Merge 1a85069b75 into cc300b3940

feat(quick-dev): add Review Trail generation to step 5

src/bmm/agents/bmad-agent-analyst/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-type: agent
+type: skill
 name: bmad-agent-analyst
 displayName: Mary
 title: Business Analyst

src/bmm/agents/bmad-agent-architect/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-type: agent
+type: skill
 name: bmad-agent-architect
 displayName: Winston
 title: Architect

src/bmm/agents/bmad-agent-dev/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-type: agent
+type: skill
 name: bmad-agent-dev
 displayName: Amelia
 title: Developer Agent

src/bmm/agents/bmad-agent-pm/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-type: agent
+type: skill
 name: bmad-agent-pm
 displayName: John
 title: Product Manager

src/bmm/agents/bmad-agent-qa/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-type: agent
+type: skill
 name: bmad-agent-qa
 displayName: Quinn
 title: QA Engineer

src/bmm/agents/bmad-agent-quick-flow-solo-dev/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-type: agent
+type: skill
 name: bmad-agent-quick-flow-solo-dev
 displayName: Barry
 title: Quick Flow Solo Dev

src/bmm/agents/bmad-agent-sm/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-type: agent
+type: skill
 name: bmad-agent-sm
 displayName: Bob
 title: Scrum Master

src/bmm/agents/bmad-agent-tech-writer/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-type: agent
+type: skill
 name: bmad-agent-tech-writer
 displayName: Paige
 title: Technical Writer

src/bmm/agents/bmad-agent-ux-designer/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-type: agent
+type: skill
 name: bmad-agent-ux-designer
 displayName: Sally
 title: UX Designer

src/bmm/agents/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml

@@ -1,39 +0,0 @@
-analyst.agent.yaml:
-  canonicalId: bmad-analyst
-  type: agent
-  description: "Business Analyst for market research, competitive analysis, and requirements elicitation"
-
-architect.agent.yaml:
-  canonicalId: bmad-architect
-  type: agent
-  description: "Architect for distributed systems, cloud infrastructure, and API design"
-
-dev.agent.yaml:
-  canonicalId: bmad-dev
-  type: agent
-  description: "Developer Agent for story execution, test-driven development, and code implementation"
-
-pm.agent.yaml:
-  canonicalId: bmad-pm
-  type: agent
-  description: "Product Manager for PRD creation, requirements discovery, and stakeholder alignment"
-
-qa.agent.yaml:
-  canonicalId: bmad-qa
-  type: agent
-  description: "QA Engineer for test automation, API testing, and E2E testing"
-
-quick-flow-solo-dev.agent.yaml:
-  canonicalId: bmad-quick-flow-solo-dev
-  type: agent
-  description: "Quick Flow Solo Dev for rapid spec creation and lean implementation"
-
-sm.agent.yaml:
-  canonicalId: bmad-sm
-  type: agent
-  description: "Scrum Master for sprint planning, story preparation, and agile ceremonies"
-
-ux-designer.agent.yaml:
-  canonicalId: bmad-ux-designer
-  type: agent
-  description: "UX Designer for user research, interaction design, and UI patterns"

src/bmm/workflows/bmad-quick-flow/bmad-quick-dev-new-preview/step-05-present.md

@@ -10,8 +10,51 @@
 
 ## INSTRUCTIONS
 
-1. Change `{spec_file}` status to `done` in the frontmatter.
-2. If version control is available and the tree is dirty, create a local commit with a conventional message derived from the spec title.
-3. Display summary of your work to the user, including the commit hash if one was created. Advise on how to review the changes. Offer to push and/or create a pull request.
+### Generate Suggested Review Order
+
+Determine what changed:
+
+- **Plan-code-review:** Read `{baseline_commit}` from `{spec_file}` frontmatter and construct the diff of all changes since that commit.
+- **One-shot:** No baseline exists. Use the files you created or modified during implementation.
+
+**Plan-code-review:** Append the review order as a `## Suggested Review Order` section to `{spec_file}` **after the last existing section**. Do not modify the Code Map.
+
+**One-shot:** Display the review order directly in conversation output.
+
+Build the trail as an ordered sequence of **stops** — clickable `path:line` references with brief framing — optimized for a human reviewer reading top-down to understand the change:
+
+1. **Order by concern, not by file.** Group stops by the conceptual concern they address (e.g., "validation logic", "schema change", "UI binding"). A single file may appear under multiple concerns.
+2. **Lead with the entry point** — the single highest-leverage file:line a reviewer should look at first to grasp the design intent.
+3. **Inside each concern**, order stops from most important / architecturally interesting to supporting. Lightly bias toward higher-risk or boundary-crossing stops.
+4. **End with peripherals** — tests, config, types, and other supporting changes come last.
+5. **Every code reference is a clickable `vscode://file/` link.** Format each stop as a markdown link: `[short-name:line](vscode://file/absolute/path:line:1)`. Use the file's basename (or shortest unambiguous suffix) as the link text.
+6. **Each stop gets one ultra-concise line of framing** (≤15 words) — why this approach was chosen here and what it achieves in the context of the change. No paragraphs.
+
+Format each stop as framing first, link on the next indented line:
+
+```markdown
+## Suggested Review Order
+
+**{Concern name}**
+
+- {one-line framing}
+  [`file.ts:42`](vscode://file/absolute/path/to/file.ts:42:1)
+
+- {one-line framing}
+  [`other.ts:17`](vscode://file/absolute/path/to/other.ts:17:1)
+
+**{Next concern}**
+
+- {one-line framing}
+  [`file.ts:88`](vscode://file/absolute/path/to/file.ts:88:1)
+```
+
+When there is only one concern, omit the bold label — just list the stops directly.
+
+### Commit and Present
+
+1. **Plan-code-review:** Change `{spec_file}` status to `done` in the frontmatter.
+2. If version control is available and the tree is dirty, create a local commit with a conventional message derived from the spec title (plan-code-review) or the intent (one-shot).
+3. Display summary of your work to the user, including the commit hash if one was created. Advise on how to review the changes — for plan-code-review, mention that `{spec_file}` now contains a Suggested Review Order. Offer to push and/or create a pull request.
 
 Workflow complete.

src/core/tasks/validate-workflow/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+---
+name: validate-workflow
+description: "Run a checklist against a document with thorough analysis and produce a validation report"
+---
+
+Follow the instructions in [workflow.md](workflow.md).

src/core/tasks/validate-workflow/bmad-skill-manifest.yaml

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

src/core/tasks/validate-workflow/workflow.md

@@ -0,0 +1,88 @@
+# Validate Workflow Output
+
+**Goal:** Run a checklist against a document with thorough analysis and produce a validation report.
+
+**Inputs:**
+
+- **workflow** (required) — Workflow path containing `checklist.md`
+- **checklist** (optional) — Checklist to validate against (defaults to the workflow's `checklist.md`)
+- **document** (optional) — Document to validate (ask user if not specified)
+
+## STEPS
+
+### Step 1: Setup
+
+- If checklist not provided, load `checklist.md` from the workflow location
+- Try to fuzzy-match files similar to the input document name; if document not provided or unsure, ask user: "Which document should I validate?"
+- Load both the checklist and document
+
+### Step 2: Validate (CRITICAL)
+
+**For EVERY checklist item, WITHOUT SKIPPING ANY:**
+
+1. Read the requirement carefully
+2. Search the document for evidence along with any ancillary loaded documents or artifacts (quotes with line numbers)
+3. Analyze deeply — look for explicit AND implied coverage
+
+**Mark each item as:**
+
+- **PASS** `✓` — Requirement fully met (provide evidence)
+- **PARTIAL** `⚠` — Some coverage but incomplete (explain gaps)
+- **FAIL** `✗` — Not met or severely deficient (explain why)
+- **N/A** `➖` — Not applicable (explain reason)
+
+**DO NOT SKIP ANY SECTIONS OR ITEMS.**
+
+### Step 3: Generate Report
+
+Create `validation-report-{timestamp}.md` in the document's folder with the following format:
+
+```markdown
+# Validation Report
+
+**Document:** {document-path}
+**Checklist:** {checklist-path}
+**Date:** {timestamp}
+
+## Summary
+
+- Overall: X/Y passed (Z%)
+- Critical Issues: {count}
+
+## Section Results
+
+### {Section Name}
+
+Pass Rate: X/Y (Z%)
+
+[MARK] {Item description}
+Evidence: {Quote with line# or explanation}
+{If FAIL/PARTIAL: Impact: {why this matters}}
+
+## Failed Items
+
+{All ✗ items with recommendations}
+
+## Partial Items
+
+{All ⚠ items with what's missing}
+
+## Recommendations
+
+1. Must Fix: {critical failures}
+2. Should Improve: {important gaps}
+3. Consider: {minor improvements}
+```
+
+### Step 4: Summary for User
+
+- Present section-by-section summary
+- Highlight all critical issues
+- Provide path to saved report
+- **HALT** — do not continue unless user asks
+
+## HALT CONDITIONS
+
+- HALT after presenting summary in Step 4
+- HALT with error if no checklist is found and none is provided
+- HALT with error if no document is found and user does not specify one