Archon/bmad/bmm/docs/workflows-analysis.md

BMM Analysis Workflows (Phase 1)

Reading Time: ~12 minutes

Overview

Phase 1 (Analysis) workflows are optional exploration and discovery tools that help you understand your project space before committing to detailed planning. These workflows facilitate creative thinking, market validation, and strategic alignment.

When to use Analysis workflows:

• Starting a new project from scratch
• Exploring a problem space or opportunity
• Validating market fit before significant investment
• Gathering strategic context for planning phases

When to skip Analysis workflows:

• Continuing an existing project with clear requirements
• Working on well-defined features with known solutions
• Operating under strict time constraints where discovery is complete

Quick Reference

Workflow	Agent	Duration	Required	Purpose
brainstorm-project	Analyst	30-60 min	No	Explore solution approaches and architectures
brainstorm-game	Analyst	45-90 min	No	Generate game concepts using creative techniques
product-brief	PM	60-90 min	Recommended	Define product vision and strategy
game-brief	PM	60-90 min	Recommended	Capture game vision before GDD
research	Analyst	Varies	No	Multi-type research system (market, technical, competitive)

---

brainstorm-project

Purpose

Generate multiple solution approaches for software projects through parallel ideation tracks that align technical and business thinking from inception.

Agent: Analyst Phase: 1 (Analysis) Required: No Typical Duration: 30-60 minutes

When to Use

• You have a business objective but unclear technical approach
• Multiple solution paths exist and you need to evaluate trade-offs
• Hidden assumptions need discovery before planning
• Innovation beyond obvious solutions is valuable

Prerequisites

• Business objectives and constraints
• Technical environment context
• Stakeholder needs identified
• Success criteria defined (at least preliminary)

Process Overview

1. Context Capture

• Business objectives and constraints
• Technical environment
• Stakeholder needs
• Success criteria

2. Parallel Ideation

• Architecture Track: Technical approaches with trade-offs
• UX Track: Interface paradigms and user journeys
• Integration Track: System connection patterns
• Value Track: Feature prioritization and delivery sequences

3. Solution Synthesis

• Evaluate feasibility and impact
• Align with strategic objectives
• Surface hidden assumptions
• Generate recommendations with rationale

Inputs

Input	Type	Purpose
Project Context	Document	Business objectives, environment, constraints
Problem Statement	Optional	Core challenge or opportunity to address

Outputs

Output	Content
Architecture Proposals	Multiple approaches with trade-off analysis
Value Framework	Prioritized features aligned to objectives
Risk Analysis	Dependencies, challenges, opportunities
Strategic Recommendation	Synthesized direction with rationale

Example Scenario

Starting Point: "We need a customer dashboard for our SaaS product"

After brainstorm-project:

• Architecture Option A: Monolith with server-side rendering (faster to market, easier ops)
• Architecture Option B: Microservices + SPA (better scalability, more complex)
• Architecture Option C: Hybrid approach (SSR shell + client-side islands)
• Recommendation: Option A for MVP, with clear path to Option C as we scale
• Risk: Option A may require rewrite if we hit 10K+ concurrent users

Related Workflows

• research - Deep investigation of market/technical options
• product-brief - Strategic planning document
• prd (Phase 2) - Requirements document from chosen approach

---

brainstorm-game

Purpose

Generate and refine game concepts through systematic creative exploration using five distinct brainstorming techniques, grounded in practical constraints.

Agent: Analyst Phase: 1 (Analysis) Required: No Typical Duration: 45-90 minutes

When to Use

• Generating original game concepts
• Exploring variations on a theme
• Breaking creative blocks
• Validating game ideas against constraints

Prerequisites

• Platform specifications (mobile, PC, console, web)
• Genre preferences or inspirations
• Technical constraints understood
• Target audience defined
• Core design pillars identified (at least preliminary)

Process Overview

Five Brainstorming Methods (applied in isolation, then synthesized):

Method	Focus	Output Characteristics
SCAMPER	Systematic modification	Structured transformation analysis
Mind Mapping	Hierarchical exploration	Visual concept relationships
Lotus Blossom	Radial expansion	Layered thematic development
Six Thinking Hats	Multi-perspective	Balanced evaluation framework
Random Word Association	Lateral thinking	Unexpected conceptual combinations

Each method generates distinct artifacts that are then evaluated against design pillars, technical feasibility, and market positioning.

Inputs

• Game Context Document: Platform specs, genre, technical constraints, target audience, monetization approach, design pillars
• Initial Concept Seed (optional): High-level game idea or theme

Outputs

• Method-Specific Artifacts: Five separate brainstorming documents
• Consolidated Concept Document: Synthesized game concepts with feasibility assessments and unique value propositions
• Design Pillar Alignment Matrix: Evaluation of concepts against stated objectives

Example Scenario

Starting Point: "A roguelike with psychological themes"

After brainstorm-game:

• SCAMPER Result: "What if standard roguelike death → becomes emotional regression?"
• Mind Map Result: Emotion types (anger, fear, joy) as character classes
• Lotus Blossom Result: Inner demons as enemies, therapy sessions as rest points
• Six Thinking Hats Result: White (data) - mental health market growing; Red (emotion) - theme may alienate hardcore players
• Random Word Association Result: "Mirror" + "Roguelike" = reflection mechanics that change gameplay

Synthesized Concept: "Mirror of Mind: A roguelike card battler where you play as emotions battling inner demons. Deck composition affects narrative, emotional theme drives mechanics, 3 characters representing anger/fear/joy, target audience: core gamers interested in mental health themes."

Related Workflows

• game-brief - Capture validated concept in structured brief
• gdd (Phase 2) - Full game design document

---

product-brief

Purpose

Interactive product brief creation that guides users through defining their product vision with multiple input sources and conversational collaboration.

Agent: PM Phase: 1 (Analysis) Required: Recommended (skip only if PRD already exists) Typical Duration: 60-90 minutes (Interactive), 20-30 minutes (YOLO)

When to Use

• Starting a new product or major feature initiative
• Aligning stakeholders before detailed planning
• Transitioning from exploration to strategy
• Creating executive-level product documentation

Prerequisites

• Business context understood
• Problem or opportunity identified
• Stakeholders accessible for input
• Strategic objectives defined

Modes of Operation

Interactive Mode (Recommended):

• Step-by-step collaborative development
• Probing questions to refine thinking
• Deep exploration of problem/solution fit
• 60-90 minutes with high-quality output

YOLO Mode:

• AI generates complete draft from initial context
• User reviews and refines sections iteratively
• 20-30 minutes for rapid draft
• Best for time-constrained situations or when you have clear vision

Process Overview

Phase 1: Initialization and Context (Steps 0-2)

• Project setup and context capture
• Input document gathering
• Mode selection
• Context extraction

Phase 2: Interactive Development (Steps 3-12) - Interactive Mode

• Problem definition and pain points
• Solution articulation and value proposition
• User segmentation
• Success metrics and KPIs
• MVP scoping (ruthlessly defined)
• Financial planning and ROI
• Technical context
• Risk assessment and assumptions

Phase 3: Rapid Generation (Steps 3-4) - YOLO Mode

• Complete draft generation from context
• Iterative refinement of sections
• Quality validation

Phase 4: Finalization (Steps 13-15)

• Executive summary creation
• Supporting materials compilation
• Final review and handoff preparation

Inputs

• Optional: Market research, competitive analysis, brainstorming results
• User input through conversational process
• Business context and objectives

Outputs

Primary Output: product-brief-{project_name}-{date}.md

Output Structure:

1. Executive Summary
2. Problem Statement (with evidence)
3. Proposed Solution (core approach and differentiators)
4. Target Users (primary and secondary segments)
5. Goals and Success Metrics
6. MVP Scope (must-have features)
7. Post-MVP Vision
8. Financial Impact (investment and ROI)
9. Strategic Alignment
10. Technical Considerations
11. Constraints and Assumptions
12. Risks and Open Questions
13. Supporting Materials

Example Scenario

Starting Point: "We see customers struggling with project tracking"

After product-brief (Interactive Mode):

• Problem: Teams using 3+ tools for project management, causing 40% efficiency loss
• Solution: Unified workspace combining tasks, docs, and communication
• Target Users: 10-50 person product teams, SaaS-first companies
• MVP Scope: Task management + Real-time collaboration + Integrations (GitHub, Slack)
• Success Metrics: 30% reduction in tool-switching time, 20% faster project completion
• Financial Impact: $2M investment, $10M ARR target year 2

Related Workflows

• brainstorm-project - Generate solution approaches first
• research - Gather market/competitive intelligence
• prd (Phase 2) - Detailed requirements from product brief

---

game-brief

Purpose

Lightweight, interactive brainstorming and planning session that captures game vision before diving into detailed Game Design Documents.

Agent: PM Phase: 1 (Analysis) Required: Recommended for game projects Typical Duration: 60-90 minutes

When to Use

• Starting a new game project from scratch
• Exploring a game idea before committing
• Pitching a concept to team/stakeholders
• Validating market fit and feasibility
• Preparing input for GDD workflow

Skip if:

• You already have a complete GDD
• Continuing an existing project
• Prototyping without planning needs

Comparison: Game Brief vs GDD

Aspect	Game Brief	GDD
Purpose	Validate concept	Design for implementation
Detail Level	High-level vision	Detailed specifications
Time Investment	1-2 hours	4-10 hours
Audience	Self, team, stakeholders	Development team
Scope	Concept validation	Implementation roadmap
Format	Conversational, exploratory	Structured, comprehensive
Output	3-5 pages	10-30+ pages

Comparison: Game Brief vs Product Brief

Aspect	Game Brief	Product Brief
Focus	Player experience, fun, feel	User problems, features, value
Metrics	Engagement, retention, fun	Revenue, conversion, satisfaction
Core Elements	Gameplay pillars, mechanics	Problem/solution, user segments
References	Other games	Competitors, market
Vision	Emotional experience	Business outcomes

Workflow Structure

Interactive Mode (Recommended):

1. Game Vision (concept, pitch, vision statement)
2. Target Market (audience, competition, positioning)
3. Game Fundamentals (pillars, mechanics, experience goals)
4. Scope and Constraints (platforms, timeline, budget, team)
5. Reference Framework (inspiration, competitors, differentiators)
6. Content Framework (world, narrative, volume)
7. Art and Audio Direction
8. Risk Assessment (risks, challenges, mitigation)
9. Success Criteria (MVP, metrics, launch goals)
10. Next Steps

YOLO Mode: AI generates complete draft, then you refine iteratively

Inputs

Optional:

• Market research
• Brainstorming results
• Competitive analysis
• Design notes
• Reference game lists

Outputs

Primary Output: game-brief-{game_name}-{date}.md

Sections:

• Executive summary
• Complete game vision
• Target market analysis
• Core gameplay definition
• Scope and constraints
• Reference framework
• Art/audio direction
• Risk assessment
• Success criteria
• Next steps

Example Scenario

Starting Point: "I want to make a roguelike card game with a twist"

After Game Brief:

• Core Concept: Roguelike card battler where you play as emotions battling inner demons
• Target Audience: Core gamers who love Slay the Spire, interested in mental health themes
• Differentiator: Emotional narrative system where deck composition affects story
• MVP Scope: 3 characters, 80 cards, 30 enemy types, 3 bosses, 6-hour first run
• Platform: PC (Steam) first, mobile later
• Timeline: 12 months with 2-person team
• Key Risk: Emotional theme might alienate hardcore roguelike fans
• Mitigation: Prototype early, test with target audience, offer "mechanical-only" mode

Next Steps:

1. Build card combat prototype (2 weeks)
2. Test emotional resonance with players
3. Proceed to GDD workflow if prototype validates

Related Workflows

• brainstorm-game - Generate initial concepts
• gdd (Phase 2) - Full game design document
• narrative (Phase 2) - For story-heavy games

---

research

Purpose

Comprehensive, adaptive multi-type research system that consolidates various research methodologies into a single powerful tool.

Agent: Analyst Phase: 1 (Analysis) Required: No Typical Duration: Varies by type (Quick: 30-60 min, Standard: 2-4 hours, Comprehensive: 4-8 hours)

Research Types

6 Research Types Available:

Type	Purpose	Use When
market	Market intelligence, TAM/SAM/SOM, competitive analysis	Need market viability validation
deep_prompt	Generate optimized research prompts for AI platforms	Need AI to research deeper topics
technical	Technology evaluation, architecture decisions	Choosing frameworks/platforms
competitive	Deep competitor analysis	Understanding competitive landscape
user	Customer insights, personas, JTBD	Need user understanding
domain	Industry deep dives, trends	Understanding domain/industry

Market Research (Type: market)

Key Features:

• Real-time web research
• TAM/SAM/SOM calculations with multiple methodologies
• Competitive landscape analysis
• Customer persona development
• Porter's Five Forces and strategic frameworks
• Go-to-market strategy recommendations

Inputs:

• Product or business description
• Target customer hypotheses (optional)
• Known competitors list (optional)

Outputs:

• Market size analysis (TAM/SAM/SOM)
• Competitive positioning
• Customer segments and personas
• Market trends and opportunities
• Strategic recommendations
• Financial projections (optional)

Deep Research Prompt (Type: deep_prompt)

Key Features:

• Optimized for AI research platforms (ChatGPT Deep Research, Gemini, Grok, Claude Projects)
• Prompt engineering best practices
• Platform-specific optimization
• Context packaging for optimal AI understanding
• Research question refinement

Inputs:

• Research question or topic
• Background context documents (optional)
• Target AI platform preference (optional)

Outputs:

• Platform-optimized research prompt
• Multi-stage research workflow
• Context documents packaged
• Execution guidance

Technical Research (Type: technical)

Key Features:

• Technology evaluation and comparison matrices
• Architecture pattern research
• Framework/library assessment
• Technical feasibility studies
• Cost-benefit analysis
• Architecture Decision Records (ADR)

Inputs:

• Technical requirements
• Current architecture (if brownfield)
• Technical constraints

Outputs:

• Technology comparison matrix
• Trade-off analysis
• Cost-benefit assessment
• ADR with recommendation
• Implementation guidance

Configuration Options

Can be customized through workflow.yaml:

• research_depth: quick, standard, or comprehensive
• enable_web_research: Enable real-time data gathering
• enable_competitor_analysis: Competitive intelligence
• enable_financial_modeling: Financial projections

Frameworks Available

Market Research:

• TAM/SAM/SOM Analysis
• Porter's Five Forces
• Jobs-to-be-Done (JTBD)
• Technology Adoption Lifecycle
• SWOT Analysis
• Value Chain Analysis

Technical Research:

• Trade-off Analysis Matrix
• Architecture Decision Records (ADR)
• Technology Radar
• Comparison Matrix
• Cost-Benefit Analysis
• Technical Risk Assessment

Example Scenario

Type: market

Input: "SaaS project management tool for remote teams"

Output:

• TAM: $50B (global project management software)
• SAM: $5B (remote-first teams 10-50 people)
• SOM: $50M (achievable in year 3)
• Top Competitors: Asana, Monday.com, ClickUp
• Positioning: "Real-time collaboration focused, vs async-first competitors"
• Customer Personas: Product Managers (primary), Engineering Leads (secondary)
• Key Trends: Remote work permanence, tool consolidation, AI features
• Go-to-Market: PLG motion, free tier, viral invite mechanics

Related Workflows

• product-brief - Use research to inform brief
• prd (Phase 2) - Research feeds requirements
• architecture (Phase 3) - Technical research informs design

---

Best Practices for Phase 1

1. Don't Over-Invest in Analysis

Analysis workflows are optional for a reason. If you already know what you're building and why, skip to Phase 2 (Planning).

2. Iterate Between Workflows

It's common to:

1. Run brainstorm-project to explore
2. Use research to validate
3. Create product-brief to synthesize

3. Document Assumptions

Analysis phase is about surfacing and validating assumptions. Document them explicitly so planning can challenge them.

4. Keep It Strategic

Analysis workflows focus on "what" and "why", not "how". Leave implementation details for Planning and Solutioning phases.

5. Involve Stakeholders

Analysis workflows are collaborative. Use them to align stakeholders before committing to detailed planning.

---

Decision Guide: Which Analysis Workflow?

Starting a Software Project

1. brainstorm-project (if unclear solution) → research (market/technical) → product-brief

Starting a Game Project

1. brainstorm-game (if generating concepts) → research (market/competitive) → game-brief

Validating an Idea

1. research (market type) → product-brief or game-brief

Technical Decision

1. research (technical type) → Use ADR in architecture (Phase 3)

Understanding Market

1. research (market or competitive type) → product-brief

Generating Deep Research

1. research (deep_prompt type) → External AI research platform → Return with findings

---

Integration with Phase 2 (Planning)

Analysis workflows feed directly into Planning:

Analysis Output	Planning Input
product-brief.md	prd workflow
game-brief.md	gdd workflow
market-research.md	prd context
technical-research.md	architecture (Phase 3)
competitive-intelligence.md	prd positioning

The Planning phase (Phase 2) will load these documents automatically if they exist in the output folder.

---

Summary

Phase 1 Analysis workflows are your strategic thinking tools. Use them to:

• Explore problem spaces and solutions
• Validate ideas before heavy investment
• Align stakeholders on vision
• Research markets, competitors, and technologies
• Document strategic thinking for future reference

Remember: These workflows are optional. If you know what you're building and why, skip to Phase 2 (Planning) to define requirements and create your PRD/GDD.