Merge pull request #499 from raifdmueller/feat/socratic-quality-scenarios-498

feat(socratic-recovery): derive quality scenarios instead of blanket [OPEN]

Author: rdmueller

docs/brownfield-workflow.adoc

@@ -126,6 +126,12 @@ Process:
                  Operations
      - State precisely what cannot be answered, and why.
 
+   Quality (the Q4 branch) is not wholly team knowledge. Where the code
+   shows measurable behaviour — a timeout, a truncation limit, a budget,
+   a retry policy, the threats and test concept from Q3.8 — write it as
+   an [ANSWERED] quality scenario with file:line. Never invent a target
+   number. Only the quality-goal ranking (Q4.9) is [OPEN].
+
 5. Output two files in AsciiDoc:
 
    QUESTION_TREE.adoc

docs/brownfield-workflow.de.adoc

@@ -124,6 +124,12 @@ Process:
                  Operations
      - State precisely what cannot be answered, and why.
 
+   Quality (the Q4 branch) is not wholly team knowledge. Where the code
+   shows measurable behaviour — a timeout, a truncation limit, a budget,
+   a retry policy, the threats and test concept from Q3.8 — write it as
+   an [ANSWERED] quality scenario with file:line. Never invent a target
+   number. Only the quality-goal ranking (Q4.9) is [OPEN].
+
 5. Output two files in AsciiDoc:
 
    QUESTION_TREE.adoc

plugins/semantic-anchors/skills/socratic-code-theory-recovery/prompts/phase-1-question-tree.md

@@ -55,6 +55,12 @@ Process:
                  Operations
      - State precisely what cannot be answered, and why.
 
+   Quality (the Q4 branch) is not wholly team knowledge. Where the code
+   shows measurable behaviour — a timeout, a truncation limit, a budget,
+   a retry policy, the threats and test concept from Q3.8 — write it as
+   an [ANSWERED] quality scenario with file:line. Never invent a target
+   number. Only the quality-goal ranking (Q4.9) is [OPEN].
+
 5. Output two files in AsciiDoc:
 
    QUESTION_TREE.adoc

plugins/semantic-anchors/skills/socratic-code-theory-recovery/prompts/phase-2-synthesize.md

@@ -39,6 +39,13 @@ Produce four artifacts:
 3. docs/arc42/arc42-[context-name].adoc — Architecture
    - All 12 arc42 chapters. Mark chapters with no content as
      "No information from Phase 1" rather than fabricating content.
+   - Chapter 10 (Quality Requirements) is an exception: synthesize it
+     from the [ANSWERED] Q4 quality scenarios plus the Q4.9 ranking. It
+     is never just an [OPEN] pointer. Reuse evidence already in Q3.8 —
+     Security scenarios cite the STRIDE T-IDs, Maintainability scenarios
+     the test concept. Only the goal ranking stays [OPEN]; "No
+     information" is legitimate here only if Q4 produced no answered
+     scenario at all.
    - Source: Q3 branch of QUESTION_TREE.adoc
    - Anchor: arc42 (Starke / Hruschka)
 

plugins/semantic-anchors/skills/socratic-code-theory-recovery/references/arc42.md

@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ arc42 is a 12-chapter template for documenting software architecture (Gernot Sta
 | Q3.7 | Deployment View | Which hardware/infrastructure runs the system? Deployment topology, environments, mapping building blocks to infrastructure. |
 | Q3.8 | Crosscutting Concepts | Domain models, architecture/design patterns used, persistence, UI, communication, plausibility checks, exception/error handling, logging, security, internationalisation, configurability? |
 | Q3.9 | Architecture Decisions | Why was each significant decision made? Each becomes a Nygard ADR — see [nygard-adrs.md](nygard-adrs.md). |
-| Q3.10 | Quality Requirements | Quality tree, quality scenarios (when/where/who/measurement). Connects to Q4 (ISO 25010). |
+| Q3.10 | Quality Requirements | Quality tree and quality scenarios. Synthesized from the `[ANSWERED]` Q4 scenarios plus the `Q4.9` ranking — never just an `[OPEN]` pointer. The Q4 branch derives the scenarios; see [iso-25010.md](iso-25010.md). |
 | Q3.11 | Risks and Technical Debt | Known technical risks, debt items, and their mitigation status. Overlaps with Q5. |
 | Q3.12 | Glossary | Domain terminology — terms the team uses with project-specific meaning. |