移除所有测试代码和测试要求

**变更说明**:
- 删除所有 *_test.go 文件（单元测试、集成测试、验收测试、流程测试）
- 删除整个 tests/ 目录
- 更新 CLAUDE.md：用"测试禁令"章节替换所有测试要求
- 删除测试生成 Skill (openspec-generate-acceptance-tests)
- 删除测试生成命令 (opsx:gen-tests)
- 更新 tasks.md：删除所有测试相关任务

**新规范**:
- ❌ 禁止编写任何形式的自动化测试
- ❌ 禁止创建 *_test.go 文件
- ❌ 禁止在任务中包含测试相关工作
- ✅ 仅当用户明确要求时才编写测试

**原因**:
业务系统的正确性通过人工验证和生产环境监控保证，测试代码维护成本高于价值。

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

.opencode/command/opsx-explore.md

@@ -4,11 +4,11 @@ description: Enter explore mode - think through ideas, investigate problems, cla
 
 Enter explore mode. Think deeply. Visualize freely. Follow the conversation wherever it goes.
 
-**IMPORTANT: Explore mode is for thinking, not implementing.** You may read files, search code, and investigate the codebase, but you must NEVER write code or implement features. If the user asks you to implement something, remind them to exit explore mode first (e.g., start a change with `/opsx:new` or `/opsx:ff`). You MAY create OpenSpec artifacts (proposals, designs, specs) if the user asks—that's capturing thinking, not implementing.
+**IMPORTANT: Explore mode is for thinking, not implementing.** You may read files, search code, and investigate the codebase, but you must NEVER write code or implement features. If the user asks you to implement something, remind them to exit explore mode first (e.g., start a change with `/opsx-new` or `/opsx-ff`). You MAY create OpenSpec artifacts (proposals, designs, specs) if the user asks—that's capturing thinking, not implementing.
 
 **This is a stance, not a workflow.** There are no fixed steps, no required sequence, no mandatory outputs. You're a thinking partner helping the user explore.
 
-**Input**: The argument after `/opsx:explore` is whatever the user wants to think about. Could be:
+**Input**: The argument after `/opsx-explore` is whatever the user wants to think about. Could be:
 - A vague idea: "real-time collaboration"
 - A specific problem: "the auth system is getting unwieldy"
 - A change name: "add-dark-mode" (to explore in context of that change)
@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ If the user mentioned a specific change name, read its artifacts for context.
 Think freely. When insights crystallize, you might offer:
 
 - "This feels solid enough to start a change. Want me to create one?"
-  → Can transition to `/opsx:new` or `/opsx:ff`
+  → Can transition to `/opsx-new` or `/opsx-ff`
 - Or keep exploring - no pressure to formalize
 
 ### When a change exists
@@ -150,7 +150,7 @@ If the user mentions a change or you detect one is relevant:
 
 There's no required ending. Discovery might:
 
-- **Flow into action**: "Ready to start? `/opsx:new` or `/opsx:ff`"
+- **Flow into action**: "Ready to start? `/opsx-new` or `/opsx-ff`"
 - **Result in artifact updates**: "Updated design.md with these decisions"
 - **Just provide clarity**: User has what they need, moves on
 - **Continue later**: "We can pick this up anytime"