BMAD Tip: Prefer Intermediate Stories Over Ad-Hoc Improvements

[cdoudet]

Hi all.

When an improvement or fix emerges during development or code review, create a new intermediate story rather than expanding the scope of the current one.

Example:
Story 4.3 implements client matching.
During testing, we discover the candidate accumulation logic should be a funnel filter instead.

Rather than modifying 4.3, we create Story 4.3.1 dedicated to the refactoring.
Why?
Lighter context: Each story stays focused on a single objective
Better tracking: Sprint status accurately reflects real progress
Clean history: Commits remain atomic and traceable
Efficient reviews: Bounded scope = fast and precise reviews

I Think that is the BMAD spirit: small, validated, documented increments — not stories that bloat mid-flight.