bi-agents/_bmad/wds/workflows/7-design-system/steps-c/step-04-identify-opportunities.md

name, description, nextStepFile

name	description	nextStepFile
step-04-identify-opportunities	Identify potential benefits of each design system decision option: reuse, variant, or create new	./step-05-identify-risks.md

Step 4: Identify Opportunities

STEP GOAL:

Identify potential benefits of each design system decision option (reuse existing, add variant, create new). Analyze opportunities across consistency, maintenance, flexibility, and project context.

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}

Role Reinforcement:

• ✅ You are the Design System Architect guiding design system creation and maintenance
• ✅ If you already have been given a name, communication_style and persona, continue to use those while playing this new role
• ✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
• ✅ You bring design system expertise and component analysis, user brings design knowledge and project context
• ✅ Maintain systematic and analytical tone throughout

Step-Specific Rules:

• 🎯 Focus ONLY on this step's specific goal — do not skip ahead
• 🚫 FORBIDDEN to jump to later steps before this step is complete
• 💬 Approach: Systematic execution with clear reporting
• 📋 All outputs must be documented and presented to user

EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:

• 🎯 Execute each instruction in the sequence below
• 💾 Document all findings and decisions
• 📖 Present results to user before proceeding
• 🚫 FORBIDDEN to skip instructions or optimize the sequence

CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:

• Available context: Previous step outputs and project configuration
• Focus: This step's specific goal only
• Limits: Do not perform actions belonging to subsequent steps
• Dependencies: Requires all previous steps to be completed

Sequence of Instructions (Do not deviate, skip, or optimize)

Decision Options

For each similar component, there are 3 options:

Option 1: Reuse Existing Component

Use the existing component reference, just change content

Option 2: Add Variant to Existing

Extend existing component with new variant

Option 3: Create New Component

Create separate component in design system

---

Opportunity Analysis Framework

For Option 1: Reuse Existing

Potential Opportunities:

Consistency

• ✅ Visual consistency across pages
• ✅ Behavioral consistency (same interactions)
• ✅ User familiarity (looks/works the same)
• ✅ Brand coherence

Maintenance

• ✅ Single source of truth
• ✅ Update once, applies everywhere
• ✅ Easier to maintain
• ✅ Fewer files to manage

Development

• ✅ Faster development (component exists)
• ✅ Less code duplication
• ✅ Easier testing (test once)
• ✅ Better performance (reused code)

Design System

• ✅ Cleaner design system
• ✅ Fewer components to document
• ✅ Easier for developers to find
• ✅ Simpler component library

---

For Option 2: Add Variant

Potential Opportunities:

Flexibility

• ✅ Accommodates different use cases
• ✅ Maintains component family
• ✅ Allows contextual adaptation
• ✅ Supports design evolution

Consistency

• ✅ Related components stay connected
• ✅ Shared base styling
• ✅ Consistent naming pattern
• ✅ Clear component relationships

Scalability

• ✅ Easy to add more variants later
• ✅ Supports design system growth
• ✅ Handles edge cases gracefully
• ✅ Accommodates future needs

Documentation

• ✅ Variants documented together
• ✅ Clear component family
• ✅ Easier to understand relationships
• ✅ Better developer guidance

---

For Option 3: Create New

Potential Opportunities:

Clarity

• ✅ Clear separation of concerns
• ✅ Distinct purpose/function
• ✅ No confusion about usage
• ✅ Semantic clarity

Simplicity

• ✅ Simpler component definition
• ✅ No complex variant logic
• ✅ Easier to understand
• ✅ Fewer edge cases

Independence

• ✅ Can evolve independently
• ✅ No impact on other components
• ✅ Easier to modify
• ✅ No unintended side effects

Specificity

• ✅ Optimized for specific use case
• ✅ No unnecessary features
• ✅ Better performance
• ✅ Clearer developer intent

---

Step 1: Analyze Current Situation

Based on similarity level and comparison, identify which opportunities apply

Example (72% similarity):

Current Situation:
- High visual similarity
- Different functional purpose (navigation vs submission)
- Some behavioral differences (loading state, icon)
- Similar usage context

Applicable Opportunities:
- Reuse: Consistency, maintenance benefits
- Variant: Flexibility, maintains family
- New: Clarity of purpose, independence

---

Step 2: Generate Opportunity Lists

**Option 1: Reuse Button [btn-001]**

Opportunities: ✅ Consistency: All buttons look and behave the same ✅ Maintenance: Update button styling once, applies everywhere ✅ Simplicity: Fewer components in design system ✅ Development: Faster implementation (component exists)

Best if: Visual consistency is more important than functional distinction

**Option 2: Add "Navigation" Variant to Button [btn-001]**

Opportunities: ✅ Flexibility: Supports both submission and navigation use cases ✅ Family: Keeps related buttons together ✅ Scalability: Easy to add more button types later ✅ Documentation: All button variants in one place

Best if: You want to maintain button family but need different behaviors

**Option 3: Create New "Navigation Button" Component**

Opportunities: ✅ Clarity: Clear distinction between submission and navigation ✅ Semantics: Developers understand purpose immediately ✅ Independence: Can evolve without affecting submit buttons ✅ Optimization: Tailored for navigation use case

Best if: Functional distinction is more important than visual consistency

---

Step 3: Highlight Strongest Opportunities

Based on comparison data, identify the most compelling opportunities for each option

Example:

🌟 Strongest Opportunities:

**For Reuse:**
- Your buttons are 90% visually identical
- Consistency would be very strong
- Maintenance would be significantly easier

**For Variant:**
- You have 2 distinct button purposes emerging
- Variant structure would accommodate both
- Future button types could fit this pattern

**For New:**
- Navigation and submission are semantically different
- Developers would benefit from clear distinction
- Each could evolve independently as needs change

---

Step 4: Consider Project Context

Factor in project-specific considerations: - Design system maturity (new vs established) - Team size (solo vs large team) - Project complexity (simple vs complex) - Timeline (fast vs thorough)

Example:

📋 Project Context:

Design System: New (3 components so far)
Team: Small (2-3 people)
Complexity: Medium
Timeline: Moderate

Context-Specific Opportunities:
- **New design system:** Easier to keep simple (favors reuse/variant)
- **Small team:** Fewer components = easier maintenance (favors reuse)
- **Medium complexity:** Room for some structure (favors variant)

---

Step 5: Pass to Next Step

Pass opportunity analysis to risk identification: - Opportunities for each option - Strongest opportunities - Context considerations

Next: step-05-identify-risks.md

---

Edge Cases

All options have strong opportunities:

✨ All Options Look Good!

Each approach has compelling opportunities:
- Reuse: Strong consistency benefits
- Variant: Good balance of flexibility
- New: Clear semantic distinction

This means the risks will be the deciding factor.

No clear opportunities:

⚠️ No Strong Opportunities Identified

This might mean:
- Components are too different to benefit from connection
- Or too similar to benefit from separation

I'll focus on risks to help clarify the decision.

Conflicting opportunities:

⚠️ Conflicting Opportunities

Reuse offers consistency, but New offers clarity.
These are competing values.

Your design philosophy will guide this decision:
- Value consistency? → Reuse
- Value semantics? → New

---

Output Format

For next step:

{
  "opportunities": {
    "reuse": {
      "consistency": "high",
      "maintenance": "high",
      "development": "medium",
      "strongest": ["consistency", "maintenance"]
    },
    "variant": {
      "flexibility": "high",
      "family": "medium",
      "scalability": "high",
      "strongest": ["flexibility", "scalability"]
    },
    "new": {
      "clarity": "high",
      "independence": "high",
      "specificity": "medium",
      "strongest": ["clarity", "independence"]
    }
  }
}

8. Present MENU OPTIONS

Display: "Select an Option: [C] Continue to Identify Risks"

Menu Handling Logic:

• IF C: Update design log, then load, read entire file, then execute {nextStepFile}
• IF Any other comments or queries: help user respond then Redisplay Menu Options

EXECUTION RULES:

• ALWAYS halt and wait for user input after presenting menu
• ONLY proceed to next step when user selects the appropriate option
• User can chat or ask questions — always respond and then redisplay menu options

CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE

ONLY WHEN [C continue option is selected and opportunities identified for all three options], will you then load and read fully {nextStepFile} to execute the next step.

---

🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS

✅ SUCCESS:

• Step goal achieved completely
• All instructions executed in sequence
• Results documented and presented to user
• User confirmed before proceeding
• Design log updated

❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:

• Skipping any instruction in the sequence
• Generating content without user input
• Jumping ahead to later steps
• Not presenting results to user
• Proceeding without user confirmation

Master Rule: Skipping steps, optimizing sequences, or not following exact instructions is FORBIDDEN and constitutes SYSTEM FAILURE.