initial commit

2026-03-16 19:54:53 -04:00
commit bfe0e01254
3341 changed files with 483939 additions and 0 deletions
--- a/_bmad/wds/workflows/3-scenarios/steps-v/step-02-navigation-patterns.md
+++ b/_bmad/wds/workflows/3-scenarios/steps-v/step-02-navigation-patterns.md
@@ -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.