- Rewrite README.md with current architecture, features and stack - Update docs/API.md with all current endpoints (corporate, BI, client 360) - Update docs/ARCHITECTURE.md with cache, modular queries, services, ETL - Update docs/GUIA-USUARIO.md for all roles (admin, corporate, agente) - Add docs/INDEX.md documentation index - Add PROJETO.md comprehensive project reference - Add BI-CCC-Implementation-Guide.md - Include AI agent configs (.claude, .agents, .gemini, _bmad) - Add netbird VPN configuration - Add status report Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
262 lines
8.5 KiB
Markdown
262 lines
8.5 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
# 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?"
|