- 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>
5.0 KiB
Working with Existing Materials
Purpose: Guide for naturally incorporating existing materials into conversational PB workflow.
Core Principles
- Reference, don't re-ask - Build on documented work
- Validate currency - "Is this still accurate?"
- Focus on gaps - What's missing or needs refinement?
- Document refinement - Capture UPDATE conversation, not just creation
- Stay casual - No judgment about what exists or doesn't
Checking for Materials
Phase 0 asks: "Do you have existing materials?" (website, brief, guidelines, research)
Stored in outline:
existing_materials:
has_materials: true/false
website: "[URL]"
previous_brief: "[path]"
brand_guidelines: "[path]"
research: "[path]"
context_notes: "[brief notes]"
If materials exist: Read them before starting PB steps
Adaptation Pattern
Opening Adaptation
Without materials:
"Let's start with vision. What are you envisioning?"
With materials:
"I see you mentioned [reference from materials]. Let's build on that - tell me more."
Follow-Up Patterns
- Validate: "You wrote X - is that still accurate?"
- Fill gaps: "Your brief mentions Y, but I'm curious about Z..."
- Refine: "When you said X, did you mean [interpretation]?"
- Update: "Has your thinking evolved since you wrote this?"
Step-by-Step Application
Apply to all conversational steps (2, 3, 5, 7, 7a, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12):
| Step | No Materials | With Materials |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (2) | "What are you envisioning?" | "You mentioned [vision]. Tell me more." |
| Positioning (3) | "Let's explore positioning." | "Your brief positions this as [quote]. Still accurate?" |
| Users (7) | "Who are ideal users?" | "You described [archetypes]. Still primary users?" |
| Concept (7a) | "What's the core concept?" | "I see [concept from materials]. Tell me more about that principle." |
| Success (8) | "What does success look like?" | "You mentioned success means [quote]. Still the goal?" |
Pattern: Reference existing → Validate → Build on it
Dialog Documentation
When materials exist, capture:
- What existed: Quote/summarize existing material
- Validation: User's response to "Is this still accurate?"
- Refinement: What changed, added, or clarified
- Why: Rationale for changes
- Synthesis: Updated version (old + new integrated)
Template:
**Existing context:** [What was documented]
**Opening:** "I see [reference]. [Question]"
**User response:** [Confirmed/refined/changed]
**Key exchanges:**
- [Exploration]
- [Gaps filled]
- [Evolution]
**Reflection checkpoint:**
"Building on your earlier work: [synthesis].
Keeps [solid parts], adds [new], refines [changed].
Does that capture it?"
**User confirmation:** [Confirmed / Corrected]
**Final:** [Updated artifact]
Common Scenarios
Scenario: Previous brief exists
- Read it thoroughly
- Identify solid vs gaps/unclear
- Open: "I read your brief. [Strong points] captured well. Questions about [gaps]."
- Explore gaps conversationally
- Dialog: what was there + what we added + why
Scenario: Existing website
- Review site (if URL in materials)
- Note current positioning/tone/UX
- Reference: "I looked at your site. It positions you as [observation]. Still the direction?"
- Use as baseline for "what's changing?"
Scenario: Brand guidelines exist
- Read guidelines (voice, values, identity)
- Reference when discussing tone: "Your guidelines describe tone as [quote]. Match exactly or evolve?"
- Don't re-ask defined things (colors, values)
- Focus on how brand translates to this project
Scenario: Research exists
- Review findings
- Reference insights: "Your research showed [finding]. Great insight for..."
- Validate currency: "Is this still what you hear from customers?"
What NOT to Do
❌ Ignore existing materials (if outline says they exist) ❌ Make users repeat documented work ❌ Assume everything is still current (validate!) ❌ Judge quality of existing work ❌ Create separate "refinement workflow" (same conversational pattern, just adapt openings)
Benefits
✅ Efficiency - Don't re-explore documented areas ✅ Continuity - Build on previous work ✅ Respect - Acknowledge existing thinking ✅ Focus - Spend time on gaps/unclear areas ✅ Natural flow - Same pattern, context-aware ✅ Rich dialog - Captures refinement, not just creation
Quick Reference
Check: existing_materials.has_materials in outline
If true:
- Read materials before starting PB
- Adapt openings to reference what exists
- Validate currency with each step
- Fill gaps conversationally
- Document: old + new + why
Dialog pattern: Existing → Validate → Refine → Synthesize → Confirm
Remember: Not a separate workflow - same conversational pattern, just context-aware. If materials exist, read and adapt. If not, explore from scratch. Either way, natural conversation.