Merge branch 'main' into convert-market-research-skill

src/bmm/agents/pm.agent.yaml

@@ -20,11 +20,11 @@ agent:
 
   menu:
     - trigger: CP or fuzzy match on create-prd
-      exec: "{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/workflow-create-prd.md"
+      exec: "skill:bmad-create-prd"
       description: "[CP] Create PRD: Expert led facilitation to produce your Product Requirements Document"
 
     - trigger: VP or fuzzy match on validate-prd
-      exec: "{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/workflow-validate-prd.md"
+      exec: "skill:bmad-validate-prd"
       description: "[VP] Validate PRD: Validate a Product Requirements Document is comprehensive, lean, well organized and cohesive"
 
     - trigger: EP or fuzzy match on edit-prd

src/bmm/module-help.csv

@@ -15,8 +15,8 @@ bmm,1-analysis,Market Research,MR,20,skill:bmad-market-research,bmad-bmm-market-
 bmm,1-analysis,Domain Research,DR,21,skill:bmad-domain-research,bmad-bmm-domain-research,false,analyst,Create Mode,"Industry domain deep dive subject matter expertise and terminology","planning_artifacts|project_knowledge","research documents",
 bmm,1-analysis,Technical Research,TR,22,skill:bmad-technical-research,bmad-bmm-technical-research,false,analyst,Create Mode,"Technical feasibility architecture options and implementation approaches","planning_artifacts|project_knowledge","research documents",
 bmm,1-analysis,Create Brief,CB,30,skill:bmad-create-product-brief,bmad-bmm-create-product-brief,false,analyst,Create Mode,"A guided experience to nail down your product idea",planning_artifacts,"product brief",
-bmm,2-planning,Create PRD,CP,10,_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/workflow-create-prd.md,bmad-bmm-create-prd,true,pm,Create Mode,"Expert led facilitation to produce your Product Requirements Document",planning_artifacts,prd,
+bmm,2-planning,Create PRD,CP,10,skill:bmad-create-prd,bmad-bmm-create-prd,true,pm,Create Mode,"Expert led facilitation to produce your Product Requirements Document",planning_artifacts,prd,
-bmm,2-planning,Validate PRD,VP,20,_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/workflow-validate-prd.md,bmad-bmm-validate-prd,false,pm,Validate Mode,"Validate PRD is comprehensive lean well organized and cohesive",planning_artifacts,"prd validation report",
+bmm,2-planning,Validate PRD,VP,20,skill:bmad-validate-prd,bmad-bmm-validate-prd,false,pm,Validate Mode,"Validate PRD is comprehensive lean well organized and cohesive",planning_artifacts,"prd validation report",
 bmm,2-planning,Edit PRD,EP,25,skill:bmad-edit-prd,bmad-bmm-edit-prd,false,pm,Edit Mode,"Improve and enhance an existing PRD",planning_artifacts,"updated prd",
 bmm,2-planning,Create UX,CU,30,skill:bmad-create-ux-design,bmad-bmm-create-ux-design,false,ux-designer,Create Mode,"Guidance through realizing the plan for your UX, strongly recommended if a UI is a primary piece of the proposed project",planning_artifacts,"ux design",
 bmm,3-solutioning,Create Architecture,CA,10,skill:bmad-create-architecture,bmad-bmm-create-architecture,true,architect,Create Mode,"Guided Workflow to document technical decisions",planning_artifacts,architecture,

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+---
+name: bmad-validate-prd
+description: 'Validate a PRD against standards. Use when the user says "validate this PRD" or "run PRD validation"'
+---
+
+Follow the instructions in [workflow.md](workflow.md).

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+type: skill

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/data/domain-complexity.csv

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+domain,signals,complexity,key_concerns,required_knowledge,suggested_workflow,web_searches,special_sections
+healthcare,"medical,diagnostic,clinical,FDA,patient,treatment,HIPAA,therapy,pharma,drug",high,"FDA approval;Clinical validation;HIPAA compliance;Patient safety;Medical device classification;Liability","Regulatory pathways;Clinical trial design;Medical standards;Data privacy;Integration requirements","domain-research","FDA software medical device guidance {date};HIPAA compliance software requirements;Medical software standards {date};Clinical validation software","clinical_requirements;regulatory_pathway;validation_methodology;safety_measures"
+fintech,"payment,banking,trading,investment,crypto,wallet,transaction,KYC,AML,funds,fintech",high,"Regional compliance;Security standards;Audit requirements;Fraud prevention;Data protection","KYC/AML requirements;PCI DSS;Open banking;Regional laws (US/EU/APAC);Crypto regulations","domain-research","fintech regulations {date};payment processing compliance {date};open banking API standards;cryptocurrency regulations {date}","compliance_matrix;security_architecture;audit_requirements;fraud_prevention"
+govtech,"government,federal,civic,public sector,citizen,municipal,voting",high,"Procurement rules;Security clearance;Accessibility (508);FedRAMP;Privacy;Transparency","Government procurement;Security frameworks;Accessibility standards;Privacy laws;Open data requirements","domain-research","government software procurement {date};FedRAMP compliance requirements;section 508 accessibility;government security standards","procurement_compliance;security_clearance;accessibility_standards;transparency_requirements"
+edtech,"education,learning,student,teacher,curriculum,assessment,K-12,university,LMS",medium,"Student privacy (COPPA/FERPA);Accessibility;Content moderation;Age verification;Curriculum standards","Educational privacy laws;Learning standards;Accessibility requirements;Content guidelines;Assessment validity","domain-research","educational software privacy {date};COPPA FERPA compliance;WCAG education requirements;learning management standards","privacy_compliance;content_guidelines;accessibility_features;curriculum_alignment"
+aerospace,"aircraft,spacecraft,aviation,drone,satellite,propulsion,flight,radar,navigation",high,"Safety certification;DO-178C compliance;Performance validation;Simulation accuracy;Export controls","Aviation standards;Safety analysis;Simulation validation;ITAR/export controls;Performance requirements","domain-research + technical-model","DO-178C software certification;aerospace simulation standards {date};ITAR export controls software;aviation safety requirements","safety_certification;simulation_validation;performance_requirements;export_compliance"
+automotive,"vehicle,car,autonomous,ADAS,automotive,driving,EV,charging",high,"Safety standards;ISO 26262;V2X communication;Real-time requirements;Certification","Automotive standards;Functional safety;V2X protocols;Real-time systems;Testing requirements","domain-research","ISO 26262 automotive software;automotive safety standards {date};V2X communication protocols;EV charging standards","safety_standards;functional_safety;communication_protocols;certification_requirements"
+scientific,"research,algorithm,simulation,modeling,computational,analysis,data science,ML,AI",medium,"Reproducibility;Validation methodology;Peer review;Performance;Accuracy;Computational resources","Scientific method;Statistical validity;Computational requirements;Domain expertise;Publication standards","technical-model","scientific computing best practices {date};research reproducibility standards;computational modeling validation;peer review software","validation_methodology;accuracy_metrics;reproducibility_plan;computational_requirements"
+legaltech,"legal,law,contract,compliance,litigation,patent,attorney,court",high,"Legal ethics;Bar regulations;Data retention;Attorney-client privilege;Court system integration","Legal practice rules;Ethics requirements;Court filing systems;Document standards;Confidentiality","domain-research","legal technology ethics {date};law practice management software requirements;court filing system standards;attorney client privilege technology","ethics_compliance;data_retention;confidentiality_measures;court_integration"
+insuretech,"insurance,claims,underwriting,actuarial,policy,risk,premium",high,"Insurance regulations;Actuarial standards;Data privacy;Fraud detection;State compliance","Insurance regulations by state;Actuarial methods;Risk modeling;Claims processing;Regulatory reporting","domain-research","insurance software regulations {date};actuarial standards software;insurance fraud detection;state insurance compliance","regulatory_requirements;risk_modeling;fraud_detection;reporting_compliance"
+energy,"energy,utility,grid,solar,wind,power,electricity,oil,gas",high,"Grid compliance;NERC standards;Environmental regulations;Safety requirements;Real-time operations","Energy regulations;Grid standards;Environmental compliance;Safety protocols;SCADA systems","domain-research","energy sector software compliance {date};NERC CIP standards;smart grid requirements;renewable energy software standards","grid_compliance;safety_protocols;environmental_compliance;operational_requirements"
+process_control,"industrial automation,process control,PLC,SCADA,DCS,HMI,operational technology,OT,control system,cyberphysical,MES,historian,instrumentation,I&C,P&ID",high,"Functional safety;OT cybersecurity;Real-time control requirements;Legacy system integration;Process safety and hazard analysis;Environmental compliance and permitting;Engineering authority and PE requirements","Functional safety standards;OT security frameworks;Industrial protocols;Process control architecture;Plant reliability and maintainability","domain-research + technical-model","IEC 62443 OT cybersecurity requirements {date};functional safety software requirements {date};industrial process control architecture;ISA-95 manufacturing integration","functional_safety;ot_security;process_requirements;engineering_authority"
+building_automation,"building automation,BAS,BMS,HVAC,smart building,lighting control,fire alarm,fire protection,fire suppression,life safety,elevator,access control,DDC,energy management,sequence of operations,commissioning",high,"Life safety codes;Building energy standards;Multi-trade coordination and interoperability;Commissioning and ongoing operational performance;Indoor environmental quality and occupant comfort;Engineering authority and PE requirements","Building automation protocols;HVAC and mechanical controls;Fire alarm, fire protection, and life safety design;Commissioning process and sequence of operations;Building codes and energy standards","domain-research","smart building software architecture {date};BACnet integration best practices;building automation cybersecurity {date};ASHRAE building standards","life_safety;energy_compliance;commissioning_requirements;engineering_authority"
+gaming,"game,player,gameplay,level,character,multiplayer,quest",redirect,"REDIRECT TO GAME WORKFLOWS","Game design","game-brief","NA","NA"
+general,"",low,"Standard requirements;Basic security;User experience;Performance","General software practices","continue","software development best practices {date}","standard_requirements"

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/data/prd-purpose.md

@@ -0,0 +1,197 @@
+# BMAD PRD Purpose
+
+**The PRD is the top of the required funnel that feeds all subsequent product development work in rhw BMad Method.**
+
+---
+
+## What is a BMAD PRD?
+
+A dual-audience document serving:
+1. **Human Product Managers and builders** - Vision, strategy, stakeholder communication
+2. **LLM Downstream Consumption** - UX Design → Architecture → Epics → Development AI Agents
+
+Each successive document becomes more AI-tailored and granular.
+
+---
+
+## Core Philosophy: Information Density
+
+**High Signal-to-Noise Ratio**
+
+Every sentence must carry information weight. LLMs consume precise, dense content efficiently.
+
+**Anti-Patterns (Eliminate These):**
+- ❌ "The system will allow users to..." → ✅ "Users can..."
+- ❌ "It is important to note that..." → ✅ State the fact directly
+- ❌ "In order to..." → ✅ "To..."
+- ❌ Conversational filler and padding → ✅ Direct, concise statements
+
+**Goal:** Maximum information per word. Zero fluff.
+
+---
+
+## The Traceability Chain
+
+**PRD starts the chain:**
+```
+Vision → Success Criteria → User Journeys → Functional Requirements → (future: User Stories)
+```
+
+**In the PRD, establish:**
+- Vision → Success Criteria alignment
+- Success Criteria → User Journey coverage
+- User Journey → Functional Requirement mapping
+- All requirements traceable to user needs
+
+**Why:** Each downstream artifact (UX, Architecture, Epics, Stories) must trace back to documented user needs and business objectives. This chain ensures we build the right thing.
+
+---
+
+## What Makes Great Functional Requirements?
+
+### FRs are Capabilities, Not Implementation
+
+**Good FR:** "Users can reset their password via email link"
+**Bad FR:** "System sends JWT via email and validates with database" (implementation leakage)
+
+**Good FR:** "Dashboard loads in under 2 seconds for 95th percentile"
+**Bad FR:** "Fast loading time" (subjective, unmeasurable)
+
+### SMART Quality Criteria
+
+**Specific:** Clear, precisely defined capability
+**Measurable:** Quantifiable with test criteria
+**Attainable:** Realistic within constraints
+**Relevant:** Aligns with business objectives
+**Traceable:** Links to source (executive summary or user journey)
+
+### FR Anti-Patterns
+
+**Subjective Adjectives:**
+- ❌ "easy to use", "intuitive", "user-friendly", "fast", "responsive"
+- ✅ Use metrics: "completes task in under 3 clicks", "loads in under 2 seconds"
+
+**Implementation Leakage:**
+- ❌ Technology names, specific libraries, implementation details
+- ✅ Focus on capability and measurable outcomes
+
+**Vague Quantifiers:**
+- ❌ "multiple users", "several options", "various formats"
+- ✅ "up to 100 concurrent users", "3-5 options", "PDF, DOCX, TXT formats"
+
+**Missing Test Criteria:**
+- ❌ "The system shall provide notifications"
+- ✅ "The system shall send email notifications within 30 seconds of trigger event"
+
+---
+
+## What Makes Great Non-Functional Requirements?
+
+### NFRs Must Be Measurable
+
+**Template:**
+```
+"The system shall [metric] [condition] [measurement method]"
+```
+
+**Examples:**
+- ✅ "The system shall respond to API requests in under 200ms for 95th percentile as measured by APM monitoring"
+- ✅ "The system shall maintain 99.9% uptime during business hours as measured by cloud provider SLA"
+- ✅ "The system shall support 10,000 concurrent users as measured by load testing"
+
+### NFR Anti-Patterns
+
+**Unmeasurable Claims:**
+- ❌ "The system shall be scalable" → ✅ "The system shall handle 10x load growth through horizontal scaling"
+- ❌ "High availability required" → ✅ "99.9% uptime as measured by cloud provider SLA"
+
+**Missing Context:**
+- ❌ "Response time under 1 second" → ✅ "API response time under 1 second for 95th percentile under normal load"
+
+---
+
+## Domain-Specific Requirements
+
+**Auto-Detect and Enforce Based on Project Context**
+
+Certain industries have mandatory requirements that must be present:
+
+- **Healthcare:** HIPAA Privacy & Security Rules, PHI encryption, audit logging, MFA
+- **Fintech:** PCI-DSS Level 1, AML/KYC compliance, SOX controls, financial audit trails
+- **GovTech:** NIST framework, Section 508 accessibility (WCAG 2.1 AA), FedRAMP, data residency
+- **E-Commerce:** PCI-DSS for payments, inventory accuracy, tax calculation by jurisdiction
+
+**Why:** Missing these requirements in the PRD means they'll be missed in architecture and implementation, creating expensive rework. During PRD creation there is a step to cover this - during validation we want to make sure it was covered. For this purpose steps will utilize a domain-complexity.csv and project-types.csv.
+
+---
+
+## Document Structure (Markdown, Human-Readable)
+
+### Required Sections
+1. **Executive Summary** - Vision, differentiator, target users
+2. **Success Criteria** - Measurable outcomes (SMART)
+3. **Product Scope** - MVP, Growth, Vision phases
+4. **User Journeys** - Comprehensive coverage
+5. **Domain Requirements** - Industry-specific compliance (if applicable)
+6. **Innovation Analysis** - Competitive differentiation (if applicable)
+7. **Project-Type Requirements** - Platform-specific needs
+8. **Functional Requirements** - Capability contract (FRs)
+9. **Non-Functional Requirements** - Quality attributes (NFRs)
+
+### Formatting for Dual Consumption
+
+**For Humans:**
+- Clear, professional language
+- Logical flow from vision to requirements
+- Easy for stakeholders to review and approve
+
+**For LLMs:**
+- ## Level 2 headers for all main sections (enables extraction)
+- Consistent structure and patterns
+- Precise, testable language
+- High information density
+
+---
+
+## Downstream Impact
+
+**How the PRD Feeds Next Artifacts:**
+
+**UX Design:**
+- User journeys → interaction flows
+- FRs → design requirements
+- Success criteria → UX metrics
+
+**Architecture:**
+- FRs → system capabilities
+- NFRs → architecture decisions
+- Domain requirements → compliance architecture
+- Project-type requirements → platform choices
+
+**Epics & Stories (created after architecture):**
+- FRs → user stories (1 FR could map to 1-3 stories potentially)
+- Acceptance criteria → story acceptance tests
+- Priority → sprint sequencing
+- Traceability → stories map back to vision
+
+**Development AI Agents:**
+- Precise requirements → implementation clarity
+- Test criteria → automated test generation
+- Domain requirements → compliance enforcement
+- Measurable NFRs → performance targets
+
+---
+
+## Summary: What Makes a Great BMAD PRD?
+
+✅ **High Information Density** - Every sentence carries weight, zero fluff
+✅ **Measurable Requirements** - All FRs and NFRs are testable with specific criteria
+✅ **Clear Traceability** - Each requirement links to user need and business objective
+✅ **Domain Awareness** - Industry-specific requirements auto-detected and included
+✅ **Zero Anti-Patterns** - No subjective adjectives, implementation leakage, or vague quantifiers
+✅ **Dual Audience Optimized** - Human-readable AND LLM-consumable
+✅ **Markdown Format** - Professional, clean, accessible to all stakeholders
+
+---
+
+**Remember:** The PRD is the foundation. Quality here ripples through every subsequent phase. A dense, precise, well-traced PRD makes UX design, architecture, epic breakdown, and AI development dramatically more effective.

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/data/project-types.csv

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+project_type,detection_signals,key_questions,required_sections,skip_sections,web_search_triggers,innovation_signals
+api_backend,"API,REST,GraphQL,backend,service,endpoints","Endpoints needed?;Authentication method?;Data formats?;Rate limits?;Versioning?;SDK needed?","endpoint_specs;auth_model;data_schemas;error_codes;rate_limits;api_docs","ux_ui;visual_design;user_journeys","framework best practices;OpenAPI standards","API composition;New protocol"
+mobile_app,"iOS,Android,app,mobile,iPhone,iPad","Native or cross-platform?;Offline needed?;Push notifications?;Device features?;Store compliance?","platform_reqs;device_permissions;offline_mode;push_strategy;store_compliance","desktop_features;cli_commands","app store guidelines;platform requirements","Gesture innovation;AR/VR features"
+saas_b2b,"SaaS,B2B,platform,dashboard,teams,enterprise","Multi-tenant?;Permission model?;Subscription tiers?;Integrations?;Compliance?","tenant_model;rbac_matrix;subscription_tiers;integration_list;compliance_reqs","cli_interface;mobile_first","compliance requirements;integration guides","Workflow automation;AI agents"
+developer_tool,"SDK,library,package,npm,pip,framework","Language support?;Package managers?;IDE integration?;Documentation?;Examples?","language_matrix;installation_methods;api_surface;code_examples;migration_guide","visual_design;store_compliance","package manager best practices;API design patterns","New paradigm;DSL creation"
+cli_tool,"CLI,command,terminal,bash,script","Interactive or scriptable?;Output formats?;Config method?;Shell completion?","command_structure;output_formats;config_schema;scripting_support","visual_design;ux_principles;touch_interactions","CLI design patterns;shell integration","Natural language CLI;AI commands"
+web_app,"website,webapp,browser,SPA,PWA","SPA or MPA?;Browser support?;SEO needed?;Real-time?;Accessibility?","browser_matrix;responsive_design;performance_targets;seo_strategy;accessibility_level","native_features;cli_commands","web standards;WCAG guidelines","New interaction;WebAssembly use"
+game,"game,player,gameplay,level,character","REDIRECT TO USE THE BMad Method Game Module Agent and Workflows - HALT","game-brief;GDD","most_sections","game design patterns","Novel mechanics;Genre mixing"
+desktop_app,"desktop,Windows,Mac,Linux,native","Cross-platform?;Auto-update?;System integration?;Offline?","platform_support;system_integration;update_strategy;offline_capabilities","web_seo;mobile_features","desktop guidelines;platform requirements","Desktop AI;System automation"
+iot_embedded,"IoT,embedded,device,sensor,hardware","Hardware specs?;Connectivity?;Power constraints?;Security?;OTA updates?","hardware_reqs;connectivity_protocol;power_profile;security_model;update_mechanism","visual_ui;browser_support","IoT standards;protocol specs","Edge AI;New sensors"
+blockchain_web3,"blockchain,crypto,DeFi,NFT,smart contract","Chain selection?;Wallet integration?;Gas optimization?;Security audit?","chain_specs;wallet_support;smart_contracts;security_audit;gas_optimization","traditional_auth;centralized_db","blockchain standards;security patterns","Novel tokenomics;DAO structure"

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-01-discovery.md

@@ -0,0 +1,226 @@
+---
+name: 'step-v-01-discovery'
+description: 'Document Discovery & Confirmation - Handle fresh context validation, confirm PRD path, discover input documents'
+
+# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
+nextStepFile: './step-v-02-format-detection.md'
+advancedElicitationTask: 'skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation'
+partyModeWorkflow: '{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md'
+prdPurpose: '../data/prd-purpose.md'
+---
+
+# Step 1: Document Discovery & Confirmation
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+Handle fresh context validation by confirming PRD path, discovering and loading input documents from frontmatter, and initializing the validation report.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+
+### Role Reinforcement:
+
+- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
+- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
+- ✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
+- ✅ You bring systematic validation expertise and analytical rigor
+- ✅ User brings domain knowledge and specific PRD context
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Focus ONLY on discovering PRD and input documents, not validating yet
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to perform any validation checks in this step
+- 💬 Approach: Systematic discovery with clear reporting to user
+- 🚪 This is the setup step - get everything ready for validation
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Discover and confirm PRD to validate
+- 💾 Load PRD and all input documents from frontmatter
+- 📖 Initialize validation report next to PRD
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to load next step until user confirms setup
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Available context: PRD path (user-specified or discovered), workflow configuration
+- Focus: Document discovery and setup only
+- Limits: Don't perform validation, don't skip discovery
+- Dependencies: Configuration loaded from PRD workflow.md initialization
+
+## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
+
+**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
+
+### 1. Load PRD Purpose and Standards
+
+Load and read the complete file at:
+`{prdPurpose}`
+
+This file contains the BMAD PRD philosophy, standards, and validation criteria that will guide all validation checks. Internalize this understanding - it defines what makes a great BMAD PRD.
+
+### 2. Discover PRD to Validate
+
+**If PRD path provided as invocation parameter:**
+- Use provided path
+
+**If no PRD path provided, auto-discover:**
+- Search `{planning_artifacts}` for files matching `*prd*.md`
+- Also check for sharded PRDs: `{planning_artifacts}/*prd*/*.md`
+
+**If exactly ONE PRD found:**
+- Use it automatically
+- Inform user: "Found PRD: {discovered_path} — using it for validation."
+
+**If MULTIPLE PRDs found:**
+- List all discovered PRDs with numbered options
+- "I found multiple PRDs. Which one would you like to validate?"
+- Wait for user selection
+
+**If NO PRDs found:**
+- "I couldn't find any PRD files in {planning_artifacts}. Please provide the path to the PRD file you want to validate."
+- Wait for user to provide PRD path.
+
+### 3. Validate PRD Exists and Load
+
+Once PRD path is provided:
+
+- Check if PRD file exists at specified path
+- If not found: "I cannot find a PRD at that path. Please check the path and try again."
+- If found: Load the complete PRD file including frontmatter
+
+### 4. Extract Frontmatter and Input Documents
+
+From the loaded PRD frontmatter, extract:
+
+- `inputDocuments: []` array (if present)
+- Any other relevant metadata (classification, date, etc.)
+
+**If no inputDocuments array exists:**
+Note this and proceed with PRD-only validation
+
+### 5. Load Input Documents
+
+For each document listed in `inputDocuments`:
+
+- Attempt to load the document
+- Track successfully loaded documents
+- Note any documents that fail to load
+
+**Build list of loaded input documents:**
+- Product Brief (if present)
+- Research documents (if present)
+- Other reference materials (if present)
+
+### 6. Ask About Additional Reference Documents
+
+"**I've loaded the following documents from your PRD frontmatter:**
+
+{list loaded documents with file names}
+
+**Are there any additional reference documents you'd like me to include in this validation?**
+
+These could include:
+- Additional research or context documents
+- Project documentation not tracked in frontmatter
+- Standards or compliance documents
+- Competitive analysis or benchmarks
+
+Please provide paths to any additional documents, or type 'none' to proceed."
+
+**Load any additional documents provided by user.**
+
+### 7. Initialize Validation Report
+
+Create validation report at: `{validationReportPath}`
+
+**Initialize with frontmatter:**
+```yaml
+---
+validationTarget: '{prd_path}'
+validationDate: '{current_date}'
+inputDocuments: [list of all loaded documents]
+validationStepsCompleted: []
+validationStatus: IN_PROGRESS
+---
+```
+
+**Initial content:**
+```markdown
+# PRD Validation Report
+
+**PRD Being Validated:** {prd_path}
+**Validation Date:** {current_date}
+
+## Input Documents
+
+{list all documents loaded for validation}
+
+## Validation Findings
+
+[Findings will be appended as validation progresses]
+```
+
+### 8. Present Discovery Summary
+
+"**Setup Complete!**
+
+**PRD to Validate:** {prd_path}
+
+**Input Documents Loaded:**
+- PRD: {prd_name} ✓
+- Product Brief: {count} {if count > 0}✓{else}(none found){/if}
+- Research: {count} {if count > 0}✓{else}(none found){/if}
+- Additional References: {count} {if count > 0}✓{else}(none){/if}
+
+**Validation Report:** {validationReportPath}
+
+**Ready to begin validation.**"
+
+### 9. Present MENU OPTIONS
+
+Display: **Select an Option:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue to Format Detection
+
+#### EXECUTION RULES:
+
+- ALWAYS halt and wait for user input after presenting menu
+- ONLY proceed to next step when user selects 'C'
+- User can ask questions or add more documents - always respond and redisplay menu
+
+#### Menu Handling Logic:
+
+- IF A: Read fully and follow: {advancedElicitationTask}, and when finished redisplay the menu
+- IF P: Read fully and follow: {partyModeWorkflow}, and when finished redisplay the menu
+- IF C: Read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} to begin format detection
+- IF user provides additional document: Load it, update report, redisplay summary
+- IF Any other: help user, then redisplay menu
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- PRD path discovered and confirmed
+- PRD file exists and loads successfully
+- All input documents from frontmatter loaded
+- Additional reference documents (if any) loaded
+- Validation report initialized next to PRD
+- User clearly informed of setup status
+- Menu presented and user input handled correctly
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Proceeding with non-existent PRD file
+- Not loading input documents from frontmatter
+- Creating validation report in wrong location
+- Proceeding without user confirming setup
+- Not handling missing input documents gracefully
+
+**Master Rule:** Complete discovery and setup BEFORE validation. This step ensures everything is in place for systematic validation checks.

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-02-format-detection.md

@@ -0,0 +1,191 @@
+---
+name: 'step-v-02-format-detection'
+description: 'Format Detection & Structure Analysis - Classify PRD format and route appropriately'
+
+# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
+nextStepFile: './step-v-03-density-validation.md'
+altStepFile: './step-v-02b-parity-check.md'
+prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
+validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
+---
+
+# Step 2: Format Detection & Structure Analysis
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+Detect if PRD follows BMAD format and route appropriately - classify as BMAD Standard / BMAD Variant / Non-Standard, with optional parity check for non-standard formats.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+
+### Role Reinforcement:
+
+- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
+- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
+- ✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
+- ✅ You bring systematic validation expertise and pattern recognition
+- ✅ User brings domain knowledge and PRD context
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Focus ONLY on detecting format and classifying structure
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to perform other validation checks in this step
+- 💬 Approach: Analytical and systematic, clear reporting of findings
+- 🚪 This is a branch step - may route to parity check for non-standard PRDs
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Analyze PRD structure systematically
+- 💾 Append format findings to validation report
+- 📖 Route appropriately based on format classification
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to skip format detection or proceed without classification
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Available context: PRD file loaded in step 1, validation report initialized
+- Focus: Format detection and classification only
+- Limits: Don't perform other validation, don't skip classification
+- Dependencies: Step 1 completed - PRD loaded and report initialized
+
+## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
+
+**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
+
+### 1. Extract PRD Structure
+
+Load the complete PRD file and extract:
+
+**All Level 2 (##) headers:**
+- Scan through entire PRD document
+- Extract all ## section headers
+- List them in order
+
+**PRD frontmatter:**
+- Extract classification.domain if present
+- Extract classification.projectType if present
+- Note any other relevant metadata
+
+### 2. Check for BMAD PRD Core Sections
+
+Check if the PRD contains the following BMAD PRD core sections:
+
+1. **Executive Summary** (or variations: ## Executive Summary, ## Overview, ## Introduction)
+2. **Success Criteria** (or: ## Success Criteria, ## Goals, ## Objectives)
+3. **Product Scope** (or: ## Product Scope, ## Scope, ## In Scope, ## Out of Scope)
+4. **User Journeys** (or: ## User Journeys, ## User Stories, ## User Flows)
+5. **Functional Requirements** (or: ## Functional Requirements, ## Features, ## Capabilities)
+6. **Non-Functional Requirements** (or: ## Non-Functional Requirements, ## NFRs, ## Quality Attributes)
+
+**Count matches:**
+- How many of these 6 core sections are present?
+- Which specific sections are present?
+- Which are missing?
+
+### 3. Classify PRD Format
+
+Based on core section count, classify:
+
+**BMAD Standard:**
+- 5-6 core sections present
+- Follows BMAD PRD structure closely
+
+**BMAD Variant:**
+- 3-4 core sections present
+- Generally follows BMAD patterns but may have structural differences
+- Missing some sections but recognizable as BMAD-style
+
+**Non-Standard:**
+- Fewer than 3 core sections present
+- Does not follow BMAD PRD structure
+- May be completely custom format, legacy format, or from another framework
+
+### 4. Report Format Findings to Validation Report
+
+Append to validation report:
+
+```markdown
+## Format Detection
+
+**PRD Structure:**
+[List all ## Level 2 headers found]
+
+**BMAD Core Sections Present:**
+- Executive Summary: [Present/Missing]
+- Success Criteria: [Present/Missing]
+- Product Scope: [Present/Missing]
+- User Journeys: [Present/Missing]
+- Functional Requirements: [Present/Missing]
+- Non-Functional Requirements: [Present/Missing]
+
+**Format Classification:** [BMAD Standard / BMAD Variant / Non-Standard]
+**Core Sections Present:** [count]/6
+```
+
+### 5. Route Based on Format Classification
+
+**IF format is BMAD Standard or BMAD Variant:**
+
+Display: "**Format Detected:** {classification}
+
+Proceeding to systematic validation checks..."
+
+Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} (step-v-03-density-validation.md)
+
+**IF format is Non-Standard (< 3 core sections):**
+
+Display: "**Format Detected:** Non-Standard PRD
+
+This PRD does not follow BMAD standard structure (only {count}/6 core sections present).
+
+You have options:"
+
+Present MENU OPTIONS below for user selection
+
+### 6. Present MENU OPTIONS (Non-Standard PRDs Only)
+
+**[A] Parity Check** - Analyze gaps and estimate effort to reach BMAD PRD parity
+**[B] Validate As-Is** - Proceed with validation using current structure
+**[C] Exit** - Exit validation and review format findings
+
+#### EXECUTION RULES:
+
+- ALWAYS halt and wait for user input
+- Only proceed based on user selection
+
+#### Menu Handling Logic:
+
+- IF A (Parity Check): Read fully and follow: {altStepFile} (step-v-02b-parity-check.md)
+- IF B (Validate As-Is): Display "Proceeding with validation..." then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+- IF C (Exit): Display format findings summary and exit validation
+- IF Any other: help user respond, then redisplay menu
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- All ## Level 2 headers extracted successfully
+- BMAD core sections checked systematically
+- Format classified correctly based on section count
+- Findings reported to validation report
+- BMAD Standard/Variant PRDs proceed directly to next validation step
+- Non-Standard PRDs pause and present options to user
+- User can choose parity check, validate as-is, or exit
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Not extracting all headers before classification
+- Incorrect format classification
+- Not reporting findings to validation report
+- Not pausing for non-standard PRDs
+- Proceeding without user decision for non-standard formats
+
+**Master Rule:** Format detection determines validation path. Non-standard PRDs require user choice before proceeding.

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-02b-parity-check.md

@@ -0,0 +1,209 @@
+---
+name: 'step-v-02b-parity-check'
+description: 'Document Parity Check - Analyze non-standard PRD and identify gaps to achieve BMAD PRD parity'
+
+# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
+nextStepFile: './step-v-03-density-validation.md'
+prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
+validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
+---
+
+# Step 2B: Document Parity Check
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+Analyze non-standard PRD and identify gaps to achieve BMAD PRD parity, presenting user with options for how to proceed.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+
+### Role Reinforcement:
+
+- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
+- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
+- ✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
+- ✅ You bring BMAD PRD standards expertise and gap analysis
+- ✅ User brings domain knowledge and PRD context
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Focus ONLY on analyzing gaps and estimating parity effort
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to perform other validation checks in this step
+- 💬 Approach: Systematic gap analysis with clear recommendations
+- 🚪 This is an optional branch step - user chooses next action
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Analyze each BMAD PRD section for gaps
+- 💾 Append parity analysis to validation report
+- 📖 Present options and await user decision
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to proceed without user selection
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Available context: Non-standard PRD from step 2, validation report in progress
+- Focus: Parity analysis only - what's missing, what's needed
+- Limits: Don't perform validation checks, don't auto-proceed
+- Dependencies: Step 2 classified PRD as non-standard and user chose parity check
+
+## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
+
+**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
+
+### 1. Analyze Each BMAD PRD Section
+
+For each of the 6 BMAD PRD core sections, analyze:
+
+**Executive Summary:**
+- Does PRD have vision/overview?
+- Is problem statement clear?
+- Are target users identified?
+- Gap: [What's missing or incomplete]
+
+**Success Criteria:**
+- Are measurable goals defined?
+- Is success clearly defined?
+- Gap: [What's missing or incomplete]
+
+**Product Scope:**
+- Is scope clearly defined?
+- Are in-scope items listed?
+- Are out-of-scope items listed?
+- Gap: [What's missing or incomplete]
+
+**User Journeys:**
+- Are user types/personas identified?
+- Are user flows documented?
+- Gap: [What's missing or incomplete]
+
+**Functional Requirements:**
+- Are features/capabilities listed?
+- Are requirements structured?
+- Gap: [What's missing or incomplete]
+
+**Non-Functional Requirements:**
+- Are quality attributes defined?
+- Are performance/security/etc. requirements documented?
+- Gap: [What's missing or incomplete]
+
+### 2. Estimate Effort to Reach Parity
+
+For each missing or incomplete section, estimate:
+
+**Effort Level:**
+- Minimal - Section exists but needs minor enhancements
+- Moderate - Section missing but content exists elsewhere in PRD
+- Significant - Section missing, requires new content creation
+
+**Total Parity Effort:**
+- Based on individual section estimates
+- Classify overall: Quick / Moderate / Substantial effort
+
+### 3. Report Parity Analysis to Validation Report
+
+Append to validation report:
+
+```markdown
+## Parity Analysis (Non-Standard PRD)
+
+### Section-by-Section Gap Analysis
+
+**Executive Summary:**
+- Status: [Present/Missing/Incomplete]
+- Gap: [specific gap description]
+- Effort to Complete: [Minimal/Moderate/Significant]
+
+**Success Criteria:**
+- Status: [Present/Missing/Incomplete]
+- Gap: [specific gap description]
+- Effort to Complete: [Minimal/Moderate/Significant]
+
+**Product Scope:**
+- Status: [Present/Missing/Incomplete]
+- Gap: [specific gap description]
+- Effort to Complete: [Minimal/Moderate/Significant]
+
+**User Journeys:**
+- Status: [Present/Missing/Incomplete]
+- Gap: [specific gap description]
+- Effort to Complete: [Minimal/Moderate/Significant]
+
+**Functional Requirements:**
+- Status: [Present/Missing/Incomplete]
+- Gap: [specific gap description]
+- Effort to Complete: [Minimal/Moderate/Significant]
+
+**Non-Functional Requirements:**
+- Status: [Present/Missing/Incomplete]
+- Gap: [specific gap description]
+- Effort to Complete: [Minimal/Moderate/Significant]
+
+### Overall Parity Assessment
+
+**Overall Effort to Reach BMAD Standard:** [Quick/Moderate/Substantial]
+**Recommendation:** [Brief recommendation based on analysis]
+```
+
+### 4. Present Parity Analysis and Options
+
+Display:
+
+"**Parity Analysis Complete**
+
+Your PRD is missing {count} of 6 core BMAD PRD sections. The overall effort to reach BMAD standard is: **{effort level}**
+
+**Quick Summary:**
+[2-3 sentence summary of key gaps]
+
+**Recommendation:**
+{recommendation from analysis}
+
+**How would you like to proceed?**"
+
+### 5. Present MENU OPTIONS
+
+**[C] Continue Validation** - Proceed with validation using current structure
+**[E] Exit & Review** - Exit validation and review parity report
+**[S] Save & Exit** - Save parity report and exit
+
+#### EXECUTION RULES:
+
+- ALWAYS halt and wait for user input
+- Only proceed based on user selection
+
+#### Menu Handling Logic:
+
+- IF C (Continue): Display "Proceeding with validation..." then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+- IF E (Exit): Display parity summary and exit validation
+- IF S (Save): Confirm saved, display summary, exit
+- IF Any other: help user respond, then redisplay menu
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- All 6 BMAD PRD sections analyzed for gaps
+- Effort estimates provided for each gap
+- Overall parity effort assessed correctly
+- Parity analysis reported to validation report
+- Clear summary presented to user
+- User can choose to continue validation, exit, or save report
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Not analyzing all 6 sections systematically
+- Missing effort estimates
+- Not reporting parity analysis to validation report
+- Auto-proceeding without user decision
+- Unclear recommendations
+
+**Master Rule:** Parity check informs user of gaps and effort, but user decides whether to proceed with validation or address gaps first.

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-03-density-validation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,174 @@
+---
+name: 'step-v-03-density-validation'
+description: 'Information Density Check - Scan for anti-patterns that violate information density principles'
+
+# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
+nextStepFile: './step-v-04-brief-coverage-validation.md'
+prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
+validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
+---
+
+# Step 3: Information Density Validation
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+Validate PRD meets BMAD information density standards by scanning for conversational filler, wordy phrases, and redundant expressions that violate conciseness principles.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+
+### Role Reinforcement:
+
+- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
+- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
+- ✅ We engage in systematic validation, not collaborative dialogue
+- ✅ You bring analytical rigor and attention to detail
+- ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Focus ONLY on information density anti-patterns
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate other aspects in this step
+- 💬 Approach: Systematic scanning and categorization
+- 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Scan PRD for density anti-patterns systematically
+- 💾 Append density findings to validation report
+- 📖 Display "Proceeding to next check..." and load next step
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to pause or request user input
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Available context: PRD file, validation report with format findings
+- Focus: Information density validation only
+- Limits: Don't validate other aspects, don't pause for user input
+- Dependencies: Step 2 completed - format classification done
+
+## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
+
+**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
+
+### 1. Attempt Sub-Process Validation
+
+**Try to use Task tool to spawn a subprocess:**
+
+"Perform information density validation on this PRD:
+
+1. Load the PRD file
+2. Scan for the following anti-patterns:
+   - Conversational filler phrases (examples: 'The system will allow users to...', 'It is important to note that...', 'In order to')
+   - Wordy phrases (examples: 'Due to the fact that', 'In the event of', 'For the purpose of')
+   - Redundant phrases (examples: 'Future plans', 'Absolutely essential', 'Past history')
+3. Count violations by category with line numbers
+4. Classify severity: Critical (>10 violations), Warning (5-10), Pass (<5)
+
+Return structured findings with counts and examples."
+
+### 2. Graceful Degradation (if Task tool unavailable)
+
+If Task tool unavailable, perform analysis directly:
+
+**Scan for conversational filler patterns:**
+- "The system will allow users to..."
+- "It is important to note that..."
+- "In order to"
+- "For the purpose of"
+- "With regard to"
+- Count occurrences and note line numbers
+
+**Scan for wordy phrases:**
+- "Due to the fact that" (use "because")
+- "In the event of" (use "if")
+- "At this point in time" (use "now")
+- "In a manner that" (use "how")
+- Count occurrences and note line numbers
+
+**Scan for redundant phrases:**
+- "Future plans" (just "plans")
+- "Past history" (just "history")
+- "Absolutely essential" (just "essential")
+- "Completely finish" (just "finish")
+- Count occurrences and note line numbers
+
+### 3. Classify Severity
+
+**Calculate total violations:**
+- Conversational filler count
+- Wordy phrases count
+- Redundant phrases count
+- Total = sum of all categories
+
+**Determine severity:**
+- **Critical:** Total > 10 violations
+- **Warning:** Total 5-10 violations
+- **Pass:** Total < 5 violations
+
+### 4. Report Density Findings to Validation Report
+
+Append to validation report:
+
+```markdown
+## Information Density Validation
+
+**Anti-Pattern Violations:**
+
+**Conversational Filler:** {count} occurrences
+[If count > 0, list examples with line numbers]
+
+**Wordy Phrases:** {count} occurrences
+[If count > 0, list examples with line numbers]
+
+**Redundant Phrases:** {count} occurrences
+[If count > 0, list examples with line numbers]
+
+**Total Violations:** {total}
+
+**Severity Assessment:** [Critical/Warning/Pass]
+
+**Recommendation:**
+[If Critical] "PRD requires significant revision to improve information density. Every sentence should carry weight without filler."
+[If Warning] "PRD would benefit from reducing wordiness and eliminating filler phrases."
+[If Pass] "PRD demonstrates good information density with minimal violations."
+```
+
+### 5. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
+
+Display: "**Information Density Validation Complete**
+
+Severity: {Critical/Warning/Pass}
+
+**Proceeding to next validation check...**"
+
+Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} (step-v-04-brief-coverage-validation.md)
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- PRD scanned for all three anti-pattern categories
+- Violations counted with line numbers
+- Severity classified correctly
+- Findings reported to validation report
+- Auto-proceeds to next validation step
+- Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Not scanning all anti-pattern categories
+- Missing severity classification
+- Not reporting findings to validation report
+- Pausing for user input (should auto-proceed)
+- Not attempting subprocess architecture
+
+**Master Rule:** Information density validation runs autonomously. Scan, classify, report, auto-proceed. No user interaction needed.

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-04-brief-coverage-validation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,214 @@
+---
+name: 'step-v-04-brief-coverage-validation'
+description: 'Product Brief Coverage Check - Validate PRD covers all content from Product Brief (if used as input)'
+
+# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
+nextStepFile: './step-v-05-measurability-validation.md'
+prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
+productBrief: '{product_brief_path}'
+validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
+---
+
+# Step 4: Product Brief Coverage Validation
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+Validate that PRD covers all content from Product Brief (if brief was used as input), mapping brief content to PRD sections and identifying gaps.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+
+### Role Reinforcement:
+
+- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
+- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
+- ✅ We engage in systematic validation, not collaborative dialogue
+- ✅ You bring analytical rigor and traceability expertise
+- ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Focus ONLY on Product Brief coverage (conditional on brief existence)
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate other aspects in this step
+- 💬 Approach: Systematic mapping and gap analysis
+- 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Check if Product Brief exists in input documents
+- 💬 If no brief: Skip this check and report "N/A - No Product Brief"
+- 🎯 If brief exists: Map brief content to PRD sections
+- 💾 Append coverage findings to validation report
+- 📖 Display "Proceeding to next check..." and load next step
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to pause or request user input
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Available context: PRD file, input documents from step 1, validation report
+- Focus: Product Brief coverage only (conditional)
+- Limits: Don't validate other aspects, conditional execution
+- Dependencies: Step 1 completed - input documents loaded
+
+## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
+
+**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
+
+### 1. Check for Product Brief
+
+Check if Product Brief was loaded in step 1's inputDocuments:
+
+**IF no Product Brief found:**
+Append to validation report:
+```markdown
+## Product Brief Coverage
+
+**Status:** N/A - No Product Brief was provided as input
+```
+
+Display: "**Product Brief Coverage: Skipped** (No Product Brief provided)
+
+**Proceeding to next validation check...**"
+
+Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+
+**IF Product Brief exists:** Continue to step 2 below
+
+### 2. Attempt Sub-Process Validation
+
+**Try to use Task tool to spawn a subprocess:**
+
+"Perform Product Brief coverage validation:
+
+1. Load the Product Brief
+2. Extract key content:
+   - Vision statement
+   - Target users/personas
+   - Problem statement
+   - Key features
+   - Goals/objectives
+   - Differentiators
+   - Constraints
+3. For each item, search PRD for corresponding coverage
+4. Classify coverage: Fully Covered / Partially Covered / Not Found / Intentionally Excluded
+5. Note any gaps with severity: Critical / Moderate / Informational
+
+Return structured coverage map with classifications."
+
+### 3. Graceful Degradation (if Task tool unavailable)
+
+If Task tool unavailable, perform analysis directly:
+
+**Extract from Product Brief:**
+- Vision: What is this product?
+- Users: Who is it for?
+- Problem: What problem does it solve?
+- Features: What are the key capabilities?
+- Goals: What are the success criteria?
+- Differentiators: What makes it unique?
+
+**For each item, search PRD:**
+- Scan Executive Summary for vision
+- Check User Journeys or user personas
+- Look for problem statement
+- Review Functional Requirements for features
+- Check Success Criteria section
+- Search for differentiators
+
+**Classify coverage:**
+- **Fully Covered:** Content present and complete
+- **Partially Covered:** Content present but incomplete
+- **Not Found:** Content missing from PRD
+- **Intentionally Excluded:** Content explicitly out of scope
+
+### 4. Assess Coverage and Severity
+
+**For each gap (Partially Covered or Not Found):**
+- Is this Critical? (Core vision, primary users, main features)
+- Is this Moderate? (Secondary features, some goals)
+- Is this Informational? (Nice-to-have features, minor details)
+
+**Note:** Some exclusions may be intentional (valid scoping decisions)
+
+### 5. Report Coverage Findings to Validation Report
+
+Append to validation report:
+
+```markdown
+## Product Brief Coverage
+
+**Product Brief:** {brief_file_name}
+
+### Coverage Map
+
+**Vision Statement:** [Fully/Partially/Not Found/Intentionally Excluded]
+[If gap: Note severity and specific missing content]
+
+**Target Users:** [Fully/Partially/Not Found/Intentionally Excluded]
+[If gap: Note severity and specific missing content]
+
+**Problem Statement:** [Fully/Partially/Not Found/Intentionally Excluded]
+[If gap: Note severity and specific missing content]
+
+**Key Features:** [Fully/Partially/Not Found/Intentionally Excluded]
+[If gap: List specific features with severity]
+
+**Goals/Objectives:** [Fully/Partially/Not Found/Intentionally Excluded]
+[If gap: Note severity and specific missing content]
+
+**Differentiators:** [Fully/Partially/Not Found/Intentionally Excluded]
+[If gap: Note severity and specific missing content]
+
+### Coverage Summary
+
+**Overall Coverage:** [percentage or qualitative assessment]
+**Critical Gaps:** [count] [list if any]
+**Moderate Gaps:** [count] [list if any]
+**Informational Gaps:** [count] [list if any]
+
+**Recommendation:**
+[If critical gaps exist] "PRD should be revised to cover critical Product Brief content."
+[If moderate gaps] "Consider addressing moderate gaps for complete coverage."
+[If minimal gaps] "PRD provides good coverage of Product Brief content."
+```
+
+### 6. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
+
+Display: "**Product Brief Coverage Validation Complete**
+
+Overall Coverage: {assessment}
+
+**Proceeding to next validation check...**"
+
+Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} (step-v-05-measurability-validation.md)
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- Checked for Product Brief existence correctly
+- If no brief: Reported "N/A" and skipped gracefully
+- If brief exists: Mapped all key brief content to PRD sections
+- Coverage classified appropriately (Fully/Partially/Not Found/Intentionally Excluded)
+- Severity assessed for gaps (Critical/Moderate/Informational)
+- Findings reported to validation report
+- Auto-proceeds to next validation step
+- Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Not checking for brief existence before attempting validation
+- If brief exists: not mapping all key content areas
+- Missing coverage classifications
+- Not reporting findings to validation report
+- Not auto-proceeding
+
+**Master Rule:** Product Brief coverage is conditional - skip if no brief, validate thoroughly if brief exists. Always auto-proceed.

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-05-measurability-validation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,228 @@
+---
+name: 'step-v-05-measurability-validation'
+description: 'Measurability Validation - Validate that all requirements (FRs and NFRs) are measurable and testable'
+
+# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
+nextStepFile: './step-v-06-traceability-validation.md'
+prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
+validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
+---
+
+# Step 5: Measurability Validation
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+Validate that all Functional Requirements (FRs) and Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs) are measurable, testable, and follow proper format without implementation details.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+
+### Role Reinforcement:
+
+- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
+- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
+- ✅ We engage in systematic validation, not collaborative dialogue
+- ✅ You bring analytical rigor and requirements engineering expertise
+- ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Focus ONLY on FR and NFR measurability
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate other aspects in this step
+- 💬 Approach: Systematic requirement-by-requirement analysis
+- 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Extract all FRs and NFRs from PRD
+- 💾 Validate each for measurability and format
+- 📖 Append findings to validation report
+- 📖 Display "Proceeding to next check..." and load next step
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to pause or request user input
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Available context: PRD file, validation report
+- Focus: FR and NFR measurability only
+- Limits: Don't validate other aspects, don't pause for user input
+- Dependencies: Steps 2-4 completed - initial validation checks done
+
+## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
+
+**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
+
+### 1. Attempt Sub-Process Validation
+
+**Try to use Task tool to spawn a subprocess:**
+
+"Perform measurability validation on this PRD:
+
+**Functional Requirements (FRs):**
+1. Extract all FRs from Functional Requirements section
+2. Check each FR for:
+   - '[Actor] can [capability]' format compliance
+   - No subjective adjectives (easy, fast, simple, intuitive, etc.)
+   - No vague quantifiers (multiple, several, some, many, etc.)
+   - No implementation details (technology names, library names, data structures unless capability-relevant)
+3. Document violations with line numbers
+
+**Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs):**
+1. Extract all NFRs from Non-Functional Requirements section
+2. Check each NFR for:
+   - Specific metrics with measurement methods
+   - Template compliance (criterion, metric, measurement method, context)
+   - Context included (why this matters, who it affects)
+3. Document violations with line numbers
+
+Return structured findings with violation counts and examples."
+
+### 2. Graceful Degradation (if Task tool unavailable)
+
+If Task tool unavailable, perform analysis directly:
+
+**Functional Requirements Analysis:**
+
+Extract all FRs and check each for:
+
+**Format compliance:**
+- Does it follow "[Actor] can [capability]" pattern?
+- Is actor clearly defined?
+- Is capability actionable and testable?
+
+**No subjective adjectives:**
+- Scan for: easy, fast, simple, intuitive, user-friendly, responsive, quick, efficient (without metrics)
+- Note line numbers
+
+**No vague quantifiers:**
+- Scan for: multiple, several, some, many, few, various, number of
+- Note line numbers
+
+**No implementation details:**
+- Scan for: React, Vue, Angular, PostgreSQL, MongoDB, AWS, Docker, Kubernetes, Redux, etc.
+- Unless capability-relevant (e.g., "API consumers can access...")
+- Note line numbers
+
+**Non-Functional Requirements Analysis:**
+
+Extract all NFRs and check each for:
+
+**Specific metrics:**
+- Is there a measurable criterion? (e.g., "response time < 200ms", not "fast response")
+- Can this be measured or tested?
+
+**Template compliance:**
+- Criterion defined?
+- Metric specified?
+- Measurement method included?
+- Context provided?
+
+### 3. Tally Violations
+
+**FR Violations:**
+- Format violations: count
+- Subjective adjectives: count
+- Vague quantifiers: count
+- Implementation leakage: count
+- Total FR violations: sum
+
+**NFR Violations:**
+- Missing metrics: count
+- Incomplete template: count
+- Missing context: count
+- Total NFR violations: sum
+
+**Total violations:** FR violations + NFR violations
+
+### 4. Report Measurability Findings to Validation Report
+
+Append to validation report:
+
+```markdown
+## Measurability Validation
+
+### Functional Requirements
+
+**Total FRs Analyzed:** {count}
+
+**Format Violations:** {count}
+[If violations exist, list examples with line numbers]
+
+**Subjective Adjectives Found:** {count}
+[If found, list examples with line numbers]
+
+**Vague Quantifiers Found:** {count}
+[If found, list examples with line numbers]
+
+**Implementation Leakage:** {count}
+[If found, list examples with line numbers]
+
+**FR Violations Total:** {total}
+
+### Non-Functional Requirements
+
+**Total NFRs Analyzed:** {count}
+
+**Missing Metrics:** {count}
+[If missing, list examples with line numbers]
+
+**Incomplete Template:** {count}
+[If incomplete, list examples with line numbers]
+
+**Missing Context:** {count}
+[If missing, list examples with line numbers]
+
+**NFR Violations Total:** {total}
+
+### Overall Assessment
+
+**Total Requirements:** {FRs + NFRs}
+**Total Violations:** {FR violations + NFR violations}
+
+**Severity:** [Critical if >10 violations, Warning if 5-10, Pass if <5]
+
+**Recommendation:**
+[If Critical] "Many requirements are not measurable or testable. Requirements must be revised to be testable for downstream work."
+[If Warning] "Some requirements need refinement for measurability. Focus on violating requirements above."
+[If Pass] "Requirements demonstrate good measurability with minimal issues."
+```
+
+### 5. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
+
+Display: "**Measurability Validation Complete**
+
+Total Violations: {count} ({severity})
+
+**Proceeding to next validation check...**"
+
+Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} (step-v-06-traceability-validation.md)
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- All FRs extracted and analyzed for measurability
+- All NFRs extracted and analyzed for measurability
+- Violations documented with line numbers
+- Severity assessed correctly
+- Findings reported to validation report
+- Auto-proceeds to next validation step
+- Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Not analyzing all FRs and NFRs
+- Missing line numbers for violations
+- Not reporting findings to validation report
+- Not assessing severity
+- Not auto-proceeding
+
+**Master Rule:** Requirements must be testable to be useful. Validate every requirement for measurability, document violations, auto-proceed.

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-06-traceability-validation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,217 @@
+---
+name: 'step-v-06-traceability-validation'
+description: 'Traceability Validation - Validate the traceability chain from vision → success → journeys → FRs is intact'
+
+# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
+nextStepFile: './step-v-07-implementation-leakage-validation.md'
+prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
+validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
+---
+
+# Step 6: Traceability Validation
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+Validate the traceability chain from Executive Summary → Success Criteria → User Journeys → Functional Requirements is intact, ensuring every requirement traces back to a user need or business objective.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+
+### Role Reinforcement:
+
+- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
+- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
+- ✅ We engage in systematic validation, not collaborative dialogue
+- ✅ You bring analytical rigor and traceability matrix expertise
+- ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Focus ONLY on traceability chain validation
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate other aspects in this step
+- 💬 Approach: Systematic chain validation and orphan detection
+- 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Build and validate traceability matrix
+- 💾 Identify broken chains and orphan requirements
+- 📖 Append findings to validation report
+- 📖 Display "Proceeding to next check..." and load next step
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to pause or request user input
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Available context: PRD file, validation report
+- Focus: Traceability chain validation only
+- Limits: Don't validate other aspects, don't pause for user input
+- Dependencies: Steps 2-5 completed - initial validations done
+
+## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
+
+**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
+
+### 1. Attempt Sub-Process Validation
+
+**Try to use Task tool to spawn a subprocess:**
+
+"Perform traceability validation on this PRD:
+
+1. Extract content from Executive Summary (vision, goals)
+2. Extract Success Criteria
+3. Extract User Journeys (user types, flows, outcomes)
+4. Extract Functional Requirements (FRs)
+5. Extract Product Scope (in-scope items)
+
+**Validate chains:**
+- Executive Summary → Success Criteria: Does vision align with defined success?
+- Success Criteria → User Journeys: Are success criteria supported by user journeys?
+- User Journeys → Functional Requirements: Does each FR trace back to a user journey?
+- Scope → FRs: Do MVP scope FRs align with in-scope items?
+
+**Identify orphans:**
+- FRs not traceable to any user journey or business objective
+- Success criteria not supported by user journeys
+- User journeys without supporting FRs
+
+Build traceability matrix and identify broken chains and orphan FRs.
+
+Return structured findings with chain status and orphan list."
+
+### 2. Graceful Degradation (if Task tool unavailable)
+
+If Task tool unavailable, perform analysis directly:
+
+**Step 1: Extract key elements**
+- Executive Summary: Note vision, goals, objectives
+- Success Criteria: List all criteria
+- User Journeys: List user types and their flows
+- Functional Requirements: List all FRs
+- Product Scope: List in-scope items
+
+**Step 2: Validate Executive Summary → Success Criteria**
+- Does Executive Summary mention the success dimensions?
+- Are Success Criteria aligned with vision?
+- Note any misalignment
+
+**Step 3: Validate Success Criteria → User Journeys**
+- For each success criterion, is there a user journey that achieves it?
+- Note success criteria without supporting journeys
+
+**Step 4: Validate User Journeys → FRs**
+- For each user journey/flow, are there FRs that enable it?
+- List FRs with no clear user journey origin
+- Note orphan FRs (requirements without traceable source)
+
+**Step 5: Validate Scope → FR Alignment**
+- Does MVP scope align with essential FRs?
+- Are in-scope items supported by FRs?
+- Note misalignments
+
+**Step 6: Build traceability matrix**
+- Map each FR to its source (journey or business objective)
+- Note orphan FRs
+- Identify broken chains
+
+### 3. Tally Traceability Issues
+
+**Broken chains:**
+- Executive Summary → Success Criteria gaps: count
+- Success Criteria → User Journeys gaps: count
+- User Journeys → FRs gaps: count
+- Scope → FR misalignments: count
+
+**Orphan elements:**
+- Orphan FRs (no traceable source): count
+- Unsupported success criteria: count
+- User journeys without FRs: count
+
+**Total issues:** Sum of all broken chains and orphans
+
+### 4. Report Traceability Findings to Validation Report
+
+Append to validation report:
+
+```markdown
+## Traceability Validation
+
+### Chain Validation
+
+**Executive Summary → Success Criteria:** [Intact/Gaps Identified]
+{If gaps: List specific misalignments}
+
+**Success Criteria → User Journeys:** [Intact/Gaps Identified]
+{If gaps: List unsupported success criteria}
+
+**User Journeys → Functional Requirements:** [Intact/Gaps Identified]
+{If gaps: List journeys without supporting FRs}
+
+**Scope → FR Alignment:** [Intact/Misaligned]
+{If misaligned: List specific issues}
+
+### Orphan Elements
+
+**Orphan Functional Requirements:** {count}
+{List orphan FRs with numbers}
+
+**Unsupported Success Criteria:** {count}
+{List unsupported criteria}
+
+**User Journeys Without FRs:** {count}
+{List journeys without FRs}
+
+### Traceability Matrix
+
+{Summary table showing traceability coverage}
+
+**Total Traceability Issues:** {total}
+
+**Severity:** [Critical if orphan FRs exist, Warning if gaps, Pass if intact]
+
+**Recommendation:**
+[If Critical] "Orphan requirements exist - every FR must trace back to a user need or business objective."
+[If Warning] "Traceability gaps identified - strengthen chains to ensure all requirements are justified."
+[If Pass] "Traceability chain is intact - all requirements trace to user needs or business objectives."
+```
+
+### 5. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
+
+Display: "**Traceability Validation Complete**
+
+Total Issues: {count} ({severity})
+
+**Proceeding to next validation check...**"
+
+Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} (step-v-07-implementation-leakage-validation.md)
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- All traceability chains validated systematically
+- Orphan FRs identified with numbers
+- Broken chains documented
+- Traceability matrix built
+- Severity assessed correctly
+- Findings reported to validation report
+- Auto-proceeds to next validation step
+- Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Not validating all traceability chains
+- Missing orphan FR detection
+- Not building traceability matrix
+- Not reporting findings to validation report
+- Not auto-proceeding
+
+**Master Rule:** Every requirement should trace to a user need or business objective. Orphan FRs indicate broken traceability that must be fixed.

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-07-implementation-leakage-validation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,205 @@
+---
+name: 'step-v-07-implementation-leakage-validation'
+description: 'Implementation Leakage Check - Ensure FRs and NFRs don\'t include implementation details'
+
+# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
+nextStepFile: './step-v-08-domain-compliance-validation.md'
+prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
+validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
+---
+
+# Step 7: Implementation Leakage Validation
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+Ensure Functional Requirements and Non-Functional Requirements don't include implementation details - they should specify WHAT, not HOW.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+
+### Role Reinforcement:
+
+- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
+- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
+- ✅ We engage in systematic validation, not collaborative dialogue
+- ✅ You bring analytical rigor and separation of concerns expertise
+- ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Focus ONLY on implementation leakage detection
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate other aspects in this step
+- 💬 Approach: Systematic scanning for technology and implementation terms
+- 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Scan FRs and NFRs for implementation terms
+- 💾 Distinguish capability-relevant vs leakage
+- 📖 Append findings to validation report
+- 📖 Display "Proceeding to next check..." and load next step
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to pause or request user input
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Available context: PRD file, validation report
+- Focus: Implementation leakage detection only
+- Limits: Don't validate other aspects, don't pause for user input
+- Dependencies: Steps 2-6 completed - initial validations done
+
+## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
+
+**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
+
+### 1. Attempt Sub-Process Validation
+
+**Try to use Task tool to spawn a subprocess:**
+
+"Perform implementation leakage validation on this PRD:
+
+**Scan for:**
+1. Technology names (React, Vue, Angular, PostgreSQL, MongoDB, AWS, GCP, Azure, Docker, Kubernetes, etc.)
+2. Library names (Redux, axios, lodash, Express, Django, Rails, Spring, etc.)
+3. Data structures (JSON, XML, CSV) unless relevant to capability
+4. Architecture patterns (MVC, microservices, serverless) unless business requirement
+5. Protocol names (HTTP, REST, GraphQL, WebSockets) - check if capability-relevant
+
+**For each term found:**
+- Is this capability-relevant? (e.g., 'API consumers can access...' - API is capability)
+- Or is this implementation detail? (e.g., 'React component for...' - implementation)
+
+Document violations with line numbers and explanation.
+
+Return structured findings with leakage counts and examples."
+
+### 2. Graceful Degradation (if Task tool unavailable)
+
+If Task tool unavailable, perform analysis directly:
+
+**Implementation leakage terms to scan for:**
+
+**Frontend Frameworks:**
+React, Vue, Angular, Svelte, Solid, Next.js, Nuxt, etc.
+
+**Backend Frameworks:**
+Express, Django, Rails, Spring, Laravel, FastAPI, etc.
+
+**Databases:**
+PostgreSQL, MySQL, MongoDB, Redis, DynamoDB, Cassandra, etc.
+
+**Cloud Platforms:**
+AWS, GCP, Azure, Cloudflare, Vercel, Netlify, etc.
+
+**Infrastructure:**
+Docker, Kubernetes, Terraform, Ansible, etc.
+
+**Libraries:**
+Redux, Zustand, axios, fetch, lodash, jQuery, etc.
+
+**Data Formats:**
+JSON, XML, YAML, CSV (unless capability-relevant)
+
+**For each term found in FRs/NFRs:**
+- Determine if it's capability-relevant or implementation leakage
+- Example: "API consumers can access data via REST endpoints" - API/REST is capability
+- Example: "React components fetch data using Redux" - implementation leakage
+
+**Count violations and note line numbers**
+
+### 3. Tally Implementation Leakage
+
+**By category:**
+- Frontend framework leakage: count
+- Backend framework leakage: count
+- Database leakage: count
+- Cloud platform leakage: count
+- Infrastructure leakage: count
+- Library leakage: count
+- Other implementation details: count
+
+**Total implementation leakage violations:** sum
+
+### 4. Report Implementation Leakage Findings to Validation Report
+
+Append to validation report:
+
+```markdown
+## Implementation Leakage Validation
+
+### Leakage by Category
+
+**Frontend Frameworks:** {count} violations
+{If violations, list examples with line numbers}
+
+**Backend Frameworks:** {count} violations
+{If violations, list examples with line numbers}
+
+**Databases:** {count} violations
+{If violations, list examples with line numbers}
+
+**Cloud Platforms:** {count} violations
+{If violations, list examples with line numbers}
+
+**Infrastructure:** {count} violations
+{If violations, list examples with line numbers}
+
+**Libraries:** {count} violations
+{If violations, list examples with line numbers}
+
+**Other Implementation Details:** {count} violations
+{If violations, list examples with line numbers}
+
+### Summary
+
+**Total Implementation Leakage Violations:** {total}
+
+**Severity:** [Critical if >5 violations, Warning if 2-5, Pass if <2]
+
+**Recommendation:**
+[If Critical] "Extensive implementation leakage found. Requirements specify HOW instead of WHAT. Remove all implementation details - these belong in architecture, not PRD."
+[If Warning] "Some implementation leakage detected. Review violations and remove implementation details from requirements."
+[If Pass] "No significant implementation leakage found. Requirements properly specify WHAT without HOW."
+
+**Note:** API consumers, GraphQL (when required), and other capability-relevant terms are acceptable when they describe WHAT the system must do, not HOW to build it.
+```
+
+### 5. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
+
+Display: "**Implementation Leakage Validation Complete**
+
+Total Violations: {count} ({severity})
+
+**Proceeding to next validation check...**"
+
+Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} (step-v-08-domain-compliance-validation.md)
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- Scanned FRs and NFRs for all implementation term categories
+- Distinguished capability-relevant from implementation leakage
+- Violations documented with line numbers and explanations
+- Severity assessed correctly
+- Findings reported to validation report
+- Auto-proceeds to next validation step
+- Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Not scanning all implementation term categories
+- Not distinguishing capability-relevant from leakage
+- Missing line numbers for violations
+- Not reporting findings to validation report
+- Not auto-proceeding
+
+**Master Rule:** Requirements specify WHAT, not HOW. Implementation details belong in architecture documents, not PRDs.

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-08-domain-compliance-validation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,243 @@
+---
+name: 'step-v-08-domain-compliance-validation'
+description: 'Domain Compliance Validation - Validate domain-specific requirements are present for high-complexity domains'
+
+# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
+nextStepFile: './step-v-09-project-type-validation.md'
+prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
+prdFrontmatter: '{prd_frontmatter}'
+validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
+domainComplexityData: '../data/domain-complexity.csv'
+---
+
+# Step 8: Domain Compliance Validation
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+Validate domain-specific requirements are present for high-complexity domains (Healthcare, Fintech, GovTech, etc.), ensuring regulatory and compliance requirements are properly documented.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+
+### Role Reinforcement:
+
+- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
+- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
+- ✅ We engage in systematic validation, not collaborative dialogue
+- ✅ You bring domain expertise and compliance knowledge
+- ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Focus ONLY on domain-specific compliance requirements
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate other aspects in this step
+- 💬 Approach: Conditional validation based on domain classification
+- 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Check classification.domain from PRD frontmatter
+- 💬 If low complexity (general): Skip detailed checks
+- 🎯 If high complexity: Validate required special sections
+- 💾 Append compliance findings to validation report
+- 📖 Display "Proceeding to next check..." and load next step
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to pause or request user input
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Available context: PRD file with frontmatter classification, validation report
+- Focus: Domain compliance only (conditional on domain complexity)
+- Limits: Don't validate other aspects, conditional execution
+- Dependencies: Steps 2-7 completed - format and requirements validation done
+
+## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
+
+**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
+
+### 1. Load Domain Complexity Data
+
+Load and read the complete file at:
+`{domainComplexityData}` (../data/domain-complexity.csv)
+
+This CSV contains:
+- Domain classifications and complexity levels (high/medium/low)
+- Required special sections for each domain
+- Key concerns and requirements for regulated industries
+
+Internalize this data - it drives which domains require special compliance sections.
+
+### 2. Extract Domain Classification
+
+From PRD frontmatter, extract:
+- `classification.domain` - what domain is this PRD for?
+
+**If no domain classification found:**
+Treat as "general" (low complexity) and proceed to step 4
+
+### 2. Determine Domain Complexity
+
+**Low complexity domains (skip detailed checks):**
+- General
+- Consumer apps (standard e-commerce, social, productivity)
+- Content websites
+- Business tools (standard)
+
+**High complexity domains (require special sections):**
+- Healthcare / Healthtech
+- Fintech / Financial services
+- GovTech / Public sector
+- EdTech (educational records, accredited courses)
+- Legal tech
+- Other regulated domains
+
+### 3. For High-Complexity Domains: Validate Required Special Sections
+
+**Attempt subprocess validation:**
+
+"Perform domain compliance validation for {domain}:
+
+Based on {domain} requirements, check PRD for:
+
+**Healthcare:**
+- Clinical Requirements section
+- Regulatory Pathway (FDA, HIPAA, etc.)
+- Safety Measures
+- HIPAA Compliance (data privacy, security)
+- Patient safety considerations
+
+**Fintech:**
+- Compliance Matrix (SOC2, PCI-DSS, GDPR, etc.)
+- Security Architecture
+- Audit Requirements
+- Fraud Prevention measures
+- Financial transaction handling
+
+**GovTech:**
+- Accessibility Standards (WCAG 2.1 AA, Section 508)
+- Procurement Compliance
+- Security Clearance requirements
+- Data residency requirements
+
+**Other regulated domains:**
+- Check for domain-specific regulatory sections
+- Compliance requirements
+- Special considerations
+
+For each required section:
+- Is it present in PRD?
+- Is it adequately documented?
+- Note any gaps
+
+Return compliance matrix with presence/adequacy assessment."
+
+**Graceful degradation (if no Task tool):**
+- Manually check for required sections based on domain
+- List present sections and missing sections
+- Assess adequacy of documentation
+
+### 5. For Low-Complexity Domains: Skip Detailed Checks
+
+Append to validation report:
+```markdown
+## Domain Compliance Validation
+
+**Domain:** {domain}
+**Complexity:** Low (general/standard)
+**Assessment:** N/A - No special domain compliance requirements
+
+**Note:** This PRD is for a standard domain without regulatory compliance requirements.
+```
+
+Display: "**Domain Compliance Validation Skipped**
+
+Domain: {domain} (low complexity)
+
+**Proceeding to next validation check...**"
+
+Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+
+### 6. Report Compliance Findings (High-Complexity Domains)
+
+Append to validation report:
+
+```markdown
+## Domain Compliance Validation
+
+**Domain:** {domain}
+**Complexity:** High (regulated)
+
+### Required Special Sections
+
+**{Section 1 Name}:** [Present/Missing/Adequate]
+{If missing or inadequate: Note specific gaps}
+
+**{Section 2 Name}:** [Present/Missing/Adequate]
+{If missing or inadequate: Note specific gaps}
+
+[Continue for all required sections]
+
+### Compliance Matrix
+
+| Requirement | Status | Notes |
+|-------------|--------|-------|
+| {Requirement 1} | [Met/Partial/Missing] | {Notes} |
+| {Requirement 2} | [Met/Partial/Missing] | {Notes} |
+[... continue for all requirements]
+
+### Summary
+
+**Required Sections Present:** {count}/{total}
+**Compliance Gaps:** {count}
+
+**Severity:** [Critical if missing regulatory sections, Warning if incomplete, Pass if complete]
+
+**Recommendation:**
+[If Critical] "PRD is missing required domain-specific compliance sections. These are essential for {domain} products."
+[If Warning] "Some domain compliance sections are incomplete. Strengthen documentation for full compliance."
+[If Pass] "All required domain compliance sections are present and adequately documented."
+```
+
+### 7. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
+
+Display: "**Domain Compliance Validation Complete**
+
+Domain: {domain} ({complexity})
+Compliance Status: {status}
+
+**Proceeding to next validation check...**"
+
+Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} (step-v-09-project-type-validation.md)
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- Domain classification extracted correctly
+- Complexity assessed appropriately
+- Low complexity domains: Skipped with clear "N/A" documentation
+- High complexity domains: All required sections checked
+- Compliance matrix built with status for each requirement
+- Severity assessed correctly
+- Findings reported to validation report
+- Auto-proceeds to next validation step
+- Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Not checking domain classification before proceeding
+- Performing detailed checks on low complexity domains
+- For high complexity: missing required section checks
+- Not building compliance matrix
+- Not reporting findings to validation report
+- Not auto-proceeding
+
+**Master Rule:** Domain compliance is conditional. High-complexity domains require special sections - low complexity domains skip these checks.

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-09-project-type-validation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,263 @@
+---
+name: 'step-v-09-project-type-validation'
+description: 'Project-Type Compliance Validation - Validate project-type specific requirements are properly documented'
+
+# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
+nextStepFile: './step-v-10-smart-validation.md'
+prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
+prdFrontmatter: '{prd_frontmatter}'
+validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
+projectTypesData: '../data/project-types.csv'
+---
+
+# Step 9: Project-Type Compliance Validation
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+Validate project-type specific requirements are properly documented - different project types (api_backend, web_app, mobile_app, etc.) have different required and excluded sections.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+
+### Role Reinforcement:
+
+- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
+- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
+- ✅ We engage in systematic validation, not collaborative dialogue
+- ✅ You bring project type expertise and architectural knowledge
+- ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Focus ONLY on project-type compliance
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate other aspects in this step
+- 💬 Approach: Validate required sections present, excluded sections absent
+- 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Check classification.projectType from PRD frontmatter
+- 🎯 Validate required sections for that project type are present
+- 🎯 Validate excluded sections for that project type are absent
+- 💾 Append compliance findings to validation report
+- 📖 Display "Proceeding to next check..." and load next step
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to pause or request user input
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Available context: PRD file with frontmatter classification, validation report
+- Focus: Project-type compliance only
+- Limits: Don't validate other aspects, don't pause for user input
+- Dependencies: Steps 2-8 completed - domain and requirements validation done
+
+## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
+
+**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
+
+### 1. Load Project Types Data
+
+Load and read the complete file at:
+`{projectTypesData}` (../data/project-types.csv)
+
+This CSV contains:
+- Detection signals for each project type
+- Required sections for each project type
+- Skip/excluded sections for each project type
+- Innovation signals
+
+Internalize this data - it drives what sections must be present or absent for each project type.
+
+### 2. Extract Project Type Classification
+
+From PRD frontmatter, extract:
+- `classification.projectType` - what type of project is this?
+
+**Common project types:**
+- api_backend
+- web_app
+- mobile_app
+- desktop_app
+- data_pipeline
+- ml_system
+- library_sdk
+- infrastructure
+- other
+
+**If no projectType classification found:**
+Assume "web_app" (most common) and note in findings
+
+### 3. Determine Required and Excluded Sections from CSV Data
+
+**From loaded project-types.csv data, for this project type:**
+
+**Required sections:** (from required_sections column)
+These MUST be present in the PRD
+
+**Skip sections:** (from skip_sections column)
+These MUST NOT be present in the PRD
+
+**Example mappings from CSV:**
+- api_backend: Required=[endpoint_specs, auth_model, data_schemas], Skip=[ux_ui, visual_design]
+- mobile_app: Required=[platform_reqs, device_permissions, offline_mode], Skip=[desktop_features, cli_commands]
+- cli_tool: Required=[command_structure, output_formats, config_schema], Skip=[visual_design, ux_principles, touch_interactions]
+- etc.
+
+### 4. Validate Against CSV-Based Requirements
+
+**Based on project type, determine:**
+
+**api_backend:**
+- Required: Endpoint Specs, Auth Model, Data Schemas, API Versioning
+- Excluded: UX/UI sections, mobile-specific sections
+
+**web_app:**
+- Required: User Journeys, UX/UI Requirements, Responsive Design
+- Excluded: None typically
+
+**mobile_app:**
+- Required: Mobile UX, Platform specifics (iOS/Android), Offline mode
+- Excluded: Desktop-specific sections
+
+**desktop_app:**
+- Required: Desktop UX, Platform specifics (Windows/Mac/Linux)
+- Excluded: Mobile-specific sections
+
+**data_pipeline:**
+- Required: Data Sources, Data Transformation, Data Sinks, Error Handling
+- Excluded: UX/UI sections
+
+**ml_system:**
+- Required: Model Requirements, Training Data, Inference Requirements, Model Performance
+- Excluded: UX/UI sections (unless ML UI)
+
+**library_sdk:**
+- Required: API Surface, Usage Examples, Integration Guide
+- Excluded: UX/UI sections, deployment sections
+
+**infrastructure:**
+- Required: Infrastructure Components, Deployment, Monitoring, Scaling
+- Excluded: Feature requirements (this is infrastructure, not product)
+
+### 4. Attempt Sub-Process Validation
+
+"Perform project-type compliance validation for {projectType}:
+
+**Check that required sections are present:**
+{List required sections for this project type}
+For each: Is it present in PRD? Is it adequately documented?
+
+**Check that excluded sections are absent:**
+{List excluded sections for this project type}
+For each: Is it absent from PRD? (Should not be present)
+
+Build compliance table showing:
+- Required sections: [Present/Missing/Incomplete]
+- Excluded sections: [Absent/Present] (Present = violation)
+
+Return compliance table with findings."
+
+**Graceful degradation (if no Task tool):**
+- Manually check PRD for required sections
+- Manually check PRD for excluded sections
+- Build compliance table
+
+### 5. Build Compliance Table
+
+**Required sections check:**
+- For each required section: Present / Missing / Incomplete
+- Count: Required sections present vs total required
+
+**Excluded sections check:**
+- For each excluded section: Absent / Present (violation)
+- Count: Excluded sections present (violations)
+
+**Total compliance score:**
+- Required: {present}/{total}
+- Excluded violations: {count}
+
+### 6. Report Project-Type Compliance Findings to Validation Report
+
+Append to validation report:
+
+```markdown
+## Project-Type Compliance Validation
+
+**Project Type:** {projectType}
+
+### Required Sections
+
+**{Section 1}:** [Present/Missing/Incomplete]
+{If missing or incomplete: Note specific gaps}
+
+**{Section 2}:** [Present/Missing/Incomplete]
+{If missing or incomplete: Note specific gaps}
+
+[Continue for all required sections]
+
+### Excluded Sections (Should Not Be Present)
+
+**{Section 1}:** [Absent/Present] ✓
+{If present: This section should not be present for {projectType}}
+
+**{Section 2}:** [Absent/Present] ✓
+{If present: This section should not be present for {projectType}}
+
+[Continue for all excluded sections]
+
+### Compliance Summary
+
+**Required Sections:** {present}/{total} present
+**Excluded Sections Present:** {violations} (should be 0)
+**Compliance Score:** {percentage}%
+
+**Severity:** [Critical if required sections missing, Warning if incomplete, Pass if complete]
+
+**Recommendation:**
+[If Critical] "PRD is missing required sections for {projectType}. Add missing sections to properly specify this type of project."
+[If Warning] "Some required sections for {projectType} are incomplete. Strengthen documentation."
+[If Pass] "All required sections for {projectType} are present. No excluded sections found."
+```
+
+### 7. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
+
+Display: "**Project-Type Compliance Validation Complete**
+
+Project Type: {projectType}
+Compliance: {score}%
+
+**Proceeding to next validation check...**"
+
+Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} (step-v-10-smart-validation.md)
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- Project type extracted correctly (or default assumed)
+- Required sections validated for presence and completeness
+- Excluded sections validated for absence
+- Compliance table built with status for all sections
+- Severity assessed correctly
+- Findings reported to validation report
+- Auto-proceeds to next validation step
+- Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Not checking project type before proceeding
+- Missing required section checks
+- Missing excluded section checks
+- Not building compliance table
+- Not reporting findings to validation report
+- Not auto-proceeding
+
+**Master Rule:** Different project types have different requirements. API PRDs don't need UX sections - validate accordingly.

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-10-smart-validation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,209 @@
+---
+name: 'step-v-10-smart-validation'
+description: 'SMART Requirements Validation - Validate Functional Requirements meet SMART quality criteria'
+
+# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
+nextStepFile: './step-v-11-holistic-quality-validation.md'
+prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
+validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
+---
+
+# Step 10: SMART Requirements Validation
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+Validate Functional Requirements meet SMART quality criteria (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Traceable), ensuring high-quality requirements.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS WRITE all artifact and document content in `{document_output_language}`
+
+### Role Reinforcement:
+
+- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
+- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
+- ✅ We engage in systematic validation, not collaborative dialogue
+- ✅ You bring requirements engineering expertise and quality assessment
+- ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Focus ONLY on FR quality assessment using SMART framework
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate other aspects in this step
+- 💬 Approach: Score each FR on SMART criteria (1-5 scale)
+- 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Extract all FRs from PRD
+- 🎯 Score each FR on SMART criteria (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Traceable)
+- 💾 Flag FRs with score < 3 in any category
+- 📖 Append scoring table and suggestions to validation report
+- 📖 Display "Proceeding to next check..." and load next step
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to pause or request user input
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Available context: PRD file, validation report
+- Focus: FR quality assessment only using SMART framework
+- Limits: Don't validate NFRs or other aspects, don't pause for user input
+- Dependencies: Steps 2-9 completed - comprehensive validation checks done
+
+## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
+
+**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
+
+### 1. Extract All Functional Requirements
+
+From the PRD's Functional Requirements section, extract:
+- All FRs with their FR numbers (FR-001, FR-002, etc.)
+- Count total FRs
+
+### 2. Attempt Sub-Process Validation
+
+**Try to use Task tool to spawn a subprocess:**
+
+"Perform SMART requirements validation on these Functional Requirements:
+
+{List all FRs}
+
+**For each FR, score on SMART criteria (1-5 scale):**
+
+**Specific (1-5):**
+- 5: Clear, unambiguous, well-defined
+- 3: Somewhat clear but could be more specific
+- 1: Vague, ambiguous, unclear
+
+**Measurable (1-5):**
+- 5: Quantifiable metrics, testable
+- 3: Partially measurable
+- 1: Not measurable, subjective
+
+**Attainable (1-5):**
+- 5: Realistic, achievable with constraints
+- 3: Probably achievable but uncertain
+- 1: Unrealistic, technically infeasible
+
+**Relevant (1-5):**
+- 5: Clearly aligned with user needs and business objectives
+- 3: Somewhat relevant but connection unclear
+- 1: Not relevant, doesn't align with goals
+
+**Traceable (1-5):**
+- 5: Clearly traces to user journey or business objective
+- 3: Partially traceable
+- 1: Orphan requirement, no clear source
+
+**For each FR with score < 3 in any category:**
+- Provide specific improvement suggestions
+
+Return scoring table with all FR scores and improvement suggestions for low-scoring FRs."
+
+**Graceful degradation (if no Task tool):**
+- Manually score each FR on SMART criteria
+- Note FRs with low scores
+- Provide improvement suggestions
+
+### 3. Build Scoring Table
+
+For each FR:
+- FR number
+- Specific score (1-5)
+- Measurable score (1-5)
+- Attainable score (1-5)
+- Relevant score (1-5)
+- Traceable score (1-5)
+- Average score
+- Flag if any category < 3
+
+**Calculate overall FR quality:**
+- Percentage of FRs with all scores ≥ 3
+- Percentage of FRs with all scores ≥ 4
+- Average score across all FRs and categories
+
+### 4. Report SMART Findings to Validation Report
+
+Append to validation report:
+
+```markdown
+## SMART Requirements Validation
+
+**Total Functional Requirements:** {count}
+
+### Scoring Summary
+
+**All scores ≥ 3:** {percentage}% ({count}/{total})
+**All scores ≥ 4:** {percentage}% ({count}/{total})
+**Overall Average Score:** {average}/5.0
+
+### Scoring Table
+
+| FR # | Specific | Measurable | Attainable | Relevant | Traceable | Average | Flag |
+|------|----------|------------|------------|----------|-----------|--------|------|
+| FR-001 | {s1} | {m1} | {a1} | {r1} | {t1} | {avg1} | {X if any <3} |
+| FR-002 | {s2} | {m2} | {a2} | {r2} | {t2} | {avg2} | {X if any <3} |
+[Continue for all FRs]
+
+**Legend:** 1=Poor, 3=Acceptable, 5=Excellent
+**Flag:** X = Score < 3 in one or more categories
+
+### Improvement Suggestions
+
+**Low-Scoring FRs:**
+
+**FR-{number}:** {specific suggestion for improvement}
+[For each FR with score < 3 in any category]
+
+### Overall Assessment
+
+**Severity:** [Critical if >30% flagged FRs, Warning if 10-30%, Pass if <10%]
+
+**Recommendation:**
+[If Critical] "Many FRs have quality issues. Revise flagged FRs using SMART framework to improve clarity and testability."
+[If Warning] "Some FRs would benefit from SMART refinement. Focus on flagged requirements above."
+[If Pass] "Functional Requirements demonstrate good SMART quality overall."
+```
+
+### 5. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
+
+Display: "**SMART Requirements Validation Complete**
+
+FR Quality: {percentage}% with acceptable scores ({severity})
+
+**Proceeding to next validation check...**"
+
+Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} (step-v-11-holistic-quality-validation.md)
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- All FRs extracted from PRD
+- Each FR scored on all 5 SMART criteria (1-5 scale)
+- FRs with scores < 3 flagged for improvement
+- Improvement suggestions provided for low-scoring FRs
+- Scoring table built with all FR scores
+- Overall quality assessment calculated
+- Findings reported to validation report
+- Auto-proceeds to next validation step
+- Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Not scoring all FRs on all SMART criteria
+- Missing improvement suggestions for low-scoring FRs
+- Not building scoring table
+- Not calculating overall quality metrics
+- Not reporting findings to validation report
+- Not auto-proceeding
+
+**Master Rule:** FRs should be high-quality, not just present. SMART framework provides objective quality measure.

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-11-holistic-quality-validation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,265 @@
+---
+name: 'step-v-11-holistic-quality-validation'
+description: 'Holistic Quality Assessment - Assess PRD as cohesive, compelling document - is it a good PRD?'
+
+# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
+nextStepFile: './step-v-12-completeness-validation.md'
+prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
+validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
+advancedElicitationTask: 'skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation'
+---
+
+# Step 11: Holistic Quality Assessment
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+Assess the PRD as a cohesive, compelling document - evaluating document flow, dual audience effectiveness (humans and LLMs), BMAD PRD principles compliance, and overall quality rating.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS WRITE all artifact and document content in `{document_output_language}`
+
+### Role Reinforcement:
+
+- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
+- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
+- ✅ We engage in systematic validation, not collaborative dialogue
+- ✅ You bring analytical rigor and document quality expertise
+- ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
+- ✅ Uses Advanced Elicitation for multi-perspective evaluation
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Focus ONLY on holistic document quality assessment
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate individual components (done in previous steps)
+- 💬 Approach: Multi-perspective evaluation using Advanced Elicitation
+- 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Use Advanced Elicitation for multi-perspective assessment
+- 🎯 Evaluate document flow, dual audience, BMAD principles
+- 💾 Append comprehensive assessment to validation report
+- 📖 Display "Proceeding to next check..." and load next step
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to pause or request user input
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Available context: Complete PRD file, validation report with findings from steps 1-10
+- Focus: Holistic quality - the WHOLE document
+- Limits: Don't re-validate individual components, don't pause for user input
+- Dependencies: Steps 1-10 completed - all systematic checks done
+
+## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
+
+**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
+
+### 1. Attempt Sub-Process with Advanced Elicitation
+
+**Try to use Task tool to spawn a subprocess using Advanced Elicitation:**
+
+"Perform holistic quality assessment on this PRD using multi-perspective evaluation:
+
+**Read fully and follow the Advanced Elicitation workflow:**
+{advancedElicitationTask}
+
+**Evaluate the PRD from these perspectives:**
+
+**1. Document Flow & Coherence:**
+- Read entire PRD
+- Evaluate narrative flow - does it tell a cohesive story?
+- Check transitions between sections
+- Assess consistency - is it coherent throughout?
+- Evaluate readability - is it clear and well-organized?
+
+**2. Dual Audience Effectiveness:**
+
+**For Humans:**
+- Executive-friendly: Can executives understand vision and goals quickly?
+- Developer clarity: Do developers have clear requirements to build from?
+- Designer clarity: Do designers understand user needs and flows?
+- Stakeholder decision-making: Can stakeholders make informed decisions?
+
+**For LLMs:**
+- Machine-readable structure: Is the PRD structured for LLM consumption?
+- UX readiness: Can an LLM generate UX designs from this?
+- Architecture readiness: Can an LLM generate architecture from this?
+- Epic/Story readiness: Can an LLM break down into epics and stories?
+
+**3. BMAD PRD Principles Compliance:**
+- Information density: Every sentence carries weight?
+- Measurability: Requirements testable?
+- Traceability: Requirements trace to sources?
+- Domain awareness: Domain-specific considerations included?
+- Zero anti-patterns: No filler or wordiness?
+- Dual audience: Works for both humans and LLMs?
+- Markdown format: Proper structure and formatting?
+
+**4. Overall Quality Rating:**
+Rate the PRD on 5-point scale:
+- Excellent (5/5): Exemplary, ready for production use
+- Good (4/5): Strong with minor improvements needed
+- Adequate (3/5): Acceptable but needs refinement
+- Needs Work (2/5): Significant gaps or issues
+- Problematic (1/5): Major flaws, needs substantial revision
+
+**5. Top 3 Improvements:**
+Identify the 3 most impactful improvements to make this a great PRD
+
+Return comprehensive assessment with all perspectives, rating, and top 3 improvements."
+
+**Graceful degradation (if no Task tool or Advanced Elicitation unavailable):**
+- Perform holistic assessment directly in current context
+- Read complete PRD
+- Evaluate document flow, coherence, transitions
+- Assess dual audience effectiveness
+- Check BMAD principles compliance
+- Assign overall quality rating
+- Identify top 3 improvements
+
+### 2. Synthesize Assessment
+
+**Compile findings from multi-perspective evaluation:**
+
+**Document Flow & Coherence:**
+- Overall assessment: [Excellent/Good/Adequate/Needs Work/Problematic]
+- Key strengths: [list]
+- Key weaknesses: [list]
+
+**Dual Audience Effectiveness:**
+- For Humans: [assessment]
+- For LLMs: [assessment]
+- Overall dual audience score: [1-5]
+
+**BMAD Principles Compliance:**
+- Principles met: [count]/7
+- Principles with issues: [list]
+
+**Overall Quality Rating:** [1-5 with label]
+
+**Top 3 Improvements:**
+1. [Improvement 1]
+2. [Improvement 2]
+3. [Improvement 3]
+
+### 3. Report Holistic Quality Findings to Validation Report
+
+Append to validation report:
+
+```markdown
+## Holistic Quality Assessment
+
+### Document Flow & Coherence
+
+**Assessment:** [Excellent/Good/Adequate/Needs Work/Problematic]
+
+**Strengths:**
+{List key strengths}
+
+**Areas for Improvement:**
+{List key weaknesses}
+
+### Dual Audience Effectiveness
+
+**For Humans:**
+- Executive-friendly: [assessment]
+- Developer clarity: [assessment]
+- Designer clarity: [assessment]
+- Stakeholder decision-making: [assessment]
+
+**For LLMs:**
+- Machine-readable structure: [assessment]
+- UX readiness: [assessment]
+- Architecture readiness: [assessment]
+- Epic/Story readiness: [assessment]
+
+**Dual Audience Score:** {score}/5
+
+### BMAD PRD Principles Compliance
+
+| Principle | Status | Notes |
+|-----------|--------|-------|
+| Information Density | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
+| Measurability | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
+| Traceability | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
+| Domain Awareness | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
+| Zero Anti-Patterns | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
+| Dual Audience | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
+| Markdown Format | [Met/Partial/Not Met] | {notes} |
+
+**Principles Met:** {count}/7
+
+### Overall Quality Rating
+
+**Rating:** {rating}/5 - {label}
+
+**Scale:**
+- 5/5 - Excellent: Exemplary, ready for production use
+- 4/5 - Good: Strong with minor improvements needed
+- 3/5 - Adequate: Acceptable but needs refinement
+- 2/5 - Needs Work: Significant gaps or issues
+- 1/5 - Problematic: Major flaws, needs substantial revision
+
+### Top 3 Improvements
+
+1. **{Improvement 1}**
+   {Brief explanation of why and how}
+
+2. **{Improvement 2}**
+   {Brief explanation of why and how}
+
+3. **{Improvement 3}**
+   {Brief explanation of why and how}
+
+### Summary
+
+**This PRD is:** {one-sentence overall assessment}
+
+**To make it great:** Focus on the top 3 improvements above.
+```
+
+### 4. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
+
+Display: "**Holistic Quality Assessment Complete**
+
+Overall Rating: {rating}/5 - {label}
+
+**Proceeding to final validation checks...**"
+
+Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} (step-v-12-completeness-validation.md)
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- Advanced Elicitation used for multi-perspective evaluation (or graceful degradation)
+- Document flow & coherence assessed
+- Dual audience effectiveness evaluated (humans and LLMs)
+- BMAD PRD principles compliance checked
+- Overall quality rating assigned (1-5 scale)
+- Top 3 improvements identified
+- Comprehensive assessment reported to validation report
+- Auto-proceeds to next validation step
+- Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Not using Advanced Elicitation for multi-perspective evaluation
+- Missing document flow assessment
+- Missing dual audience evaluation
+- Not checking all BMAD principles
+- Not assigning overall quality rating
+- Missing top 3 improvements
+- Not reporting comprehensive assessment to validation report
+- Not auto-proceeding
+
+**Master Rule:** This evaluates the WHOLE document, not just components. Answers "Is this a good PRD?" and "What would make it great?"

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-12-completeness-validation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,242 @@
+---
+name: 'step-v-12-completeness-validation'
+description: 'Completeness Check - Final comprehensive completeness check before report generation'
+
+# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
+nextStepFile: './step-v-13-report-complete.md'
+prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
+prdFrontmatter: '{prd_frontmatter}'
+validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
+---
+
+# Step 12: Completeness Validation
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+Final comprehensive completeness check - validate no template variables remain, each section has required content, section-specific completeness, and frontmatter is properly populated.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+
+### Role Reinforcement:
+
+- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
+- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
+- ✅ We engage in systematic validation, not collaborative dialogue
+- ✅ You bring attention to detail and completeness verification
+- ✅ This step runs autonomously - no user input needed
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Focus ONLY on completeness verification
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to validate quality (done in step 11) or other aspects
+- 💬 Approach: Systematic checklist-style verification
+- 🚪 This is a validation sequence step - auto-proceeds when complete
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Check template completeness (no variables remaining)
+- 🎯 Validate content completeness (each section has required content)
+- 🎯 Validate section-specific completeness
+- 🎯 Validate frontmatter completeness
+- 💾 Append completeness matrix to validation report
+- 📖 Display "Proceeding to final step..." and load next step
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to pause or request user input
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Available context: Complete PRD file, frontmatter, validation report
+- Focus: Completeness verification only (final gate)
+- Limits: Don't assess quality, don't pause for user input
+- Dependencies: Steps 1-11 completed - all validation checks done
+
+## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
+
+**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
+
+### 1. Attempt Sub-Process Validation
+
+**Try to use Task tool to spawn a subprocess:**
+
+"Perform completeness validation on this PRD - final gate check:
+
+**1. Template Completeness:**
+- Scan PRD for any remaining template variables
+- Look for: {variable}, {{variable}}, {placeholder}, [placeholder], etc.
+- List any found with line numbers
+
+**2. Content Completeness:**
+- Executive Summary: Has vision statement? ({key content})
+- Success Criteria: All criteria measurable? ({metrics present})
+- Product Scope: In-scope and out-of-scope defined? ({both present})
+- User Journeys: User types identified? ({users listed})
+- Functional Requirements: FRs listed with proper format? ({FRs present})
+- Non-Functional Requirements: NFRs with metrics? ({NFRs present})
+
+For each section: Is required content present? (Yes/No/Partial)
+
+**3. Section-Specific Completeness:**
+- Success Criteria: Each has specific measurement method?
+- User Journeys: Cover all user types?
+- Functional Requirements: Cover MVP scope?
+- Non-Functional Requirements: Each has specific criteria?
+
+**4. Frontmatter Completeness:**
+- stepsCompleted: Populated?
+- classification: Present (domain, projectType)?
+- inputDocuments: Tracked?
+- date: Present?
+
+Return completeness matrix with status for each check."
+
+**Graceful degradation (if no Task tool):**
+- Manually scan for template variables
+- Manually check each section for required content
+- Manually verify frontmatter fields
+- Build completeness matrix
+
+### 2. Build Completeness Matrix
+
+**Template Completeness:**
+- Template variables found: count
+- List if any found
+
+**Content Completeness by Section:**
+- Executive Summary: Complete / Incomplete / Missing
+- Success Criteria: Complete / Incomplete / Missing
+- Product Scope: Complete / Incomplete / Missing
+- User Journeys: Complete / Incomplete / Missing
+- Functional Requirements: Complete / Incomplete / Missing
+- Non-Functional Requirements: Complete / Incomplete / Missing
+- Other sections: [List completeness]
+
+**Section-Specific Completeness:**
+- Success criteria measurable: All / Some / None
+- Journeys cover all users: Yes / Partial / No
+- FRs cover MVP scope: Yes / Partial / No
+- NFRs have specific criteria: All / Some / None
+
+**Frontmatter Completeness:**
+- stepsCompleted: Present / Missing
+- classification: Present / Missing
+- inputDocuments: Present / Missing
+- date: Present / Missing
+
+**Overall completeness:**
+- Sections complete: X/Y
+- Critical gaps: [list if any]
+
+### 3. Report Completeness Findings to Validation Report
+
+Append to validation report:
+
+```markdown
+## Completeness Validation
+
+### Template Completeness
+
+**Template Variables Found:** {count}
+{If count > 0, list variables with line numbers}
+{If count = 0, note: No template variables remaining ✓}
+
+### Content Completeness by Section
+
+**Executive Summary:** [Complete/Incomplete/Missing]
+{If incomplete or missing, note specific gaps}
+
+**Success Criteria:** [Complete/Incomplete/Missing]
+{If incomplete or missing, note specific gaps}
+
+**Product Scope:** [Complete/Incomplete/Missing]
+{If incomplete or missing, note specific gaps}
+
+**User Journeys:** [Complete/Incomplete/Missing]
+{If incomplete or missing, note specific gaps}
+
+**Functional Requirements:** [Complete/Incomplete/Missing]
+{If incomplete or missing, note specific gaps}
+
+**Non-Functional Requirements:** [Complete/Incomplete/Missing]
+{If incomplete or missing, note specific gaps}
+
+### Section-Specific Completeness
+
+**Success Criteria Measurability:** [All/Some/None] measurable
+{If Some or None, note which criteria lack metrics}
+
+**User Journeys Coverage:** [Yes/Partial/No] - covers all user types
+{If Partial or No, note missing user types}
+
+**FRs Cover MVP Scope:** [Yes/Partial/No]
+{If Partial or No, note scope gaps}
+
+**NFRs Have Specific Criteria:** [All/Some/None]
+{If Some or None, note which NFRs lack specificity}
+
+### Frontmatter Completeness
+
+**stepsCompleted:** [Present/Missing]
+**classification:** [Present/Missing]
+**inputDocuments:** [Present/Missing]
+**date:** [Present/Missing]
+
+**Frontmatter Completeness:** {complete_fields}/4
+
+### Completeness Summary
+
+**Overall Completeness:** {percentage}% ({complete_sections}/{total_sections})
+
+**Critical Gaps:** [count] [list if any]
+**Minor Gaps:** [count] [list if any]
+
+**Severity:** [Critical if template variables exist or critical sections missing, Warning if minor gaps, Pass if complete]
+
+**Recommendation:**
+[If Critical] "PRD has completeness gaps that must be addressed before use. Fix template variables and complete missing sections."
+[If Warning] "PRD has minor completeness gaps. Address minor gaps for complete documentation."
+[If Pass] "PRD is complete with all required sections and content present."
+```
+
+### 4. Display Progress and Auto-Proceed
+
+Display: "**Completeness Validation Complete**
+
+Overall Completeness: {percentage}% ({severity})
+
+**Proceeding to final step...**"
+
+Without delay, read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} (step-v-13-report-complete.md)
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- Scanned for template variables systematically
+- Validated each section for required content
+- Validated section-specific completeness (measurability, coverage, scope)
+- Validated frontmatter completeness
+- Completeness matrix built with all checks
+- Severity assessed correctly
+- Findings reported to validation report
+- Auto-proceeds to final step
+- Subprocess attempted with graceful degradation
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Not scanning for template variables
+- Missing section-specific completeness checks
+- Not validating frontmatter
+- Not building completeness matrix
+- Not reporting findings to validation report
+- Not auto-proceeding
+
+**Master Rule:** Final gate to ensure document is complete before presenting findings. Template variables or critical gaps must be fixed.

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/steps-v/step-v-13-report-complete.md

@@ -0,0 +1,232 @@
+---
+name: 'step-v-13-report-complete'
+description: 'Validation Report Complete - Finalize report, summarize findings, present to user, offer next steps'
+
+# File references (ONLY variables used in this step)
+validationReportPath: '{validation_report_path}'
+prdFile: '{prd_file_path}'
+---
+
+# Step 13: Validation Report Complete
+
+## STEP GOAL:
+
+Finalize validation report, summarize all findings from steps 1-12, present summary to user conversationally, and offer actionable next steps.
+
+## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
+
+### Universal Rules:
+
+- 🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
+- 📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
+- 🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
+- 📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
+- ✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS WRITE all artifact and document content in `{document_output_language}`
+
+### Role Reinforcement:
+
+- ✅ You are a Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist
+- ✅ If you already have been given communication or persona patterns, continue to use those while playing this new role
+- ✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
+- ✅ You bring synthesis and summary expertise
+- ✅ This is the FINAL step - requires user interaction
+
+### Step-Specific Rules:
+
+- 🎯 Focus ONLY on summarizing findings and presenting options
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to perform additional validation
+- 💬 Approach: Conversational summary with clear next steps
+- 🚪 This is the final step - no next step after this
+
+## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
+
+- 🎯 Load complete validation report
+- 🎯 Summarize all findings from steps 1-12
+- 🎯 Update report frontmatter with final status
+- 💬 Present summary to user conversationally
+- 💬 Offer menu options for next actions
+- 🚫 FORBIDDEN to proceed without user selection
+
+## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
+
+- Available context: Complete validation report with findings from all validation steps
+- Focus: Summary and presentation only (no new validation)
+- Limits: Don't add new findings, just synthesize existing
+- Dependencies: Steps 1-12 completed - all validation checks done
+
+## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
+
+**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise unless user explicitly requests a change.
+
+### 1. Load Complete Validation Report
+
+Read the entire validation report from {validationReportPath}
+
+Extract all findings from:
+- Format Detection (Step 2)
+- Parity Analysis (Step 2B, if applicable)
+- Information Density (Step 3)
+- Product Brief Coverage (Step 4)
+- Measurability (Step 5)
+- Traceability (Step 6)
+- Implementation Leakage (Step 7)
+- Domain Compliance (Step 8)
+- Project-Type Compliance (Step 9)
+- SMART Requirements (Step 10)
+- Holistic Quality (Step 11)
+- Completeness (Step 12)
+
+### 2. Update Report Frontmatter with Final Status
+
+Update validation report frontmatter:
+
+```yaml
+---
+validationTarget: '{prd_path}'
+validationDate: '{current_date}'
+inputDocuments: [list of documents]
+validationStepsCompleted: ['step-v-01-discovery', 'step-v-02-format-detection', 'step-v-03-density-validation', 'step-v-04-brief-coverage-validation', 'step-v-05-measurability-validation', 'step-v-06-traceability-validation', 'step-v-07-implementation-leakage-validation', 'step-v-08-domain-compliance-validation', 'step-v-09-project-type-validation', 'step-v-10-smart-validation', 'step-v-11-holistic-quality-validation', 'step-v-12-completeness-validation']
+validationStatus: COMPLETE
+holisticQualityRating: '{rating from step 11}'
+overallStatus: '{Pass/Warning/Critical based on all findings}'
+---
+```
+
+### 3. Create Summary of Findings
+
+**Overall Status:**
+- Determine from all validation findings
+- **Pass:** All critical checks pass, minor warnings acceptable
+- **Warning:** Some issues found but PRD is usable
+- **Critical:** Major issues that prevent PRD from being fit for purpose
+
+**Quick Results Table:**
+- Format: [classification]
+- Information Density: [severity]
+- Measurability: [severity]
+- Traceability: [severity]
+- Implementation Leakage: [severity]
+- Domain Compliance: [status]
+- Project-Type Compliance: [compliance score]
+- SMART Quality: [percentage]
+- Holistic Quality: [rating/5]
+- Completeness: [percentage]
+
+**Critical Issues:** List from all validation steps
+**Warnings:** List from all validation steps
+**Strengths:** List positives from all validation steps
+
+**Holistic Quality Rating:** From step 11
+**Top 3 Improvements:** From step 11
+
+**Recommendation:** Based on overall status
+
+### 4. Present Summary to User Conversationally
+
+Display:
+
+"**✓ PRD Validation Complete**
+
+**Overall Status:** {Pass/Warning/Critical}
+
+**Quick Results:**
+{Present quick results table with key findings}
+
+**Critical Issues:** {count or "None"}
+{If any, list briefly}
+
+**Warnings:** {count or "None"}
+{If any, list briefly}
+
+**Strengths:**
+{List key strengths}
+
+**Holistic Quality:** {rating}/5 - {label}
+
+**Top 3 Improvements:**
+1. {Improvement 1}
+2. {Improvement 2}
+3. {Improvement 3}
+
+**Recommendation:**
+{Based on overall status:
+- Pass: "PRD is in good shape. Address minor improvements to make it great."
+- Warning: "PRD is usable but has issues that should be addressed. Review warnings and improve where needed."
+- Critical: "PRD has significant issues that should be fixed before use. Focus on critical issues above."}
+
+**What would you like to do next?**"
+
+### 5. Present MENU OPTIONS
+
+Display:
+
+**[R] Review Detailed Findings** - Walk through validation report section by section
+**[E] Use Edit Workflow** - Use validation report with Edit workflow for systematic improvements
+**[F] Fix Simpler Items** - Immediate fixes for simple issues (anti-patterns, leakage, missing headers)
+**[X] Exit** - Exit and Suggest Next Steps.
+
+#### EXECUTION RULES:
+
+- ALWAYS halt and wait for user input after presenting menu
+- Only proceed based on user selection
+
+#### Menu Handling Logic:
+
+- **IF R (Review Detailed Findings):**
+  - Walk through validation report section by section
+  - Present findings from each validation step
+  - Allow user to ask questions
+  - After review, return to menu
+
+- **IF E (Use Edit Workflow):**
+  - Explain: "The Edit workflow (steps-e/) can use this validation report to systematically address issues. Edit mode will guide you through discovering what to edit, reviewing the PRD, and applying targeted improvements."
+  - Offer: "Would you like to launch Edit mode now? It will help you fix validation findings systematically."
+  - If yes: Read fully and follow: steps-e/step-e-01-discovery.md
+  - If no: Return to menu
+
+- **IF F (Fix Simpler Items):**
+  - Offer immediate fixes for:
+    - Template variables (fill in with appropriate content)
+    - Conversational filler (remove wordy phrases)
+    - Implementation leakage (remove technology names from FRs/NFRs)
+    - Missing section headers (add ## headers)
+  - Ask: "Which simple fixes would you like me to make?"
+  - If user specifies fixes, make them and update validation report
+  - Return to menu
+
+- **IF X (Exit):**
+  - Display: "**Validation Report Saved:** {validationReportPath}"
+  - Display: "**Summary:** {overall status} - {recommendation}"
+  - PRD Validation complete. Invoke the `bmad-help` skill.
+
+- **IF Any other:** Help user, then redisplay menu
+
+---
+
+## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
+
+### ✅ SUCCESS:
+
+- Complete validation report loaded successfully
+- All findings from steps 1-12 summarized
+- Report frontmatter updated with final status
+- Overall status determined correctly (Pass/Warning/Critical)
+- Quick results table presented
+- Critical issues, warnings, and strengths listed
+- Holistic quality rating included
+- Top 3 improvements presented
+- Clear recommendation provided
+- Menu options presented with clear explanations
+- User can review findings, get help, or exit
+
+### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
+
+- Not loading complete validation report
+- Missing summary of findings
+- Not updating report frontmatter
+- Not determining overall status
+- Missing menu options
+- Unclear next steps
+
+**Master Rule:** User needs clear summary and actionable next steps. Edit workflow is best for complex issues; immediate fixes available for simpler ones.

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/bmad-validate-prd/workflow.md

@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+---
+main_config: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/config.yaml'
+validateWorkflow: './steps-v/step-v-01-discovery.md'
+---
+
+# PRD Validate Workflow
+
+**Goal:** Validate existing PRDs against BMAD standards through comprehensive review.
+
+**Your Role:** Validation Architect and Quality Assurance Specialist.
+
+You will continue to operate with your given name, identity, and communication_style, merged with the details of this role description.
+
+## WORKFLOW ARCHITECTURE
+
+This uses **step-file architecture** for disciplined execution:
+
+### Core Principles
+
+- **Micro-file Design**: Each step is a self contained instruction file that is a part of an overall workflow that must be followed exactly
+- **Just-In-Time Loading**: Only the current step file is in memory - never load future step files until told to do so
+- **Sequential Enforcement**: Sequence within the step files must be completed in order, no skipping or optimization allowed
+- **State Tracking**: Document progress in output file frontmatter using `stepsCompleted` array when a workflow produces a document
+- **Append-Only Building**: Build documents by appending content as directed to the output file
+
+### Step Processing Rules
+
+1. **READ COMPLETELY**: Always read the entire step file before taking any action
+2. **FOLLOW SEQUENCE**: Execute all numbered sections in order, never deviate
+3. **WAIT FOR INPUT**: If a menu is presented, halt and wait for user selection
+4. **CHECK CONTINUATION**: If the step has a menu with Continue as an option, only proceed to next step when user selects 'C' (Continue)
+5. **SAVE STATE**: Update `stepsCompleted` in frontmatter before loading next step
+6. **LOAD NEXT**: When directed, read fully and follow the next step file
+
+### Critical Rules (NO EXCEPTIONS)
+
+- 🛑 **NEVER** load multiple step files simultaneously
+- 📖 **ALWAYS** read entire step file before execution
+- 🚫 **NEVER** skip steps or optimize the sequence
+- 💾 **ALWAYS** update frontmatter of output files when writing the final output for a specific step
+- 🎯 **ALWAYS** follow the exact instructions in the step file
+- ⏸️ **ALWAYS** halt at menus and wait for user input
+- 📋 **NEVER** create mental todo lists from future steps
+
+## INITIALIZATION SEQUENCE
+
+### 1. Configuration Loading
+
+Load and read full config from {main_config} and resolve:
+
+- `project_name`, `output_folder`, `planning_artifacts`, `user_name`
+- `communication_language`, `document_output_language`, `user_skill_level`
+- `date` as system-generated current datetime
+
+✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT In your Agent communication style with the configured `{communication_language}`.
+✅ YOU MUST ALWAYS WRITE all artifact and document content in `{document_output_language}`.
+
+### 2. Route to Validate Workflow
+
+"**Validate Mode: Validating an existing PRD against BMAD standards.**"
+
+Then read fully and follow: `{validateWorkflow}` (steps-v/step-v-01-discovery.md)

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml

@@ -1,9 +0,0 @@
-workflow-create-prd.md:
-  canonicalId: bmad-create-prd
-  type: workflow
-  description: "Create a PRD from scratch. Use when the user says 'lets create a product requirements document' or 'I want to create a new PRD'"
-
-workflow-validate-prd.md:
-  canonicalId: bmad-validate-prd
-  type: workflow
-  description: "Validate a PRD against standards. Use when the user says 'validate this PRD' or 'run PRD validation'"

src/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/workflow-validate-prd.md

@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 ---
 name: validate-prd
 description: 'Validate a PRD against standards. Use when the user says "validate this PRD" or "run PRD validation"'
+standalone: false
 main_config: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/config.yaml'
 validateWorkflow: './steps-v/step-v-01-discovery.md'
 ---

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+---
+name: bmad-create-prd
+description: 'Create a PRD from scratch. Use when the user says "lets create a product requirements document" or "I want to create a new PRD"'
+---
+
+Follow the instructions in [workflow.md](workflow.md).

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+type: skill

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/data/domain-complexity.csv

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+domain,signals,complexity,key_concerns,required_knowledge,suggested_workflow,web_searches,special_sections
+healthcare,"medical,diagnostic,clinical,FDA,patient,treatment,HIPAA,therapy,pharma,drug",high,"FDA approval;Clinical validation;HIPAA compliance;Patient safety;Medical device classification;Liability","Regulatory pathways;Clinical trial design;Medical standards;Data privacy;Integration requirements","domain-research","FDA software medical device guidance {date};HIPAA compliance software requirements;Medical software standards {date};Clinical validation software","clinical_requirements;regulatory_pathway;validation_methodology;safety_measures"
+fintech,"payment,banking,trading,investment,crypto,wallet,transaction,KYC,AML,funds,fintech",high,"Regional compliance;Security standards;Audit requirements;Fraud prevention;Data protection","KYC/AML requirements;PCI DSS;Open banking;Regional laws (US/EU/APAC);Crypto regulations","domain-research","fintech regulations {date};payment processing compliance {date};open banking API standards;cryptocurrency regulations {date}","compliance_matrix;security_architecture;audit_requirements;fraud_prevention"
+govtech,"government,federal,civic,public sector,citizen,municipal,voting",high,"Procurement rules;Security clearance;Accessibility (508);FedRAMP;Privacy;Transparency","Government procurement;Security frameworks;Accessibility standards;Privacy laws;Open data requirements","domain-research","government software procurement {date};FedRAMP compliance requirements;section 508 accessibility;government security standards","procurement_compliance;security_clearance;accessibility_standards;transparency_requirements"
+edtech,"education,learning,student,teacher,curriculum,assessment,K-12,university,LMS",medium,"Student privacy (COPPA/FERPA);Accessibility;Content moderation;Age verification;Curriculum standards","Educational privacy laws;Learning standards;Accessibility requirements;Content guidelines;Assessment validity","domain-research","educational software privacy {date};COPPA FERPA compliance;WCAG education requirements;learning management standards","privacy_compliance;content_guidelines;accessibility_features;curriculum_alignment"
+aerospace,"aircraft,spacecraft,aviation,drone,satellite,propulsion,flight,radar,navigation",high,"Safety certification;DO-178C compliance;Performance validation;Simulation accuracy;Export controls","Aviation standards;Safety analysis;Simulation validation;ITAR/export controls;Performance requirements","domain-research + technical-model","DO-178C software certification;aerospace simulation standards {date};ITAR export controls software;aviation safety requirements","safety_certification;simulation_validation;performance_requirements;export_compliance"
+automotive,"vehicle,car,autonomous,ADAS,automotive,driving,EV,charging",high,"Safety standards;ISO 26262;V2X communication;Real-time requirements;Certification","Automotive standards;Functional safety;V2X protocols;Real-time systems;Testing requirements","domain-research","ISO 26262 automotive software;automotive safety standards {date};V2X communication protocols;EV charging standards","safety_standards;functional_safety;communication_protocols;certification_requirements"
+scientific,"research,algorithm,simulation,modeling,computational,analysis,data science,ML,AI",medium,"Reproducibility;Validation methodology;Peer review;Performance;Accuracy;Computational resources","Scientific method;Statistical validity;Computational requirements;Domain expertise;Publication standards","technical-model","scientific computing best practices {date};research reproducibility standards;computational modeling validation;peer review software","validation_methodology;accuracy_metrics;reproducibility_plan;computational_requirements"
+legaltech,"legal,law,contract,compliance,litigation,patent,attorney,court",high,"Legal ethics;Bar regulations;Data retention;Attorney-client privilege;Court system integration","Legal practice rules;Ethics requirements;Court filing systems;Document standards;Confidentiality","domain-research","legal technology ethics {date};law practice management software requirements;court filing system standards;attorney client privilege technology","ethics_compliance;data_retention;confidentiality_measures;court_integration"
+insuretech,"insurance,claims,underwriting,actuarial,policy,risk,premium",high,"Insurance regulations;Actuarial standards;Data privacy;Fraud detection;State compliance","Insurance regulations by state;Actuarial methods;Risk modeling;Claims processing;Regulatory reporting","domain-research","insurance software regulations {date};actuarial standards software;insurance fraud detection;state insurance compliance","regulatory_requirements;risk_modeling;fraud_detection;reporting_compliance"
+energy,"energy,utility,grid,solar,wind,power,electricity,oil,gas",high,"Grid compliance;NERC standards;Environmental regulations;Safety requirements;Real-time operations","Energy regulations;Grid standards;Environmental compliance;Safety protocols;SCADA systems","domain-research","energy sector software compliance {date};NERC CIP standards;smart grid requirements;renewable energy software standards","grid_compliance;safety_protocols;environmental_compliance;operational_requirements"
+process_control,"industrial automation,process control,PLC,SCADA,DCS,HMI,operational technology,OT,control system,cyberphysical,MES,historian,instrumentation,I&C,P&ID",high,"Functional safety;OT cybersecurity;Real-time control requirements;Legacy system integration;Process safety and hazard analysis;Environmental compliance and permitting;Engineering authority and PE requirements","Functional safety standards;OT security frameworks;Industrial protocols;Process control architecture;Plant reliability and maintainability","domain-research + technical-model","IEC 62443 OT cybersecurity requirements {date};functional safety software requirements {date};industrial process control architecture;ISA-95 manufacturing integration","functional_safety;ot_security;process_requirements;engineering_authority"
+building_automation,"building automation,BAS,BMS,HVAC,smart building,lighting control,fire alarm,fire protection,fire suppression,life safety,elevator,access control,DDC,energy management,sequence of operations,commissioning",high,"Life safety codes;Building energy standards;Multi-trade coordination and interoperability;Commissioning and ongoing operational performance;Indoor environmental quality and occupant comfort;Engineering authority and PE requirements","Building automation protocols;HVAC and mechanical controls;Fire alarm, fire protection, and life safety design;Commissioning process and sequence of operations;Building codes and energy standards","domain-research","smart building software architecture {date};BACnet integration best practices;building automation cybersecurity {date};ASHRAE building standards","life_safety;energy_compliance;commissioning_requirements;engineering_authority"
+gaming,"game,player,gameplay,level,character,multiplayer,quest",redirect,"REDIRECT TO GAME WORKFLOWS","Game design","game-brief","NA","NA"
+general,"",low,"Standard requirements;Basic security;User experience;Performance","General software practices","continue","software development best practices {date}","standard_requirements"

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/data/prd-purpose.md

@@ -0,0 +1,197 @@
+# BMAD PRD Purpose
+
+**The PRD is the top of the required funnel that feeds all subsequent product development work in rhw BMad Method.**
+
+---
+
+## What is a BMAD PRD?
+
+A dual-audience document serving:
+1. **Human Product Managers and builders** - Vision, strategy, stakeholder communication
+2. **LLM Downstream Consumption** - UX Design → Architecture → Epics → Development AI Agents
+
+Each successive document becomes more AI-tailored and granular.
+
+---
+
+## Core Philosophy: Information Density
+
+**High Signal-to-Noise Ratio**
+
+Every sentence must carry information weight. LLMs consume precise, dense content efficiently.
+
+**Anti-Patterns (Eliminate These):**
+- ❌ "The system will allow users to..." → ✅ "Users can..."
+- ❌ "It is important to note that..." → ✅ State the fact directly
+- ❌ "In order to..." → ✅ "To..."
+- ❌ Conversational filler and padding → ✅ Direct, concise statements
+
+**Goal:** Maximum information per word. Zero fluff.
+
+---
+
+## The Traceability Chain
+
+**PRD starts the chain:**
+```
+Vision → Success Criteria → User Journeys → Functional Requirements → (future: User Stories)
+```
+
+**In the PRD, establish:**
+- Vision → Success Criteria alignment
+- Success Criteria → User Journey coverage
+- User Journey → Functional Requirement mapping
+- All requirements traceable to user needs
+
+**Why:** Each downstream artifact (UX, Architecture, Epics, Stories) must trace back to documented user needs and business objectives. This chain ensures we build the right thing.
+
+---
+
+## What Makes Great Functional Requirements?
+
+### FRs are Capabilities, Not Implementation
+
+**Good FR:** "Users can reset their password via email link"
+**Bad FR:** "System sends JWT via email and validates with database" (implementation leakage)
+
+**Good FR:** "Dashboard loads in under 2 seconds for 95th percentile"
+**Bad FR:** "Fast loading time" (subjective, unmeasurable)
+
+### SMART Quality Criteria
+
+**Specific:** Clear, precisely defined capability
+**Measurable:** Quantifiable with test criteria
+**Attainable:** Realistic within constraints
+**Relevant:** Aligns with business objectives
+**Traceable:** Links to source (executive summary or user journey)
+
+### FR Anti-Patterns
+
+**Subjective Adjectives:**
+- ❌ "easy to use", "intuitive", "user-friendly", "fast", "responsive"
+- ✅ Use metrics: "completes task in under 3 clicks", "loads in under 2 seconds"
+
+**Implementation Leakage:**
+- ❌ Technology names, specific libraries, implementation details
+- ✅ Focus on capability and measurable outcomes
+
+**Vague Quantifiers:**
+- ❌ "multiple users", "several options", "various formats"
+- ✅ "up to 100 concurrent users", "3-5 options", "PDF, DOCX, TXT formats"
+
+**Missing Test Criteria:**
+- ❌ "The system shall provide notifications"
+- ✅ "The system shall send email notifications within 30 seconds of trigger event"
+
+---
+
+## What Makes Great Non-Functional Requirements?
+
+### NFRs Must Be Measurable
+
+**Template:**
+```
+"The system shall [metric] [condition] [measurement method]"
+```
+
+**Examples:**
+- ✅ "The system shall respond to API requests in under 200ms for 95th percentile as measured by APM monitoring"
+- ✅ "The system shall maintain 99.9% uptime during business hours as measured by cloud provider SLA"
+- ✅ "The system shall support 10,000 concurrent users as measured by load testing"
+
+### NFR Anti-Patterns
+
+**Unmeasurable Claims:**
+- ❌ "The system shall be scalable" → ✅ "The system shall handle 10x load growth through horizontal scaling"
+- ❌ "High availability required" → ✅ "99.9% uptime as measured by cloud provider SLA"
+
+**Missing Context:**
+- ❌ "Response time under 1 second" → ✅ "API response time under 1 second for 95th percentile under normal load"
+
+---
+
+## Domain-Specific Requirements
+
+**Auto-Detect and Enforce Based on Project Context**
+
+Certain industries have mandatory requirements that must be present:
+
+- **Healthcare:** HIPAA Privacy & Security Rules, PHI encryption, audit logging, MFA
+- **Fintech:** PCI-DSS Level 1, AML/KYC compliance, SOX controls, financial audit trails
+- **GovTech:** NIST framework, Section 508 accessibility (WCAG 2.1 AA), FedRAMP, data residency
+- **E-Commerce:** PCI-DSS for payments, inventory accuracy, tax calculation by jurisdiction
+
+**Why:** Missing these requirements in the PRD means they'll be missed in architecture and implementation, creating expensive rework. During PRD creation there is a step to cover this - during validation we want to make sure it was covered. For this purpose steps will utilize a domain-complexity.csv and project-types.csv.
+
+---
+
+## Document Structure (Markdown, Human-Readable)
+
+### Required Sections
+1. **Executive Summary** - Vision, differentiator, target users
+2. **Success Criteria** - Measurable outcomes (SMART)
+3. **Product Scope** - MVP, Growth, Vision phases
+4. **User Journeys** - Comprehensive coverage
+5. **Domain Requirements** - Industry-specific compliance (if applicable)
+6. **Innovation Analysis** - Competitive differentiation (if applicable)
+7. **Project-Type Requirements** - Platform-specific needs
+8. **Functional Requirements** - Capability contract (FRs)
+9. **Non-Functional Requirements** - Quality attributes (NFRs)
+
+### Formatting for Dual Consumption
+
+**For Humans:**
+- Clear, professional language
+- Logical flow from vision to requirements
+- Easy for stakeholders to review and approve
+
+**For LLMs:**
+- ## Level 2 headers for all main sections (enables extraction)
+- Consistent structure and patterns
+- Precise, testable language
+- High information density
+
+---
+
+## Downstream Impact
+
+**How the PRD Feeds Next Artifacts:**
+
+**UX Design:**
+- User journeys → interaction flows
+- FRs → design requirements
+- Success criteria → UX metrics
+
+**Architecture:**
+- FRs → system capabilities
+- NFRs → architecture decisions
+- Domain requirements → compliance architecture
+- Project-type requirements → platform choices
+
+**Epics & Stories (created after architecture):**
+- FRs → user stories (1 FR could map to 1-3 stories potentially)
+- Acceptance criteria → story acceptance tests
+- Priority → sprint sequencing
+- Traceability → stories map back to vision
+
+**Development AI Agents:**
+- Precise requirements → implementation clarity
+- Test criteria → automated test generation
+- Domain requirements → compliance enforcement
+- Measurable NFRs → performance targets
+
+---
+
+## Summary: What Makes a Great BMAD PRD?
+
+✅ **High Information Density** - Every sentence carries weight, zero fluff
+✅ **Measurable Requirements** - All FRs and NFRs are testable with specific criteria
+✅ **Clear Traceability** - Each requirement links to user need and business objective
+✅ **Domain Awareness** - Industry-specific requirements auto-detected and included
+✅ **Zero Anti-Patterns** - No subjective adjectives, implementation leakage, or vague quantifiers
+✅ **Dual Audience Optimized** - Human-readable AND LLM-consumable
+✅ **Markdown Format** - Professional, clean, accessible to all stakeholders
+
+---
+
+**Remember:** The PRD is the foundation. Quality here ripples through every subsequent phase. A dense, precise, well-traced PRD makes UX design, architecture, epic breakdown, and AI development dramatically more effective.

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/data/project-types.csv

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+project_type,detection_signals,key_questions,required_sections,skip_sections,web_search_triggers,innovation_signals
+api_backend,"API,REST,GraphQL,backend,service,endpoints","Endpoints needed?;Authentication method?;Data formats?;Rate limits?;Versioning?;SDK needed?","endpoint_specs;auth_model;data_schemas;error_codes;rate_limits;api_docs","ux_ui;visual_design;user_journeys","framework best practices;OpenAPI standards","API composition;New protocol"
+mobile_app,"iOS,Android,app,mobile,iPhone,iPad","Native or cross-platform?;Offline needed?;Push notifications?;Device features?;Store compliance?","platform_reqs;device_permissions;offline_mode;push_strategy;store_compliance","desktop_features;cli_commands","app store guidelines;platform requirements","Gesture innovation;AR/VR features"
+saas_b2b,"SaaS,B2B,platform,dashboard,teams,enterprise","Multi-tenant?;Permission model?;Subscription tiers?;Integrations?;Compliance?","tenant_model;rbac_matrix;subscription_tiers;integration_list;compliance_reqs","cli_interface;mobile_first","compliance requirements;integration guides","Workflow automation;AI agents"
+developer_tool,"SDK,library,package,npm,pip,framework","Language support?;Package managers?;IDE integration?;Documentation?;Examples?","language_matrix;installation_methods;api_surface;code_examples;migration_guide","visual_design;store_compliance","package manager best practices;API design patterns","New paradigm;DSL creation"
+cli_tool,"CLI,command,terminal,bash,script","Interactive or scriptable?;Output formats?;Config method?;Shell completion?","command_structure;output_formats;config_schema;scripting_support","visual_design;ux_principles;touch_interactions","CLI design patterns;shell integration","Natural language CLI;AI commands"
+web_app,"website,webapp,browser,SPA,PWA","SPA or MPA?;Browser support?;SEO needed?;Real-time?;Accessibility?","browser_matrix;responsive_design;performance_targets;seo_strategy;accessibility_level","native_features;cli_commands","web standards;WCAG guidelines","New interaction;WebAssembly use"
+game,"game,player,gameplay,level,character","REDIRECT TO USE THE BMad Method Game Module Agent and Workflows - HALT","game-brief;GDD","most_sections","game design patterns","Novel mechanics;Genre mixing"
+desktop_app,"desktop,Windows,Mac,Linux,native","Cross-platform?;Auto-update?;System integration?;Offline?","platform_support;system_integration;update_strategy;offline_capabilities","web_seo;mobile_features","desktop guidelines;platform requirements","Desktop AI;System automation"
+iot_embedded,"IoT,embedded,device,sensor,hardware","Hardware specs?;Connectivity?;Power constraints?;Security?;OTA updates?","hardware_reqs;connectivity_protocol;power_profile;security_model;update_mechanism","visual_ui;browser_support","IoT standards;protocol specs","Edge AI;New sensors"
+blockchain_web3,"blockchain,crypto,DeFi,NFT,smart contract","Chain selection?;Wallet integration?;Gas optimization?;Security audit?","chain_specs;wallet_support;smart_contracts;security_audit;gas_optimization","traditional_auth;centralized_db","blockchain standards;security patterns","Novel tokenomics;DAO structure"

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/steps-c/step-01-init.md

@@ -1,16 +1,3 @@
----
-name: 'step-01-init'
-description: 'Initialize the PRD workflow by detecting continuation state and setting up the document'
-
-# File References
-nextStepFile: './step-02-discovery.md'
-continueStepFile: './step-01b-continue.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/prd.md'
-
-# Template Reference
-prdTemplate: '../templates/prd-template.md'
----
-
 # Step 1: Workflow Initialization
 
 **Progress: Step 1 of 11** - Next: Project Discovery
@@ -71,11 +58,11 @@ First, check if the output document already exists:
 
 ### 2. Handle Continuation (If Document Exists)
 
-If the document exists and has frontmatter with `stepsCompleted` BUT `step-11-complete` is NOT in the list, follow the Continuation Protocol since the document is incomplete:
+If the document exists and has frontmatter with `stepsCompleted` BUT `step-12-complete` is NOT in the list, follow the Continuation Protocol since the document is incomplete:
 
 **Continuation Protocol:**
 
-- **STOP immediately** and load `{continueStepFile}`
+- **STOP immediately** and load `./step-01b-continue.md`
 - Do not proceed with any initialization tasks
 - Let step-01b handle all continuation logic
 - This is an auto-proceed situation - no user choice needed
@@ -89,7 +76,7 @@ If no document exists or no `stepsCompleted` in frontmatter:
 Discover and load context documents using smart discovery. Documents can be in the following locations:
 - {planning_artifacts}/**
 - {output_folder}/**
-- {product_knowledge}/**
+- {project_knowledge}/**
 - docs/**
 
 Also - when searching - documents can be a single markdown file, or a folder with an index and multiple files. For Example, if searching for `*foo*.md` and not found, also search for a folder called *foo*/index.md (which indicates sharded content)
@@ -97,7 +84,7 @@ Also - when searching - documents can be a single markdown file, or a folder wit
 Try to discover the following:
 - Product Brief (`*brief*.md`)
 - Research Documents (`/*research*.md`)
-- Project Documentation (generally multiple documents might be found for this in the `{product_knowledge}` or `docs` folder.)
+- Project Documentation (generally multiple documents might be found for this in the `{project_knowledge}` or `docs` folder.)
 - Project Context (`**/project-context.md`)
 
 <critical>Confirm what you have found with the user, along with asking if the user wants to provide anything else. Only after this confirmation will you proceed to follow the loading rules</critical>
@@ -114,7 +101,7 @@ Try to discover the following:
 
 **Document Setup:**
 
-- Copy the template from `{prdTemplate}` to `{outputFile}`
+- Copy the template from `../templates/prd-template.md` to `{outputFile}`
 - Initialize frontmatter with proper structure including inputDocuments array.
 
 #### C. Present Initialization Results
@@ -151,7 +138,7 @@ Display menu after setup report:
 
 #### Menu Handling Logic:
 
-- IF C: Update output file frontmatter, adding this step name to the end of the list of stepsCompleted, then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+- IF C: Update output file frontmatter, adding this step name to the end of the list of stepsCompleted, then read fully and follow: ./step-02-discovery.md
 - IF user provides additional files: Load them, update inputDocuments and documentCounts, redisplay report
 - IF user asks questions: Answer and redisplay menu
 
@@ -162,7 +149,7 @@ Display menu after setup report:
 
 ## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
 
-ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [frontmatter properly updated with this step added to stepsCompleted and documentCounts], will you then read fully and follow: `{nextStepFile}` to begin project discovery.
+ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [frontmatter properly updated with this step added to stepsCompleted and documentCounts], will you then read fully and follow: `./step-02-discovery.md` to begin project discovery.
 
 ---
 

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/steps-c/step-01b-continue.md

@@ -1,11 +1,3 @@
----
-name: 'step-01b-continue'
-description: 'Resume an interrupted PRD workflow from the last completed step'
-
-# File References
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/prd.md'
----
-
 # Step 1B: Workflow Continuation
 
 ## STEP GOAL:
@@ -70,21 +62,38 @@ Review the frontmatter to understand:
 
 ### 3. Determine Next Step
 
-**Simplified Next Step Logic:**
+**Step Sequence Lookup:**
-1. Get the last element from the `stepsCompleted` array (this is the filename of the last completed step, e.g., "step-03-success.md")
+
-2. Load that step file and read its frontmatter
+Use the following ordered sequence to determine the next step from the last completed step:
-3. Extract the `nextStepFile` value from the frontmatter
+
-4. That's the next step to load!
+| Last Completed | Next Step |
+|---|---|
+| step-01-init.md | step-02-discovery.md |
+| step-02-discovery.md | step-02b-vision.md |
+| step-02b-vision.md | step-02c-executive-summary.md |
+| step-02c-executive-summary.md | step-03-success.md |
+| step-03-success.md | step-04-journeys.md |
+| step-04-journeys.md | step-05-domain.md |
+| step-05-domain.md | step-06-innovation.md |
+| step-06-innovation.md | step-07-project-type.md |
+| step-07-project-type.md | step-08-scoping.md |
+| step-08-scoping.md | step-09-functional.md |
+| step-09-functional.md | step-10-nonfunctional.md |
+| step-10-nonfunctional.md | step-11-polish.md |
+| step-11-polish.md | step-12-complete.md |
+
+1. Get the last element from the `stepsCompleted` array
+2. Look it up in the table above to find the next step
+3. That's the next step to load!
 
 **Example:**
 - If `stepsCompleted = ["step-01-init.md", "step-02-discovery.md", "step-03-success.md"]`
 - Last element is `"step-03-success.md"`
-- Load `{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-03-success.md`, read its frontmatter
+- Table lookup → next step is `./step-04-journeys.md`
-- Read fully and follow: `{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-04-journeys.md`
 
 ### 4. Handle Workflow Completion
 
-**If `stepsCompleted` array contains `"step-11-complete.md"`:**
+**If `stepsCompleted` array contains `"step-12-complete.md"`:**
 "Great news! It looks like we've already completed the PRD workflow for {{project_name}}.
 
 The final document is ready at `{outputFile}` with all sections completed.
@@ -104,7 +113,7 @@ What would be most helpful?"
 
 **Current Progress:**
 - Last completed: {last step filename from stepsCompleted array}
-- Next up: {nextStepFile determined from that step's frontmatter}
+- Next up: {next step from lookup table}
 - Context documents available: {len(inputDocuments)} files
 
 **Document Status:**
@@ -119,7 +128,7 @@ Display: "**Select an Option:** [C] Continue to {next step name}"
 
 #### Menu Handling Logic:
 
-- IF C: Read fully and follow the {nextStepFile} determined in step 3
+- IF C: Read fully and follow the next step determined from the lookup table in step 3
 - IF Any other comments or queries: respond and redisplay menu
 
 #### EXECUTION RULES:
@@ -129,7 +138,7 @@ Display: "**Select an Option:** [C] Continue to {next step name}"
 
 ## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
 
-ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [current state confirmed], will you then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile} to resume the workflow.
+ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [current state confirmed], will you then read fully and follow the next step (from the lookup table) to resume the workflow.
 
 ---
 
@@ -146,7 +155,7 @@ ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [current state confirmed], will yo
 
 - Discovering new input documents instead of reloading existing ones
 - Modifying content from already completed steps
-- Failing to extract nextStepFile from the last completed step's frontmatter
+- Failing to determine the next step from the lookup table
 - Proceeding without user confirmation of current state
 
 **Master Rule:** Skipping steps, optimizing sequences, or not following exact instructions is FORBIDDEN and constitutes SYSTEM FAILURE.

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/steps-c/step-02-discovery.md

@@ -1,20 +1,3 @@
----
-name: 'step-02-discovery'
-description: 'Discover project type, domain, and context through collaborative dialogue'
-
-# File References
-nextStepFile: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-02b-vision.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/prd.md'
-
-# Data Files
-projectTypesCSV: '../data/project-types.csv'
-domainComplexityCSV: '../data/domain-complexity.csv'
-
-# Task References
-advancedElicitationTask: 'skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation'
-partyModeWorkflow: '{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md'
----
-
 # Step 2: Project Discovery
 
 **Progress: Step 2 of 13** - Next: Product Vision
@@ -97,7 +80,7 @@ Read the frontmatter from `{outputFile}` to get document counts:
 **Attempt subprocess data lookup:**
 
 **Project Type Lookup:**
-"Your task: Lookup data in {projectTypesCSV}
+"Your task: Lookup data in ../data/project-types.csv
 
 **Search criteria:**
 - Find row where project_type matches {{detectedProjectType}}
@@ -109,7 +92,7 @@ project_type, detection_signals
 **Do NOT return the entire CSV - only the matching row.**"
 
 **Domain Complexity Lookup:**
-"Your task: Lookup data in {domainComplexityCSV}
+"Your task: Lookup data in ../data/domain-complexity.csv
 
 **Search criteria:**
 - Find row where domain matches {{detectedDomain}}
@@ -186,9 +169,9 @@ Present the project classification for review, then display menu:
 Display: "**Select:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue to Product Vision (Step 2b of 13)"
 
 #### Menu Handling Logic:
-- IF A: Read fully and follow: {advancedElicitationTask} with the current classification, process the enhanced insights that come back, ask user if they accept the improvements, if yes update classification then redisplay menu, if no keep original classification then redisplay menu
+- IF A: Read fully and follow: skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation with the current classification, process the enhanced insights that come back, ask user if they accept the improvements, if yes update classification then redisplay menu, if no keep original classification then redisplay menu
-- IF P: Read fully and follow: {partyModeWorkflow} with the current classification, process the collaborative insights, ask user if they accept the changes, if yes update classification then redisplay menu, if no keep original classification then redisplay menu
+- IF P: Read fully and follow: {project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md with the current classification, process the collaborative insights, ask user if they accept the changes, if yes update classification then redisplay menu, if no keep original classification then redisplay menu
-- IF C: Save classification to {outputFile} frontmatter, add this step name to the end of stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+- IF C: Save classification to {outputFile} frontmatter, add this step name to the end of stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: ./step-02b-vision.md
 - IF Any other: help user respond, then redisplay menu
 
 #### EXECUTION RULES:
@@ -198,7 +181,7 @@ Display: "**Select:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue to Pr
 
 ## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
 
-ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [classification saved to frontmatter], will you then read fully and follow: `{nextStepFile}` to explore product vision.
+ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [classification saved to frontmatter], will you then read fully and follow: `./step-02b-vision.md` to explore product vision.
 
 ---
 

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/steps-c/step-02b-vision.md

@@ -1,16 +1,3 @@
----
-name: 'step-02b-vision'
-description: 'Discover the product vision and differentiator through collaborative dialogue'
-
-# File References
-nextStepFile: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-02c-executive-summary.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/prd.md'
-
-# Task References
-advancedElicitationTask: 'skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation'
-partyModeWorkflow: '{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md'
----
-
 # Step 2b: Product Vision Discovery
 
 **Progress: Step 2b of 13** - Next: Executive Summary
@@ -114,9 +101,9 @@ Present your understanding of the product vision for review, then display menu:
 Display: "**Select:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue to Executive Summary (Step 2c of 13)"
 
 #### Menu Handling Logic:
-- IF A: Read fully and follow: {advancedElicitationTask} with the current vision insights, process the enhanced insights that come back, ask user if they accept the improvements, if yes update understanding then redisplay menu, if no keep original understanding then redisplay menu
+- IF A: Read fully and follow: skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation with the current vision insights, process the enhanced insights that come back, ask user if they accept the improvements, if yes update understanding then redisplay menu, if no keep original understanding then redisplay menu
-- IF P: Read fully and follow: {partyModeWorkflow} with the current vision insights, process the collaborative insights, ask user if they accept the changes, if yes update understanding then redisplay menu, if no keep original understanding then redisplay menu
+- IF P: Read fully and follow: {project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md with the current vision insights, process the collaborative insights, ask user if they accept the changes, if yes update understanding then redisplay menu, if no keep original understanding then redisplay menu
-- IF C: Update {outputFile} frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+- IF C: Update {outputFile} frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: ./step-02c-executive-summary.md
 - IF Any other: help user respond, then redisplay menu
 
 #### EXECUTION RULES:
@@ -126,7 +113,7 @@ Display: "**Select:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue to Ex
 
 ## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
 
-ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [stepsCompleted updated], will you then read fully and follow: `{nextStepFile}` to generate the Executive Summary.
+ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [stepsCompleted updated], will you then read fully and follow: `./step-02c-executive-summary.md` to generate the Executive Summary.
 
 ---
 

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/steps-c/step-02c-executive-summary.md

@@ -1,16 +1,3 @@
----
-name: 'step-02c-executive-summary'
-description: 'Generate and append the Executive Summary section to the PRD document'
-
-# File References
-nextStepFile: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-03-success.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/prd.md'
-
-# Task References
-advancedElicitationTask: 'skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation'
-partyModeWorkflow: '{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md'
----
-
 # Step 2c: Executive Summary Generation
 
 **Progress: Step 2c of 13** - Next: Success Criteria
@@ -104,9 +91,9 @@ Present the executive summary content for user review, then display menu:
 Display: "**Select:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue to Success Criteria (Step 3 of 13)"
 
 #### Menu Handling Logic:
-- IF A: Read fully and follow: {advancedElicitationTask} with the current executive summary content, process the enhanced content that comes back, ask user if they accept the improvements, if yes update content then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
+- IF A: Read fully and follow: skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation with the current executive summary content, process the enhanced content that comes back, ask user if they accept the improvements, if yes update content then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
-- IF P: Read fully and follow: {partyModeWorkflow} with the current executive summary content, process the collaborative improvements, ask user if they accept the changes, if yes update content then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
+- IF P: Read fully and follow: {project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md with the current executive summary content, process the collaborative improvements, ask user if they accept the changes, if yes update content then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
-- IF C: Append the final content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+- IF C: Append the final content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: ./step-03-success.md
 - IF Any other: help user respond, then redisplay menu
 
 #### EXECUTION RULES:
@@ -139,7 +126,7 @@ Where:
 
 ## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
 
-ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [content appended to document], will you then read fully and follow: `{nextStepFile}` to define success criteria.
+ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [content appended to document], will you then read fully and follow: `./step-03-success.md` to define success criteria.
 
 ---
 

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/steps-c/step-03-success.md

@@ -1,16 +1,3 @@
----
-name: 'step-03-success'
-description: 'Define comprehensive success criteria covering user, business, and technical success'
-
-# File References
-nextStepFile: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-04-journeys.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/prd.md'
-
-# Task References
-advancedElicitationTask: 'skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation'
-partyModeWorkflow: '{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md'
----
-
 # Step 3: Success Criteria Definition
 
 **Progress: Step 3 of 11** - Next: User Journey Mapping
@@ -176,9 +163,9 @@ Present the success criteria content for user review, then display menu:
 Display: "**Select:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue to User Journey Mapping (Step 4 of 11)"
 
 #### Menu Handling Logic:
-- IF A: Read fully and follow: {advancedElicitationTask} with the current success criteria content, process the enhanced success metrics that come back, ask user "Accept these improvements to the success criteria? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
+- IF A: Read fully and follow: skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation with the current success criteria content, process the enhanced success metrics that come back, ask user "Accept these improvements to the success criteria? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
-- IF P: Read fully and follow: {partyModeWorkflow} with the current success criteria, process the collaborative improvements to metrics and scope, ask user "Accept these changes to the success criteria? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
+- IF P: Read fully and follow: {project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md with the current success criteria, process the collaborative improvements to metrics and scope, ask user "Accept these changes to the success criteria? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
-- IF C: Append the final content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+- IF C: Append the final content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: ./step-04-journeys.md
 - IF Any other: help user respond, then redisplay menu
 
 #### EXECUTION RULES:
@@ -222,6 +209,6 @@ If working in regulated domains (healthcare, fintech, govtech):
 
 ## NEXT STEP:
 
-After user selects 'C' and content is saved to document, load `{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-04-journeys.md` to map user journeys.
+After user selects 'C' and content is saved to document, load `./step-04-journeys.md` to map user journeys.
 
 Remember: Do NOT proceed to step-04 until user explicitly selects 'C' from the A/P/C menu and content is saved!

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/steps-c/step-04-journeys.md

@@ -1,16 +1,3 @@
----
-name: 'step-04-journeys'
-description: 'Map ALL user types that interact with the system with narrative story-based journeys'
-
-# File References
-nextStepFile: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-05-domain.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/prd.md'
-
-# Task References
-advancedElicitationTask: 'skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation'
-partyModeWorkflow: '{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md'
----
-
 # Step 4: User Journey Mapping
 
 **Progress: Step 4 of 11** - Next: Domain Requirements
@@ -156,9 +143,9 @@ Present the user journey content for review, then display menu:
 Display: "**Select:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue to Domain Requirements (Step 5 of 11)"
 
 #### Menu Handling Logic:
-- IF A: Read fully and follow: {advancedElicitationTask} with the current journey content, process the enhanced journey insights that come back, ask user "Accept these improvements to the user journeys? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
+- IF A: Read fully and follow: skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation with the current journey content, process the enhanced journey insights that come back, ask user "Accept these improvements to the user journeys? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
-- IF P: Read fully and follow: {partyModeWorkflow} with the current journeys, process the collaborative journey improvements and additions, ask user "Accept these changes to the user journeys? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
+- IF P: Read fully and follow: {project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md with the current journeys, process the collaborative journey improvements and additions, ask user "Accept these changes to the user journeys? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
-- IF C: Append the final content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+- IF C: Append the final content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: ./step-05-domain.md
 - IF Any other: help user respond, then redisplay menu
 
 #### EXECUTION RULES:
@@ -209,6 +196,6 @@ When user selects 'C', append the content directly to the document using the str
 
 ## NEXT STEP:
 
-After user selects 'C' and content is saved to document, load `{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-05-domain.md`.
+After user selects 'C' and content is saved to document, load `./step-05-domain.md`.
 
 Remember: Do NOT proceed to step-05 until user explicitly selects 'C' from the A/P/C menu and content is saved!

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/steps-c/step-05-domain.md

@@ -1,24 +1,10 @@
----
-name: 'step-05-domain'
-description: 'Explore domain-specific requirements for complex domains (optional step)'
-
-# File References
-nextStepFile: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-06-innovation.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/prd.md'
-domainComplexityCSV: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/data/domain-complexity.csv'
-
-# Task References
-advancedElicitationTask: 'skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation'
-partyModeWorkflow: '{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md'
----
-
 # Step 5: Domain-Specific Requirements (Optional)
 
 **Progress: Step 5 of 13** - Next: Innovation Focus
 
 ## STEP GOAL:
 
-For complex domains only that have a mapping in {domainComplexityCSV}, explore domain-specific constraints, compliance requirements, and technical considerations that shape the product.
+For complex domains only that have a mapping in ../data/domain-complexity.csv, explore domain-specific constraints, compliance requirements, and technical considerations that shape the product.
 
 ## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
 
@@ -93,7 +79,7 @@ Proceed with domain exploration.
 
 **Attempt subprocess data lookup:**
 
-"Your task: Lookup data in {domainComplexityCSV}
+"Your task: Lookup data in ../data/domain-complexity.csv
 
 **Search criteria:**
 - Find row where domain matches {{domainFromStep02}}
@@ -155,9 +141,9 @@ Acknowledge the domain and explore what makes it complex:
 Display: "**Select:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue - Save and Proceed to Innovation (Step 6 of 13)"
 
 #### Menu Handling Logic:
-- IF A: Read fully and follow: {advancedElicitationTask}, and when finished redisplay the menu
+- IF A: Read fully and follow: skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation, and when finished redisplay the menu
-- IF P: Read fully and follow: {partyModeWorkflow}, and when finished redisplay the menu
+- IF P: Read fully and follow: `{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md` and when finished redisplay the menu
-- IF C: Save content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter, then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+- IF C: Save content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter, then read fully and follow: ./step-06-innovation.md
 - IF Any other comments or queries: help user respond then [Redisplay Menu Options](#n-present-menu-options)
 
 #### EXECUTION RULES:
@@ -179,7 +165,7 @@ If step was skipped, append nothing and proceed.
 
 ## CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE
 
-ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [content saved or skipped], will you then read fully and follow: `{nextStepFile}` to explore innovation.
+ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [content saved or skipped], will you then read fully and follow: `./step-06-innovation.md` to explore innovation.
 
 ---
 

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/steps-c/step-06-innovation.md

@@ -1,19 +1,3 @@
----
-name: 'step-06-innovation'
-description: 'Detect and explore innovative aspects of the product (optional step)'
-
-# File References
-nextStepFile: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-07-project-type.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/prd.md'
-
-# Data Files
-projectTypesCSV: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/data/project-types.csv'
-
-# Task References
-advancedElicitationTask: 'skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation'
-partyModeWorkflow: '{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md'
----
-
 # Step 6: Innovation Discovery
 
 **Progress: Step 6 of 11** - Next: Project Type Analysis
@@ -65,7 +49,7 @@ Detect and explore innovation patterns in the product, focusing on what makes it
 
 Load innovation signals specific to this project type:
 
-- Load `{projectTypesCSV}` completely
+- Load `../data/project-types.csv` completely
 - Find the row where `project_type` matches detected type from step-02
 - Extract `innovation_signals` (semicolon-separated list)
 - Extract `web_search_triggers` for potential innovation research
@@ -156,9 +140,9 @@ Present the innovation content for review, then display menu:
 Display: "**Select:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue to Project Type Analysis (Step 7 of 11)"
 
 #### Menu Handling Logic:
-- IF A: Read fully and follow: {advancedElicitationTask} with the current innovation content, process the enhanced innovation insights that come back, ask user "Accept these improvements to the innovation analysis? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
+- IF A: Read fully and follow: skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation with the current innovation content, process the enhanced innovation insights that come back, ask user "Accept these improvements to the innovation analysis? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
-- IF P: Read fully and follow: {partyModeWorkflow} with the current innovation content, process the collaborative innovation exploration and ideation, ask user "Accept these changes to the innovation analysis? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
+- IF P: Read fully and follow: {project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md with the current innovation content, process the collaborative innovation exploration and ideation, ask user "Accept these changes to the innovation analysis? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
-- IF C: Append the final content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+- IF C: Append the final content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: ./step-07-project-type.md
 - IF Any other: help user respond, then redisplay menu
 
 #### EXECUTION RULES:
@@ -177,7 +161,7 @@ Display: "**Select:** [A] Advanced Elicitation - Let's try to find innovative an
 
 ### Menu Handling Logic:
 - IF A: Proceed with content generation anyway, then return to menu
-- IF C: Skip this step, then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+- IF C: Skip this step, then read fully and follow: ./step-07-project-type.md
 
 ### EXECUTION RULES:
 - ALWAYS halt and wait for user input after presenting menu
@@ -213,7 +197,7 @@ When user selects 'C', append the content directly to the document using the str
 
 ## SKIP CONDITIONS:
 
-Skip this step and load `{nextStepFile}` if:
+Skip this step and load `./step-07-project-type.md` if:
 
 - No innovation signals detected in conversation
 - Product is incremental improvement rather than breakthrough
@@ -222,6 +206,6 @@ Skip this step and load `{nextStepFile}` if:
 
 ## NEXT STEP:
 
-After user selects 'C' and content is saved to document (or step is skipped), load `{nextStepFile}`.
+After user selects 'C' and content is saved to document (or step is skipped), load `./step-07-project-type.md`.
 
 Remember: Do NOT proceed to step-07 until user explicitly selects 'C' from the A/P/C menu (or confirms step skip)!

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/steps-c/step-07-project-type.md

@@ -1,19 +1,3 @@
----
-name: 'step-07-project-type'
-description: 'Conduct project-type specific discovery using CSV-driven guidance'
-
-# File References
-nextStepFile: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-08-scoping.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/prd.md'
-
-# Data Files
-projectTypesCSV: '../data/project-types.csv'
-
-# Task References
-advancedElicitationTask: 'skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation'
-partyModeWorkflow: '{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md'
----
-
 # Step 7: Project-Type Deep Dive
 
 **Progress: Step 7 of 11** - Next: Scoping
@@ -56,7 +40,7 @@ Conduct project-type specific discovery using CSV-driven guidance to define tech
 
 **Attempt subprocess data lookup:**
 
-"Your task: Lookup data in {projectTypesCSV}
+"Your task: Lookup data in ../data/project-types.csv
 
 **Search criteria:**
 - Find row where project_type matches {{projectTypeFromStep02}}
@@ -173,9 +157,9 @@ Present the project-type content for review, then display menu:
 Display: "**Select:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue to Scoping (Step 8 of 11)"
 
 #### Menu Handling Logic:
-- IF A: Read fully and follow: {advancedElicitationTask} with the current project-type content, process the enhanced technical insights that come back, ask user "Accept these improvements to the technical requirements? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
+- IF A: Read fully and follow: skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation with the current project-type content, process the enhanced technical insights that come back, ask user "Accept these improvements to the technical requirements? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
-- IF P: Read fully and follow: {partyModeWorkflow} with the current project-type requirements, process the collaborative technical expertise and validation, ask user "Accept these changes to the technical requirements? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
+- IF P: Read fully and follow: {project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md with the current project-type requirements, process the collaborative technical expertise and validation, ask user "Accept these changes to the technical requirements? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
-- IF C: Append the final content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+- IF C: Append the final content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: ./step-08-scoping.md
 - IF Any other: help user respond, then redisplay menu
 
 #### EXECUTION RULES:
@@ -233,6 +217,6 @@ When user selects 'C', append the content directly to the document using the str
 
 ## NEXT STEP:
 
-After user selects 'C' and content is saved to document, load `{nextStepFile}` to define project scope.
+After user selects 'C' and content is saved to document, load `./step-08-scoping.md` to define project scope.
 
 Remember: Do NOT proceed to step-08 (Scoping) until user explicitly selects 'C' from the A/P/C menu and content is saved!

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/steps-c/step-08-scoping.md

@@ -1,16 +1,3 @@
----
-name: 'step-08-scoping'
-description: 'Define MVP boundaries and prioritize features across development phases'
-
-# File References
-nextStepFile: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-09-functional.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/prd.md'
-
-# Task References
-advancedElicitationTask: 'skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation'
-partyModeWorkflow: '{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md'
----
-
 # Step 8: Scoping Exercise - MVP & Future Features
 
 **Progress: Step 8 of 11** - Next: Functional Requirements
@@ -184,9 +171,9 @@ Present the scoping decisions for review, then display menu:
 Display: "**Select:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue to Functional Requirements (Step 9 of 11)"
 
 #### Menu Handling Logic:
-- IF A: Read fully and follow: {advancedElicitationTask} with the current scoping analysis, process the enhanced insights that come back, ask user if they accept the improvements, if yes update content then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
+- IF A: Read fully and follow: skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation with the current scoping analysis, process the enhanced insights that come back, ask user if they accept the improvements, if yes update content then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
-- IF P: Read fully and follow: {partyModeWorkflow} with the scoping context, process the collaborative insights on MVP and roadmap decisions, ask user if they accept the changes, if yes update content then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
+- IF P: Read fully and follow: {project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md with the scoping context, process the collaborative insights on MVP and roadmap decisions, ask user if they accept the changes, if yes update content then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
-- IF C: Append the final content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+- IF C: Append the final content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: ./step-09-functional.md
 - IF Any other: help user respond, then redisplay menu
 
 #### EXECUTION RULES:
@@ -224,6 +211,6 @@ When user selects 'C', append the content directly to the document using the str
 
 ## NEXT STEP:
 
-After user selects 'C' and content is saved to document, load {nextStepFile}.
+After user selects 'C' and content is saved to document, load ./step-09-functional.md.
 
 Remember: Do NOT proceed to step-09 until user explicitly selects 'C' from the A/P/C menu and content is saved!

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/steps-c/step-09-functional.md

@@ -1,16 +1,3 @@
----
-name: 'step-09-functional'
-description: 'Synthesize all discovery into comprehensive functional requirements'
-
-# File References
-nextStepFile: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-10-nonfunctional.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/prd.md'
-
-# Task References
-advancedElicitationTask: 'skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation'
-partyModeWorkflow: '{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md'
----
-
 # Step 9: Functional Requirements Synthesis
 
 **Progress: Step 9 of 11** - Next: Non-Functional Requirements
@@ -182,9 +169,9 @@ Present the functional requirements for review, then display menu:
 Display: "**Select:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue to Non-Functional Requirements (Step 10 of 11)"
 
 #### Menu Handling Logic:
-- IF A: Read fully and follow: {advancedElicitationTask} with the current FR list, process the enhanced capability coverage that comes back, ask user if they accept the additions, if yes update content then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
+- IF A: Read fully and follow: skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation with the current FR list, process the enhanced capability coverage that comes back, ask user if they accept the additions, if yes update content then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
-- IF P: Read fully and follow: {partyModeWorkflow} with the current FR list, process the collaborative capability validation and additions, ask user if they accept the changes, if yes update content then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
+- IF P: Read fully and follow: {project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md with the current FR list, process the collaborative capability validation and additions, ask user if they accept the changes, if yes update content then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
-- IF C: Append the final content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+- IF C: Append the final content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: ./step-10-nonfunctional.md
 - IF Any other: help user respond, then redisplay menu
 
 #### EXECUTION RULES:
@@ -227,6 +214,6 @@ Emphasize to user: "This FR list is now binding. Any feature not listed here wil
 
 ## NEXT STEP:
 
-After user selects 'C' and content is saved to document, load {nextStepFile} to define non-functional requirements.
+After user selects 'C' and content is saved to document, load ./step-10-nonfunctional.md to define non-functional requirements.
 
 Remember: Do NOT proceed to step-10 until user explicitly selects 'C' from the A/P/C menu and content is saved!

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/steps-c/step-10-nonfunctional.md

@@ -1,16 +1,3 @@
----
-name: 'step-10-nonfunctional'
-description: 'Define quality attributes that matter for this specific product'
-
-# File References
-nextStepFile: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-11-polish.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/prd.md'
-
-# Task References
-advancedElicitationTask: 'skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation'
-partyModeWorkflow: '{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md'
----
-
 # Step 10: Non-Functional Requirements
 
 **Progress: Step 10 of 12** - Next: Polish Document
@@ -169,9 +156,9 @@ Present the non-functional requirements for review, then display menu:
 Display: "**Select:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue to Polish Document (Step 11 of 12)"
 
 #### Menu Handling Logic:
-- IF A: Read fully and follow: {advancedElicitationTask} with the current NFR content, process the enhanced quality attribute insights that come back, ask user if they accept the improvements, if yes update content then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
+- IF A: Read fully and follow: skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation with the current NFR content, process the enhanced quality attribute insights that come back, ask user if they accept the improvements, if yes update content then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
-- IF P: Read fully and follow: {partyModeWorkflow} with the current NFR list, process the collaborative technical validation and additions, ask user if they accept the changes, if yes update content then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
+- IF P: Read fully and follow: {project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md with the current NFR list, process the collaborative technical validation and additions, ask user if they accept the changes, if yes update content then redisplay menu, if no keep original content then redisplay menu
-- IF C: Append the final content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+- IF C: Append the final content to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: ./step-11-polish.md
 - IF Any other: help user respond, then redisplay menu
 
 #### EXECUTION RULES:
@@ -238,6 +225,6 @@ When user selects 'C', append the content directly to the document using the str
 
 ## NEXT STEP:
 
-After user selects 'C' and content is saved to document, load {nextStepFile} to finalize the PRD and complete the workflow.
+After user selects 'C' and content is saved to document, load ./step-11-polish.md to finalize the PRD and complete the workflow.
 
 Remember: Do NOT proceed to step-11 until user explicitly selects 'C' from the A/P/C menu and content is saved!

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/steps-c/step-11-polish.md

@@ -1,17 +1,3 @@
----
-name: 'step-11-polish'
-description: 'Optimize and polish the complete PRD document for flow, coherence, and readability'
-
-# File References
-nextStepFile: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-12-complete.md'
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/prd.md'
-purposeFile: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/data/prd-purpose.md'
-
-# Task References
-advancedElicitationTask: 'skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation'
-partyModeWorkflow: '{project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md'
----
-
 # Step 11: Document Polish
 
 **Progress: Step 11 of 12** - Next: Complete PRD
@@ -56,7 +42,7 @@ Optimize the complete PRD document for flow, coherence, and professional present
 
 **CRITICAL:** Load the PRD purpose document first:
 
-- Read `{purposeFile}` to understand what makes a great BMAD PRD
+- Read `../data/prd-purpose.md` to understand what makes a great BMAD PRD
 - Internalize the philosophy: information density, traceability, measurable requirements
 - Keep the dual-audience nature (humans + LLMs) in mind
 
@@ -186,9 +172,9 @@ Present the polished document for review, then display menu:
 Display: "**Select:** [A] Advanced Elicitation [P] Party Mode [C] Continue to Complete PRD (Step 12 of 12)"
 
 #### Menu Handling Logic:
-- IF A: Read fully and follow: {advancedElicitationTask} with the polished document, process the enhanced refinements that come back, ask user "Accept these polish improvements? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original polish then redisplay menu
+- IF A: Read fully and follow: skill:bmad-advanced-elicitation with the polished document, process the enhanced refinements that come back, ask user "Accept these polish improvements? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original polish then redisplay menu
-- IF P: Read fully and follow: {partyModeWorkflow} with the polished document, process the collaborative refinements to flow and coherence, ask user "Accept these polish changes? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original polish then redisplay menu
+- IF P: Read fully and follow: {project-root}/_bmad/core/workflows/bmad-party-mode/workflow.md with the polished document, process the collaborative refinements to flow and coherence, ask user "Accept these polish changes? (y/n)", if yes update content with improvements then redisplay menu, if no keep original polish then redisplay menu
-- IF C: Save the polished document to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: {nextStepFile}
+- IF C: Save the polished document to {outputFile}, update frontmatter by adding this step name to the end of the stepsCompleted array, then read fully and follow: ./step-12-complete.md
 - IF Any other: help user respond, then redisplay menu
 
 #### EXECUTION RULES:
@@ -230,6 +216,6 @@ When user selects 'C', replace the entire document content with the polished ver
 
 ## NEXT STEP:
 
-After user selects 'C' and polished document is saved, load `{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/workflows/2-plan-workflows/create-prd/steps-c/step-12-complete.md` to complete the workflow.
+After user selects 'C' and polished document is saved, load `./step-12-complete.md` to complete the workflow.
 
 Remember: Do NOT proceed to step-12 until user explicitly selects 'C' from the A/P/C menu and polished document is saved!

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/steps-c/step-12-complete.md

@@ -1,12 +1,3 @@
----
-name: 'step-12-complete'
-description: 'Complete the PRD workflow, update status files, and suggest next steps including validation'
-
-# File References
-outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/prd.md'
-validationFlow: '../steps-v/step-v-01-discovery.md'
----
-
 # Step 12: Workflow Completion
 
 **Final Step - Complete the PRD**
@@ -60,8 +51,8 @@ Inform user that the PRD is complete and polished:
 
 Update the main workflow status file if there is one:
 
-- Load `{status_file}` from workflow configuration (if exists)
+- Check workflow configuration for a status file (if one exists)
-- Update workflow_status["prd"] = "{default_output_file}"
+- Update workflow_status["prd"] = "{outputFile}"
 - Save file, preserving all comments and structure
 - Mark current timestamp as completion time
 
@@ -71,7 +62,7 @@ Offer validation workflows to ensure PRD is ready for implementation:
 
 **Available Validation Workflows:**
 
-**Option 1: Check Implementation Readiness** (`{checkImplementationReadinessWorkflow}`)
+**Option 1: Check Implementation Readiness** (`skill:bmad-check-implementation-readiness`)
 - Validates PRD has all information needed for development
 - Checks epic coverage completeness
 - Reviews UX alignment with requirements

src/core/tasks/bmad-create-prd/workflow.md

@@ -1,8 +1,6 @@
 ---
-name: create-prd
-description: 'Create a PRD from scratch. Use when the user says "lets create a product requirements document" or "I want to create a new PRD"'
 main_config: '{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/config.yaml'
-nextStep: './steps-c/step-01-init.md'
+outputFile: '{planning_artifacts}/prd.md'
 ---
 
 # PRD Create Workflow
@@ -61,4 +59,4 @@ Load and read full config from {main_config} and resolve:
 
 "**Create Mode: Creating a new PRD from scratch.**"
 
-Read fully and follow: `{nextStep}` (steps-c/step-01-init.md)
+Read fully and follow: `./steps-c/step-01-init.md`