refactor(ux): consolidate BMAD skills, update design system, and clean up Prisma generated client
This commit is contained in:
79
.gemini/skills/bmad-prfaq/references/verdict.md
Normal file
79
.gemini/skills/bmad-prfaq/references/verdict.md
Normal file
@@ -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.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user