Wow, very nice. Thank you. That's very well thought out.

I'm particularly intrigued by the large bold letters: "Success must be verifiable by the AI / LLM that will be writing the code later, using tools like Codex or Cursor."

May I ask, what your testing strategy is like?

I think you've encapsulated a good best practices workflow here in a nice condensed way.

I'd also be interested to know how you handle documentation but don't want to bombard you with too many questions

I added that line, because otherwise the LLM would generate goals that are not verifiable in development (e.g. certain pages to render <300ms - this is not something you can test on your local machine).

Documentation is a different topic - I have not yet found how to do it correctly. But I am reading about it and might soon test some ideas to co-generate documentation based on the PRD and the actual code. The challenge being, the code normally evolves and drifts away from the original PRD.

I think the only way to keep documentation up-to-date is to have it as part of the PR review process. Knowledge needs to evolve with code.

We working on this at https://dosu.dev/ (open to feedback!)