture is system design for complex multi-epic projects.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Can I skip gate check?**
|
||||
A: Only for Quick Flow. BMad Method and Enterprise both require gate check before Phase 4.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: What if gate check fails?**
|
||||
A: Resolve the identified gaps (missing architecture sections, conflicting requirements) and re-run gate check.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: How long should architecture take?**
|
||||
A: BMad Method: 1-2 days for architecture. Enterprise: 2-3 days total (1-2 days architecture + 0.5-1 day optional extended workflows). If taking longer, you may be over-documenting.
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Do ADRs need to be perfect?**
|
||||
A: No. ADRs capture key decisions with rationale. They should be concise (1 page max per ADR).
|
||||
|
||||
**Q: Can I update architecture during implementation?**
|
||||
A: Yes! Architecture is living. Update it as you learn. Use `correct-course` workflow for significant changes.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
_Phase 3 Solutioning - Technical decisions before implementation._
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user