diff --git a/src/bmm/workflows/4-implementation/create-story/checklist.md b/src/bmm/workflows/4-implementation/create-story/checklist.md
index 6fc678994..1fe7c2d5c 100644
--- a/src/bmm/workflows/4-implementation/create-story/checklist.md
+++ b/src/bmm/workflows/4-implementation/create-story/checklist.md
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ This is a COMPETITION to create the **ULTIMATE story context** that makes LLM de
- **Story file**: The story file to review and improve
- **Workflow variables**: From workflow.yaml (implementation_artifacts, epics_file, etc.)
- **Source documents**: Epics, architecture, etc. (discovered or provided)
-- **Validation framework**: `validate-workflow.xml` (handles checklist execution)
+- **Validation framework**: `validate-workflow.xml` (handles checklist execution and report generation)
---
@@ -64,8 +64,12 @@ You will systematically re-do the entire story creation process, but with a crit
1. **Load the workflow configuration**: `{installed_path}/workflow.yaml` for variable inclusion
2. **Load the story file**: `{story_file_path}` (provided by user or discovered)
3. **Load validation framework**: `{project-root}/_bmad/core/tasks/validate-workflow.xml`
-4. **Extract metadata**: epic_num, story_num, story_key, story_title from story file
-5. **Resolve all workflow variables**: implementation_artifacts, epics_file, architecture_file, etc.
+4. **Resolve variables deterministically**:
+ - Parse workflow.yaml key/value pairs
+ - For any value matching `{config_source}:key`, load the referenced config file and resolve `key`
+ - Resolve system path variables (for example `{project-root}`, `{installed_path}`) in every path value
+ - If any required variable remains unresolved, stop and request explicit user input before continuing
+5. **Extract metadata**: epic_num, story_num, story_key, story_title from story file
6. **Understand current status**: What story implementation guidance is currently provided?
**Note:** If running in fresh context, user should provide the story file path being reviewed. If running from create-story workflow, the validation framework will automatically discover the checklist and story file.
diff --git a/src/bmm/workflows/4-implementation/create-story/instructions.xml b/src/bmm/workflows/4-implementation/create-story/instructions.xml
index f9433371f..2f67a9004 100644
--- a/src/bmm/workflows/4-implementation/create-story/instructions.xml
+++ b/src/bmm/workflows/4-implementation/create-story/instructions.xml
@@ -280,16 +280,12 @@
testing_requirements
-
- previous_story_intelligence
-
+ If previous story learnings are unavailable (for example this is story 1 in epic), set previous_story_intelligence to an explicit N/A note with reason
+ previous_story_intelligence
-
- git_intelligence_summary
-
+ If git analysis is unavailable or not relevant, set git_intelligence_summary to an explicit N/A note with reason
+ git_intelligence_summary
@@ -311,7 +307,7 @@
- Validate against checklist at {installed_path}/checklist.md using _bmad/core/tasks/validate-workflow.xml
+ Validate against checklist at {installed_path}/checklist.md using _bmad/core/tasks/validate-workflow.xml and target file {default_output_file}Save story document unconditionally
diff --git a/src/core/tasks/validate-workflow.xml b/src/core/tasks/validate-workflow.xml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..7d6edccec
--- /dev/null
+++ b/src/core/tasks/validate-workflow.xml
@@ -0,0 +1,135 @@
+
+
+ Validate a generated document against checklist requirements with deterministic variable resolution and produce an actionable pass/fail report
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ MANDATORY: Execute ALL steps in order. Do not skip any checklist item.
+ Always read COMPLETE files; do not sample with offsets.
+ Every non-N/A judgment must include concrete evidence from the document.
+ If a required path cannot be resolved, stop and ask for explicit user input.
+ Be strict and objective: no assumptions without evidence.
+
+
+
+
+ Load workflow yaml from input {workflow}
+ Resolve variables in this order:
+ 1) load config_source file if present
+ 2) resolve all {config_source}:key references
+ 3) resolve system path variables ({project-root}, {installed_path})
+ 4) resolve system-generated values (date)
+
+ Determine checklist path in priority order:
+ - explicit input {checklist}
+ - workflow.yaml field "validation"
+ - sibling file checklist.md in workflow directory
+
+ Determine document path in priority order:
+ - explicit input {document}
+ - resolved variable {story_file} if present
+ - resolved variable {default_output_file} if present
+
+ Try fuzzy discovery in implementation_artifacts: pick most likely recent .md output and state this inference explicitly
+ Ask user: "Which document should I validate?" and WAIT
+
+
+
+ Load full checklist content
+ Load full target document content
+ Extract story metadata when available (epic_num, story_num, story_id) from document title or filename for conditional checks
+ Parse checklist into sections and atomic validation items
+ Mark items containing terms like "critical", "must", "required", "blocking" as critical checks
+ HALT with error: "Checklist is empty or unparsable"
+
+
+
+ For every checklist item, evaluate one of: PASS, PARTIAL, FAIL, N/A
+ For each item:
+ - restate requirement in one short sentence
+ - if item contains explicit condition (for example "If story_num > 1") and condition is false, mark N/A with the exact reason
+ - locate explicit evidence in document (include line references when possible)
+ - consider implied coverage only when explicit text is absent
+ - assign verdict and rationale
+ - if PARTIAL/FAIL, describe impact and a concrete fix
+
+ DO NOT SKIP ANY ITEM OR SECTION
+
+
+
+ Set report path:
+ - use explicit input {report} when provided
+ - else save to target document folder as validation-report-{timestamp}.md
+
+ Write report with the format below
+
+
+ # Validation Report
+
+ - Document: {document}
+ - Checklist: {checklist}
+ - Workflow: {workflow}
+ - Date: {timestamp}
+
+ ## Summary
+ - Overall pass rate: {pass_count}/{applicable_count} ({pass_percent}%)
+ - Critical failures: {critical_fail_count}
+ - Critical partials: {critical_partial_count}
+ - Gate decision: {PASS|FAIL}
+
+ ## Section Results
+ ### {Section Name}
+ - PASS: {count}
+ - PARTIAL: {count}
+ - FAIL: {count}
+ - N/A: {count}
+
+ For each checklist item:
+ - [MARK] {item}
+ - Evidence: {quote or line reference}
+ - Analysis: {why mark is correct}
+ - Action (if PARTIAL/FAIL): {specific remediation}
+
+ ## Must Fix Before Proceeding
+ - {all critical FAIL items}
+
+ ## Should Improve
+ - {all non-critical FAIL and PARTIAL items}
+
+ ## Final Recommendation
+ 1. {highest-priority fix}
+ 2. {second-priority fix}
+ 3. {third-priority fix}
+
+
+
+
+ Present concise summary with counts and gate decision
+ Provide report path
+ State clearly that workflow should not proceed until fixes are applied
+ HALT and wait for user direction
+
+
+
+
+ HALT if workflow file cannot be loaded
+ HALT if checklist file cannot be loaded
+ HALT if target document cannot be determined after user prompt
+ HALT if any checklist section is skipped
+
+
+
+ Never skip checklist items
+ Every PASS/PARTIAL/FAIL must have evidence
+ Use deterministic variable resolution before asking the user
+ Always save a validation report file
+
+