SAFe-FCC Bridge Interpreter (SFBI) Prompts¶

Six prompts for the SAFe-FCC Bridge Interpreter — the persona that translates vocabulary between SAFe practitioners (portfolio epics, PI objectives, ARTs, features) and FCC practitioners (personas, workflows, scenarios, R.I.S.C.E.A.R. slots) without renaming either side.

SFBI is a jv_governance persona at Zachman cell ARCHITECT/WHY. It is the hinge that lets the two communities read the same governance artifacts without forcing either to adopt the other's jargon.

Context for Claude¶

When invoked as SFBI you read SAFe guidance + FCC docs, and emit translation hints that accompany a document rather than replacing its native terms. Your output is always bidirectional: SAFe→FCC + FCC→SAFe. You coordinate with SMC on metric vocabulary, with TLDR on the three-layer doc tree, and never introduce a third term when the two existing terms already cover the concept.

Prompt 1: Translate a portfolio epic¶

SFBI, translate this SAFe portfolio epic for FCC readers:
  "Epic E-2026-07: Harmonic Graph Expansion — deliver LYRA-backed
  GraphRAG across 3 ARTs by PI-2026-Q3."

Produce:
- FCC-language equivalent (reference Pillar A, the LYRA bridge,
  and the three ARTs as Framework / Ecosystem / Docs).
- Reverse translation: how would an FCC contributor describe this
  to a SAFe Release Train Engineer?
- 3 terms that are NOT interchangeable across the two communities
  (e.g., "feature" has different meaning in each).

Expected outcome: two-way translation + non-interchangeable term list.

Prompt 2: R.I.S.C.E.A.R. slot ↔ SAFe artifact mapping¶

Map each of the 10 R.I.S.C.E.A.R. slots to its nearest SAFe
artifact analog. Where no analog exists, explain why. Present as a
table with columns: slot, SAFe analog, 1-sentence rationale,
exists-y/n.

Expected outcome: 10-row table, gaps explicitly marked.

Prompt 3: Three-ART structure explainer¶

A new hire arrives on the SAFe side. Write a 300-word explainer
that covers:
- What the 3 FCC ARTs (Framework, Ecosystem, Docs) do day-to-day.
- Which FCC personas anchor each ART.
- How PI cadence interacts with FCC's semver + patch-series pattern.

Close with a 3-item first-week reading list.

Expected outcome: explainer ready for onboarding packet.

Prompt 4: Metric vocabulary accord with SMC¶

SMC wants to call the metric "lead time". SAFe coaches argue for
"cycle time". Draft a 1-page accord that:
- Names the canonical term FCC will use internally.
- Names the SAFe-facing synonym for external communication.
- Specifies where each term must appear in docs/safe/.
- Gives SMC explicit permission to use the canonical term.

Expected outcome: signed accord that both communities can reference during PI planning.

Prompt 5: PI planning kickoff prompt¶

Draft the opening prompt for a PI-2026-Q4 planning session joint
between SAFe RTEs and FCC maintainers. Include:
- 3 scope framing questions (one from each framework).
- Translation of 2 SAFe acronyms and 2 FCC acronyms.
- A "vocabulary yellow-card" rule: pause when any participant uses
  a third term not on the accord list.

Expected outcome: agenda-ready opener.

Prompt 6: Bridge failure diagnosis¶

Last PI, a SAFe feature shipped in FCC under a different name and
two parallel ADRs were created. Forensically walk back through the
PI artifacts and diagnose:
- Where did the vocabulary bridge break?
- Which R.I.S.C.E.A.R. slot should have caught it?
- What SFBI automation / accord would prevent a recurrence?

Expected outcome: root-cause narrative + preventive accord.

Tutorial: docs/tutorials/advanced-capabilities/performance-optimization-guide.md
Persona YAML: src/fcc/data/personas/safe_fcc_bridge_interpreter.yaml
ADR: docs/decisions/ADR-007_safe_skeleton.md (v1.5.1)
Related prompts: persona-smc-prompts.md, persona-tldr-prompts.md