|
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261 |
- ---
- # File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
- nextStepFile: './step-v-12-completeness-validation.md'
- prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
- validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
- ---
-
- # Step 11: Holistic Quality Assessment
-
- ## STEP GOAL:
-
- Assess the PRD as a cohesive, compelling document - evaluating document flow, dual audience effectiveness (humans and LLMs), BMAD PRD principles compliance, and overall quality rating.
-
- ## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
-
- ### Universal Rules:
-
- - 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
- - 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
- - 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
- - 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
- - ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
- - ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS WRITE all artifact and document content in `{document_output_language}`
-
- ### Role Reinforcement:
-
- - ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
- - ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
- - ✅ We engage in systematic validation, not collaborative dialogue
- - ✅ You bring analytical rigor and document quality expertise
- - ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
- - ✅ Uses Advanced Elicitation for multi-perspective evaluation
-
- ### Step-Specific Rules:
-
- - 🎯 Focus ONLY on holistic document quality assessment
- - 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate individual components (done in previous steps)
- - 💬 Approach: Multi-perspective evaluation using Advanced Elicitation
- - 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
-
- ## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
-
- - 🎯 Use Advanced Elicitation for multi-perspective assessment
- - 🎯 Evaluate document flow, dual audience, BMAD principles
- - 💾 Append comprehensive assessment to validation report
- - 📖 Display "Proceeding to next check..." and load next step
- - 🚫 FORBIDDEN to pause or request user input
-
- ## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
-
- - Available context: Complete PRD file, validation report with findings from steps 1-10
- - Focus: Holistic quality - the WHOLE document
- - Limits: Don't re-validate individual components, don't pause for user input
- - Dependencies: Steps 1-10 completed - all systematic checks done
-
- ## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
-
- **CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
-
- ### 1. Attempt Sub-Process with Advanced Elicitation
-
- **Try to use Task tool to spawn a subprocess using Advanced Elicitation:**
-
- "Perform holistic quality assessment on this PRD using multi-perspective evaluation:
-
- **Advanced Elicitation workflow:**
- Invoke the `bmad-advanced-elicitation` skill
-
- **Evaluate the PRD from these perspectives:**
-
- **1. Document Flow & Coherence:**
- - Read entire PRD
- - Evaluate narrative flow - does it tell a cohesive story?
- - Check transitions between sections
- - Assess consistency - is it coherent throughout?
- - Evaluate readability - is it clear and well-organized?
-
- **2. Dual Audience Effectiveness:**
-
- **For Humans:**
- - Executive-friendly: Can executives understand vision and goals quickly?
- - Developer clarity: Do developers have clear requirements to build from?
- - Designer clarity: Do designers understand user needs and flows?
- - Stakeholder decision-making: Can stakeholders make informed decisions?
-
- **For LLMs:**
- - Machine-readable structure: Is the PRD structured for LLM consumption?
- - UX readiness: Can an LLM generate UX designs from this?
- - Architecture readiness: Can an LLM generate architecture from this?
- - Epic/Story readiness: Can an LLM break down into epics and stories?
-
- **3. BMAD PRD Principles Compliance:**
- - Information density: Every sentence carries weight?
- - Measurability: Requirements testable?
- - Traceability: Requirements trace to sources?
- - Domain awareness: Domain-specific considerations included?
- - Zero anti-patterns: No filler or wordiness?
- - Dual audience: Works for both humans and LLMs?
- - Markdown format: Proper structure and formatting?
-
- **4. Overall Quality Rating:**
- Rate the PRD on 5-point scale:
- - Excellent (5/5): Exemplary, ready for production use
- - Good (4/5): Strong with minor improvements needed
- - Adequate (3/5): Acceptable but needs refinement
- - Needs Work (2/5): Significant gaps or issues
- - Problematic (1/5): Major flaws, needs substantial revision
-
- **5. Top 3 Improvements:**
- Identify the 3 most impactful improvements to make this a great PRD
-
- Return comprehensive assessment with all perspectives, rating, and top 3 improvements."
-
- **Graceful degradation (if no Task tool or Advanced Elicitation unavailable):**
- - Perform holistic assessment directly in current context
- - Read complete PRD
- - Evaluate document flow, coherence, transitions
- - Assess dual audience effectiveness
- - Check BMAD principles compliance
- - Assign overall quality rating
- - Identify top 3 improvements
-
- ### 2. Synthesize Assessment
-
- **Compile findings from multi-perspective evaluation:**
-
- **Document Flow & Coherence:**
- - Overall assessment: [Excellent/Good/Adequate/Needs Work/Problematic]
- - Key strengths: [list]
- - Key weaknesses: [list]
-
- **Dual Audience Effectiveness:**
- - For Humans: [assessment]
- - For LLMs: [assessment]
- - Overall dual audience score: [1-5]
-
- **BMAD Principles Compliance:**
- - Principles met: [count]/7
- - Principles with issues: [list]
-
- **Overall Quality Rating:** [1-5 with label]
-
- **Top 3 Improvements:**
- 1. [Improvement 1]
- 2. [Improvement 2]
- 3. [Improvement 3]
-
- ### 3. Report Holistic Quality Findings to Validation Report
-
- Append to validation report:
-
- ```markdown
- ## Holistic Quality Assessment
-
- ### Document Flow & Coherence
-
- **Assessment:** [Excellent/Good/Adequate/Needs Work/Problematic]
-
- **Strengths:**
- {List key strengths}
-
- **Areas for Improvement:**
- {List key weaknesses}
-
- ### Dual Audience Effectiveness
-
- **For Humans:**
- - Executive-friendly: [assessment]
- - Developer clarity: [assessment]
- - Designer clarity: [assessment]
- - Stakeholder decision-making: [assessment]
-
- **For LLMs:**
- - Machine-readable structure: [assessment]
- - UX readiness: [assessment]
- - Architecture readiness: [assessment]
- - Epic/Story readiness: [assessment]
-
- **Dual Audience Score:** {score}/5
-
- ### BMAD PRD Principles Compliance
-
- | Principle | Status | Notes |
- |-----------|--------|-------|
- | Information Density | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
- | Measurability | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
- | Traceability | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
- | Domain Awareness | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
- | Zero Anti-Patterns | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
- | Dual Audience | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
- | Markdown Format | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
-
- **Principles Met:** {count}/7
-
- ### Overall Quality Rating
-
- **Rating:** {rating}/5 - {label}
-
- **Scale:**
- - 5/5 - Excellent: Exemplary, ready for production use
- - 4/5 - Good: Strong with minor improvements needed
- - 3/5 - Adequate: Acceptable but needs refinement
- - 2/5 - Needs Work: Significant gaps or issues
- - 1/5 - Problematic: Major flaws, needs substantial revision
-
- ### Top 3 Improvements
-
- 1. **{Improvement 1}**
- {Brief explanation of why and how}
-
- 2. **{Improvement 2}**
- {Brief explanation of why and how}
-
- 3. **{Improvement 3}**
- {Brief explanation of why and how}
-
- ### Summary
-
- **This PRD is:** {one-sentence overall assessment}
-
- **To make it great:** Focus on the top 3 improvements above.
- ```
-
- ### 4. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
-
- Display: "**Holistic Quality Assessment Complete**
-
- Overall Rating: {rating}/5 - {label}
-
- **Proceeding to final validation checks...**"
-
- Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} (step-v-12-completeness-validation.md)
-
- ---
-
- ## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
-
- ### ✅ SUCCESS:
-
- - Advanced Elicitation used for multi-perspective evaluation (or graceful degradation)
- - Document flow & coherence assessed
- - Dual audience effectiveness evaluated (humans and LLMs)
- - BMAD PRD principles compliance checked
- - Overall quality rating assigned (1-5 scale)
- - Top 3 improvements identified
- - Comprehensive assessment reported to validation report
- - Auto-proceeds to next validation step
- - Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
-
- ### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
-
- - Not using Advanced Elicitation for multi-perspective evaluation
- - Missing document flow assessment
- - Missing dual audience evaluation
- - Not checking all BMAD principles
- - Not assigning overall quality rating
- - Missing top 3 improvements
- - Not reporting comprehensive assessment to validation report
- - Not auto-proceeding
-
- **Master Rule:** This evaluates the WHOLE document, not just components. Answers "Is this a good PRD?" and "What would make it great?"
|