# Idunn's Design Handoff Guide

**When to load:** During Phase 6 (Design Deliveries) or when preparing BMM handoff

---

## Core Principle

**Package complete flows for confident, testable implementation.**

Design handoffs aren't just "here's the specs" - they're complete, ready-to-implement packages that developers can trust.

---

## What is Phase 6?

**Phase 6 compiles all design work into development-ready deliverables:**

```
Inputs (from earlier phases):
├── Product Brief (Phase 1)
├── Trigger Map (Phase 2)
├── Platform PRD (Phase 3)
├── Page Specifications (Phase 4)
└── Design System (Phase 5 - if enabled)

Phase 6 Output:
├── Complete PRD (Platform + Functional requirements)
├── Design Delivery files (DD-XXX.yaml per epic/flow)
└── Handoff package for BMM Phase 4 (Implementation)
```

---

## The Design Delivery File (DD-XXX.yaml)

**One file per complete, testable flow or epic**

### Structure
```yaml
delivery:
  id: DD-001
  name: "User Authentication Flow"
  epic: "User Management"
  priority: high
  status: ready_for_implementation

description: |
  Complete user authentication flow including signup, login, 
  password reset, and session management.

scenarios:
  - name: "New User Signup"
    path: "docs/C-UX-Scenarios/1.1-signup-flow/"
    pages:
      - "01-signup-form.md"
      - "02-email-verification.md"
      - "03-welcome-onboarding.md"
    
  - name: "Existing User Login"
    path: "docs/C-UX-Scenarios/1.2-login-flow/"
    pages:
      - "01-login-form.md"
      - "02-two-factor-auth.md"

platform_requirements:
  references:
    - section: "3.1 Authentication"
      file: "docs/C-Requirements/platform-prd.md"
    - section: "3.2 Session Management"
      file: "docs/C-Requirements/platform-prd.md"

design_system:
  enabled: true
  components_used:
    - "button (primary, secondary variants)"
    - "input-field (text, password, email types)"
    - "form-validation-error"
    - "loading-spinner"

acceptance_criteria:
  - "User can create account with email + password"
  - "Email verification required before access"
  - "Password reset flow works end-to-end"
  - "Sessions persist across browser closes"
  - "Failed login shows helpful error messages"

testing_notes: |
  Focus on:
  - Email delivery (use test mail service)
  - Password validation (8+ chars, special char, etc.)
  - Rate limiting on login attempts
  - Session timeout behavior

estimated_effort: "2 weeks (including testing)"
dependencies: []
risks:
  - "Email deliverability in production"
  - "Session management complexity"
```

---

## Organizing Deliveries by Value

**Group related functionality into complete, testable units:**

### ✅ Good Organization
```
DD-001: User Authentication (signup, login, reset)
DD-002: Proposal Creation (template, edit, preview, save)
DD-003: Proposal Sharing (send, track, reminders)
DD-004: Team Collaboration (invite, permissions, comments)
```

**Why good:** Each is complete, testable, can be implemented and deployed independently

---

### ❌ Bad Organization
```
DD-001: All signup pages
DD-002: All login pages
DD-003: All forms
DD-004: All buttons
```

**Why bad:** No complete user flow, can't test end-to-end, no clear business value

---

## Development Sequence

**Priority order for implementation:**

### 1. Foundation (P0 - Critical)
**Must have for MVP:**
- User authentication
- Core user flow (main value proposition)
- Basic error handling

---

### 2. Core Value (P1 - High)
**Enables primary use cases:**
- Main features users pay for
- Critical integrations
- Essential workflows

---

### 3. Enhancement (P2 - Medium)
**Improves experience:**
- Secondary features
- Nice-to-have integrations
- Optimization

---

### 4. Polish (P3 - Low)
**Completes experience:**
- Advanced features
- Edge case handling
- Delighters

---

## The Complete PRD

**Platform PRD + Functional Requirements (from Phase 4) = Complete PRD**

### Platform PRD (from Phase 3)
- Technical architecture
- Data model
- Integrations
- Security, performance, scalability

### Functional Requirements (accumulated during Phase 4)
Each page spec adds functional requirements:
- User stories
- Business logic
- Validation rules
- State management
- API endpoints needed

### Complete PRD
Combines both into one comprehensive document:

```
docs/C-Requirements/
├── platform-prd.md (technical foundation)
├── functional-requirements.md (features from design)
└── complete-prd.md (synthesized, organized by epic)
```

---

## Reference, Don't Duplicate

**DD files reference specs, don't copy them**

### ❌ Wrong (Copying Content)
```yaml
DD-001:
  description: |
    Signup page has:
    - Email input field (validation: RFC 5322)
    - Password input field (8+ chars, 1 special)
    - Submit button (primary variant)
    [... 200 more lines of copied spec ...]
```

**Why bad:** Two sources of truth, sync nightmare

---

### ✅ Right (Referencing)
```yaml
DD-001:
  scenarios:
    - name: "Signup Flow"
      path: "docs/C-UX-Scenarios/1.1-signup-flow/"
      pages:
        - "01-signup-form.md"
        - "02-verification.md"
  
  platform_requirements:
    references:
      - section: "3.1 Authentication"
        file: "docs/C-Requirements/platform-prd.md"
```

**Why better:** One source of truth (the actual specs)

---

## Handoff to BMM

**Design Deliveries feed into BMM Phase 4 (Implementation):**

### What BMM Developers Get
1. **Complete PRD** - What to build
2. **Design Delivery files** - How it's organized
3. **Page Specifications** - Detailed specs
4. **Platform PRD** - Technical foundation
5. **Design System** (if exists) - Component library
6. **Interactive Prototypes** - How it should feel

### What They Do With It
1. **Architect (BMM):** Reviews Platform PRD, creates architecture
2. **PM (BMM):** Breaks DD files into user stories
3. **Dev (BMM):** Implements according to page specs
4. **Test Architect (BMM):** Creates test scenarios

---

## Acceptance Criteria

**Every DD file needs clear acceptance criteria:**

### Good Acceptance Criteria
- ✅ Specific: "User can reset password via email link"
- ✅ Testable: "Email arrives within 5 minutes"
- ✅ Complete: "User receives confirmation message after reset"
- ✅ User-focused: "User understands why email verification is needed"

### Bad Acceptance Criteria
- ❌ Vague: "Password reset works"
- ❌ Untestable: "User is happy with password reset"
- ❌ Technical: "POST to /api/auth/reset returns 200"
- ❌ Incomplete: "Email is sent"

---

## Testing Notes

**Guide developers on what to focus on:**

### What to Include
- **Edge cases:** What happens when email fails to send?
- **Performance:** Page should load in < 2 seconds
- **Security:** Rate limit password reset attempts
- **Browser compatibility:** Test in Chrome, Safari, Firefox
- **Accessibility:** Screen reader compatible
- **Responsive:** Works on mobile, tablet, desktop

---

## Estimated Effort

**Help BMM plan sprints:**

### Good Estimates
- "2 weeks (including testing and edge cases)"
- "3 days (straightforward CRUD, existing patterns)"
- "1 week (complex form logic, multiple validations)"

### Include Considerations
- Complexity of business logic
- Number of integrations
- Testing requirements
- Edge case handling
- Documentation needs

---

## Dependencies & Risks

### Dependencies
**What must be done first:**
- "Requires DD-001 (User Authentication) to be complete"
- "Depends on Stripe integration (Epic 3)"
- "Needs Design System tokens defined"

### Risks
**What might go wrong:**
- "Email deliverability in production (mitigation: use SendGrid)"
- "File upload limits (mitigation: chunk uploads)"
- "Third-party API rate limits (mitigation: caching layer)"

---

## Continuous Handoff Pattern

**Don't wait until everything is done:**

### Traditional (Waterfall)
```
Phase 4 Design → (wait months) → Phase 6 Handoff → BMM Implementation
```

**Problem:** Long delay, no feedback loop, risk builds up

---

### WDS Continuous (Agile)
```
Phase 4: Scenario 1 designed
    ↓
Phase 6: DD-001 ready
    ↓
BMM: Implement DD-001
    ↓ (parallel)
Phase 4: Scenario 2 designed
    ↓
Phase 6: DD-002 ready
    ↓
BMM: Implement DD-002
```

**Better:** Fast feedback, continuous delivery, risk mitigated early

---

## Quality Checklist

Before marking a Design Delivery "ready":

- [ ] **Complete flow** - All pages in scenario specified?
- [ ] **Platform refs** - Technical requirements linked?
- [ ] **Design System** - Components identified (if enabled)?
- [ ] **Acceptance criteria** - Clear, testable criteria?
- [ ] **Testing notes** - Edge cases and focus areas?
- [ ] **Effort estimated** - Realistic timeline?
- [ ] **Dependencies clear** - What's needed first?
- [ ] **Risks documented** - What could go wrong?
- [ ] **Priority set** - P0/P1/P2/P3?
- [ ] **No duplication** - References specs, doesn't copy?

---

## File Naming

**Pattern: `DD-XXX-[epic-name].yaml`**

Examples:
- `DD-001-user-authentication.yaml`
- `DD-002-proposal-creation.yaml`
- `DD-003-team-collaboration.yaml`

**Not:**
- ❌ `delivery-1.yaml` (not descriptive)
- ❌ `auth-spec.yaml` (not the DD pattern)
- ❌ `README.md` (generic, confusing)

---

## Output Location

```
docs/E-PRD/Design-Deliveries/
├── DD-001-user-authentication.yaml
├── DD-002-proposal-creation.yaml
├── DD-003-proposal-sharing.yaml
└── DD-004-team-collaboration.yaml
```

---

## Related Resources

- **Handover Workflow:** `../../workflows/4-ux-design/workflow-handover.md`
- **DD Template:** `../../templates/design-delivery.template.yaml`
- **BMM Phase 4:** Where these deliveries are implemented
- **Complete PRD:** Synthesis of Platform + Functional requirements

---

*Design deliveries are the bridge between design vision and development reality. Package with confidence, hand off with pride.*


