Next Steps, Gaps, and User Education

This project is strong on methodology and templates. The highest leverage now is execution clarity: faster onboarding, fewer unknowns during implementation, and tighter operator-specific guidance.

Direct Answer: Top Gaps + Next Steps

1. Operator-specific execution detail is the largest gap. Close open placeholders in the runbooks first.
2. Unknowns need active tracking. Keep RESEARCH_NEEDED.md current with status and source evidence.
3. User education needs layered onboarding + troubleshooting. Implement the immediate onboarding and recovery items in this guide.

Priority Next Steps

Immediate

1. Complete operator playbooks with verified commands
2. Turn placeholders into validated snippets
3. Add a “First Run” path from install to first shipped artifact
4. Document failure recovery paths (plan fails gate, tests fail, deployment fails)

Stabilization

1. Add architecture variants (single-service, API + worker, event-driven)
2. Add scale profiles (solo builder, two-engineer team, multi-agent execution)
3. Add validation bundles per phase (charter lint, plan gate checks, task consistency checks)

Expansion

1. Add vertical examples (mobile, data pipeline, internal tooling)
2. Add change-management workflow for requirement drift
3. Publish operator compatibility matrix with tested versions and known limitations

Current Gaps

Gap 1: Operator-Specific End-to-End Coverage

General methodology is clear, but concrete execution differs by agent environment.

Impact: Users stall at setup and orchestration details.

Fix: Provide tested playbooks for each operator with:

• exact prerequisites
• exact commands
• expected outputs
• failure handling

Gap 2: Unknowns Are Not Centrally Tracked

Open questions are spread across docs and chats.

Impact: Knowledge gaps persist and recur.

Fix: Maintain RESEARCH_NEEDED.md as a live backlog with status + source evidence.

Gap 3: Limited “What Good Looks Like” Evidence

Current walkthrough is strong but single-domain.

Impact: Users cannot map ACE to their stack quickly.

Fix: Add multiple production-like examples and include measurable success criteria (time to first commit, test pass rate, deployment lead time).

Gap 4: Insufficient Troubleshooting Paths

Users need explicit recovery when gates fail or generated tasks are inconsistent.

Impact: Momentum loss during first adoption cycle.

Fix: Add troubleshooting runbooks:

• charter ambiguity saturation
• phase gate rejection
• task dependency deadlocks
• implementation mismatch vs charter

How To Educate Users Better

Teach in Layers

1. Layer 1: quick orientation (concepts + one command chain)
2. Layer 2: guided build (copyable end-to-end runbook)
3. Layer 3: advanced operations (parallel agents, governance, scale)

Teach with Artifacts, Not Theory

For each phase, show:

• input artifact
• command/operator action
• output artifact
• review checklist

Teach with Fast Feedback

Include frequent checkpoints:

• “You should now have <artifact>”
• “Run <verification command>”
• “If it fails, do <recovery step>”

Teach with Verified Deltas

Every operator playbook should include:

• tested version
• known limitations
• compatibility notes

Definition of Done for Documentation Quality

Documentation is “operationally complete” when a new user can:

1. Install tools and initialize a project without external help.
2. Run charter -> plan -> tasks -> implement once end-to-end.
3. Resolve one controlled failure using documented recovery steps.
4. Deploy and verify a live artifact.