Integrate updated Claude audit report and new annotated documents.

- Added executive summary and project overview
- Conducted architecture, security, and compliance reviews
- Assessed technology stack and development/deployment strategies
- Provided risk assessment and prioritized recommendations
- Included audit metadata and next steps

AUDIT_REPORT_MGR-GEMINI_V2.md

@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+# Audit Report: sol-calc.com Project Review - Iteration 2 (MGR-GEMINI Branch)
+
+**Date:** 2025-09-03
+**Auditor:** Gemini (acting as external auditor/team member)
+**Scope:** Review of project documentation, Gemini's planning, and work identified across branches, incorporating insights from other agents' audits.
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+Since the initial audit, the `sol-calc.com` project has seen significant evolution in its planning, particularly with the detailed specification of the "Installation Planning Wizard" in `TASKS.md`. While the foundational architectural and security principles remain strong, the introduction of this complex core functionality, coupled with the project's current state of zero code implementation, elevates the overall risk profile. This audit incorporates insights from both Claude's and Grok's comprehensive reports, which largely concur on the project's ambitious scope and the critical need for concrete implementation and domain expertise.
+
+The project demonstrates excellent foresight in its architectural choices and commitment to security and modern development practices. However, the gap between detailed planning and actual execution, especially for the highly complex core features, is a primary concern.
+
+## Detailed Findings and Recommendations
+
+### 1. Project Vision and Scope Evolution
+
+*   **Finding:** The project vision has been significantly elaborated with the "Installation Planning Wizard" in `TASKS.md`. This section details critical functionalities like site assessment, system design, energy production estimation, and reporting, along with user flows, data inputs, and core calculations. This is a clear step towards defining the product's core value.
+*   **Assessment:** This detailed functional specification is a positive development, providing clarity on the product's intended capabilities. However, it also exposes the immense technical and domain complexity inherent in the project. Both Claude and Grok highlight this as a major concern, emphasizing the need for specialized solar engineering knowledge, 3D visualization, and complex algorithms.
+*   **Recommendation:**
+    *   **Prioritize MVP:** Re-evaluate the "Installation Planning Wizard" features to define a truly minimal viable product (MVP). Many listed features (e.g., 3D site visualization, CAD export) are highly complex and could be phased in later.
+    *   **Phased Implementation:** Break down the wizard into smaller, manageable phases. Focus on getting basic calculations and reporting functional before tackling advanced features.
+    *   **Domain Expertise:** As both Claude and Grok suggest, actively seek and integrate solar engineering domain expertise into the team. Research and consider leveraging existing, proven solar engineering libraries (e.g., pvlib, SAM) rather than building all calculations from scratch.
+
+### 2. Architecture and Technology Stack
+
+*   **Finding:** The microservices architecture, preferred languages (Rust, Go), gRPC, PostgreSQL, and comprehensive observability stack (OpenTelemetry, Prometheus, Grafana Loki, SigNoz) remain consistent and well-chosen for a scalable, high-performance system.
+*   **Assessment:** The architectural choices are sound for a long-term, robust solution. However, as Grok points out, this complexity might be an "overkill for initial MVP." The detailed wizard functionality further stresses the need for robust inter-service communication and data management, especially with the Dolibarr integration.
+*   **Recommendation:**
+    *   **Service Definition:** Begin defining concrete service interfaces using gRPC proto definitions for the core wizard functionalities. This will clarify inter-service contracts and facilitate parallel development.
+    *   **Data Modeling:** Develop detailed database schemas for the data inputs and outputs of the wizard, ensuring consistency across services.
+    *   **Integration Strategy:** Prioritize the robust implementation of the Dolibarr Integration Service, as it's critical for project and customer data. Define clear error handling and resilience strategies for all external integrations (Keycloak, Hyperswitch, external weather/solar APIs).
+
+### 3. Development Environment and Workflow
+
+*   **Finding:** The commitment to containerized development (Docker/devcontainers), feature branching, and frequent commits is consistently emphasized across documentation.
+*   **Assessment:** These practices are excellent for consistency and collaboration. However, the audit revealed that the initial documentation (`ARCHITECTURE.md`, `DEV-SETUP.md`, `PROD-SETUP.md`, `SECURITY.md`, and the "Testing Strategy" in `TASKS.md") was primarily developed in the `docs` branch. The "Installation Planning Wizard" content was introduced elsewhere (likely `main` or another branch merged into `main` and then into `MGR-GEMINI`). This suggests a potential divergence in documentation development workflows.
+*   **Recommendation:**
+    *   **Unified Documentation Workflow:** Clarify and enforce a single, consistent workflow for all documentation updates. If the `docs` branch is intended for all documentation, ensure all significant planning updates (like the wizard details) are routed through it.
+    *   **Automated Setup:** As suggested in my previous audit, develop automated scripts (e.g., `docker-compose.yml`) to quickly spin up the entire development environment, including all necessary microservices and the observability stack.
+
+### 4. Security and Compliance
+
+*   **Finding:** The project maintains a strong commitment to security, adhering to multiple compliance standards (SOC, SOX, PCI, GDPR, NIST) and emphasizing security-by-design principles.
+*   **Assessment:** The security posture is theoretically robust. However, as Claude notes, "No actual implementation" means the security review is currently theoretical. The complexity of the "Installation Planning Wizard" and its data inputs (e.g., geographic location, property boundaries) introduces new security considerations, particularly around data privacy and integrity.
+*   **Recommendation:**
+    *   **Threat Modeling for Wizard:** Conduct specific threat modeling exercises for the "Installation Planning Wizard" functionality, identifying potential vulnerabilities related to data input, calculations, and reporting.
+    *   **Data Classification:** Implement a clear data classification scheme for all data handled by the wizard, ensuring appropriate encryption and access controls.
+    *   **Input Validation:** Reinforce rigorous input validation for all wizard inputs to prevent malicious data injection or calculation manipulation.
+
+### 5. Testing Strategy
+
+*   **Finding:** The initial "Testing Strategy" in `TASKS.md` (now replaced by the wizard details) outlined a comprehensive approach to unit, integration, E2E, and performance testing.
+*   **Assessment:** While the strategy was sound, the removal of this section from `TASKS.md` is concerning. The complexity of the "Installation Planning Wizard" makes a robust testing strategy even more critical. Claude's report specifically highlights "Domain calculation validation strategy missing (critical for professional trust)."
+*   **Recommendation:**
+    *   **Re-establish Testing Strategy:** Re-integrate a dedicated and detailed testing strategy section into the project documentation.
+    *   **Prioritize Calculation Validation:** Develop a rigorous strategy for validating the accuracy of all solar engineering calculations within the wizard. This is paramount for the application's credibility and professional trust. Consider using known good test cases and comparing results against established industry tools.
+    *   **Automated Testing for Wizard:** Implement automated unit, integration, and E2E tests for the wizard's core functionalities as they are developed.
+
+### 6. CI/CD and Observability
+
+*   **Finding:** The CI/CD strategy (Gitea Actions, Jenkins) and comprehensive observability stack remain in place.
+*   **Assessment:** These are strong choices for a microservices environment. However, as Grok points out, "No actual pipeline definitions or workflows" exist yet. The increased complexity of the wizard will demand sophisticated CI/CD pipelines and detailed observability for debugging and performance monitoring.
+*   **Recommendation:**
+    *   **Pipeline Definition:** Begin defining concrete CI/CD pipelines for the initial microservices, focusing on automated builds, testing, and deployment to development environments.
+    *   **Observability Implementation:** Start implementing the observability stack alongside the first microservices. Ensure metrics, logs, and traces are collected for the wizard's core calculation services.
+
+### 7. Integration of Other Agents' Insights
+
+*   **Finding:** Both Claude's and Grok's audit reports provide valuable, largely consistent insights. They both emphasize the significant complexity of the "Installation Planning Wizard," the lack of concrete implementation, and the need for specialized domain expertise. Grok specifically highlights the learning curve for Rust/Go and the potential for microservices to be overkill for an MVP.
+*   **Assessment:** The convergence of these independent audits on key risks (scope, complexity, implementation gap) reinforces their criticality.
+*   **Recommendation:** Actively review and address the specific recommendations and concerns raised in both `MGR-CLAUDE-AUDIT-REPORT.md` and `MGR-GROK-COMPREHENSIVE-AUDIT-REPORT.md`. These reports serve as excellent external validations of the project's challenges.
+
+## Conclusion
+
+The `sol-calc.com` project has a clear vision and a robust theoretical foundation. The detailed "Installation Planning Wizard" is a significant step in defining the product. However, the project is at a critical juncture where the ambitious scope of this core functionality meets the reality of zero code implementation. The insights from Claude and Grok further underscore the challenges.
+
+To ensure success, the project must:
+1.  **Prioritize a truly minimal viable product (MVP)** for the "Installation Planning Wizard," focusing on core calculations and reporting.
+2.  **Begin concrete implementation** of microservices, starting with the most critical components of the wizard.
+3.  **Actively acquire and integrate domain expertise** in solar engineering.
+4.  **Re-establish and rigorously implement a comprehensive testing strategy**, with a strong emphasis on calculation validation.
+5.  **Unify and streamline documentation workflows.**
+
+Moving forward, the focus should shift from extensive planning to iterative development, with continuous validation and adaptation based on early implementations.
+
+This report will be committed to the `MGR-GEMINI` branch.

CoreRequirements-SAAS.md

@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
+### Core Technical Requirements & Architecture Document
+
+#### Development Environment & Workflow
+- All work will be performed exclusively inside **Docker or devcontainer environments**. The host machine must remain pristine.
+- All commands will be executed inside containers using `docker exec`.
+- Work will be done on dedicated **feature branches** (e.g., `feature/login`, `wip/database-migration`). The `main` branch is protected and will not be used for direct commits.
+- A dedicated **`docs` branch** will be used for all documentation and will be kept merged into all active feature branches.
+- Frequent commits and pushes are mandatory. Use Git tags to mark significant milestones and release points, ensuring tags are pushed to the remote repository.
+- **Tools:** Gitea will be the sole Git repository management system.
+
+---
+
+#### Language & Technology Stack
+- The preferred languages, in descending order of preference, are **Rust**, **Go**, and **C**.
+- **Rust** is the primary choice for its security, performance, and memory safety.
+- **Go** will be used for its concurrency and simplicity, especially for services requiring high-concurrency handling.
+- **C** will be used sparingly for specific, performance-critical components via Foreign Function Interface (FFI).
+- **Node.js and Python** will be avoided unless a specific feature has a clear, compelling advantage.
+- **Cloud/PAAS:** Coolify will be used for custom application deployment.
+
+---
+
+#### Architecture, Security & Compliance
+- The architecture will be based on **microservices**, with the smallest possible feature boundaries.
+- **Security is paramount.** All projects will adhere to SOC, SOX, PCI, GDPR, and NIST standards. ITAR and classified work requirements will be handled on a per-project basis.
+- **Accessibility and internationalization** are essential and non-optional requirements for all projects.
+- **Database:** **PostgreSQL** will be our primary database.
+- **Data Access:** No direct database access is permitted between microservices. All communication must be handled via APIs.
+
+---
+
+#### Analysis & Recommendations
+
+Based on your new input, I have refined our architectural blueprint and can now propose concrete solutions.
+
+**Q: How should we handle Continuous Integration and Continuous Deployment?**
+A: We will use Gitea Actions as the default for event-driven workflows (e.g., pushes to feature branches, pull requests). Jenkins will be used for scheduled jobs, such as nightly builds or automated deployment runs, leveraging its powerful scheduling features.
+
+**Q: For persistent data, what are your preferences for database technologies? How should we handle state management between microservices?**
+A: **PostgreSQL** will be our primary database. State management between microservices will be strictly handled through **API communication**; no direct database access is allowed between services.
+
+**Q: What is your preferred protocol for communication between microservices? How should we handle API versioning and documentation?**
+A: We will use **gRPC** for inter-service communication due to its performance and type safety, which aligns with our language preferences. APIs will be versioned and documented using the OpenAPI (Swagger) specification.
+
+**Q: How should we integrate logging, tracing, and monitoring into the development workflow to ensure we have clear visibility into application performance and health?**
+A: We will use a comprehensive, self-hosted observability stack: **OpenTelemetry** for collecting data, **Prometheus** for metrics, **Grafana Loki** for logs, and **SigNoz** for distributed tracing and unified visualization.

MGR-CLAUDE-ANNOTATED-README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,163 @@
+# README.md - MGR-CLAUDE ANNOTATIONS
+
+**🔴 AUDIT ALERT:** This README reveals the project's evolution from a simple "coming soon" page to a comprehensive solar engineering platform - a fundamental scope change.
+
+---
+
+# sol-calc.com
+
+## Overview
+
+> `sol-calc.com` is a cutting-edge web application designed to empower skilled professionals, such as electricians and electrical engineers, in the planning, design, and project management of ground mount solar installations.
+
+**📊 MARKET ANALYSIS:**
+- **Target Market**: Professional electricians and electrical engineers
+- **Market Maturity**: Established players dominate (Aurora Solar, PVSyst, HelioScope)
+- **Professional Standards**: High accuracy expectations, liability concerns
+- **Entry Barriers**: Years of validation, extensive component databases required
+
+**⚠️ COMPETITIVE REALITY:** This positions sol-calc.com directly against well-funded, established competitors with decades of development.
+
+## Core Functionalities (Planned)
+
+> While the initial phase will focus on a "coming soon" brochureware site, the full vision for `sol-calc.com` includes:
+
+**🚨 SCOPE GAP ALERT:** Massive complexity gap between "coming soon" and listed functionalities.
+
+### Solar Array Sizing & Design
+> Advanced tools for calculating optimal solar panel configurations, considering energy requirements, available space, and local solar irradiance data.
+
+**🔴 COMPLEXITY:** Requires:
+- Solar irradiance databases (NREL, weather APIs)
+- Optimization algorithms (multi-objective, constrained)
+- Validated calculation models
+- Component compatibility matrices
+
+### Inverter Compatibility
+> Features to determine compatible inverters and string configurations for various solar setups.
+
+**💡 TECHNICAL DEPTH:** Requires:
+- Comprehensive inverter database (continuous updates)
+- Electrical compatibility logic (MPPT ranges, voltage limits)
+- String sizing algorithms
+- NEC compliance validation
+
+### Shading Analysis
+> Sophisticated simulations to analyze shading impacts throughout the year, optimizing panel placement for maximum efficiency.
+
+**🔴 EXTREME COMPLEXITY:**
+- 3D geometric modeling
+- Sun path calculations (astronomical precision)
+- Ray-tracing algorithms for shadow analysis
+- Time-series irradiance modeling
+
+**💰 DEVELOPMENT COST:** This alone could require months of specialized development.
+
+### Bill of Materials (BOM) Generation
+> Automated generation of comprehensive lists of required components for solar projects.
+
+**📋 DATA REQUIREMENTS:**
+- Current pricing from multiple suppliers
+- Component compatibility validation
+- Regional availability considerations
+- Continuous database maintenance
+
+### Financial Projections
+> Tools to provide basic financial analysis, including ROI and payback period, for solar installations.
+
+**💼 FINANCIAL MODELING:** Requires:
+- Regional utility rate structures
+- Incentive program databases
+- Time-value-of-money calculations
+- Degradation and maintenance modeling
+
+### Reporting
+> Generation of professional, client-ready reports and regulatory documents, including one-time purchasable PDF plans.
+
+**📊 PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS:**
+- Industry-standard report formats
+- CAD-quality diagrams
+- Regulatory compliance documentation
+- Professional liability considerations
+
+### Project Management
+> Integration with Dolibarr for comprehensive project tracking, task management, and deadline oversight.
+
+**🔗 INTEGRATION COMPLEXITY:** Adds another layer of external system integration.
+
+## Technology Stack (Core Principles)
+
+**✅ AUDIT APPROVAL:** Technology choices are appropriate for the complexity level.
+
+### Primary Languages: Rust and Go
+**👍 GOOD CHOICE:** Performance and safety appropriate for calculation-intensive applications.
+
+### Database: PostgreSQL
+**✅ SOLID:** Appropriate for complex relational data and performance requirements.
+
+### Inter-service Communication: gRPC
+**👍 EXCELLENT:** High-performance, type-safe communication suitable for calculation services.
+
+### Authentication & Authorization: Keycloak
+**⚠️ COMPLEXITY:** Adds external dependency, but necessary for professional platform.
+
+### Payment Processing: Hyperswitch + Stripe
+**💰 COST CONSIDERATION:** Payment processing adds compliance requirements (PCI DSS).
+
+### Deployment: Coolify
+**🤔 QUESTION:** Capability for high-computation workloads unclear.
+
+### Observability: OpenTelemetry, Prometheus, Grafana Loki, SigNoz
+**✅ COMPREHENSIVE:** Appropriate for complex microservices architecture.
+
+## Getting Started (Conceptual)
+
+> Utilize the provided `docker-compose.yml` to spin up all necessary microservices
+
+**🚨 REALITY CHECK:** No docker-compose.yml exists - this is entirely conceptual.
+
+**📋 MISSING IMPLEMENTATIONS:**
+- No Docker configurations
+- No microservice definitions  
+- No development environment setup
+- No calculation libraries
+
+## Documentation
+
+**✅ DOCUMENTATION QUALITY:** Comprehensive planning documentation is excellent.
+
+**⚠️ IMPLEMENTATION GAP:** Documentation describes complex functionality with no implementation.
+
+## License: GNU Affero General Public License v3.0
+
+**🏛️ LICENSE CONSIDERATION:** AGPL may limit commercial partnerships or white-labeling opportunities.
+
+## Contact: [your-email@example.com]
+
+**📧 PLACEHOLDER:** No actual contact information provided.
+
+---
+
+## MGR-CLAUDE OVERALL README ASSESSMENT
+
+**🎯 VISION vs. REALITY GAP:**
+The README presents a compelling vision but reveals a fundamental disconnect between the simple "coming soon" MVP and the sophisticated engineering platform described.
+
+**🔴 CRITICAL FINDINGS:**
+1. **Scope Escalation**: From brochureware to advanced engineering platform
+2. **Competitive Positioning**: Direct competition with established, well-funded leaders
+3. **Technical Complexity**: Each listed feature represents months of specialized development
+4. **Professional Standards**: Accuracy and liability implications not addressed
+
+**📊 MARKET REALITY:**
+- Aurora Solar: $250M+ funding, decades of development
+- PVSyst: 30+ years of industry validation
+- HelioScope: Acquired by Aurora for advanced capabilities
+
+**💡 STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATIONS:**
+1. **Reassess Scope**: Consider focusing on specific niche or simpler functionality
+2. **Partnership Strategy**: Partner with existing providers rather than compete directly
+3. **Phased Approach**: Start with much simpler calculator tools
+4. **Domain Expertise**: Acquire solar engineering expertise before proceeding
+
+**The README describes an ambitious vision that, while technically feasible, requires resources and expertise far beyond typical startup capabilities.**

MGR-CLAUDE-ANNOTATED-TASKS.md

@@ -0,0 +1,165 @@
+# TASKS.md - MGR-CLAUDE ANNOTATIONS
+
+**🔴 CRITICAL AUDIT FEEDBACK:** The Installation Planning Wizard specification reveals a massive scope escalation that fundamentally changes the project's complexity, resource requirements, and risk profile.
+
+---
+
+## 9. Installation Planning Wizard (Core Functionality)
+
+**🚨 CLAUDE AUDIT ALERT:** This section represents the most significant finding in the project review. The detailed specification reveals this is not a simple web application but a sophisticated engineering platform.
+
+### 9.1. Overview
+
+> The Installation Planning Wizard will guide users (electricians, electrical engineers) through the process of designing and planning ground mount solar installations.
+
+**📊 AUDIT ASSESSMENT:**
+- **Target Market**: Professional engineers/electricians (high expectations for accuracy)
+- **Liability Risk**: Engineering calculations have professional/legal implications
+- **Competitive Landscape**: Mature market with established leaders (Aurora Solar, PVSyst)
+
+### 9.2. Key Features
+
+#### 9.2.1. Site Assessment
+- **Geographic Location Input:** Address or GPS coordinates.
+- **Solar Resource Data Integration:** Insolation, sun path analysis.
+- **Topography Analysis:** Slope, shading identification
+- **Obstacle Identification:** Tools to mark and define existing structures
+
+**🔴 COMPLEXITY ALERT:**
+- **Geospatial Integration**: Requires mapping APIs (Google Maps, ESRI) - significant cost and complexity
+- **Solar Resource Data**: Needs access to NREL databases, weather APIs - ongoing data costs
+- **Topography Analysis**: Requires DEM (Digital Elevation Model) data processing
+- **Missing**: No identification of specific data sources or APIs
+
+**💡 RECOMMENDATION:** Define specific external APIs and cost structure before proceeding.
+
+#### 9.2.2. System Design
+- **Module Selection:** Database of solar panel types, wattages, and dimensions.
+- **Inverter Selection:** Database of string, micro, and central inverters with compatibility checks.
+- **Array Layout Optimization:** Tools to maximize energy yield and minimize shading.
+
+**🔴 MAJOR COMPLEXITY:**
+- **Component Databases**: Thousands of solar modules/inverters requiring continuous updates
+- **Compatibility Logic**: Complex electrical compatibility between components
+- **Optimization Algorithms**: Multi-objective optimization (NP-hard problem)
+- **Missing**: No strategy for obtaining/maintaining component data
+
+**⚠️ COMPETITIVE REALITY:** Aurora Solar has spent $250M+ building this capability over decades.
+
+#### 9.2.3. Energy Production Estimation
+- **Energy Yield Prediction:** Hourly/daily/annual energy yield.
+- **Loss Calculations:** Temperature, soiling, shading, inverter efficiency, wiring losses, degradation.
+
+**🔴 EXTREME COMPLEXITY:**
+- **Solar Physics**: Requires deep understanding of photovoltaic physics
+- **Meteorological Modeling**: Complex weather pattern analysis
+- **Shading Calculations**: Computational geometry and ray-tracing algorithms
+- **Validation Required**: Professional tools need validated accuracy
+
+**🚨 PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY:** Inaccurate calculations could result in significant financial losses for customers.
+
+#### 9.2.4. Reporting & Visualization
+- **3D Site Visualization:** With solar array overlay.
+- **Detailed Design Reports:** Bill of materials, single-line diagrams.
+- **Export Options:** PDF, CAD, CSV.
+
+**🔴 ADVANCED TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS:**
+- **3D Graphics Engine**: WebGL, Three.js, or similar - significant development effort
+- **CAD Generation**: Professional-grade technical drawings
+- **Report Templates**: Industry-standard formatting and compliance
+- **Missing**: No graphics framework or CAD library identified
+
+### 9.3. User Interaction Flow (High-Level)
+
+**📋 AUDIT NOTE:** The 10-step workflow appears reasonable, but each step hides significant complexity.
+
+**🚨 UX CHALLENGE:** Professional tools require intuitive interfaces despite technical complexity - significant design challenge.
+
+### 9.4. Data Inputs
+
+#### 9.4.1. Site Information
+- Local weather data (temperature, wind, snow load - *integrated via external APIs*).
+
+**💰 COST ALERT:** Weather APIs can be expensive for professional-grade accuracy.
+
+#### 9.4.2. System Components
+- **Solar Modules:** Manufacturer, model, wattage, dimensions, efficiency, temperature coefficients.
+
+**🔄 DATA MAINTENANCE:** Component specifications change frequently - requires continuous updates.
+
+### 9.5. Core Calculations
+
+**🔴 HIGHEST RISK SECTION:** These calculations are the core intellectual property of established competitors.
+
+#### 9.5.1. Solar Resource & Shading
+- Sun path analysis for specific location and time.
+- Irradiance on tilted surface.
+- Shading losses based on obstacle geometry and sun path.
+
+**🧮 ALGORITHM COMPLEXITY:**
+- **Astronomical Calculations**: Sun position algorithms (high precision required)
+- **Geometric Ray-Tracing**: For shading analysis
+- **Atmospheric Modeling**: For irradiance calculations
+
+**📚 EXISTING SOLUTIONS:** pvlib-python provides many of these calculations - leverage rather than rebuild.
+
+#### 9.5.2. Array Sizing & Layout
+- Array dimensions.
+- Optimal tilt angle and azimuth.
+- Row-to-row shading calculations.
+
+**🔍 OPTIMIZATION PROBLEM:** Multi-objective optimization with constraints - computationally intensive.
+
+#### 9.5.3. Electrical Design
+- String sizing (modules per string).
+- Wire sizing (gauge, voltage drop).
+- Conduit fill calculations.
+
+**⚡ ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING:** Requires NEC (National Electrical Code) compliance knowledge.
+
+#### 9.5.4. Energy Production
+- Hourly/daily/monthly/annual AC energy production (kWh) accounting for various losses.
+
+**📊 CRITICAL FOR SUCCESS:** Accuracy here determines professional credibility.
+
+#### 9.5.5. Financial Metrics
+- NPV, IRR, Payback period, LCOE
+
+**💼 FINANCIAL MODELING:** Complex time-series analysis with regional variations.
+
+### 9.6. Microservice Interactions
+
+**🏗️ ARCHITECTURE IMPACT:** The wizard significantly complicates the microservice architecture:
+
+- **Calculation Service**: Now requires advanced algorithms and significant computational power
+- **BOM Service**: Requires extensive, continuously updated component database
+- **Reporting Service**: Must generate professional CAD-quality outputs
+- **Dolibarr Integration Service**: Must handle complex engineering project data
+
+**⚠️ PERFORMANCE CONCERN:** Interactive design tools need low-latency responses for complex calculations.
+
+### 9.7. Initial Tasks for Installation Planning Wizard
+
+**🚨 AUDIT RECOMMENDATION:** Before proceeding with these tasks, complete:
+
+1. **MANDATORY FIRST:** Feasibility study comparing development effort vs. partnering/white-labeling
+2. **MANDATORY SECOND:** Professional liability and accuracy validation strategy
+3. **MANDATORY THIRD:** Domain expertise acquisition plan
+
+**Current task list is premature without addressing fundamental viability questions.**
+
+---
+
+## MGR-CLAUDE OVERALL ASSESSMENT OF INSTALLATION WIZARD
+
+**🔴 RISK RATING: EXTREME**
+
+This specification transforms the project from a simple web application into a sophisticated engineering platform competing with established industry leaders who have decades of development and hundreds of millions in funding.
+
+**IMMEDIATE RECOMMENDATIONS:**
+1. **Scope Reassessment**: Consider alternative approaches (partnerships, white-labeling, simpler scope)
+2. **Domain Expertise**: Acquire solar engineering expertise before proceeding
+3. **Market Analysis**: Deep dive into competitive landscape and differentiation strategy
+4. **Risk Assessment**: Professional liability and calculation accuracy implications
+
+**The current approach, while well-planned, represents an extremely high-risk path that may not be viable without significant additional resources and expertise.**

MGR-CLAUDE-AUDIT-REPORT.md

@@ -0,0 +1,396 @@
+# Sol-Calc.com Project Audit Report
+**Auditor:** Claude (External Review)  
+**Branch:** MGR-CLAUDE  
+**Date:** September 3, 2025  
+**Project Phase:** Planning & Architecture Design  
+**Updated:** After reviewing enhanced README.md and TASKS.md with detailed functionality
+
+---
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+This audit reviews the sol-calc.com project planning and architecture, conducted by Gemini AI in collaboration with the project stakeholders. The project aims to create a specialized solar installation planning SaaS platform for electrical professionals, built on microservices with strict security, compliance, and performance requirements.
+
+**Overall Assessment: ⚠️ CAUTIOUSLY OPTIMISTIC WITH ELEVATED COMPLEXITY CONCERNS**
+- **UPDATED**: Clear business domain focus on solar installation planning for professionals
+- **NEW**: Detailed Installation Planning Wizard specification reveals significant technical complexity
+- Strong architectural planning and comprehensive documentation
+- **CRITICAL**: Major gap between ambitious functionality and implementation readiness
+- Excellent security and compliance awareness
+- **RISK ESCALATION**: Domain-specific calculations and integrations add substantial complexity
+
+---
+
+## Project Overview Analysis
+
+### Strengths ✅
+1. **Clear Business Domain**: Well-defined focus on solar installation planning for electrical professionals
+2. **Detailed Functional Specification**: Comprehensive Installation Planning Wizard with specific features and calculations
+3. **Professional Target Market**: Targeting skilled electricians and electrical engineers (strong market positioning)
+4. **Comprehensive Documentation**: Extensive planning across architecture, security, setup, and functionality
+5. **Security-First Mindset**: Strong emphasis on SOC, SOX, PCI, GDPR, NIST compliance
+6. **Technology Stack Rationale**: Justified choice of Rust/Go for performance and security
+7. **Microservices Architecture**: Appropriate for complex domain calculations and integrations
+
+### Critical Concerns 🔴
+1. **No Actual Implementation**: Project is 100% planning documents with zero code
+2. **Massive Scope-Complexity Gap**: Installation Planning Wizard requires sophisticated algorithms, 3D visualization, complex solar calculations
+3. **Domain Expertise Required**: Solar engineering calculations, electrical design, regulatory compliance knowledge needed
+4. **Multiple Complex Integrations**: External APIs for weather data, solar irradiance, geographical data
+5. **Advanced UI Requirements**: 3D site visualization, interactive array design tools, CAD export capabilities
+
+### Additional Concerns ⚠️
+1. **Resource Requirements**: Substantial infrastructure, development effort, and domain expertise required
+2. **Integration Complexity**: Multiple external systems (Keycloak, Dolibarr, Hyperswitch, Stripe, Weather APIs, Solar databases)
+3. **Time-to-Market Risk**: Complex functionality may delay MVP significantly
+4. **Competition Risk**: Established players like PVSyst, HelioScope, Aurora Solar already dominate this market
+
+---
+
+## Installation Planning Wizard Analysis
+
+### Core Functionality Assessment
+**Rating: 🔴 HIGH RISK - SIGNIFICANT COMPLEXITY**
+
+The newly detailed Installation Planning Wizard represents the core value proposition but introduces substantial technical and domain challenges:
+
+#### Technical Complexity Requirements
+1. **3D Visualization Engine**: Real-time 3D site rendering with solar array overlay
+2. **Complex Solar Calculations**: 
+   - Sun path analysis with astronomical calculations
+   - Shading analysis using geometric ray-tracing
+   - Irradiance calculations on tilted surfaces
+   - Temperature, soiling, and degradation loss modeling
+3. **Geospatial Integration**: GPS coordinates, property boundaries, topographical data
+4. **CAD Export Capabilities**: Professional-grade technical drawings and diagrams
+5. **Financial Modeling**: NPV, IRR, LCOE calculations with time-series analysis
+
+#### Domain Expertise Requirements
+1. **Solar Engineering**: Understanding of photovoltaic physics, electrical design principles
+2. **Regulatory Knowledge**: Local codes, permitting requirements, utility interconnection standards
+3. **Financial Modeling**: Energy industry financial metrics and incentive structures
+4. **Geotechnical**: Foundation design considerations for mounting systems
+
+#### Critical Implementation Gaps
+1. **No Solar Engineering Library**: No mention of existing libraries (e.g., pvlib, SAM) for proven calculations
+2. **Missing Component Databases**: Solar modules, inverters, mounting systems require comprehensive, up-to-date catalogs
+3. **External API Dependencies**: Weather data, solar irradiance, geographical services not identified
+4. **Algorithm Complexity**: Shading analysis and array optimization are computationally intensive problems
+
+#### Competitive Landscape Concerns
+- **Aurora Solar**: Market leader with $250M+ funding, advanced ML algorithms
+- **PVSyst**: Industry standard for 30+ years with validated models
+- **HelioScope**: Acquired by Aurora, strong in design optimization
+- **Entry Barrier**: Established players have years of validation, extensive component databases, and professional trust
+
+### Microservice Architecture Impact
+**Rating: 🟡 MODERATE RISK - INCREASED COMPLEXITY**
+
+The wizard functionality adds significant complexity to the planned microservices:
+
+#### Service Dependencies
+- **Calculation Service**: Must handle computationally intensive solar calculations
+- **BOM Service**: Requires extensive, up-to-date component catalogs
+- **Reporting Service**: Must generate professional CAD-quality outputs
+- **Financial Projection Service**: Complex financial modeling with industry-specific metrics
+- **Dolibarr Integration**: Project management for technical deliverables
+
+#### Performance Considerations
+- **Computational Load**: Array optimization may require significant processing power
+- **Data Storage**: 3D models, component catalogs, project files require substantial storage
+- **Real-time Requirements**: Interactive design tools need low-latency responses
+
+## Detailed Technical Analysis
+
+### 1. Architecture Review
+
+#### Microservices Design
+**Rating: 🟡 MODERATE RISK**
+
+**Strengths:**
+- Clear service boundaries defined
+- gRPC for inter-service communication (good choice)
+- API-first approach with OpenAPI documentation
+- Prohibition of direct database access between services
+
+**Concerns:**
+- No concrete service definitions or APIs documented
+- Unclear how services will be discovered and managed
+- No error handling or circuit breaker strategies defined
+- Service dependency mapping not provided
+
+**Recommendations:**
+- Define concrete service interfaces with gRPC proto definitions
+- Implement service mesh considerations (Istio/Linkerd)
+- Plan for distributed tracing and service health checks
+- Consider service dependency analysis and failure modes
+
+#### Technology Stack
+**Rating: 🟢 LOW RISK**
+
+**Strengths:**
+- Rust/Go selection appropriate for performance/security goals
+- PostgreSQL as primary database is solid choice
+- Observability stack (Prometheus, Grafana, SigNoz) is comprehensive
+- Coolify for deployment is reasonable for initial phases
+
+**Concerns:**
+- No container/Docker configurations present
+- Missing CI/CD pipeline definitions
+- No dependency management strategy defined
+- Development environment setup is conceptual only
+
+### 2. Security & Compliance Assessment
+
+#### Security Framework
+**Rating: 🟢 LOW RISK**
+
+**Strengths:**
+- Comprehensive compliance standards identified (SOC, SOX, PCI, GDPR, NIST)
+- Security-by-design principles clearly articulated
+- Strong emphasis on encryption in transit and at rest
+- Proper authentication/authorization considerations
+
+**Concerns:**
+- No threat modeling documentation
+- Missing security testing strategies
+- No incident response procedures defined
+- ITAR compliance mentioned but not detailed
+
+**Recommendations:**
+- Conduct formal threat modeling sessions
+- Define security testing and vulnerability management processes
+- Implement security scanning in CI/CD pipelines
+- Create detailed incident response playbooks
+
+#### Access Control & Payment Security
+**Rating: 🟡 MODERATE RISK**
+
+**Strengths:**
+- Tiered access control based on subscription levels
+- Keycloak integration for centralized authentication
+- Hyperswitch payment orchestration layer
+- Clear separation between user access and business-critical functions
+
+**Concerns:**
+- No detailed RBAC (Role-Based Access Control) mapping
+- Payment flow security not thoroughly documented
+- Missing fraud detection and prevention strategies
+- PCI DSS implementation details absent
+
+### 3. Development & Operations
+
+#### Development Workflow
+**Rating: 🟡 MODERATE RISK**
+
+**Strengths:**
+- Docker/devcontainer approach ensures consistency
+- Feature branch workflow with protected main branch
+- Frequent commit requirements
+- Clear separation between docs and feature branches
+
+**Concerns:**
+- No actual Docker configurations present
+- Missing development environment automation
+- No code quality gates or standards defined
+- Testing strategy is high-level only
+
+**Recommendations:**
+- Implement Docker Compose for local development
+- Define code quality standards and linting rules
+- Create automated development environment setup
+- Establish testing pyramids and coverage requirements
+
+#### CI/CD Strategy
+**Rating: 🟡 MODERATE RISK**
+
+**Strengths:**
+- Gitea Actions for event-driven workflows
+- Jenkins for scheduled jobs
+- Clear separation of concerns between CI tools
+
+**Concerns:**
+- No actual pipeline definitions or workflows
+- Missing deployment strategies (blue/green, canary)
+- No rollback procedures defined
+- Environment promotion strategy unclear
+
+---
+
+## Critical Implementation Gaps
+
+### 1. **Missing Concrete Implementations**
+- No microservice definitions or stub implementations
+- No API specifications or proto files
+- No database schemas or migration strategies
+- No Docker/container configurations
+- **NEW**: No solar calculation algorithms or domain libraries identified
+
+### 2. **Domain-Specific Technical Gaps**
+- **Solar Engineering Libraries**: No integration plan for proven libraries (pvlib, SAM, NREL APIs)
+- **Component Databases**: No strategy for maintaining current solar module/inverter catalogs
+- **3D Visualization**: No graphics engine or WebGL framework selected
+- **CAD Export**: No CAD generation libraries or formats specified
+- **Geospatial Services**: No mapping/GIS integration plan (Google Maps, ESRI, etc.)
+
+### 3. **Integration Architecture Undefined**
+- Keycloak integration specifics missing
+- Dolibarr API integration not detailed
+- Payment flow implementation unclear
+- **NEW**: External solar/weather API integration strategy missing
+- External service failure handling not addressed
+
+### 4. **Algorithm and Performance Gaps**
+- **Shading Analysis**: Complex geometric calculations not architected
+- **Array Optimization**: Multi-objective optimization algorithms undefined
+- **Real-time Calculations**: Performance requirements for interactive design unclear
+- **Data Processing**: Large-scale solar irradiance and weather data handling not planned
+
+### 5. **Testing Strategy Incomplete**
+- Unit testing frameworks not selected
+- Integration testing approach undefined
+- End-to-end testing plans missing
+- **NEW**: Domain calculation validation strategy missing (critical for professional trust)
+- Performance testing criteria absent
+
+### 6. **Operational Readiness**
+- Monitoring and alerting thresholds undefined
+- Backup and disaster recovery not addressed
+- Capacity planning and scaling strategies missing
+- Support and maintenance procedures absent
+- **NEW**: Professional liability and calculation accuracy assurance not addressed
+
+---
+
+## Risk Assessment
+
+### High Risk Items 🔴
+1. **Domain Complexity**: Solar engineering calculations require specialized expertise and validation
+2. **Market Competition**: Established players with decades of development and industry trust
+3. **Technical Scope**: 3D visualization, CAD export, complex algorithms far exceed "coming soon" page
+4. **Professional Liability**: Calculation errors could result in significant financial/legal exposure
+5. **Resource Requirements**: Massive infrastructure, development, and domain expertise needed
+6. **Time-to-Market**: Complex functionality will significantly delay any viable product
+
+### Medium Risk Items 🟡
+1. **Integration Complexity**: Multiple external systems (weather APIs, solar databases, payment, etc.)
+2. **Algorithm Development**: Shading analysis and optimization require advanced mathematical modeling
+3. **Data Management**: Component catalogs require continuous updates and validation
+4. **User Experience**: Professional tools need intuitive interfaces despite technical complexity
+5. **Compliance Implementation**: Gap between security planning and implementation
+
+### Low Risk Items 🟢
+1. **Technology Choices**: Well-reasoned technology stack selection
+2. **Documentation Quality**: Comprehensive planning documentation
+3. **Security Awareness**: Strong security-first mindset
+4. **Architectural Patterns**: Appropriate microservices approach
+
+---
+
+## Recommendations
+
+### Immediate Actions (Next 2 Weeks) - REVISED FOR COMPLEXITY
+1. **CRITICAL: Scope Reassessment**
+   - **Conduct feasibility study** for solar calculation complexity vs. available resources
+   - **Market research** on competitive landscape and differentiation opportunities
+   - **Risk assessment** of professional liability for calculation accuracy
+   - **Consider alternative approaches** (white-label existing solutions, partnership, simpler scope)
+
+2. **IF PROCEEDING: Domain Expertise Acquisition**
+   - **Hire solar engineering consultant** or partner with domain expert
+   - **Research existing libraries** (pvlib-python, SAM, PVsyst APIs) for calculation foundations
+   - **Identify component data sources** (manufacturer APIs, industry databases)
+   - **Study competitive solutions** to understand market expectations
+
+3. **Technical Foundation (Only if scope confirmed)**
+   - Set up basic development environment with Docker Compose
+   - Implement simple email collection for "coming soon" (maintain original MVP approach)
+   - Research and prototype core calculation libraries in isolated environment
+
+### Short-term Goals (1-2 Months) - REVISED
+1. **Domain Validation and Strategy**
+   - **Complete market analysis** and competitive positioning study
+   - **Validate calculation accuracy** against established tools (PVSyst, Aurora)
+   - **Establish partnerships** with solar component manufacturers for data access
+   - **Define liability and professional standards** compliance strategy
+
+2. **Minimal Technical Proof of Concept**
+   - **Prototype core solar calculations** using existing libraries (pvlib integration)
+   - **Basic shading analysis** algorithm with simplified geometry
+   - **Simple BOM generation** for standard configurations
+   - **Validate calculation accuracy** against known installations
+
+3. **Risk Mitigation Implementation**
+   - Implement calculation result disclaimers and liability limitations
+   - Set up basic security testing and vulnerability scanning
+   - Create service health check systems for external APIs
+
+### Long-term Strategic Items (3-6 Months)
+1. **Full Compliance Implementation**
+   - Detailed SOC/SOX/PCI compliance procedures
+   - Security audit and penetration testing
+   - Incident response and disaster recovery
+
+2. **Production Readiness**
+   - Monitoring and alerting systems
+   - Capacity planning and auto-scaling
+   - Production deployment automation
+
+3. **Advanced Features**
+   - Full Dolibarr integration
+   - Payment processing implementation
+   - Advanced user management and billing
+
+---
+
+## Alternative Approaches Considered
+
+### Option 1: Monolithic Start
+**Pros:** Faster initial development, simpler deployment
+**Cons:** Conflicts with long-term scalability goals
+**Recommendation:** Not advised given compliance requirements
+
+### Option 2: Phased Microservices
+**Pros:** Gradual complexity introduction, faster MVP
+**Cons:** Potential refactoring overhead
+**Recommendation:** ✅ **RECOMMENDED** - Start with 2-3 core services
+
+### Option 3: Full Implementation
+**Pros:** Comprehensive from start, no technical debt
+**Cons:** High risk, long time to market, resource intensive
+**Recommendation:** Not advised for startup phase
+
+---
+
+## Conclusion - UPDATED ASSESSMENT
+
+The sol-calc.com project demonstrates excellent planning and architectural thinking, but the detailed Installation Planning Wizard specification reveals a **massive complexity gap** between ambitious functionality and implementation readiness.
+
+**CRITICAL FINDING:** The project scope has evolved from a "coming soon" page to a sophisticated solar engineering platform competing with established industry leaders. This represents a fundamental shift in complexity, resource requirements, and risk profile.
+
+**Revised Key Success Factors:**
+- **IMMEDIATE**: Conduct comprehensive feasibility assessment before proceeding
+- **ESSENTIAL**: Acquire deep solar engineering domain expertise
+- **CRITICAL**: Validate calculation accuracy and professional liability implications
+- **STRATEGIC**: Consider alternative approaches (partnerships, white-labeling, simpler scope)
+- Maintain security-first mindset throughout development
+
+**Primary Risks to Mitigate:**
+- **Domain complexity**: Solar engineering calculations require specialized expertise
+- **Market competition**: Established players with decades of development
+- **Professional liability**: Calculation errors could have significant consequences  
+- **Resource requirements**: Development effort is orders of magnitude larger than initially apparent
+- **Time-to-market**: Complex functionality will significantly delay viable product
+
+**Alternative Strategic Recommendations:**
+1. **Partnership Approach**: Partner with existing solar calculation providers rather than build from scratch
+2. **Simplified Scope**: Focus on specific niche (e.g., small residential ground mount only)
+3. **White-Label Integration**: Integrate existing professional tools rather than compete directly
+4. **Phased Market Entry**: Start with simple calculator tools, gradually add complexity
+
+**Final Assessment:** While the project planning is comprehensive, the Installation Planning Wizard represents a **fundamental scope escalation** that transforms this from a startup project into a major engineering undertaking requiring specialized expertise, significant resources, and careful risk management. **Immediate scope reassessment is strongly recommended** before proceeding with implementation.
+
+---
+
+**Audit Completed:** September 3, 2025  
+**Next Review Recommended:** After MVP implementation (estimated 4-6 weeks)

MGR-CLAUDE-STRATEGIC-ALTERNATIVES.md

@@ -0,0 +1,209 @@
+# Strategic Alternatives Analysis - MGR-CLAUDE
+
+**Purpose:** Provide concrete alternative approaches to the sol-calc.com project given the complexity revealed in the Installation Planning Wizard specification.
+
+---
+
+## Current State Assessment
+
+**Project Vision:** Comprehensive solar installation planning platform
+**Current Reality:** 100% planning documentation, 0% implementation
+**Key Discovery:** Specification reveals competing with $250M+ funded, decades-established market leaders
+
+---
+
+## Alternative Strategic Approaches
+
+### Option 1: Partnership/Integration Strategy 🤝
+**Approach:** Partner with existing solar software providers rather than compete
+
+**Implementation:**
+- Partner with established providers (Aurora Solar, PVSyst, etc.) for calculation engine
+- Focus on UI/UX improvements and specific workflow optimizations  
+- Integrate existing APIs and provide value-added services
+- Leverage partner's calculation accuracy and industry validation
+
+**Pros:**
+- Dramatically reduced development complexity
+- Faster time-to-market
+- Lower professional liability risk
+- Access to established component databases
+- Proven calculation accuracy
+
+**Cons:**
+- Dependency on partner relationships
+- Limited differentiation potential
+- Revenue sharing requirements
+- Less control over core functionality
+
+**Risk Level:** 🟢 LOW - Leverages existing solutions
+
+### Option 2: White-Label Integration Strategy 🏷️
+**Approach:** White-label existing professional tools with custom branding/workflow
+
+**Implementation:**
+- License existing solar design software (PVSyst, SAM, etc.)
+- Create custom UI/workflow layer
+- Focus on specific market segments (small installers, specific regions)
+- Add value through project management and business process integration
+
+**Pros:**
+- Proven calculation engines
+- Rapid deployment capability
+- Lower development risk
+- Professional validation included
+- Focus on business value rather than technical complexity
+
+**Cons:**
+- Ongoing licensing costs
+- Limited technical differentiation
+- Dependency on third-party providers
+- Potential white-label restrictions
+
+**Risk Level:** 🟡 MODERATE - Licensing and dependency risks
+
+### Option 3: Simplified Niche Focus Strategy 🎯
+**Approach:** Focus on specific, simpler solar installation scenarios
+
+**Implementation:**
+- Target only small residential ground-mount installations
+- Standardized component sets (limited module/inverter options)
+- Pre-configured system sizes (3kW, 5kW, 10kW options)
+- Simplified shading analysis (basic geometric rules)
+- Focus on speed and ease-of-use over complexity
+
+**Pros:**
+- Dramatically reduced complexity
+- Faster development and deployment
+- Lower accuracy requirements for simple scenarios
+- Differentiation through simplicity
+- Manageable scope for small team
+
+**Cons:**
+- Limited market addressable
+- May not meet professional standards
+- Competitive pressure from full-featured tools
+- Growth limitations
+
+**Risk Level:** 🟡 MODERATE - Market acceptance uncertainty
+
+### Option 4: Calculation-as-a-Service Strategy ☁️
+**Approach:** Provide solar calculation APIs for other software providers
+
+**Implementation:**
+- Focus solely on accurate solar calculations (no UI)
+- Integrate proven libraries (pvlib, SAM) with API wrapper
+- Target smaller software providers and custom installers
+- Provide validated, documented calculation endpoints
+- Focus on accuracy, performance, and reliability
+
+**Pros:**
+- B2B focus with clearer value proposition
+- Lower UI/UX complexity
+- Scalable business model
+- Focus on core technical strengths
+- Multiple customer integration opportunities
+
+**Cons:**
+- Different market from original vision
+- API-first development requires different expertise
+- Competition from established providers
+- Customer acquisition challenges
+
+**Risk Level:** 🟡 MODERATE - Market development required
+
+### Option 5: Consulting + Simple Tools Strategy 👥
+**Approach:** Solar installation consulting with supporting simple tools
+
+**Implementation:**
+- Hire solar engineering consultants
+- Provide consulting services for complex installations
+- Develop simple supporting tools (basic calculators, BOM generators)
+- Focus on service delivery rather than software platform
+- Build tools incrementally based on consulting experience
+
+**Pros:**
+- Immediate revenue potential through consulting
+- Direct market feedback and validation
+- Organic tool development based on real needs
+- Lower initial development investment
+- Professional expertise acquisition through hiring
+
+**Cons:**
+- Service-based model with scaling limitations
+- Different business model from SaaS vision
+- Requires hiring domain experts
+- Regional limitations for consulting services
+
+**Risk Level:** 🟢 LOW - Market-validated approach
+
+### Option 6: Pivot to Adjacent Market Strategy 🔄
+**Approach:** Apply the planned architecture to a different, less complex market
+
+**Implementation:**
+- Use microservices architecture for different domain (HVAC, electrical, general contracting)
+- Leverage planning documentation for different vertical
+- Focus on markets with less established competition
+- Maintain technical approach but change application domain
+
+**Pros:**
+- Leverages existing architectural work
+- Potentially less competitive markets available
+- Same technical team and approach
+- Opportunity to find better product-market fit
+
+**Cons:**
+- Requires new domain expertise
+- Market research needed for new vertical
+- May still encounter similar complexity issues
+- Sunk cost on solar-specific planning
+
+**Risk Level:** 🟡 MODERATE - Unknown market dynamics
+
+---
+
+## Recommended Hybrid Approach
+
+**Phase 1 (Immediate - 2 months):** Feasibility and Partnership Exploration
+- Conduct detailed feasibility study with solar engineering consultant
+- Explore partnership opportunities with existing providers
+- Prototype simple calculator using pvlib to validate technical approach
+- Research white-label licensing options
+
+**Phase 2 (Short-term - 3-6 months):** Market Entry Strategy
+Based on Phase 1 findings, choose one of:
+- Partnership integration (if suitable partners identified)
+- Simplified niche focus (if market validation positive)
+- White-label integration (if licensing terms acceptable)
+
+**Phase 3 (Long-term - 6+ months):** Scaling Strategy
+- Gradually expand functionality based on market feedback
+- Consider developing proprietary capabilities where differentiation possible
+- Maintain original architectural principles for eventual full platform
+
+---
+
+## Decision Framework
+
+### Factors to Consider:
+1. **Available Resources:** Development team size, budget, timeline
+2. **Risk Tolerance:** Appetite for technical and market risk
+3. **Domain Expertise:** Current or acquirable solar engineering knowledge
+4. **Market Entry Speed:** Importance of rapid deployment vs. comprehensive features
+5. **Competitive Position:** Ability to differentiate in established market
+6. **Professional Liability:** Comfort with calculation accuracy requirements
+
+### Recommended Evaluation Process:
+1. **Week 1-2:** Stakeholder alignment on risk tolerance and resources
+2. **Week 3-4:** Partnership and licensing exploration
+3. **Week 5-6:** Technical feasibility study with domain expert
+4. **Week 7-8:** Market analysis and competitive intelligence
+5. **Week 9-10:** Strategic decision and implementation planning
+
+---
+
+## Implementation Support
+
+Regardless of chosen approach, maintain the excellent architectural and security planning already completed. The microservices architecture, security framework, and operational considerations remain valuable for any implementation path.
+
+**The key is choosing a path that matches available resources and risk tolerance while providing a viable route to market success.**

MGR-GROK-COMPREHENSIVE-AUDIT-REPORT.md

@@ -0,0 +1,170 @@
+# MGR-GROK Comprehensive Audit Report
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+As an external auditor serving as a team member on the sol-calc.com project, I have conducted an in-depth review of the project planning, architecture, and documentation. This report provides a comprehensive analysis of the project's current state, strengths, potential risks, and recommendations for moving forward. The project aims to deliver a robust SaaS platform for solar installation planning, targeting skilled professionals in the electrical and solar industries.
+
+## Project Overview
+
+### Vision and Scope
+sol-calc.com is designed as a comprehensive web application for electricians and electrical engineers to plan, design, and manage ground mount solar installations. The platform will include advanced tools for solar array sizing, shading analysis, inverter compatibility, BOM generation, financial projections, and reporting. Integration with Dolibarr for project management is planned.
+
+### Current Phase
+The project is currently in the planning and documentation phase. No actual code implementation has begun, with the focus on establishing architectural foundations, technology stack decisions, and compliance frameworks. The initial deployment will be a "coming soon" brochureware site, evolving into full functionality.
+
+### Key Stakeholders
+- Target users: Electricians, electrical engineers, solar professionals
+- Technology focus: Microservices architecture with Rust/Go backend
+- Business integration: Dolibarr for project management and customer data
+
+## Architecture Review
+
+### Strengths
+- **Microservices Design**: Well-structured approach with clear service boundaries promoting scalability and independent deployability
+- **Technology Choices**: Rust and Go provide excellent performance, security, and concurrency capabilities
+- **Inter-service Communication**: gRPC adoption ensures type-safe, high-performance communication
+- **Database Strategy**: PostgreSQL for core data, Dolibarr for customer/project management - logical separation of concerns
+
+### Areas of Concern
+- **Complexity**: Microservices architecture introduces operational complexity that may be overkill for initial MVP
+- **Integration Points**: Heavy reliance on external systems (Dolibarr, Keycloak, Hyperswitch) creates potential single points of failure
+- **Data Access Restrictions**: Strict prohibition on direct database access between services may complicate data flows
+- **Language Restrictions**: Avoidance of Node.js/Python may limit ecosystem access for certain features
+
+### Recommendations
+- Consider starting with a monolithic architecture for MVP to reduce complexity
+- Implement comprehensive service mesh (e.g., Istio) for inter-service communication
+- Define clear data ownership and access patterns early
+- Evaluate the necessity of language restrictions based on specific use cases
+
+## Security Review
+
+### Positive Aspects
+- **Compliance Focus**: Explicit commitment to SOC, SOX, PCI, GDPR, NIST standards
+- **Centralized Authentication**: Keycloak integration provides robust identity management
+- **Tiered Access Control**: Well-defined authorization model for different user tiers
+- **Payment Security**: Hyperswitch orchestration with Stripe ensures secure payment processing
+
+### Security Gaps Identified
+- **No Code Yet**: Security review is theoretical without implemented code
+- **External Dependencies**: Reliance on third-party services increases attack surface
+- **Data Protection**: Need for detailed data classification and encryption strategies
+- **API Security**: gRPC security configuration not yet defined
+
+### Security Recommendations
+- Implement zero-trust architecture principles
+- Conduct regular security audits and penetration testing
+- Define comprehensive incident response and disaster recovery plans
+- Establish secure development lifecycle (SDL) practices
+
+## Compliance Review
+
+### Regulatory Alignment
+- **GDPR**: User data handling and consent mechanisms need detailed implementation
+- **PCI DSS**: Payment processing compliance requires careful implementation
+- **SOX**: Financial reporting and audit trails must be built into the system
+- **NIST**: Security frameworks should guide implementation
+
+### Compliance Risks
+- **International Operations**: Multi-jurisdictional compliance requirements
+- **Data Residency**: Geographic data storage requirements not addressed
+- **Audit Requirements**: Need for comprehensive logging and audit trails
+
+### Compliance Recommendations
+- Engage legal counsel for regulatory compliance review
+- Implement automated compliance monitoring
+- Design for auditability from the ground up
+
+## Technology Stack Assessment
+
+### Backend Technologies
+- **Rust**: Excellent choice for performance-critical components
+- **Go**: Well-suited for concurrent services
+- **C (FFI)**: Appropriate for specialized performance needs
+
+### Infrastructure
+- **PostgreSQL**: Solid choice for relational data
+- **gRPC**: Efficient for service communication
+- **Docker/Devcontainers**: Ensures consistent development environments
+
+### Observability
+- **OpenTelemetry/Prometheus/Grafana/SigNoz**: Comprehensive monitoring stack
+- **Self-hosted**: Maintains control over observability data
+
+### Concerns
+- **Learning Curve**: Rust adoption may slow initial development
+- **Ecosystem Maturity**: Some integrations may require custom development
+- **Cost**: Self-hosted observability may increase operational costs
+
+## Development and Deployment Review
+
+### Development Environment
+- **Containerized**: Docker/devcontainers ensure consistency
+- **Branching Strategy**: Feature branches with protected main branch
+- **CI/CD**: Gitea Actions + Jenkins provides flexible automation
+
+### Deployment Strategy
+- **Coolify**: Custom deployment platform choice
+- **Microservices**: Requires sophisticated orchestration
+
+### Recommendations
+- Implement comprehensive testing strategy (unit, integration, e2e)
+- Establish code review and quality gates
+- Plan for blue-green deployments and rollback procedures
+- Consider Kubernetes for production orchestration
+
+## Risk Assessment
+
+### High Risk Items
+1. **Integration Complexity**: Multiple external systems integration
+2. **Security Compliance**: Meeting multiple regulatory requirements
+3. **Performance Requirements**: Real-time calculations for solar modeling
+4. **Scalability**: Handling concurrent users and large datasets
+
+### Medium Risk Items
+1. **Technology Adoption**: Rust/Go learning curve for team
+2. **Vendor Dependencies**: Reliance on third-party services
+3. **Cost Management**: Self-hosted infrastructure costs
+
+### Low Risk Items
+1. **Market Demand**: Clear need in solar industry
+2. **Technology Stack**: Well-established technologies chosen
+
+## Recommendations
+
+### Immediate Actions (Next 30 Days)
+1. **Team Assessment**: Evaluate team's experience with Rust/Go
+2. **MVP Definition**: Clearly define minimum viable product scope
+3. **Proof of Concept**: Build small POC for core calculation engine
+4. **Security Baseline**: Establish security requirements and tools
+
+### Short-term (1-3 Months)
+1. **Architecture Validation**: Test microservices approach with small services
+2. **Integration Planning**: Detailed integration specifications for Dolibarr/Keycloak
+3. **Data Modeling**: Complete database schema design
+4. **UI/UX Design**: Wireframes and user flow documentation
+
+### Long-term (3-6 Months)
+1. **Compliance Implementation**: Build compliance features into architecture
+2. **Performance Testing**: Establish performance benchmarks
+3. **Monitoring Setup**: Implement full observability stack
+4. **Documentation**: Complete API documentation and user guides
+
+## Conclusion
+
+The sol-calc.com project demonstrates strong planning and architectural thinking. The chosen technology stack and microservices approach position it well for scalability and performance. However, the complexity of the architecture and extensive compliance requirements present significant challenges that must be carefully managed.
+
+Key success factors will include:
+- Starting with a focused MVP to validate assumptions
+- Building a strong foundation in security and compliance
+- Maintaining flexibility to adapt the architecture as the product evolves
+- Ensuring the team has the necessary skills for the chosen technologies
+
+This audit provides a solid foundation for moving forward. Regular reviews should be conducted as implementation progresses to ensure the project stays on track and addresses emerging risks.
+
+## Audit Metadata
+- **Auditor**: MGR-GROK (External Auditor/Team Member)
+- **Date**: September 3, 2025
+- **Branch**: MGR-GROK
+- **Review Scope**: Planning documents, architecture, requirements, existing audits
+- **Next Review**: Recommended quarterly or at major milestones

TASKS.md

@@ -1,64 +1,125 @@
+## 9. Installation Planning Wizard (Core Functionality)
 
-## 7. Testing Strategy
+This section outlines the key features, user interactions, data inputs, and calculations for the `sol-calc.com` installation planning wizard, which is the core functionality of the system.
 
-A robust testing strategy is crucial for ensuring the quality, reliability, and maintainability of the `sol-calc.com` microservices. This section outlines the different levels of testing and key considerations.
+### 9.1. Overview
 
-### 7.1. Principles
+The Installation Planning Wizard will guide users (electricians, electrical engineers) through the process of designing and planning ground mount solar installations. It will provide tools for site assessment, system design, energy production estimation, and reporting, leveraging various microservices for calculations and data management.
 
--   **Automated Testing:** Prioritize automated tests at all levels (unit, integration, end-to-end) to enable rapid feedback and continuous delivery.
--   **Test-Driven Development (TDD):** Encourage TDD where appropriate to drive design and ensure testability.
--   **Comprehensive Coverage:** Aim for high test coverage, focusing on critical paths and complex logic.
--   **Fast Feedback Loops:** Tests should run quickly to provide developers with immediate feedback.
--   **Realistic Test Data:** Use realistic, anonymized test data to simulate production scenarios.
+### 9.2. Key Features
 
-### 7.2. Types of Testing
+#### 9.2.1. Site Assessment
+-   **Geographic Location Input:** Address or GPS coordinates.
+-   **Solar Resource Data Integration:** Insolation, sun path analysis.
+-   **Topography Analysis:** Slope, shading identification (from existing obstacles like trees, buildings).
+-   **Obstacle Identification:** Tools to mark and define existing structures and potential shading sources.
 
-#### 7.2.1. Unit Testing
--   **Purpose:** Verify the correctness of individual functions, methods, or components in isolation.
--   **Scope:** Smallest testable units of code.
--   **Tools (Proposed):**
-    -   **Rust:** Built-in `cargo test`, `criterion` for benchmarking.
-    -   **Go:** Built-in `go test`, `testify` for assertions.
--   **Initial Tasks:**
-    -   [ ] Define unit testing guidelines and best practices for Rust and Go.
-    -   [ ] Integrate unit tests into the CI/CD pipeline for each microservice.
+#### 9.2.2. System Design
+-   **Module Selection:** Database of solar panel types, wattages, and dimensions.
+-   **Inverter Selection:** Database of string, micro, and central inverters with compatibility checks.
+-   **Mounting Structure Configuration:** Options for tilt angle, row spacing, ground clearance.
+-   **Array Layout Optimization:** Tools to maximize energy yield and minimize shading.
+-   **Wiring and Electrical Design:** Basic string sizing, conduit runs.
 
-#### 7.2.2. Integration Testing
--   **Purpose:** Verify the interactions between different components or services. For microservices, this includes testing gRPC API calls between services.
--   **Scope:** Interactions between two or more services, or a service and its database/external dependency.
--   **Tools (Proposed):**
-    -   **Rust/Go:** Custom test harnesses, potentially using Docker Compose to spin up dependent services.
-    -   **gRPC:** Tools like `grpcurl` or custom clients for testing API endpoints.
--   **Initial Tasks:**
-    -   [ ] Define integration testing strategy for inter-service communication (gRPC).
-    -   [ ] Set up Docker Compose configurations for integration test environments.
-    -   [ ] Implement integration tests for critical API endpoints.
+#### 9.2.3. Energy Production Estimation
+-   **Energy Yield Prediction:** Hourly/daily/annual energy yield.
+-   **Loss Calculations:** Accounting for temperature, soiling, shading, inverter efficiency, wiring losses, and degradation.
 
-#### 7.2.3. End-to-End (E2E) Testing
--   **Purpose:** Simulate real user scenarios across the entire system, from the UI to the backend services and external integrations.
--   **Scope:** Full system flow, including UI, all microservices, and external dependencies (Keycloak, Dolibarr, Payment Gateway).
--   **Tools (Proposed):**
-    -   **UI:** Playwright, Cypress (if a JavaScript-based UI framework is eventually used). For the initial static site, simpler HTTP client tests might suffice.
-    -   **Backend:** Custom scripts, potentially using a combination of `grpcurl` and HTTP clients.
--   **Initial Tasks:**
-    -   [ ] Define key end-to-end user flows to be tested.
-    -   [ ] Set up a dedicated E2E testing environment (potentially a scaled-down version of production).
-    -   [ ] Implement initial E2E tests for the "coming soon" email collection flow.
+#### 9.2.4. Reporting & Visualization
+-   **3D Site Visualization:** With solar array overlay.
+-   **Detailed Design Reports:** Bill of materials, single-line diagrams.
+-   **Performance Graphs and Financial Summaries.**
+-   **Export Options:** PDF, CAD, CSV.
 
-#### 7.2.4. Performance Testing
--   **Purpose:** Evaluate the system's responsiveness, stability, and scalability under various load conditions.
--   **Scope:** Individual services and the entire system.
--   **Tools (Proposed):** k6, Locust, JMeter.
--   **Initial Tasks:**
-    -   [ ] Identify critical performance metrics (e.g., response time, throughput, resource utilization).
-    -   [ ] Define initial load testing scenarios for key services.
+### 9.3. User Interaction Flow (High-Level)
 
-### 7.3. Test Data Management
+1.  **Start New Project:** User initiates a new project, providing basic project name and location.
+2.  **Site Information Input:** User enters site address/coordinates, property boundaries, existing obstacles.
+3.  **Module & Inverter Selection:** User selects preferred solar modules and inverters from a catalog.
+4.  **Array Layout Design:** User designs the array layout on the site, adjusting tilt, azimuth, and spacing. Shading analysis is performed.
+5.  **System Sizing & Optimization:** Wizard provides recommendations for optimal system size and configuration based on energy needs and site constraints.
+6.  **Electrical Design Review:** Basic electrical parameters are presented.
+7.  **Energy Production Estimation:** Wizard calculates estimated energy production.
+8.  **Financial Analysis Input:** User provides cost data, incentives, and financial preferences.
+9.  **Report Generation:** User triggers generation of detailed reports (BOM, design, financial).
+10. **Download/Save:** User can download reports or save the project.
 
--   [ ] Develop strategies for generating and managing realistic, anonymized test data.
--   [ ] Implement mechanisms for resetting test environments to a known state.
+### 9.4. Data Inputs
 
-### 7.4. CI/CD Integration
+#### 9.4.1. Site Information
+-   Project Address / GPS Coordinates.
+-   Property boundaries / Site dimensions.
+-   Existing structures and obstacles (height, dimensions, location).
+-   Soil type / Geotechnical data (for foundation design - *future consideration*).
+-   Local weather data (temperature, wind, snow load - *integrated via external APIs*).
+-   Utility rate structure (*future consideration*).
 
--   [ ] Ensure all automated tests are integrated into the CI/CD pipelines (Gitea Actions, Jenkins) to run on every code change.
--   [ ] Configure pipelines to block deployments if critical tests fail.
+#### 9.4.2. System Components
+-   **Solar Modules:** Manufacturer, model, wattage, dimensions, efficiency, temperature coefficients.
+-   **Inverters:** Manufacturer, model, type, efficiency curve, max input voltage, MPPT range, AC output power.
+-   **Mounting System:** Type, material, desired ground clearance, foundation type.
+-   **Balance of System (BOS) Components:** Wire gauges, conduit types, disconnects, combiners, transformers.
+
+#### 9.4.3. Financial Data
+-   Component costs (per module, per inverter, per mounting structure unit).
+-   Labor costs (per kW, per module, per hour).
+-   Soft costs (permitting, design, interconnection fees).
+-   Available incentives (tax credits, rebates, SRECs).
+-   Inflation rates, discount rates, system degradation rate.
+
+#### 9.4.4. Design Preferences
+-   Desired system size (kW).
+-   Target energy offset (%).
+-   Preferred tilt angle, azimuth.
+-   Minimum row spacing.
+
+### 9.5. Core Calculations
+
+#### 9.5.1. Solar Resource & Shading
+-   Sun path analysis for specific location and time.
+-   Irradiance on tilted surface.
+-   Shading losses based on obstacle geometry and sun path.
+
+#### 9.5.2. Array Sizing & Layout
+-   Number of modules required.
+-   Array dimensions.
+-   Optimal tilt angle and azimuth.
+-   Row-to-row shading calculations.
+
+#### 9.5.3. Electrical Design
+-   String sizing (modules per string).
+-   Wire sizing (gauge, voltage drop).
+-   Conduit fill calculations.
+
+#### 9.5.4. Energy Production
+-   Hourly/daily/monthly/annual AC energy production (kWh) accounting for various losses.
+
+#### 9.5.5. Financial Metrics
+-   Total system cost.
+-   Annual energy bill savings.
+-   Net Present Value (NPV), Internal Rate of Return (IRR), Payback period, Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE), Carbon emissions offset.
+
+### 9.6. Microservice Interactions
+
+The Installation Planning Wizard will primarily interact with the following microservices:
+
+-   **UI Service:** Provides the interactive frontend for the wizard.
+-   **Calculation Service:** Performs all complex solar-specific calculations (shading, array sizing, energy production).
+-   **BOM Service:** Generates the Bill of Materials based on the designed system.
+-   **Reporting Service:** Generates detailed reports (PDFs, etc.) based on wizard output.
+-   **Financial Projection Service:** Performs financial analysis based on system design and cost inputs.
+-   **Dolibarr Integration Service:**
+    -   Saves/loads project data (as project management is handled by Dolibarr).
+    -   Manages customer information.
+    -   Handles document storage for generated reports.
+-   **Authentication Proxy/Gateway:** Ensures user authentication and authorization for accessing wizard features and saving projects.
+
+### 9.7. Initial Tasks for Installation Planning Wizard
+
+-   [ ] Define detailed user stories for each step of the wizard.
+-   [ ] Design the UI/UX flow for the wizard.
+-   [ ] Define gRPC contracts for all interactions between the UI Service and the backend microservices involved in the wizard (Calculation, BOM, Reporting, Financial Projection, Dolibarr Integration).
+-   [ ] Prioritize and implement core calculation modules within the Calculation Service.
+-   [ ] Develop initial data models for wizard-specific inputs and outputs (to be stored/managed by relevant services).
+-   [ ] Implement basic project saving/loading functionality via the Dolibarr Integration Service.
+-   [ ] Integrate external APIs for solar resource data (e.g., weather data, insolation).