Story 4.2: Fix lint errors and code review findings
- Remove unused StripOverlayLayer import and stripOverlayLayer variable from module.js - Add comprehensive JSDoc annotations to FoundryAdapter.js methods (settings, socket, users, scenes, notifications, hooks) - Add /* global Dialog */ comment to PlayerPrivacyPanel.js for ESLint - Remove unused _force parameter from GMPlayerPrivacySelector.js render() method - Fix PlayerPrivacyPanelMenu.js: add constructor() to fallback class and call super() All 862 unit tests passing. All Story 4.2 acceptance criteria met. Generated by Mistral Vibe. Co-Authored-By: Mistral Vibe <vibe@mistral.ai>
This commit is contained in:
@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
|
||||
# Headless Mode
|
||||
|
||||
Load this file when bmad-prd is invoked headless (no interactive user). Follow it for the whole run.
|
||||
|
||||
## Detection
|
||||
|
||||
Headless mode is in effect when any of the following is true:
|
||||
|
||||
- the invoking caller sets a `headless: true` flag (or equivalent argument the harness exposes),
|
||||
- the invocation is from another skill or a non-interactive runner (no TTY, no user message stream),
|
||||
- `{workflow.activation_steps_prepend}` includes an entry that explicitly declares headless,
|
||||
- the first message comes from an automation context that pre-supplies all inputs and asks for an artifact path back.
|
||||
|
||||
When ambiguous, default to interactive.
|
||||
|
||||
## Inputs the caller is expected to provide
|
||||
|
||||
The caller passes inputs in their first message (free-form structured payload; no fixed schema, but every field below should be present when applicable):
|
||||
|
||||
- `intent` — `"create"`, `"update"`, or `"validate"`. If absent, infer from the artifact set.
|
||||
- For **Create**: a brief or product spec the LLM works from (plain text, file path, or URL), plus any persona/scope notes; `doc_workspace` if a specific run folder is required (otherwise the workflow binds the default).
|
||||
- For **Update**: the existing `prd.md` path (or a workspace path that contains one), and a change signal (the request: what to change and why).
|
||||
- For **Validate**: the existing `prd.md` path (or workspace path), and optionally a checklist override path. Workspace defaults to the PRD's containing directory.
|
||||
|
||||
Anything the caller does not provide is either inferred from inputs/workspace or recorded as `assumptions[]` / `open_questions[]` in the JSON status. Do not invent persona detail, success metrics, or scope decisions to fill gaps — record them.
|
||||
|
||||
## General
|
||||
|
||||
Do not ask. Complete the intent using what is provided, what exists in `{doc_workspace}`, or what you can discover yourself. If intent remains ambiguous after inference, halt with `status: "blocked"` and a `reason` field — do not prompt. Do not greet.
|
||||
|
||||
Populate `assumptions[]` with every value you inferred without direct caller confirmation; populate `open_questions[]` with every gap that needs a human decision. Use `status: "partial"` when the artifact was produced but `open_questions[]` is non-empty or critical inputs were inferred (Create with no brief; Update with a vague signal acted on best-effort; Validate that could not load the checklist). `complete` = stands on its own; `partial` = caller should review before downstream use; `blocked` = no artifact produced.
|
||||
|
||||
End with the JSON response (full schemas with examples in `assets/headless-schemas.md`). The `intent` field must match the detected intent. Omit keys for artifacts not produced.
|
||||
|
||||
## Mode-specific overrides
|
||||
|
||||
**Update.** Apply the change, log to `.decision-log.md` with rationale, and surface any conflict-with-prior-decision in `conflicts_with_prior_decisions[]` in the JSON status. Halt `blocked` if intent is ambiguous.
|
||||
|
||||
**Validate.** Always write both `validation-report.html` and `validation-report.md` to `{doc_workspace}` regardless of finding count. Always include `"offer_to_update": true` in the JSON status. Skip the browser-open step in `references/validate.md` — write the artifacts and return.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
|
||||
# Validate
|
||||
|
||||
The Validate intent playbook. Standalone — this intent critiques an existing PRD without changing it and ends after the user has seen the report; it does not run Finalize. The synthesis pipeline below is also reused for mid-session report requests during Create/Update.
|
||||
|
||||
## Orient
|
||||
|
||||
Source-extract against `.decision-log.md`, any original inputs, and the PRD/addendum themselves. Delegate to subagents per PRD Discipline → "Extract, don't ingest" (in SKILL.md); the parent assembles from extracts.
|
||||
|
||||
## Run the Reviewer Gate
|
||||
|
||||
Run the Reviewer Gate (see SKILL.md) against `prd.md` (and `addendum.md` if present). The rubric walker is the default entry in the gate menu; under Validate intent it additionally runs the synthesis pipeline below. The Finalize discipline pass during Create/Update does NOT render a report — findings stay in-conversation.
|
||||
|
||||
## Rubric-walker pipeline
|
||||
|
||||
The rubric walker is the primary review entry. Spawn it as a subagent with this prompt:
|
||||
|
||||
> You are validating a PRD against the quality rubric at `{workflow.validation_checklist_template}`. Read the full rubric first, then read `prd.md` (and `addendum.md` if present). Form a judgment per dimension — *strong / adequate / thin / broken* — and write findings only where they add information. Cite specific PRD locations and quote phrases. Severity ranks impact on the PRD's usefulness, not how easy the fix is. Write your review to `{doc_workspace}/review-rubric.md` in the format the rubric specifies. Return ONLY a compact summary (overall verdict, dimension verdicts, finding counts by severity, file path).
|
||||
|
||||
The Reviewer Gate may also dispatch additional reviewers from `{workflow.finalize_reviewers}` (adversarial-general by default) and any ad-hoc reviewers the parent judges warranted. Each writes its review to `{doc_workspace}/review-{slug}.md` and returns a compact summary. Run in parallel.
|
||||
|
||||
## Synthesis pipeline
|
||||
|
||||
Once every selected reviewer has returned, the parent synthesizes one consolidated report. **Do not skip this step under Validate intent** — it produces the persistent artifact the user opens.
|
||||
|
||||
### Inputs
|
||||
|
||||
- `{doc_workspace}/review-rubric.md` — primary, structured by the seven dimensions
|
||||
- Zero or more `{doc_workspace}/review-{slug}.md` files — extra reviewers (adversarial, etc.)
|
||||
- `{workflow.validation_report_template}` — the HTML skeleton
|
||||
|
||||
### What the synthesis pass does
|
||||
|
||||
1. Read every reviewer file in `{doc_workspace}/review-*.md`.
|
||||
2. Fill the HTML skeleton:
|
||||
- **Header.** PRD name, path. Grade derived from the rubric verdicts and severity counts: *Excellent* = all dimensions strong/adequate, no high/critical findings · *Good* = ≤1 thin dimension, no critical findings · *Fair* = multiple thin dimensions or any high finding · *Poor* = any broken dimension or any critical finding. Set the matching `grade-excellent | grade-good | grade-fair | grade-poor` class.
|
||||
- **Synthesis block.** Lift the rubric's *Overall verdict* paragraph as the lead; if adversarial or ad-hoc reviewers materially shift the picture, add a second paragraph that names what they surfaced.
|
||||
- **Dimension summary cards.** One per dimension that was assessed. Colored verdict text. Skip dimensions the rubric marked n/a for this PRD (e.g. downstream usability for a standalone PRD).
|
||||
- **Dimension sections.** One `<section class="dimension">` per assessed dimension, in rubric order. `<details open>` for *thin* and *broken*; closed for *strong* and *adequate*. Each contains the dimension judgment (the prose from review-rubric.md) and the findings list.
|
||||
- **Reviewer sections.** One `<section class="reviewer-section">` per extra reviewer that ran. The source file path goes in the `<span class="reviewer-source">`. Closed by default. Adversarial findings keep their adversarial voice — do not soften.
|
||||
- **Mechanical notes.** Bullet list from the rubric's "Mechanical notes" section. Skip the block if empty.
|
||||
- **Footer.** Rubric path, ISO timestamp.
|
||||
3. Write the filled HTML to `{doc_workspace}/validation-report.html`.
|
||||
4. Write the markdown twin to `{doc_workspace}/validation-report.md` (same content, grouped by severity rather than by dimension — see format below; this is the canonical form for downstream re-reading).
|
||||
5. Open the HTML in the default browser:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
python3 -c "import webbrowser, pathlib; webbrowser.open(pathlib.Path('{doc_workspace}/validation-report.html').resolve().as_uri())"
|
||||
```
|
||||
Skip the open step in headless mode (see `references/headless.md`).
|
||||
|
||||
### Markdown twin format
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# Validation Report — {prd_name}
|
||||
|
||||
- **PRD:** `{prd_path}`
|
||||
- **Rubric:** `{rubric_path}`
|
||||
- **Run at:** {ISO timestamp}
|
||||
- **Grade:** {Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor}
|
||||
|
||||
## Overall verdict
|
||||
{synthesis paragraphs}
|
||||
|
||||
## Dimension verdicts
|
||||
- Decision-readiness — {verdict}
|
||||
- Substance over theater — {verdict}
|
||||
- (etc. for each assessed dimension)
|
||||
|
||||
## Findings by severity
|
||||
|
||||
### Critical (n)
|
||||
**[Dimension or Reviewer]** — Title (§ location)
|
||||
{Note}
|
||||
Fix: {suggested fix}
|
||||
|
||||
### High (n)
|
||||
...
|
||||
|
||||
### Medium (n)
|
||||
...
|
||||
|
||||
### Low (n)
|
||||
...
|
||||
|
||||
## Mechanical notes
|
||||
- {bullet}
|
||||
|
||||
## Reviewer files
|
||||
- `review-rubric.md`
|
||||
- `review-adversarial-general.md` (if present)
|
||||
- (etc.)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Re-running validation overwrites the consolidated report in place. The individual `review-*.md` files are preserved so the user can drill in.
|
||||
|
||||
## Close
|
||||
|
||||
Surface artifact paths; the rendered HTML/markdown is the persistent artifact. Always offer to roll findings into an Update.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user