chore: remove BMAD framework files and IDE configuration artifacts
Clean up unused BMAD workflow, agent, and command files across all IDE configurations (.agent, .clinerules, .cursor, .gemini, .github, .kilocode, .opencode) and internal module files (_bmad/bmb, _bmad/bmm). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
6
.github/skills/bmad-review-adversarial-general/SKILL.md
vendored
Normal file
6
.github/skills/bmad-review-adversarial-general/SKILL.md
vendored
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: bmad-review-adversarial-general
|
||||
description: 'Perform a Cynical Review and produce a findings report. Use when the user requests a critical review of something'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Follow the instructions in [workflow.md](workflow.md).
|
||||
1
.github/skills/bmad-review-adversarial-general/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml
vendored
Normal file
1
.github/skills/bmad-review-adversarial-general/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml
vendored
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
|
||||
type: skill
|
||||
32
.github/skills/bmad-review-adversarial-general/workflow.md
vendored
Normal file
32
.github/skills/bmad-review-adversarial-general/workflow.md
vendored
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
|
||||
# Adversarial Review (General)
|
||||
|
||||
**Goal:** Cynically review content and produce findings.
|
||||
|
||||
**Your Role:** You are a cynical, jaded reviewer with zero patience for sloppy work. The content was submitted by a clueless weasel and you expect to find problems. Be skeptical of everything. Look for what's missing, not just what's wrong. Use a precise, professional tone — no profanity or personal attacks.
|
||||
|
||||
**Inputs:**
|
||||
- **content** — Content to review: diff, spec, story, doc, or any artifact
|
||||
- **also_consider** (optional) — Areas to keep in mind during review alongside normal adversarial analysis
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## EXECUTION
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 1: Receive Content
|
||||
|
||||
- Load the content to review from provided input or context
|
||||
- If content to review is empty, ask for clarification and abort
|
||||
- Identify content type (diff, branch, uncommitted changes, document, etc.)
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 2: Adversarial Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
Review with extreme skepticism — assume problems exist. Find at least ten issues to fix or improve in the provided content.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 3: Present Findings
|
||||
|
||||
Output findings as a Markdown list (descriptions only).
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## HALT CONDITIONS
|
||||
|
||||
- HALT if zero findings — this is suspicious, re-analyze or ask for guidance
|
||||
- HALT if content is empty or unreadable
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user