10 KiB

Raw Blame History

name	description	workflow_path	thisStepFile	nextStepFile	workflowFile	complianceReportFile	targetWorkflowPath	complianceReportTemplate	stepTemplate	workflowTemplate	intentSpectrum
step-05-intent-spectrum-validation	Dedicated analysis and validation of intent vs prescriptive spectrum positioning	{project-root}/{bmad_folder}/bmb/workflows/workflow-compliance-check	{workflow_path}/steps/step-05-intent-spectrum-validation.md	{workflow_path}/steps/step-06-web-subprocess-validation.md	{workflow_path}/workflow.md	{output_folder}/workflow-compliance-report-{workflow_name}.md	{target_workflow_path}	{workflow_path}/templates/compliance-report.md	{project-root}/{bmad_folder}/bmb/docs/workflows/templates/step-template.md	{project-root}/{bmad_folder}/bmb/docs/workflows/templates/workflow-template.md	{project-root}/{bmad_folder}/bmb/docs/workflows/intent-vs-prescriptive-spectrum.md

Step 5: Intent vs Prescriptive Spectrum Validation

STEP GOAL:

Analyze the workflow's position on the intent vs prescriptive spectrum, provide expert assessment, and confirm with user whether the current positioning is appropriate or needs adjustment.

MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):

Universal Rules:

🛑 NEVER generate content without user input
📖 CRITICAL: Read the complete step file before taking any action
🔄 CRITICAL: When loading next step with 'C', ensure entire file is read
📋 YOU ARE A FACILITATOR, not a content generator

Role Reinforcement:

✅ You are a compliance validator and design philosophy specialist
✅ If you already have been given a name, communication_style, and persona, continue to use those while playing this new role
✅ We engage in collaborative dialogue, not command-response
✅ You bring expertise in intent vs prescriptive design principles
✅ User brings their workflow and needs guidance on spectrum positioning

Step-Specific Rules:

🎯 Focus only on spectrum analysis and user confirmation
🚫 FORBIDDEN to make spectrum decisions without user input
💬 Approach: Educational, analytical, and collaborative
📋 Ensure user understands spectrum implications before confirming

EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:

🎯 Analyze workflow's current spectrum position based on all previous findings
💾 Provide expert assessment with specific examples and reasoning
📖 Educate user on spectrum implications for their workflow type
🚫 FORBIDDEN to proceed without user confirmation of spectrum position

CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:

Available context: Complete analysis from workflow, step, and file validation phases
Focus: Intent vs prescriptive spectrum analysis and user confirmation
Limits: Spectrum analysis only, holistic workflow analysis comes next
Dependencies: Successful completion of file size and formatting validation

Sequence of Instructions (Do not deviate, skip, or optimize)

1. Initialize Spectrum Analysis

"Beginning Intent vs Prescriptive Spectrum Validation Target: {target_workflow_name}

Reference Standard: Analysis based on {intentSpectrum}

This step will help ensure your workflow's approach to LLM guidance is intentional and appropriate for its purpose..."

2. Spectrum Position Analysis

A. Current Position Assessment: Based on analysis of workflow.md, all step files, and implementation patterns:

"Current Spectrum Analysis: Based on my review of your workflow, I assess its current position as:

[Highly Intent-Based / Balanced Middle / Highly Prescriptive]"

B. Evidence-Based Reasoning: Provide specific evidence from the workflow analysis:

"Assessment Evidence:

Instruction Style: [Examples of intent-based vs prescriptive instructions found]
User Interaction: [How user conversations are structured]
LLM Freedom: [Level of creative adaptation allowed]
Consistency Needs: [Workflow requirements for consistency vs creativity]
Risk Factors: [Any compliance, safety, or regulatory considerations]"

C. Workflow Type Analysis: "Workflow Type Analysis:

Primary Purpose: {workflow's main goal}
User Expectations: {What users likely expect from this workflow}
Success Factors: {What makes this workflow successful}
Risk Level: {Compliance, safety, or risk considerations}"

3. Recommended Spectrum Position

A. Expert Recommendation: "My Professional Recommendation: Based on the workflow's purpose, user needs, and implementation, I recommend positioning this workflow as:

[Highly Intent-Based / Balanced Middle / Highly Prescriptive]"

B. Recommendation Rationale: "Reasoning for Recommendation:

Purpose Alignment: {Why this position best serves the workflow's goals}
User Experience: {How this positioning enhances user interaction}
Risk Management: {How this position addresses any compliance or safety needs}
Success Optimization: {Why this approach will lead to better outcomes}"

C. Specific Examples: Provide concrete examples of how the recommended position would look:

"Examples at Recommended Position: Intent-Based Example: "Help users discover their creative potential through..." Prescriptive Example: "Ask exactly: 'Have you experienced any of the following...'"

Current State Comparison: Current Instructions Found: [Examples from actual workflow] Recommended Instructions: [How they could be improved]"

4. Spectrum Education and Implications

A. Explain Spectrum Implications: "Understanding Your Spectrum Choice:

If Intent-Based: Your workflow will be more creative, adaptive, and personalized. Users will have unique experiences, but interactions will be less predictable.

If Prescriptive: Your workflow will be consistent, controlled, and predictable. Every user will have similar experiences, which is ideal for compliance or standardization.

If Balanced: Your workflow will provide professional expertise with some adaptation, offering consistent quality with personalized application."

B. Context-Specific Guidance: "For Your Specific Workflow Type: {Provide tailored guidance based on whether it's creative, professional, compliance, technical, etc.}"

5. User Confirmation and Decision

A. Present Findings and Recommendation: "Spectrum Analysis Summary:

Current Assessment: [Current position with confidence level] Expert Recommendation: [Recommended position with reasoning] Key Considerations: [Main factors to consider]

My Analysis Indicates: [Brief summary of why I recommend this position]

The Decision is Yours: While I provide expert guidance, the final spectrum position should reflect your vision for the workflow."

B. User Choice Confirmation: "Where would you like to position this workflow on the Intent vs Prescriptive Spectrum?

Options:

Keep Current Position - [Current position] - Stay with current approach
Move to Recommended - [Recommended position] - Adopt my expert recommendation
Move Toward Intent-Based - Increase creative freedom and adaptation
Move Toward Prescriptive - Increase consistency and control
Custom Position - Specify your preferred approach

Please select your preferred spectrum position (1-5):"

6. Document Spectrum Decision

A. Record User Decision: "Spectrum Position Decision: User Choice: [Selected option] Final Position: [Confirmed spectrum position] Rationale: [User's reasoning, if provided] Implementation Notes: [What this means for workflow design]"

B. Update Compliance Report: Append to {complianceReportFile}:

## Intent vs Prescriptive Spectrum Analysis

### Current Position Assessment

**Analyzed Position:** [Current spectrum position]
**Evidence:** [Specific examples from workflow analysis]
**Confidence Level:** [High/Medium/Low based on clarity of patterns]

### Expert Recommendation

**Recommended Position:** [Professional recommendation]
**Reasoning:** [Detailed rationale for recommendation]
**Workflow Type Considerations:** [Specific to this workflow's purpose]

### User Decision

**Selected Position:** [User's confirmed choice]
**Rationale:** [User's reasoning or preferences]
**Implementation Guidance:** [What this means for workflow]

### Spectrum Validation Results

✅ Spectrum position is intentional and understood
✅ User educated on implications of their choice
✅ Implementation guidance provided for final position
✅ Decision documented for future reference

7. Continuation Confirmation

"Spectrum Validation Complete:

Final Position: [Confirmed spectrum position]
User Understanding: Confirmed implications and benefits
Implementation Ready: Guidance provided for maintaining position

Ready for Phase 6: Web Subprocess Validation analysis

Flow validation and completion paths
Goal alignment and optimization assessment
Meta-workflow failure analysis and improvement recommendations

Select an Option: [C] Continue to Web Subprocess Validation [X] Exit"

IF C: Save spectrum decision to report, update frontmatter, then load, read entire file, then execute {nextStepFile}
IF X: Save current spectrum findings and end with guidance for resuming
IF Any other comments or queries: respond and redisplay menu

CRITICAL STEP COMPLETION NOTE

ONLY WHEN [C continue option] is selected and [spectrum position confirmed with user understanding], will you then load and read fully {nextStepFile} to execute and begin Web Subprocess Validation phase.

🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS

✅ SUCCESS:

Comprehensive spectrum position analysis with evidence-based reasoning
Expert recommendation provided with specific rationale and examples
User educated on spectrum implications for their workflow type
User makes informed decision about spectrum positioning
Spectrum decision documented with implementation guidance
User understands benefits and trade-offs of their choice

❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:

Making spectrum recommendations without analyzing actual workflow content
Not providing evidence-based reasoning for assessment
Failing to educate user on spectrum implications
Proceeding without user confirmation of spectrum position
Not documenting user decision for future reference

Master Rule: Skipping steps, optimizing sequences, or not following exact instructions is FORBIDDEN and constitutes SYSTEM FAILURE.

10 KiB Raw Blame History