refactor(wds): Rename and update specifications to reflect conceptual focus
Revised multiple documentation files to replace references to "why-based specifications" with "conceptual specifications," aligning terminology with the updated framework. This change enhances clarity and consistency across the WDS methodology, ensuring that all materials accurately reflect the intent and structure of the specifications. Additionally, removed outdated tutorial files and streamlined content to improve user understanding and engagement with the design process.
This commit is contained in:
Mårten Angner
parent
5f596f795a
commit
e34ef08c56
|
|
@ -1344,7 +1344,7 @@ Each module contains:
|
|||
- Module 09: Sketch Interfaces ⏳ TO CREATE
|
||||
- Module 10: Analyze with AI ⏳ TO CREATE
|
||||
- Module 11: Decompose Components ⏳ TO CREATE
|
||||
- Module 12: Why-Based Specifications ⏳ TO CREATE
|
||||
- Module 12: Conceptual Specifications ⏳ TO CREATE
|
||||
- Module 13: Validate Specifications ⏳ TO CREATE
|
||||
|
||||
#### Phase 5: Design System
|
||||
|
|
@ -1473,7 +1473,7 @@ Create Module 02: Project Brief as template for remaining modules
|
|||
- Module 02: Project Brief
|
||||
- Module 04: Map Triggers & Outcomes
|
||||
- Module 08: Initialize Scenario
|
||||
- Module 12: Why-Based Specifications
|
||||
- Module 12: Conceptual Specifications
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Option 2: Create Module Templates**
|
||||
- Template structure for each module type
|
||||
|
|
@ -2075,7 +2075,7 @@ workflows/5-design-system/
|
|||
- `course/module-02-project-brief/tutorial-02.md` - Create Project Brief
|
||||
- `course/module-04-map-triggers-outcomes/tutorial-04.md` - Map Triggers & Outcomes
|
||||
- `course/module-08-initialize-scenario/tutorial-08.md` - Initialize Scenario
|
||||
- `course/module-12-why-based-specs/tutorial-12.md` - Why-Based Specifications
|
||||
- `course/module-12-conceptual-specs/tutorial-12.md` - Conceptual Specifications
|
||||
|
||||
**Excalidraw Integration (Dec 9 AM):**
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ Mimir can guide you through the comprehensive WDS course:
|
|||
- **Module 03:** Project Brief - Creating strategic foundations
|
||||
- **Module 05:** Map Triggers & Outcomes - Understanding user needs
|
||||
- **Module 09:** Initialize Scenario - Building user scenarios
|
||||
- **Module 13:** Why-Based Specs - Writing meaningful specifications
|
||||
- **Module 13:** Conceptual Specs - Writing meaningful specifications
|
||||
|
||||
**Location:** `src/modules/wds/course/`
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -344,7 +344,7 @@ Mimir: "Since you're familiar with Cursor, let me show you
|
|||
|
||||
2. **Deep Explanations**
|
||||
```
|
||||
"WDS uses 'why-based specifications' because... Let me show
|
||||
"WDS uses 'conceptual specifications' because... Let me show
|
||||
you an example..."
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -472,7 +472,7 @@ All answers are perfect. I'm here for you."
|
|||
- Create their first artifact
|
||||
- **Check emotional state regularly**
|
||||
|
||||
**Your Voice:** *"Excellent! You've just created your first why-based specification. See what you just accomplished? You DID that!"*
|
||||
**Your Voice:** *"Excellent! You've just created your first conceptual specification. See what you just accomplished? You DID that!"*
|
||||
|
||||
**Encouragement Patterns:**
|
||||
- **After small wins:** *"Perfect! You're learning fast!"*
|
||||
|
|
@ -514,7 +514,7 @@ if you need me. Just call my name."
|
|||
|
||||
1. **Understanding user psychology** (Trigger Maps)
|
||||
2. **Defining scenarios** (User journeys)
|
||||
3. **Creating specifications** (Why-based specs)
|
||||
3. **Creating specifications** (Conceptual specs)
|
||||
4. **Building prototypes** (Interactive demos)
|
||||
5. **Maintaining design systems** (Component libraries)
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ Each module contains:
|
|||
- [Module 10: Sketch Interfaces](module-10-sketch-interfaces/)
|
||||
- [Module 11: Analyze with AI](module-11-analyze-with-ai/)
|
||||
- [Module 12: Decompose Components](module-12-decompose-components/)
|
||||
- [Module 13: Why-Based Specifications](module-13-why-based-specs/) • [Tutorial →](module-13-why-based-specs/tutorial-13.md)
|
||||
- [Module 13: Conceptual Specifications](module-13-conceptual-specs/) • [Tutorial →](module-13-conceptual-specs/tutorial-13.md)
|
||||
- [Module 14: Validate Specifications](module-14-validate-specifications/)
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 5: Design System
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ By the end of this course, you'll have created:
|
|||
**3. Scenario Specifications**
|
||||
|
||||
- At least one complete user scenario
|
||||
- Why-based specifications for key components
|
||||
- Conceptual specifications for key components
|
||||
- AI-ready documentation
|
||||
|
||||
**4. Design System Foundation**
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -12,7 +12,7 @@
|
|||
>
|
||||
> **— Sarah K., Product Designer**
|
||||
|
||||
> "The 5x speed increase is real. But what surprised me most was how much clearer my thinking became. Writing why-based specifications forced me to understand the 'why' at a deeper level."
|
||||
> "The 5x speed increase is real. But what surprised me most was how much clearer my thinking became. Writing conceptual specifications forced me to understand the 'why' at a deeper level."
|
||||
>
|
||||
> **— Marcus L., UX Lead**
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ Here's the transformation that WDS enables. In the old model, you were a cog des
|
|||
|
||||
With WDS and AI, everything changes - and here's the key insight: **your design contribution completely replaces prompting.** Think about it. You make design decisions. AI helps you clarify them in text. The result is an absolute goldmine for everyone on the team - providing clarity that works like clockwork, replacing hours of pointless back-and-forth prompting.
|
||||
|
||||
You provide the user-centric creativity - the deep understanding of WHY things need to work a certain way. You create why-based specifications that capture not just what to build, but why you're building it that way and what mistakes to avoid. Then AI implements it - but you're there as gatekeeper, catching the mistakes, evaluating the logic, ensuring it actually serves both business and user.
|
||||
You provide the user-centric creativity - the deep understanding of WHY things need to work a certain way. You create conceptual specifications that capture not just what to build, but why you're building it that way and what mistakes to avoid. Then AI implements it - but you're there as gatekeeper, catching the mistakes, evaluating the logic, ensuring it actually serves both business and user.
|
||||
|
||||
Here's the paradigm shift: **The design becomes the specification. The specification becomes the product. The code is just the printout - the projection to the end user.** Your thinking no longer stops at handoff. It scales infinitely. Every specification you write becomes a permanent record of your design reasoning that provides clarity for developers, stakeholders, and AI alike. No more endless prompting sessions. No more "can you make it more modern?" Your design thinking, captured in specifications, is the source of truth.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
|
|||
# Tutorial 12: Write Why-Based Specifications
|
||||
# Tutorial 12: Write Conceptual Specifications
|
||||
|
||||
**Hands-on guide to documenting WHAT + WHY + WHAT NOT TO DO**
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ This tutorial teaches you how to transform sketches into specifications that pre
|
|||
|
||||
**Time:** 60-90 minutes
|
||||
**Prerequisites:** Sketches completed and analyzed
|
||||
**What you'll create:** Complete why-based specifications for a page
|
||||
**What you'll create:** Complete conceptual specifications for a page
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -658,7 +658,7 @@ Agent: "Your design brilliance is captured beautifully! Let me verify:
|
|||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## The Power of Why-Based Specs
|
||||
## The Power of Conceptual Specs
|
||||
|
||||
**Traditional approach:**
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ Entrepreneurs, startup founders, and product owners who:
|
|||
|
||||
WDS is the **only end-to-end design methodology** that:
|
||||
- Provides complete journey (vision → specifications → handoff)
|
||||
- Preserves design thinking through why-based specifications
|
||||
- Preserves design thinking through conceptual specifications
|
||||
- Makes designers strategic linchpins (not replaceable executors)
|
||||
- Built on proven 25-year methodology (BMad Method)
|
||||
- Free and open-source (no cost barriers)
|
||||
|
|
@ -391,7 +391,7 @@ Most tools solve **fragments** of the design challenge:
|
|||
|
||||
4. **Complete Integration (Not Fragmented)**
|
||||
- Only solution that covers idea → maintenance
|
||||
- Why-based specifications unique approach
|
||||
- Conceptual specifications unique approach
|
||||
- Design system + scenario design + PRD all connected
|
||||
- Seamless handoff to development (BMM agents)
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -187,16 +187,15 @@ flowchart LR
|
|||
**[06-Feature-Impact.md](06-Feature-Impact.md)** - Prioritized features for UX and development (Optional Design Brief)
|
||||
|
||||
**Top Priority Features (Must Have MVP):**
|
||||
1. BMad Method Integration (Score: 11) - All personas benefit from seamless design-to-dev
|
||||
2. Complete End-to-End Workflow (Score: 9) - Core differentiation from fragmented tools
|
||||
3. Why-Based Specifications (Score: 9) - Makes Stina indispensable, Felix happy
|
||||
4. Example Projects/Case Studies (Score: 8) - Proof that overcomes "wasting time" fear
|
||||
5. Testimonials & Social Proof (Score: 8) - Peer validation from designers and entrepreneurs
|
||||
1. Testimonials & Social Proof (Score: 11) 🏆 - ONLY feature scoring HIGH across all three personas
|
||||
1. BMad Method Integration (Score: 11) 🏆 - All personas benefit from seamless design-to-dev
|
||||
3. End-to-End Workflow Through Agents (Score: 9) - Complete journey told through expert guides (Saga, Freyja, Idunn, Mimir)
|
||||
3. Conceptual Specifications (Score: 9) - Specs that capture concept + reasoning, making Stina indispensable and Felix happy
|
||||
5. Example Projects/Case Studies (Score: 8) - Proof that overcomes "wasting time" fear
|
||||
6. Course Modules (Score: 6) - Hand-holding builds Stina's confidence
|
||||
7. Installation Documentation (Score: 5) - Removes barrier to entry
|
||||
8. WDS Agents (Score: 5) - The methodology in practice
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Insight:** Testimonials complement case studies - case studies prove methodology works, testimonials prove it's worth the effort through peer validation.
|
||||
**Key Insight:** Agents merged into workflow story - maintains strategic score (9) while creating more engaging, memorable presentation. Characters make abstract methodology human and approachable.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,7 +1,5 @@
|
|||
# Feature Impact Analysis: WDS Presentation Page
|
||||
|
||||
> **Status: Beta** - Scoring system being refined through real-world use
|
||||
|
||||
**Created:** December 27, 2025
|
||||
**Updated:** December 27, 2025 (Added Testimonials feature)
|
||||
**Analyst:** Saga with Mårten Angner
|
||||
|
|
@ -24,16 +22,15 @@
|
|||
| Rank | Feature | Stina ⭐ | Lars | Felix | **Score** | **Decision** |
|
||||
| ---- | ------- | -------- | ---- | ----- | --------- | ------------ |
|
||||
| 1 | BMad Method Integration (WDS → BMM) | HIGH (5) | HIGH (3) | HIGH (3) | **11** | **MUST HAVE** |
|
||||
| 2 | Complete End-to-End Workflow | HIGH (5) | HIGH (3) | MED (1) | **9** | **MUST HAVE** |
|
||||
| 3 | Why-Based Specifications | HIGH (5) | MED (1) | HIGH (3) | **9** | **MUST HAVE** |
|
||||
| 4 | Example Projects & Case Studies | HIGH (5) | HIGH (3) | LOW (0) | **8** | **MUST HAVE** |
|
||||
| 5 | Testimonials & Social Proof | HIGH (5) | HIGH (3) | LOW (0) | **8** | **MUST HAVE** |
|
||||
| 1 | Testimonials & Social Proof | HIGH (5) | HIGH (3) | HIGH (3) | **11** | **MUST HAVE** |
|
||||
| 3 | End-to-End Workflow Through Agents | HIGH (5) | HIGH (3) | MED (1) | **9** | **MUST HAVE** |
|
||||
| 3 | Conceptual Specifications | HIGH (5) | MED (1) | HIGH (3) | **9** | **MUST HAVE** |
|
||||
| 5 | Example Projects & Case Studies | HIGH (5) | HIGH (3) | LOW (0) | **8** | **MUST HAVE** |
|
||||
| 6 | Course Modules (Video + Lessons) | HIGH (5) | MED (1) | LOW (0) | **6** | **MUST HAVE** |
|
||||
| 7 | Installation & Setup Documentation | HIGH (5) | LOW (0) | LOW (0) | **5** | **MUST HAVE** |
|
||||
| 8 | WDS Agents (Saga, Freyja, Idunn, Mimir) | HIGH (5) | LOW (0) | LOW (0) | **5** | **MUST HAVE** |
|
||||
| 9 | Design System Module | MED (3) | MED (1) | MED (1) | **5** | **CONSIDER** |
|
||||
| 10 | GitHub Repository & Documentation | MED (3) | LOW (0) | MED (1) | **4** | **CONSIDER** |
|
||||
| 11 | Community & Discord Support | MED (3) | LOW (0) | LOW (0) | **3** | **CONSIDER** |
|
||||
| 8 | Design System Module | MED (3) | MED (1) | MED (1) | **5** | **CONSIDER** |
|
||||
| 9 | GitHub Repository & Documentation | MED (3) | LOW (0) | MED (1) | **4** | **CONSIDER** |
|
||||
| 10 | Community & Discord Support | MED (3) | LOW (0) | LOW (0) | **3** | **CONSIDER** |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -52,47 +49,62 @@
|
|||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### 2. Complete End-to-End Workflow (Score: 9)
|
||||
**Full methodology covering all phases from vision to handoff**
|
||||
#### 1. Testimonials & Social Proof (Score: 11) 🏆
|
||||
**Real testimonials from designers, entrepreneurs, AND developers**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Stina Impact (HIGH):** Addresses "being strategic expert" want - she owns the complete journey
|
||||
- **Lars Impact (HIGH):** Ensures quality throughout entire process, no gaps
|
||||
- **Felix Impact (MEDIUM):** Better handoff means fewer headaches
|
||||
- **Stina Impact (HIGH):** Peer validation from other designers who succeeded - "People like me did this and it worked"
|
||||
- **Lars Impact (HIGH):** Social proof from other entrepreneurs validates investment - "Business owners saw ROI"
|
||||
- **Felix Impact (HIGH):** Developer testimonials about better specs - "WDS designers make my life easier"
|
||||
|
||||
**Why This Matters:** Core differentiation from fragmented tools. Shows WDS isn't just another prototyping tool - it's a complete professional methodology.
|
||||
**Why This Matters:** UNIVERSAL TRUST BUILDER. This is the only feature that scores HIGH across all three personas. Everyone needs peer validation from their own perspective:
|
||||
- **Stina hears from designers:** "I became indispensable"
|
||||
- **Lars hears from entrepreneurs:** "Quality went up, my team succeeded"
|
||||
- **Felix hears from developers:** "Finally, specs that make sense"
|
||||
|
||||
Three-dimensional social proof creates powerful conversion momentum. This isn't just marketing - it's strategic trust-building that serves the entire ecosystem.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### 3. Why-Based Specifications (Score: 9)
|
||||
**Specifications that explain WHAT + WHY + WHAT NOT TO DO**
|
||||
#### 3. End-to-End Workflow Through Agents (Score: 9)
|
||||
**Complete methodology told through four expert AI agents who guide each phase**
|
||||
|
||||
**The Story:**
|
||||
- **Saga the Analyst** guides Product Brief & Trigger Mapping (strategy & discovery)
|
||||
- **Freyja the Designer** guides UX Design & Design System (creative execution)
|
||||
- **Idunn the PM** guides Platform Requirements & PRD (technical planning)
|
||||
- **Mimir the Orchestrator** coordinates your entire journey (wise guide)
|
||||
|
||||
**Impact Assessment:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Stina Impact (HIGH):** Gets structured journey WITH personality - agents make abstract phases tangible and provide hand-holding she needs. "I have guides, not just documentation."
|
||||
- **Lars Impact (HIGH):** Sees complete business process with clear owners - agents make methodology approachable. "I understand who does what and when."
|
||||
- **Felix Impact (MEDIUM):** Understands the structure that creates good specs, but focuses on output quality over process.
|
||||
|
||||
**Why This Matters:** This is strategic differentiation with emotional resonance. Instead of "6 phases of documentation," it's "4 expert guides who walk you through the complete journey." Agents transform abstract methodology into relatable story.
|
||||
|
||||
**Merger Benefit:** Previously scored as two separate features (Workflow: 9, Agents: 5). By merging, we maintain the strategic score while creating more engaging, memorable presentation. Characters make structure human.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### 3. Conceptual Specifications (Score: 9)
|
||||
**Specifications that capture the concept and reasoning: WHAT + WHY + WHAT NOT TO DO**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Stina Impact (HIGH):** Makes her indispensable - her thinking is preserved
|
||||
- **Lars Impact (MEDIUM):** Better quality, less confusion in execution
|
||||
- **Felix Impact (HIGH):** Directly addresses his "clear specs" want - major pain point solved
|
||||
|
||||
**Why This Matters:** This is the secret sauce. Felix's happiness depends on this. Stina becomes irreplaceable because AI can't replicate her "why." Lars gets quality.
|
||||
**Why This Matters:** This is the secret sauce. Felix's happiness depends on this. Stina becomes irreplaceable because AI can't replicate her conceptual thinking. Lars gets quality.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### 4. Example Projects & Case Studies (Score: 8)
|
||||
**Real-world examples showing WDS in action (Dog Week: 5x faster)**
|
||||
#### 5. Example Projects & Case Studies (Score: 8)
|
||||
**Real-world examples showing WDS in action**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Stina Impact (HIGH):** Addresses "wasting time" fear - proof it works before investing effort
|
||||
- **Lars Impact (HIGH):** Validates methodology before committing his team
|
||||
- **Felix Impact (LOW):** Nice to see, but doesn't directly help him
|
||||
|
||||
**Why This Matters:** Trust builder. Stina and Lars both need proof before adopting. Dog Week case study (26 weeks → 5 weeks) is compelling evidence.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### 5. Testimonials & Social Proof (Score: 8)
|
||||
**Real designer and client testimonials showing WDS impact**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Stina Impact (HIGH):** Addresses "wasting time" fear - peer validation from other designers who succeeded
|
||||
- **Lars Impact (HIGH):** Social proof from other entrepreneurs validates investment decision
|
||||
- **Felix Impact (LOW):** Doesn't care about marketing; cares about actual specs quality
|
||||
|
||||
**Why This Matters:** Peer validation is different from case studies. While case studies provide detailed proof, testimonials give quick emotional reassurance. "People like me succeeded with this" is powerful for both Stina (designer peers) and Lars (business peers). This complements Example Projects - case studies prove methodology works, testimonials prove it's worth the effort.
|
||||
**Why This Matters:** Trust builder. Stina and Lars both need proof before adopting. Dog Week case study (26 weeks → 5 weeks) is compelling evidence. Felix doesn't need proof of concept - he needs proof of execution quality (which testimonials provide).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -118,20 +130,9 @@
|
|||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### 8. WDS Agents (Score: 5)
|
||||
**AI agents (Saga, Freyja, Idunn, Mimir) that guide through each phase**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Stina Impact (HIGH):** Core value - "AI as co-pilot" with structured guidance
|
||||
- **Lars Impact (LOW):** Behind-the-scenes tool for his designer
|
||||
- **Felix Impact (LOW):** Designer's workflow, not his
|
||||
|
||||
**Why This Matters:** All Primary High features are Must Have. The agents ARE the methodology in practice. This is how Stina experiences "shouldering complexity with excitement."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Consider for MVP
|
||||
|
||||
#### 9. Design System Module (Score: 5)
|
||||
#### 8. Design System Module (Score: 5)
|
||||
**Structured approach to creating reusable design systems**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Stina Impact (MEDIUM):** Professional capability, but not core transformation
|
||||
|
|
@ -142,7 +143,7 @@
|
|||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### 10. GitHub Repository & Documentation (Score: 4)
|
||||
#### 9. GitHub Repository & Documentation (Score: 4)
|
||||
**Open-source access to all WDS resources**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Stina Impact (MEDIUM):** Access is important, but content matters more
|
||||
|
|
@ -153,7 +154,7 @@
|
|||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### 11. Community & Discord Support (Score: 3)
|
||||
#### 10. Community & Discord Support (Score: 3)
|
||||
**Active community for questions, sharing, and collaboration**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Stina Impact (MEDIUM):** Support reduces risk, but not core transformation
|
||||
|
|
@ -167,17 +168,17 @@
|
|||
## Strategic Implications for UX Design
|
||||
|
||||
### **Hero Section Priority:**
|
||||
Focus on **BMad Integration**, **End-to-End Workflow**, and **Why-Based Specs** - the top differentiators that serve all personas.
|
||||
Focus on **Testimonials** (universal trust), **BMad Integration** (universal benefit), and **Workflow Through Agents** (engaging differentiation) - the features that serve all personas with both substance and story.
|
||||
|
||||
### **Early Content Focus:**
|
||||
Lead with **Example Projects** (proof) and **Testimonials** (peer validation) to overcome Stina's "wasting time" fear and Lars's validation need. Follow with **Complete Workflow** (differentiation).
|
||||
Lead with **Testimonials** (three-dimensional trust from all perspectives) immediately after hero. Then **Example Projects** (detailed proof) and **Workflow Through Agents** (engaging differentiation). Testimonials must include designer, entrepreneur, AND developer voices.
|
||||
|
||||
### **Agent Presentation Strategy:**
|
||||
Don't present agents as separate "tools" - weave them into the workflow story. Each phase introduction features the agent guide: "Saga helps you discover your product strategy" rather than "Phase 1: Product Brief (also, we have an agent called Saga)." This makes the methodology human and memorable.
|
||||
|
||||
### **Course Module Prominence:**
|
||||
Make **Course Modules** and **Installation** highly visible and accessible - remove all friction from Stina's learning path.
|
||||
|
||||
### **Agent Introduction:**
|
||||
Present **WDS Agents** as the personality and guide of the methodology - make them relatable and trustworthy.
|
||||
|
||||
### **Secondary Features:**
|
||||
Mention **Design System**, **GitHub**, and **Community** but don't feature them prominently in MVP content.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -187,13 +188,12 @@ Mention **Design System**, **GitHub**, and **Community** but don't feature them
|
|||
|
||||
### **Phase 1 MVP:**
|
||||
- BMad Method Integration messaging
|
||||
- Complete workflow explanation
|
||||
- Why-based specifications showcase
|
||||
- Workflow told through agents (Saga, Freyja, Idunn, Mimir as guides)
|
||||
- Conceptual specifications showcase
|
||||
- Dog Week case study (prominent)
|
||||
- Testimonials from early adopters (designer + entrepreneur + developer perspectives)
|
||||
- Course Modules 01-02 (complete)
|
||||
- Installation guide (detailed)
|
||||
- Agent introductions (personality-driven)
|
||||
|
||||
### **Phase 2 Enhancements:**
|
||||
- Design System module details
|
||||
|
|
@ -210,33 +210,56 @@ Mention **Design System**, **GitHub**, and **Community** but don't feature them
|
|||
|
||||
1. **Proof It Works** (Example Projects + Testimonials) → Stina and Lars trust WDS
|
||||
2. **Easy to Start** (Installation + Course) → Stina begins learning
|
||||
3. **Structured Guidance** (Agents + Workflow) → Stina gains confidence
|
||||
4. **Better Specs** (Why-Based) → Felix's life improves
|
||||
3. **Guided Journey** (Workflow Through Agents) → Stina gains confidence with expert guides
|
||||
4. **Better Specs** (Conceptual) → Felix's life improves
|
||||
5. **Smooth Handoff** (BMad Integration) → Lars sees quality + productivity
|
||||
6. **Success Creates Evangelists** → More testimonials → 50 hardcore believers emerge
|
||||
|
||||
### **Testimonials = Universal Trust Builder:**
|
||||
|
||||
Testimonials (Score: 11) is the ONLY feature that scores HIGH across all three personas. This makes it strategically critical - it serves everyone simultaneously:
|
||||
- Designer testimonials convince Stina
|
||||
- Entrepreneur testimonials convince Lars
|
||||
- Developer testimonials convince Felix (and validate Stina's value to Lars)
|
||||
|
||||
**Design Implication:** Testimonials section must include all three perspectives. Felix's voice is particularly powerful - when he says "WDS designers make my life easier," it proves designer value to Lars AND builds Stina's confidence.
|
||||
|
||||
### **Felix is the Secret Weapon:**
|
||||
|
||||
Why-Based Specifications (Score: 9) directly addresses Felix's main pain point. When Felix's day is "enlightened" by clear specs, he becomes an advocate. This validates Lars's investment and proves Stina's value.
|
||||
Developer testimonials serve double duty: They directly impact Felix (peer validation) AND prove Stina's value to Lars (business validation). When Felix says "Finally, specs that make sense," Lars hears "Quality investment validated."
|
||||
|
||||
**Design Implication:** Show how WDS makes developers happy - this is proof of designer value.
|
||||
**Design Implication:** Developer testimonials aren't just nice-to-have - they're strategic proof that the entire ecosystem works.
|
||||
|
||||
### **All Primary High Features Matter:**
|
||||
|
||||
Every feature where Stina scored HIGH (5) is Must Have MVP. Why? Because Stina IS the engine. The 50 evangelists come from successful Stinas. Without her complete transformation, the flywheel doesn't start.
|
||||
|
||||
### **Strategic Feature Merging:**
|
||||
|
||||
By merging "Complete Workflow" with "Agents," we:
|
||||
- ✅ Reduced Must Have features from 8 to 7 (simpler message)
|
||||
- ✅ Maintained strategic score (9) while improving presentation
|
||||
- ✅ Created memorable story (characters > abstract phases)
|
||||
- ✅ Made methodology more approachable for Lars (sees "who does what")
|
||||
- ✅ Strengthened hand-holding for Stina (guides, not just docs)
|
||||
|
||||
**Presentation Impact:** Instead of explaining methodology THEN introducing agents as separate tools, we tell ONE story: "Four expert agents guide you through the complete journey." This is cleaner, more engaging, and more memorable.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Questions for Designer (Phase 4)
|
||||
|
||||
When designing the page, consider:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **How do we make BMad Integration tangible?** (It's abstract but highest-scoring)
|
||||
2. **Should Dog Week case study have its own section or integrate throughout?**
|
||||
3. **Testimonials: Where and how many?** (Need designer, entrepreneur, and developer perspectives)
|
||||
4. **How much personality should agents have on the page?** (Critical feature but hard to show)
|
||||
5. **Installation: Prominent CTA or embedded in course section?**
|
||||
6. **How do we show "end-to-end" visually?** (Diagram? Illustration?)
|
||||
1. **Testimonials prominence:** Should they appear in hero/early, or dedicated section? (Highest-scoring feature tied with BMad)
|
||||
2. **Three-perspective testimonials:** How to structure designer/entrepreneur/developer voices? Separate sections or integrated?
|
||||
3. **Developer testimonial strategy:** Felix's voice proves Stina's value to Lars - how to highlight this?
|
||||
4. **How do we make BMad Integration tangible?** (Abstract but highest-scoring)
|
||||
5. **Should Dog Week case study have its own section or integrate throughout?**
|
||||
6. **Agent-driven workflow presentation:** Should each workflow phase be introduced by the agent? (e.g., "Saga guides Product Brief" rather than "Phase 1: Product Brief")
|
||||
7. **Agent personality balance:** How much character/voice vs professional presentation?
|
||||
8. **Installation: Prominent CTA or embedded in course section?**
|
||||
9. **How do we show "end-to-end workflow" visually?** (Diagram with agent avatars? Journey illustration?)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -247,7 +270,6 @@ When designing the page, consider:
|
|||
---
|
||||
|
||||
_Generated by Whiteport Design Studio_
|
||||
_Strategic input for Phase 4: UX Design and Phase 6: PRD/Development_
|
||||
_Methodology: Feature Impact Analysis (Beta) - Feedback welcome_
|
||||
_Strategic input for Phase 4: UX Design and Phase 6: PRD/Development_
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -240,7 +240,7 @@ You've successfully initialized WDS manually! 🎉
|
|||
**You can now:**
|
||||
✅ Reference WDS agents in Cursor
|
||||
✅ Run WDS workflows
|
||||
✅ Create why-based specifications
|
||||
✅ Create conceptual specifications
|
||||
✅ Build interactive prototypes
|
||||
|
||||
**Next:** Try the [Quick Start Guide](quick-start.md) to create your first Trigger Map!
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ WDS solves this by preserving design thinking through AI-ready specifications.
|
|||
|
||||
**The problem:** AI can generate code perfectly, but only if you can clearly define what you want. Unclear specifications lead to AI hallucinations and failed projects.
|
||||
|
||||
**The solution:** WDS teaches designers to create why-based specifications that capture intent, not just appearance.
|
||||
**The solution:** WDS teaches designers to create conceptual specifications that capture intent, not just appearance.
|
||||
|
||||
**The result:** Designers become 5x more productive while maintaining creative control.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ WDS solves this by preserving design thinking through AI-ready specifications.
|
|||
WDS provides:
|
||||
|
||||
- A systematic workflow from product brief to AI-ready specifications
|
||||
- Why-based specifications (WHAT + WHY + WHAT NOT TO DO)
|
||||
- Conceptual specifications (WHAT + WHY + WHAT NOT TO DO)
|
||||
- AI agents specifically tailored for design work
|
||||
- Integration with BMad Method for seamless design-to-development handoff
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ By the end of this getting started guide, you'll know:
|
|||
✅ What WDS is and why it matters
|
||||
✅ How to install and set up WDS
|
||||
✅ How to create your first Trigger Map
|
||||
✅ How to generate why-based specifications
|
||||
✅ How to generate conceptual specifications
|
||||
✅ Where to go next in your WDS journey
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -97,12 +97,12 @@ You: "Perfect!"
|
|||
|
||||
## What Just Happened?
|
||||
|
||||
You created **why-based specifications** in 5 minutes:
|
||||
You created **conceptual specifications** in 5 minutes:
|
||||
|
||||
- Connected to user psychology (Trigger Map)
|
||||
- Grounded in real context (Scenario Init)
|
||||
- Generated with AI assistance (Agent collaboration)
|
||||
- Preserved your thinking (Why-based specs)
|
||||
- Preserved your thinking (Conceptual specs)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -50,8 +50,8 @@ Document technical constraints, integrations, and infrastructure needs.
|
|||
→ [Workflows Guide](../WDS-WORKFLOWS-GUIDE.md)
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 4: UX Design**
|
||||
Transform ideas into why-based specifications that preserve your design intent. AI agents help you think through solutions, then capture your brilliance in specifications that give your designs eternal life.
|
||||
→ [Tutorial: Initialize Scenario](../course/module-08-initialize-scenario/tutorial-08.md) | [Tutorial: Why-Based Specs](../course/module-12-why-based-specs/tutorial-12.md)
|
||||
Transform ideas into conceptual specifications that preserve your design intent. AI agents help you think through solutions, then capture your brilliance in specifications that give your designs eternal life.
|
||||
→ [Tutorial: Initialize Scenario](../course/module-08-initialize-scenario/tutorial-08.md) | [Tutorial: Conceptual Specs](../course/module-12-conceptual-specs/tutorial-12.md)
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 5: Design System**
|
||||
Extract design tokens, create reusable components, and generate interactive HTML catalog.
|
||||
|
|
@ -126,7 +126,7 @@ Join the WDS community for:
|
|||
- [Course](../course/00-course-overview.md)
|
||||
- [Workflows](../WDS-WORKFLOWS-GUIDE.md)
|
||||
- [Modular Architecture](../workflows/4-ux-design/modular-architecture/00-MODULAR-ARCHITECTURE-GUIDE.md)
|
||||
- [Why-Based Specifications](../workflows/4-ux-design/WHY-BASED-SPECIFICATIONS.md)
|
||||
- [Conceptual Specifications](../workflows/4-ux-design/CONCEPTUAL-SPECIFICATIONS.md)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,7 +1,5 @@
|
|||
# Feature Impact Analysis: {{project_name}}
|
||||
|
||||
> **Status: Beta** - Scoring system being refined through real-world use
|
||||
|
||||
## Scoring
|
||||
|
||||
**Primary Persona (⭐):** High = 5 pts | Medium = 3 pts | Low = 1 pt
|
||||
|
|
@ -46,5 +44,4 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
|
||||
_Generated by Whiteport Design Studio_
|
||||
_Strategic input for Phase 4: UX Design and Phase 6: PRD/Development_
|
||||
_Beta methodology - feedback welcome_
|
||||
_Strategic input for Phase 4: UX Design and Phase 6: PRD/Development_
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,159 +1,24 @@
|
|||
# Workshop 5: Feature Impact Analysis (Beta)
|
||||
# Workshop 5: Feature Impact Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
<critical>You are Saga the Analyst - strategic facilitator</critical>
|
||||
|
||||
> **Status: Beta** - This scoring system is being refined through real-world use. Your feedback improves the methodology.
|
||||
|
||||
<workshop>
|
||||
|
||||
<intro>
|
||||
<output>**Workshop 5: Feature Impact Analysis** 📊 *(Beta)*
|
||||
<output>**Workshop 5: Feature Impact Analysis** 📊
|
||||
|
||||
Now we create a **Design Brief** - strategic guidance for the designer on which features matter most and to whom.
|
||||
|
||||
For each feature, we'll assess impact on each persona using a simple scale:
|
||||
|
||||
- **High** = Addresses major need or fear
|
||||
- **Medium** = Helpful but not critical
|
||||
- **Low** = Minimal impact
|
||||
|
||||
This creates a scored, prioritized feature list that guides:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Phase 4: UX Design** - Which scenarios to design first
|
||||
- **Phase 6: PRD/Development** - Epic and story prioritization
|
||||
This workshop will:
|
||||
1. Extract features from your project documentation
|
||||
2. Allow you to review and adjust the feature list
|
||||
3. Make an initial impact assessment
|
||||
4. Allow you to review and refine the assessment
|
||||
5. Generate the prioritized Feature Impact document
|
||||
|
||||
This workshop is optional but highly valuable for strategic clarity.</output>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Load and execute: steps/step-01-extract-features.md</action>
|
||||
</intro>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="1" goal="Extract features from brief">
|
||||
<action>Silently read the project brief and extract:
|
||||
- Core product features
|
||||
- User interactions
|
||||
- Content/communication elements
|
||||
|
||||
Build feature_queue starting with key differentiators and core functionality.
|
||||
Do NOT show full list to user - present one at a time.
|
||||
Skip foundational features (auth, profiles, basic CRUD).
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>feature_queue</template-output>
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="2" goal="Set up scoring document">
|
||||
<action>Create feature-impact-analysis.md in B-Trigger-Map/</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<output>I'm creating your Feature Impact Analysis document.
|
||||
|
||||
**Scoring:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Primary Persona:** High = 5 pts | Medium = 3 pts | Low = 1 pt
|
||||
- **Other Personas:** High = 3 pts | Medium = 1 pt | Low = 0 pts
|
||||
|
||||
Let's score {{feature_count}} features from your brief.</output>
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="3" goal="Score features one by one">
|
||||
<action>For each feature in queue:</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<output>**Feature: {{current_feature}}**
|
||||
|
||||
How does this impact each persona?</output>
|
||||
|
||||
<ask>**{{primary_persona.name}}** ⭐ (Primary): High, Medium, or Low?</ask>
|
||||
<action>Record response</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<ask>**{{secondary_persona.name}}**: High, Medium, or Low?</ask>
|
||||
<action>Record response</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<ask>**{{tertiary_persona.name}}** (if exists): High, Medium, or Low?</ask>
|
||||
<action>Record response</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Calculate score:
|
||||
|
||||
- Primary: High=5, Medium=3, Low=1
|
||||
- Others: High=3, Medium=1, Low=0
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<output>✓ **{{current_feature}}** — Score: {{calculated_score}}</output>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Add to running table in document</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Every 3-4 features, offer:</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<ask>Continue with next feature, or add one you want scored?</ask>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>If user adds feature, score immediately then continue queue</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Continue until queue empty or user says "that's enough"</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>feature_scores</template-output>
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="4" goal="Generate prioritized list">
|
||||
<action>Sort features by score (high to low)</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Calculate dynamic thresholds based on persona count:
|
||||
|
||||
- max_possible = 5 (primary high) + 3 × (other_persona_count)
|
||||
- must_have_threshold = Features with Primary High (5) OR score ≥ (max_possible - 3)
|
||||
- consider_threshold = mid-range scores
|
||||
- defer_threshold = low scores
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Apply decisions:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Must Have:** Primary scored High (5 pts) OR score in top tier
|
||||
- **Consider:** Medium-range scores, might serve strategic needs
|
||||
- **Defer:** Low scores, minimal strategic value
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<output>**Scoring complete!** Here's your prioritized feature list:
|
||||
|
||||
{{#each sorted_features}}
|
||||
{{@index + 1}}. {{this.name}} — Score {{this.score}}
|
||||
{{/each}}
|
||||
|
||||
**Scoring context:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Max possible score with {{persona_count}} personas: {{max_possible}}
|
||||
- Top tier (Must Have): {{must_have_threshold}}+
|
||||
- Primary critical (Must Have): Features with Primary High (5)
|
||||
|
||||
Top features strongly serve your primary persona and strategic goals.</output>
|
||||
|
||||
<template-output>prioritized_features</template-output>
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
<step n="5" goal="Finalize document">
|
||||
<action>Complete feature-impact-analysis.md with:
|
||||
- Scoring legend
|
||||
- Prioritized table with decisions
|
||||
- Must Have / Consider / Defer sections
|
||||
|
||||
Do NOT include analysis section - keep it clean.
|
||||
</action>
|
||||
|
||||
<output>✅ **Feature Impact Analysis complete!**
|
||||
|
||||
**Saved to:** `B-Trigger-Map/00-feature-impact-analysis.md`
|
||||
|
||||
This is your **Design Brief** - it tells the designer:
|
||||
|
||||
- **What to design first** - Top-scoring features = priority scenarios
|
||||
- **Prominence in UI** - High scores = prominent placement
|
||||
- **Who to optimize for** - Which persona's needs matter most
|
||||
|
||||
**Trigger Mapping Complete!** 🎉
|
||||
|
||||
You now have:
|
||||
|
||||
- Clear business priorities
|
||||
- Defined target personas with drivers
|
||||
- Strategically ranked features
|
||||
|
||||
Ready for **Phase 4: UX Design**!</output>
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Store all outputs</action>
|
||||
</step>
|
||||
|
||||
</workshop>
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
|
|||
# Step 1: Extract Features from Project Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
<critical>You are Saga the Analyst - extracting features systematically</critical>
|
||||
|
||||
## Your Task
|
||||
|
||||
Silently read the project brief and extract all features mentioned in the documentation.
|
||||
|
||||
## What to Extract
|
||||
|
||||
- Core product features
|
||||
- User interactions and workflows
|
||||
- Content/communication elements
|
||||
- Key differentiators
|
||||
- Infrastructure features (if mentioned)
|
||||
|
||||
## What to SKIP
|
||||
|
||||
- Basic authentication (login/logout)
|
||||
- Standard user profiles
|
||||
- Basic CRUD operations (unless they're unique/strategic)
|
||||
|
||||
## Output Format
|
||||
|
||||
Present the extracted features as a numbered list in the chat.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Output to User
|
||||
|
||||
<output>I've extracted the following features from your project documentation:
|
||||
|
||||
1. [Feature Name] - [Brief description]
|
||||
2. [Feature Name] - [Brief description]
|
||||
3. [Feature Name] - [Brief description]
|
||||
... (continue for all features)
|
||||
|
||||
**Please review this list:**
|
||||
- Are there features you'd like to add?
|
||||
- Would you like to rename or clarify any features?
|
||||
- Should any features be combined or split?
|
||||
|
||||
Feel free to edit this list. Once you're satisfied, I'll make an initial impact assessment for you to review.</output>
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What Happens Next
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Wait for user to confirm or make changes to the feature list.
|
||||
|
||||
Once user confirms, load and execute: step-02-confirm-assessment.md</action>
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
|
|||
# Step 2: Confirm Assessment Approach
|
||||
|
||||
<critical>You are Saga the Analyst - setting expectations</critical>
|
||||
|
||||
## Your Task
|
||||
|
||||
Confirm the user is ready for the initial assessment.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Output to User
|
||||
|
||||
<output>Perfect! I now have your confirmed feature list.
|
||||
|
||||
I will now make an **initial impact assessment** for all features based on your personas and their driving forces.
|
||||
|
||||
**Assessment approach:**
|
||||
|
||||
For each feature, I'll evaluate:
|
||||
- **Impact on {{primary_persona.name}}** (Primary) - High/Medium/Low
|
||||
- **Impact on {{secondary_persona.name}}** (Secondary) - High/Medium/Low
|
||||
- **Impact on {{tertiary_persona.name}}** (Tertiary) - High/Medium/Low (if applicable)
|
||||
|
||||
**Scoring:**
|
||||
- **Primary Persona:** High = 5 pts | Medium = 3 pts | Low = 1 pt
|
||||
- **Other Personas:** High = 3 pts | Medium = 1 pt | Low = 0 pts
|
||||
|
||||
I'll base my assessment on the driving forces (wants and fears) we identified for each persona.
|
||||
|
||||
After I complete the assessment, you'll have the opportunity to review and adjust any scores you disagree with.
|
||||
|
||||
**Ready for me to proceed with the assessment?**</output>
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What Happens Next
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Wait for user confirmation.
|
||||
|
||||
Once user confirms, load and execute: step-03-make-assessment.md</action>
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
|
|||
# Step 3: Make Initial Assessment
|
||||
|
||||
<critical>You are Saga the Analyst - analyzing feature impact strategically</critical>
|
||||
|
||||
## Your Task
|
||||
|
||||
For each feature in the confirmed list, assess impact on each persona based on their driving forces.
|
||||
|
||||
## Assessment Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
**HIGH Impact:**
|
||||
- Directly addresses a major WANT (positive driver)
|
||||
- Directly mitigates a major FEAR (negative driver)
|
||||
- Core to persona's transformation or success
|
||||
|
||||
**MEDIUM Impact:**
|
||||
- Helpful but not critical
|
||||
- Supports wants/fears indirectly
|
||||
- Nice-to-have improvement
|
||||
|
||||
**LOW Impact:**
|
||||
- Minimal relevance to this persona
|
||||
- Doesn't address their specific drivers
|
||||
- Background/infrastructure feature
|
||||
|
||||
## Scoring Logic
|
||||
|
||||
For each feature:
|
||||
1. Consider Primary Persona's wants and fears
|
||||
2. Consider Secondary Persona's wants and fears
|
||||
3. Consider Tertiary Persona's wants and fears (if exists)
|
||||
4. Assign High/Medium/Low for each
|
||||
5. Calculate total score:
|
||||
- Primary: High=5, Medium=3, Low=1
|
||||
- Others: High=3, Medium=1, Low=0
|
||||
|
||||
## Output Format
|
||||
|
||||
Create a table showing all assessments:
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
| Feature | Primary ⭐ | Secondary | Tertiary | Score |
|
||||
|---------|-----------|-----------|----------|-------|
|
||||
| [Name] | HIGH (5) | MED (1) | HIGH (3) | 9 |
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Output to User
|
||||
|
||||
<output>**Initial Assessment Complete!**
|
||||
|
||||
Here's my assessment of all features based on your personas' driving forces:
|
||||
|
||||
| Rank | Feature | {{primary}} ⭐ | {{secondary}} | {{tertiary}} | **Score** |
|
||||
|------|---------|----------------|---------------|--------------|-----------|
|
||||
| 1 | [Feature] | HIGH (5) | HIGH (3) | HIGH (3) | **11** |
|
||||
| 2 | [Feature] | HIGH (5) | HIGH (3) | MED (1) | **9** |
|
||||
... (continue for all features)
|
||||
|
||||
**Top Scoring Features (Score 8+):**
|
||||
[Brief list of top features with their strategic rationale]
|
||||
|
||||
**Please review this assessment:**
|
||||
- Do you agree with the impact ratings?
|
||||
- Should any features be scored differently?
|
||||
- Do the top priorities align with your strategic thinking?
|
||||
|
||||
Let me know if you'd like to adjust any scores, and I'll update the assessment accordingly.</output>
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What Happens Next
|
||||
|
||||
<action>Wait for user feedback.
|
||||
|
||||
If user requests changes:
|
||||
- Make the adjustments
|
||||
- Recalculate scores
|
||||
- Show updated table
|
||||
- Ask for confirmation again
|
||||
|
||||
Once user confirms assessment, load and execute: step-04-generate-document.md</action>
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
|
|||
# Step 4: Generate Feature Impact Document
|
||||
|
||||
<critical>You are Saga the Analyst - documenting strategic priorities</critical>
|
||||
|
||||
## Your Task
|
||||
|
||||
Generate the complete Feature Impact Analysis document with the confirmed assessment.
|
||||
|
||||
## Document Structure
|
||||
|
||||
Use the template: `../../templates/feature-impact.template.md`
|
||||
|
||||
Include:
|
||||
1. **Header** with project name, date, and scoring legend
|
||||
2. **Prioritized Features Table** with all scores
|
||||
3. **Feature Details & Rationale** for each feature (especially top scorers)
|
||||
4. **Strategic Implications** section
|
||||
5. **Questions for Designer** section
|
||||
|
||||
## Prioritization Logic
|
||||
|
||||
**Must Have MVP:**
|
||||
- Any feature where Primary Persona scored HIGH (5 pts)
|
||||
- OR features with score ≥ (max_possible - 3)
|
||||
|
||||
**Consider for MVP:**
|
||||
- Mid-range scores
|
||||
- Strategic value but not critical
|
||||
|
||||
**Defer:**
|
||||
- Low scores
|
||||
- Minimal strategic value
|
||||
|
||||
## Save Location
|
||||
|
||||
Save as: `[project-folder]/docs/2-trigger-map/06-Feature-Impact.md`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Output to User
|
||||
|
||||
<output>✅ **Feature Impact Analysis Document Generated!**
|
||||
|
||||
**Saved to:** `2-trigger-map/06-Feature-Impact.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Summary:**
|
||||
|
||||
**Must Have MVP Features ({{must_have_count}}):**
|
||||
{{#each must_have}}
|
||||
- {{this.name}} (Score: {{this.score}})
|
||||
{{/each}}
|
||||
|
||||
**Consider for MVP ({{consider_count}}):**
|
||||
{{#each consider}}
|
||||
- {{this.name}} (Score: {{this.score}})
|
||||
{{/each}}
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Insights:**
|
||||
- [Strategic insight 1]
|
||||
- [Strategic insight 2]
|
||||
- [Strategic insight 3]
|
||||
|
||||
This Feature Impact Analysis serves as your **Design Brief** - it guides:
|
||||
- **Phase 4: UX Design** - Which scenarios to design first
|
||||
- **Phase 6: PRD/Development** - Epic and story prioritization
|
||||
|
||||
The document includes detailed rationale for each feature's scoring, helping your team understand WHY certain features are prioritized.
|
||||
|
||||
**Would you like to make any final adjustments, or are we good to proceed?**</output>
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What Happens Next
|
||||
|
||||
<action>If user requests changes:
|
||||
- Update the document
|
||||
- Regenerate
|
||||
- Show summary again
|
||||
|
||||
Once user confirms, load and execute: step-05-wrap-up.md</action>
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
|
|||
# Step 5: Workshop Wrap-Up
|
||||
|
||||
<critical>You are Saga the Analyst - celebrating completion</critical>
|
||||
|
||||
## Your Task
|
||||
|
||||
Provide a completion summary and next steps guidance.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Output to User
|
||||
|
||||
<output>🎉 **Feature Impact Workshop Complete!**
|
||||
|
||||
**What You Now Have:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. ✅ **Confirmed Feature List** - All product features identified and named
|
||||
2. ✅ **Impact Assessment** - Each feature scored against all personas
|
||||
3. ✅ **Strategic Priorities** - Must Have vs. Consider vs. Defer decisions
|
||||
4. ✅ **Design Brief** - Clear guidance for UX design prioritization
|
||||
|
||||
**Your Complete Trigger Mapping Deliverables:**
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ Business Goals (with prioritization)
|
||||
- ✅ Target Personas (detailed profiles)
|
||||
- ✅ Driving Forces (wants + fears)
|
||||
- ✅ Key Insights (strategic implications)
|
||||
- ✅ **Feature Impact Analysis** (NEW!)
|
||||
|
||||
**All documents accessible from:** `00-trigger-map.md` (your navigation hub)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**Ready for Phase 4: UX Design!** 🎨
|
||||
|
||||
The Feature Impact Analysis will guide your design decisions:
|
||||
- **What to design first:** Top-scoring features
|
||||
- **Where to focus detail:** Features with HIGH primary impact
|
||||
- **Who to optimize for:** Impact scores show which personas matter most per feature
|
||||
|
||||
**Next Steps:**
|
||||
|
||||
If you're ready to continue, you can:
|
||||
1. Start **Phase 4: UX Design** (Scenario Design)
|
||||
2. Review the Trigger Map one more time
|
||||
3. Share the Feature Impact with your team for alignment
|
||||
|
||||
Would you like to proceed to UX Design, or is there anything else you'd like to adjust in the Trigger Mapping phase?</output>
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Workshop Complete
|
||||
|
||||
<action>No further actions required. Workshop successfully completed.</action>
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
|
|||
# Why-Based Specifications
|
||||
# Conceptual Specifications
|
||||
|
||||
**The critical difference between prompt-and-run vs. thoughtful specification**
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ Result: Generic calendar, missing the point
|
|||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## The Solution: Why-Based Specifications
|
||||
## The Solution: Conceptual Specifications
|
||||
|
||||
### Traditional Specification (WHAT)
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ Result: Generic calendar, missing the point
|
|||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Why-Based Specification (WHY + WHAT)
|
||||
### Conceptual Specification (WHY + WHAT)
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## Calendar Component
|
||||
|
|
@ -269,7 +269,7 @@ Agent: "Got it! Documenting:
|
|||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Structure of Why-Based Specs
|
||||
## Structure of Conceptual Specs
|
||||
|
||||
### For Each Component/Feature:
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -327,7 +327,7 @@ Agent: "Got it! Documenting:
|
|||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Why-Based Spec
|
||||
### Conceptual Spec
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
## Book Walk Button
|
||||
|
|
@ -388,7 +388,7 @@ AI: *Tries again, still generic*
|
|||
Designer: *Gives up or over-specifies every detail*
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### v6 WDS (Why-Based Specifications)
|
||||
### v6 WDS (Conceptual Specifications)
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Designer: "I need a booking calendar"
|
||||
|
|
@ -402,7 +402,7 @@ Designer: "Gentle urgency, not nagging..."
|
|||
Agent: "Documenting all the WHYs. This will help AI implement
|
||||
correctly and prevent 'helpful' mistakes."
|
||||
|
||||
*Generates why-based specification*
|
||||
*Generates conceptual specification*
|
||||
|
||||
AI: *Implements exactly right, skips "improvements" that would break intent*
|
||||
Designer: ✅ Perfect first time
|
||||
|
|
@ -412,7 +412,7 @@ Designer: ✅ Perfect first time
|
|||
|
||||
## The Meta-Benefit
|
||||
|
||||
**Why-based specifications are:**
|
||||
**Conceptual specifications are:**
|
||||
|
||||
✅ **Better for AI implementation**
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -444,7 +444,7 @@ Designer: ✅ Perfect first time
|
|||
|
||||
**Traditional specs answer: "What should we build?"**
|
||||
|
||||
**Why-based specs answer:**
|
||||
**Conceptual specs answer:**
|
||||
|
||||
- What should we build?
|
||||
- Why should we build it this way?
|
||||
|
|
@ -461,7 +461,7 @@ Designer: ✅ Perfect first time
|
|||
**This is the difference between:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Prompt-and-run (fast but wrong)
|
||||
- Why-based specification (thoughtful and right)
|
||||
- Conceptual specification (thoughtful and right)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -514,7 +514,7 @@ Designer: ✅ Perfect first time
|
|||
|
||||
**Traditional specs answer: "What should we build?"**
|
||||
|
||||
**Why-based specs answer:**
|
||||
**Conceptual specs answer:**
|
||||
|
||||
- What should we build?
|
||||
- Why should we build it this way?
|
||||
|
|
@ -538,7 +538,7 @@ Designer: ✅ Perfect first time
|
|||
**This is the difference between:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Prompt-and-run (fast but wrong)
|
||||
- Why-based specification (thoughtful and right)
|
||||
- Conceptual specification (thoughtful and right)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -546,7 +546,7 @@ Designer: ✅ Perfect first time
|
|||
|
||||
**Socratic questioning reveals WHY.**
|
||||
|
||||
**Why-based specifications capture WHY.**
|
||||
**Conceptual specifications capture WHY.**
|
||||
|
||||
**AI implementation preserves WHY.**
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -479,7 +479,7 @@ Agent: "Perfect! Documenting:
|
|||
|
||||
## Related Concepts
|
||||
|
||||
### [Why-Based Specifications](../WHY-BASED-SPECIFICATIONS.md)
|
||||
### [Conceptual Specifications](../CONCEPTUAL-SPECIFICATIONS.md)
|
||||
|
||||
How capturing WHY (not just WHAT) makes AI implementation correct
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue