refactor(ux): consolidate BMAD skills, update design system, and clean up Prisma generated client

.agent/skills/bmad-prfaq/references/customer-faq.md

@@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
+**Language:** Use `{communication_language}` for all output.
+**Output Language:** Use `{document_output_language}` for documents.
+**Output Location:** `{planning_artifacts}`
+**Coaching stance:** Be direct, challenge vague thinking, but offer concrete alternatives when the user is stuck — tough love, not tough silence.
+**Concept type:** Check `{concept_type}` — calibrate all question framing to match (commercial, internal tool, open-source, community/nonprofit).
+
+# Stage 3: Customer FAQ
+
+**Goal:** Validate the value proposition by asking the hardest questions a real user would ask — and crafting answers that hold up under scrutiny.
+
+## The Devil's Advocate
+
+You are now the customer. Not a friendly early-adopter — a busy, skeptical person who has been burned by promises before. You've read the press release. Now you have questions.
+
+**Generate 6-10 customer FAQ questions** that cover these angles:
+
+- **Skepticism:** "How is this different from [existing solution]?" / "Why should I switch from what I use today?"
+- **Trust:** "What happens to my data?" / "What if this shuts down?" / "Who's behind this?"
+- **Practical concerns:** "How much does it cost?" / "How long does it take to get started?" / "Does it work with [thing I already use]?"
+- **Edge cases:** "What if I need to [uncommon but real scenario]?" / "Does it work for [adjacent use case]?"
+- **The hard question they're afraid of:** Every product has one question the team hopes nobody asks. Find it and ask it.
+
+**Don't generate softball questions.** "How do I sign up?" is not a FAQ — it's a CTA. Real customer FAQs are the objections standing between interest and adoption.
+
+**Calibrate to concept type.** For non-commercial concepts (internal tools, open-source, community projects), adapt question framing: replace "cost" with "effort to adopt," replace "competitor switching" with "why change from current workflow," replace "trust/company viability" with "maintenance and sustainability."
+
+## Coaching the Answers
+
+Present the questions and work through answers with the user:
+
+1. **Present all questions at once** — let the user see the full landscape of customer concern.
+2. **Work through answers together.** The user drafts (or you draft and they react). For each answer:
+   - Is it honest? If the answer is "we don't do that yet," say so — and explain the roadmap or alternative.
+   - Is it specific? "We have enterprise-grade security" is not an answer. What certifications? What encryption? What SLA?
+   - Would a customer believe it? Marketing language in FAQ answers destroys credibility.
+3. **If an answer reveals a real gap in the concept**, name it directly and force a decision: is this a launch blocker, a fast-follow, or an accepted trade-off?
+4. **The user can add their own questions too.** Often they know the scary questions better than anyone.
+
+## Headless Mode
+
+Generate questions and best-effort answers from available context. Flag answers with low confidence so a human can review.
+
+## Updating the Document
+
+Append the Customer FAQ section to the output document. Update frontmatter: `status: "customer-faq"`, `stage: 3`, `updated` timestamp.
+
+## Coaching Notes Capture
+
+Before moving on, append a `<!-- coaching-notes-stage-3 -->` block to the output document: gaps revealed by customer questions, trade-off decisions made (launch blocker vs fast-follow vs accepted), competitive intelligence surfaced, and any scope or requirements signals.
+
+## Stage Complete
+
+This stage is complete when every question has an honest, specific answer — and the user has confronted the hardest customer objections their concept faces. No softballs survived.
+
+Route to `./internal-faq.md`.

.agent/skills/bmad-prfaq/references/internal-faq.md

@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+**Language:** Use `{communication_language}` for all output.
+**Output Language:** Use `{document_output_language}` for documents.
+**Output Location:** `{planning_artifacts}`
+**Coaching stance:** Be direct, challenge vague thinking, but offer concrete alternatives when the user is stuck — tough love, not tough silence.
+**Concept type:** Check `{concept_type}` — calibrate all question framing to match (commercial, internal tool, open-source, community/nonprofit).
+
+# Stage 4: Internal FAQ
+
+**Goal:** Stress-test the concept from the builder's side. The customer FAQ asked "should I use this?" The internal FAQ asks "can we actually pull this off — and should we?"
+
+## The Skeptical Stakeholder
+
+You are now the internal stakeholder panel — engineering lead, finance, legal, operations, the CEO who's seen a hundred pitches. The press release was inspiring. Now prove it's real.
+
+**Generate 6-10 internal FAQ questions** that cover these angles:
+
+- **Feasibility:** "What's the hardest technical problem here?" / "What do we not know how to build yet?" / "What are the key dependencies and risks?"
+- **Business viability:** "What does the unit economics look like?" / "How do we acquire the first 100 customers?" / "What's the competitive moat — and how durable is it?"
+- **Resource reality:** "What does the team need to look like?" / "What's the realistic timeline to a usable product?" / "What do we have to say no to in order to do this?"
+- **Risk:** "What kills this?" / "What's the worst-case scenario if we ship and it doesn't work?" / "What regulatory or legal exposure exists?"
+- **Strategic fit:** "Why us? Why now?" / "What does this cannibalize?" / "If this succeeds, what does the company look like in 3 years?"
+- **The question the founder avoids:** The internal counterpart to the hard customer question. The thing that keeps them up at night but hasn't been said out loud.
+
+**Calibrate questions to context.** A solo founder building an MVP needs different internal questions than a team inside a large organization. Don't ask about "board alignment" for a weekend project. Don't ask about "weekend viability" for an enterprise product. For non-commercial concepts (internal tools, open-source, community projects), replace "unit economics" with "maintenance burden," replace "customer acquisition" with "adoption strategy," and replace "competitive moat" with "sustainability and contributor/stakeholder engagement."
+
+## Coaching the Answers
+
+Same approach as Customer FAQ — draft, challenge, refine:
+
+1. **Present all questions at once.**
+2. **Work through answers.** Demand specificity. "We'll figure it out" is not an answer. Neither is "we'll hire for that." What's the actual plan?
+3. **Honest unknowns are fine — unexamined unknowns are not.** If the answer is "we don't know yet," the follow-up is: "What would it take to find out, and when do you need to know by?"
+4. **Watch for hand-waving on resources and timeline.** These are the most commonly over-optimistic answers. Push for concrete scoping.
+
+## Headless Mode
+
+Generate questions calibrated to context and best-effort answers. Flag high-risk areas and unknowns prominently.
+
+## Updating the Document
+
+Append the Internal FAQ section to the output document. Update frontmatter: `status: "internal-faq"`, `stage: 4`, `updated` timestamp.
+
+## Coaching Notes Capture
+
+Before moving on, append a `<!-- coaching-notes-stage-4 -->` block to the output document: feasibility risks identified, resource/timeline estimates discussed, unknowns flagged with "what would it take to find out" answers, strategic positioning decisions, and any technical constraints or dependencies surfaced.
+
+## Stage Complete
+
+This stage is complete when the internal questions have honest, specific answers — and the user has a clear-eyed view of what it actually takes to execute this concept. Optimism is fine. Delusion is not.
+
+Route to `./verdict.md`.

.agent/skills/bmad-prfaq/references/press-release.md

@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+**Language:** Use `{communication_language}` for all output.
+**Output Language:** Use `{document_output_language}` for documents.
+**Output Location:** `{planning_artifacts}`
+**Coaching stance:** Be direct, challenge vague thinking, but offer concrete alternatives when the user is stuck — tough love, not tough silence.
+
+# Stage 2: The Press Release
+
+**Goal:** Produce a press release that would make a real customer stop scrolling and pay attention. Draft iteratively, challenging every sentence for specificity, customer relevance, and honesty.
+
+**Concept type adaptation:** Check `{concept_type}` (commercial product, internal tool, open-source, community/nonprofit). For non-commercial concepts, adapt press release framing: "announce the initiative" not "announce the product," "How to Participate" not "Getting Started," "Community Member quote" not "Customer quote." The structure stays — the language shifts to match the audience.
+
+## The Forge
+
+The press release is the heart of Working Backwards. It has a specific structure, and each part earns its place by forcing a different type of clarity:
+
+| Section | What It Forces |
+|---------|---------------|
+| **Headline** | Can you say what this is in one sentence a customer would understand? |
+| **Subheadline** | Who benefits and what changes for them? |
+| **Opening paragraph** | What are you announcing, who is it for, and why should they care? |
+| **Problem paragraph** | Can you make the reader feel the customer's pain without mentioning your solution? |
+| **Solution paragraph** | What changes for the customer? (Not: what did you build.) |
+| **Leader quote** | What's the vision beyond the feature list? |
+| **How It Works** | Can you explain the experience from the customer's perspective? |
+| **Customer quote** | Would a real person say this? Does it sound human? |
+| **Getting Started** | Is the path to value clear and concrete? |
+
+## Coaching Approach
+
+The coaching dynamic: draft each section yourself first, then model critical thinking by challenging your own draft out loud before inviting the user to sharpen it. Push one level deeper on every response — if the user gives you a generality, demand the specific. The cycle is: draft → self-challenge → invite → deepen.
+
+When the user is stuck, offer 2-3 concrete alternatives to react to rather than repeating the question harder.
+
+## Quality Bars
+
+These are the standards to hold the press release to. Don't enumerate them to the user — embody them in your challenges:
+
+- **No jargon** — If a customer wouldn't use the word, neither should the press release
+- **No weasel words** — "significantly", "revolutionary", "best-in-class" are banned. Replace with specifics.
+- **The mom test** — Could you explain this to someone outside your industry and have them understand why it matters?
+- **The "so what?" test** — Every sentence should survive "so what?" If it can't, cut or sharpen it.
+- **Honest framing** — The press release should be compelling without being dishonest. If you're overselling, the customer FAQ will expose it.
+
+## Headless Mode
+
+If running headless: draft the complete press release based on available inputs without interaction. Apply the quality bars internally — challenge yourself and produce the strongest version you can. Write directly to the output document.
+
+## Updating the Document
+
+After each section is refined, append it to the output document at `{planning_artifacts}/prfaq-{project_name}.md`. Update frontmatter: `status: "press-release"`, `stage: 2`, and `updated` timestamp.
+
+## Coaching Notes Capture
+
+Before moving on, append a brief `<!-- coaching-notes-stage-2 -->` block to the output document capturing key contextual observations from this stage: rejected headline framings, competitive positioning discussed, differentiators explored but not used, and any out-of-scope details the user mentioned (technical constraints, timeline, team context). These notes survive context compaction and feed the Stage 5 distillate.
+
+## Stage Complete
+
+This stage is complete when the full press release reads as a coherent, compelling announcement that a real customer would find relevant. The user should feel proud of what they've written — and confident every sentence earned its place.
+
+Route to `./customer-faq.md`.

.agent/skills/bmad-prfaq/references/verdict.md

@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+**Language:** Use `{communication_language}` for all output.
+**Output Language:** Use `{document_output_language}` for documents.
+**Output Location:** `{planning_artifacts}`
+**Coaching stance:** Be direct and honest — the verdict exists to surface truth, not to soften it. But frame every finding constructively.
+
+# Stage 5: The Verdict
+
+**Goal:** Step back from the details and give the user an honest assessment of where their concept stands. Finalize the PRFAQ document and produce the downstream distillate.
+
+## The Assessment
+
+Review the entire PRFAQ — press release, customer FAQ, internal FAQ — and deliver a candid verdict:
+
+**Concept Strength:** Rate the overall concept readiness. Not a score — a narrative assessment. Where is the thinking sharp and where is it still soft? What survived the gauntlet and what barely held together?
+
+**Three categories of findings:**
+
+- **Forged in steel** — aspects of the concept that are clear, compelling, and defensible. The press release sections that would actually make a customer stop. The FAQ answers that are honest and convincing.
+- **Needs more heat** — areas that are promising but underdeveloped. The user has a direction but hasn't gone deep enough. These need more work before they're ready for a PRD.
+- **Cracks in the foundation** — genuine risks, unresolved contradictions, or gaps that could undermine the whole concept. Not necessarily deal-breakers, but things that must be addressed deliberately.
+
+**Present the verdict directly.** Don't soften it. The whole point of this process is to surface truth before committing resources. But frame findings constructively — for every crack, suggest what it would take to address it.
+
+## Finalize the Document
+
+1. **Polish the PRFAQ** — ensure the press release reads as a cohesive narrative, FAQs flow logically, formatting is consistent
+2. **Append The Verdict section** to the output document with the assessment
+3. Update frontmatter: `status: "complete"`, `stage: 5`, `updated` timestamp
+
+## Produce the Distillate
+
+Throughout the process, you captured context beyond what fits in the PRFAQ. Source material for the distillate includes the `<!-- coaching-notes-stage-N -->` blocks in the output document (which survive context compaction) as well as anything remaining in session memory — rejected framings, alternative positioning, technical constraints, competitive intelligence, scope signals, resource estimates, open questions.
+
+**Always produce the distillate** at `{planning_artifacts}/prfaq-{project_name}-distillate.md`:
+
+```yaml
+---
+title: "PRFAQ Distillate: {project_name}"
+type: llm-distillate
+source: "prfaq-{project_name}.md"
+created: "{timestamp}"
+purpose: "Token-efficient context for downstream PRD creation"
+---
+```
+
+**Distillate content:** Dense bullet points grouped by theme. Each bullet stands alone with enough context for a downstream LLM to use it. Include:
+- Rejected framings and why they were dropped
+- Requirements signals captured during coaching
+- Technical context, constraints, and platform preferences
+- Competitive intelligence from discussion
+- Open questions and unknowns flagged during internal FAQ
+- Scope signals — what's in, out, and maybe for MVP
+- Resource and timeline estimates discussed
+- The Verdict findings (especially "needs more heat" and "cracks") as actionable items
+
+## Present Completion
+
+"Your PRFAQ for {project_name} has survived the gauntlet.
+
+**PRFAQ:** `{planning_artifacts}/prfaq-{project_name}.md`
+**Detail Pack:** `{planning_artifacts}/prfaq-{project_name}-distillate.md`
+
+**Recommended next step:** Use the PRFAQ and detail pack as input for PRD creation. The PRFAQ replaces the product brief in your planning pipeline — tell your PM 'create a PRD' and point them to these files."
+
+**Headless mode output:**
+```json
+{
+  "status": "complete",
+  "prfaq": "{planning_artifacts}/prfaq-{project_name}.md",
+  "distillate": "{planning_artifacts}/prfaq-{project_name}-distillate.md",
+  "verdict": "forged|needs-heat|cracked",
+  "key_risks": ["top unresolved items"],
+  "open_questions": ["unresolved items from FAQs"]
+}
+```
+
+## Stage Complete
+
+This is the terminal stage. If the user wants to revise, loop back to the relevant stage. Otherwise, the workflow is done.