# MIL-STD-498 Workflow Audit Report

> Audit Date: 2026-03-02
> Auditor: Claude (BMAD Framework)
> Scope: All 7 MIL-STD-498 document generation workflows and templates
> Reference: DID PDFs from D:\mil498\MIL-STD-498-master\MIL-STD-498-templates-pdf\

---

## Executive Summary

Each of the 7 MIL-STD-498 workflows was compared line-by-line against its DID PDF template.

**Update (2026-03-02)**: All 7 workflows have been fully fixed:
- SSDD: Rewritten with CSCI Discovery Interview + requirements-driven behavioral guidance
- SDD: New SDD.md template created from DID. Instructions fully rewritten with epics/stories as primary inputs
- OCD: Added Sections 7 (impacts) and 8 (analysis), expanded 3.3/5.3 to items a-h, added 4.4/4.5, fixed section numbering
- SDP: Expanded Sections 4-5 to cover all 50+ DID subsections (5.1-5.19), added risk/uncertainty requirement
- STD: Fixed two-level test hierarchy (4.x → 4.x.y), expanded all sub-items to full DID detail, added safety callout
- SRS: Expanded 3.3.x interfaces (a-g), 3.10 (3.10.1-3.10.4), added 4.e special qualifications, Appendix A
- SSS: Expanded 3.3.x interfaces (a-g), 3.10, 3.12 (a-f with physical), 3.13-3.18, added 4.e, fixed Section 5
- All 7 workflows: Document dependency chain with predecessor alerts + CSCI scoping for per-CSCI docs

### Status

| Document | DID | Template | Instructions | Status |
|----------|-----|----------|-------------|--------|
| SSDD | DI-IPSC-81432 | Complete | Fully rewritten | **FIXED** |
| SRS | DI-IPSC-81433 | Complete | Fully rewritten | **FIXED** |
| SDD | DI-IPSC-81435 | **Created** | Fully rewritten | **FIXED** |
| SDP | DI-IPSC-81427 | Complete | Fully rewritten | **FIXED** |
| OCD | DI-IPSC-81430 | Complete | Fully rewritten | **FIXED** |
| SSS | DI-IPSC-81431 | Complete | Fully rewritten | **FIXED** |
| STD | DI-IPSC-81439 | Complete | Fully rewritten | **FIXED** |

### Document Dependency Chain

All workflows now enforce a dependency chain. When generating a document, the agent checks for predecessor documents and alerts the user if they are missing.

```
OCD (first — no predecessors)
 └──→ SSS (recommends OCD)
       └──→ SSDD (recommends SSS)
             ├──→ SRS (requires SSDD)
             │     ├──→ SDD (requires SRS + SSDD, uses Epics/Stories)
             │     └──→ STD (requires SRS + SSDD)
             └──→ SDP (recommends SSDD)
```

Per-CSCI documents (SRS, SDD, STD) now include a **CSCI Scoping** step that asks the user which CSCI from the SSDD this document covers.

### All Common Issues Resolved

All previously identified common issues have been fixed:
1. **Appendix A guidance** — All 7 workflows now include Appendix A section guidance
2. **Interface detail** — SRS 3.3.x, SSS 3.3.x, SDD 4.3.x, SSDD 4.3.x all now cover the full 7 categories (a-g) with sub-items
3. **CSCI scoping** — SRS, SDD, and STD all include a CSCI Scoping step
4. **Requirements-driven behavioral principle** — Both SSDD and SDD Section 3 now enforce behavioral language
5. **Qualification provisions** — SRS and SSS Section 4 now include "e. Special qualification methods"

---

## 1. SRS — Software Requirements Specification (DI-IPSC-81433)

### Template Assessment
**Verdict: Complete.** Template matches DID structure including all sections 1-6 and Appendix A.

### Workflow Instruction Gaps

| # | DID Section | Gap Description | Severity |
|---|-------------|-----------------|----------|
| 1 | Pre-generation | No CSCI scoping step — SRS is per-CSCI. Workflow must ask which CSCI from SSDD this SRS covers | High |
| 2 | 3.2 | "Map each Epic/feature from PRD" — but Epics may span multiple CSCIs. Must filter to in-scope CSCI | Medium |
| 3 | 3.3.x | Interface requirements have 7 categories (a-g) with detailed sub-items. Instructions collapse to one sentence | High |
| 4 | 3.10 | DID has 4 subsections (3.10.1-3.10.4). Instructions collapse to one bullet | Medium |
| 5 | 4 | Missing "e. Special qualification methods" | Low |
| 6 | 3, 5 | DID allows inline annotation of qualification methods and traceability as alternative to separate sections. Not mentioned | Low |
| 7 | A | No Appendix A guidance in instructions | Low |

### Recommended Fixes
- Add Step 2.5: CSCI Scoping — ask which CSCI, verify against SSDD
- Expand 3.3.x guidance to cover all 7 categories (a-g) with sub-items
- Expand 3.10 to explicitly list 3.10.1-3.10.4
- Add Section 4.e special qualification methods
- Add Appendix A section
- Add note about inline annotation alternative

---

## 2. SDD — Software Design Description (DI-IPSC-81435)

### Template Assessment
**Verdict: MISSING.** No SDD.md template exists. The workflow says "uses the SSDD template adapted for CSCI-level design" — but the SDD DID has a fundamentally different structure from SSDD. This is the most critical gap.

### Key Structural Differences (SDD DID vs SSDD DID)

| Aspect | SSDD (DI-IPSC-81432) | SDD (DI-IPSC-81435) |
|--------|----------------------|----------------------|
| Section 3 | System-wide decisions (a-f) | CSCI-wide decisions (a-e, no hardware item) |
| Section 4.1.e | Hardware resource descriptions | Resource utilization allocation per CSC |
| Section 4.1.f | Specification tree | Program library description |
| Section 5 | Requirements traceability | **CSCI detailed design** (5.x per unit, a-f) — entirely new |
| Section 6 | Notes | Requirements traceability |
| Section 7 | N/A | Notes |

### Workflow Instruction Gaps

| # | DID Section | Gap Description | Severity |
|---|-------------|-----------------|----------|
| 1 | Template | No SDD.md template exists — agent cannot follow DID structure | Critical |
| 2 | Pre-generation | No CSCI scoping step — SDD is per-CSCI | High |
| 3 | 3 | Section 3 items don't match DID (should be a-e for CSCI-level). Also needs requirements-driven behavioral guidance | High |
| 4 | 4.1.e | Missing resource utilization allocation per CSC | Medium |
| 5 | 4.1.f | Should be "program library" not "specification tree" (that's SSDD) | Medium |
| 6 | 5 | CSCI detailed design grossly under-specified. DID has 5.x per software unit with items a-f: unit design decisions, design constraints, programming language, control flow/logic, data elements/structures, restrictions/limitations | Critical |
| 7 | A | No Appendix A | Low |

### Recommended Fixes
- **Create SDD.md template** from DID PDF — this is critical
- Add Step 2.5: CSCI Scoping
- Rewrite Section 3 guidance with correct a-e items and behavioral principle
- Rewrite Section 4.1 with correct items (e=resource utilization, f=program library)
- Completely rewrite Section 5 guidance with detailed per-unit structure (a-f)
- Add Appendix A
- Remove reference to using SSDD template

---

## 3. SDP — Software Development Plan (DI-IPSC-81427)

### Template Assessment
**Verdict: Complete.** Template matches DID with all ~50 subsections in Sections 4-5.

### Workflow Instruction Gaps

| # | DID Section | Gap Description | Severity |
|---|-------------|-----------------|----------|
| 1 | 4.2 | DID has 7 subsections (4.2.1-4.2.7). Instructions compress to 1 bullet | Critical |
| 2 | 5 | DID has 19 major subsections (5.1-5.19) each with sub-items (~50 total). Instructions compress to 5 bullets | Critical |
| 3 | 4-5 | DID requires each paragraph to "identify applicable risks/uncertainties and plans for dealing with them". Not mentioned | High |
| 4 | 4.1, 5 | Instructions reference "BMAD-METHOD lifecycle" and "BMAD workflow" — project-specific, not DID-standard | Medium |
| 5 | 8 | No Notes section guidance (DID Section 8) | Low |
| 6 | A | No Appendix A guidance | Low |
| 7 | 5.14 | Software configuration management (5.14.1-5.14.5) not mentioned | Medium |
| 8 | 5.15-5.16 | Software product evaluation and QA not mentioned | Medium |
| 9 | 5.17 | Corrective action process not mentioned | Medium |
| 10 | 5.18 | Joint technical and management reviews not mentioned | Medium |

### Recommended Fixes
- Expand Section 4 guidance to explicitly cover 4.2.1-4.2.7
- Expand Section 5 guidance to cover all 19 subsections (5.1-5.19) with key content expectations
- Add risk/uncertainty identification requirement per paragraph
- Remove BMAD-specific references — make workflow DID-generic
- Add Section 8 Notes and Appendix A guidance

---

## 4. OCD — Operational Concept Description (DI-IPSC-81430)

### Template Assessment
**Verdict: Complete.** Template has all sections including 4.4, 4.5, 7.1-7.3, 8.1-8.3.

### Workflow Instruction Gaps

| # | DID Section | Gap Description | Severity |
|---|-------------|-----------------|----------|
| 1 | 7 | **Entire Section 7 "Summary of impacts" (7.1-7.3) missing** from instructions | Critical |
| 2 | 8 | **Entire Section 8 "Analysis of proposed system" (8.1-8.3) missing** from instructions | Critical |
| 3 | 4 | **Missing 4.4** "Changes considered but not included" and **4.5** "Assumptions and constraints" | High |
| 4 | 3.3 | DID has items a-h for current system description. Instructions cover only 4 of 8 items. Missing: d (capabilities), e (data flow charts), f (performance), g (quality), h (safety/security) | High |
| 5 | 5.3 | DID has items a-h for new system description (mirrors 3.3). Instructions thin | High |
| 6 | 7 (instr) | Instructions label Notes as "Section 7" but DID has it as Section 9. Section numbering is wrong | Medium |
| 7 | A | No Appendix A guidance | Low |

### Recommended Fixes
- Add Section 7 "Summary of impacts" with subsections 7.1-7.3
- Add Section 8 "Analysis of proposed system" with subsections 8.1-8.3
- Add 4.4 and 4.5 to Section 4
- Expand 3.3 and 5.3 to cover items a-h
- Fix section numbering (Notes = Section 9, not 7)
- Add Appendix A guidance

---

## 5. SSS — System/Subsystem Specification (DI-IPSC-81431)

### Template Assessment
**Verdict: Complete.** Template matches DID.

### Workflow Instruction Gaps

| # | DID Section | Gap Description | Severity |
|---|-------------|-----------------|----------|
| 1 | 3.3.x | DID has 7 categories (a-g) with detailed sub-items. Instructions say "Map top-level external interfaces" | High |
| 2 | 3.10 | DID has 4 subsections (3.10.1-3.10.4). Instructions collapse to one bullet | Medium |
| 3 | 3.12 | DID has items a-f including physical requirements (weight, dimensions, materials, nameplates). Instructions say "Technology and methodology constraints" — misses physical aspects | Medium |
| 4 | 3.13-3.18 | Instructions say "Additional requirement categories as defined in the template" — no guidance | Medium |
| 5 | 4 | Missing "e. Special qualification methods" | Low |
| 6 | 5 | DID distinguishes system-level (no traceability required) from subsystem-level. Instructions don't handle this distinction | Low |
| 7 | A | No Appendix A guidance | Low |

### Recommended Fixes
- Expand 3.3.x guidance to cover all 7 categories (a-g)
- Expand 3.10 to explicitly list 3.10.1-3.10.4
- Expand 3.12 to cover items a-f including physical requirements
- Add explicit guidance for 3.13-3.18
- Add Section 4.e special qualification methods
- Handle system vs subsystem distinction in Section 5
- Add Appendix A guidance

---

## 6. STD — Software Test Description (DI-IPSC-81439)

### Template Assessment
**Verdict: Complete.** Template is very detailed and matches DID.

### Workflow Instruction Gaps

| # | DID Section | Gap Description | Severity |
|---|-------------|-----------------|----------|
| 1 | 4 | DID has two-level hierarchy: 4.x (test) → 4.x.y (test case) → 4.x.y.1-7. Instructions flatten to one level | High |
| 2 | 4.x.y.2 | DID has items a-f for prerequisite conditions. Instructions say "preconditions and initial state" | High |
| 3 | 4.x.y.3 | DID has items a-e for test inputs including data control strategy (min/reasonable, overload/worst-case, invalid, retesting). Instructions thin | High |
| 4 | 4.x.y.5 | DID has items a-i for evaluation criteria. Instructions say "Pass/fail criteria" | High |
| 5 | 4.x.y.6 | DID has items a-e for test procedure with extensive detail (10 operator action sub-items, per-step results, error actions, analysis). Instructions say "Step-by-step procedure" | High |
| 6 | 3-4 | DID requires safety precautions (WARNING/CAUTION) and security/privacy considerations. Not mentioned | Medium |
| 7 | Pre-generation | No CSCI/system scoping step — STD can be for CSCI or system testing | Medium |
| 8 | A | No Appendix A guidance | Low |

### Recommended Fixes
- Preserve two-level test hierarchy (4.x → 4.x.y → 4.x.y.1-7)
- Expand 4.x.y.2 prerequisites to cover items a-f
- Expand 4.x.y.3 test inputs to cover items a-e with data control strategy
- Expand 4.x.y.5 evaluation criteria to cover items a-i
- Expand 4.x.y.6 test procedure to cover items a-e with detail
- Add safety/security considerations callout
- Add CSCI/system scoping step
- Add Appendix A guidance

---

## Fix Priority Matrix

### Priority 1 — Critical (structural defects that prevent compliance)

| Workflow | Fix | Effort |
|----------|-----|--------|
| SDD | Create SDD.md template from DID | Large |
| SDD | Rewrite instructions — Section 3 (a-e), 4.1 (e,f), Section 5 detailed design | Large |
| OCD | Add missing Sections 7 and 8 to instructions | Medium |
| SDP | Expand Sections 4-5 from 7 bullets to cover 50+ DID subsections | Large |

### Priority 2 — High (content will be significantly incomplete)

| Workflow | Fix | Effort |
|----------|-----|--------|
| SRS | Add CSCI scoping step | Small |
| SRS | Expand 3.3.x interface guidance (a-g) | Medium |
| SDD | Add CSCI scoping step + behavioral guidance | Small |
| OCD | Add 4.4, 4.5 + expand 3.3 and 5.3 (a-h) | Medium |
| SSS | Expand 3.3.x interface guidance (a-g) | Medium |
| STD | Preserve test hierarchy + expand 4.x.y sub-items | Medium |
| STD | Add CSCI/system scoping step | Small |
| SDP | Add risk/uncertainty requirement per paragraph | Small |

### Priority 3 — Medium/Low (completeness improvements)

| Workflow | Fix | Effort |
|----------|-----|--------|
| All 6 | Add Appendix A guidance | Small |
| SRS, SSS | Add Section 4.e special qualification methods | Small |
| SRS, SSS | Expand 3.10 (3.10.1-3.10.4) | Small |
| SSS | Expand 3.12 (a-f) and 3.13-3.18 | Small |
| SDP | Remove BMAD-specific references | Small |
| OCD | Fix section numbering (Notes = 9) | Small |
| STD | Add safety/security considerations callout | Small |

---

## Recommended Implementation Order

1. **SDD** (Critical) — Create template + rewrite instructions. Largest effort, highest impact.
2. **OCD** (Critical) — Add Sections 7-8 + fix Section 4. Medium effort.
3. **SDP** (Critical) — Expand Sections 4-5. Large effort but template is already correct.
4. **STD** (High) — Fix test hierarchy + expand sub-items. Medium effort.
5. **SRS** (High) — Add CSCI scoping + expand interfaces. Medium effort.
6. **SSS** (High) — Expand interfaces + 3.12 + qualification. Medium effort.

Total estimated changes: ~6 instruction rewrites + 1 new template.
