Bug Report

Description

When quick-dev writes a spec for a story that derives from a parent artifact (epic plan, PRD), it can silently drop requirements assigned to the story's scope during AC decomposition. The self-review step does not verify that every upstream requirement has a corresponding acceptance criterion.

Steps to Reproduce

1. Create an epic with an FR Coverage Map assigning specific FRs to a story
2. Run quick-dev to plan and implement that story
3. Observe that the generated spec may omit ACs for some assigned FRs — particularly when the epic annotation describes the architectural mechanism (e.g., "AccountingProvider abstraction validates this") rather than explicitly spelling out the test

Expected Behavior

Every requirement assigned to the story's scope in the parent artifact should have a corresponding AC in the quick-dev spec.

Actual Behavior

Requirements can be dropped when the spec author interprets architectural annotations as exemptions from testing. The self-review and adversarial review steps do not catch this because they validate the spec's internal consistency, not its completeness against upstream requirements.

Environment

• BMad Method latest (main)
• Discovered during production use with epic-level planning

Proposed Fix

Two minimal changes to bmad-quick-dev:

• step-02-plan.md: Extend the self-review to verify AC coverage against parent artifact requirements
• spec-template.md: Add a comment hint in the AC section reminding that parent-assigned requirements need ACs

Both changes are general-purpose (no project-specific logic) and preserve quick-dev's speed philosophy.