Files
sar/.agents/skills/wds-8-product-evolution/steps-p/step-01-create-delivery.md
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

309 lines
9.8 KiB
Markdown

---
name: 'step-01-create-delivery'
description: 'Package incremental improvement as Design Delivery (DD-XXX)'
# File References
nextStepFile: './step-02-hand-off.md'
# Data References
deliveryTemplates: '../data/delivery-templates.md'
---
# Step 4: Create Design Delivery
## STEP GOAL:
Package your incremental improvement as a Design Delivery (DD-XXX) for BMad - using the same format as complete flows, but with focused scope and content.
## 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 Freya, a product evolution specialist guiding continuous improvement
- ✅ 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 delivery packaging expertise, user brings design work
- ✅ Maintain organized and detail-oriented tone throughout
### Step-Specific Rules:
- 🎯 Focus only on packaging existing design work into delivery format
- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to design new features or expand scope
- 💬 Approach: Help user organize artifacts, reference specifications, define acceptance criteria
- 📋 Ensure all artifacts are created and linked before packaging
- 📋 Define clear success metrics and rollback criteria
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
- 🎯 Guide user to create DD file following template exactly
- 💾 Help user create matching test scenario (TS-XXX)
- 📖 Reference templates from {deliveryTemplates} for both deliverables
- 🚫 Do not allow vague descriptions or missing artifacts
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
- Available context: Completed step 03 (update designed), specifications created, change scope documented, before/after comparison ready
- Focus: Packaging design work, creating delivery file, creating test scenario
- Limits: Do not design new features, do not modify scope, do not skip metrics
- Dependencies: Requires completed step 03, update specifications, change scope, before/after comparison, all artifacts ready
## Sequence of Instructions (Do not deviate, skip, or optimize)
### 1. Design Delivery Format Overview
**Explain to user:**
All design work uses Design Deliveries (DD-XXX), whether it's:
- ✅ Complete new user flows (large scope)
- ✅ Incremental improvements (small scope)
**The format is the same - only the scope and content differ!**
| Scope | Description | Effort |
|-------|-------------|--------|
| **Large** (New Flows) | Multiple scenarios, complete user flow | Weeks |
| **Small** (Improvements) | Targeted changes, focused improvement | Days |
**User is creating a small scope delivery.**
### 2. Create Design Delivery File
**File:** `deliveries/DD-XXX-description.yaml`
**Numbering:** Ask user for last DD number, continue from there (use leading zeros: DD-001, DD-002, etc.)
**Reference:** Use Design Delivery (Small Scope) template from {deliveryTemplates}
Guide user through each section:
#### 2a. Delivery Metadata
```yaml
delivery:
id: 'DD-XXX'
name: '[Short descriptive name]'
type: 'incremental_improvement'
scope: 'update'
version: 'v2.0'
previous_version: 'v1.0'
created_at: '[timestamp]'
designer: '[User name]'
status: 'ready_for_handoff'
```
#### 2b. Improvement Section
Help user write:
- **summary**: 2-3 sentences (what's changing and why)
- **problem**: What problem does this solve? (with metrics)
- **solution**: What's the solution? (specific changes)
- **expected_impact**: What will improve? (with target metrics)
#### 2c. Changes Section
Guide user to specify:
- **screens_affected**: List screens
- **features_affected**: List features
- **components_new**: New components with IDs and file paths
- **components_modified**: Modified components with changes and file paths
- **components_unchanged**: "All other components remain as-is"
- **what_stays_same**: List unchanged elements
#### 2d. Design Artifacts Section
Help user link all artifacts:
- **specifications**: Path to specifications.md
- **change-scope**: Path to change-scope.md
- **before-after**: Path to before-after.md
- **components**: Paths to new/modified component files
**Verify:** All files exist at specified paths.
#### 2e. Technical Requirements Section
Guide user to document:
- **frontend**: List frontend implementation tasks
- **backend**: List backend changes (if any)
- **data**: List data model changes (if any)
- **integrations**: List integration changes (analytics, etc.)
#### 2f. Acceptance Criteria Section
Help user define testable criteria:
- Each criterion has: id (AC-001, AC-002...), description, verification method
- Criteria must be objective and testable
- Cover new functionality, edge cases, persistence
#### 2g. Metrics Section
Guide user to specify:
- **baseline**: Current metrics with targets
- **measurement_period**: Typically "2 weeks after release"
- **success_threshold**: Minimum acceptable improvements
- **rollback_criteria**: When to rollback if targets not met
**Critical:** Ensure targets are realistic and measurable.
#### 2h. Effort Estimate Section
Help user estimate:
- Design (already done)
- Frontend implementation
- Backend implementation (if any)
- Testing
- Total effort and complexity (Low/Medium/High)
#### 2i. Timeline Section
Work with user to define:
- design_complete (today)
- handoff_date (today or soon)
- development_start (estimated)
- development_complete (estimated)
- testing_complete (estimated)
- release_date (target)
- measurement_end (release + 2 weeks)
#### 2j. Handoff Section
Specify:
- architect: BMad Architect name
- developer: BMad Developer name
- handoff_dialog_required: false (for small updates)
- notes: Brief note about scope
#### 2k. Related Section
Link related files:
- improvement_file (from step 01)
- analytics_report (if exists)
- user_feedback (if exists)
- original_delivery (if this is update to previous DD)
### 3. Create Test Scenario
**File:** `test-scenarios/TS-XXX-description.yaml`
**Use same XXX number as DD-XXX.**
**Reference:** Use Test Scenario (Incremental Improvement) template from {deliveryTemplates}
Guide user to create:
#### 3a. Test Metadata
```yaml
test_scenario:
id: 'TS-XXX'
name: '[Update Name] Validation'
type: 'incremental_improvement'
delivery_id: 'DD-XXX'
created_at: '[timestamp]'
```
#### 3b. Test Focus
List key focus areas:
- New functionality (what changed)
- Regression testing (what should stay the same)
- Edge cases specific to update
- Accessibility
#### 3c. Happy Path Tests
Define tests for new functionality:
- Each test has: id (HP-001, HP-002...), name, steps
- Steps have: action, expected result
- Cover the primary user flow through new feature
#### 3d. Regression Tests
Define tests for existing functionality:
- Each test has: id (REG-001, REG-002...), name, steps
- Verify existing features work exactly as before
- Focus on areas adjacent to changes
#### 3e. Edge Cases
Define edge case tests:
- Each test has: id (EC-001, EC-002...), name, steps
- Cover unusual scenarios (dismissal persistence, multiple devices, cleared cache, etc.)
#### 3f. Accessibility
Define accessibility checks:
- Each test has: id (A11Y-001, A11Y-002...), name, checks
- Screen reader compatibility
- Keyboard navigation
- Focus management
### 4. Review and Verify
**Before proceeding, verify with user:**
- [ ] DD file created with all sections complete
- [ ] All artifact paths valid and files exist
- [ ] Acceptance criteria are testable and objective
- [ ] Metrics and targets are realistic
- [ ] Success and rollback criteria defined
- [ ] Test scenario created with all test types
- [ ] TS file references correct DD-XXX
- [ ] No vague descriptions or missing information
**All must be checked before proceeding.**
### 5. Present MENU OPTIONS
Display: "**Select an Option:** [C] Continue to step-02-hand-off.md (next step in this activity)"
#### 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 'C'
- User can chat or ask questions - always respond and then redisplay menu options
## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
ONLY WHEN user selects [C] and delivery packaging is complete will you then load and read fully `{nextStepFile}` to execute and begin step 02 (hand off to BMad).
---
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
### ✅ SUCCESS:
- Design Delivery file (DD-XXX) created following template exactly
- All sections complete with no placeholders
- Change scope clearly defined in delivery
- All artifacts referenced with valid file paths
- Acceptance criteria defined and testable
- Metrics with baseline, targets, success threshold, and rollback criteria
- Test scenario (TS-XXX) created with all test types
- Happy path, regression, edge case, and accessibility tests defined
- Effort estimate and timeline realistic
- Ready for handoff to BMad
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
- Vague change description or missing sections
- Missing artifacts or broken file paths
- No success metrics or rollback criteria defined
- Scope too large (not incremental improvement)
- No before/after comparison referenced
- Acceptance criteria not testable or missing
- Test scenario missing or incomplete
- No regression tests defined
- Generating content without user input
- Skipping verification checklist
**Master Rule:** Skipping steps, optimizing sequences, or not following exact instructions is FORBIDDEN and constitutes SYSTEM FAILURE.