PMFlow/mdproject/requirements-charter-ai-fir...

284 lines
13 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

# Requirements Charter — AI-First Design Plan
---
## Core Principle
> **AI drives the process. Humans only veto, choose, or initiate.**
---
## Human Role (Redefined)
| Action | When | Cost |
|---|---|---|
| **Veto** | AI judgment is wrong | < 10s |
| **Choose** | AI cannot auto-converge | Pick from AI options, < 30s |
| **Initiate** | New direction or project | One trigger, AI takes over |
Everything else — writing, aligning, versioning, risk detection, scheduling, notifying — is fully owned by AI.
---
## 5 Hard Rules (AI-Enforced)
- [ ] **Upstream binding** — Charter is auto-generated from signal source; blank creation is blocked by AI
- [ ] **Alignment gate** — Downstream unlocks automatically after AI confirms alignment; no manual gate-keeping
- [ ] **Non-deletable structure** — 6 core modules enforced by AI at the logic layer, not just UI
- [ ] **Version lock** — AI auto-classifies minor fix vs. major version change; humans never manage versions manually
- [ ] **Full traceability** — All content, alignment records, versions, and tasks are bidirectionally linked and maintained by AI
---
## Page Layout
### Left Panel (280px, fixed)
- [ ] **SSTC Chain Status Card (120px)** — 6-node chain; AI highlights current node and auto-locks downstream until aligned; clicking a locked node shows AI-generated reason
- [ ] **Version List** — AI-managed; users see only the `Active` version by default; history visible on demand; AI auto-archives stale versions
- [ ] **Create Charter Button** — "From Signal Source" (primary); AI intercepts and blocks if no signal source exists; offers to auto-generate one from pasted content (chat logs, emails, meeting notes)
### Right Panel (75%)
#### Top Bar (100px, fixed)
- [ ] Charter name, version tag, status badge, bound project, last modified, owner — all AI-maintained
- [ ] Context actions by status:
| Status | Available Actions |
|---|---|
| Draft | `Save Draft` / `Initiate Alignment` |
| Aligning | `Veto Alignment` / `View AI Progress` |
| Aligned | `New Version` / `Export` / `View History` |
| Archived | `View History` / `Copy as New` |
---
## 6 Core Modules (Non-Deletable, AI-Driven)
Every module follows the same contract:
- [ ] Required metadata: `status`, `confidence_score`, `last_validated_at`, `evidence_refs[]`, `escalation_reason`
- [ ] AI must maintain traceability from each generated field back to signal source evidence
- [ ] If `confidence_score < 0.75` or source evidence conflicts, AI escalates for one human veto/accept decision
### Module 1 — Trigger & Goal
*Auto-generated from signal source. Human is veto-only.*
- [ ] **Inputs (required):** bound signal source IDs, target user segment, business context
- [ ] **Outputs (required):**
- One-sentence problem statement (max 120 chars, no vague terms)
- One-sentence goal with baseline, target, and due date
- 3–5 measurable KPIs (business + AI quality), each with `formula`, `baseline`, `target`, `owner`, `data_source`, `measurement_cadence`
- [ ] **AI validations:**
- KPI-to-source evidence mapping is complete
- KPI definitions are testable (no unverifiable wording)
- Goal and KPI are semantically consistent
- [ ] **Escalation trigger:** inconsistent evidence, non-testable KPI, or unresolved goal ambiguity
### Module 2 — Scope & Alignment Checklist
*AI auto-fills; humans review only low-confidence exceptions.*
- [ ] **Outputs (required):**
- In-scope: 3–7 features, each with acceptance condition
- Out-of-scope: 3–7 explicit exclusions, each with boundary example
- Fixed alignment Q&A (5 questions), each with answer + confidence + evidence ref:
- Who is the core user and what pain is prioritized?
- What is the launch date and immovable constraint?
- What is explicitly out of scope?
- What tech/model/third-party dependencies are required?
- What are top risks and mitigations?
- [ ] **AI validations:**
- Detect overlap/conflict between in-scope and out-of-scope
- Detect missing constraints (security, compliance, data/privacy, performance)
- Block alignment if unanswered critical checklist items exist
- [ ] **Escalation trigger:** any critical question with low confidence or conflicting source evidence
### Module 3 — AI Model & Tech Dependencies
*AI generates one canonical dependency model and serves role-specific views from it.*
- [ ] **Outputs (required):**
- Primary model + fallback model with selection rationale
- Capability table: context window, rate limits, latency range, token cost, known boundaries
- Dependency map: frameworks, external APIs, data stores, observability requirements
- Two synchronized views from one source of truth:
- Business view (non-technical language)
- Engineering view (technical specs and limits)
- [ ] **AI validations:**
- Budget simulation for P50/P90 workload
- Boundary stress check against expected input size and concurrency
- Semantic consistency check between business and engineering views
- [ ] **Escalation trigger:** no feasible model stack under budget/SLA constraints
### Module 4 — Timeline & Resource Planning
*AI schedules and allocates automatically; humans only veto exceptions.*
- [ ] **Outputs (required):**
- Milestone plan with `start`, `end`, `dependency`, `critical_path`
- Role-level effort estimates with confidence intervals
- Owner assignment from capability graph (not manual guessing)
- Buffer policy for delivery risk and handoff delays
- [ ] **AI validations:**
- Capacity check: default cap at 85% utilization per member
- Calendar check: timezone, holiday, leave windows
- Deadline risk simulation and recommended reallocation when risk exceeds threshold
- [ ] **Escalation trigger:** unresolved overload, missing capability match, or launch risk above allowed threshold
### Module 5 — Risks & Mitigations
*AI owns risk detection, monitoring, and first-response execution.*
- [ ] **Outputs (required):**
- Risk register with `category`, `probability`, `impact`, `trigger_signal`, `owner`, `mitigation`, `fallback_plan`
- Minimum coverage categories: tech, model, schedule, market, compliance/security
- Runtime trigger rules bound to alert center
- [ ] **AI validations:**
- High-risk items must include executable fallback steps and ETA
- Trigger signals must map to observable metrics/events
- Risk owner must exist in org graph and match capability domain
- [ ] **Execution rule:** when trigger fires, AI executes fallback, records action trail, and notifies affected owners
- [ ] **Escalation trigger:** fallback unavailable, owner missing, or mitigation fails repeatedly
### Module 6 — Attachments & Notes
*Optional in UI, mandatory in indexing and governance.*
- [ ] **Outputs (required):**
- Structured attachment metadata: `type`, `source`, `version`, `owner`, `confidentiality_level`, `linked_module`
- AI-generated summary and decision extraction for each attachment
- Search index + semantic tags for cross-project retrieval
- [ ] **AI validations:**
- Duplicate/conflict detection across attachment versions
- Broken link and inaccessible file detection
- Sensitive content scan with masking/redaction suggestion
- [ ] **Governance rule:** attachments are references only; source-of-truth fields must live in Modules 1–5
### Module Definition of Done (DoD)
- [ ] 100% required fields completed with evidence refs
- [ ] All module validations pass with no critical blockers
- [ ] Any escalated items resolved by single human veto/accept
- [ ] Module state is auditable and traceable in version history
---
## AI Alignment Engine (Replaces Manual Alignment Flow)
### New Alignment Logic: No Opposition = Aligned
- [ ] Charter locked and distributed to all members on alignment initiation
- [ ] Members have **24 hours** to raise objections; silence = consent
- [ ] AI monitors behavior signals (opened charter, acted on related tasks, no objection raised) to infer stance
- [ ] AI auto-records: `Active Confirmed` / `Implicit Consent` / `Objected` — all auditable
- [ ] If objection raised: AI analyzes disagreement, generates resolution proposal, pushes to relevant parties for a single accept/veto
- [ ] 100% resolved (by active confirmation or implicit consent) → AI auto-marks as `Aligned`, unlocks downstream
### Alignment Status Views
**Aligning**
- [ ] AI progress card: `X/N resolved` — breakdown of active confirms, implicit consents, pending objections
- [ ] Unresolved objections show AI-generated resolution proposals inline
- [ ] No manual "remind" buttons — AI handles follow-up autonomously
**Aligned**
- [ ] Green banner: "Charter aligned by AI. Downstream task breakdown unlocked."
- [ ] Permanent alignment record: timestamps, consent type, immutable
- [ ] `New Version` + `AI Breakdown Tasks` buttons
---
## AI Version Management
- [ ] AI classifies every change: **minor fix** (auto-merged, no new version) vs. **major change** (new version + re-alignment)
- [ ] Classification based on semantic diff + learned team behavior patterns
- [ ] If two parallel versions exceed 80% similarity, AI proposes merge
- [ ] Version tree auto-maintained by AI; stale branches auto-archived
- [ ] Humans always see only the current active version; history on demand
---
## AI Signal Source Engine (Cold Start Solution)
- [ ] AI connects to Feishu, email, meeting notes — continuously monitors for requirement signals in the background
- [ ] When a signal is detected, AI auto-generates a structured signal source draft and notifies PM: "Potential requirement detected. Create charter?"
- [ ] PM one-tap confirms → signal source + charter draft generated simultaneously
- [ ] If no integrations available: paste any raw content (chat screenshot, email, voice transcript) → AI structures it into a signal source + charter draft
- [ ] Cold-start rule: signal source binding is a **warning**, not a hard block, during first 30 days; AI tracks and prompts completion
---
## AI Capability Graph (Cold Start Solution)
- [ ] On first use: member confirms role + seniority (10 seconds)
- [ ] AI uses industry benchmark data as baseline
- [ ] After each task: AI auto-captures actual vs. estimated hours, updates capability model silently
- [ ] No manual input ever required again; model improves with every project
---
## AI Toolbar (Fixed, Below Modules)
| Button | Trigger | AI Action |
|---|---|---|
| Re-validate Charter | Before alignment | Full charter scan: vague expressions, missing fields, logical inconsistencies — auto-fixed where possible |
| Compare Versions | Has history | AI-generated semantic diff with change summary |
| Export Charter | Any status | PDF / Markdown with full alignment record |
---
## SSTC Chain Integration
- [ ] **Upstream**: signal source changes auto-trigger charter refresh; AI notifies owner of delta
- [ ] **Downstream lock**: task breakdown stays locked until AI confirms `Aligned` status
- [ ] **Task generation**: on alignment, AI auto-generates full task tree from charter — assigns owners, estimates hours, zero manual input
- [ ] **Execution sync**: major task delays auto-trigger charter change assessment by AI; escalates to human only if major revision needed
- [ ] **Retrospective**: AI auto-compares charter goals vs. actuals → generates retrospective report → feeds into team knowledge graph
---
## Mobile
- [ ] View-only (no editing on mobile)
- [ ] Collapsed module list, tap to expand
- [ ] One-tap veto or confirm
- [ ] Voice input for objections (AI transcribes + structures)
- [ ] Swipe left = version history, swipe right = alignment record
- [ ] Push notifications for alignment requests and AI-escalated decisions
---
## Dev Rollout — 3 Phases
### Phase 1 — Core Loop (Week 1)
- [ ] Left panel: AI-managed version list + chain status card
- [ ] 6 structured module editors with AI auto-fill
- [ ] AI alignment engine: 24h implicit consent, objection handling
- [ ] Downstream auto-unlock on alignment
- [ ] AI version classification (minor fix vs. major change)
### Phase 2 — AI-Native (Week 2)
- [ ] Real-time vague expression detection + auto-fix
- [ ] AI self-validation (cross-check generated content)
- [ ] Role-aware dual-language view for Module 3
- [ ] Model binding + match evaluation + capability boundary validation
- [ ] Signal source auto-detection (Feishu / email integration)
- [ ] Task auto-generation from charter on alignment
### Phase 3 — Polish & Advanced (Week 3+)
- [ ] Capability graph auto-learning from task execution
- [ ] Version merge suggestions + version tree visualization
- [ ] Mobile adaptation
- [ ] Feishu card actions (veto / confirm directly in Feishu)
- [ ] Retrospective auto-report generation
- [ ] Charter template library
---
## Summary: What Changed vs. Original Plan
| Original | AI-First |
|---|---|
| 100% manual confirmation to unlock downstream | 24h no-objection = aligned, AI records |
| AI assists human writing | AI writes + self-validates; human vetoes |
| Human creates signal sources | AI detects signals proactively; human one-tap confirms |
| Human manages versions | AI fully manages; human sees active version only |
| All members see one charter | AI serves role-appropriate language view per member |
| Human fills capability graph | AI learns from task execution automatically |
| AI is a feature | AI is the process engine; humans are veto holders |