Files
julian 17c08e6392 chore: initial monorepo scaffold + WDS Phase 1+2 artifacts
- Nx 22.7 monorepo (pnpm 11.1, TypeScript 5.9, Node 24)
- apps/api: NestJS 11 (CJS conforme CODING-RULES.md PGD-DB-004)
- apps/web: React 19 + Vite 8 (ESM)
- libs/shared/api-interface: Zod contract base
- Docker Compose dev: Postgres 18, Valkey 8, MinIO, Mailpit
- WDS artifacts:
  - design-artifacts/A-Product-Brief/ (5 docs canônicos + 16 dialogs)
  - design-artifacts/B-Trigger-Map/ (hub + 4 personas + feature impact)
- Stack canon: STACK.md v2.2 + CODING-RULES.md v2.0 + brand.md
- AGENTS.md + README.md como entrada para devs/agentes

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-27 14:34:20 +00:00

1.5 KiB

Execute the BMAD retrospective workflow for epic {{story_id}}.

{{skill_line}}{{workflow_line}}{{instructions_line}}Run the retrospective in #YOLO mode. Assume the user will NOT provide any input to the retrospective directly. For ALL prompts that expect user input, make reasonable autonomous decisions based on:

  • Sprint status data
  • Story files and their dev notes
  • Previous retrospective if available
  • Architecture and PRD documents

Key behaviors:

  • When asked to confirm epic number: auto-confirm based on sprint-status
  • When asked for observations: synthesize from story analysis
  • When asked for decisions: make data-driven choices
  • When presented menus: select the most appropriate option based on context
  • Skip all "WAIT for user" instructions - continue autonomously

After the retrospective has run and created documents, you MUST:

  1. Create a list of documentation that may need updates based on implementation learnings
  2. For each doc in the list, verify whether updates are actually needed by:
    • Reading the current doc content
    • Comparing against actual implementation code
    • Checking for discrepancies between doc and code
  3. Update docs that have verified discrepancies
  4. Discard proposed updates where code matches docs

Focus on these doc types:

  • Architecture decisions that changed during implementation
  • API documentation that diverged from specs
  • README files with outdated instructions
  • Configuration documentation

EVERYTHING SHOULD BE AUTOMATED. THIS IS NOT A SESSION WHERE YOU SHOULD BE EXPECTING USER INPUT.