5.9 KiB
Story Draft Checklist
The Scrum Master should use this checklist to validate that each story contains sufficient context for a developer agent to implement it successfully, while assuming the dev agent has reasonable capabilities to figure things out.
[[LLM: INITIALIZATION INSTRUCTIONS - STORY DRAFT VALIDATION
Before proceeding with this checklist, ensure you have access to:
- The story document being validated (usually in docs/stories/ or provided directly)
- The parent epic context
- Any referenced architecture or design documents
- Previous related stories if this builds on prior work
IMPORTANT: This checklist validates individual stories BEFORE implementation begins.
VALIDATION PRINCIPLES:
- Clarity - A developer should understand WHAT to build
- Context - WHY this is being built and how it fits
- Guidance - Key technical decisions and patterns to follow
- Testability - How to verify the implementation works
- Self-Contained - Most info needed is in the story itself
REMEMBER: We assume competent developer agents who can:
- Research documentation and codebases
- Make reasonable technical decisions
- Follow established patterns
- Ask for clarification when truly stuck
We're checking for SUFFICIENT guidance, not exhaustive detail.]]
1. GOAL & CONTEXT CLARITY
[[LLM: Without clear goals, developers build the wrong thing. Verify:
- The story states WHAT functionality to implement
- The business value or user benefit is clear
- How this fits into the larger epic/product is explained
- Dependencies are explicit ("requires Story X to be complete")
- Success looks like something specific, not vague]]
- Story goal/purpose is clearly stated
- Relationship to epic goals is evident
- How the story fits into overall system flow is explained
- Dependencies on previous stories are identified (if applicable)
- Business context and value are clear
2. TECHNICAL IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE
[[LLM: Developers need enough technical context to start coding. Check:
- Key files/components to create or modify are mentioned
- Technology choices are specified where non-obvious
- Integration points with existing code are identified
- Data models or API contracts are defined or referenced
- Non-standard patterns or exceptions are called out
Note: We don't need every file listed - just the important ones.]]
- Key files to create/modify are identified (not necessarily exhaustive)
- Technologies specifically needed for this story are mentioned
- Critical APIs or interfaces are sufficiently described
- Necessary data models or structures are referenced
- Required environment variables are listed (if applicable)
- Any exceptions to standard coding patterns are noted
3. REFERENCE EFFECTIVENESS
[[LLM: References should help, not create a treasure hunt. Ensure:
- References point to specific sections, not whole documents
- The relevance of each reference is explained
- Critical information is summarized in the story
- References are accessible (not broken links)
- Previous story context is summarized if needed]]
- References to external documents point to specific relevant sections
- Critical information from previous stories is summarized (not just referenced)
- Context is provided for why references are relevant
- References use consistent format (e.g.,
docs/filename.md#section)
4. SELF-CONTAINMENT ASSESSMENT
[[LLM: Stories should be mostly self-contained to avoid context switching. Verify:
- Core requirements are in the story, not just in references
- Domain terms are explained or obvious from context
- Assumptions are stated explicitly
- Edge cases are mentioned (even if deferred)
- The story could be understood without reading 10 other documents]]
- Core information needed is included (not overly reliant on external docs)
- Implicit assumptions are made explicit
- Domain-specific terms or concepts are explained
- Edge cases or error scenarios are addressed
5. TESTING GUIDANCE
[[LLM: Testing ensures the implementation actually works. Check:
- Test approach is specified (unit, integration, e2e)
- Key test scenarios are listed
- Success criteria are measurable
- Special test considerations are noted
- Acceptance criteria in the story are testable]]
- Required testing approach is outlined
- Key test scenarios are identified
- Success criteria are defined
- Special testing considerations are noted (if applicable)
VALIDATION RESULT
[[LLM: FINAL STORY VALIDATION REPORT
Generate a concise validation report:
-
Quick Summary
- Story readiness: READY / NEEDS REVISION / BLOCKED
- Clarity score (1-10)
- Major gaps identified
-
Fill in the validation table with:
- PASS: Requirements clearly met
- PARTIAL: Some gaps but workable
- FAIL: Critical information missing
-
Specific Issues (if any)
- List concrete problems to fix
- Suggest specific improvements
- Identify any blocking dependencies
-
Developer Perspective
- Could YOU implement this story as written?
- What questions would you have?
- What might cause delays or rework?
Be pragmatic - perfect documentation doesn't exist, but it must be enough to provide the extreme context a dev agent needs to get the work down and not create a mess.]]
| Category | Status | Issues |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Goal & Context Clarity | TBD | |
| 2. Technical Implementation Guidance | TBD | |
| 3. Reference Effectiveness | TBD | |
| 4. Self-Containment Assessment | TBD | |
| 5. Testing Guidance | TBD |
Final Assessment:
- READY: The story provides sufficient context for implementation
- NEEDS REVISION: The story requires updates (see issues)
- BLOCKED: External information required (specify what information)