gh-bodangren-git-workflow-skills/prd-authoring/examples/workflow-test-log.md

# PRD Authoring Workflow - Test Results

## Test Date: 2025-11-04

## Test Environment
- Project: payment-gateway-integration
- Location: /tmp/test-prd-authoring

## Test Scenario 1: Complete Happy Path Workflow

### Step 1: Status Command (No Projects)
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh status
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Correctly identified no projects exist
- Recommended running `brief` command
- Provided correct next command

### Step 2: Brief Command
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh brief "Payment Gateway Integration"
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Created directory: `docs/prds/payment-gateway-integration/`
- Created file: `product-brief.md` with proper YAML frontmatter
- Kebab-cased project name correctly
- Template included all required sections:
  - Problem Statement
  - Target Users
  - Proposed Solution
  - Value Proposition
  - Success Metrics

### Step 3: Status Command (Brief Created)
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh status payment-gateway-integration
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Detected brief exists
- Validated brief completeness (all required sections present)
- Status: "Brief Complete"
- Recommended running `research` command

### Step 4: Research Command
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh research payment-gateway-integration
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Created file: `research.md` with YAML frontmatter
- Template included all sections:
  - Competitive Analysis (3 competitor templates)
  - Market Insights
  - User Feedback Analysis
  - Technical Considerations
  - Recommendations

### Step 5: Status Command (Research Created)
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh status payment-gateway-integration
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Detected both brief and research exist
- Validated completeness
- Status: "Research Phase"
- Recommended running `create-prd` command

### Step 6: Create PRD Command
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh create-prd payment-gateway-integration
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Created file: `prd.md` with comprehensive template
- YAML frontmatter present
- All major sections included:
  - Objectives (Primary and Secondary)
  - Success Criteria (Launch, Metrics, Stretch Goals)
  - Functional Requirements (numbered FR1, FR2, etc.)
  - Non-Functional Requirements (NFR1-6)
  - Constraints
  - Assumptions
  - Out of Scope

### Step 7: Validate PRD Command (Draft Mode)
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh validate-prd payment-gateway-integration --lenient
```

**Result**: PASSED (Lenient Mode)
- Detected incomplete PRD (template placeholders)
- Warnings issued for vague language
- Recommended completing sections
- Lenient mode allowed template placeholders

### Step 8: Validate PRD Command (Strict Mode - After Completion)
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh validate-prd payment-gateway-integration
```

**Result**: PASSED (after populating PRD)
- All required sections present
- SMART criteria validated
- Measurable success criteria detected
- No critical issues found
- Rating: "GOOD" (some minor warnings acceptable)

### Step 9: Decompose Command
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh decompose payment-gateway-integration
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Created file: `epics.md`
- Template included:
  - Epic decomposition guidelines
  - Epic templates (1-3 examples)
  - Dependencies and sequencing section
  - Requirements traceability matrix
  - Sprint planning guidance

### Step 10: Generate Spec Command
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh generate-spec payment-gateway-integration "Payment Processing Core"
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Created directory: `docs/changes/payment-processing-core/`
- Created files:
  - `proposal.md` (Epic scope and objectives)
  - `spec-delta.md` (Technical specifications)
  - `tasks.md` (Initial task breakdown)
- All files properly linked back to PRD and epic

---

## Test Scenario 2: Edge Cases and Error Handling

### Test 2.1: Missing docs/prds Directory
```bash
$ rm -rf docs/prds
$ bash prd-authoring.sh status
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Error message: "Error: docs/prds/ directory does not exist."
- Helpful guidance: "Please create it first: mkdir -p docs/prds"
- Non-zero exit code

### Test 2.2: Brief Already Exists
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh brief "Payment Gateway Integration"
$ bash prd-authoring.sh brief "Payment Gateway Integration"
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Error message: "Error: Product brief already exists"
- File not overwritten
- Suggested using different name or editing existing

### Test 2.3: Research Without Brief
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh research nonexistent-project
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Error: "Error: Project directory 'docs/prds/nonexistent-project' does not exist."
- Recommended: "Run 'brief' command first"

### Test 2.4: Create PRD Without Prerequisites
```bash
$ mkdir -p docs/prds/incomplete-project
$ bash prd-authoring.sh create-prd incomplete-project
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Detected missing product brief
- Error: "Run 'brief' command first to create the product brief."

### Test 2.5: Create PRD Without Research (Warning)
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh brief "No Research Project"
$ bash prd-authoring.sh create-prd no-research-project
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Warning: "Research document not found. PRD quality may be reduced."
- Prompted for confirmation: "Continue anyway? (y/n)"
- Allowed proceeding with 'y' but discouraged it

### Test 2.6: Validate PRD That Doesn't Exist
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh validate-prd nonexistent-project
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Error: "Error: PRD not found"
- Recommended: "Run 'create-prd' command first"

### Test 2.7: Decompose Without Complete PRD
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh decompose payment-gateway-integration
```
(With incomplete/template PRD)

**Result**: PASSED
- Warning: "PRD appears incomplete"
- Recommended running validate-prd first
- Still allowed decomposition (user judgment)

### Test 2.8: Generate Spec for Non-existent Epic
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh generate-spec payment-gateway-integration "Nonexistent Epic"
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Warning: "Could not find epic 'Nonexistent Epic' in epics.md"
- Generated generic template anyway
- User responsible for populating manually

### Test 2.9: Generate Spec When Spec Already Exists
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh generate-spec payment-gateway-integration "Payment Processing Core"
$ bash prd-authoring.sh generate-spec payment-gateway-integration "Payment Processing Core"
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Error: "Spec proposal directory already exists"
- Suggested using different name or deleting existing
- Files not overwritten

### Test 2.10: Invalid Project Name Characters
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh brief "Test@#$%Project!"
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Sanitized to kebab-case: "testproject"
- Special characters removed
- Valid directory created

---

## Test Scenario 3: Validation Quality Checks

### Test 3.1: Vague Language Detection
Created PRD with vague terms: "should", "might", "probably", "good", "fast"

**Result**: PASSED
- Validation detected all vague terms
- Listed line numbers where issues occurred
- Provided suggestions for making language specific
- Example warnings:
  - "Line 45: Contains 'should' - be more specific"
  - "Line 67: Contains 'fast' - provide numeric target"

### Test 3.2: Unmeasurable Success Criteria
Created PRD with qualitative success criteria: "improve user experience", "better performance"

**Result**: PASSED
- Validation flagged unmeasurable criteria
- Suggested adding numeric targets
- Example: "improve UX" → "task completion rate > 85%"

### Test 3.3: Missing Required Sections
Created PRD without "Assumptions" section

**Result**: PASSED (Strict Mode)
- Error: "Missing required section: ## Assumptions"
- Validation failed with recommendation to add section

**Result**: PASSED (Lenient Mode)
- Warning: "Missing section: ## Assumptions (lenient mode)"
- Validation passed but noted improvement needed

### Test 3.4: Well-Formed PRD
Created PRD with:
- All sections present
- Specific, measurable requirements
- SMART objectives
- Clear acceptance criteria

**Result**: PASSED
- Validation: "EXCELLENT ✓"
- "PRD meets all quality standards"
- Zero issues, zero warnings

---

## Test Scenario 4: Command Variations

### Test 4.1: Status Command Without Project Name
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh status
```
(With multiple projects)

**Result**: PASSED
- Listed all projects in docs/prds/
- Suggested running status with specific project name

### Test 4.2: Validate PRD Lenient Mode
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh validate-prd payment-gateway-integration --lenient
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Lenient mode enabled
- Warnings instead of errors for missing sections
- Useful for draft PRDs

### Test 4.3: Invalid Command
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh invalid-command
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Error: "Unknown command 'invalid-command'"
- Usage help displayed
- Listed all valid commands

### Test 4.4: Missing Required Argument
```bash
$ bash prd-authoring.sh brief
```

**Result**: PASSED
- Error: "Project name not provided for 'brief' command"
- Usage help: "Usage: $0 brief <project-name>"

---

## Test Scenario 5: Integration Tests

### Test 5.1: Complete Workflow End-to-End
Executed full workflow from status → brief → research → create-prd → validate-prd → decompose → generate-spec

**Result**: PASSED
- All commands executed successfully
- Each step built on previous
- Final output: Complete spec proposal ready for development
- Traceability maintained: spec → epic → PRD → brief

### Test 5.2: Parallel Projects
Created two separate projects:
1. payment-gateway-integration
2. mobile-app-redesign

**Result**: PASSED
- Both projects coexist independently
- Status command lists both
- No cross-contamination of data
- Proper isolation in separate directories

---

## Test Scenario 6: Validation Accuracy

### Test 6.1: YAML Frontmatter Validation
- Missing frontmatter: FAILED validation ✓
- Incomplete frontmatter: WARNING issued ✓
- Proper frontmatter: PASSED ✓

### Test 6.2: Section Completeness
- All sections present: PASSED ✓
- Missing Objectives: FAILED ✓
- Missing Success Criteria: FAILED ✓
- Missing Constraints: FAILED (strict) / WARNING (lenient) ✓

### Test 6.3: Requirements Quality
- Specific acceptance criteria: PASSED ✓
- Vague requirements: WARNED ✓
- Missing acceptance criteria: WARNED ✓
- Unnumbered requirements: WARNED ✓

---

## Summary of Test Results

### Commands Tested: 7/7 PASSED
1. ✓ status - Works with and without project name
2. ✓ brief - Creates template with proper structure
3. ✓ research - Generates comprehensive research template
4. ✓ create-prd - Creates full PRD template
5. ✓ validate-prd - Detects quality issues accurately
6. ✓ decompose - Generates epic breakdown template
7. ✓ generate-spec - Creates spec proposal structure

### Edge Cases Tested: 10/10 PASSED
1. ✓ Missing directories - Proper error messages
2. ✓ Duplicate files - Prevents overwriting
3. ✓ Missing prerequisites - Clear guidance provided
4. ✓ Invalid project names - Sanitization works correctly
5. ✓ Incomplete documents - Warnings appropriate
6. ✓ Invalid commands - Help text displayed
7. ✓ Missing arguments - Usage guidance provided
8. ✓ Parallel projects - Proper isolation
9. ✓ Validation modes - Strict and lenient work as expected
10. ✓ Epic generation - Handles missing epics gracefully

### Validation Quality: EXCELLENT
- Detects vague language accurately
- Identifies unmeasurable criteria
- Checks section completeness
- SMART criteria validation working
- Both strict and lenient modes functional

### Overall Assessment: ALL TESTS PASSED ✓

The prd-authoring skill is production-ready with:
- Complete functionality for all commands
- Robust error handling for edge cases
- Clear, actionable error messages
- Proper validation of document quality
- Helpful guidance at each step
- Maintains traceability throughout workflow

## Recommendations

1. **Documentation**: Add examples to SKILL.md showing this workflow
2. **Troubleshooting**: Document common errors and solutions
3. **Edge Cases**: Add more examples of error scenarios to documentation
4. **User Guidance**: Consider adding more inline help in templates