diff --git a/.github/workflows/promote-to-stable.yml b/.github/workflows/promote-to-stable.yml
index d0dabbf2..0fe72c03 100644
--- a/.github/workflows/promote-to-stable.yml
+++ b/.github/workflows/promote-to-stable.yml
@@ -4,9 +4,9 @@ on:
   workflow_dispatch:
     inputs:
       version_bump:
-        description: 'Version bump type'
+        description: "Version bump type"
         required: true
-        default: 'minor'
+        default: "minor"
         type: choice
         options:
           - patch
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ jobs:
     permissions:
       contents: write
       pull-requests: write
-    
+
     steps:
       - name: Checkout repository
         uses: actions/checkout@v4
@@ -30,8 +30,8 @@ jobs:
       - name: Setup Node.js
         uses: actions/setup-node@v4
         with:
-          node-version: '20'
-          registry-url: 'https://registry.npmjs.org'
+          node-version: "20"
+          registry-url: "https://registry.npmjs.org"
 
       - name: Configure Git
         run: |
@@ -57,17 +57,17 @@ jobs:
           # Get current version from package.json
           CURRENT_VERSION=$(node -p "require('./package.json').version")
           echo "current_version=$CURRENT_VERSION" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
-          
+
           # Remove beta suffix if present
           BASE_VERSION=$(echo $CURRENT_VERSION | sed 's/-beta\.[0-9]\+//')
           echo "base_version=$BASE_VERSION" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
-          
+
           # Calculate new version based on bump type
           IFS='.' read -ra VERSION_PARTS <<< "$BASE_VERSION"
           MAJOR=${VERSION_PARTS[0]}
           MINOR=${VERSION_PARTS[1]}
           PATCH=${VERSION_PARTS[2]}
-          
+
           case "${{ github.event.inputs.version_bump }}" in
             "major")
               NEW_VERSION="$((MAJOR + 1)).0.0"
@@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ jobs:
               NEW_VERSION="$BASE_VERSION"
               ;;
           esac
-          
+
           echo "new_version=$NEW_VERSION" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
           echo "Promoting from $CURRENT_VERSION to $NEW_VERSION"
 
@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ jobs:
         run: |
           # Update main package.json
           npm version ${{ steps.version.outputs.new_version }} --no-git-tag-version
-          
+
           # Update installer package.json
           sed -i 's/"version": ".*"/"version": "${{ steps.version.outputs.new_version }}"/' tools/installer/package.json
 
@@ -119,4 +119,4 @@ jobs:
           echo "🎉 Successfully promoted to stable!"
           echo "📦 Version: ${{ steps.version.outputs.new_version }}"
           echo "🚀 The stable release will be automatically published to NPM via semantic-release"
-          echo "✅ Users running 'npx bmad-method install' will now get version ${{ steps.version.outputs.new_version }}"
\ No newline at end of file
+          echo "✅ Users running 'npx bmad-method install' will now get version ${{ steps.version.outputs.new_version }}"
diff --git a/bmad-core/data/test-levels-framework.md b/bmad-core/data/test-levels-framework.md
index b31f5b7b..57b49003 100644
--- a/bmad-core/data/test-levels-framework.md
+++ b/bmad-core/data/test-levels-framework.md
@@ -25,10 +25,10 @@ Comprehensive guide for determining appropriate test levels (unit, integration,
 
 ```yaml
 unit_test:
-  component: "PriceCalculator"
-  scenario: "Calculate discount with multiple rules"
-  justification: "Complex business logic with multiple branches"
-  mock_requirements: "None - pure function"
+  component: 'PriceCalculator'
+  scenario: 'Calculate discount with multiple rules'
+  justification: 'Complex business logic with multiple branches'
+  mock_requirements: 'None - pure function'
 ```
 
 ### Integration Tests
@@ -52,10 +52,10 @@ unit_test:
 
 ```yaml
 integration_test:
-  components: ["UserService", "AuthRepository"]
-  scenario: "Create user with role assignment"
-  justification: "Critical data flow between service and persistence"
-  test_environment: "In-memory database"
+  components: ['UserService', 'AuthRepository']
+  scenario: 'Create user with role assignment'
+  justification: 'Critical data flow between service and persistence'
+  test_environment: 'In-memory database'
 ```
 
 ### End-to-End Tests
@@ -79,10 +79,10 @@ integration_test:
 
 ```yaml
 e2e_test:
-  journey: "Complete checkout process"
-  scenario: "User purchases with saved payment method"
-  justification: "Revenue-critical path requiring full validation"
-  environment: "Staging with test payment gateway"
+  journey: 'Complete checkout process'
+  scenario: 'User purchases with saved payment method'
+  justification: 'Revenue-critical path requiring full validation'
+  environment: 'Staging with test payment gateway'
 ```
 
 ## Test Level Selection Rules
diff --git a/bmad-core/tasks/nfr-assess.md b/bmad-core/tasks/nfr-assess.md
index 6b77526c..c441880e 100644
--- a/bmad-core/tasks/nfr-assess.md
+++ b/bmad-core/tasks/nfr-assess.md
@@ -6,18 +6,19 @@ Quick NFR validation focused on the core four: security, performance, reliabilit
 
 ```yaml
 required:
-  - story_id: "{epic}.{story}"  # e.g., "1.3"
-  - story_path: "docs/stories/{epic}.{story}.*.md"
-  
+  - story_id: '{epic}.{story}' # e.g., "1.3"
+  - story_path: 'docs/stories/{epic}.{story}.*.md'
+
 optional:
-  - architecture_refs: "docs/architecture/*.md"
-  - technical_preferences: "docs/technical-preferences.md"
+  - architecture_refs: 'docs/architecture/*.md'
+  - technical_preferences: 'docs/technical-preferences.md'
   - acceptance_criteria: From story file
 ```
 
 ## Purpose
 
 Assess non-functional requirements for a story and generate:
+
 1. YAML block for the gate file's `nfr_validation` section
 2. Brief markdown assessment saved to `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-nfr-{YYYYMMDD}.md`
 
@@ -26,6 +27,7 @@ Assess non-functional requirements for a story and generate:
 ### 0. Fail-safe for Missing Inputs
 
 If story_path or story file can't be found:
+
 - Still create assessment file with note: "Source story not found"
 - Set all selected NFRs to CONCERNS with notes: "Target unknown / evidence missing"
 - Continue with assessment to provide value
@@ -38,7 +40,7 @@ If story_path or story file can't be found:
 ```text
 Which NFRs should I assess? (Enter numbers or press Enter for default)
 [1] Security (default)
-[2] Performance (default)  
+[2] Performance (default)
 [3] Reliability (default)
 [4] Maintainability (default)
 [5] Usability
@@ -52,6 +54,7 @@ Which NFRs should I assess? (Enter numbers or press Enter for default)
 ### 2. Check for Thresholds
 
 Look for NFR requirements in:
+
 - Story acceptance criteria
 - `docs/architecture/*.md` files
 - `docs/technical-preferences.md`
@@ -72,6 +75,7 @@ No security requirements found. Required auth method?
 ### 3. Quick Assessment
 
 For each selected NFR, check:
+
 - Is there evidence it's implemented?
 - Can we validate it?
 - Are there obvious gaps?
@@ -86,24 +90,24 @@ Generate ONLY for NFRs actually assessed (no placeholders):
 # Gate YAML (copy/paste):
 nfr_validation:
   _assessed: [security, performance, reliability, maintainability]
-  security: 
+  security:
     status: CONCERNS
-    notes: "No rate limiting on auth endpoints"
+    notes: 'No rate limiting on auth endpoints'
   performance:
     status: PASS
-    notes: "Response times < 200ms verified"
+    notes: 'Response times < 200ms verified'
   reliability:
     status: PASS
-    notes: "Error handling and retries implemented"
+    notes: 'Error handling and retries implemented'
   maintainability:
     status: CONCERNS
-    notes: "Test coverage at 65%, target is 80%"
+    notes: 'Test coverage at 65%, target is 80%'
 ```
 
 ## Deterministic Status Rules
 
 - **FAIL**: Any selected NFR has critical gap or target clearly not met
-- **CONCERNS**: No FAILs, but any NFR is unknown/partial/missing evidence  
+- **CONCERNS**: No FAILs, but any NFR is unknown/partial/missing evidence
 - **PASS**: All selected NFRs meet targets with evidence
 
 ## Quality Score Calculation
@@ -123,18 +127,21 @@ If `technical-preferences.md` defines custom weights, use those instead.
 
 ```markdown
 # NFR Assessment: {epic}.{story}
+
 Date: {date}
 Reviewer: Quinn
 
 <!-- Note: Source story not found (if applicable) -->
 
 ## Summary
+
 - Security: CONCERNS - Missing rate limiting
 - Performance: PASS - Meets <200ms requirement
 - Reliability: PASS - Proper error handling
 - Maintainability: CONCERNS - Test coverage below target
 
 ## Critical Issues
+
 1. **No rate limiting** (Security)
    - Risk: Brute force attacks possible
    - Fix: Add rate limiting middleware to auth endpoints
@@ -144,6 +151,7 @@ Reviewer: Quinn
    - Fix: Add tests for uncovered branches
 
 ## Quick Wins
+
 - Add rate limiting: ~2 hours
 - Increase test coverage: ~4 hours
 - Add performance monitoring: ~1 hour
@@ -152,6 +160,7 @@ Reviewer: Quinn
 ## Output 3: Story Update Line
 
 **End with this line for the review task to quote:**
+
 ```
 NFR assessment: docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-nfr-{YYYYMMDD}.md
 ```
@@ -159,6 +168,7 @@ NFR assessment: docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-nfr-{YYYYMMDD}.md
 ## Output 4: Gate Integration Line
 
 **Always print at the end:**
+
 ```
 Gate NFR block ready → paste into docs/qa/gates/{epic}.{story}-{slug}.yml under nfr_validation
 ```
@@ -166,66 +176,82 @@ Gate NFR block ready → paste into docs/qa/gates/{epic}.{story}-{slug}.yml unde
 ## Assessment Criteria
 
 ### Security
+
 **PASS if:**
+
 - Authentication implemented
 - Authorization enforced
 - Input validation present
 - No hardcoded secrets
 
 **CONCERNS if:**
+
 - Missing rate limiting
 - Weak encryption
 - Incomplete authorization
 
 **FAIL if:**
+
 - No authentication
 - Hardcoded credentials
 - SQL injection vulnerabilities
 
 ### Performance
+
 **PASS if:**
+
 - Meets response time targets
 - No obvious bottlenecks
 - Reasonable resource usage
 
 **CONCERNS if:**
+
 - Close to limits
 - Missing indexes
 - No caching strategy
 
 **FAIL if:**
+
 - Exceeds response time limits
 - Memory leaks
 - Unoptimized queries
 
 ### Reliability
+
 **PASS if:**
+
 - Error handling present
 - Graceful degradation
 - Retry logic where needed
 
 **CONCERNS if:**
+
 - Some error cases unhandled
 - No circuit breakers
 - Missing health checks
 
 **FAIL if:**
+
 - No error handling
 - Crashes on errors
 - No recovery mechanisms
 
 ### Maintainability
+
 **PASS if:**
+
 - Test coverage meets target
 - Code well-structured
 - Documentation present
 
 **CONCERNS if:**
+
 - Test coverage below target
 - Some code duplication
 - Missing documentation
 
 **FAIL if:**
+
 - No tests
 - Highly coupled code
 - No documentation
@@ -283,7 +309,7 @@ maintainability:
 
 1. **Functional Suitability**: Completeness, correctness, appropriateness
 2. **Performance Efficiency**: Time behavior, resource use, capacity
-3. **Compatibility**: Co-existence, interoperability  
+3. **Compatibility**: Co-existence, interoperability
 4. **Usability**: Learnability, operability, accessibility
 5. **Reliability**: Maturity, availability, fault tolerance
 6. **Security**: Confidentiality, integrity, authenticity
@@ -291,6 +317,7 @@ maintainability:
 8. **Portability**: Adaptability, installability
 
 Use these when assessing beyond the core four.
+
 </details>
 
 <details>
@@ -304,12 +331,13 @@ performance_deep_dive:
     p99: 350ms
   database:
     slow_queries: 2
-    missing_indexes: ["users.email", "orders.user_id"]
+    missing_indexes: ['users.email', 'orders.user_id']
   caching:
     hit_rate: 0%
-    recommendation: "Add Redis for session data"
+    recommendation: 'Add Redis for session data'
   load_test:
     max_rps: 150
     breaking_point: 200 rps
 ```
-</details>
\ No newline at end of file
+
+</details>
diff --git a/bmad-core/tasks/qa-gate.md b/bmad-core/tasks/qa-gate.md
index 9bcc924e..64b0a099 100644
--- a/bmad-core/tasks/qa-gate.md
+++ b/bmad-core/tasks/qa-gate.md
@@ -27,11 +27,11 @@ Slug rules:
 
 ```yaml
 schema: 1
-story: "{epic}.{story}"
+story: '{epic}.{story}'
 gate: PASS|CONCERNS|FAIL|WAIVED
-status_reason: "1-2 sentence explanation of gate decision"
-reviewer: "Quinn"
-updated: "{ISO-8601 timestamp}"
+status_reason: '1-2 sentence explanation of gate decision'
+reviewer: 'Quinn'
+updated: '{ISO-8601 timestamp}'
 top_issues: [] # Empty array if no issues
 waiver: { active: false } # Only set active: true if WAIVED
 ```
@@ -40,20 +40,20 @@ waiver: { active: false } # Only set active: true if WAIVED
 
 ```yaml
 schema: 1
-story: "1.3"
+story: '1.3'
 gate: CONCERNS
-status_reason: "Missing rate limiting on auth endpoints poses security risk."
-reviewer: "Quinn"
-updated: "2025-01-12T10:15:00Z"
+status_reason: 'Missing rate limiting on auth endpoints poses security risk.'
+reviewer: 'Quinn'
+updated: '2025-01-12T10:15:00Z'
 top_issues:
-  - id: "SEC-001"
+  - id: 'SEC-001'
     severity: high # ONLY: low|medium|high
-    finding: "No rate limiting on login endpoint"
-    suggested_action: "Add rate limiting middleware before production"
-  - id: "TEST-001"
+    finding: 'No rate limiting on login endpoint'
+    suggested_action: 'Add rate limiting middleware before production'
+  - id: 'TEST-001'
     severity: medium
-    finding: "No integration tests for auth flow"
-    suggested_action: "Add integration test coverage"
+    finding: 'No integration tests for auth flow'
+    suggested_action: 'Add integration test coverage'
 waiver: { active: false }
 ```
 
@@ -61,20 +61,20 @@ waiver: { active: false }
 
 ```yaml
 schema: 1
-story: "1.3"
+story: '1.3'
 gate: WAIVED
-status_reason: "Known issues accepted for MVP release."
-reviewer: "Quinn"
-updated: "2025-01-12T10:15:00Z"
+status_reason: 'Known issues accepted for MVP release.'
+reviewer: 'Quinn'
+updated: '2025-01-12T10:15:00Z'
 top_issues:
-  - id: "PERF-001"
+  - id: 'PERF-001'
     severity: low
-    finding: "Dashboard loads slowly with 1000+ items"
-    suggested_action: "Implement pagination in next sprint"
+    finding: 'Dashboard loads slowly with 1000+ items'
+    suggested_action: 'Implement pagination in next sprint'
 waiver:
   active: true
-  reason: "MVP release - performance optimization deferred"
-  approved_by: "Product Owner"
+  reason: 'MVP release - performance optimization deferred'
+  approved_by: 'Product Owner'
 ```
 
 ## Gate Decision Criteria
diff --git a/bmad-core/tasks/risk-profile.md b/bmad-core/tasks/risk-profile.md
index 5882c849..3669b36a 100644
--- a/bmad-core/tasks/risk-profile.md
+++ b/bmad-core/tasks/risk-profile.md
@@ -6,10 +6,10 @@ Generate a comprehensive risk assessment matrix for a story implementation using
 
 ```yaml
 required:
-  - story_id: "{epic}.{story}" # e.g., "1.3"
-  - story_path: "docs/stories/{epic}.{story}.*.md"
-  - story_title: "{title}" # If missing, derive from story file H1
-  - story_slug: "{slug}" # If missing, derive from title (lowercase, hyphenated)
+  - story_id: '{epic}.{story}' # e.g., "1.3"
+  - story_path: 'docs/stories/{epic}.{story}.*.md'
+  - story_title: '{title}' # If missing, derive from story file H1
+  - story_slug: '{slug}' # If missing, derive from title (lowercase, hyphenated)
 ```
 
 ## Purpose
@@ -79,14 +79,14 @@ For each category, identify specific risks:
 
 ```yaml
 risk:
-  id: "SEC-001" # Use prefixes: SEC, PERF, DATA, BUS, OPS, TECH
+  id: 'SEC-001' # Use prefixes: SEC, PERF, DATA, BUS, OPS, TECH
   category: security
-  title: "Insufficient input validation on user forms"
-  description: "Form inputs not properly sanitized could lead to XSS attacks"
+  title: 'Insufficient input validation on user forms'
+  description: 'Form inputs not properly sanitized could lead to XSS attacks'
   affected_components:
-    - "UserRegistrationForm"
-    - "ProfileUpdateForm"
-  detection_method: "Code review revealed missing validation"
+    - 'UserRegistrationForm'
+    - 'ProfileUpdateForm'
+  detection_method: 'Code review revealed missing validation'
 ```
 
 ### 2. Risk Assessment
@@ -133,20 +133,20 @@ For each identified risk, provide mitigation:
 
 ```yaml
 mitigation:
-  risk_id: "SEC-001"
-  strategy: "preventive" # preventive|detective|corrective
+  risk_id: 'SEC-001'
+  strategy: 'preventive' # preventive|detective|corrective
   actions:
-    - "Implement input validation library (e.g., validator.js)"
-    - "Add CSP headers to prevent XSS execution"
-    - "Sanitize all user inputs before storage"
-    - "Escape all outputs in templates"
+    - 'Implement input validation library (e.g., validator.js)'
+    - 'Add CSP headers to prevent XSS execution'
+    - 'Sanitize all user inputs before storage'
+    - 'Escape all outputs in templates'
   testing_requirements:
-    - "Security testing with OWASP ZAP"
-    - "Manual penetration testing of forms"
-    - "Unit tests for validation functions"
-  residual_risk: "Low - Some zero-day vulnerabilities may remain"
-  owner: "dev"
-  timeline: "Before deployment"
+    - 'Security testing with OWASP ZAP'
+    - 'Manual penetration testing of forms'
+    - 'Unit tests for validation functions'
+  residual_risk: 'Low - Some zero-day vulnerabilities may remain'
+  owner: 'dev'
+  timeline: 'Before deployment'
 ```
 
 ## Outputs
@@ -172,12 +172,12 @@ risk_summary:
   highest:
     id: SEC-001
     score: 9
-    title: "XSS on profile form"
+    title: 'XSS on profile form'
   recommendations:
     must_fix:
-      - "Add input sanitization & CSP"
+      - 'Add input sanitization & CSP'
     monitor:
-      - "Add security alerts for auth endpoints"
+      - 'Add security alerts for auth endpoints'
 ```
 
 ### Output 2: Markdown Report
diff --git a/bmad-core/tasks/test-design.md b/bmad-core/tasks/test-design.md
index ec0798fd..dde4a846 100644
--- a/bmad-core/tasks/test-design.md
+++ b/bmad-core/tasks/test-design.md
@@ -6,10 +6,10 @@ Create comprehensive test scenarios with appropriate test level recommendations
 
 ```yaml
 required:
-  - story_id: "{epic}.{story}" # e.g., "1.3"
-  - story_path: "{devStoryLocation}/{epic}.{story}.*.md" # Path from core-config.yaml
-  - story_title: "{title}" # If missing, derive from story file H1
-  - story_slug: "{slug}" # If missing, derive from title (lowercase, hyphenated)
+  - story_id: '{epic}.{story}' # e.g., "1.3"
+  - story_path: '{devStoryLocation}/{epic}.{story}.*.md' # Path from core-config.yaml
+  - story_title: '{title}' # If missing, derive from story file H1
+  - story_slug: '{slug}' # If missing, derive from title (lowercase, hyphenated)
 ```
 
 ## Purpose
@@ -62,13 +62,13 @@ For each identified test need, create:
 
 ```yaml
 test_scenario:
-  id: "{epic}.{story}-{LEVEL}-{SEQ}"
-  requirement: "AC reference"
+  id: '{epic}.{story}-{LEVEL}-{SEQ}'
+  requirement: 'AC reference'
   priority: P0|P1|P2|P3
   level: unit|integration|e2e
-  description: "What is being tested"
-  justification: "Why this level was chosen"
-  mitigates_risks: ["RISK-001"] # If risk profile exists
+  description: 'What is being tested'
+  justification: 'Why this level was chosen'
+  mitigates_risks: ['RISK-001'] # If risk profile exists
 ```
 
 ### 5. Validate Coverage
diff --git a/bmad-core/tasks/trace-requirements.md b/bmad-core/tasks/trace-requirements.md
index f1882bf0..07b11a9f 100644
--- a/bmad-core/tasks/trace-requirements.md
+++ b/bmad-core/tasks/trace-requirements.md
@@ -31,21 +31,21 @@ Identify all testable requirements from:
 For each requirement, document which tests validate it. Use Given-When-Then to describe what the test validates (not how it's written):
 
 ```yaml
-requirement: "AC1: User can login with valid credentials"
+requirement: 'AC1: User can login with valid credentials'
 test_mappings:
-  - test_file: "auth/login.test.ts"
-    test_case: "should successfully login with valid email and password"
+  - test_file: 'auth/login.test.ts'
+    test_case: 'should successfully login with valid email and password'
     # Given-When-Then describes WHAT the test validates, not HOW it's coded
-    given: "A registered user with valid credentials"
-    when: "They submit the login form"
-    then: "They are redirected to dashboard and session is created"
+    given: 'A registered user with valid credentials'
+    when: 'They submit the login form'
+    then: 'They are redirected to dashboard and session is created'
     coverage: full
 
-  - test_file: "e2e/auth-flow.test.ts"
-    test_case: "complete login flow"
-    given: "User on login page"
-    when: "Entering valid credentials and submitting"
-    then: "Dashboard loads with user data"
+  - test_file: 'e2e/auth-flow.test.ts'
+    test_case: 'complete login flow'
+    given: 'User on login page'
+    when: 'Entering valid credentials and submitting'
+    then: 'Dashboard loads with user data'
     coverage: integration
 ```
 
@@ -67,19 +67,19 @@ Document any gaps found:
 
 ```yaml
 coverage_gaps:
-  - requirement: "AC3: Password reset email sent within 60 seconds"
-    gap: "No test for email delivery timing"
+  - requirement: 'AC3: Password reset email sent within 60 seconds'
+    gap: 'No test for email delivery timing'
     severity: medium
     suggested_test:
       type: integration
-      description: "Test email service SLA compliance"
+      description: 'Test email service SLA compliance'
 
-  - requirement: "AC5: Support 1000 concurrent users"
-    gap: "No load testing implemented"
+  - requirement: 'AC5: Support 1000 concurrent users'
+    gap: 'No load testing implemented'
     severity: high
     suggested_test:
       type: performance
-      description: "Load test with 1000 concurrent connections"
+      description: 'Load test with 1000 concurrent connections'
 ```
 
 ## Outputs
@@ -95,11 +95,11 @@ trace:
     full: Y
     partial: Z
     none: W
-  planning_ref: "docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-test-design-{YYYYMMDD}.md"
+  planning_ref: 'docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-test-design-{YYYYMMDD}.md'
   uncovered:
-    - ac: "AC3"
-      reason: "No test found for password reset timing"
-  notes: "See docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-trace-{YYYYMMDD}.md"
+    - ac: 'AC3'
+      reason: 'No test found for password reset timing'
+  notes: 'See docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-trace-{YYYYMMDD}.md'
 ```
 
 ### Output 2: Traceability Report
diff --git a/bmad-core/templates/qa-gate-tmpl.yaml b/bmad-core/templates/qa-gate-tmpl.yaml
index ae8b8c79..e085e4aa 100644
--- a/bmad-core/templates/qa-gate-tmpl.yaml
+++ b/bmad-core/templates/qa-gate-tmpl.yaml
@@ -11,8 +11,8 @@ template:
 schema: 1
 story: "{{epic_num}}.{{story_num}}"
 story_title: "{{story_title}}"
-gate: "{{gate_status}}"  # PASS|CONCERNS|FAIL|WAIVED
-status_reason: "{{status_reason}}"  # 1-2 sentence summary of why this gate decision
+gate: "{{gate_status}}" # PASS|CONCERNS|FAIL|WAIVED
+status_reason: "{{status_reason}}" # 1-2 sentence summary of why this gate decision
 reviewer: "Quinn (Test Architect)"
 updated: "{{iso_timestamp}}"
 
@@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ examples:
         severity: medium
         finding: "Missing integration tests for auth flow"
         suggested_action: "Add test coverage for critical paths"
-  
+
   when_waived: |
     waiver:
       active: true
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ optional_fields_examples:
   quality_and_expiry: |
     quality_score: 75  # 0-100 (optional scoring)
     expires: "2025-01-26T00:00:00Z"  # Optional gate freshness window
-  
+
   evidence: |
     evidence:
       tests_reviewed: 15
@@ -63,14 +63,14 @@ optional_fields_examples:
       trace:
         ac_covered: [1, 2, 3]  # AC numbers with test coverage
         ac_gaps: [4]  # AC numbers lacking coverage
-  
+
   nfr_validation: |
     nfr_validation:
       security: { status: CONCERNS, notes: "Rate limiting missing" }
       performance: { status: PASS, notes: "" }
       reliability: { status: PASS, notes: "" }
       maintainability: { status: PASS, notes: "" }
-  
+
   history: |
     history:  # Append-only audit trail
       - at: "2025-01-12T10:00:00Z"
@@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ optional_fields_examples:
       - at: "2025-01-12T15:00:00Z"  
         gate: CONCERNS
         note: "Tests added but rate limiting still missing"
-  
+
   risk_summary: |
     risk_summary:  # From risk-profile task
       totals:
@@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ optional_fields_examples:
       recommendations:
         must_fix: []
         monitor: []
-  
+
   recommendations: |
     recommendations:
       immediate:  # Must fix before production
@@ -99,4 +99,4 @@ optional_fields_examples:
           refs: ["api/auth/login.ts:42-68"]
       future:  # Can be addressed later
         - action: "Consider caching for better performance"
-          refs: ["services/data.service.ts"]
\ No newline at end of file
+          refs: ["services/data.service.ts"]
diff --git a/docs/enhanced-ide-development-workflow.md b/docs/enhanced-ide-development-workflow.md
index 1af97d7d..6159d395 100644
--- a/docs/enhanced-ide-development-workflow.md
+++ b/docs/enhanced-ide-development-workflow.md
@@ -29,14 +29,14 @@ The Test Architect (Quinn) provides comprehensive quality assurance throughout t
 
 ### Quick Command Reference
 
-| **Stage** | **Command** | **Purpose** | **Output** | **Priority** |
-|-----------|------------|-------------|------------|--------------|
-| **After Story Approval** | `*risk` | Identify integration & regression risks | `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-risk-{YYYYMMDD}.md` | High for complex/brownfield |
-| | `*design` | Create test strategy for dev | `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-test-design-{YYYYMMDD}.md` | High for new features |
-| **During Development** | `*trace` | Verify test coverage | `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-trace-{YYYYMMDD}.md` | Medium |
-| | `*nfr` | Validate quality attributes | `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-nfr-{YYYYMMDD}.md` | High for critical features |
-| **After Development** | `*review` | Comprehensive assessment | QA Results in story + `docs/qa/gates/{epic}.{story}-{slug}.yml` | **Required** |
-| **Post-Review** | `*gate` | Update quality decision | Updated `docs/qa/gates/{epic}.{story}-{slug}.yml` | As needed |
+| **Stage**                | **Command** | **Purpose**                             | **Output**                                                      | **Priority**                |
+| ------------------------ | ----------- | --------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------- |
+| **After Story Approval** | `*risk`     | Identify integration & regression risks | `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-risk-{YYYYMMDD}.md`         | High for complex/brownfield |
+|                          | `*design`   | Create test strategy for dev            | `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-test-design-{YYYYMMDD}.md`  | High for new features       |
+| **During Development**   | `*trace`    | Verify test coverage                    | `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-trace-{YYYYMMDD}.md`        | Medium                      |
+|                          | `*nfr`      | Validate quality attributes             | `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-nfr-{YYYYMMDD}.md`          | High for critical features  |
+| **After Development**    | `*review`   | Comprehensive assessment                | QA Results in story + `docs/qa/gates/{epic}.{story}-{slug}.yml` | **Required**                |
+| **Post-Review**          | `*gate`     | Update quality decision                 | Updated `docs/qa/gates/{epic}.{story}-{slug}.yml`               | As needed                   |
 
 ### Stage 1: After Story Creation (Before Dev Starts)
 
@@ -134,24 +134,24 @@ The Test Architect (Quinn) provides comprehensive quality assurance throughout t
 
 ### Understanding Gate Decisions
 
-| **Status** | **Meaning** | **Action Required** | **Can Proceed?** |
-|------------|-------------|-------------------|------------------|
-| **PASS** | All critical requirements met | None | ✅ Yes |
-| **CONCERNS** | Non-critical issues found | Team review recommended | ⚠️ With caution |
-| **FAIL** | Critical issues (security, missing P0 tests) | Must fix | ❌ No |
-| **WAIVED** | Issues acknowledged and accepted | Document reasoning | ✅ With approval |
+| **Status**   | **Meaning**                                  | **Action Required**     | **Can Proceed?** |
+| ------------ | -------------------------------------------- | ----------------------- | ---------------- |
+| **PASS**     | All critical requirements met                | None                    | ✅ Yes           |
+| **CONCERNS** | Non-critical issues found                    | Team review recommended | ⚠️ With caution  |
+| **FAIL**     | Critical issues (security, missing P0 tests) | Must fix                | ❌ No            |
+| **WAIVED**   | Issues acknowledged and accepted             | Document reasoning      | ✅ With approval |
 
 ### Risk-Based Testing Strategy
 
 The Test Architect uses risk scoring to prioritize testing:
 
-| **Risk Score** | **Calculation** | **Testing Priority** | **Gate Impact** |
-|---------------|----------------|-------------------|----------------|
-| **9** | High probability × High impact | P0 - Must test thoroughly | FAIL if untested |
-| **6** | Medium-high combinations | P1 - Should test well | CONCERNS if gaps |
-| **4** | Medium combinations | P1 - Should test | CONCERNS if notable gaps |
-| **2-3** | Low-medium combinations | P2 - Nice to have | Note in review |
-| **1** | Minimal risk | P2 - Minimal | Note in review |
+| **Risk Score** | **Calculation**                | **Testing Priority**      | **Gate Impact**          |
+| -------------- | ------------------------------ | ------------------------- | ------------------------ |
+| **9**          | High probability × High impact | P0 - Must test thoroughly | FAIL if untested         |
+| **6**          | Medium-high combinations       | P1 - Should test well     | CONCERNS if gaps         |
+| **4**          | Medium combinations            | P1 - Should test          | CONCERNS if notable gaps |
+| **2-3**        | Low-medium combinations        | P2 - Nice to have         | Note in review           |
+| **1**          | Minimal risk                   | P2 - Minimal              | Note in review           |
 
 ### Special Situations & Best Practices
 
@@ -227,14 +227,14 @@ All Test Architect activities create permanent records:
 
 **Should I run Test Architect commands?**
 
-| **Scenario** | **Before Dev** | **During Dev** | **After Dev** |
-|-------------|---------------|----------------|---------------|
-| **Simple bug fix** | Optional | Optional | Required `*review` |
-| **New feature** | Recommended `*risk`, `*design` | Optional `*trace` | Required `*review` |
-| **Brownfield change** | **Required** `*risk`, `*design` | Recommended `*trace`, `*nfr` | Required `*review` |
-| **API modification** | **Required** `*risk`, `*design` | **Required** `*trace` | Required `*review` |
-| **Performance-critical** | Recommended `*design` | **Required** `*nfr` | Required `*review` |
-| **Data migration** | **Required** `*risk`, `*design` | **Required** `*trace` | Required `*review` + `*gate` |
+| **Scenario**             | **Before Dev**                  | **During Dev**               | **After Dev**                |
+| ------------------------ | ------------------------------- | ---------------------------- | ---------------------------- |
+| **Simple bug fix**       | Optional                        | Optional                     | Required `*review`           |
+| **New feature**          | Recommended `*risk`, `*design`  | Optional `*trace`            | Required `*review`           |
+| **Brownfield change**    | **Required** `*risk`, `*design` | Recommended `*trace`, `*nfr` | Required `*review`           |
+| **API modification**     | **Required** `*risk`, `*design` | **Required** `*trace`        | Required `*review`           |
+| **Performance-critical** | Recommended `*design`           | **Required** `*nfr`          | Required `*review`           |
+| **Data migration**       | **Required** `*risk`, `*design` | **Required** `*trace`        | Required `*review` + `*gate` |
 
 ### Success Metrics
 
diff --git a/docs/user-guide.md b/docs/user-guide.md
index ceee141d..43c2daf6 100644
--- a/docs/user-guide.md
+++ b/docs/user-guide.md
@@ -277,7 +277,7 @@ The documentation uses short forms for convenience. Both styles are valid:
 
 ```text
 *risk    → *risk-profile
-*design  → *test-design  
+*design  → *test-design
 *nfr     → *nfr-assess
 *trace   → *trace-requirements (or just *trace)
 *review  → *review
@@ -376,14 +376,14 @@ Manages quality gate decisions:
 
 The Test Architect provides value throughout the entire development lifecycle. Here's when and how to leverage each capability:
 
-| **Stage** | **Command** | **When to Use** | **Value** | **Output** |
-|-----------|------------|-----------------|-----------|------------|
-| **Story Drafting** | `*risk` | After SM drafts story | Identify pitfalls early | `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-risk-{YYYYMMDD}.md` |
-| | `*design` | After risk assessment | Guide dev on test strategy | `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-test-design-{YYYYMMDD}.md` |
-| **Development** | `*trace` | Mid-implementation | Verify test coverage | `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-trace-{YYYYMMDD}.md` |
-| | `*nfr` | While building features | Catch quality issues early | `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-nfr-{YYYYMMDD}.md` |
-| **Review** | `*review` | Story marked complete | Full quality assessment | QA Results in story + gate file |
-| **Post-Review** | `*gate` | After fixing issues | Update quality decision | Updated `docs/qa/gates/{epic}.{story}-{slug}.yml` |
+| **Stage**          | **Command** | **When to Use**         | **Value**                  | **Output**                                                     |
+| ------------------ | ----------- | ----------------------- | -------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------- |
+| **Story Drafting** | `*risk`     | After SM drafts story   | Identify pitfalls early    | `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-risk-{YYYYMMDD}.md`        |
+|                    | `*design`   | After risk assessment   | Guide dev on test strategy | `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-test-design-{YYYYMMDD}.md` |
+| **Development**    | `*trace`    | Mid-implementation      | Verify test coverage       | `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-trace-{YYYYMMDD}.md`       |
+|                    | `*nfr`      | While building features | Catch quality issues early | `docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-nfr-{YYYYMMDD}.md`         |
+| **Review**         | `*review`   | Story marked complete   | Full quality assessment    | QA Results in story + gate file                                |
+| **Post-Review**    | `*gate`     | After fixing issues     | Update quality decision    | Updated `docs/qa/gates/{epic}.{story}-{slug}.yml`              |
 
 #### Example Commands
 
diff --git a/tools/installer/bin/bmad.js b/tools/installer/bin/bmad.js
index 8a074d30..14f271e5 100755
--- a/tools/installer/bin/bmad.js
+++ b/tools/installer/bin/bmad.js
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ const yaml = require('js-yaml');
 const chalk = require('chalk').default || require('chalk');
 const inquirer = require('inquirer').default || require('inquirer');
 const semver = require('semver');
-const https = require('https');
+const https = require('node:https');
 
 // Handle both execution contexts (from root via npx or from installer directory)
 let version;
@@ -104,28 +104,30 @@ program
   .description('Check for BMad Update')
   .action(async () => {
     console.log('Checking for updates...');
-    
+
     // Make HTTP request to npm registry for latest version info
-    const req = https.get(`https://registry.npmjs.org/${packageName}/latest`, res => {
+    const req = https.get(`https://registry.npmjs.org/${packageName}/latest`, (res) => {
       // Check for HTTP errors (non-200 status codes)
       if (res.statusCode !== 200) {
         console.error(chalk.red(`Update check failed: Received status code ${res.statusCode}`));
         return;
       }
-      
+
       // Accumulate response data chunks
       let data = '';
-      res.on('data', chunk => data += chunk);
-      
+      res.on('data', (chunk) => (data += chunk));
+
       // Process complete response
       res.on('end', () => {
         try {
           // Parse npm registry response and extract version
           const latest = JSON.parse(data).version;
-          
+
           // Compare versions using semver
           if (semver.gt(latest, version)) {
-            console.log(chalk.bold.blue(`⚠️  ${packageName} update available: ${version} → ${latest}`));
+            console.log(
+              chalk.bold.blue(`⚠️  ${packageName} update available: ${version} → ${latest}`),
+            );
             console.log(chalk.bold.blue('\nInstall latest by running:'));
             console.log(chalk.bold.magenta(`  npm install ${packageName}@latest`));
             console.log(chalk.dim('  or'));
@@ -139,14 +141,14 @@ program
         }
       });
     });
-    
+
     // Handle network/connection errors
-    req.on('error', error => {
+    req.on('error', (error) => {
       console.error(chalk.red('Update check failed:'), error.message);
     });
-    
+
     // Set 30 second timeout to prevent hanging
-    req.setTimeout(30000, () => {
+    req.setTimeout(30_000, () => {
       req.destroy();
       console.error(chalk.red('Update check timed out'));
     });
diff --git a/tools/installer/lib/ide-base-setup.js b/tools/installer/lib/ide-base-setup.js
index a80a1bc4..d47d8d5d 100644
--- a/tools/installer/lib/ide-base-setup.js
+++ b/tools/installer/lib/ide-base-setup.js
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
  * Reduces duplication and provides shared methods
  */
 
-const path = require('path');
+const path = require('node:path');
 const fs = require('fs-extra');
 const yaml = require('js-yaml');
 const chalk = require('chalk').default || require('chalk');