initial commit
This commit is contained in:
@@ -0,0 +1,129 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: step-01-scenario-coverage
|
||||
description: Verify that all strategic context chains from the Trigger Map are covered by at least one scenario
|
||||
|
||||
# File References
|
||||
nextStepFile: './step-02-navigation-patterns.md'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Validation Step 1: Scenario Coverage
|
||||
|
||||
## STEP GOAL:
|
||||
|
||||
Verify that all strategic context chains from the Trigger Map are covered by at least one scenario, with Priority 1 chains having dedicated scenarios.
|
||||
|
||||
## 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 a Validation Specialist reviewing scenario quality, coverage, and consistency
|
||||
- ✅ If you already have been given a name, communication_style and identity, continue to use those while playing this new role
|
||||
- ✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
|
||||
- ✅ You bring validation expertise and quality standards knowledge, user brings project context, together we ensure scenario quality meets WDS standards
|
||||
- ✅ Maintain thorough analytical tone throughout
|
||||
|
||||
### Step-Specific Rules:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Focus only on strategic-context-to-scenario coverage verification
|
||||
- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to modify any scenario files during validation
|
||||
- 💬 Approach: Systematic cross-referencing of Trigger Map strategic context against scenarios
|
||||
- 📋 Report findings with clear severity levels
|
||||
|
||||
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
|
||||
|
||||
- 📖 Load both Trigger Map and all scenario files
|
||||
- 🔗 Cross-reference every strategic context chain against scenario coverage
|
||||
- 📊 Report with severity levels (Critical/Warning/Pass)
|
||||
- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to skip any chain during verification
|
||||
|
||||
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
|
||||
|
||||
- Available context: Trigger Map, all scenario outlines, scenario index
|
||||
- Focus: Strategic context coverage verification only
|
||||
- Limits: No scenario modifications, only verification and reporting
|
||||
- Dependencies: All scenario files must exist from Phase 3 creation workflow
|
||||
|
||||
## Sequence of Instructions (Do not deviate, skip, or optimize)
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Load Trigger Map Data
|
||||
|
||||
Read `{output_folder}/B-Trigger-Map/trigger-map.md` and extract all strategic context chains (Business Goal → Persona → Driving Force chains).
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Load All Scenario Files
|
||||
|
||||
Read all scenario outlines from `{output_folder}/C-UX-Scenarios/`.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Cross-Reference
|
||||
|
||||
For each strategic context chain, verify:
|
||||
- [ ] At least one scenario addresses this chain
|
||||
- [ ] The scenario Trigger Map Connections section explicitly references the strategic context components
|
||||
- [ ] Priority 1 chains have dedicated scenarios (not just secondary coverage)
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Generate Report
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Coverage Report
|
||||
|
||||
| Chain | Persona | Driving Force | Scenario(s) | Status |
|
||||
|-----|---------|---------------|-------------|--------|
|
||||
| [Goal] | [Name] | [Force] | [Scenario ID] | ✅/⚠️/❌ |
|
||||
|
||||
**Coverage: [X]/[Total] chains covered ([X]%)
|
||||
**Gaps: [list uncovered chains]]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Severity:**
|
||||
- ❌ Critical: Priority 1 chain with no scenario
|
||||
- ⚠️ Warning: Priority 2-3 chain with no scenario
|
||||
- ✅ Pass: Chain covered by at least one scenario
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Present MENU OPTIONS
|
||||
|
||||
Display: "Are you ready to [C] Continue to Navigation Patterns validation?"
|
||||
|
||||
#### Menu Handling Logic:
|
||||
|
||||
- IF C: Load, read entire file, then execute {nextStepFile}
|
||||
|
||||
#### EXECUTION RULES:
|
||||
|
||||
- ALWAYS halt and wait for user input after presenting menu
|
||||
- ONLY proceed to next step when user selects 'C'
|
||||
- After other menu items execution, return to this menu
|
||||
- User can chat or ask questions - always respond and then end with display again of the menu options
|
||||
|
||||
## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
|
||||
|
||||
ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [coverage report generated with all chains checked], will you then load and read fully `{nextStepFile}` to execute and begin navigation patterns validation.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- All strategic context chains from Trigger Map identified and cross-referenced
|
||||
- Every chain checked against scenario coverage
|
||||
- Severity levels correctly assigned
|
||||
- Coverage report generated with clear gaps identified
|
||||
- Priority 1 chains verified for dedicated scenario coverage
|
||||
- Menu presented and user input handled correctly
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- Missing any chain from the cross-reference
|
||||
- Not loading all scenario files
|
||||
- Incorrect severity assignment
|
||||
- Not identifying coverage gaps
|
||||
- Modifying scenario files during validation
|
||||
|
||||
**Master Rule:** Skipping steps, optimizing sequences, or not following exact instructions is FORBIDDEN and constitutes SYSTEM FAILURE.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,148 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: step-02-navigation-patterns
|
||||
description: Verify that all scenario shortest paths follow WDS navigation conventions
|
||||
|
||||
# File References
|
||||
nextStepFile: './step-03-outline-completeness.md'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Validation Step 2: Navigation Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
## STEP GOAL:
|
||||
|
||||
Verify that all scenario shortest paths follow WDS navigation conventions, page naming is consistent across scenarios, and navigation flows are logical with no impossible jumps or dead ends.
|
||||
|
||||
## 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 a Validation Specialist reviewing scenario quality, coverage, and consistency
|
||||
- ✅ If you already have been given a name, communication_style and identity, continue to use those while playing this new role
|
||||
- ✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
|
||||
- ✅ You bring validation expertise and quality standards knowledge, user brings project context, together we ensure scenario quality meets WDS standards
|
||||
- ✅ Maintain thorough analytical tone throughout
|
||||
|
||||
### Step-Specific Rules:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Focus only on navigation pattern verification and page naming consistency
|
||||
- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to modify any scenario files during validation
|
||||
- 💬 Approach: Build a page registry and check for conflicts systematically
|
||||
- 📋 Report navigation conflicts with specific details
|
||||
|
||||
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
|
||||
|
||||
- 📋 Check page naming consistency across all scenarios
|
||||
- 🔗 Verify navigation flow rules for each scenario
|
||||
- 📊 Build cross-scenario page registry
|
||||
- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to skip any scenario during verification
|
||||
|
||||
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
|
||||
|
||||
- Available context: All scenario outlines with their shortest paths
|
||||
- Focus: Navigation pattern verification and page naming consistency
|
||||
- Limits: No scenario modifications, only verification and reporting
|
||||
- Dependencies: All scenario files must exist
|
||||
|
||||
## Sequence of Instructions (Do not deviate, skip, or optimize)
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Page Naming Consistency
|
||||
|
||||
For each scenario shortest path:
|
||||
- [ ] Page names are consistent across scenarios (same page = same name everywhere)
|
||||
- [ ] Page names are descriptive and user-facing (not technical identifiers)
|
||||
- [ ] No duplicate page names with different meanings
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Navigation Flow Rules
|
||||
|
||||
For each scenario:
|
||||
- [ ] Path is truly linear — zero "if" statements, zero branches
|
||||
- [ ] First step is a landing/entry page (not an internal page)
|
||||
- [ ] Last step ends with a success state (marked with ✓)
|
||||
- [ ] Each step transitions naturally to the next (no impossible jumps)
|
||||
- [ ] No dead ends — every page has a clear next action
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Cross-Scenario Page Registry
|
||||
|
||||
Build a page registry from all scenarios:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Page Registry
|
||||
|
||||
| Page Name | Used In Scenarios | Role |
|
||||
|-----------|-------------------|------|
|
||||
| [Name] | 01, 03 | Landing |
|
||||
| [Name] | 01, 02, 03 | Service Detail |
|
||||
|
||||
**Total unique pages:** [N]
|
||||
**Shared pages:** [N] (appear in 2+ scenarios)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Navigation Conflicts
|
||||
|
||||
Check for conflicts:
|
||||
- [ ] No scenario routes FROM the same page TO different pages without clear context
|
||||
- [ ] Shared pages serve consistent purposes across scenarios
|
||||
- [ ] Entry points are reachable from the described discovery method
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Generate Report
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Navigation Pattern Report
|
||||
|
||||
**Scenarios checked:** [N]
|
||||
**Unique pages:** [N]
|
||||
**Shared pages:** [N]
|
||||
**Conflicts found:** [N]
|
||||
|
||||
[List any issues with severity]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Present MENU OPTIONS
|
||||
|
||||
Display: "Are you ready to [C] Continue to Outline Completeness validation?"
|
||||
|
||||
#### Menu Handling Logic:
|
||||
|
||||
- IF C: Load, read entire file, then execute {nextStepFile}
|
||||
|
||||
#### EXECUTION RULES:
|
||||
|
||||
- ALWAYS halt and wait for user input after presenting menu
|
||||
- ONLY proceed to next step when user selects 'C'
|
||||
- After other menu items execution, return to this menu
|
||||
- User can chat or ask questions - always respond and then end with display again of the menu options
|
||||
|
||||
## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
|
||||
|
||||
ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [navigation pattern report generated], will you then load and read fully `{nextStepFile}` to execute and begin outline completeness validation.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- All scenario paths checked for navigation rules
|
||||
- Page naming consistency verified across all scenarios
|
||||
- Page registry built with shared page tracking
|
||||
- Navigation conflicts identified and reported
|
||||
- Report generated with all findings
|
||||
- Menu presented and user input handled correctly
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- Skipping any scenario during navigation check
|
||||
- Not building the page registry
|
||||
- Missing navigation conflicts
|
||||
- Not verifying page naming consistency
|
||||
- Modifying scenario files during validation
|
||||
|
||||
**Master Rule:** Skipping steps, optimizing sequences, or not following exact instructions is FORBIDDEN and constitutes SYSTEM FAILURE.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,150 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: step-03-outline-completeness
|
||||
description: Verify every scenario outline has all 7 required components with sufficient quality
|
||||
|
||||
# File References
|
||||
nextStepFile: './step-04-cross-scenario-consistency.md'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Validation Step 3: Outline Completeness
|
||||
|
||||
## STEP GOAL:
|
||||
|
||||
Verify every scenario outline has all 7 required components with sufficient quality, scoring each component and identifying specific gaps.
|
||||
|
||||
## 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 a Validation Specialist reviewing scenario quality, coverage, and consistency
|
||||
- ✅ If you already have been given a name, communication_style and identity, continue to use those while playing this new role
|
||||
- ✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
|
||||
- ✅ You bring validation expertise and quality standards knowledge, user brings project context, together we ensure scenario quality meets WDS standards
|
||||
- ✅ Maintain thorough analytical tone throughout
|
||||
|
||||
### Step-Specific Rules:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Focus only on validating the 7 required components of each scenario
|
||||
- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to modify any scenario files during validation
|
||||
- 💬 Approach: Check each component systematically with specific quality criteria
|
||||
- 📋 Score each component and provide actionable gap descriptions
|
||||
|
||||
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
|
||||
|
||||
- 📋 Check all 7 components for each scenario
|
||||
- ✅ Score each component with pass/warning/fail
|
||||
- 📊 Generate completeness report with specific gaps
|
||||
- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to skip any component or any scenario
|
||||
|
||||
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
|
||||
|
||||
- Available context: All scenario outlines
|
||||
- Focus: Component completeness and quality verification
|
||||
- Limits: No scenario modifications, only verification and reporting
|
||||
- Dependencies: All scenario files must exist
|
||||
|
||||
## Sequence of Instructions (Do not deviate, skip, or optimize)
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Validate Each Scenario
|
||||
|
||||
For **each scenario**, validate all 7 components:
|
||||
|
||||
#### Component 1: Scenario Name & ID
|
||||
- [ ] Name includes persona name
|
||||
- [ ] ID assigned (01, 02, etc.)
|
||||
- [ ] Slug follows format: `NN-descriptive-name`
|
||||
|
||||
#### Component 2: Core Feature
|
||||
- [ ] Stated as user purpose (not feature name)
|
||||
- [ ] Aligned to a specific business goal from Trigger Map
|
||||
|
||||
#### Component 3: Entry Point
|
||||
- [ ] Device specified (mobile/desktop/tablet)
|
||||
- [ ] Context described (where user is, what they are doing)
|
||||
- [ ] Discovery method specified (search, link, ad, bookmark, etc.)
|
||||
- [ ] Realistic — not "user opens app"
|
||||
|
||||
#### Component 4: Mental State
|
||||
- [ ] Trigger present and specific (what just happened)
|
||||
- [ ] Hope present and specific (what they want)
|
||||
- [ ] Worry present and specific (what they fear)
|
||||
- [ ] All three are visceral, not generic
|
||||
|
||||
#### Component 5: Success Goals
|
||||
- [ ] User success defined and measurable
|
||||
- [ ] Business success defined and measurable
|
||||
- [ ] Both are specific — not "get more customers"
|
||||
|
||||
#### Component 6: Shortest Path
|
||||
- [ ] Linear — zero "if" statements
|
||||
- [ ] Each step has page name + purpose
|
||||
- [ ] Minimum viable steps (each justifies existence)
|
||||
- [ ] Final step marked with ✓
|
||||
|
||||
#### Component 7: Trigger Map Connections
|
||||
- [ ] Persona referenced (with priority level)
|
||||
- [ ] Positive driving force(s) linked
|
||||
- [ ] Negative driving force(s) linked
|
||||
- [ ] Business goal referenced (with objective number)
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Generate Report
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Outline Completeness Report
|
||||
|
||||
| Scenario | Name | Feature | Entry | Mental | Success | Path | TM Links | Score |
|
||||
|----------|------|---------|-------|--------|---------|------|----------|-------|
|
||||
| 01 | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ⚠️ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | 6.5/7 |
|
||||
|
||||
**All scenarios complete:** [Yes/No]
|
||||
**Issues found:** [list specific gaps]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Present MENU OPTIONS
|
||||
|
||||
Display: "Are you ready to [C] Continue to Cross-Scenario Consistency validation?"
|
||||
|
||||
#### Menu Handling Logic:
|
||||
|
||||
- IF C: Load, read entire file, then execute {nextStepFile}
|
||||
|
||||
#### EXECUTION RULES:
|
||||
|
||||
- ALWAYS halt and wait for user input after presenting menu
|
||||
- ONLY proceed to next step when user selects 'C'
|
||||
- After other menu items execution, return to this menu
|
||||
- User can chat or ask questions - always respond and then end with display again of the menu options
|
||||
|
||||
## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
|
||||
|
||||
ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [completeness report generated for all scenarios], will you then load and read fully `{nextStepFile}` to execute and begin cross-scenario consistency validation.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- All 7 components checked for every scenario
|
||||
- Each component scored with clear pass/warning/fail
|
||||
- Specific gaps identified with actionable descriptions
|
||||
- Completeness report generated with scores
|
||||
- Menu presented and user input handled correctly
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- Skipping any component or any scenario
|
||||
- Not providing specific gap descriptions
|
||||
- Giving pass scores without thorough checking
|
||||
- Modifying scenario files during validation
|
||||
- Not generating the completeness report
|
||||
|
||||
**Master Rule:** Skipping steps, optimizing sequences, or not following exact instructions is FORBIDDEN and constitutes SYSTEM FAILURE.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,152 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: step-04-cross-scenario-consistency
|
||||
description: Verify scenarios are consistent with each other with no contradictions and balanced coverage
|
||||
|
||||
# File References
|
||||
nextStepFile: './step-05-seo-keyword-alignment.md'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Validation Step 4: Cross-Scenario Consistency
|
||||
|
||||
## STEP GOAL:
|
||||
|
||||
Verify scenarios are consistent with each other — no contradictions, proper page sharing, balanced persona and business goal coverage, and no duplicate scenarios.
|
||||
|
||||
## 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 a Validation Specialist reviewing scenario quality, coverage, and consistency
|
||||
- ✅ If you already have been given a name, communication_style and identity, continue to use those while playing this new role
|
||||
- ✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
|
||||
- ✅ You bring validation expertise and quality standards knowledge, user brings project context, together we ensure scenario quality meets WDS standards
|
||||
- ✅ Maintain thorough analytical tone throughout
|
||||
|
||||
### Step-Specific Rules:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Focus only on cross-scenario consistency and balance verification
|
||||
- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to modify any scenario files during validation
|
||||
- 💬 Approach: Compare scenarios against each other systematically
|
||||
- 📋 Check for contradictions, duplicates, and coverage imbalances
|
||||
|
||||
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🔗 Check shared page consistency across scenarios
|
||||
- 📊 Verify persona and business goal balance
|
||||
- 🔍 Identify any duplicate or overlapping scenarios
|
||||
- ✅ Validate scenario index accuracy
|
||||
- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to skip any consistency check
|
||||
|
||||
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
|
||||
|
||||
- Available context: All scenario outlines, scenario index, Trigger Map
|
||||
- Focus: Cross-scenario consistency and balance
|
||||
- Limits: No scenario modifications, only verification and reporting
|
||||
- Dependencies: All scenario files and index must exist
|
||||
|
||||
## Sequence of Instructions (Do not deviate, skip, or optimize)
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Shared Page Consistency
|
||||
|
||||
For pages that appear in multiple scenarios:
|
||||
- [ ] Same page name = same page purpose everywhere
|
||||
- [ ] Page descriptions are compatible (not contradictory)
|
||||
- [ ] If a page serves different personas, it should handle both needs
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Persona Balance
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Priority 1 personas have the most scenarios
|
||||
- [ ] No persona is over-represented relative to their priority
|
||||
- [ ] Each primary persona has at least one dedicated scenario
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Business Goal Coverage
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Each business goal is addressed by at least one scenario
|
||||
- [ ] High-priority goals have more scenario coverage
|
||||
- [ ] No business goal is orphaned (referenced but no scenario)
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Scenario Overlap
|
||||
|
||||
Check for:
|
||||
- [ ] No two scenarios are essentially duplicates (same path, different name)
|
||||
- [ ] Overlapping scenarios have distinct user intents
|
||||
- [ ] Shared pages are intentional, not accidental
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Scenario Index Verification (00-ux-scenarios.md)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Index lists all scenarios
|
||||
- [ ] Priority assignments are consistent with Trigger Map priorities
|
||||
- [ ] Coverage matrix is accurate
|
||||
- [ ] Page count matches actual pages in scenarios
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Generate Report
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Cross-Scenario Consistency Report
|
||||
|
||||
**Scenarios analyzed:** [N]
|
||||
**Shared pages:** [N]
|
||||
**Contradictions found:** [N]
|
||||
**Duplicate concerns:** [N]
|
||||
|
||||
**Persona coverage:**
|
||||
| Persona | Priority | Scenarios | Status |
|
||||
|---------|----------|-----------|--------|
|
||||
| [Name] | P1 | 01, 03 | ✅ |
|
||||
|
||||
**Business goal coverage:**
|
||||
| Goal | Scenarios | Status |
|
||||
|------|-----------|--------|
|
||||
| [Goal] | 01, 02 | ✅ |
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 7. Present MENU OPTIONS
|
||||
|
||||
Display: "Are you ready to [C] Continue to SEO Keyword Alignment validation?"
|
||||
|
||||
#### Menu Handling Logic:
|
||||
|
||||
- IF C: Load, read entire file, then execute {nextStepFile}
|
||||
|
||||
#### EXECUTION RULES:
|
||||
|
||||
- ALWAYS halt and wait for user input after presenting menu
|
||||
- ONLY proceed to next step when user selects 'C'
|
||||
- After other menu items execution, return to this menu
|
||||
- User can chat or ask questions - always respond and then end with display again of the menu options
|
||||
|
||||
## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
|
||||
|
||||
ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [cross-scenario consistency report generated], will you then load and read fully `{nextStepFile}` to execute and begin SEO keyword alignment validation.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- Shared page consistency verified across all scenarios
|
||||
- Persona balance checked against Trigger Map priorities
|
||||
- Business goal coverage verified
|
||||
- Scenario overlap and duplicates checked
|
||||
- Scenario index accuracy verified
|
||||
- Consistency report generated with all findings
|
||||
- Menu presented and user input handled correctly
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- Skipping any consistency check
|
||||
- Not verifying the scenario index accuracy
|
||||
- Missing contradictions between scenarios
|
||||
- Not checking persona or business goal balance
|
||||
- Modifying scenario files during validation
|
||||
|
||||
**Master Rule:** Skipping steps, optimizing sequences, or not following exact instructions is FORBIDDEN and constitutes SYSTEM FAILURE.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,172 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: step-05-seo-keyword-alignment
|
||||
description: Verify that scenario pages align with the SEO keyword strategy defined in Phase 1
|
||||
|
||||
# File References
|
||||
workflowFile: '../workflow.md'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Validation Step 5: SEO Keyword Alignment
|
||||
|
||||
## STEP GOAL:
|
||||
|
||||
Verify that scenario pages align with the SEO keyword strategy defined in Phase 1, compile results from all 5 validation steps into a final report, and save the report to the output folder.
|
||||
|
||||
## 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 a Validation Specialist reviewing scenario quality, coverage, and consistency
|
||||
- ✅ If you already have been given a name, communication_style and identity, continue to use those while playing this new role
|
||||
- ✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
|
||||
- ✅ You bring validation expertise and quality standards knowledge, user brings project context, together we ensure scenario quality meets WDS standards
|
||||
- ✅ Maintain thorough analytical tone throughout
|
||||
|
||||
### Step-Specific Rules:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Focus on SEO keyword alignment and final validation report compilation
|
||||
- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to modify any scenario files during validation
|
||||
- 💬 Approach: Check keyword mapping and compile all validation results
|
||||
- 📋 If no SEO keyword map exists, note as gap and proceed to final report
|
||||
|
||||
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
|
||||
|
||||
- 📖 Load SEO keyword map from Phase 1 output
|
||||
- 🔗 Map keywords to scenario pages
|
||||
- 📊 Compile final validation report from all 5 steps
|
||||
- 💾 Save report to output folder
|
||||
- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to skip the final report compilation
|
||||
|
||||
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
|
||||
|
||||
- Available context: All scenario outlines, Phase 1 SEO data, results from validation steps 1-4
|
||||
- Focus: SEO alignment and final report
|
||||
- Limits: No scenario modifications, only verification and final reporting
|
||||
- Dependencies: All previous validation steps must be complete
|
||||
|
||||
## Sequence of Instructions (Do not deviate, skip, or optimize)
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Load SEO Keyword Map
|
||||
|
||||
Load the SEO keyword map from `{output_folder}/A-Product-Brief/` (content language section or dedicated SEO strategy file).
|
||||
|
||||
If no SEO keyword map exists, note this as a gap and skip to the final report (instruction 5).
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Page-Keyword Mapping
|
||||
|
||||
For each unique page across all scenarios:
|
||||
- [ ] Page has at least one primary keyword assigned (from Phase 1 keyword map)
|
||||
- [ ] Keywords match the page user intent (not forced)
|
||||
- [ ] No two pages compete for the same primary keyword
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Keyword Coverage
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] All high-priority keywords from Phase 1 map to at least one scenario page
|
||||
- [ ] Service keywords map to relevant service pages
|
||||
- [ ] Location keywords map to location-relevant pages
|
||||
- [ ] Problem keywords map to solution pages
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. URL Slug Alignment
|
||||
|
||||
If URL slugs were defined in the keyword map:
|
||||
- [ ] Scenario page names align with planned URL slugs
|
||||
- [ ] No naming conflicts between scenario names and SEO slugs
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. SEO Report
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## SEO Keyword Alignment Report
|
||||
|
||||
**Pages with keywords:** [X]/[Total]
|
||||
**Keyword conflicts:** [N]
|
||||
**Unmapped keywords:** [list]
|
||||
|
||||
| Page | Primary Keyword | Secondary | Status |
|
||||
|------|----------------|-----------|--------|
|
||||
| [Name] | [keyword] | [keywords] | ✅/⚠️/❌ |
|
||||
|
||||
**Overall SEO readiness:** [Good / Needs Work / No keyword map]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Final Validation Report
|
||||
|
||||
Compile results from all 5 validation steps into a summary:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Phase 3 Validation Report
|
||||
|
||||
**Project:** {project_name}
|
||||
**Date:** [date]
|
||||
**Scenarios validated:** [N]
|
||||
|
||||
### Results Summary
|
||||
| Check | Status | Issues |
|
||||
|-------|--------|--------|
|
||||
| Scenario Coverage | ✅/⚠️/❌ | [summary] |
|
||||
| Navigation Patterns | ✅/⚠️/❌ | [summary] |
|
||||
| Outline Completeness | ✅/⚠️/❌ | [summary] |
|
||||
| Cross-Scenario Consistency | ✅/⚠️/❌ | [summary] |
|
||||
| SEO Keyword Alignment | ✅/⚠️/❌ | [summary] |
|
||||
|
||||
### Critical Issues (must fix)
|
||||
[list or "None"]
|
||||
|
||||
### Warnings (should fix)
|
||||
[list or "None"]
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommendations
|
||||
[list or "All clear"]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Save report to `{output_folder}/C-UX-Scenarios/validation-report.md`
|
||||
|
||||
### 7. Present MENU OPTIONS
|
||||
|
||||
Display: "[M] Main Menu — Return to workflow start"
|
||||
|
||||
#### Menu Handling Logic:
|
||||
|
||||
- IF M: Load, read entire file, then execute {workflowFile}
|
||||
|
||||
#### EXECUTION RULES:
|
||||
|
||||
- ALWAYS halt and wait for user input after presenting menu
|
||||
- ONLY complete workflow when user selects 'M' or indicates they want to stop
|
||||
- After other menu items execution, return to this menu
|
||||
- User can chat or ask questions - always respond and then end with display again of the menu options
|
||||
|
||||
## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
|
||||
|
||||
ONLY WHEN [M main menu option] is selected and [final validation report compiled and saved], will the validation workflow end gracefully with all results documented.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- SEO keyword map loaded (or gap noted if absent)
|
||||
- Page-keyword mapping verified for all pages
|
||||
- Keyword coverage checked against Phase 1 map
|
||||
- SEO report generated
|
||||
- Final validation report compiled from all 5 steps
|
||||
- Report saved to output folder
|
||||
- Menu presented and user input handled correctly
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- Not checking for SEO keyword map
|
||||
- Skipping the final validation report compilation
|
||||
- Not saving the report to output folder
|
||||
- Missing results from any of the 5 validation steps
|
||||
- Modifying scenario files during validation
|
||||
|
||||
**Master Rule:** Skipping steps, optimizing sequences, or not following exact instructions is FORBIDDEN and constitutes SYSTEM FAILURE.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user