| name | 00-meta-initialization |
| description | Use when starting project documentation to detect project type, select Waterfall, Agile, or Hybrid delivery, and generate the documentation roadmap. |
| metadata | {"use_when":"Use when the task matches meta-initialization skill and this skill's local workflow.","do_not_use_when":"Do not use when a more specific upstream or downstream skill owns the task, or when the required project context has not been prepared.","required_inputs":"Provide the target project or document, the relevant context files, scope constraints, and any domain or standards inputs referenced here.","workflow":"Follow the ordered steps, review gates, and local generation logic in this file before consulting deeper support files as needed.","quality_standards":"Keep outputs grounded in source context, traceable to stated standards, and specific enough to review or verify.","anti_patterns":"Do not fabricate missing requirements, skip human review gates, or substitute vague prose for verifiable documentation.","outputs":"Produce or update the document, scaffold, analysis, or phase artifact that this skill defines.","references":"Use `references/`, `templates/`, `README.md` when deeper detail is needed.","portable":true,"compatible_with":["claude-code","codex"]} |
Meta-Initialization Skill
Inputs
| Artefact | Required? | Purpose |
|---|
| Project objective, stakeholders, constraints, and delivery context | yes | Classify project and method |
| Existing documents and standards | conditional | Avoid duplicate or conflicting scaffolds |
Outputs
| Artefact | Consumer | Acceptance condition |
|---|
| Project profile and documentation roadmap | Project team | Method justified, phases ordered, owners and gates explicit |
Capability contract
Read/search are required. Creating directories or documents requires explicit project-initialisation scope; never overwrite existing artefacts without inspection.
Degraded mode
Fallback with incomplete context: produce a provisional profile and question register, not a falsely definitive methodology.
Decision rules
| Condition | Method | Failure avoided |
|---|
| Stable regulated scope and formal approvals | Waterfall | Missing governance evidence |
| Evolving product with iterative discovery | Agile | Premature specification lock-in |
| Formal gates plus iterative delivery | Hybrid | False either/or method choice |
Domain anti-patterns
- Selecting Agile because requirements are missing. Fix: gather minimum project facts first.
- Generating every possible document. Fix: justify each artefact by risk and audience.
- Overwriting an existing roadmap. Fix: inspect and propose a merge.
- Treating the method as a label. Fix: define gates, cadence, owners, and evidence.
- Marking provisional assumptions as decisions. Fix: keep an explicit question register.
Process Workflow
flowchart TD
Start[Run Skill] --> Scan[Scan Project Directory]
Scan --> Detect[Detect Project Characteristics]
Detect --> Q1{Existing<br/>methodology.md?}
Q1 -->|Yes| Confirm[Confirm/Update Methodology]
Q1 -->|No| Analyze[Analyze Project Type]
Analyze --> Recommend[Recommend Methodology]
Recommend --> UserChoice[User Selects Methodology]
Confirm --> UserChoice
UserChoice --> Generate[Generate Documentation Roadmap]
Generate --> Init[Initialize Project Context]
Init --> Output[Write methodology.md + doc_roadmap.md]
Output --> Next[Show Next Steps]
style UserChoice fill:#fff4e1
style Generate fill:#e1f5ff
Step-by-Step Instructions
Step 1: Scan Project Directory
Scan ../ (parent project root) for indicators:
Project Type Indicators:
- package.json → Node.js/JavaScript project
- composer.json → PHP project
- requirements.txt / pyproject.toml → Python project
- .sln / .csproj → C# .NET project
- pom.xml / build.gradle → Java project
- Cargo.toml → Rust project
- go.mod → Go project
Existing Documentation:
- README.md → Check for methodology mentions
- ARCHITECTURE.md → Check for design approach
- projects//_context/methodology.md → Previous methodology selection
Development Artifacts:
- .git/ → Git repository (check for branch strategy)
- docker-compose.yml → Containerized deployment
- .github/workflows/ → CI/CD setup
Log all findings:
[Scan Report]
- Project Type: PHP (composer.json detected)
- Framework: Laravel (composer.json dependencies)
- Database: MySQL (migrations/ directory)
- Deployment: Docker (docker-compose.yml)
- Version Control: Git
- CI/CD: GitHub Actions
- Existing Docs: README.md, ARCHITECTURE.md
- Existing Context: None (first-time setup)
Step 2: Detect Project Characteristics
Based on scan results, determine:
Regulatory/Compliance Indicators
Check for keywords in README.md, documentation:
- "FDA", "FAA", "DOD", "medical device", "aerospace" → Regulated project
- "HIPAA", "GDPR", "SOC2", "PCI-DSS" → Compliance required
- "safety-critical", "life-safety" → Formal V&V needed
Project Maturity
- Greenfield (no existing code): Need comprehensive upfront planning
- Brownfield (existing codebase): Need documentation for existing system
- Startup/MVP: Fast iteration, evolving requirements
- Enterprise: Established processes, likely Waterfall or SAFe
Team Structure
Infer from repository activity (if Git history exists):
- Multiple contributors, PR workflow → Team environment
- Single contributor → Solo developer
- Frequent commits → Agile/iterative
- Infrequent, large commits → Waterfall/milestone-based
Step 3: Recommend Methodology
Based on detected characteristics, recommend:
Recommend Waterfall if:
- ✅ Regulatory/compliance keywords detected
- ✅ Project type: Medical, aerospace, government, automotive
- ✅ Fixed-scope contract language in docs
- ✅ Formal signoff processes mentioned
- ✅ Safety-critical system
Confidence Score: Calculate based on indicators (0-100%)
Example:
[Recommendation: Waterfall] (Confidence: 85%)
Reasons:
1. "FDA" and "medical device" detected in README.md
2. Formal compliance requirements (HIPAA)
3. Fixed-scope project (contract.pdf found)
4. Safety-critical indicators present
Recommended Pipeline:
- 02-requirements-engineering/waterfall/ (Full IEEE 830 SRS)
- 03-design-documentation/ (HLD + LLD for traceability)
- 09-governance-compliance/ (Traceability matrix, audit reports)
Recommend Agile if:
- ✅ Startup/MVP keywords in README
- ✅ Frequent commits (>10/week average)
- ✅ Sprint-based branch naming (feature/, sprint/)
- ✅ User-centric language ("user stories", "epics")
- ✅ No regulatory constraints
Example:
[Recommendation: Agile] (Confidence: 90%)
Reasons:
1. Startup project (package.json: version 0.3.2)
2. Frequent commits (average 15/week)
3. Feature branch workflow detected
4. No regulatory constraints detected
5. README mentions "MVP" and "rapid iteration"
Recommended Pipeline:
- 02-requirements-engineering/agile/ (User stories, backlog)
- 07-agile-artifacts/ (Sprint planning, DoD, DoR)
- Lightweight design docs (HLD only, no LLD)
Recommend Hybrid if:
- ✅ Mixed indicators (regulatory backend + agile frontend)
- ✅ Microservices architecture (some services regulated, others not)
- ✅ SAFe framework indicators
- ✅ Enterprise with agile teams
Example:
[Recommendation: Hybrid] (Confidence: 70%)
Reasons:
1. Microservices architecture detected (docker-compose.yml: 8 services)
2. Backend mentions "payment processing" (regulated)
3. Frontend is React SPA (rapid iteration)
4. Mix of waterfall (API) and agile (UI) branches
Recommended Pipeline:
- Backend: 02-requirements-engineering/waterfall/ (IEEE 830 SRS for payment service)
- Frontend: 02-requirements-engineering/agile/ (User stories for UI)
- Shared: 03-design-documentation/ (Unified HLD)
Step 4: User Selection
Present recommendation and allow user to confirm or override:
==================================================
SDLC-Docs-Engine: Methodology Selection
==================================================
Based on analysis of your project, we recommend:
📋 WATERFALL METHODOLOGY (Confidence: 85%)
Reasons:
- Regulated industry detected (FDA, medical device)
- Fixed-scope project indicators
- Safety-critical system
This recommendation suggests:
✅ Comprehensive upfront requirements (IEEE 830 SRS)
✅ Formal design documentation (HLD + LLD)
✅ Traceability matrix and audit reports
✅ Verification & Validation per IEEE 1012
==================================================
Do you want to:
[1] Accept recommendation (Waterfall)
[2] Choose Agile instead
[3] Choose Hybrid approach
[4] Show detailed comparison
[5] Skip methodology selection (manual setup)
Your choice:
Step 5: Generate Documentation Roadmap
Based on selected methodology, create doc_roadmap.md:
For Waterfall Projects:
# Documentation Roadmap: [Project Name]
**Methodology:** Waterfall
**Selected:** [Date]
**Rationale:** [Brief explanation from detection]
## Active Documentation Pipelines
### Phase 01: Strategic Vision (Optional but Recommended)
- [ ] 01-prd-generation → Product Requirements Document
### Phase 02: Requirements Engineering (MANDATORY)
- [ ] 02-requirements-engineering/waterfall/01-initialize-srs
- [ ] 02-requirements-engineering/waterfall/02-context-engineering
- [ ] 02-requirements-engineering/waterfall/03-descriptive-modeling
- [ ] 02-requirements-engineering/waterfall/04-interface-specification
- [ ] 02-requirements-engineering/waterfall/05-feature-decomposition
- [ ] 02-requirements-engineering/waterfall/06-logic-modeling
- [ ] 02-requirements-engineering/waterfall/07-attribute-mapping
- [ ] 02-requirements-engineering/waterfall/08-semantic-auditing
### Phase 03: Design Documentation (MANDATORY)
- [ ] 03-design-documentation/01-high-level-design
- [ ] 03-design-documentation/02-low-level-design
- [ ] 03-design-documentation/03-api-specification
### Phase 05: Testing Documentation (MANDATORY)
- [ ] 05-testing-documentation/01-test-strategy
- [ ] 05-testing-documentation/02-test-plans
### Phase 09: Governance & Compliance (MANDATORY)
- [ ] 09-governance-compliance/01-traceability-matrix
- [ ] 09-governance-compliance/02-audit-reports
- [ ] 09-governance-compliance/03-compliance-docs (if HIPAA/GDPR/SOC2)
## Disabled Pipelines
❌ **Phase 07: Agile Artifacts** (Not applicable for Waterfall)
❌ **Phase 02: Agile Requirements** (Using Waterfall SRS instead)
## Execution Order
1. **Week 1-2:** Phase 02 (Requirements) - Generate IEEE 830 SRS
Phase 03 (Design) - HLD and LLD
Phase 05 (Testing) - Test strategy and plans
Phase 09 (Governance) - Traceability and audits
6 weeks for complete documentation suite
Run: 02-requirements-engineering/waterfall/01-initialize-srs
For Agile Projects:
# Documentation Roadmap: [Project Name]
**Methodology:** Agile (Scrum)
**Selected:** [Date]
**Rationale:** [Brief explanation]
## Active Documentation Pipelines
### Phase 01: Strategic Vision (MANDATORY for Agile)
- [ ] 01-strategic-vision/01-prd-generation → Lightweight PRD
### Phase 02: Requirements Engineering (MANDATORY)
- [ ] 02-requirements-engineering/agile/01-user-story-generation
- [ ] 02-requirements-engineering/agile/02-acceptance-criteria
- [ ] 02-requirements-engineering/agile/03-story-mapping
- [ ] 02-requirements-engineering/agile/04-backlog-prioritization
### Phase 03: Design Documentation (Lightweight)
- [ ] 03-design-documentation/01-high-level-design (HLD only, skip LLD)
### Phase 07: Agile Artifacts (MANDATORY)
- [ ] 07-agile-artifacts/01-sprint-planning
- [ ] 07-agile-artifacts/02-definition-of-done
- [ ] 07-agile-artifacts/03-definition-of-ready
### Phase 08: End-User Documentation (Post-MVP)
- [ ] 08-end-user-documentation/01-user-manual
## Disabled Pipelines
❌ **Phase 02: Waterfall SRS** (Using Agile user stories instead)
❌ **Phase 09: Formal Governance** (Lightweight traceability via story tags)
## Execution Order
1. **Sprint 0:** Phase 01 (Vision) + Phase 02 (User Stories)
2. **Sprint 0:** Phase 03 (HLD) - Architectural overview
3. **Sprint 1-N:** Phase 07 (Agile Artifacts) - Ongoing per sprint
4. **Post-MVP:** Phase 08 (User Docs)
**Total Estimated Time:** 1-2 sprints for initial setup, then continuous
## Next Steps
Run: 01-strategic-vision/01-prd-generation
Then: 02-requirements-engineering/agile/01-user-story-generation
Step 6: Initialize Project Context
Check if projects/<ProjectName>/_context/ exists:
If missing:
mkdir -p projects/<ProjectName>/_context
echo "Project context directory created."
If exists:
[INFO] Project context directory already exists.
Checking for existing files...
Found:
- vision.md (last modified: 2026-01-15)
- features.md (last modified: 2026-01-20)
Missing:
- methodology.md (will be created)
- doc_roadmap.md (will be created)
Step 7: Write Output Files
File 1: projects/<ProjectName>/_context/methodology.md
Use template from templates/methodology.md.template (populated with detection results).
File 2: projects/<ProjectName>/_context/doc_roadmap.md
Use template from templates/doc_roadmap.md.template (populated based on methodology).
File 3: projects/<ProjectName>/_context/project_profile.md
# Project Profile
**Generated:** [Date]
**Project Type:** [Detected type]
**Framework:** [Detected framework]
**Database:** [Detected database]
**Deployment:** [Detected deployment]
## Characteristics
- **Regulatory Constraints:** [Yes/No - list standards]
- **Team Size:** [Inferred from git history]
- **Development Pace:** [Rapid/Moderate/Methodical]
- **Maturity:** [Greenfield/Brownfield/Startup/Enterprise]
## Recommended Methodology
**Selected:** [Waterfall/Agile/Hybrid]
**Confidence:** [XX%]
See `methodology.md` for full rationale.
Resources
Common Pitfalls
❌ Skipping this skill
- Jumping directly to Phase 02 without methodology selection leads to wrong documentation approach
❌ Overriding recommendation without justification
- If you choose Agile for a regulated project, document WHY (e.g., regulatory approval already obtained)
❌ Not updating roadmap when project changes
- Re-run this skill if project characteristics change (e.g., startup gets FDA approval)
❌ Ignoring hybrid recommendations
- If recommended Hybrid, don't force pure Waterfall or Agile
Verification Checklist
Before proceeding to Phase 01/02:
Integration with Other Phases
This skill enables:
- Phase 01 (Strategic Vision): Knows whether to generate PRD (Agile) or skip (Waterfall starts with SRS)
- Phase 02 (Requirements): Activates correct pipeline (waterfall/ or agile/)
- Phase 03 (Design): Determines depth (full HLD+LLD for Waterfall, lightweight HLD for Agile)
- Phase 07 (Agile Artifacts): Only activates if methodology is Agile or Hybrid
- Phase 09 (Governance): Determines formality level (full RTM for Waterfall, lightweight for Agile)
Upstream Dependencies:
- None (this is the first skill to run)
Downstream Consumers:
- All other phases read
methodology.md to determine their execution mode
Example Output
See templates/ directory for complete examples:
methodology.md.example - Waterfall selection for medical devicemethodology.md.example-agile - Agile selection for startupmethodology.md.example-hybrid - Hybrid for enterprise SaaS
Maintenance & Updates
When to re-run this skill:
- Project characteristics change significantly (e.g., startup becomes enterprise)
- Regulatory status changes (e.g., FDA approval required mid-project)
- Team decides to switch methodologies
- Major pivot in product direction
Safe to re-run: Yes, this skill will prompt before overwriting existing files.
Last Updated: 2026-02-07
Skill Version: 1.0.0
Maintained by: Peter Bamuhigire
