Initial commit: Brachnha Insight project setup
- Next.js 14+ with App Router and TypeScript - Tailwind CSS and ShadCN UI styling - Zustand state management - Dexie.js for IndexedDB (local-first data) - Auth.js v5 for authentication - BMAD framework integration Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Max
164
_bmad/bmb/workflows/workflow/steps-v/step-03-menu-validation.md
Normal file
164
_bmad/bmb/workflows/workflow/steps-v/step-03-menu-validation.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,164 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: 'step-03-menu-validation'
|
||||
description: 'Validate menu handling compliance across all step files'
|
||||
|
||||
nextStepFile: './step-04-step-type-validation.md'
|
||||
targetWorkflowPath: '{workflow_folder_path}'
|
||||
validationReportFile: '{workflow_folder_path}/validation-report-{datetime}.md'
|
||||
menuHandlingStandards: '../data/menu-handling-standards.md'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Validation Step 3: Menu Handling Validation
|
||||
|
||||
## STEP GOAL:
|
||||
|
||||
To validate that EVERY step file's menus follow the menu handling standards - proper handlers, execution rules, appropriate menu types.
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
|
||||
|
||||
### Universal Rules:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🛑 DO NOT BE LAZY - LOAD AND REVIEW EVERY FILE
|
||||
- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
|
||||
- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step, ensure entire file is read
|
||||
- ✅ Validation does NOT stop for user input - auto-proceed through all validation steps
|
||||
- ⚙️ If any instruction references a subprocess, subagent, or tool you do not have access to, you MUST still achieve the outcome in your main context
|
||||
|
||||
### Step-Specific Rules:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Validate EVERY step file's menus using subprocess optimization - per-file deep analysis pattern (Pattern 2)
|
||||
- 🚫 DO NOT skip any files or checks - DO NOT BE LAZY
|
||||
- 💬 Subprocess must either update validation report directly OR return structured findings to parent for aggregation
|
||||
- 🚪 This is validation - systematic and thorough, leveraging per-file subprocess for menu structure analysis
|
||||
|
||||
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Load menu standards first
|
||||
- 💾 Check EVERY file's menu structure using subprocess optimization when available - per-file deep analysis for menu structure validation
|
||||
- 📖 Append findings to validation report (subprocesses either update report OR return findings for parent aggregation)
|
||||
- 🚫 DO NOT halt for user input - validation runs to completion
|
||||
|
||||
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
|
||||
|
||||
- All step files in steps-c/ must be validated
|
||||
- Load {menuHandlingStandards} for validation criteria
|
||||
- Check for: handler section, execution rules, reserved letters, inappropriate A/P
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip or shortcut.
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Load Menu Standards
|
||||
|
||||
Load {menuHandlingStandards} to understand validation criteria:
|
||||
|
||||
**Reserved Letters:** A (Advanced Elicitation), P (Party Mode), C (Continue/Accept), X (Exit/Cancel)
|
||||
|
||||
**Required Structure:**
|
||||
1. Display section
|
||||
2. Handler section (MANDATORY)
|
||||
3. Execution Rules section
|
||||
|
||||
**When To Include A/P:**
|
||||
- DON'T: Step 1 (init), validation sequences, simple data gathering
|
||||
- DO: Collaborative content creation, user might want alternatives, quality gates
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Check EVERY Step File
|
||||
|
||||
**DO NOT BE LAZY - For EVERY file in steps-c/, launch a subprocess that:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. Loads that step file
|
||||
2. Loads {menuHandlingStandards} to understand validation criteria
|
||||
3. Validates menu structure deeply (handler section, execution rules, A/P appropriateness, reserved letter compliance)
|
||||
4. **EITHER** updates validation report directly with findings
|
||||
5. **OR** returns structured validation findings to parent for aggregation
|
||||
|
||||
**SUBPROCESS VALIDATION PATTERN - Each subprocess checks for:**
|
||||
|
||||
**Check 1: Handler Section Exists**
|
||||
- ✅ Handler section immediately follows Display
|
||||
- ❌ If missing: mark as violation
|
||||
|
||||
**Check 2: Execution Rules Section Exists**
|
||||
- ✅ "EXECUTION RULES" section present
|
||||
- ✅ Contains "halt and wait" instruction
|
||||
- ❌ If missing: mark as violation
|
||||
|
||||
**Check 3: Non-C Options Redisplay Menu**
|
||||
- ✅ A/P options specify "redisplay menu"
|
||||
- ❌ If missing: mark as violation
|
||||
|
||||
**Check 4: C Option Sequence**
|
||||
- ✅ C option: save → update frontmatter → load next step
|
||||
- ❌ If sequence wrong: mark as violation
|
||||
|
||||
**Check 5: A/P Only Where Appropriate**
|
||||
- Step 01 should NOT have A/P (inappropriate for init)
|
||||
- Validation sequences should auto-proceed, not have menus
|
||||
- ❌ If A/P in wrong place: mark as violation
|
||||
|
||||
**RETURN FORMAT:**
|
||||
Each subprocess should return validation findings for its assigned file including:
|
||||
- File name
|
||||
- Whether a menu is present
|
||||
- Results of all 5 checks (handler section, execution rules, redisplay menu, C sequence, A/P appropriateness)
|
||||
- List of any violations found
|
||||
- Overall status (PASS/FAIL/WARN)
|
||||
|
||||
**Context savings estimate:** Each subprocess returns structured findings vs full file content. Parent aggregates all findings into final report table.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Aggregate Findings and Document Results
|
||||
|
||||
After ALL files have been validated (either via subprocess or main context), document the menu handling validation results in the validation report, including:
|
||||
|
||||
- Overall assessment of menu handling compliance across all step files
|
||||
- Summary of files checked and their menu status
|
||||
- Files that passed all menu validation checks
|
||||
- Files with warnings or issues that need attention
|
||||
- Files that failed validation with specific violations
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. List Violations
|
||||
|
||||
Compile and document all violations found during validation, organizing them by file and providing clear descriptions of each issue, such as:
|
||||
|
||||
- Missing handler sections
|
||||
- Incomplete execution rules
|
||||
- Improper A/P usage
|
||||
- Missing redisplay menu instructions
|
||||
- Any other menu handling standard violations
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Append to Report
|
||||
|
||||
Update {validationReportFile} - replace "## Menu Handling Validation *Pending...*" with actual findings.
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Save Report and Auto-Proceed
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL:** Save the validation report BEFORE loading next step.
|
||||
|
||||
Then immediately load, read entire file, then execute {nextStepFile}.
|
||||
|
||||
**Display:**
|
||||
"**Menu Handling validation complete.** Proceeding to Step Type Validation..."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- Menu standards loaded and understood
|
||||
- EVERY step file's menus validated via subprocess (per-file deep analysis) OR main context
|
||||
- All violations documented across handler sections, execution rules, A/P appropriateness
|
||||
- Findings aggregated into validation report (subprocesses either updated report OR returned findings)
|
||||
- Report saved before proceeding
|
||||
- Next validation step loaded
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- Not checking every file's menus
|
||||
- Skipping menu structure checks
|
||||
- Not documenting violations
|
||||
- Not saving report before proceeding
|
||||
- Loading full file contents into parent context instead of using subprocess analysis
|
||||
|
||||
**Master Rule:** Validation is systematic and thorough. DO NOT BE LAZY. Use subprocess optimization (Pattern 2) - each file in its own subprocess for deep menu structure analysis. Subprocess returns only findings to parent. Auto-proceed through all validation steps.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user