docs(H5弹窗): AUG26-007 归档变更并同步 h5-popup-notification 主 Spec 与证据链

新增 000225 迁移：运营弹窗配置表 tb_h5_popup_configuration（页面/范围/优先级/频率/受控动作/启停/有效期/版本）
与 tb_notification 可空 JSONB 列 popup_snapshot。

新增通知直建窄接口 DirectWriter.CreateOrGetPersonal：与 Outbox 消费共用 prepareDelivery 的渲染、
展示期与 CreateIdempotent 规则，冲突时回查返回既有行；同步扩展个人通知查询与已读两处类型白名单，
并按个人客户入口补齐投递审计来源。

新增 H5 候选与风险换卡：GET /api/c/v1/popup-candidates 先判风险资格（广电卡 + 风险停机 +
无活动物流换货单），命中只返回风险候选；未命中再按时间/启停/页面/店铺/设备类型/卡类型范围/频率
匹配运营配置。POST /api/c/v1/risk-exchanges/:asset_id/address 锁资产行后幂等创建待发货物流换货单，
首次地址锁定，不沿用资产级群发通知。

新增后台运营弹窗配置 CRUD 与启停（仅超级管理员与平台账号），更新递增版本并刷新最近更新时间，
标题与正文统一拒绝 URL 与前端路由，全部写操作记录操作者、前后值、版本与时间。

同步 OpenAPI（cmd/gendocs、cmd/api/docs.go、pkg/openapi/handlers.go）与参数校验中文提示共用实现。

.agents/skills/.openspec-target

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+codex

.agents/skills/ask-matt/PHASE-BOUNDARIES.md

@@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
+# Phase boundaries
+
+A **phase** is a chunk of work inside a session — the grilling, the implementation, the QA. The definition is fuzzy on purpose: a phase ends when you think *"ok, we're done with that"*.
+
+The **phase boundary** is the gap between two phases, and it is the only place this decision belongs. Mid-phase there is no decision to make — continue, or split the work that's left into subagents. Compacting mid-phase makes the agent lose the thread.
+
+## The five options
+
+| Option       | What it does                                                    |
+| ------------ | --------------------------------------------------------------- |
+| **Continue** | Stay in the session. No context switch at all.                    |
+| **`/clear`** | Empty the context window and start from nothing.                  |
+| **`/handoff`** | Write a portable markdown file and seed a session anywhere with it. |
+| **Subagent** | Send the task to its own context window and get a report back.     |
+| **`/compact`** | Compress this context and seed a fresh session with the summary.  |
+
+## The tree
+
+Work top to bottom at the boundary. The first **yes** wins.
+
+**1. Can you continue in this session?** Two things make the answer yes: the next phase needs this phase as a **primary source**, or you have enough [smart zone](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/smart-zone) left (~150k tokens) for the next phase to fit. Grilling → implementation is the standard yes: the implementation wants the reasoning verbatim, not a summary of it. Continue costs nothing and loses nothing, so rule it out before anything else.
+
+**2. Is the context irrelevant to what comes next?** Is everything in this session — the exploration, the decisions, the dead ends — disposable? If so, **`/clear`**. It is the cheapest move on the board: it takes no time and hands back the whole window. `/clear` also isn't terminal — the old session stays resumable.
+
+The cost of getting this wrong is one-way. Clear a *relevant* context and you lose the **why** behind what you built, and no amount of reading the diff back gets it returned.
+
+**3. Do you need to hand off?** `/handoff` is narrow. You need it only when you are:
+
+- swapping to a **new harness** (Claude → Codex),
+- moving to a **new directory** or repo,
+- sending the work to a **colleague**,
+- or forking a side task you found **mid-phase** without derailing what you're doing.
+
+That list is the whole clause. What `/handoff` buys is **portability** — a file that travels. If nothing is travelling, you don't need it.
+
+**4. Can the task be done AFK?** Is it scoped tightly enough to run with you away from the keyboard, no steering? Then send it to a **subagent** and leave this session untouched. Automated review is the standard case: the agent reads the diff and reports, and you aren't needed while it does.
+
+**5. Otherwise, `/compact`.** Relevant context, same harness, same directory, and you need to stay in the loop — this is where the tree lands, and it lands here often. Pass it an instruction (`/compact we're going to QA this area`) so the summary keeps what the next phase needs.
+
+`/compact` is the **default, not the first reach**. It sits at the bottom because the four questions above it are all cheaper or more precise. The failure mode when people start here is a fresh session that is confidently wrong about a decision the summary flattened.
+
+## Primary and secondary sources
+
+Every move except **Continue** turns a **primary source** into a **secondary source** — the session as it happened, replaced by a summary of it. The trade is always the same shape:
+
+| Source                            | Information | Noise | Room to move |
+| --------------------------------- | ----------- | ----- | ------------ |
+| Primary (Continue)                | Full        | Lots  | Little       |
+| Secondary (`/compact`, `/handoff`) | Lossy       | Less  | Lots         |
+
+This is why question 1 comes first. You only pay the lossiness when staying costs more than it saves.
+
+## These are judgement calls
+
+The questions are not objective — each has taste in it, and the same boundary can go two ways on two days. The value is in asking them **in order**, at the boundary rather than in the middle of the work.

.agents/skills/ask-matt/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
+---
+name: ask-matt
+description: Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the skills in this repo.
+disable-model-invocation: true
+---
+
+# Ask Matt
+
+You don't remember every skill, so ask.
+
+A **flow** is a path through the skills. Most paths run along one **main flow**, and two **on-ramps** merge onto it. Everything else is standalone, or a vocabulary layer that runs underneath.
+
+## The main flow: idea → ship
+
+The route most work travels. You have an idea and want it built.
+
+1. **`/grill-with-docs`** — sharpen the idea by interview. Start here whenever you are **working in a working directory**: it's stateful, retaining what it learns in `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs. (No working directory? Use `/grill-me` — see Standalone. Both run the same `/grilling` primitive; `grill-with-docs` is the one that leaves a paper trail, which makes it the better of the two whenever a repo is there to leave it in.)
+2. **Branch — can you settle every question in conversation?** If a question needs a runnable answer (state, business logic, a UI you have to see), detour through a prototype, bridged by **`/handoff`** in both directions (a prototype lives in its own directory, which is exactly what `/handoff` is for — see Phase boundaries):
+   - **`/handoff`** out, then open a fresh session against that file,
+   - **`/prototype`** to answer the question with throwaway code,
+   - **`/handoff`** back what you learned, and reference it from the original idea thread.
+3. **Branch — is this a multi-session build?**
+   - **Yes** → **`/to-spec`** (turn the thread into a spec), then **`/to-tickets`** to split it into tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its **blocking edges**. On a local tracker that's one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature>/issues/`, worked blockers-first by hand; on a real tracker the edges become native blocking links, so any ticket whose blockers are done can be grabbed — kick off **`/implement`** per ticket, **`/clear`ing context between each one**. Each ticket is self-contained, so the last one's context is disposable.
+   - **No** → **`/implement`** right here, in the same context window.
+
+   Either way, **`/implement`** builds each issue by driving **`/tdd`** internally — one red-green slice at a time — then closes out by running **`/code-review`**, a two-axis review (Standards + Spec) of the diff, before committing. Reach for **`/tdd`** on its own when you just want to build a concrete behaviour test-first without a full spec, and **`/code-review`** on its own whenever you want to review a branch or PR against a fixed point.
+
+### Context hygiene
+
+Keep steps 1–3 in **one unbroken context window** — don't compact or clear until after `/to-tickets` — so the grilling, spec, and tickets all build on the same thinking. Each `/implement` then starts fresh, working from the ticket.
+
+The limit on this is the **[smart zone](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/smart-zone)**: the window (~150k tokens on state-of-the-art models) within which the model still reasons sharply. If a session approaches it before `/to-tickets`, don't push on degraded — `/compact` at the nearest phase boundary and carry on (see Phase boundaries).
+
+## On-ramps
+
+A starting situation that generates work, then merges onto the main flow.
+
+- **Bugs and requests piling up** → **`/triage`**. It moves issues through triage roles and produces agent-ready issues, which **`/implement`** later picks up.
+
+  Triage is only for issues **you didn't create** — bug reports, incoming feature requests, anything that arrives raw. Tickets that `/to-tickets` produced are already agent-ready, so **don't triage them**.
+
+- **Something's broken** → **`/diagnosing-bugs`**. For the hard ones: the bug that resists a first glance, the intermittent flake, the regression that crept in between two known-good states. It refuses to theorise until it has a **tight feedback loop** — one command that already goes red on *this* bug — then fixes with a regression test. Its post-mortem hands off to **`/improve-codebase-architecture`** when the real finding is that there's no good seam to lock the bug down.
+
+- **A huge, foggy effort — a greenfield project or a huge feature build, too big for one session** → **`/wayfinder`**, the most cognitively demanding flow here. When the way from here to the destination isn't visible yet, it charts a **shared map** of **decision tickets** on the issue tracker and resolves them one at a time — producing **decisions, not deliverables** — until the fog is pushed back and the way is clear. Where **`/grill-with-docs`** sharpens an idea you can hold in one session, wayfinder is for the idea you can't — and it's slower and denser, so save it for exactly that, never a well-scoped feature.
+
+  When the map clears, **it hands off, it doesn't build**: merge onto the main flow at **`/to-spec`**, which collapses the map's linked decisions into a buildable plan, then `/to-tickets` and `/implement` as usual. Looping the map straight into `/implement` skips that collapse and throws the linked detail away — go straight to `/implement` only when the effort turned out genuinely small.
+
+## Codebase health
+
+Not feature work — upkeep.
+
+- **`/improve-codebase-architecture`** — run whenever you have a spare moment to keep the codebase good for agents to operate in. It surfaces **deepening opportunities**; picking one _generates an idea_ you can take into the main flow at `/grill-with-docs`. It's the survey that finds the candidates; **`/codebase-design`** (below) is the bench you design the chosen one on.
+
+## Vocabulary underneath
+
+Two model-invoked references that run *beneath* the other skills — each the single source of truth for its vocabulary. Reach for them directly when the **words**, not the process, are the problem; or let the skills above pull them in.
+
+- **`/domain-modeling`** — sharpen the project's *domain* language: challenge a fuzzy term, resolve an overloaded word ("account" doing three jobs), record a hard-to-reverse decision as an ADR. It's the active discipline `/grill-with-docs` drives to keep `CONTEXT.md` a clean glossary.
+- **`/codebase-design`** — the deep-module vocabulary (module, interface, depth, seam, adapter, leverage, locality) for designing a module's *shape*: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface at a clean seam. `/tdd` and `/improve-codebase-architecture` both speak it.
+
+## Phase boundaries
+
+A **phase** is a chunk of work inside a session — the grilling, the implementation, the QA. At the **boundary** between two of them you have five options, and picking between them is the fuzziest decision in this whole map:
+
+- **Continue** — stay put. Costs nothing, loses nothing.
+- **`/clear`** — empty the window, when nothing here matters to what's next.
+- **`/handoff`** — write a portable markdown file. Narrow: only for a **new harness**, a **new directory**, a **colleague**, or forking a side task **mid-phase**. What it buys is portability.
+- **Subagent** — send a tightly-scoped task to its own window and get a report back.
+- **`/compact`** — compress this context and seed a fresh session with it. The **default**, at the bottom of the tree rather than the first reach.
+
+Read [PHASE-BOUNDARIES.md](PHASE-BOUNDARIES.md) for the ordered tree — the five questions, the reasoning behind each branch, and why the primary-source cost makes **Continue** the one to rule out first. Make the decision **at** a boundary; mid-phase, continue or split the rest into subagents.
+
+## Standalone
+
+Off the main flow entirely.
+
+- **`/grill-me`** — the same relentless interview as `/grill-with-docs`, but **stateless**: it saves nothing locally and builds no `CONTEXT.md`. Reach for it when you are **not working in a working directory** — sharpening a plan, a design, a piece of writing, anything with no repo under it. If you are in a working directory, use `/grill-with-docs` instead: it runs the same interview and leaves a paper trail, so it is strictly the better one.
+- **`/grilling`** — the interview primitive itself: rounds, the frontier, facts are the agent's job and decisions are yours. `/grill-me` and `/grill-with-docs` are the two named ways in, and `/triage`, `/wayfinder` and `/improve-codebase-architecture` all run it internally. Reach for it directly only when you want the interview with no wrapper around it.
+- **`/resolving-merge-conflicts`** — work an in-progress merge or rebase conflict hunk by hunk, resolving by **intent** traced to each side's primary source rather than by picking lines, then finish the operation. It never runs `--abort`. Standalone and off every flow: reach for it when you are already mid-conflict.
+- **`/prototype`** — a small, throwaway program that answers one design question: does this state model feel right, or what should this UI look like. Throwaway is a constraint on how the code is written, not a promise to destroy it: the answer folds into the real code, and the prototype itself is kept as a **primary source** on a `prototype/<name>` branch out of main, pointed at from the implementation issue. It's the detour in step 2 of the main flow, but reach for it any time a design question is hard to settle on paper.
+- **`/research`** — delegate reading legwork to a **background agent**: it investigates a question against **primary sources**, then leaves a cited Markdown file in the repo. Keep working while it reads. The file it produces is something to take *into* the main flow at `/grill-with-docs` — research feeds the thinking, it doesn't replace it.
+- **`/to-questionnaire`** — when the thing blocking you isn't in your head or the codebase but in **someone else's**, this writes them a questionnaire to fill in. It's the inverse of `/grill-me`: instead of interviewing you about the subject, it interviews you about the **send** — who it's going to, what you need back — and aims the questions at the gap. What comes back is material for `/grill-with-docs` or `/to-spec`.
+- **`/wizard`** — for the steps only a **human** can take: provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, clicking through an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, running a one-off migration or cutover. It generates an interactive bash script that opens each URL, captures each value, and writes it into `.env` and GitHub secrets — so the procedure stops being something you re-explain to an agent every time. Model-invoked, so the agent reaches for it the moment it hits a wall only you can pass. If the agent could just do it itself, it should; this is for where a human is genuinely in the loop.
+- **`/wait-what`** — the corrective for a message that didn't land. Use it mid-conversation, inside any other skill, and the agent re-pitches what it just said with the context you were missing, in plain English, using the `CONTEXT.md` vocabulary. It works after the fact; `/grill-with-docs` is the upfront cure, because a shared language agreed early is what stops the jargon arriving at all.
+- **`/teach`** — learn a concept over multiple sessions, using the current directory as a stateful workspace.
+- **`/writing-for-agents`** — reference for writing documents agents consume: skills, AGENTS.md, pointed-at docs.
+
+## Precondition
+
+**`/setup-matt-pocock-skills`** — run before your first engineering flow to configure the issue tracker, triage labels, and doc layout the other skills assume. Custom issue trackers also work.

.agents/skills/ask-matt/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Ask Matt"
+  short_description: "Find the right skill or workflow"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

.agents/skills/caveman/SKILL.md

@@ -1,49 +0,0 @@
----
-name: caveman
-description: >
-  Ultra-compressed communication mode. Cuts token usage ~75% by dropping
-  filler, articles, and pleasantries while keeping full technical accuracy.
-  Use when user says "caveman mode", "talk like caveman", "use caveman",
-  "less tokens", "be brief", or invokes /caveman.
----
-
-Respond terse like smart caveman. All technical substance stay. Only fluff die.
-
-## Persistence
-
-ACTIVE EVERY RESPONSE once triggered. No revert after many turns. No filler drift. Still active if unsure. Off only when user says "stop caveman" or "normal mode".
-
-## Rules
-
-Drop: articles (a/an/the), filler (just/really/basically/actually/simply), pleasantries (sure/certainly/of course/happy to), hedging. Fragments OK. Short synonyms (big not extensive, fix not "implement a solution for"). Abbreviate common terms (DB/auth/config/req/res/fn/impl). Strip conjunctions. Use arrows for causality (X -> Y). One word when one word enough.
-
-Technical terms stay exact. Code blocks unchanged. Errors quoted exact.
-
-Pattern: `[thing] [action] [reason]. [next step].`
-
-Not: "Sure! I'd be happy to help you with that. The issue you're experiencing is likely caused by..."
-Yes: "Bug in auth middleware. Token expiry check use `<` not `<=`. Fix:"
-
-### Examples
-
-**"Why React component re-render?"**
-
-> Inline obj prop -> new ref -> re-render. `useMemo`.
-
-**"Explain database connection pooling."**
-
-> Pool = reuse DB conn. Skip handshake -> fast under load.
-
-## Auto-Clarity Exception
-
-Drop caveman temporarily for: security warnings, irreversible action confirmations, multi-step sequences where fragment order risks misread, user asks to clarify or repeats question. Resume caveman after clear part done.
-
-Example -- destructive op:
-
-> **Warning:** This will permanently delete all rows in the `users` table and cannot be undone.
->
-> ```sql
-> DROP TABLE users;
-> ```
->
-> Caveman resume. Verify backup exist first.

.agents/skills/code-review/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
+---
+name: code-review
+description: Review the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes — Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding standards?) and Spec (does the code match what the originating issue/spec asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side. Use when the user wants to review a branch, a PR, work-in-progress changes, or asks to "review since X".
+---
+
+Two-axis review of the diff between `HEAD` and a fixed point the user supplies:
+
+- **Standards** — does the code conform to this repo's documented coding standards?
+- **Spec** — does the code faithfully implement the originating issue / spec?
+
+Both axes run as **parallel sub-agents** so they don't pollute each other's context, then this skill aggregates their findings.
+
+The issue tracker should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` is missing.
+
+## Process
+
+### 1. Pin the fixed point
+
+Whatever the user said is the fixed point — a commit SHA, branch name, tag, `main`, `HEAD~5`, etc. If they didn't specify one, ask for it.
+
+Capture the diff command once: `git diff <fixed-point>...HEAD` (three-dot, so the comparison is against the merge-base). Also note the list of commits via `git log <fixed-point>..HEAD --oneline`.
+
+Before going further, confirm the fixed point resolves (`git rev-parse <fixed-point>`) and the diff is non-empty. A bad ref or empty diff should fail here — not inside two parallel sub-agents.
+
+### 2. Identify the spec source
+
+Look for the originating spec, in this order:
+
+1. Issue references in the commit messages (`#123`, `Closes #45`, GitLab `!67`, etc.) — fetch via the workflow in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`.
+2. A path the user passed as an argument.
+3. A spec file under `docs/`, `specs/`, or `.scratch/` matching the branch name or feature.
+4. If nothing is found, ask the user where the spec is. If they say there isn't one, the **Spec** sub-agent will skip and report "no spec available".
+
+### 3. Identify the standards sources
+
+Anything in the repo that documents how code should be written, such as `CODING_STANDARDS.md` or `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
+
+On top of whatever the repo documents, the Standards axis always carries the **smell baseline** below — a fixed set of Fowler code smells (_Refactoring_, ch.3) that applies even when a repo documents nothing. Two rules bind it:
+
+- **The repo overrides.** A documented repo standard always wins; where it endorses something the baseline would flag, suppress the smell.
+- **Always a judgement call.** Each smell is a labelled heuristic ("possible Feature Envy"), never a hard violation — and, like any standard here, skip anything tooling already enforces.
+
+Each smell reads *what it is* → *how to fix*; match it against the diff:
+
+- **Mysterious Name** — a function, variable, or type whose name doesn't reveal what it does or holds. → rename it; if no honest name comes, the design's murky.
+- **Duplicated Code** — the same logic shape appears in more than one hunk or file in the change. → extract the shared shape, call it from both.
+- **Feature Envy** — a method that reaches into another object's data more than its own. → move the method onto the data it envies.
+- **Data Clumps** — the same few fields or params keep travelling together (a type wanting to be born). → bundle them into one type, pass that.
+- **Primitive Obsession** — a primitive or string standing in for a domain concept that deserves its own type. → give the concept its own small type.
+- **Repeated Switches** — the same `switch`/`if`-cascade on the same type recurs across the change. → replace with polymorphism, or one map both sites share.
+- **Shotgun Surgery** — one logical change forces scattered edits across many files in the diff. → gather what changes together into one module.
+- **Divergent Change** — one file or module is edited for several unrelated reasons. → split so each module changes for one reason.
+- **Speculative Generality** — abstraction, parameters, or hooks added for needs the spec doesn't have. → delete it; inline back until a real need shows.
+- **Message Chains** — long `a.b().c().d()` navigation the caller shouldn't depend on. → hide the walk behind one method on the first object.
+- **Middle Man** — a class or function that mostly just delegates onward. → cut it, call the real target direct.
+- **Refused Bequest** — a subclass or implementer that ignores or overrides most of what it inherits. → drop the inheritance, use composition.
+
+### 4. Spawn both sub-agents in parallel
+
+**Standards sub-agent prompt** — include:
+
+- The full diff command and commit list.
+- The list of standards-source files you found in step 3, **plus the smell baseline from step 3** pasted in full — the sub-agent has no other access to it.
+- The brief: "Report — per file/hunk where relevant — (a) every place the diff violates a documented standard: cite the standard (file + the rule); and (b) any baseline smell you spot: name it and quote the hunk. Distinguish hard violations from judgement calls — documented-standard breaches can be hard, but baseline smells are always judgement calls, and a documented repo standard overrides the baseline. Skip anything tooling enforces. Under 400 words."
+
+**Spec sub-agent prompt** — include:
+
+- The diff command and commit list.
+- The path or fetched contents of the spec.
+- The brief: "Report: (a) requirements the spec asked for that are missing or partial; (b) behaviour in the diff that wasn't asked for (scope creep); (c) requirements that look implemented but where the implementation looks wrong. Quote the spec line for each finding. Under 400 words."
+
+If the spec is missing, skip the Spec sub-agent and note this in the final report.
+
+### 5. Aggregate
+
+Present the two reports under `## Standards` and `## Spec` headings, verbatim or lightly cleaned. Do **not** merge or rerank findings — the two axes are deliberately separate (see _Why two axes_).
+
+End with a one-line summary: total findings per axis, and the worst issue _within each axis_ (if any). Don't pick a single winner across axes — that's the reranking the separation exists to prevent.
+
+## Why two axes
+
+A change can pass one axis and fail the other:
+
+- Code that follows every standard but implements the wrong thing → **Standards pass, Spec fail.**
+- Code that does exactly what the issue asked but breaks the project's conventions → **Spec pass, Standards fail.**
+
+Reporting them separately stops one axis from masking the other.

.agents/skills/code-review/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Code Review"
+  short_description: "Review a diff on standards and spec"

.agents/skills/codebase-design/DEEPENING.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Deepening
 
-How to deepen a cluster of shallow modules safely, given its dependencies. Assumes the vocabulary in [LANGUAGE.md](LANGUAGE.md) — **module**, **interface**, **seam**, **adapter**.
+How to deepen a cluster of shallow modules safely, given its dependencies. Assumes the vocabulary in [SKILL.md](SKILL.md) — **module**, **interface**, **seam**, **adapter**.
 
 ## Dependency categories
 

.agents/skills/codebase-design/DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+# Design It Twice
+
+When the user wants to explore alternative interfaces for a chosen deepening candidate, use this parallel sub-agent pattern. Based on "Design It Twice" (Ousterhout) — your first idea is unlikely to be the best.
+
+Uses the vocabulary in [SKILL.md](SKILL.md) — **module**, **interface**, **seam**, **adapter**, **leverage**.
+
+## Process
+
+### 1. Frame the problem space
+
+Before spawning sub-agents, write a user-facing explanation of the problem space for the chosen candidate:
+
+- The constraints any new interface would need to satisfy
+- The dependencies it would rely on, and which category they fall into (see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md))
+- A rough illustrative code sketch to ground the constraints — not a proposal, just a way to make the constraints concrete
+
+Show this to the user, then immediately proceed to Step 2. The user reads and thinks while the sub-agents work in parallel.
+
+### 2. Spawn sub-agents
+
+Spawn 3+ sub-agents in parallel. Each must produce a **radically different** interface for the deepened module.
+
+Prompt each sub-agent with a separate technical brief (file paths, coupling details, dependency category from [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md), what sits behind the seam). The brief is independent of the user-facing problem-space explanation in Step 1. Give each agent a different design constraint:
+
+- Agent 1: "Minimize the interface — aim for 1–3 entry points max. Maximise leverage per entry point."
+- Agent 2: "Maximise flexibility — support many use cases and extension."
+- Agent 3: "Optimise for the most common caller — make the default case trivial."
+- Agent 4 (if applicable): "Design around ports & adapters for cross-seam dependencies."
+
+Include both [SKILL.md](SKILL.md) vocabulary and CONTEXT.md vocabulary in the brief so each sub-agent names things consistently with the architecture language and the project's domain language.
+
+Each sub-agent outputs:
+
+1. Interface (types, methods, params — plus invariants, ordering, error modes)
+2. Usage example showing how callers use it
+3. What the implementation hides behind the seam
+4. Dependency strategy and adapters (see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md))
+5. Trade-offs — where leverage is high, where it's thin
+
+### 3. Present and compare
+
+Present designs sequentially so the user can absorb each one, then compare them in prose. Contrast by **depth** (leverage at the interface), **locality** (where change concentrates), and **seam placement**.
+
+After comparing, give your own recommendation: which design you think is strongest and why. If elements from different designs would combine well, propose a hybrid. Be opinionated — the user wants a strong read, not a menu.

.agents/skills/codebase-design/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,114 @@
+---
+name: codebase-design
+description: Shared vocabulary for designing deep modules. Use when the user wants to design or improve a module's interface, find deepening opportunities, decide where a seam goes, make code more testable or AI-navigable, or when another skill needs the deep-module vocabulary.
+---
+
+# Codebase Design
+
+Design **deep modules**: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface, placed at a clean seam, testable through that interface. Use this language and these principles wherever code is being designed or restructured. The aim is leverage for callers, locality for maintainers, and testability for everyone.
+
+## Glossary
+
+Use these terms exactly — don't substitute "component," "service," "API," or "boundary." Consistent language is the whole point.
+
+**Module** — anything with an interface and an implementation. Deliberately scale-agnostic: a function, class, package, or tier-spanning slice. _Avoid_: unit, component, service.
+
+**Interface** — everything a caller must know to use the module correctly: the type signature, but also invariants, ordering constraints, error modes, required configuration, and performance characteristics. _Avoid_: API, signature (too narrow — they refer only to the type-level surface).
+
+**Implementation** — what's inside a module, its body of code. Distinct from **Adapter**: a thing can be a small adapter with a large implementation (a Postgres repo) or a large adapter with a small implementation (an in-memory fake). Reach for "adapter" when the seam is the topic; "implementation" otherwise.
+
+**Depth** — leverage at the interface: the amount of behaviour a caller (or test) can exercise per unit of interface they have to learn. A module is **deep** when a large amount of behaviour sits behind a small interface, **shallow** when the interface is nearly as complex as the implementation.
+
+**Seam** _(Michael Feathers)_ — a place where you can alter behaviour without editing in that place; the *location* at which a module's interface lives. Where to put the seam is its own design decision, distinct from what goes behind it. _Avoid_: boundary (overloaded with DDD's bounded context).
+
+**Adapter** — a concrete thing that satisfies an interface at a seam. Describes *role* (what slot it fills), not substance (what's inside).
+
+**Leverage** — what callers get from depth: more capability per unit of interface they learn. One implementation pays back across N call sites and M tests.
+
+**Locality** — what maintainers get from depth: change, bugs, knowledge, and verification concentrate in one place rather than spreading across callers. Fix once, fixed everywhere.
+
+## Deep vs shallow
+
+**Deep module** = small interface + lots of implementation:
+
+```
+┌─────────────────────┐
+│   Small Interface   │  ← Few methods, simple params
+├─────────────────────┤
+│                     │
+│  Deep Implementation│  ← Complex logic hidden
+│                     │
+└─────────────────────┘
+```
+
+**Shallow module** = large interface + little implementation (avoid):
+
+```
+┌─────────────────────────────────┐
+│       Large Interface           │  ← Many methods, complex params
+├─────────────────────────────────┤
+│  Thin Implementation            │  ← Just passes through
+└─────────────────────────────────┘
+```
+
+When designing an interface, ask:
+
+- Can I reduce the number of methods?
+- Can I simplify the parameters?
+- Can I hide more complexity inside?
+
+## Principles
+
+- **Depth is a property of the interface, not the implementation.** A deep module can be internally composed of small, mockable, swappable parts — they just aren't part of the interface. A module can have **internal seams** (private to its implementation, used by its own tests) as well as the **external seam** at its interface.
+- **The deletion test.** Imagine deleting the module. If complexity vanishes, it was a pass-through. If complexity reappears across N callers, it was earning its keep.
+- **The interface is the test surface.** Callers and tests cross the same seam. If you want to test *past* the interface, the module is probably the wrong shape.
+- **One adapter means a hypothetical seam. Two adapters means a real one.** Don't introduce a seam unless something actually varies across it.
+
+## Designing for testability
+
+Good interfaces make testing natural:
+
+1. **Accept dependencies, don't create them.**
+
+   ```typescript
+   // Testable
+   function processOrder(order, paymentGateway) {}
+
+   // Hard to test
+   function processOrder(order) {
+     const gateway = new StripeGateway();
+   }
+   ```
+
+2. **Return results, don't produce side effects.**
+
+   ```typescript
+   // Testable
+   function calculateDiscount(cart): Discount {}
+
+   // Hard to test
+   function applyDiscount(cart): void {
+     cart.total -= discount;
+   }
+   ```
+
+3. **Small surface area.** Fewer methods = fewer tests needed. Fewer params = simpler test setup.
+
+## Relationships
+
+- A **Module** has exactly one **Interface** (the surface it presents to callers and tests).
+- **Depth** is a property of a **Module**, measured against its **Interface**.
+- A **Seam** is where a **Module**'s **Interface** lives.
+- An **Adapter** sits at a **Seam** and satisfies the **Interface**.
+- **Depth** produces **Leverage** for callers and **Locality** for maintainers.
+
+## Rejected framings
+
+- **Depth as ratio of implementation-lines to interface-lines** (Ousterhout): rewards padding the implementation. We use depth-as-leverage instead.
+- **"Interface" as the TypeScript `interface` keyword or a class's public methods**: too narrow — interface here includes every fact a caller must know.
+- **"Boundary"**: overloaded with DDD's bounded context. Say **seam** or **interface**.
+
+## Going deeper
+
+- **Deepening a cluster given its dependencies** — see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md): dependency categories, seam discipline, and replace-don't-layer testing.
+- **Exploring alternative interfaces** — see [DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md](DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md): spin up parallel sub-agents to design the interface several radically different ways, then compare on depth, locality, and seam placement.

.agents/skills/codebase-design/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Codebase Design"
+  short_description: "Vocabulary for deep-module design"

.agents/skills/diagnose/SKILL.md

@@ -1,117 +0,0 @@
----
-name: diagnose
-description: Disciplined diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions. Reproduce → minimise → hypothesise → instrument → fix → regression-test. Use when user says "diagnose this" / "debug this", reports a bug, says something is broken/throwing/failing, or describes a performance regression.
----
-
-# Diagnose
-
-A discipline for hard bugs. Skip phases only when explicitly justified.
-
-When exploring the codebase, use the project's domain glossary to get a clear mental model of the relevant modules, and check ADRs in the area you're touching.
-
-## Phase 1 — Build a feedback loop
-
-**This is the skill.** Everything else is mechanical. If you have a fast, deterministic, agent-runnable pass/fail signal for the bug, you will find the cause — bisection, hypothesis-testing, and instrumentation all just consume that signal. If you don't have one, no amount of staring at code will save you.
-
-Spend disproportionate effort here. **Be aggressive. Be creative. Refuse to give up.**
-
-### Ways to construct one — try them in roughly this order
-
-1. **Failing test** at whatever seam reaches the bug — unit, integration, e2e.
-2. **Curl / HTTP script** against a running dev server.
-3. **CLI invocation** with a fixture input, diffing stdout against a known-good snapshot.
-4. **Headless browser script** (Playwright / Puppeteer) — drives the UI, asserts on DOM/console/network.
-5. **Replay a captured trace.** Save a real network request / payload / event log to disk; replay it through the code path in isolation.
-6. **Throwaway harness.** Spin up a minimal subset of the system (one service, mocked deps) that exercises the bug code path with a single function call.
-7. **Property / fuzz loop.** If the bug is "sometimes wrong output", run 1000 random inputs and look for the failure mode.
-8. **Bisection harness.** If the bug appeared between two known states (commit, dataset, version), automate "boot at state X, check, repeat" so you can `git bisect run` it.
-9. **Differential loop.** Run the same input through old-version vs new-version (or two configs) and diff outputs.
-10. **HITL bash script.** Last resort. If a human must click, drive _them_ with `scripts/hitl-loop.template.sh` so the loop is still structured. Captured output feeds back to you.
-
-Build the right feedback loop, and the bug is 90% fixed.
-
-### Iterate on the loop itself
-
-Treat the loop as a product. Once you have _a_ loop, ask:
-
-- Can I make it faster? (Cache setup, skip unrelated init, narrow the test scope.)
-- Can I make the signal sharper? (Assert on the specific symptom, not "didn't crash".)
-- Can I make it more deterministic? (Pin time, seed RNG, isolate filesystem, freeze network.)
-
-A 30-second flaky loop is barely better than no loop. A 2-second deterministic loop is a debugging superpower.
-
-### Non-deterministic bugs
-
-The goal is not a clean repro but a **higher reproduction rate**. Loop the trigger 100×, parallelise, add stress, narrow timing windows, inject sleeps. A 50%-flake bug is debuggable; 1% is not — keep raising the rate until it's debuggable.
-
-### When you genuinely cannot build a loop
-
-Stop and say so explicitly. List what you tried. Ask the user for: (a) access to whatever environment reproduces it, (b) a captured artifact (HAR file, log dump, core dump, screen recording with timestamps), or (c) permission to add temporary production instrumentation. Do **not** proceed to hypothesise without a loop.
-
-Do not proceed to Phase 2 until you have a loop you believe in.
-
-## Phase 2 — Reproduce
-
-Run the loop. Watch the bug appear.
-
-Confirm:
-
-- [ ] The loop produces the failure mode the **user** described — not a different failure that happens to be nearby. Wrong bug = wrong fix.
-- [ ] The failure is reproducible across multiple runs (or, for non-deterministic bugs, reproducible at a high enough rate to debug against).
-- [ ] You have captured the exact symptom (error message, wrong output, slow timing) so later phases can verify the fix actually addresses it.
-
-Do not proceed until you reproduce the bug.
-
-## Phase 3 — Hypothesise
-
-Generate **3–5 ranked hypotheses** before testing any of them. Single-hypothesis generation anchors on the first plausible idea.
-
-Each hypothesis must be **falsifiable**: state the prediction it makes.
-
-> Format: "If <X> is the cause, then <changing Y> will make the bug disappear / <changing Z> will make it worse."
-
-If you cannot state the prediction, the hypothesis is a vibe — discard or sharpen it.
-
-**Show the ranked list to the user before testing.** They often have domain knowledge that re-ranks instantly ("we just deployed a change to #3"), or know hypotheses they've already ruled out. Cheap checkpoint, big time saver. Don't block on it — proceed with your ranking if the user is AFK.
-
-## Phase 4 — Instrument
-
-Each probe must map to a specific prediction from Phase 3. **Change one variable at a time.**
-
-Tool preference:
-
-1. **Debugger / REPL inspection** if the env supports it. One breakpoint beats ten logs.
-2. **Targeted logs** at the boundaries that distinguish hypotheses.
-3. Never "log everything and grep".
-
-**Tag every debug log** with a unique prefix, e.g. `[DEBUG-a4f2]`. Cleanup at the end becomes a single grep. Untagged logs survive; tagged logs die.
-
-**Perf branch.** For performance regressions, logs are usually wrong. Instead: establish a baseline measurement (timing harness, `performance.now()`, profiler, query plan), then bisect. Measure first, fix second.
-
-## Phase 5 — Fix + regression test
-
-Write the regression test **before the fix** — but only if there is a **correct seam** for it.
-
-A correct seam is one where the test exercises the **real bug pattern** as it occurs at the call site. If the only available seam is too shallow (single-caller test when the bug needs multiple callers, unit test that can't replicate the chain that triggered the bug), a regression test there gives false confidence.
-
-**If no correct seam exists, that itself is the finding.** Note it. The codebase architecture is preventing the bug from being locked down. Flag this for the next phase.
-
-If a correct seam exists:
-
-1. Turn the minimised repro into a failing test at that seam.
-2. Watch it fail.
-3. Apply the fix.
-4. Watch it pass.
-5. Re-run the Phase 1 feedback loop against the original (un-minimised) scenario.
-
-## Phase 6 — Cleanup + post-mortem
-
-Required before declaring done:
-
-- [ ] Original repro no longer reproduces (re-run the Phase 1 loop)
-- [ ] Regression test passes (or absence of seam is documented)
-- [ ] All `[DEBUG-...]` instrumentation removed (`grep` the prefix)
-- [ ] Throwaway prototypes deleted (or moved to a clearly-marked debug location)
-- [ ] The hypothesis that turned out correct is stated in the commit / PR message — so the next debugger learns
-
-**Then ask: what would have prevented this bug?** If the answer involves architectural change (no good test seam, tangled callers, hidden coupling) hand off to the `/improve-codebase-architecture` skill with the specifics. Make the recommendation **after** the fix is in, not before — you have more information now than when you started.

.agents/skills/diagnosing-bugs/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,140 @@
+---
+name: diagnosing-bugs
+description: Diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions. Use when the user says "diagnose"/"debug this", or reports something broken/throwing/failing/slow.
+---
+
+# Diagnosing Bugs
+
+A discipline for hard bugs. Skip phases only when explicitly justified.
+
+When exploring the codebase, read `CONTEXT.md` (if it exists) to get a clear mental model of the relevant modules, and check ADRs in the area you're touching.
+
+## Redact
+
+This skill has you show commands, outputs and captured artifacts. **Redact every secret first** — write `<REDACTED>` in its place. Build loops against env vars, so the credential stays in the environment rather than in what you show. Captured artifacts carry auth headers: quote only the lines that carry the signal.
+
+If the redacted output is not enough to diagnose the bug, say so and ask the user.
+
+## Phase 1 — Build a feedback loop
+
+**This is the skill.** Everything else is mechanical. If you have a **tight** pass/fail signal for the bug — one that goes red on _this_ bug — you will find the cause; bisection, hypothesis-testing, and instrumentation all just consume it. If you don't have one, no amount of staring at code will save you.
+
+Spend disproportionate effort here. **Be aggressive. Be creative. Refuse to give up.**
+
+### Ways to construct one — try them in roughly this order
+
+1. **Failing test** at whatever seam reaches the bug — unit, integration, e2e.
+2. **Curl / HTTP script** against a running dev server.
+3. **CLI invocation** with a fixture input, diffing stdout against a known-good snapshot.
+4. **Headless browser script** (Playwright / Puppeteer) — drives the UI, asserts on DOM/console/network.
+5. **Replay a captured trace.** Save a real network request / payload / event log to disk; replay it through the code path in isolation.
+6. **Throwaway harness.** Spin up a minimal subset of the system (one service, mocked deps) that exercises the bug code path with a single function call.
+7. **Property / fuzz loop.** If the bug is "sometimes wrong output", run 1000 random inputs and look for the failure mode.
+8. **Bisection harness.** If the bug appeared between two known states (commit, dataset, version), automate "boot at state X, check, repeat" so you can `git bisect run` it.
+9. **Differential loop.** Run the same input through old-version vs new-version (or two configs) and diff outputs.
+10. **HITL bash script.** Last resort. If a human must click, drive _them_ with `scripts/hitl-loop.template.sh` so the loop is still structured. Captured output feeds back to you.
+
+Build the right feedback loop, and the bug is 90% fixed.
+
+### Tighten the loop
+
+Treat the loop as a product. Once you have _a_ loop, **tighten** it:
+
+- Can I make it faster? (Cache setup, skip unrelated init, narrow the test scope.)
+- Can I make the signal sharper? (Assert on the specific symptom, not "didn't crash".)
+- Can I make it more deterministic? (Pin time, seed RNG, isolate filesystem, freeze network.)
+
+A 30-second flaky loop is barely better than no loop; a 2-second deterministic one is tight — a debugging superpower.
+
+### Non-deterministic bugs
+
+The goal is not a clean repro but a **higher reproduction rate**. Loop the trigger 100×, parallelise, add stress, narrow timing windows, inject sleeps. A 50%-flake bug is debuggable; 1% is not — keep raising the rate until it's debuggable.
+
+### When you genuinely cannot build a loop
+
+Stop and say so explicitly. List what you tried. Ask the user for: (a) access to whatever environment reproduces it, (b) a redacted captured artifact (HAR file, log dump, core dump, screen recording with timestamps), or (c) permission to add temporary production instrumentation. Do **not** proceed to hypothesise without a loop.
+
+### Completion criterion — a tight loop that goes red
+
+Phase 1 is done when the loop is **tight** and **red-capable**: you can name **one command** — a script path, a test invocation, a curl — that you have **already run at least once** (show the invocation and its output, redacted), and that is:
+
+- [ ] **Red-capable** — it drives the actual bug code path and asserts the **user's exact symptom**, so it can go red on this bug and green once fixed. Not "runs without erroring" — it must be able to _catch this specific bug_.
+- [ ] **Deterministic** — same verdict every run (flaky bugs: a pinned, high reproduction rate, per above).
+- [ ] **Fast** — seconds, not minutes.
+- [ ] **Agent-runnable** — you can run it unattended; a human in the loop only via `scripts/hitl-loop.template.sh`.
+
+If you catch yourself reading code to build a theory before this command exists, **stop — jumping straight to a hypothesis is the exact failure this skill prevents.** No red-capable command, no Phase 2.
+
+## Phase 2 — Reproduce + minimise
+
+Run the loop. Watch it go red — the bug appears.
+
+Confirm:
+
+- [ ] The loop produces the failure mode the **user** described — not a different failure that happens to be nearby. Wrong bug = wrong fix.
+- [ ] The failure is reproducible across multiple runs (or, for non-deterministic bugs, reproducible at a high enough rate to debug against).
+- [ ] You have captured the exact symptom (error message, wrong output, slow timing) so later phases can verify the fix actually addresses it.
+
+### Minimise
+
+Once it's red, shrink the repro to the **smallest scenario that still goes red**. Cut inputs, callers, config, data, and steps **one at a time**, re-running the loop after each cut — keep only what's load-bearing for the failure.
+
+Why bother: a minimal repro shrinks the hypothesis space in Phase 3 (fewer moving parts left to suspect) and becomes the clean regression test in Phase 5.
+
+Done when **every remaining element is load-bearing** — removing any one of them makes the loop go green.
+
+Do not proceed until you have reproduced **and** minimised.
+
+## Phase 3 — Hypothesise
+
+Generate **3–5 ranked hypotheses** before testing any of them. Single-hypothesis generation anchors on the first plausible idea.
+
+Each hypothesis must be **falsifiable**: state the prediction it makes.
+
+> Format: "If <X> is the cause, then <changing Y> will make the bug disappear / <changing Z> will make it worse."
+
+If you cannot state the prediction, the hypothesis is a vibe — discard or sharpen it.
+
+**Show the ranked list to the user before testing.** They often have domain knowledge that re-ranks instantly ("we just deployed a change to #3"), or know hypotheses they've already ruled out. Cheap checkpoint, big time saver. Don't block on it — proceed with your ranking if the user is AFK.
+
+## Phase 4 — Instrument
+
+Each probe must map to a specific prediction from Phase 3. **Change one variable at a time.**
+
+Tool preference:
+
+1. **Debugger / REPL inspection** if the env supports it. One breakpoint beats ten logs.
+2. **Targeted logs** at the boundaries that distinguish hypotheses.
+3. Never "log everything and grep".
+
+**Tag every debug log** with a unique prefix, e.g. `[DEBUG-a4f2]`. Cleanup at the end becomes a single grep. Untagged logs survive; tagged logs die.
+
+**Perf branch.** For performance regressions, logs are usually wrong. Instead: establish a baseline measurement (timing harness, `performance.now()`, profiler, query plan), then bisect. Measure first, fix second.
+
+## Phase 5 — Fix + regression test
+
+Write the regression test **before the fix** — but only if there is a **correct seam** for it.
+
+A correct seam is one where the test exercises the **real bug pattern** as it occurs at the call site. If the only available seam is too shallow (single-caller test when the bug needs multiple callers, unit test that can't replicate the chain that triggered the bug), a regression test there gives false confidence.
+
+**If no correct seam exists, that itself is the finding.** Note it. The codebase architecture is preventing the bug from being locked down. Flag this for the next phase.
+
+If a correct seam exists:
+
+1. Turn the minimised repro into a failing test at that seam.
+2. Watch it fail.
+3. Apply the fix.
+4. Watch it pass.
+5. Re-run the Phase 1 feedback loop against the original (un-minimised) scenario.
+
+## Phase 6 — Cleanup + post-mortem
+
+Required before declaring done:
+
+- [ ] Original repro no longer reproduces (re-run the Phase 1 loop)
+- [ ] Regression test passes (or absence of seam is documented)
+- [ ] All `[DEBUG-...]` instrumentation removed (`grep` the prefix)
+- [ ] Throwaway prototypes deleted (or moved to a clearly-marked debug location)
+- [ ] The hypothesis that turned out correct is stated in the commit / PR message — so the next debugger learns
+
+**Then ask: what would have prevented this bug?** If the answer involves architectural change (no good test seam, tangled callers, hidden coupling) hand off to the `/improve-codebase-architecture` skill with the specifics. Make the recommendation **after** the fix is in, not before — you have more information now than when you started.

.agents/skills/diagnosing-bugs/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Diagnosing Bugs"
+  short_description: "Diagnose hard bugs and regressions"

.agents/skills/diagnosing-bugs/scripts/hitl-loop.template.sh

@@ -11,6 +11,9 @@
 #   capture VAR "<question>"      → show question, read response into VAR
 #
 # At the end, captured values are printed as KEY=VALUE for the agent to parse.
+#
+# `capture` prints its value back to the terminal, where the agent reads it — so
+# capture observations, and leave signing in to the user as a `step`.
 
 set -euo pipefail
 

.agents/skills/domain-modeling/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+---
+name: domain-modeling
+description: Build and sharpen a project's domain model. Use when the user wants to pin down domain terminology or a ubiquitous language, record an architectural decision, or when another skill needs to maintain the domain model.
+---
+
+# Domain Modeling
+
+Actively build and sharpen the project's domain model as you design. This is the *active* discipline — challenging terms, inventing edge-case scenarios, and writing the glossary and decisions down the moment they crystallise. (Merely *reading* `CONTEXT.md` for vocabulary is not this skill — that's a one-line habit any skill can do. This skill is for when you're changing the model, not just consuming it.)
+
+## File structure
+
+Most repos have a single context:
+
+```
+/
+├── CONTEXT.md
+├── docs/
+│   └── adr/
+│       ├── 0001-event-sourced-orders.md
+│       └── 0002-postgres-for-write-model.md
+└── src/
+```
+
+If a `CONTEXT-MAP.md` exists at the root, the repo has multiple contexts. The map points to where each one lives:
+
+```
+/
+├── CONTEXT-MAP.md
+├── docs/
+│   └── adr/                          ← system-wide decisions
+├── src/
+│   ├── ordering/
+│   │   ├── CONTEXT.md
+│   │   └── docs/adr/                 ← context-specific decisions
+│   └── billing/
+│       ├── CONTEXT.md
+│       └── docs/adr/
+```
+
+Create files lazily — only when you have something to write. If no `CONTEXT.md` exists, create one when the first term is resolved. If no `docs/adr/` exists, create it when the first ADR is needed.
+
+## During the session
+
+### Challenge against the glossary
+
+When the user uses a term that conflicts with the existing language in `CONTEXT.md`, call it out immediately. "Your glossary defines 'cancellation' as X, but you seem to mean Y — which is it?"
+
+### Sharpen fuzzy language
+
+When the user uses vague or overloaded terms, propose a precise canonical term. "You're saying 'account' — do you mean the Customer or the User? Those are different things."
+
+### Discuss concrete scenarios
+
+When domain relationships are being discussed, stress-test them with specific scenarios. Invent scenarios that probe edge cases and force the user to be precise about the boundaries between concepts.
+
+### Cross-reference with code
+
+When the user states how something works, check whether the code agrees. If you find a contradiction, surface it: "Your code cancels entire Orders, but you just said partial cancellation is possible — which is right?"
+
+### Update CONTEXT.md inline
+
+When a term is resolved, update `CONTEXT.md` right there. Don't batch these up — capture them as they happen. Use the format in [CONTEXT-FORMAT.md](./CONTEXT-FORMAT.md).
+
+`CONTEXT.md` should be totally devoid of implementation details. Do not treat `CONTEXT.md` as a spec, a scratch pad, or a repository for implementation decisions. It is a glossary and nothing else.
+
+### Offer ADRs sparingly
+
+Only offer to create an ADR when all three are true:
+
+1. **Hard to reverse** — the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful
+2. **Surprising without context** — a future reader will wonder "why did they do it this way?"
+3. **The result of a real trade-off** — there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons
+
+If any of the three is missing, skip the ADR. Use the format in [ADR-FORMAT.md](./ADR-FORMAT.md).

.agents/skills/domain-modeling/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Domain Modeling"
+  short_description: "Build and sharpen a domain model"

.agents/skills/grill-me/SKILL.md

@@ -1,10 +1,7 @@
 ---
 name: grill-me
-description: Interview the user relentlessly about a plan or design until reaching shared understanding, resolving each branch of the decision tree. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan, get grilled on their design, or mentions "grill me".
+description: A relentless interview to sharpen a plan or design.
+disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
-Interview me relentlessly about every aspect of this plan until we reach a shared understanding. Walk down each branch of the design tree, resolving dependencies between decisions one-by-one. For each question, provide your recommended answer.
-
-Ask the questions one at a time.
-
-If a question can be answered by exploring the codebase, explore the codebase instead.
+Run a `/grilling` session.

.agents/skills/grill-me/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Grill Me"
+  short_description: "Sharpen a plan through interview"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

.agents/skills/grill-with-docs/SKILL.md

@@ -1,88 +1,7 @@
 ---
 name: grill-with-docs
-description: Grilling session that challenges your plan against the existing domain model, sharpens terminology, and updates documentation (CONTEXT.md, ADRs) inline as decisions crystallise. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan against their project's language and documented decisions.
+description: A relentless interview to sharpen a plan or design, which also creates docs (ADR's and glossary) as we go.
+disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
-<what-to-do>
-
-Interview me relentlessly about every aspect of this plan until we reach a shared understanding. Walk down each branch of the design tree, resolving dependencies between decisions one-by-one. For each question, provide your recommended answer.
-
-Ask the questions one at a time, waiting for feedback on each question before continuing.
-
-If a question can be answered by exploring the codebase, explore the codebase instead.
-
-</what-to-do>
-
-<supporting-info>
-
-## Domain awareness
-
-During codebase exploration, also look for existing documentation:
-
-### File structure
-
-Most repos have a single context:
-
-```
-/
-├── CONTEXT.md
-├── docs/
-│   └── adr/
-│       ├── 0001-event-sourced-orders.md
-│       └── 0002-postgres-for-write-model.md
-└── src/
-```
-
-If a `CONTEXT-MAP.md` exists at the root, the repo has multiple contexts. The map points to where each one lives:
-
-```
-/
-├── CONTEXT-MAP.md
-├── docs/
-│   └── adr/                          ← system-wide decisions
-├── src/
-│   ├── ordering/
-│   │   ├── CONTEXT.md
-│   │   └── docs/adr/                 ← context-specific decisions
-│   └── billing/
-│       ├── CONTEXT.md
-│       └── docs/adr/
-```
-
-Create files lazily — only when you have something to write. If no `CONTEXT.md` exists, create one when the first term is resolved. If no `docs/adr/` exists, create it when the first ADR is needed.
-
-## During the session
-
-### Challenge against the glossary
-
-When the user uses a term that conflicts with the existing language in `CONTEXT.md`, call it out immediately. "Your glossary defines 'cancellation' as X, but you seem to mean Y — which is it?"
-
-### Sharpen fuzzy language
-
-When the user uses vague or overloaded terms, propose a precise canonical term. "You're saying 'account' — do you mean the Customer or the User? Those are different things."
-
-### Discuss concrete scenarios
-
-When domain relationships are being discussed, stress-test them with specific scenarios. Invent scenarios that probe edge cases and force the user to be precise about the boundaries between concepts.
-
-### Cross-reference with code
-
-When the user states how something works, check whether the code agrees. If you find a contradiction, surface it: "Your code cancels entire Orders, but you just said partial cancellation is possible — which is right?"
-
-### Update CONTEXT.md inline
-
-When a term is resolved, update `CONTEXT.md` right there. Don't batch these up — capture them as they happen. Use the format in [CONTEXT-FORMAT.md](./CONTEXT-FORMAT.md).
-
-`CONTEXT.md` should be totally devoid of implementation details. Do not treat `CONTEXT.md` as a spec, a scratch pad, or a repository for implementation decisions. It is a glossary and nothing else.
-
-### Offer ADRs sparingly
-
-Only offer to create an ADR when all three are true:
-
-1. **Hard to reverse** — the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful
-2. **Surprising without context** — a future reader will wonder "why did they do it this way?"
-3. **The result of a real trade-off** — there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons
-
-If any of the three is missing, skip the ADR. Use the format in [ADR-FORMAT.md](./ADR-FORMAT.md).
-
-</supporting-info>
+Run a `/grilling` session, using the `/domain-modeling` skill.

.agents/skills/grill-with-docs/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Grill with Docs"
+  short_description: "Grill a design and write its docs"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

.agents/skills/grilling/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+---
+name: grilling
+description: Grill the user relentlessly about a plan, decision, or idea. Use when the user wants to stress-test their thinking, or uses any 'grill' trigger phrases.
+---
+
+Interview the user relentlessly until you reach a shared understanding. Map this as a **design tree**: every decision branches into the decisions that hang off it.
+
+Work the tree in **rounds**. The **frontier** is every decision whose prerequisites are already settled — the questions you can ask _now_ without guessing at answers you haven't heard yet. Ask the whole frontier in one round: number each question and give your recommended answer. Then wait for the user's answers before the next round.
+
+Each question should be formatted like so:
+
+```
+❓ **Q1** - **<question title>**: <question body, might be multiple paragraphs, including multiple choices>
+
+➡️ <your recommended answer>
+```
+
+Each round the user answers reshapes the tree — settled decisions push the frontier outward and unblock questions that depended on them. Recompute the frontier and ask the next round. A question whose answer depends on another question still open in this round belongs to a _later_ round, not this one.
+
+Finding _facts_ is your job, never the user's. When a frontier question needs a fact from the environment (filesystem, tools, etc.), dispatch a sub-agent to find it — don't ask the user for anything you could look up yourself. Don't block on it: a running exploration is an unsettled prerequisite, so only the questions downstream of it wait for the sub-agent to report — ask the rest of the frontier now. The _decisions_ are the user's — put each to them and wait.
+
+The session is done when the frontier is empty: every branch of the design tree visited, nothing left silently assumed. Do not act on it until the user confirms you have reached a shared understanding.

.agents/skills/grilling/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Grilling"
+  short_description: "Stress-test thinking a round of questions at a time"

.agents/skills/handoff/SKILL.md

@@ -2,13 +2,14 @@
 name: handoff
 description: Compact the current conversation into a handoff document for another agent to pick up.
 argument-hint: "What will the next session be used for?"
+disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
 Write a handoff document summarising the current conversation so a fresh agent can continue the work. Save to the temporary directory of the user's OS - not the current workspace.
 
 Include a "suggested skills" section in the document, which suggests skills that the agent should invoke.
 
-Do not duplicate content already captured in other artifacts (PRDs, plans, ADRs, issues, commits, diffs). Reference them by path or URL instead.
+Do not duplicate content already captured in other artifacts (specs, plans, ADRs, issues, commits, diffs). Reference them by path or URL instead.
 
 Redact any sensitive information, such as API keys, passwords, or personally identifiable information.
 

.agents/skills/handoff/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Handoff"
+  short_description: "Compact a conversation into a handoff"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

.agents/skills/implement/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+---
+name: implement
+description: "Implement a piece of work based on a spec or set of tickets."
+disable-model-invocation: true
+---
+
+Implement the work described by the user in the spec or tickets.
+
+Use /tdd where possible, at pre-agreed seams.
+
+Run typechecking regularly, single test files regularly, and the full test suite once at the end.
+
+Once done, use /code-review to review the work.
+
+Commit your work to the current branch.

.agents/skills/implement/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Implement"
+  short_description: "Build work from a spec or tickets"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

.agents/skills/improve-codebase-architecture/HTML-REPORT.md

@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ Repo name, date, and a compact legend: solid box = module, dashed line = seam, r
 
 ## Candidate card
 
-The diagrams carry the weight. Prose is sparse, plain, and uses the glossary terms ([LANGUAGE.md](LANGUAGE.md)) without ceremony.
+The diagrams carry the weight. Prose is sparse, plain, and uses the glossary terms (from the `/codebase-design` skill) without ceremony.
 
 Each candidate is one `<article>`:
 
@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ One larger card. Candidate name, one sentence on why, anchor link to its card. T
 
 ## Tone
 
-Plain English, concise — but the architectural nouns and verbs come straight from [LANGUAGE.md](LANGUAGE.md). Concision is not an excuse to drift.
+Plain English, concise — but the architectural nouns and verbs come straight from the `/codebase-design` skill. Concision is not an excuse to drift.
 
 **Use exactly:** module, interface, implementation, depth, deep, shallow, seam, adapter, leverage, locality.
 
@@ -120,4 +120,4 @@ Plain English, concise — but the architectural nouns and verbs come straight f
 
 **Wins bullets** name the gain in glossary terms: *"locality: bugs concentrate in one module"*, *"leverage: one interface, N call sites"*, *"interface shrinks; implementation absorbs the wrappers"*. Don't write *"easier to maintain"* or *"cleaner code"* — those terms aren't in the glossary and don't earn their place.
 
-No hedging, no throat-clearing, no "it's worth noting that…". If a sentence could be a bullet, make it a bullet. If a bullet could be cut, cut it. If a term isn't in [LANGUAGE.md](LANGUAGE.md), reach for one that is before inventing a new one.
+No hedging, no throat-clearing, no "it's worth noting that…". If a sentence could be a bullet, make it a bullet. If a bullet could be cut, cut it. If a term isn't in the `/codebase-design` glossary, reach for one that is before inventing a new one.

.agents/skills/improve-codebase-architecture/INTERFACE-DESIGN.md

@@ -1,44 +0,0 @@
-# Interface Design
-
-When the user wants to explore alternative interfaces for a chosen deepening candidate, use this parallel sub-agent pattern. Based on "Design It Twice" (Ousterhout) — your first idea is unlikely to be the best.
-
-Uses the vocabulary in [LANGUAGE.md](LANGUAGE.md) — **module**, **interface**, **seam**, **adapter**, **leverage**.
-
-## Process
-
-### 1. Frame the problem space
-
-Before spawning sub-agents, write a user-facing explanation of the problem space for the chosen candidate:
-
-- The constraints any new interface would need to satisfy
-- The dependencies it would rely on, and which category they fall into (see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md))
-- A rough illustrative code sketch to ground the constraints — not a proposal, just a way to make the constraints concrete
-
-Show this to the user, then immediately proceed to Step 2. The user reads and thinks while the sub-agents work in parallel.
-
-### 2. Spawn sub-agents
-
-Spawn 3+ sub-agents in parallel using the Agent tool. Each must produce a **radically different** interface for the deepened module.
-
-Prompt each sub-agent with a separate technical brief (file paths, coupling details, dependency category from [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md), what sits behind the seam). The brief is independent of the user-facing problem-space explanation in Step 1. Give each agent a different design constraint:
-
-- Agent 1: "Minimize the interface — aim for 1–3 entry points max. Maximise leverage per entry point."
-- Agent 2: "Maximise flexibility — support many use cases and extension."
-- Agent 3: "Optimise for the most common caller — make the default case trivial."
-- Agent 4 (if applicable): "Design around ports & adapters for cross-seam dependencies."
-
-Include both [LANGUAGE.md](LANGUAGE.md) vocabulary and CONTEXT.md vocabulary in the brief so each sub-agent names things consistently with the architecture language and the project's domain language.
-
-Each sub-agent outputs:
-
-1. Interface (types, methods, params — plus invariants, ordering, error modes)
-2. Usage example showing how callers use it
-3. What the implementation hides behind the seam
-4. Dependency strategy and adapters (see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md))
-5. Trade-offs — where leverage is high, where it's thin
-
-### 3. Present and compare
-
-Present designs sequentially so the user can absorb each one, then compare them in prose. Contrast by **depth** (leverage at the interface), **locality** (where change concentrates), and **seam placement**.
-
-After comparing, give your own recommendation: which design you think is strongest and why. If elements from different designs would combine well, propose a hybrid. Be opinionated — the user wants a strong read, not a menu.

.agents/skills/improve-codebase-architecture/LANGUAGE.md

@@ -1,53 +0,0 @@
-# Language
-
-Shared vocabulary for every suggestion this skill makes. Use these terms exactly — don't substitute "component," "service," "API," or "boundary." Consistent language is the whole point.
-
-## Terms
-
-**Module**
-Anything with an interface and an implementation. Deliberately scale-agnostic — applies equally to a function, class, package, or tier-spanning slice.
-_Avoid_: unit, component, service.
-
-**Interface**
-Everything a caller must know to use the module correctly. Includes the type signature, but also invariants, ordering constraints, error modes, required configuration, and performance characteristics.
-_Avoid_: API, signature (too narrow — those refer only to the type-level surface).
-
-**Implementation**
-What's inside a module — its body of code. Distinct from **Adapter**: a thing can be a small adapter with a large implementation (a Postgres repo) or a large adapter with a small implementation (an in-memory fake). Reach for "adapter" when the seam is the topic; "implementation" otherwise.
-
-**Depth**
-Leverage at the interface — the amount of behaviour a caller (or test) can exercise per unit of interface they have to learn. A module is **deep** when a large amount of behaviour sits behind a small interface. A module is **shallow** when the interface is nearly as complex as the implementation.
-
-**Seam** _(from Michael Feathers)_
-A place where you can alter behaviour without editing in that place. The *location* at which a module's interface lives. Choosing where to put the seam is its own design decision, distinct from what goes behind it.
-_Avoid_: boundary (overloaded with DDD's bounded context).
-
-**Adapter**
-A concrete thing that satisfies an interface at a seam. Describes *role* (what slot it fills), not substance (what's inside).
-
-**Leverage**
-What callers get from depth. More capability per unit of interface they have to learn. One implementation pays back across N call sites and M tests.
-
-**Locality**
-What maintainers get from depth. Change, bugs, knowledge, and verification concentrate at one place rather than spreading across callers. Fix once, fixed everywhere.
-
-## Principles
-
-- **Depth is a property of the interface, not the implementation.** A deep module can be internally composed of small, mockable, swappable parts — they just aren't part of the interface. A module can have **internal seams** (private to its implementation, used by its own tests) as well as the **external seam** at its interface.
-- **The deletion test.** Imagine deleting the module. If complexity vanishes, the module wasn't hiding anything (it was a pass-through). If complexity reappears across N callers, the module was earning its keep.
-- **The interface is the test surface.** Callers and tests cross the same seam. If you want to test *past* the interface, the module is probably the wrong shape.
-- **One adapter means a hypothetical seam. Two adapters means a real one.** Don't introduce a seam unless something actually varies across it.
-
-## Relationships
-
-- A **Module** has exactly one **Interface** (the surface it presents to callers and tests).
-- **Depth** is a property of a **Module**, measured against its **Interface**.
-- A **Seam** is where a **Module**'s **Interface** lives.
-- An **Adapter** sits at a **Seam** and satisfies the **Interface**.
-- **Depth** produces **Leverage** for callers and **Locality** for maintainers.
-
-## Rejected framings
-
-- **Depth as ratio of implementation-lines to interface-lines** (Ousterhout): rewards padding the implementation. We use depth-as-leverage instead.
-- **"Interface" as the TypeScript `interface` keyword or a class's public methods**: too narrow — interface here includes every fact a caller must know.
-- **"Boundary"**: overloaded with DDD's bounded context. Say **seam** or **interface**.

.agents/skills/improve-codebase-architecture/SKILL.md

@@ -1,40 +1,30 @@
 ---
 name: improve-codebase-architecture
-description: Find deepening opportunities in a codebase, informed by the domain language in CONTEXT.md and the decisions in docs/adr/. Use when the user wants to improve architecture, find refactoring opportunities, consolidate tightly-coupled modules, or make a codebase more testable and AI-navigable.
+description: Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.
+disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
 # Improve Codebase Architecture
 
 Surface architectural friction and propose **deepening opportunities** — refactors that turn shallow modules into deep ones. The aim is testability and AI-navigability.
 
-## Glossary
+This command is _informed_ by the project's domain model and built on a shared design vocabulary:
 
-Use these terms exactly in every suggestion. Consistent language is the point — don't drift into "component," "service," "API," or "boundary." Full definitions in [LANGUAGE.md](LANGUAGE.md).
-
-- **Module** — anything with an interface and an implementation (function, class, package, slice).
-- **Interface** — everything a caller must know to use the module: types, invariants, error modes, ordering, config. Not just the type signature.
-- **Implementation** — the code inside.
-- **Depth** — leverage at the interface: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface. **Deep** = high leverage. **Shallow** = interface nearly as complex as the implementation.
-- **Seam** — where an interface lives; a place behaviour can be altered without editing in place. (Use this, not "boundary.")
-- **Adapter** — a concrete thing satisfying an interface at a seam.
-- **Leverage** — what callers get from depth.
-- **Locality** — what maintainers get from depth: change, bugs, knowledge concentrated in one place.
-
-Key principles (see [LANGUAGE.md](LANGUAGE.md) for the full list):
-
-- **Deletion test**: imagine deleting the module. If complexity vanishes, it was a pass-through. If complexity reappears across N callers, it was earning its keep.
-- **The interface is the test surface.**
-- **One adapter = hypothetical seam. Two adapters = real seam.**
-
-This skill is _informed_ by the project's domain model. The domain language gives names to good seams; ADRs record decisions the skill should not re-litigate.
+- Run the `/codebase-design` skill for the architecture vocabulary (**module**, **interface**, **depth**, **seam**, **adapter**, **leverage**, **locality**) and its principles (the deletion test, "the interface is the test surface", "one adapter = hypothetical seam, two = real"). Use these terms exactly in every suggestion — don't drift into "component," "service," "API," or "boundary."
+- The domain language in `CONTEXT.md` gives names to good seams; ADRs in `docs/adr/` record decisions this command should not re-litigate.
 
 ## Process
 
 ### 1. Explore
 
-Read the project's domain glossary and any ADRs in the area you're touching first.
+**Scope before you scan — YAGNI.** Deepening a module pays off by making future changes to it easier, so put extra weight on the parts of the codebase that have recently changed. Decide *where* to look before you look:
 
-Then use the Agent tool with `subagent_type=Explore` to walk the codebase. Don't follow rigid heuristics — explore organically and note where you experience friction:
+- If the user named a direction — a module, a subsystem, a pain point — take it, and skip the inference below.
+- Otherwise, walk back a good stretch of the commit history (`git log --oneline`) to find the codebase's hot spots — the files and areas that keep coming up — and let those paths pull your attention first. If the changes are scattered with no clear hot spot, widen the net.
+
+Read the project's domain glossary (`CONTEXT.md`) and any ADRs in the area you're touching first.
+
+Then spawn a sub-agent to walk the codebase. Don't follow rigid heuristics — explore organically and note where you experience friction:
 
 - Where does understanding one concept require bouncing between many small modules?
 - Where are modules **shallow** — interface nearly as complex as the implementation?
@@ -50,7 +40,7 @@ Write a self-contained HTML file to the OS temp directory so nothing lands in th
 
 The report uses **Tailwind via CDN** for layout and styling, and **Mermaid via CDN** for diagrams where a graph/flow/sequence reliably communicates the structure. Mix Mermaid with hand-crafted CSS/SVG visuals — use Mermaid when relationships are graph-shaped (call graphs, dependencies, sequences), and hand-built divs/SVG when you want something more editorial (mass diagrams, cross-sections, collapse animations). Each candidate gets a **before/after visualisation**. Be visual.
 
-For each candidate, the same template as before, but rendered as a card:
+For each candidate, render a card with:
 
 - **Files** — which files/modules are involved
 - **Problem** — why the current architecture is causing friction
@@ -61,7 +51,7 @@ For each candidate, the same template as before, but rendered as a card:
 
 End the report with a **Top recommendation** section: which candidate you'd tackle first and why.
 
-**Use CONTEXT.md vocabulary for the domain, and [LANGUAGE.md](LANGUAGE.md) vocabulary for the architecture.** If `CONTEXT.md` defines "Order," talk about "the Order intake module" — not "the FooBarHandler," and not "the Order service."
+**Use CONTEXT.md vocabulary for the domain, and the `/codebase-design` vocabulary for the architecture.** If `CONTEXT.md` defines "Order," talk about "the Order intake module" — not "the FooBarHandler," and not "the Order service."
 
 **ADR conflicts**: if a candidate contradicts an existing ADR, only surface it when the friction is real enough to warrant revisiting the ADR. Mark it clearly in the card (e.g. a warning callout: _"contradicts ADR-0007 — but worth reopening because…"_). Don't list every theoretical refactor an ADR forbids.
 
@@ -71,11 +61,11 @@ Do NOT propose interfaces yet. After the file is written, ask the user: "Which o
 
 ### 3. Grilling loop
 
-Once the user picks a candidate, drop into a grilling conversation. Walk the design tree with them — constraints, dependencies, the shape of the deepened module, what sits behind the seam, what tests survive.
+Once the user picks a candidate, run the `/grilling` skill to walk the decision tree with them — constraints, dependencies, the shape of the deepened module, what sits behind the seam, what tests survive.
 
-Side effects happen inline as decisions crystallize:
+Side effects happen inline as decisions crystallize — run the `/domain-modeling` skill to keep the domain model current as you go:
 
-- **Naming a deepened module after a concept not in `CONTEXT.md`?** Add the term to `CONTEXT.md` — same discipline as `/grill-with-docs` (see [CONTEXT-FORMAT.md](../grill-with-docs/CONTEXT-FORMAT.md)). Create the file lazily if it doesn't exist.
+- **Naming a deepened module after a concept not in `CONTEXT.md`?** Add the term to `CONTEXT.md`. Create the file lazily if it doesn't exist.
 - **Sharpening a fuzzy term during the conversation?** Update `CONTEXT.md` right there.
-- **User rejects the candidate with a load-bearing reason?** Offer an ADR, framed as: _"Want me to record this as an ADR so future architecture reviews don't re-suggest it?"_ Only offer when the reason would actually be needed by a future explorer to avoid re-suggesting the same thing — skip ephemeral reasons ("not worth it right now") and self-evident ones. See [ADR-FORMAT.md](../grill-with-docs/ADR-FORMAT.md).
-- **Want to explore alternative interfaces for the deepened module?** See [INTERFACE-DESIGN.md](INTERFACE-DESIGN.md).
+- **User rejects the candidate with a load-bearing reason?** Offer an ADR, framed as: _"Want me to record this as an ADR so future architecture reviews don't re-suggest it?"_ Only offer when the reason would actually be needed by a future explorer to avoid re-suggesting the same thing — skip ephemeral reasons ("not worth it right now") and self-evident ones.
+- **Want to explore alternative interfaces for the deepened module?** Run the `/codebase-design` skill and use its design-it-twice parallel sub-agent pattern.

.agents/skills/improve-codebase-architecture/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Improve Codebase Architecture"
+  short_description: "Find and grill architecture improvements"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

.agents/skills/openspec-apply-change/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,185 @@
+---
+name: openspec-apply-change
+description: Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change. Use when the user wants to start implementing, continue implementation, or work through tasks.
+allowed-tools: Bash(openspec:*)
+license: MIT
+compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
+metadata:
+  author: openspec
+  version: "1.0"
+  generatedBy: "1.8.0"
+---
+
+Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change.
+
+**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`, `view`). Once selected, treat `--store <id>` as sticky for the rest of the workflow. Every unscoped example of those commands below is shorthand: before running it, append the flag. For example, run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json --store "<id>"`, not the unscoped form shown below. Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
+
+**Input**: Optionally specify a change name (e.g., `$openspec-apply-change (Codex) or /openspec-apply-change (other agents) add-auth`). If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
+
+**Steps**
+
+1. **Select the change**
+
+   If a name is provided, use it. Otherwise:
+   - Infer from conversation context if the user mentioned a change
+   - Auto-select if only one active change exists
+   - If ambiguous, run `openspec list --json` to get available changes and ask the user to select one
+
+   Always announce: "Using change: <name>" and how to override (e.g., `$openspec-apply-change (Codex) or /openspec-apply-change (other agents) <other>`).
+
+2. **Check status to understand the schema**
+   ```bash
+   openspec status --change "<name>" --json
+   ```
+   Parse the JSON to understand:
+   - `schemaName`: The workflow being used (e.g., "spec-driven")
+   - `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, and `actionContext`: planning scope and edit constraints
+   - Which artifact contains the tasks (typically "tasks" for spec-driven, check status for others)
+
+3. **Get apply instructions**
+
+   ```bash
+   openspec instructions apply --change "<name>" --json
+   ```
+
+   This returns:
+   - `contextFiles`: artifact ID -> array of concrete file paths (varies by schema - could be proposal/specs/design/tasks or spec/tests/implementation/docs)
+   - Progress (total, complete, remaining)
+   - Task list with status
+   - Dynamic instruction based on current state
+   - Optional `context`: current required project instruction input from the selected root
+   - Optional `operationGuidance`: current advisory guidance for apply
+
+   **Handle states:**
+   - If `state: "blocked"` (missing artifacts): show message, suggest using `$openspec-continue-change (Codex) or /openspec-continue-change (other agents)` (if it is not installed, run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json` to see the next artifact and `openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json` for how to create it)
+   - If `state: "all_done"`: congratulate, suggest archive
+   - Otherwise: proceed to implementation
+
+   Treat `context` as a required prompt-level input. Read and consider it, and
+   apply relevant project facts, conventions, and constraints while implementing.
+   Treat `operationGuidance` as optional additive advice. Read and consider every
+   entry, and follow entries that are applicable and compatible with the built-in
+   workflow.
+
+   Keep both fields separate from CLI-returned state, missing artifacts, tasks,
+   progress, `contextFiles`, and the built-in `instruction`. They are not
+   evidence of task completion, do not replace the built-in instruction, and do
+   not permit bypassing a blocked state. If context conflicts with the built-in
+   instruction, an explicit user choice, or a CLI-controlled value, report the
+   conflict and preserve the controlling value. If guidance is inapplicable or
+   conflicts with those controlling inputs, do not follow it and explain why.
+   These are prompt-level behavior contracts, not enforceable checks.
+
+4. **Read context files**
+
+   Read every file path listed under `contextFiles` from the apply instructions output.
+   The files depend on the schema being used:
+   - **spec-driven**: proposal, specs, design, tasks
+   - Other schemas: follow the contextFiles from CLI output
+
+   Do not copy `context` or `operationGuidance` verbatim into implementation
+   files or planning artifacts unless the user separately asks for that content.
+
+5. **Show current progress**
+
+   Display:
+   - Schema being used
+   - Progress: "N/M tasks complete"
+   - Remaining tasks overview
+   - Dynamic instruction from CLI
+
+6. **Implement tasks (loop until done or blocked)**
+
+   For each pending task:
+   - Show which task is being worked on
+   - Make the code changes required
+   - Keep changes minimal and focused
+   - Mark task complete in the tasks file: `- [ ]` → `- [x]`
+   - Continue to next task
+
+   **Pause if:**
+   - Task is unclear → ask for clarification
+   - Implementation reveals a design issue → suggest updating artifacts
+   - Error or blocker encountered → report and wait for guidance
+   - User interrupts
+
+7. **On completion or pause, show status**
+
+   Display:
+   - Tasks completed this session
+   - Overall progress: "N/M tasks complete"
+   - If all done: suggest archive
+   - If paused: explain why and wait for guidance
+
+**Output During Implementation**
+
+```
+## Implementing: <change-name> (schema: <schema-name>)
+
+Working on task 3/7: <task description>
+[...implementation happening...]
+✓ Task complete
+
+Working on task 4/7: <task description>
+[...implementation happening...]
+✓ Task complete
+```
+
+**Output On Completion**
+
+```
+## Implementation Complete
+
+**Change:** <change-name>
+**Schema:** <schema-name>
+**Progress:** 7/7 tasks complete ✓
+
+### Completed This Session
+- [x] Task 1
+- [x] Task 2
+...
+
+All tasks complete! You can archive this change with `$openspec-archive-change (Codex) or /openspec-archive-change (other agents)`.
+```
+
+**Output On Pause (Issue Encountered)**
+
+```
+## Implementation Paused
+
+**Change:** <change-name>
+**Schema:** <schema-name>
+**Progress:** 4/7 tasks complete
+
+### Issue Encountered
+<description of the issue>
+
+**Options:**
+1. <option 1>
+2. <option 2>
+3. Other approach
+
+What would you like to do?
+```
+
+**Guardrails**
+- Keep going through tasks until done or blocked
+- Always read context files before starting (from the apply instructions output)
+- If task is ambiguous, pause and ask before implementing
+- If implementation reveals issues, pause and suggest artifact updates
+- Keep code changes minimal and scoped to each task
+- Update task checkbox immediately after completing each task
+- Pause on errors, blockers, or unclear requirements - don't guess
+- Use contextFiles from CLI output, don't assume specific file names
+- Do not use context or operation guidance as proof that a task is complete
+- Apply relevant project context; report conflicts with controlling workflow inputs
+- Consider every guidance entry; explain any inapplicable or conflicting advice
+- Do not copy runtime context or operation guidance into implementation files or planning artifacts
+- Preserve CLI-controlled blocked/ready/all-done behavior and completion criteria
+
+**Fluid Workflow Integration**
+
+This skill supports the "actions on a change" model:
+
+- **Can be invoked anytime**: Before all artifacts are done (if tasks exist), after partial implementation, interleaved with other actions
+- **Allows artifact updates**: If implementation reveals design issues, suggest updating artifacts - not phase-locked, work fluidly

.agents/skills/openspec-archive-change/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,182 @@
+---
+name: openspec-archive-change
+description: Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow. Use when the user wants to finalize and archive a change after implementation is complete.
+allowed-tools: Bash(openspec:*)
+license: MIT
+compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
+metadata:
+  author: openspec
+  version: "1.0"
+  generatedBy: "1.8.0"
+---
+
+Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow.
+
+**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`, `view`). Once selected, treat `--store <id>` as sticky for the rest of the workflow. Every unscoped example of those commands below is shorthand: before running it, append the flag. For example, run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json --store "<id>"`, not the unscoped form shown below. Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
+
+`<capability-path>` is the spec directory relative to `specs/` (for example, `user-auth` or `identity/user-auth`). Preserve the full path from each delta spec when resolving its main spec.
+
+**Input**: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
+
+**Steps**
+
+1. **Select the change**
+
+   If a name is provided, use it. Otherwise:
+   - Infer from conversation context if the user mentioned a change
+   - Auto-select if only one active change exists
+   - If ambiguous, run `openspec list --json` to get available changes and ask the user to select one
+
+   When prompting, show only active changes (not already archived).
+   Include the schema used for each change if available.
+
+   Always announce: "Using change: <name>" and how to override (e.g., `$openspec-archive-change (Codex) or /openspec-archive-change (other agents) <other>`).
+
+   **Load current archive inputs before the existing archive checks:**
+
+   After resolving the selected change and planning root, run:
+   ```bash
+   openspec instructions archive --change "<name>" --json
+   ```
+   Keep the same selected-root flags on this command. This lookup is advisory and
+   optional: it only supplies extra prompt inputs, so it must never block archiving.
+   If it exits non-zero or returns invalid JSON — for example on an older CLI that
+   does not support this command yet — continue the archive workflow with no
+   context and no operation guidance. Do not report an error and do not stop.
+
+   A successful response may omit both optional fields. Treat `context` as a
+   required prompt-level input: read and consider it, and apply relevant project
+   facts, conventions, and constraints. Treat `operationGuidance` as optional
+   additive advice: read and consider every entry, and follow entries that are
+   applicable and compatible with the built-in archive workflow.
+
+   Keep both fields separate from built-in steps, explicit user choices, resolved
+   paths, CLI checks, and command contracts. If context conflicts with one of those
+   controlling inputs, report the conflict and preserve the controlling value. If
+   guidance is inapplicable or conflicts with a controlling input, do not follow it
+   and explain why. Do not infer replacement paths, skipped prompts, or flags from
+   either field, and do not copy their text verbatim into specs, change artifacts,
+   or archive summaries unless the user separately asks for it. These are
+   prompt-level behavior contracts, not enforceable checks.
+
+2. **Check artifact completion status**
+
+   Run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json` to check artifact completion.
+
+   Parse the JSON to understand:
+   - `schemaName`: The workflow being used
+   - `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`: path and scope context
+   - `artifacts`: List of artifacts with their status (`done`, `skipped`, or other)
+
+   **If any artifacts are neither `done` nor `skipped`** (skipped artifacts satisfy the requirement - the change declares skip_specs):
+   - Display warning listing incomplete artifacts
+   - Ask the user to confirm they want to proceed
+   - Proceed if user confirms
+
+3. **Check task completion status**
+
+   Read the tasks file (typically `tasks.md`) to check for incomplete tasks.
+
+   Count tasks marked with `- [ ]` (incomplete) vs `- [x]` (complete).
+
+   **If incomplete tasks found:**
+   - Display warning showing count of incomplete tasks
+   - Ask the user to confirm they want to proceed
+   - Proceed if user confirms
+
+   **If no tasks file exists:** Proceed without task-related warning.
+
+4. **Assess delta spec sync state**
+
+   Use `artifactPaths.specs.existingOutputPaths` from status JSON as the only
+   delta-spec source. If the `specs` entry is missing or
+   `existingOutputPaths` is empty, proceed without a sync prompt and do not infer
+   delta specs from other artifacts.
+
+   **If delta specs exist:**
+   - Compare each delta spec with its corresponding main spec at `<planningHome.root>/openspec/specs/<capability-path>/spec.md` (use the store-aware `planningHome.root` from step 2, not a hardcoded repo path)
+   - Determine what changes would be applied (adds, modifications, removals, renames)
+   - Show a combined summary before prompting
+
+   **Prompt options:**
+   - If changes needed: "Sync now (recommended)", "Archive without syncing"
+   - If already synced: "Archive now", "Sync anyway", "Cancel"
+
+   Route on the answer:
+   - "Cancel" — stop, do not archive
+   - "Archive without syncing" or "Archive now" — proceed to archive
+   - "Sync now" or "Sync anyway" — sync, then verify (below)
+   - Anything else — ask again rather than archiving
+
+   Before a selected sync writes any main spec, run
+   `openspec instructions specs --change "<name>" --json` once with the same
+   selected-root flags. Require a zero exit status and valid artifact-instruction
+   JSON. If the lookup fails or returns invalid JSON, report the error and stop
+   before writing any main spec or moving the change. A valid response with omitted
+   `rules` is the no-rules case. Apply returned `rules` only to the content and
+   form of main specs produced by this merge; do not use them as archive guidance,
+   change CLI behavior, or copy the rule text into any output file.
+
+   Then run the `openspec-sync-specs` workflow inline (agent-driven intelligent merge) for change '<name>', passing the delta spec analysis and the fetched specs-rule snapshot from above, and wait for it to finish. The inline sync must reuse that snapshot without fetching `specs` instructions again. Do not delegate it to a background task — step 5 would move `changeRoot` out from under a sync that is still reading it, leaving the change archived and the main specs never updated. If your agent can only run it by delegation, delegate synchronously and wait for the result.
+
+   Then re-run the comparison from the top of this step against every capability that has a delta spec in `artifactPaths.specs.existingOutputPaths` — not only the ones the sync reports it touched. A successful sync leaves nothing left to apply, so each capability must now read as already synced:
+   - ADDED requirements present
+   - MODIFIED requirements carrying the scenario and description changes named in the delta, with their other scenarios intact
+   - REMOVED requirements gone — and where this sync retired a capability (removed its last requirement, leaving `## Requirements` empty), its main spec deleted rather than left empty; a spec the sync deliberately kept and reported is also a match
+   - RENAMED requirements present under the new name and absent under the old one
+
+   If the sync failed, or any capability does not match, report what differs and stop — do not archive. Nothing has moved and `changeRoot` is intact, so the user can fix the mismatch or re-run the sync and start the archive again.
+
+5. **Perform the archive**
+
+   Create an `archive` directory under `planningHome.changesDir` if it doesn't exist:
+   ```bash
+   mkdir -p "<planningHome.changesDir>/archive"
+   ```
+
+   Generate the target name: use the change name as-is when it already starts with a `YYYY-MM-DD-` prefix; otherwise prepend the current date as `YYYY-MM-DD-<change-name>`. Never stack a second date (same rule as `openspec archive`).
+
+   **Check if target already exists:**
+   - If yes: Fail with error, suggest renaming existing archive or using different date
+   - If no: Move `changeRoot` to the archive directory
+
+   ```bash
+   mv "<changeRoot>" "<planningHome.changesDir>/archive/<target-name>"
+   ```
+
+6. **Display summary**
+
+   Show archive completion summary including:
+   - Change name
+   - Schema that was used
+   - Archive location
+   - Whether specs were synced (if applicable)
+   - Note about any warnings (incomplete artifacts/tasks)
+
+**Output On Success**
+
+```markdown
+## Archive Complete
+
+**Change:** <change-name>
+**Schema:** <schema-name>
+**Archived to:** the archive path derived from `planningHome.changesDir`/<target-name>/
+**Specs:** <"✓ Synced to main specs" only if the step 4 verification passed; otherwise "No delta specs" or "Sync skipped">
+
+<"All artifacts complete. All tasks complete." — or, if archived with warnings, list them instead (e.g. "Archived with 2 incomplete tasks")>
+```
+
+**Guardrails**
+- Announce the selected change; prompt for selection when it is ambiguous
+- Use artifact graph (openspec status --json) for completion checking
+- Don't block archive on warnings - just inform and confirm
+- Preserve .openspec.yaml when moving to archive (it moves with the directory)
+- Show clear summary of what happened
+- If sync is requested, run the `openspec-sync-specs` workflow inline (agent-driven)
+- Never archive while a spec sync is still in flight — run the sync inline and verify the main specs before moving `changeRoot`
+- If delta specs exist, always run the sync assessment and show the combined summary before prompting
+- Apply relevant runtime context and report conflicts; operation guidance remains advisory
+- Consider every guidance entry and explain any inapplicable or conflicting advice
+- Existing CLI checks, resolved paths, prompts, and command contracts are unchanged
+- Artifact rules constrain only the specs being written and are never operation guidance
+- Never copy runtime context, operation guidance, or artifact-rule text verbatim into output files

.agents/skills/openspec-explore/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,308 @@
+---
+name: openspec-explore
+description: Enter explore mode - a thinking partner for exploring ideas, investigating problems, and clarifying requirements. Use when the user wants to think through something before or during a change.
+allowed-tools: Bash(openspec:*)
+license: MIT
+compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
+metadata:
+  author: openspec
+  version: "1.0"
+  generatedBy: "1.8.0"
+---
+
+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 and create a change proposal. You MAY create OpenSpec artifacts (proposals, designs, specs) if the user asks—that's capturing thinking, not implementing. For a new change, scaffold it first as described below.
+
+**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.
+
+**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`, `view`). Once selected, treat `--store <id>` as sticky for the rest of the workflow. Every unscoped example of those commands below is shorthand: before running it, append the flag. For example, run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json --store "<id>"`, not the unscoped form shown below. Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
+
+---
+
+## The Stance
+
+- **Curious, not prescriptive** - Ask questions that emerge naturally, don't follow a script
+- **Open threads, not interrogations** - Surface multiple interesting directions and let the user follow what resonates. Don't funnel them through a single path of questions.
+- **Visual** - Use ASCII diagrams liberally when they'd help clarify thinking
+- **Adaptive** - Follow interesting threads, pivot when new information emerges
+- **Patient** - Don't rush to conclusions, let the shape of the problem emerge
+- **Grounded** - Explore the actual codebase when relevant, don't just theorize
+
+---
+
+## What You Might Do
+
+Depending on what the user brings, you might:
+
+**Explore the problem space**
+- Ask clarifying questions that emerge from what they said
+- Challenge assumptions
+- Reframe the problem
+- Find analogies
+
+**Investigate the codebase**
+- Map existing architecture relevant to the discussion
+- Find integration points
+- Identify patterns already in use
+- Surface hidden complexity
+
+**Compare options**
+- Brainstorm multiple approaches
+- Build comparison tables
+- Sketch tradeoffs
+- Recommend a path (if asked)
+
+**Visualize**
+```
+┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
+│     Use ASCII diagrams liberally        │
+├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
+│                                         │
+│      ┌────────┐         ┌────────┐      │
+│      │ State  │────────▶│ State  │      │
+│      │   A    │         │   B    │      │
+│      └────────┘         └────────┘      │
+│                                         │
+│   System diagrams, state machines,      │
+│   data flows, architecture sketches,    │
+│   dependency graphs, comparison tables  │
+│                                         │
+└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
+```
+
+**Surface risks and unknowns**
+- Identify what could go wrong
+- Find gaps in understanding
+- Suggest spikes or investigations
+
+---
+
+## OpenSpec Awareness
+
+You have full context of the OpenSpec system. Use it naturally, don't force it.
+
+### Check for context
+
+At the start, quickly check what exists:
+```bash
+openspec list --json
+```
+
+This tells you:
+- If there are active changes
+- Their names, schemas, and status
+- What the user might be working on
+
+Then read the project's own context from the resolved root - `<root.path>/openspec/config.yaml` (or `config.yml`). Use the `root.path` returned above, and skip this if neither file exists:
+- `context`: project background - tech stack, conventions, constraints
+- `rules`: keyed by artifact id - the entries for an artifact apply only when you write that artifact
+
+Ground your thinking in these. They are constraints for you to follow, not content to reproduce: do NOT copy them into the conversation or into any artifact you create.
+
+### When no change exists
+
+Think freely. When insights crystallize, you might offer:
+
+- "This feels solid enough to start a change. Want me to create a proposal?"
+- Or keep exploring - no pressure to formalize
+
+If the user asks you to capture the exploration as a new change, transition seamlessly into the requested capture:
+
+1. Run `openspec new change "<name>"` (with `--store <id>` when applicable) before creating any artifacts. Never create a new change directory under `openspec/changes/` by hand; the CLI scaffold creates required metadata such as `.openspec.yaml`. Keep the selected `--store <id>` on every applicable follow-up `status` and `instructions` command.
+2. Run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json` (append the confirmed `--store "<id>"` only for a registered standalone store), then process the requested artifacts in dependency order. For each requested artifact that is `ready`, run `openspec instructions "<artifact-id>" --change "<name>" --json` (append the confirmed `--store "<id>"` only for a registered standalone store). Before creating a requested artifact, evaluate any condition in its own `instruction` against the explored change; record a deliberate skip instead when the condition does not apply. If a requested artifact is blocked by a direct prerequisite the user did not request, run `openspec instructions "<prerequisite-id>" --change "<name>" --json` (append the confirmed `--store "<id>"` only for a registered standalone store) for that prerequisite whether it is `ready` or `blocked`. If its own `instruction` states a condition, evaluate that condition against the explored change and record a deliberate skip only when the condition does not apply. If the condition applies, or the prerequisite is not conditional, treat it as a normal prerequisite and ask before expanding the capture. Do not create an unrequested prerequisite unless the user approves.
+3. Follow the returned `template` and `instruction` fields. Read completed dependency files listed in `dependencies`, and apply `context` and `rules` as constraints without copying them into the artifact. If the instruction delegates creation to a specific skill or command, invoke it; otherwise write the artifact to `resolvedOutputPath`, using the instruction to choose a concrete path when it is a glob. Verify that the selected concrete output exists.
+4. After creating each artifact, re-run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json` (append the confirmed `--store "<id>"` only for a registered standalone store) and continue until every requested artifact is `done`, `skipped`, or was deliberately skipped because its own `instruction` stated a condition that did not apply. Tell the user about a deliberate conditional skip, remember it, and do not reconsider it. Dependencies are enablers, not gates: if a requested artifact is still `blocked` only because you deliberately skipped a conditional prerequisite, run `openspec instructions "<artifact-id>" --change "<name>" --json` (append the confirmed `--store "<id>"` only for a registered standalone store) despite the blocked status, then create it using step 3 only when those recorded conditional skips are its sole missing dependencies. If a requested artifact is blocked by a prerequisite the user did not ask to capture and cannot be conditionally skipped, explain that dependency and ask before expanding the capture.
+
+Capture the artifact(s) the user requested without asking them to invoke another workflow command. If they asked only to start a change, stop after scaffolding and show its status.
+
+### When a change exists
+
+If the user mentions a change or you detect one is relevant:
+
+1. **Resolve and read existing artifacts for context**
+   - Run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`.
+   - Use `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext` from the status JSON.
+   - Read existing files from `artifactPaths.<artifact>.existingOutputPaths`.
+
+2. **Reference them naturally in conversation**
+   - "Your design mentions using Redis, but we just realized SQLite fits better..."
+   - "The proposal scopes this to premium users, but we're now thinking everyone..."
+
+3. **Offer to capture when decisions are made**
+
+   `<capability-path>` is the spec directory relative to `specs/` (for example, `user-auth` or `identity/user-auth`). Preserve an existing capability's full path and follow the project's established organization for new capabilities.
+
+    | Insight Type               | Where to Capture                    |
+    |----------------------------|-------------------------------------|
+    | New requirement discovered | `specs/<capability-path>/spec.md` |
+    | Requirement changed        | `specs/<capability-path>/spec.md` |
+    | Design decision made       | `design.md`                       |
+    | Scope changed              | `proposal.md`                     |
+    | New work identified        | `tasks.md`                        |
+    | Assumption invalidated     | Relevant artifact                   |
+
+   Example offers:
+   - "That's a design decision. Capture it in design.md?"
+   - "This is a new requirement. Add it to specs?"
+   - "This changes scope. Update the proposal?"
+
+4. **The user decides** - Offer and move on. Don't pressure. Don't auto-capture.
+
+---
+
+## What You Don't Have To Do
+
+- Follow a script
+- Ask the same questions every time
+- Produce a specific artifact
+- Reach a conclusion
+- Stay on topic if a tangent is valuable
+- Be brief (this is thinking time)
+
+---
+
+## Handling Different Entry Points
+
+**User brings a vague idea:**
+```
+User: I'm thinking about adding real-time collaboration
+
+You: Real-time collab is a big space. Let me think about this...
+
+      COLLABORATION SPECTRUM
+      ════════════════════════════════════════════
+
+      Awareness          Coordination         Sync
+          │                   │                 │
+          ▼                   ▼                 ▼
+      ┌────────┐         ┌────────┐        ┌────────┐
+      │Presence│         │Cursors │        │  CRDT  │
+      │  "3    │         │ Multi  │        │Conflict│
+      │online" │         │ select │        │  free  │
+      └────────┘         └────────┘        └────────┘
+          │                   │                 │
+       trivial            moderate           complex
+
+      Where's your head at?
+```
+
+**User brings a specific problem:**
+```
+User: The auth system is a mess
+
+You: [reads codebase]
+
+     ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+     │              CURRENT AUTH FLOW              │
+     └─────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+                        │
+          ┌─────────────┼─────────────┐
+          ▼             ▼             ▼
+     ┌─────────┐  ┌─────────┐  ┌─────────┐
+     │ Google  │  │  GitHub │  │  Email  │
+     │  OAuth  │  │  OAuth  │  │  Magic  │
+     └────┬────┘  └────┬────┘  └────┬────┘
+          │             │             │
+          └─────────────┼─────────────┘
+                        ▼
+                  ┌───────────┐
+                  │  Session  │
+                  └─────┬─────┘
+                        │
+                        ▼
+                  ┌───────────┐
+                  │   Perms   │
+                  └───────────┘
+
+     I see three tangles. Which one's burning?
+```
+
+**User is stuck mid-implementation:**
+```
+User: $openspec-explore (Codex) or /openspec-explore (other agents) add-auth-system
+      The OAuth integration is more complex than expected
+
+You: [reads change artifacts]
+
+     You're on task 4: "Implement OAuth flow"
+
+     Let me trace what's involved...
+
+     [draws diagram, explores options, suggests paths]
+
+     Want to update the design to reflect this?
+     Or add a spike task to investigate?
+```
+
+**User wants to compare options:**
+```
+User: Should we use Postgres or SQLite?
+
+You: Generic answer is boring. What's the context?
+
+User: A CLI tool that tracks local dev environments
+
+You: That changes everything.
+
+     ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+     │          CLI TOOL DATA STORAGE                  │
+     └─────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+
+     Key constraints:
+     • No daemon running
+     • Must work offline
+     • Single user
+
+                  SQLite          Postgres
+     Deployment   embedded ✓      needs server ✗
+     Offline      yes ✓           no ✗
+     Single file  yes ✓           no ✗
+
+     SQLite. Not even close.
+
+     Unless... is there a sync component?
+```
+
+---
+
+## Ending Discovery
+
+There's no required ending. Discovery might:
+
+- **Flow into a proposal**: "Ready to start? I can create a change proposal."
+- **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"
+
+When it feels like things are crystallizing, you might summarize:
+
+```
+## What We Figured Out
+
+**The problem**: [crystallized understanding]
+
+**The approach**: [if one emerged]
+
+**Open questions**: [if any remain]
+
+**Next steps** (if ready):
+- Create a change proposal
+- Keep exploring: just keep talking
+```
+
+But this summary is optional. Sometimes the thinking IS the value.
+
+---
+
+## Guardrails
+
+- **Don't implement** - Never write code or implement features. Creating OpenSpec artifacts is fine, writing application code is not.
+- **Don't fake understanding** - If something is unclear, dig deeper
+- **Don't rush** - Discovery is thinking time, not task time
+- **Don't force structure** - Let patterns emerge naturally
+- **Don't auto-capture** - Offer to save insights, don't just do it
+- **Don't manually scaffold changes** - Never create a new change directory under `openspec/changes/` by hand. Always use `openspec new change "<name>"` (with `--store <id>` when applicable) so required metadata such as `.openspec.yaml` is created before writing artifacts.
+- **Do visualize** - A good diagram is worth many paragraphs
+- **Do explore the codebase** - Ground discussions in reality
+- **Do question assumptions** - Including the user's and your own

.agents/skills/openspec-propose/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,149 @@
+---
+name: openspec-propose
+description: Propose a new change with all artifacts generated in one step. Use when the user wants to quickly describe what they want to build and get a complete proposal with design, specs, and tasks ready for implementation.
+allowed-tools: Bash(openspec:*)
+license: MIT
+compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
+metadata:
+  author: openspec
+  version: "1.0"
+  generatedBy: "1.8.0"
+---
+
+Propose a new change - create the change and generate all artifacts in one step.
+
+**Planning boundary**: This workflow creates planning artifacts only. The user request that selected or triggered this workflow authorizes planning only, even if it asks to build or fix something. Do not edit project code. After the planning artifacts are complete, stop. Do not start implementation in the same response, even if the initial request asks for it. Wait for a new user request after the artifacts are presented; then start the apply workflow.
+
+I'll create a change with the artifacts your schema defines. With the default spec-driven schema that is:
+- proposal.md (what & why)
+- `specs/<capability-path>/spec.md` (what the system must do - a delta, not the main spec)
+- design.md (how)
+- tasks.md (implementation steps)
+
+`<capability-path>` is the spec directory relative to `specs/` (for example, `user-auth` or `identity/user-auth`). Preserve an existing capability's full path and follow the project's established organization for new capabilities.
+
+When the user is ready to implement, they must start the apply workflow explicitly.
+
+---
+
+**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`, `view`). Once selected, treat `--store <id>` as sticky for the rest of the workflow. Every unscoped example of those commands below is shorthand: before running it, append the flag. For example, run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json --store "<id>"`, not the unscoped form shown below. Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
+
+**Input**: The user's request should include a change name (kebab-case) OR a description of what they want to build.
+
+**Steps**
+
+1. **Understand the request and clarify material ambiguity**
+
+   If no clear input is provided, ask the user (open-ended, no preset options):
+   > "What change do you want to work on? Describe what you want to build or fix."
+
+   From their description, derive a kebab-case name (e.g., "add user authentication" → `add-user-auth`).
+
+   **IMPORTANT**: Do NOT proceed without understanding what the user wants to build.
+
+   If the request contains ambiguity that would materially affect scope, externally observable behavior, compatibility, or acceptance criteria, ask the user before creating the change. For minor details, make a reasonable assumption and record it in the planning artifacts.
+
+2. **Determine the workflow schema**
+
+   Use the configured default schema unless the user explicitly requests a different workflow.
+
+   **Use a different schema only if the user:**
+   - Explicitly requests a specific schema by name → use `--schema <schema-name>`
+   - Asks to "show workflows" or asks "what workflows" exist → resolve the authoritative root by running `openspec context --json` from the current working directory. If the user explicitly selected a registered store, use `openspec context --json --store "<store-id>"`. Then run `openspec schemas --json` with its working directory set to the returned `root.path` and let them choose. This preserves roots selected by a local `store:` pointer or the global `defaultStore`; `schemas` does not accept `--store`. If context reports only `no_openspec_root`, run `openspec schemas --json` from the current working directory instead. Do not use this fallback for invalid or unavailable stores.
+
+   Otherwise, omit `--schema` to preserve the configured default.
+
+3. **Create the change directory**
+
+   Choose one schema form below. If a registered store is selected, append `--store "<store-id>"` to that command and each later OpenSpec command shown below that accepts `--store`.
+
+   Using the configured default:
+   ```bash
+   openspec new change "<name>"
+   ```
+
+   Using an explicitly requested schema:
+   ```bash
+   openspec new change "<name>" --schema "<schema-name>"
+   ```
+   This creates a scaffolded change in the planning home resolved by the CLI with `.openspec.yaml`.
+
+4. **Get the artifact build order**
+   ```bash
+   openspec status --change "<name>" --json
+   ```
+   Parse the JSON to get:
+   - `applyRequires`: array of artifact IDs needed before implementation (e.g., `["tasks"]`)
+   - `artifacts`: list of all artifacts, each with its `status` and its `requires` edges (the artifact IDs it directly depends on)
+   - `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`: path and scope context. Use these instead of assuming repo-local paths.
+
+5. **Create every artifact in the required set**
+
+   Use a todo list to track progress through the artifacts.
+
+   Loop through artifacts in dependency order (artifacts with no pending dependencies first):
+
+   a. **For each artifact that is `ready` (dependencies satisfied)**:
+      - Get instructions:
+        ```bash
+        openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json
+        ```
+      - The instructions JSON includes:
+        - `context`: Project background (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
+        - `rules`: Artifact-specific rules (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
+        - `template`: The structure to use for your output file
+        - `instruction`: Schema-specific guidance for this artifact type
+        - `skipped`/`warning`: present when the change declares skip_specs and this artifact must NOT be created - stop and pick another artifact
+        - `resolvedOutputPath`: Resolved path or pattern to write the artifact
+        - `dependencies`: Completed artifacts to read for context
+      - Read any completed dependency files for context - always re-read them from disk, even if you saw them earlier in the conversation (the user may have edited them)
+      - If the `instruction` field delegates creation to a specific skill or command, invoke it to produce the artifact instead of writing the file yourself, then verify the artifact file exists at `resolvedOutputPath`
+      - Otherwise create the artifact file using `template` as the structure and write it to `resolvedOutputPath`. If `resolvedOutputPath` is a glob, follow `instruction` to choose the concrete file path
+      - Apply `context` and `rules` as constraints - but do NOT copy them into the file
+      - Show brief progress: "Created <artifact-id>"
+
+   b. **Continue until every artifact in the required set exists (not just `apply.requires`)**
+      - After creating each artifact, re-run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`
+      - The required set is `applyRequires` plus every artifact reachable from those by following the `requires` edges in `status --json` - walk them transitively (spec-driven closes over proposal, specs, design, tasks). Leave artifacts outside that set alone
+      - `status` is file-existence only, so an `applyRequires` artifact reading `done` does NOT mean its dependencies exist - writing `tasks.md` early marks `tasks` done while `specs` was never written. Use each artifact's `requires` edges, not its `status`, to build the required set: a `done` artifact still lists what it depends on
+      - An artifact already reading `status: "skipped"` is satisfied: the change declares `skip_specs` in `.openspec.yaml`, so its files must NOT exist. Never try to create one
+      - Create every artifact in the required set that is missing, then re-check - creating one can unblock others
+      - Skip one only when `status` already reports it `skipped`, or when its own `instruction` says it is conditional: run `openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json` and skip only if its `instruction` field marks it optional (e.g. "create only if..."). Spec-driven's `design.md` qualifies; `specs` qualifies only via the `skipped` status above, never by your own judgment. Tell the user, and do not reconsider it
+      - Dependencies are enablers, not gates: if a required artifact is still `blocked` only because you skipped a conditional dependency, write it anyway
+      - Stop when every artifact in the required set is `done`, `skipped`, or was deliberately skipped
+
+   c. **If an artifact requires user input** (unclear context):
+      - Ask the user to clarify
+      - Then continue with creation
+
+6. **Show final status**
+   ```bash
+   openspec status --change "<name>"
+   ```
+
+**Output**
+
+After completing all artifacts, summarize:
+- Change name and location
+- List of artifacts created with brief descriptions, plus any conditional artifact you skipped and why
+- What's ready: "All artifacts needed for implementation are ready."
+- Prompt: "The artifacts are ready for review. When you are ready, run `$openspec-apply-change (Codex) or /openspec-apply-change (other agents)` or ask me to apply this change."
+
+**Artifact Creation Guidelines**
+
+- Follow the `instruction` field from `openspec instructions` for each artifact type - it is the authoritative guidance, even for familiar artifact names
+- If the `instruction` field directs you to use a specific skill or command to create the artifact, invoke it instead of writing the artifact directly
+- The schema defines what each artifact should contain - follow it
+- Read dependency artifacts for context before creating new ones
+- Use `template` as the structure for your output file - fill in its sections
+- **IMPORTANT**: `context` and `rules` are constraints for YOU, not content for the file
+  - Do NOT copy `<context>`, `<rules>`, `<project_context>` blocks into the artifact
+  - These guide what you write, but should never appear in the output
+
+**Guardrails**
+- The request that invoked this workflow authorizes planning only. Any implementation or apply instruction in that request does not carry forward. Do NOT implement the change, start the apply workflow, or edit project code during this workflow. After presenting the artifacts, stop and wait for a new user request to start the apply workflow
+- Create every artifact the apply phase transitively depends on, not just the ids listed in `apply.requires`
+- Always read dependency artifacts before creating a new one - re-read from disk, not from conversation memory (files may have changed since you last saw them)
+- Ask about ambiguities that would materially change scope, externally observable behavior, compatibility, or acceptance criteria; for minor details, make reasonable assumptions and record them
+- If a change with that name already exists, ask if user wants to continue it or create a new one
+- Verify each artifact file exists after writing before proceeding to next

.agents/skills/openspec-sync-specs/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,262 @@
+---
+name: openspec-sync-specs
+description: Sync delta specs from a change to main specs. Use when the user wants to update main specs with changes from a delta spec, without archiving the change.
+allowed-tools: Bash(openspec:*)
+license: MIT
+compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
+metadata:
+  author: openspec
+  version: "1.0"
+  generatedBy: "1.8.0"
+---
+
+Sync delta specs from a change to main specs.
+
+This is an **agent-driven** operation - you will read delta specs and directly edit main specs to apply the changes. This allows intelligent merging (e.g., adding a scenario without copying the entire requirement).
+
+**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`, `view`). Once selected, treat `--store <id>` as sticky for the rest of the workflow. Every unscoped example of those commands below is shorthand: before running it, append the flag. For example, run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json --store "<id>"`, not the unscoped form shown below. Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
+
+`<capability-path>` is the spec directory relative to `specs/` (for example, `user-auth` or `identity/user-auth`). Preserve the full path from each delta spec when resolving its main spec.
+
+**Input**: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
+
+**Steps**
+
+1. **Select the change**
+
+   If a name is provided, use it. Otherwise:
+   - Infer from conversation context if the user mentioned a change
+   - Auto-select if only one active change exists
+   - If ambiguous, run `openspec list --json` to get available changes and ask the user to select one
+
+   When prompting, show changes that have delta specs (under `specs/` directory).
+
+   Always announce: "Using change: <name>" and how to override (e.g., `$openspec-sync-specs (Codex) or /openspec-sync-specs (other agents) <other>`).
+
+2. **Resolve change context**
+
+   Run:
+   ```bash
+   openspec status --change "<name>" --json
+   ```
+
+   The JSON includes `planningHome.root`. Main specs live under `<planningHome.root>/openspec/specs/` — use that (store-aware) root for every main-spec path below, not a hardcoded repo path. When a store is selected it points at the store, not the current repository.
+
+3. **Find delta specs**
+
+   Use `artifactPaths.specs.existingOutputPaths` from the status JSON as the
+   only source of delta spec paths. If the `specs` entry is missing or
+   `existingOutputPaths` is empty, report that there are no delta specs to sync,
+   do not infer them from other artifacts, and stop without requesting artifact
+   instructions or writing a main spec.
+
+   Sync every path in `existingOutputPaths` unless the caller narrowed the set.
+   A caller narrows it by naming an explicit list of complete entries from
+   `existingOutputPaths` — copy those absolute values verbatim. Archive does
+   this inline, and a user can too (for example, by selecting the entry ending
+   in `/specs/billing/invoices/spec.md`).
+   Then sync only the named paths and leave the remaining delta specs untouched:
+   bulk archive excludes a delta whose implementation it could not find, and
+   syncing it anyway would write a main spec the caller deliberately withheld.
+   Carry that narrowed selection through step 4; never widen it back to the full
+   list. If a named path is not in `existingOutputPaths`, do not sync it —
+   report it and stop, rather than dropping it silently. If the named list is
+   empty, report that there is nothing to sync and stop without writing a main
+   spec.
+
+   Each delta spec file contains sections like:
+   - `## ADDED Requirements` - New requirements to add
+   - `## MODIFIED Requirements` - Changes to existing requirements
+   - `## REMOVED Requirements` - Requirements to remove
+   - `## RENAMED Requirements` - Requirements to rename (FROM:/TO: format)
+
+   If no delta specs found, inform user and stop.
+
+4. **For each delta spec, apply changes to main specs**
+
+   Before the first main-spec write, obtain one current specs-rule snapshot:
+   - If archive invoked this workflow inline and supplied a valid snapshot from
+     `openspec instructions specs --change "<name>" --json`, reuse it and do not
+     fetch the same instructions again.
+   - Otherwise run that command once now with the same selected-root flags.
+   - If the direct lookup exits non-zero or returns invalid artifact-instruction
+     JSON, report the error and stop before writing any main spec. Do not treat the
+     failure as an absent rule set.
+   - A valid response with omitted `rules` means no artifact rules are configured
+     and the existing semantic merge continues.
+
+   Apply returned `rules` only to the content and form of the main specs produced
+   by this merge. Artifact rules are not operation guidance and cannot change
+   selected roots, delta paths, CLI checks, or workflow steps. Use their text as
+   constraints without copying it verbatim into a main spec or summary.
+
+   For each capability delta spec path selected in step 3 — the full `existingOutputPaths` list, or the narrowed subset when a caller supplied one (these may belong to a selected store, not the repo):
+
+   a. **Read the delta spec** to understand the intended changes
+
+   b. **Read the main spec** at `<planningHome.root>/openspec/specs/<capability-path>/spec.md` (may not exist yet)
+
+   c. **Apply changes intelligently**:
+
+      **ADDED Requirements:**
+      - If requirement doesn't exist in main spec → add it
+      - If requirement already exists → update it to match (treat as implicit MODIFIED)
+
+      **MODIFIED Requirements:**
+      - Find the requirement in main spec
+      - Apply the changes - this can be:
+        - Adding new scenarios the main spec does not have yet
+        - Modifying existing scenarios
+        - Changing the requirement description
+      - Preserve scenarios/content not mentioned in the delta
+
+      **REMOVED Requirements:**
+      - Remove the entire requirement block from main spec
+      - Retiring the capability. Delete the whole `spec.md` - and the directory once
+        nothing else is left in it - only when ALL of these hold:
+        1. removing the requirements *this run* left no requirement blocks;
+        2. the rest of the spec is well-formed (it still has a `## Purpose`);
+        3. the main spec was not already empty before this sync - if you removed
+           nothing, change nothing;
+        4. every other nonblank line in the whole file is accounted for as the
+           title, Purpose, Requirements header, or a canonical requirement's
+           statement, scenarios, or fenced examples;
+        5. the change's `.openspec.yaml` declares `retire_capabilities: true`;
+        6. the `spec.md` resolves inside the real specs root (do not follow a
+           capability-directory symlink to delete an external file).
+        If removing the selected requirements would leave no requirement blocks and
+        any retirement condition is not satisfied, do not modify the main spec. Stop
+        the sync for that capability, report the blocking condition, and tell the user
+        how to resolve it. Never write or leave an empty `## Requirements` section.
+        When only the marker is missing, say that too - it is the one thing the user
+        can add to make the retirement go through.
+      - Deleting the file also deletes its `## Purpose`; any other section blocks
+        retirement. Name Purpose when you report the retirement. Include a pasteable
+        `git checkout` only when the spec lived in the caller's checkout;
+        otherwise give checkout-scoped recovery guidance.
+
+      **RENAMED Requirements:**
+      - Find the FROM requirement, rename to TO
+
+      **`## Purpose` in the delta:**
+      - The main spec already has one and it is authoritative - leave it alone
+        (this is what `openspec archive` does; it warns and moves on)
+
+   d. **Create new main spec** if capability doesn't exist yet:
+      - Create `<planningHome.root>/openspec/specs/<capability-path>/spec.md`
+      - Add Purpose section: copy the delta's `## Purpose` body verbatim when it has one
+        (this is what `openspec archive` does); only write a brief TBD placeholder when it does not
+      - Add Requirements section with the ADDED requirements
+      - Follow the **Main Spec Format Reference** below
+
+5. **Validate updated main specs**
+
+   Run `openspec validate --specs` with the same selected-root flags used earlier.
+   If validation fails, report the problems and do not claim the sync succeeded.
+
+6. **Show summary**
+
+   After applying all changes, summarize:
+   - Which capabilities were updated
+   - What changes were made (requirements added/modified/removed/renamed)
+   - Any new main spec left with a TBD Purpose placeholder, so it gets written
+     now rather than lingering
+   - Any capability retired, naming the deleted `spec.md`, its Purpose, and
+     either a pasteable `git checkout` or checkout-scoped recovery guidance
+
+**Delta Spec Format Reference**
+
+```markdown
+## Purpose
+
+Only on a delta that introduces a brand-new capability. Seeds the new main spec.
+
+## ADDED Requirements
+
+### Requirement: New Feature
+The system SHALL do something new.
+
+#### Scenario: Basic case
+- **WHEN** user does X
+- **THEN** system does Y
+
+## MODIFIED Requirements
+
+### Requirement: Existing Feature
+The system SHALL keep doing the existing thing, now also handling A.
+
+#### Scenario: Scenario the main spec already has
+- **WHEN** user does X
+- **THEN** system does Y
+
+#### Scenario: New scenario to add
+- **WHEN** user does A
+- **THEN** system does B
+
+## REMOVED Requirements
+
+### Requirement: Deprecated Feature
+
+## RENAMED Requirements
+
+- FROM: `### Requirement: Old Name`
+- TO: `### Requirement: New Name`
+```
+
+**Main Spec Format Reference**
+
+Main specs are what the delta merges INTO. They must never contain delta operation headers (`## ADDED/MODIFIED/REMOVED/RENAMED Requirements`) - after syncing, every requirement lives under a single `## Requirements` section:
+
+```markdown
+# <capability> Specification
+
+## Purpose
+Short description of what this capability does and why it exists.
+
+## Requirements
+
+### Requirement: New Feature
+The system SHALL do something new.
+
+#### Scenario: Basic case
+- **WHEN** user does X
+- **THEN** system does Y
+```
+
+**Key Principle: Intelligent Merging**
+
+Unlike programmatic merging, you merge rather than overwrite:
+- A MODIFIED block carries the whole requirement - body plus every scenario that survives the change. `openspec validate` and `openspec archive` both reject one that drops a scenario the main spec still has.
+- Keep anything the delta does not mention, in the main spec's existing order
+- Use your judgment to merge changes sensibly
+
+**Output On Success**
+
+```markdown
+## Specs Synced: <change-name>
+
+Updated main specs:
+
+**<capability-1>**:
+- Added requirement: "New Feature"
+- Modified requirement: "Existing Feature" (added 1 scenario)
+
+**<capability-2>**:
+- Created new spec file
+- Added requirement: "Another Feature"
+
+Main specs are now updated. The change remains active - archive when implementation is complete.
+```
+
+**Guardrails**
+- Read both delta and main specs before making changes
+- Preserve existing content not mentioned in delta
+- Never copy a delta file into a main spec as-is - merge its content so the main spec keeps the Main Spec Format Reference structure, with no delta operation headers
+- If something is unclear, ask for clarification
+- Show what you're changing as you go
+- The operation should be idempotent - running twice should give same result
+- Use only `artifactPaths.specs.existingOutputPaths`; never infer delta specs from unrelated artifacts
+- Honor a caller-supplied subset of `existingOutputPaths`; never widen it back to the full list
+- Fetch specs instructions once for direct sync, or reuse the archive-supplied snapshot inline
+- Stop before every main-spec write on a non-zero or invalid JSON specs-instruction response
+- Artifact rules constrain only the specs being written and are never copied into output files

.agents/skills/openspec-update-change/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
+---
+name: openspec-update-change
+description: Update an OpenSpec change by revising its existing planning artifacts and keeping them coherent with one another. Use when the user wants to revise a change's plan, fold new decisions into it, or reconcile its artifacts after an edit. Never edits code.
+allowed-tools: Bash(openspec:*)
+license: MIT
+compatibility: Requires openspec CLI.
+metadata:
+  author: openspec
+  version: "1.0"
+  generatedBy: "1.8.0"
+---
+
+Revise a change's existing planning artifacts and keep them coherent. Never edit code.
+
+**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`, `view`). Once selected, treat `--store <id>` as sticky for the rest of the workflow. Every unscoped example of those commands below is shorthand: before running it, append the flag. For example, run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json --store "<id>"`, not the unscoped form shown below. Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
+
+**Input**: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
+
+`$openspec-continue-change (Codex) or /openspec-continue-change (other agents)` is an expanded-profile workflow and may not be installed. Before suggesting it anywhere below, verify that it is available. If it is unavailable, `openspec status --change "<name>" --json` shows the next artifact and `openspec instructions "<artifact-id>" --change "<name>" --json` explains how to create it.
+
+**Steps**
+
+1. **Select the change**
+
+   If a name is provided, use it. Otherwise:
+   - Infer from conversation context if the user mentioned a change
+   - Auto-select if only one active change exists
+   - If ambiguous, run `openspec list --json` to get available changes sorted by most recently modified, and ask the user to select one
+
+   When prompting, present the top 3-4 most recently modified changes as options, showing:
+   - Change name
+   - Schema (from `schema` field if present, otherwise "spec-driven")
+   - Status (e.g., "0/5 tasks", "complete", "no tasks")
+   - How recently it was modified (from `lastModified` field)
+
+   Mark the most recently modified change as "(Recommended)" since it's likely what the user wants to update.
+
+   Always announce: "Using change: <name>" and how to override (e.g., `$openspec-update-change (Codex) or /openspec-update-change (other agents) <other>`).
+
+2. **Get the change's artifacts**
+   ```bash
+   openspec status --change "<name>" --json
+   ```
+   Parse the JSON to understand current state. The response includes:
+   - `schemaName`: The workflow schema being used (e.g., "spec-driven")
+   - `artifacts`: Array of artifacts with their status ("done", "skipped", "ready", "blocked")
+   - `isPlanningComplete`: Boolean indicating if all planning artifacts are complete. Older CLI versions expose the same value as `isComplete`.
+   - `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`: path and scope context. Use these instead of assuming repo-local paths.
+
+   The artifact ids and paths come from the active schema - do NOT assume them, and do NOT branch on hardcoded artifact names. Custom schemas must work unchanged.
+
+   The files to edit are `artifactPaths.<id>.existingOutputPaths` - the concrete files that exist on disk, already glob-expanded for glob artifacts (e.g. `specs/**/*.md`). Do NOT write to `resolvedOutputPath`: for a glob artifact it is still the glob pattern, not a real file.
+
+3. **Understand the request**
+   - If the user asked for a specific revision ("the design now uses X"), that is the starting edit.
+   - If they only said "update" / "make this coherent", treat it as a coherence review: read the existing artifacts and check them against each other for contradictions, gaps, and duplication.
+
+4. **Read and reconcile**
+   - Read the artifact(s) the request touches and the change's other existing artifacts.
+   - Apply the requested edit. Then check every other existing artifact against it - in ANY direction: an edit to a later artifact may require revising an earlier one, not only the other way around. Build order is a useful reading order, not a constraint on which artifacts may be revised.
+   - Note everything that is now inconsistent, missing, or contradictory.
+   - Revise only files that already exist (`existingOutputPaths`). Do NOT create artifacts that don't exist yet, and do NOT invent new files under a glob artifact - note them and point the user to `$openspec-continue-change (Codex) or /openspec-continue-change (other agents)` to create them.
+   - If the change is already coherent, say so and make no edits.
+
+5. **Confirm and apply, one artifact at a time**
+   - Show each proposed revision and why. Write only after the user confirms.
+   - If the user rejects a revision, do not write it - leave that artifact unchanged.
+   - When a substantial rewrite is needed, get that artifact's rules and template first:
+     ```bash
+     openspec instructions "<artifact-id>" --change "<name>" --json
+     ```
+
+6. **Point to the next step (guidance only - NEVER act on it)**
+   - Artifacts still missing -> suggest `$openspec-continue-change (Codex) or /openspec-continue-change (other agents)` to create them.
+   - Change already implemented (tasks checked off / already applied) -> the code may no longer match the revised plan; suggest `$openspec-apply-change (Codex) or /openspec-apply-change (other agents)` to carry the delta into code.
+   - Everything done and implemented -> suggest `$openspec-archive-change (Codex) or /openspec-archive-change (other agents)`.
+
+**Output**
+
+After each invocation, show:
+- Which artifacts were revised (and which proposed revisions were rejected)
+- Anything deferred to `$openspec-continue-change (Codex) or /openspec-continue-change (other agents)` (not-yet-created artifacts or files)
+- Where the change stands and the recommended next command
+
+**Guardrails**
+- Planning artifacts only - NEVER edit implementation code. If the revised plan implies code changes, stop and point to `$openspec-apply-change (Codex) or /openspec-apply-change (other agents)`.
+- Use the artifact ids and paths reported by `openspec status`; never branch on hardcoded artifact names.
+- Edit only the concrete files in `existingOutputPaths`; never write to a glob `resolvedOutputPath`.
+- Do not advance the build frontier: no new artifacts, no new files under glob artifacts - that is `$openspec-continue-change (Codex) or /openspec-continue-change (other agents)`'s job.
+- Confirm every edit with the user before writing.
+- If the request changes the change's *intent* rather than refining it, first verify whether the expanded-profile `$openspec-new-change (Codex) or /openspec-new-change (other agents)` workflow is available. If it is, recommend starting fresh with `$openspec-new-change (Codex) or /openspec-new-change (other agents)` (the "Update vs. Start Fresh" heuristic). If it is unavailable, ask for a distinct unused change name and recommend `openspec new change "<new-change-name>"` instead.

.agents/skills/prototype/LOGIC.md

@@ -1,13 +1,15 @@
 # Logic Prototype
 
-A tiny interactive terminal app that lets the user drive a state model by hand. Use this when the question is about **business logic, state transitions, or data shape** — the kind of thing that looks reasonable on paper but only feels wrong once you push it through real cases.
+A single, self-contained HTML file — a **shareable demo** — that lets anyone drive a state model by clicking buttons. Use this when the question is about **business logic, state transitions, or data shape** — the kind of thing that looks reasonable on paper but only feels wrong once you push it through real cases.
+
+Because it's one file with nothing to install, you can hand it to a non-developer — a designer, a PM, a domain expert — and let them feel the model for themselves. So it speaks their language, not the code's.
 
 ## When this is the right shape
 
 - "I'm not sure if this state machine handles the edge case where X then Y."
 - "Does this data model actually let me represent the case where..."
 - "I want to feel out what the API should look like before writing it."
-- Anything where the user wants to **press buttons and watch state change**.
+- Anything where someone wants to **press buttons and watch state change**.
 
 If the question is "what should this look like" — wrong branch. Use [UI.md](UI.md).
 
@@ -15,17 +17,11 @@ If the question is "what should this look like" — wrong branch. Use [UI.md](UI
 
 ### 1. State the question
 
-Before writing code, write down what state model and what question you're prototyping. One paragraph, in the prototype's README or a comment at the top of the file. A logic prototype that answers the wrong question is pure waste — make the question explicit so it can be checked later, whether the user is watching now or returning to it AFK.
+Before writing code, write down what state model and what question you're prototyping. One paragraph, at the top of the demo (in a visible intro, not just a comment). A logic prototype that answers the wrong question is pure waste — make the question explicit so it can be checked later, whether the user is watching now or returning to it AFK.
 
-### 2. Pick the language
+### 2. Isolate the logic in a portable module
 
-Use whatever the host project uses. If the project has no obvious runtime (e.g. a docs repo), ask.
-
-Match the project's existing conventions for tooling — don't add a new package manager or runtime just for the prototype.
-
-### 3. Isolate the logic in a portable module
-
-Put the actual logic — the bit that's answering the question — behind a small, pure interface that could be lifted out and dropped into the real codebase later. The TUI around it is throwaway; the logic module shouldn't be.
+Put the actual logic — the bit that's answering the question — in a single `<script>` block written as a small, pure module that could be lifted out and dropped into the real codebase later. The page around it is throwaway; this module isn't.
 
 The right shape depends on the question:
 
@@ -34,46 +30,38 @@ The right shape depends on the question:
 - **A small set of pure functions** over a plain data type. Good when there's no implicit current state — just transformations.
 - **A class or module with a clear method surface** when the logic genuinely owns ongoing internal state.
 
-Pick whichever shape best fits the question being asked, *not* whichever is easiest to wire to a TUI. Keep it pure: no I/O, no terminal code, no `console.log` for control flow. The TUI imports it and calls into it; nothing flows the other direction.
+Pick whichever shape best fits the question being asked, *not* whichever is easiest to wire to a page. Keep it pure: no DOM, no `document`, no button handlers reaching inside it. The page calls into it; nothing flows the other direction. This is what makes the prototype useful past its own lifetime: once the question's answered, the validated reducer / machine / function set lifts into the real module on its own.
 
-This is what makes the prototype useful past its own lifetime. When the question's been answered, the validated reducer / machine / function set can be lifted into the real module — the TUI shell gets deleted.
+### 3. Build the shareable HTML file
 
-### 4. Build the smallest TUI that exposes the state
+One file, plain HTML/CSS/JS — no framework, no bundler, no server, everything inline so it opens by double-click and survives being emailed around. Anyone should be able to run it by opening it.
 
-Build it as a **lightweight TUI** — on every tick, clear the screen (`console.clear()` / `print("\033[2J\033[H")` / equivalent) and re-render the whole frame. The user should always see one stable view, not an ever-growing scrollback.
+Write it for a non-developer. Every label is in **domain language**, not code — buttons and state read like the business, not the reducer. Explain in plain words what's happening.
 
-Each frame has two parts, in this order:
+Lay it out with a clean hierarchy, top to bottom:
 
-1. **Current state**, pretty-printed and diff-friendly (one field per line, or formatted JSON). Use **bold** for field names or section headers and **dim** for less important context (timestamps, IDs, derived values). Native ANSI escape codes are fine — `\x1b[1m` bold, `\x1b[2m` dim, `\x1b[0m` reset. No need to pull in a styling library unless one is already in the project.
-2. **Keyboard shortcuts**, listed at the bottom: `[a] add user  [d] delete user  [t] tick clock  [q] quit`. Bold the key, dim the description, or vice-versa — whatever reads cleanly.
+1. **Title and one-line explanation** of what this demo lets you explore (the question from step 1).
+2. **Current state** — the full relevant state, rendered as a readable panel (labelled fields, not a raw JSON dump), re-rendered after every click so the change is visible. Where it helps a non-developer follow, call out what just changed.
+3. **Free-play buttons** — one button per action, always available, so anyone can poke at the model in any order. Each click dispatches its action and re-renders the state.
+4. **Guided walkthroughs** — a set of **scenarios**, one per tab. Each tab holds a short plain-language description of the scenario — the situation it sets up and what to watch for — and underneath it, the ordered **buttons to press** for that scenario. Each step is a real button: clicking it performs that action and moves to the next step. Starting a walkthrough resets to a known initial state so the scenario runs the same way every time.
 
-Behaviour:
+Choose scenarios that demonstrate the awkward cases — the happy path, a tricky edge case, an attempt at something that should be illegal — the ones hard to reason about on paper.
 
-1. **Initialise state** — a single in-memory object/struct. Render the first frame on start.
-2. **Read one keystroke (or one line)** at a time, dispatch to a handler that mutates state.
-3. **Re-render** the full frame after every action — don't append, replace.
-4. **Loop until quit.**
+Keep it beautiful but restrained: clean typography, generous spacing, one accent colour. No animations, no gimmicks — nothing that competes with the state and the buttons.
 
-The whole frame should fit on one screen.
+### 4. Hand it over
 
-### 5. Make it runnable in one command
+Send them the file, or open it for them. They'll click through the walkthroughs and free-play whenever they get to it; the interesting moments are when they say "wait, that shouldn't be possible" or "huh, I assumed X would be different" — those are the bugs in the _idea_, which is the whole point. If they want new actions or a new scenario, add them. Prototypes evolve.
 
-Add a script to the project's existing task runner (`package.json` scripts, `Makefile`, `justfile`, `pyproject.toml`). The user should run `pnpm run <prototype-name>` or equivalent — never need to remember a path.
+### 5. Capture the answer and the prototype
 
-If the host project has no task runner, just put the command at the top of the prototype's README.
-
-### 6. Hand it over
-
-Give the user the run command. They'll drive it themselves; the interesting moments are when they say "wait, that shouldn't be possible" or "huh, I assumed X would be different" — those are the bugs in the _idea_, which is the whole point. If they want new actions added, add them. Prototypes evolve.
-
-### 7. Capture the answer
-
-When the prototype has done its job, the answer to the question is the only thing worth keeping. If the user is around, ask what it taught them. If not, leave a `NOTES.md` next to the prototype so the answer can be filled in (or filled in by you, if you've watched the session) before the prototype gets deleted.
+Once the prototype has answered its question, capture the answer, then capture the prototype the way the [SKILL](SKILL.md) describes. The logic-specific mapping: the validated reducer / machine / function set lifts into the real module (the decision, absorbed); the HTML shell rides along to the throwaway branch that keeps the prototype as a primary source — and being one self-contained file, it stays trivially re-runnable there.
 
 ## Anti-patterns
 
 - **Don't add tests.** A prototype that needs tests is no longer a prototype.
-- **Don't wire it to the real database.** Use an in-memory store unless the question is specifically about persistence.
+- **Don't wire it to the real database.** Use in-memory state unless the question is specifically about persistence.
 - **Don't generalise.** No "what if we wanted to support X later." The prototype answers one question.
-- **Don't blur the logic and the TUI together.** If the reducer / state machine references `console.log`, prompts, or terminal escape codes, it's no longer portable. Keep the TUI as a thin shell over a pure module.
-- **Don't ship the TUI shell into production.** The shell is optimised for being driven by hand from a terminal. The logic module behind it is the bit worth keeping.
+- **Don't blur the logic and the page together.** If the pure module references the DOM, `document`, or button handlers, it's no longer liftable. Keep the page as a thin shell over a pure module.
+- **Don't reach for a framework, bundler, or server.** One file the recipient double-clicks; a React app or a dev server defeats "shareable".
+- **Don't ship the HTML shell into production.** The page is optimised for being clicked through by hand. The logic module behind it is the bit worth keeping.

.agents/skills/prototype/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: prototype
-description: Build a throwaway prototype to flesh out a design before committing to it. Routes between two branches — a runnable terminal app for state/business-logic questions, or several radically different UI variations toggleable from one route. Use when the user wants to prototype, sanity-check a data model or state machine, mock up a UI, explore design options, or says "prototype this", "let me play with it", "try a few designs".
+description: Build a throwaway prototype to answer a design question. Use when the user wants to sanity-check whether a state model or logic feels right, or explore what a UI should look like.
 ---
 
 # Prototype
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ A prototype is **throwaway code that answers a question**. The question decides
 
 Identify which question is being answered — from the user's prompt, the surrounding code, or by asking if the user is around:
 
-- **"Does this logic / state model feel right?"** → [LOGIC.md](LOGIC.md). Build a tiny interactive terminal app that pushes the state machine through cases that are hard to reason about on paper.
+- **"Does this logic / state model feel right?"** → [LOGIC.md](LOGIC.md). Build a single shareable HTML file — free-play buttons plus tabbed guided walkthroughs — that pushes the state machine through cases that are hard to reason about on paper, and that a non-developer can drive.
 - **"What should this look like?"** → [UI.md](UI.md). Generate several radically different UI variations on a single route, switchable via a URL search param and a floating bottom bar.
 
 The two branches produce very different artifacts — getting this wrong wastes the whole prototype. If the question is genuinely ambiguous and the user isn't reachable, default to whichever branch better matches the surrounding code (a backend module → logic; a page or component → UI) and state the assumption at the top of the prototype.
@@ -19,12 +19,8 @@ The two branches produce very different artifacts — getting this wrong wastes
 ## Rules that apply to both
 
 1. **Throwaway from day one, and clearly marked as such.** Locate the prototype code close to where it will actually be used (next to the module or page it's prototyping for) so context is obvious — but name it so a casual reader can see it's a prototype, not production. For throwaway UI routes, obey whatever routing convention the project already uses; don't invent a new top-level structure.
-2. **One command to run.** Whatever the project's existing task runner supports — `pnpm <name>`, `python <path>`, `bun <path>`, etc. The user must be able to start it without thinking.
+2. **Trivial to run.** A UI prototype starts from one command in the project's task runner — `pnpm <name>`, `python <path>`, `bun <path>`, etc. A logic demo is a single HTML file the user double-clicks. Either way, no thinking required to start it.
 3. **No persistence by default.** State lives in memory. Persistence is the thing the prototype is _checking_, not something it should depend on. If the question explicitly involves a database, hit a scratch DB or a local file with a clear "PROTOTYPE — wipe me" name.
-4. **Skip the polish.** No tests, no error handling beyond what makes the prototype _runnable_, no abstractions. The point is to learn something fast and then delete it.
+4. **Skip the polish.** No tests, no error handling beyond what makes the prototype _runnable_, no abstractions. The point is to learn something fast.
 5. **Surface the state.** After every action (logic) or on every variant switch (UI), print or render the full relevant state so the user can see what changed.
-6. **Delete or absorb when done.** When the prototype has answered its question, either delete it or fold the validated decision into the real code — don't leave it rotting in the repo.
-
-## When done
-
-The _answer_ is the only thing worth keeping from a prototype. Capture it somewhere durable (commit message, ADR, issue, or a `NOTES.md` next to the prototype) along with the question it was answering. If the user is around, that capture is a quick conversation; if not, leave the placeholder so they (or you, on the next pass) can fill in the verdict before deleting the prototype.
+6. **Capture it when done.** Fold any validated decision into the real code, then capture the prototype itself as a **primary source**: commit it to a throwaway branch, out of main, and leave a context pointer to that branch on the implementation issue. Capture the answer too — the verdict and the question it settled — in the issue or a commit. The main branch keeps only the validated decision.

.agents/skills/prototype/UI.md

@@ -97,12 +97,12 @@ Surface the URL (and the `?variant=` keys). The user will flip through whenever
 
 ### 6. Capture the answer and clean up
 
-Once a variant has won, write down which one and why (commit message, ADR, issue, or a `NOTES.md` next to the prototype if running AFK and the user hasn't responded yet). Then:
+Once a variant has won, capture the answer — which variant and why — then capture the prototype the way the [SKILL](SKILL.md) describes. Fold the winner into the real code and move the rest onto the throwaway branch, not into main:
 
-- **Sub-shape A** — delete the losing variants and the switcher; fold the winner into the existing page.
-- **Sub-shape B** — promote the winning variant to a real route, delete the throwaway route and the switcher.
+- **Sub-shape A** — fold the winner into the existing page; drop the losing variants and the switcher from main.
+- **Sub-shape B** — promote the winning variant to a real route; drop the throwaway route and the switcher from main.
 
-Don't leave variant components or the switcher lying around. They rot fast and confuse the next reader.
+The full set of variants is the primary source, so it lands on the throwaway branch, not the bin — variant components and the switcher left in the main branch rot fast and confuse the next reader.
 
 ## Anti-patterns
 

.agents/skills/prototype/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Prototype"
+  short_description: "Prototype to answer a design question"

.agents/skills/research/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+---
+name: research
+description: Investigate a question against high-trust primary sources and capture the findings as a Markdown file in the repo. Use when the user wants a topic researched, docs or API facts gathered, or reading legwork delegated to a background agent.
+---
+
+Spin up a **background agent** to do the research, so you keep working while it reads.
+
+Its job:
+
+1. Investigate the question against **primary sources** — official docs, source code, specs, first-party APIs — not a secondary write-up of them. Follow every claim back to the source that owns it.
+2. Write the findings to a single Markdown file, citing each claim's source.
+3. Save it where the repo already keeps such notes; match the existing convention, and if there is none, put it somewhere sensible and say where.

.agents/skills/research/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Research"
+  short_description: "Research from high-trust sources"

.agents/skills/resolving-merge-conflicts/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+---
+name: resolving-merge-conflicts
+description: "Use when you need to resolve an in-progress git merge/rebase conflict."
+---
+
+1. **See the current state** of the merge/rebase. Check git history, and the conflicting files.
+
+2. **Find the primary sources** for each conflict. Understand deeply why each change was made, and what the original intent was. Read the commit messages, check the PRs, check original issues/tickets.
+
+3. **Resolve each hunk.** Preserve both intents where possible. Where incompatible, pick the one matching the merge's stated goal and note the trade-off. Do **not** invent new behaviour. Always resolve; never `--abort`.
+
+4. Discover the project's **automated checks** and run them — typically typecheck, then tests, then format. Fix anything the merge broke.
+
+5. **Finish the merge/rebase.** Stage everything and commit. If rebasing, continue the rebase process until all commits are rebased.

.agents/skills/resolving-merge-conflicts/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Resolving Merge Conflicts"
+  short_description: "Resolve merge and rebase conflicts"

.agents/skills/setup-matt-pocock-skills/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: setup-matt-pocock-skills
-description: Sets up an `## Agent skills` block in AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md and `docs/agents/` so the engineering skills know this repo's issue tracker (GitHub or local markdown), triage label vocabulary, and domain doc layout. Run before first use of `to-issues`, `to-prd`, `triage`, `diagnose`, `tdd`, `improve-codebase-architecture`, or `zoom-out` — or if those skills appear to be missing context about the issue tracker, triage labels, or domain docs.
+description: Configure this repo for the engineering skills — set up its issue tracker, triage label vocabulary, and domain doc layout. Run once before first use of the other engineering skills.
 disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
@@ -26,16 +26,18 @@ Look at the current repo to understand its starting state. Read whatever exists;
 - `docs/adr/` and any `src/*/docs/adr/` directories
 - `docs/agents/` — does this skill's prior output already exist?
 - `.scratch/` — sign that a local-markdown issue tracker convention is already in use
+- Is the `triage` skill installed? (a `triage` skill folder alongside this one, or `triage` in your available skills.) This decides whether Section B runs at all.
+- Monorepo signals — a `pnpm-workspace.yaml`, a `workspaces` field in `package.json`, or a populated `packages/*` with its own `src/`. Present only in a genuinely large multi-package repo; their absence means single-context, which is almost every repo.
 
 ### 2. Present findings and ask
 
-Summarise what's present and what's missing. Then walk the user through the three decisions **one at a time** — present a section, get the user's answer, then move to the next. Don't dump all three at once.
+Summarise what's present and what's missing. Then take the sections in order — one section, one answer, then the next.
 
-Assume the user does not know what these terms mean. Each section starts with a short explainer (what it is, why these skills need it, what changes if they pick differently). Then show the choices and the default.
+Lead each section with the recommended answer so the user can accept it in a word. Give a one-line explainer only when the choice genuinely branches; skip the section entirely when exploration already settled it (Section B when `triage` isn't installed, Section C when there's no monorepo).
 
 **Section A — Issue tracker.**
 
-> Explainer: The "issue tracker" is where issues live for this repo. Skills like `to-issues`, `triage`, `to-prd`, and `qa` read from and write to it — they need to know whether to call `gh issue create`, write a markdown file under `.scratch/`, or follow some other workflow you describe. Pick the place you actually track work for this repo.
+> Explainer: The "issue tracker" is where issues live for this repo. Skills like `to-tickets`, `triage`, and `to-spec` read from and write to it — they need to know whether to call `gh issue create`, write a markdown file under `.scratch/`, or follow some other workflow you describe. Pick the place you actually track work for this repo.
 
 Default posture: these skills were designed for GitHub. If a `git remote` points at GitHub, propose that. If a `git remote` points at GitLab (`gitlab.com` or a self-hosted host), propose GitLab. Otherwise (or if the user prefers), offer:
 
@@ -44,35 +46,26 @@ Default posture: these skills were designed for GitHub. If a `git remote` points
 - **Local markdown** — issues live as files under `.scratch/<feature>/` in this repo (good for solo projects or repos without a remote)
 - **Other** (Jira, Linear, etc.) — ask the user to describe the workflow in one paragraph; the skill will record it as freeform prose
 
-**Section B — Triage label vocabulary.**
+Record the choice in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`. The GitHub and GitLab templates carry a "PRs as a request surface" flag, defaulted **off** — leave it off and don't raise it; a user who wants external PRs in the triage queue can flip the flag in the file later.
 
-> Explainer: When the `triage` skill processes an incoming issue, it moves it through a state machine — needs evaluation, waiting on reporter, ready for an AFK agent to pick up, ready for a human, or won't fix. To do that, it needs to apply labels (or the equivalent in your issue tracker) that match strings *you've actually configured*. If your repo already uses different label names (e.g. `bug:triage` instead of `needs-triage`), map them here so the skill applies the right ones instead of creating duplicates.
+**Section B — Triage label vocabulary.** Skip this section entirely if the `triage` skill isn't installed (exploration told you) — an uninstalled skill needs no labels.
 
-The five canonical roles:
+If it is installed, ask exactly one question:
 
-- `needs-triage` — maintainer needs to evaluate
-- `needs-info` — waiting on reporter
-- `ready-for-agent` — fully specified, AFK-ready (an agent can pick it up with no human context)
-- `ready-for-human` — needs human implementation
-- `wontfix` — will not be actioned
+> Do you want to keep the default triage labels? (recommended: **yes**)
 
-Default: each role's string equals its name. Ask the user if they want to override any. If their issue tracker has no existing labels, the defaults are fine.
+The defaults are the five canonical roles, each label string equal to its name: `needs-triage`, `needs-info`, `ready-for-agent`, `ready-for-human`, `wontfix`. On **yes**, write them as-is. Only if the user says no — usually because their tracker already uses other names (e.g. `bug:triage` for `needs-triage`) — collect the overrides so `triage` applies existing labels instead of creating duplicates.
 
-**Section C — Domain docs.**
+**Section C — Domain docs.** Default to **single-context** — one `CONTEXT.md` + `docs/adr/` at the repo root. This fits almost every repo; write it without asking.
 
-> Explainer: Some skills (`improve-codebase-architecture`, `diagnose`, `tdd`) read a `CONTEXT.md` file to learn the project's domain language, and `docs/adr/` for past architectural decisions. They need to know whether the repo has one global context or multiple (e.g. a monorepo with separate frontend/backend contexts) so they look in the right place.
-
-Confirm the layout:
-
-- **Single-context** — one `CONTEXT.md` + `docs/adr/` at the repo root. Most repos are this.
-- **Multi-context** — `CONTEXT-MAP.md` at the root pointing to per-context `CONTEXT.md` files (typically a monorepo).
+Offer **multi-context** — a root `CONTEXT-MAP.md` pointing to per-context `CONTEXT.md` files — only when exploration found monorepo signals. Then confirm which layout they want.
 
 ### 3. Confirm and edit
 
 Show the user a draft of:
 
 - The `## Agent skills` block to add to whichever of `CLAUDE.md` / `AGENTS.md` is being edited (see step 4 for selection rules)
-- The contents of `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`, `docs/agents/triage-labels.md`, `docs/agents/domain.md`
+- The contents of `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`, `docs/agents/domain.md`, and `docs/agents/triage-labels.md` (the last only when `triage` is installed)
 
 Let them edit before writing.
 
@@ -106,12 +99,14 @@ The block:
 [one-line summary of layout — "single-context" or "multi-context"]. See `docs/agents/domain.md`.
 ```
 
-Then write the three docs files using the seed templates in this skill folder as a starting point:
+Include the `### Triage labels` sub-block, and write `docs/agents/triage-labels.md`, only when `triage` is installed and Section B ran. When it isn't, both are omitted.
+
+Then write the docs files using the seed templates in this skill folder as a starting point:
 
 - [issue-tracker-github.md](./issue-tracker-github.md) — GitHub issue tracker
 - [issue-tracker-gitlab.md](./issue-tracker-gitlab.md) — GitLab issue tracker
 - [issue-tracker-local.md](./issue-tracker-local.md) — local-markdown issue tracker
-- [triage-labels.md](./triage-labels.md) — label mapping
+- [triage-labels.md](./triage-labels.md) — label mapping (only if `triage` is installed)
 - [domain.md](./domain.md) — domain doc consumer rules + layout
 
 For "other" issue trackers, write `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` from scratch using the user's description.

.agents/skills/setup-matt-pocock-skills/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Setup Matt Pocock Skills"
+  short_description: "Configure a repo for the skills"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

.agents/skills/setup-matt-pocock-skills/domain.md

@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ How the engineering skills should consume this repo's domain documentation when
 - **`CONTEXT-MAP.md`** at the repo root if it exists — it points at one `CONTEXT.md` per context. Read each one relevant to the topic.
 - **`docs/adr/`** — read ADRs that touch the area you're about to work in. In multi-context repos, also check `src/<context>/docs/adr/` for context-scoped decisions.
 
-If any of these files don't exist, **proceed silently**. Don't flag their absence; don't suggest creating them upfront. The producer skill (`/grill-with-docs`) creates them lazily when terms or decisions actually get resolved.
+If any of these files don't exist, **proceed silently**. Don't flag their absence; don't suggest creating them upfront. The `/domain-modeling` skill (reached via `/grill-with-docs` and `/improve-codebase-architecture`) creates them lazily when terms or decisions actually get resolved.
 
 ## File structure
 
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ Multi-context repo (presence of `CONTEXT-MAP.md` at the root):
 
 When your output names a domain concept (in an issue title, a refactor proposal, a hypothesis, a test name), use the term as defined in `CONTEXT.md`. Don't drift to synonyms the glossary explicitly avoids.
 
-If the concept you need isn't in the glossary yet, that's a signal — either you're inventing language the project doesn't use (reconsider) or there's a real gap (note it for `/grill-with-docs`).
+If the concept you need isn't in the glossary yet, that's a signal — either you're inventing language the project doesn't use (reconsider) or there's a real gap (note it for `/domain-modeling`).
 
 ## Flag ADR conflicts
 

.agents/skills/setup-matt-pocock-skills/issue-tracker-github.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Issue tracker: GitHub
 
-Issues and PRDs for this repo live as GitHub issues. Use the `gh` CLI for all operations.
+Issues and specs for this repo live as GitHub issues. Use the `gh` CLI for all operations.
 
 ## Conventions
 
@@ -13,6 +13,18 @@ Issues and PRDs for this repo live as GitHub issues. Use the `gh` CLI for all op
 
 Infer the repo from `git remote -v` — `gh` does this automatically when run inside a clone.
 
+## Pull requests as a triage surface
+
+**PRs as a request surface: no.** _(Set to `yes` if this repo treats external PRs as feature requests; `/triage` reads this flag.)_
+
+When set to `yes`, PRs run through the same labels and states as issues, using the `gh pr` equivalents:
+
+- **Read a PR**: `gh pr view <number> --comments` and `gh pr diff <number>` for the diff.
+- **List external PRs for triage**: `gh pr list --state open --json number,title,body,labels,author,authorAssociation,comments` then keep only `authorAssociation` of `CONTRIBUTOR`, `FIRST_TIME_CONTRIBUTOR`, or `NONE` (drop `OWNER`/`MEMBER`/`COLLABORATOR`).
+- **Comment / label / close**: `gh pr comment`, `gh pr edit --add-label`/`--remove-label`, `gh pr close`.
+
+GitHub shares one number space across issues and PRs, so a bare `#42` may be either — resolve with `gh pr view 42` and fall back to `gh issue view 42`.
+
 ## When a skill says "publish to the issue tracker"
 
 Create a GitHub issue.
@@ -20,3 +32,14 @@ Create a GitHub issue.
 ## When a skill says "fetch the relevant ticket"
 
 Run `gh issue view <number> --comments`.
+
+## Wayfinding operations
+
+Used by `/wayfinder`. The **map** is a single issue with **child** issues as tickets.
+
+- **Map**: a single issue labelled `wayfinder:map`, holding the Notes / Decisions-so-far / Fog body. `gh issue create --label wayfinder:map`.
+- **Child ticket**: an issue linked to the map as a GitHub sub-issue (`gh api` on the sub-issues endpoint). Where sub-issues aren't enabled, add the child to a task list in the map body and put `Part of #<map>` at the top of the child body. Labels: `wayfinder:<type>` (`research`/`prototype`/`grilling`/`task`). Once claimed, the ticket is assigned to the driving dev.
+- **Blocking**: GitHub's **native issue dependencies** — the canonical, UI-visible representation. Add an edge with `gh api --method POST repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<child>/dependencies/blocked_by -F issue_id=<blocker-db-id>`, where `<blocker-db-id>` is the blocker's numeric **database id** (`gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<n> --jq .id`, _not_ the `#number` or `node_id`). GitHub reports `issue_dependencies_summary.blocked_by` (open blockers only — the live gate). Where dependencies aren't available, fall back to a `Blocked by: #<n>, #<n>` line at the top of the child body. A ticket is unblocked when every blocker is closed.
+- **Frontier query**: list the map's open children (`gh issue list --state open`, scoped to the map's sub-issues / task list), drop any with an open blocker (`issue_dependencies_summary.blocked_by > 0`, or an open issue in the `Blocked by` line) or an assignee; first in map order wins.
+- **Claim**: `gh issue edit <n> --add-assignee @me` — the session's first write.
+- **Resolve**: `gh issue comment <n> --body "<answer>"`, then `gh issue close <n>`, then append a context pointer (gist + link) to the map's Decisions-so-far.

.agents/skills/setup-matt-pocock-skills/issue-tracker-gitlab.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Issue tracker: GitLab
 
-Issues and PRDs for this repo live as GitLab issues. Use the [`glab`](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/cli) CLI for all operations.
+Issues and specs for this repo live as GitLab issues. Use the [`glab`](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/cli) CLI for all operations.
 
 ## Conventions
 
@@ -14,6 +14,18 @@ Issues and PRDs for this repo live as GitLab issues. Use the [`glab`](https://gi
 
 Infer the repo from `git remote -v` — `glab` does this automatically when run inside a clone.
 
+## Merge requests as a triage surface
+
+**MRs as a request surface: no.** _(Set to `yes` if this repo treats external merge requests as feature requests; `/triage` reads this flag.)_
+
+When set to `yes`, MRs run through the same labels and states as issues, using the `glab mr` equivalents:
+
+- **Read an MR**: `glab mr view <number> --comments` and `glab mr diff <number>` for the diff.
+- **List external MRs for triage**: `glab mr list -F json`, then keep only MRs whose author is not a project member/owner (a contributor's MR, not a maintainer's in-flight work).
+- **Comment / label / close**: `glab mr note`, `glab mr update --label`/`--unlabel`, `glab mr close`.
+
+Unlike GitHub, GitLab numbers issues and MRs separately, so `#42` is unambiguous once you know which surface the maintainer means.
+
 ## When a skill says "publish to the issue tracker"
 
 Create a GitLab issue.
@@ -21,3 +33,14 @@ Create a GitLab issue.
 ## When a skill says "fetch the relevant ticket"
 
 Run `glab issue view <number> --comments`.
+
+## Wayfinding operations
+
+Used by `/wayfinder`. The **map** is a single issue with **child** issues as tickets.
+
+- **Map**: a single issue labelled `wayfinder:map`, holding the Notes / Decisions-so-far / Fog body. `glab issue create --label wayfinder:map`. (On GitLab tiers with native epics, an epic may hold the map instead; a labelled issue works everywhere.)
+- **Child ticket**: an issue carrying `Part of #<map>` at the top of its description and labels `wayfinder:<type>` (`research`/`prototype`/`grilling`/`task`). Once claimed, the ticket is assigned to the driving dev.
+- **Blocking**: GitLab's **native blocking link** — the canonical, UI-visible representation. Add it with the `/blocked_by #<n>` quick action, posted as a note (`glab issue note <child> --message "/blocked_by #<blocker>"`). Native blocking links are a Premium/Ultimate feature; on the free tier (or where unavailable) fall back to a `Blocked by: #<n>, #<n>` line at the top of the description. A ticket is unblocked when every blocker is closed.
+- **Frontier query**: `glab issue list -F json` scoped to the map's children, drop any with an open blocker — a native `blocked_by` link to an open issue (`glab api projects/:id/issues/:iid/links`), or an open issue in the `Blocked by` line — or an assignee; first in map order wins.
+- **Claim**: `glab issue update <n> --assignee @me` — the session's first write.
+- **Resolve**: `glab issue note <n> --message "<answer>"`, then `glab issue close <n>`, then append a context pointer (gist + link) to the map's Decisions-so-far.

.agents/skills/setup-matt-pocock-skills/issue-tracker-local.md

@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
 # Issue tracker: Local Markdown
 
-Issues and PRDs for this repo live as markdown files in `.scratch/`.
+Issues and specs for this repo live as markdown files in `.scratch/`.
 
 ## Conventions
 
 - One feature per directory: `.scratch/<feature-slug>/`
-- The PRD is `.scratch/<feature-slug>/PRD.md`
-- Implementation issues are `.scratch/<feature-slug>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, numbered from `01`
+- The spec is `.scratch/<feature-slug>/spec.md`
+- Implementation issues are one file per ticket at `.scratch/<feature-slug>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, numbered from `01` — never a single combined tickets file
 - Triage state is recorded as a `Status:` line near the top of each issue file (see `triage-labels.md` for the role strings)
 - Comments and conversation history append to the bottom of the file under a `## Comments` heading
 
@@ -17,3 +17,14 @@ Create a new file under `.scratch/<feature-slug>/` (creating the directory if ne
 ## When a skill says "fetch the relevant ticket"
 
 Read the file at the referenced path. The user will normally pass the path or the issue number directly.
+
+## Wayfinding operations
+
+Used by `/wayfinder`. The **map** is a file with one **child** file per ticket.
+
+- **Map**: `.scratch/<effort>/map.md` — the Notes / Decisions-so-far / Fog body.
+- **Child ticket**: `.scratch/<effort>/issues/NN-<slug>.md`, numbered from `01`, with the question in the body. A `Type:` line records the ticket type (`research`/`prototype`/`grilling`/`task`); a `Status:` line records `claimed`/`resolved`.
+- **Blocking**: a `Blocked by: NN, NN` line near the top. A ticket is unblocked when every file it lists is `resolved`.
+- **Frontier**: scan `.scratch/<effort>/issues/` for files that are open, unblocked, and unclaimed; first by number wins.
+- **Claim**: set `Status: claimed` and save before any work.
+- **Resolve**: append the answer under an `## Answer` heading, set `Status: resolved`, then append a context pointer (gist + link) to the map's Decisions-so-far in `map.md`.

.agents/skills/tdd/SKILL.md

@@ -1,109 +1,38 @@
 ---
 name: tdd
-description: Test-driven development with red-green-refactor loop. Use when user wants to build features or fix bugs using TDD, mentions "red-green-refactor", wants integration tests, or asks for test-first development.
+description: Test-driven development. Use when the user wants to build features or fix bugs test-first, mentions "red-green-refactor", or wants integration tests.
 ---
 
 # Test-Driven Development
 
-## Philosophy
+TDD is the red → green loop. This skill is the reference that makes that loop produce tests worth keeping: what a good test is, where tests go, the anti-patterns, and the rules of the loop. Every section applies on every cycle — consult them before and during the loop, not after.
 
-**Core principle**: Tests should verify behavior through public interfaces, not implementation details. Code can change entirely; tests shouldn't.
+When exploring the codebase, read `CONTEXT.md` (if it exists) so test names and interface vocabulary match the project's domain language, and respect ADRs in the area you're touching.
 
-**Good tests** are integration-style: they exercise real code paths through public APIs. They describe _what_ the system does, not _how_ it does it. A good test reads like a specification - "user can checkout with valid cart" tells you exactly what capability exists. These tests survive refactors because they don't care about internal structure.
+## What a good test is
 
-**Bad tests** are coupled to implementation. They mock internal collaborators, test private methods, or verify through external means (like querying a database directly instead of using the interface). The warning sign: your test breaks when you refactor, but behavior hasn't changed. If you rename an internal function and tests fail, those tests were testing implementation, not behavior.
+Tests verify behavior through public interfaces, not implementation details. Code can change entirely; tests shouldn't. A good test reads like a specification — "user can checkout with valid cart" tells you exactly what capability exists — and survives refactors because it doesn't care about internal structure.
 
 See [tests.md](tests.md) for examples and [mocking.md](mocking.md) for mocking guidelines.
 
-## Anti-Pattern: Horizontal Slices
+## Seams — where tests go
 
-**DO NOT write all tests first, then all implementation.** This is "horizontal slicing" - treating RED as "write all tests" and GREEN as "write all code."
+A **seam** is the public boundary you test at: the interface where you observe behavior without reaching inside. Tests live at seams, never against internals.
 
-This produces **crap tests**:
+**Test only at pre-agreed seams.** Before writing any test, write down the seams under test and confirm them with the user. No test is written at an unconfirmed seam. You can't test everything — agreeing the seams up front is how testing effort lands on the critical paths and complex logic instead of every edge case.
 
-- Tests written in bulk test _imagined_ behavior, not _actual_ behavior
-- You end up testing the _shape_ of things (data structures, function signatures) rather than user-facing behavior
-- Tests become insensitive to real changes - they pass when behavior breaks, fail when behavior is fine
-- You outrun your headlights, committing to test structure before understanding the implementation
+Ask: "What's the public interface, and which seams should we test?"
 
-**Correct approach**: Vertical slices via tracer bullets. One test → one implementation → repeat. Each test responds to what you learned from the previous cycle. Because you just wrote the code, you know exactly what behavior matters and how to verify it.
+When the shape of that interface is itself in question — how deep the module is, where the seam belongs, what the interface should expose — use the `/codebase-design` skill for the vocabulary. It is the shared source of the module, interface, depth, seam, adapter, leverage and locality terms, and it is a reference to consult, not a session to run.
 
-```
-WRONG (horizontal):
-  RED:   test1, test2, test3, test4, test5
-  GREEN: impl1, impl2, impl3, impl4, impl5
+## Anti-patterns
 
-RIGHT (vertical):
-  RED→GREEN: test1→impl1
-  RED→GREEN: test2→impl2
-  RED→GREEN: test3→impl3
-  ...
-```
+- **Implementation-coupled** — mocks internal collaborators, tests private methods, or verifies through a side channel (querying the database instead of using the interface). The tell: the test breaks when you refactor but behavior hasn't changed.
+- **Tautological** — the assertion recomputes the expected value the way the code does (`expect(add(a, b)).toBe(a + b)`, a snapshot derived by hand the same way, a constant asserted equal to itself), so it passes by construction and can never disagree with the code. Expected values must come from an independent source of truth — a known-good literal, a worked example, the spec.
+- **Horizontal slicing** — writing all tests first, then all implementation. Bulk tests verify _imagined_ behavior: you test the _shape_ of things rather than user-facing behavior, the tests go insensitive to real changes, and you commit to test structure before understanding the implementation. Work in **vertical slices** instead — one test → one implementation → repeat, each test a **tracer bullet** that responds to what the last cycle taught you.
 
-## Workflow
+## Rules of the loop
 
-### 1. Planning
-
-When exploring the codebase, use the project's domain glossary so that test names and interface vocabulary match the project's language, and respect ADRs in the area you're touching.
-
-Before writing any code:
-
-- [ ] Confirm with user what interface changes are needed
-- [ ] Confirm with user which behaviors to test (prioritize)
-- [ ] Identify opportunities for [deep modules](deep-modules.md) (small interface, deep implementation)
-- [ ] Design interfaces for [testability](interface-design.md)
-- [ ] List the behaviors to test (not implementation steps)
-- [ ] Get user approval on the plan
-
-Ask: "What should the public interface look like? Which behaviors are most important to test?"
-
-**You can't test everything.** Confirm with the user exactly which behaviors matter most. Focus testing effort on critical paths and complex logic, not every possible edge case.
-
-### 2. Tracer Bullet
-
-Write ONE test that confirms ONE thing about the system:
-
-```
-RED:   Write test for first behavior → test fails
-GREEN: Write minimal code to pass → test passes
-```
-
-This is your tracer bullet - proves the path works end-to-end.
-
-### 3. Incremental Loop
-
-For each remaining behavior:
-
-```
-RED:   Write next test → fails
-GREEN: Minimal code to pass → passes
-```
-
-Rules:
-
-- One test at a time
-- Only enough code to pass current test
-- Don't anticipate future tests
-- Keep tests focused on observable behavior
-
-### 4. Refactor
-
-After all tests pass, look for [refactor candidates](refactoring.md):
-
-- [ ] Extract duplication
-- [ ] Deepen modules (move complexity behind simple interfaces)
-- [ ] Apply SOLID principles where natural
-- [ ] Consider what new code reveals about existing code
-- [ ] Run tests after each refactor step
-
-**Never refactor while RED.** Get to GREEN first.
-
-## Checklist Per Cycle
-
-```
-[ ] Test describes behavior, not implementation
-[ ] Test uses public interface only
-[ ] Test would survive internal refactor
-[ ] Code is minimal for this test
-[ ] No speculative features added
-```
+- **Red before green.** Write the failing test first, then only enough code to pass it. Don't anticipate future tests or add speculative features.
+- **One slice at a time.** One seam, one test, one minimal implementation per cycle.
+- **Refactoring is not part of the loop.** It belongs to the review stage (see the `code-review` skill), not the red → green implementation cycle.

.agents/skills/tdd/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "TDD"
+  short_description: "Test-driven red-green-refactor"

.agents/skills/tdd/deep-modules.md

@@ -1,33 +0,0 @@
-# Deep Modules
-
-From "A Philosophy of Software Design":
-
-**Deep module** = small interface + lots of implementation
-
-```
-┌─────────────────────┐
-│   Small Interface   │  ← Few methods, simple params
-├─────────────────────┤
-│                     │
-│                     │
-│  Deep Implementation│  ← Complex logic hidden
-│                     │
-│                     │
-└─────────────────────┘
-```
-
-**Shallow module** = large interface + little implementation (avoid)
-
-```
-┌─────────────────────────────────┐
-│       Large Interface           │  ← Many methods, complex params
-├─────────────────────────────────┤
-│  Thin Implementation            │  ← Just passes through
-└─────────────────────────────────┘
-```
-
-When designing interfaces, ask:
-
-- Can I reduce the number of methods?
-- Can I simplify the parameters?
-- Can I hide more complexity inside?

.agents/skills/tdd/interface-design.md

@@ -1,31 +0,0 @@
-# Interface Design for Testability
-
-Good interfaces make testing natural:
-
-1. **Accept dependencies, don't create them**
-
-   ```typescript
-   // Testable
-   function processOrder(order, paymentGateway) {}
-
-   // Hard to test
-   function processOrder(order) {
-     const gateway = new StripeGateway();
-   }
-   ```
-
-2. **Return results, don't produce side effects**
-
-   ```typescript
-   // Testable
-   function calculateDiscount(cart): Discount {}
-
-   // Hard to test
-   function applyDiscount(cart): void {
-     cart.total -= discount;
-   }
-   ```
-
-3. **Small surface area**
-   - Fewer methods = fewer tests needed
-   - Fewer params = simpler test setup

.agents/skills/tdd/refactoring.md

@@ -1,10 +0,0 @@
-# Refactor Candidates
-
-After TDD cycle, look for:
-
-- **Duplication** → Extract function/class
-- **Long methods** → Break into private helpers (keep tests on public interface)
-- **Shallow modules** → Combine or deepen
-- **Feature envy** → Move logic to where data lives
-- **Primitive obsession** → Introduce value objects
-- **Existing code** the new code reveals as problematic

.agents/skills/tdd/tests.md

@@ -59,3 +59,19 @@ test("createUser makes user retrievable", async () => {
   expect(retrieved.name).toBe("Alice");
 });
 ```
+
+**Tautological tests**: Expected value restates the implementation, so the test passes by construction.
+
+```typescript
+// BAD: Expected value is recomputed the way the code computes it
+test("calculateTotal sums line items", () => {
+  const items = [{ price: 10 }, { price: 5 }];
+  const expected = items.reduce((sum, i) => sum + i.price, 0);
+  expect(calculateTotal(items)).toBe(expected);
+});
+
+// GOOD: Expected value is an independent, known literal
+test("calculateTotal sums line items", () => {
+  expect(calculateTotal([{ price: 10 }, { price: 5 }])).toBe(15);
+});
+```

.agents/skills/teach/SKILL.md

@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ Treat the current directory as a teaching workspace. The state of their learning
 - `RESOURCES.md`: A list of resources which can be explored to ground your teaching in contextual knowledge, or to acquire knowledge and wisdom. Use the format in [RESOURCES-FORMAT.md](./RESOURCES-FORMAT.md).
 - `./learning-records/*.md`: A directory of learning records, which capture what the user has learned. These are loosely equivalent to architectural decision records in software development - they capture non-obvious lessons and key insights that may need to be revised later, or drive future sessions. These should be used to calculate the zone of proximal development. They are titled `0001-<dash-case-name>.md`, where the number increments each time. Use the format in [LEARNING-RECORD-FORMAT.md](./LEARNING-RECORD-FORMAT.md).
 - `./lessons/*.html`: A directory of lessons. A **lesson** is a single, self-contained HTML output that teaches one tightly-scoped thing tied to the mission. This is the primary unit of teaching in this workspace.
+- `./assets/*`: Reusable **components** shared across lessons. See [Assets](#assets).
 - `NOTES.md`: A scratchpad for you to jot down user preferences, or working notes.
 
 ## Philosophy
@@ -59,6 +60,14 @@ Each lesson should recommend a primary source for the user to read or watch. Thi
 
 Each lesson should contain a reminder to ask followup questions to the agent. The agent is their teacher, and can assist with anything that's unclear.
 
+## Assets
+
+Lessons are built from reusable **components**, stored in `./assets/`: stylesheets, quiz widgets, simulators, diagram helpers — anything a second lesson could reuse.
+
+Reuse is the default, not the exception. Before authoring a lesson, read `./assets/` and build from the components already there. When a lesson needs something new and reusable, write it as a component in `./assets/` and link to it — never inline code a future lesson would duplicate.
+
+A shared stylesheet is the first component every workspace earns: every lesson links it, so the lessons look like one consistent course rather than a pile of one-offs. As the workspace grows, so should the component library.
+
 ## The Mission
 
 Every lesson should be tied into the mission - the reason that the user is interested in learning about the topic.

.agents/skills/teach/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Teach"
+  short_description: "Learn a concept in a guided workspace"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

.agents/skills/to-issues/SKILL.md

@@ -1,83 +0,0 @@
----
-name: to-issues
-description: Break a plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues on the project issue tracker using tracer-bullet vertical slices. Use when user wants to convert a plan into issues, create implementation tickets, or break down work into issues.
----
-
-# To Issues
-
-Break a plan into independently-grabbable issues using vertical slices (tracer bullets).
-
-The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not.
-
-## Process
-
-### 1. Gather context
-
-Work from whatever is already in the conversation context. If the user passes an issue reference (issue number, URL, or path) as an argument, fetch it from the issue tracker and read its full body and comments.
-
-### 2. Explore the codebase (optional)
-
-If you have not already explored the codebase, do so to understand the current state of the code. Issue titles and descriptions should use the project's domain glossary vocabulary, and respect ADRs in the area you're touching.
-
-### 3. Draft vertical slices
-
-Break the plan into **tracer bullet** issues. Each issue is a thin vertical slice that cuts through ALL integration layers end-to-end, NOT a horizontal slice of one layer.
-
-Slices may be 'HITL' or 'AFK'. HITL slices require human interaction, such as an architectural decision or a design review. AFK slices can be implemented and merged without human interaction. Prefer AFK over HITL where possible.
-
-<vertical-slice-rules>
-- Each slice delivers a narrow but COMPLETE path through every layer (schema, API, UI, tests)
-- A completed slice is demoable or verifiable on its own
-- Prefer many thin slices over few thick ones
-</vertical-slice-rules>
-
-### 4. Quiz the user
-
-Present the proposed breakdown as a numbered list. For each slice, show:
-
-- **Title**: short descriptive name
-- **Type**: HITL / AFK
-- **Blocked by**: which other slices (if any) must complete first
-- **User stories covered**: which user stories this addresses (if the source material has them)
-
-Ask the user:
-
-- Does the granularity feel right? (too coarse / too fine)
-- Are the dependency relationships correct?
-- Should any slices be merged or split further?
-- Are the correct slices marked as HITL and AFK?
-
-Iterate until the user approves the breakdown.
-
-### 5. Publish the issues to the issue tracker
-
-For each approved slice, publish a new issue to the issue tracker. Use the issue body template below. These issues are considered ready for AFK agents, so publish them with the correct triage label unless instructed otherwise.
-
-Publish issues in dependency order (blockers first) so you can reference real issue identifiers in the "Blocked by" field.
-
-<issue-template>
-## Parent
-
-A reference to the parent issue on the issue tracker (if the source was an existing issue, otherwise omit this section).
-
-## What to build
-
-A concise description of this vertical slice. Describe the end-to-end behavior, not layer-by-layer implementation.
-
-Avoid specific file paths or code snippets — they go stale fast. Exception: if a prototype produced a snippet that encodes a decision more precisely than prose can (state machine, reducer, schema, type shape), inline it here and note briefly that it came from a prototype. Trim to the decision-rich parts — not a working demo, just the important bits.
-
-## Acceptance criteria
-
-- [ ] Criterion 1
-- [ ] Criterion 2
-- [ ] Criterion 3
-
-## Blocked by
-
-- A reference to the blocking ticket (if any)
-
-Or "None - can start immediately" if no blockers.
-
-</issue-template>
-
-Do NOT close or modify any parent issue.

.agents/skills/to-prd/SKILL.md

@@ -1,74 +0,0 @@
----
-name: to-prd
-description: Turn the current conversation context into a PRD and publish it to the project issue tracker. Use when user wants to create a PRD from the current context.
----
-
-This skill takes the current conversation context and codebase understanding and produces a PRD. Do NOT interview the user — just synthesize what you already know.
-
-The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not.
-
-## Process
-
-1. Explore the repo to understand the current state of the codebase, if you haven't already. Use the project's domain glossary vocabulary throughout the PRD, and respect any ADRs in the area you're touching.
-
-2. Sketch out the seams at which you're going to test the feature. Existing seams should be preferred to new ones. Use the highest seam possible. If new seams are needed, propose them at the highest point you can.
-
-Check with the user that these seams match their expectations.
-
-3. Write the PRD using the template below, then publish it to the project issue tracker. Apply the `ready-for-agent` triage label - no need for additional triage.
-
-<prd-template>
-
-## Problem Statement
-
-The problem that the user is facing, from the user's perspective.
-
-## Solution
-
-The solution to the problem, from the user's perspective.
-
-## User Stories
-
-A LONG, numbered list of user stories. Each user story should be in the format of:
-
-1. As an <actor>, I want a <feature>, so that <benefit>
-
-<user-story-example>
-1. As a mobile bank customer, I want to see balance on my accounts, so that I can make better informed decisions about my spending
-</user-story-example>
-
-This list of user stories should be extremely extensive and cover all aspects of the feature.
-
-## Implementation Decisions
-
-A list of implementation decisions that were made. This can include:
-
-- The modules that will be built/modified
-- The interfaces of those modules that will be modified
-- Technical clarifications from the developer
-- Architectural decisions
-- Schema changes
-- API contracts
-- Specific interactions
-
-Do NOT include specific file paths or code snippets. They may end up being outdated very quickly.
-
-Exception: if a prototype produced a snippet that encodes a decision more precisely than prose can (state machine, reducer, schema, type shape), inline it within the relevant decision and note briefly that it came from a prototype. Trim to the decision-rich parts — not a working demo, just the important bits.
-
-## Testing Decisions
-
-A list of testing decisions that were made. Include:
-
-- A description of what makes a good test (only test external behavior, not implementation details)
-- Which modules will be tested
-- Prior art for the tests (i.e. similar types of tests in the codebase)
-
-## Out of Scope
-
-A description of the things that are out of scope for this PRD.
-
-## Further Notes
-
-Any further notes about the feature.
-
-</prd-template>

.agents/skills/to-questionnaire/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+---
+name: to-questionnaire
+description: Turn a decision you can't fully answer into a questionnaire for someone else to fill in.
+disable-model-invocation: true
+---
+
+Turn something the user can't answer alone into a **questionnaire** — a Markdown document they hand to one person to fill in async, or fill out together over a meeting. The recipient holds knowledge the user lacks; the questionnaire pulls it out of them.
+
+**Grill the send, not the subject.** Interview the user only about the _send_, which they can always answer: who it goes to, and what they need back. The questions in the document then target the **gap** between what the recipient knows and what the user needs.
+
+1. **Who is it going to?** Ask, in one exchange, the recipient's role, expertise, and relationship to the user. This fixes the questionnaire's tone and how much context it must carry. Done when you know who the recipient is and what they know that the user doesn't.
+
+2. **What do you need back?** Ask, in one exchange, the specific decisions or facts the user can't resolve alone and needs from this person. Done when you have a concrete list of what the user must walk away able to do or decide.
+
+3. **Write the questionnaire.** Draft questions aimed at the gap from steps 1–2, following the Document structure below. Write it to `to-questionnaire-<slug>.md` in the current directory (slug from the topic) and report the path. Done when the file exists and every item the user named in step 2 is covered by a question.
+
+## Document structure
+
+Frame the document as a **discovery questionnaire**: the user lacks context, the recipient holds it. Order questions most-important-first — async means you may only get one pass — and group them under `##` headings by theme once there are more than a handful. Write it using the template below.
+
+<questionnaire-template>
+
+# <Questionnaire title>
+
+**Purpose:** why this questionnaire exists and the decision riding on it.
+
+**From:** <the user> — **To:** <the recipient> — **How your answers will be used:** <where they go>
+
+## Context
+
+One paragraph orienting a recipient who wasn't in the user's head. Enough to answer well, not a page.
+
+## How to answer
+
+Deadline and rough effort. Partial answers and "I don't know" are useful — flag anything you're unsure of rather than skipping it.
+
+## <Theme heading>
+
+One `##` section per theme. Under each, its questions, most-important-first. Every question is one idea — never compound — with an answer stub directly beneath, and a one-line _why this matters_ only where the question could be misread or invite a throwaway answer.
+
+<question-example>
+### What load is the system expected to handle at launch?
+
+_Why this matters: it decides whether we provision for burst traffic now or defer it._
+
+>
+</question-example>
+
+## Anything else?
+
+A closing catch-all: anything we didn't ask that we should know?
+
+</questionnaire-template>

.agents/skills/to-questionnaire/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "To Questionnaire"
+  short_description: "Front-load questions into a doc for someone to answer"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

.agents/skills/to-spec/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,75 @@
+---
+name: to-spec
+description: Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the project issue tracker — no interview, just synthesis of what you've already discussed.
+disable-model-invocation: true
+---
+
+This skill takes the current conversation context and codebase understanding and produces a spec. Do NOT interview the user — just synthesize what you already know.
+
+The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not.
+
+## Process
+
+1. Explore the repo to understand the current state of the codebase, if you haven't already. Use the project's domain glossary vocabulary throughout the spec, and respect any ADRs in the area you're touching.
+
+2. Sketch out the seams at which you're going to test the feature. Existing seams should be preferred to new ones. Use the highest seam possible. If new seams are needed, propose them at the highest point you can. The fewer seams across the codebase, the better - the ideal number is one.
+
+Check with the user that these seams match their expectations.
+
+3. Write the spec using the template below, then publish it to the project issue tracker. Apply the `ready-for-agent` triage label - no need for additional triage.
+
+<spec-template>
+
+## Problem Statement
+
+The problem that the user is facing, from the user's perspective.
+
+## Solution
+
+The solution to the problem, from the user's perspective.
+
+## User Stories
+
+A LONG, numbered list of user stories. Each user story should be in the format of:
+
+1. As an <actor>, I want a <feature>, so that <benefit>
+
+<user-story-example>
+1. As a mobile bank customer, I want to see balance on my accounts, so that I can make better informed decisions about my spending
+</user-story-example>
+
+This list of user stories should be extremely extensive and cover all aspects of the feature.
+
+## Implementation Decisions
+
+A list of implementation decisions that were made. This can include:
+
+- The modules that will be built/modified
+- The interfaces of those modules that will be modified
+- Technical clarifications from the developer
+- Architectural decisions
+- Schema changes
+- API contracts
+- Specific interactions
+
+Do NOT include specific file paths or code snippets. They may end up being outdated very quickly.
+
+Exception: if a prototype produced a snippet that encodes a decision more precisely than prose can (state machine, reducer, schema, type shape), inline it within the relevant decision and note briefly that it came from a prototype. Trim to the decision-rich parts — not a working demo, just the important bits.
+
+## Testing Decisions
+
+A list of testing decisions that were made. Include:
+
+- A description of what makes a good test (only test external behavior, not implementation details)
+- Which modules will be tested
+- Prior art for the tests (i.e. similar types of tests in the codebase)
+
+## Out of Scope
+
+A description of the things that are out of scope for this spec.
+
+## Further Notes
+
+Any further notes about the feature.
+
+</spec-template>

.agents/skills/to-spec/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "To Spec"
+  short_description: "Turn a conversation into a spec"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

.agents/skills/to-tickets/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,105 @@
+---
+name: to-tickets
+description: Break a plan, spec, or the current conversation into a set of tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its blocking edges, published to the configured tracker — edges as text in one file per ticket locally, or native blocking links on a real tracker.
+disable-model-invocation: true
+---
+
+# To Tickets
+
+Break a plan, spec, or conversation into a set of **tickets** — tracer-bullet vertical slices, each declaring the tickets that **block** it.
+
+The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not.
+
+## Process
+
+### 1. Gather context
+
+Work from whatever is already in the conversation context. If the user passes a reference (a spec path, an issue number or URL) as an argument, fetch it and read its full body and comments.
+
+### 2. Explore the codebase (optional)
+
+If you have not already explored the codebase, do so to understand the current state of the code. Ticket titles and descriptions should use the project's domain glossary vocabulary, and respect ADRs in the area you're touching.
+
+Look for opportunities to prefactor the code to make the implementation easier. "Make the change easy, then make the easy change."
+
+### 3. Draft vertical slices
+
+Break the work into **tracer bullet** tickets.
+
+<vertical-slice-rules>
+
+- Each slice cuts a narrow but COMPLETE path through every layer (schema, API, UI, tests) — vertical, NOT a horizontal slice of one layer
+- A completed slice is demoable or verifiable on its own
+- Each slice is sized to fit in a single fresh context window
+- Any prefactoring should be done first
+
+</vertical-slice-rules>
+
+Give each ticket its **blocking edges** — the other tickets that must complete before it can start. A ticket with no blockers can start immediately.
+
+**Wide refactors are the exception to vertical slicing.** A **wide refactor** is one mechanical change — rename a column, retype a shared symbol — whose **blast radius** fans across the whole codebase, so a single edit breaks thousands of call sites at once and no vertical slice can land green. Don't force it into a tracer bullet; sequence it as **expand–contract**. First expand: add the new form beside the old so nothing breaks. Then migrate the call sites over in batches sized by blast radius (per package, per directory), each batch its own ticket blocked by the expand, keeping CI green batch to batch because the old form still exists. Finally contract: delete the old form once no caller remains, in a ticket blocked by every migrate batch. When even the batches can't stay green alone, keep the sequence but let them share an integration branch that all block a final integrate-and-verify ticket — green is promised only there.
+
+### 4. Quiz the user
+
+Present the proposed breakdown as a numbered list. For each ticket, show:
+
+- **Title**: short descriptive name
+- **Blocked by**: which other tickets (if any) must complete first
+- **What it delivers**: the end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work
+
+Ask the user:
+
+- Does the granularity feel right? (too coarse / too fine)
+- Are the blocking edges correct — does each ticket only depend on tickets that genuinely gate it?
+- Should any tickets be merged or split further?
+
+Iterate until the user approves the breakdown.
+
+### 5. Publish the tickets to the configured tracker
+
+Publish the approved tickets. **How** depends on the tracker `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` configured — the tickets are the same either way, only the shape of the blocking edges changes:
+
+- **Local files** → write one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature-slug>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, numbered from `01` in dependency order (blockers first). Each file's "Blocked by" lists the numbers/titles it depends on. Use the per-ticket file template below — one ticket per file, never a single combined file.
+- **A real issue tracker (GitHub, Linear, …)** → publish one issue per ticket in dependency order (blockers first) so each ticket's blocking edges can reference real identifiers. Use the platform's native blocking / sub-issue relationship where it has one; otherwise set each ticket's "Blocked by" to the blocking issues. Apply the `ready-for-agent` triage label unless instructed otherwise — the tickets are agent-grabbable by construction.
+
+Work the **frontier**: any ticket whose blockers are all done. For a purely linear chain that means top to bottom.
+
+Do NOT close or modify any parent issue.
+
+<local-ticket-template>
+
+# <NN> — <Ticket title>
+
+**What to build:** the end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work, from the user's perspective — not a layer-by-layer implementation list.
+
+**Blocked by:** the numbers/titles of the tickets that gate this one, or "None — can start immediately".
+
+**Status:** ready-for-agent
+
+- [ ] Acceptance criterion 1
+- [ ] Acceptance criterion 2
+
+</local-ticket-template>
+
+<issue-template>
+
+## Parent
+
+A reference to the parent issue on the tracker (if the source was an existing issue, otherwise omit this section).
+
+## What to build
+
+The end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work, from the user's perspective — not layer-by-layer implementation.
+
+## Acceptance criteria
+
+- [ ] Criterion 1
+- [ ] Criterion 2
+
+## Blocked by
+
+- A reference to each blocking ticket, or "None — can start immediately".
+
+</issue-template>
+
+In either form, avoid specific file paths or code snippets — they go stale fast. Exception: if a prototype produced a snippet that encodes a decision more precisely than prose can (state machine, reducer, schema, type shape), inline it and note briefly that it came from a prototype. Trim to the decision-rich parts — not a working demo, just the important bits.

.agents/skills/to-tickets/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "To Tickets"
+  short_description: "Split a plan into tracer-bullet tickets"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

.agents/skills/triage/AGENT-BRIEF.md

@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
 # Writing Agent Briefs
 
-An agent brief is a structured comment posted on a GitHub issue when it moves to `ready-for-agent`. It is the authoritative specification that an AFK agent will work from. The original issue body and discussion are context — the agent brief is the contract.
+An agent brief is a structured comment posted on a GitHub issue or PR when it moves to `ready-for-agent`. It is the authoritative specification that an AFK agent will work from. The original body and discussion are context — the agent brief is the contract.
+
+The brief states **what the agent should do**, which stretches to both surfaces: for an issue, that's building the change from nothing; for a PR, it's what's left to do *to the existing diff* — finish it, close gaps, address review points. Same principles either way; the PR example below shows the difference.
 
 ## Principles
 
@@ -143,6 +145,43 @@ checked for matches.
 - Bug reports (only enhancement rejections go to `.out-of-scope/`)
 ```
 
+### Good agent brief (PR)
+
+For a PR, "Current behavior" describes the state of the diff, and the brief asks the agent to finish or fix it rather than build from scratch.
+
+```markdown
+## Agent Brief
+
+**Category:** enhancement
+**Summary:** Finish the contributor's `--json` output flag for `triage list`
+
+**Current behavior:**
+The PR adds a `--json` flag that serializes the issue list to JSON. The happy
+path works and the diff matches the project's command structure. Two gaps
+remain: errors are still printed as human text (not JSON), and the new flag has
+no test coverage.
+
+**Desired behavior:**
+With `--json`, all output — including errors — is well-formed JSON on stdout,
+and the command's exit codes are unchanged. The existing human-readable output
+is untouched when the flag is absent.
+
+**Key interfaces:**
+- The command's error path should emit `{ "error": string }` under `--json`
+  instead of the plain-text error
+- Reuse the existing serializer the PR already added; don't introduce a second
+
+**Acceptance criteria:**
+- [ ] `triage list --json` emits valid JSON for both success and error cases
+- [ ] Exit codes match the non-JSON command
+- [ ] A test covers the `--json` success output and one error case
+- [ ] Default (non-JSON) output is byte-for-byte unchanged
+
+**Out of scope:**
+- Adding `--json` to any other command
+- Changing the JSON shape of the success payload the PR already defined
+```
+
 ### Bad agent brief
 
 ```markdown

.agents/skills/triage/OUT-OF-SCOPE.md

@@ -83,7 +83,11 @@ The maintainer may:
 
 ## When to write to `.out-of-scope/`
 
-Only when an **enhancement** (not a bug) is rejected as `wontfix`. The flow:
+Only when an **enhancement** (not a bug) is *rejected* as `wontfix`. This applies to enhancement PRs exactly as it does to issues — a rejected PR is recorded here so the same request doesn't return as fresh code.
+
+Do **not** write here when something is closed as `wontfix` because it's **already implemented**. That's a built feature, not a rejected one; recording it would poison the dedup checks with false rejections. Instead, the closing comment points to where the feature already lives.
+
+The flow:
 
 1. Maintainer decides a feature request is out of scope
 2. Check if a matching `.out-of-scope/` file already exists

.agents/skills/triage/SKILL.md

@@ -1,12 +1,15 @@
 ---
 name: triage
-description: Triage issues through a state machine driven by triage roles. Use when user wants to create an issue, triage issues, review incoming bugs or feature requests, prepare issues for an AFK agent, or manage issue workflow.
+description: Move issues and external PRs through a state machine of triage roles — categorise, verify, grill if needed, and write agent-ready briefs.
+disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
 # Triage
 
 Move issues on the project issue tracker through a small state machine of triage roles.
 
+If this repo treats external pull requests as a request surface (see the issue-tracker config), triage covers them too: **a PR is an issue with attached code** — same roles, same states, same machine, with a few deltas marked "for a PR" below. Resolve a bare `#42` to an issue or PR per the tracker config.
+
 Every comment or issue posted to the issue tracker during triage **must** start with this disclaimer:
 
 ```
@@ -33,6 +36,8 @@ Five **state** roles:
 - `ready-for-human` — needs human implementation
 - `wontfix` — will not be actioned
 
+For a PR, the same states read against the attached code: `ready-for-agent` means a brief is attached and an agent should take the next step on the diff; `ready-for-human` means it's ready for a human to merge.
+
 Every triaged issue should carry exactly one category role and one state role. If state roles conflict, flag it and ask the maintainer before doing anything else.
 
 These are canonical role names — the actual label strings used in the issue tracker may differ. The mapping should have been provided to you - run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not.
@@ -44,7 +49,7 @@ State transitions: an unlabeled issue normally goes to `needs-triage` first; fro
 The maintainer invokes `/triage` and describes what they want in natural language. Interpret the request and act. Examples:
 
 - "Show me anything that needs my attention"
-- "Let's look at #42"
+- "Let's look at #42" (issue or PR)
 - "Move #42 to ready-for-agent"
 - "What's ready for agents to pick up?"
 
@@ -56,24 +61,28 @@ Query the issue tracker and present three buckets, oldest first:
 2. **`needs-triage`** — evaluation in progress.
 3. **`needs-info` with reporter activity since the last triage notes** — needs re-evaluation.
 
-Show counts and a one-line summary per issue. Let the maintainer pick.
+When PRs are in scope, include external PRs in these buckets and tag each line `[PR]` or `[issue]`. Discovery surfaces only *external* PRs (the tracker config defines who counts as external) — a collaborator's in-flight PR is not triage work. This filter is discovery-only; an explicitly named PR is always triaged regardless of author.
 
-## Triage a specific issue
+Show counts and a one-line summary per item. Let the maintainer pick.
 
-1. **Gather context.** Read the full issue (body, comments, labels, reporter, dates). Parse any prior triage notes so you don't re-ask resolved questions. Explore the codebase using the project's domain glossary, respecting ADRs in the area. Read `.out-of-scope/*.md` and surface any prior rejection that resembles this issue.
+## Triage a specific issue or PR
 
-2. **Recommend.** Tell the maintainer your category and state recommendation with reasoning, plus a brief codebase summary relevant to the issue. Wait for direction.
+1. **Gather context.** Read the full issue or PR (body, comments, labels, author, dates; for a PR, the diff too). Parse any prior triage notes so you don't re-ask resolved questions. Explore the codebase using the project's domain glossary, respecting ADRs in the area. Run two checks against the codebase: (a) **redundancy** — search for an existing implementation of the requested behavior by domain concept (not just the request's wording), and report where you looked. If found, it's an already-implemented `wontfix` (step 5). (b) **prior rejection** — read `.out-of-scope/*.md` and surface any that resembles this request.
 
-3. **Reproduce (bugs only).** Before any grilling, attempt reproduction: read the reporter's steps, trace the relevant code, run tests or commands. Report what happened — successful repro with code path, failed repro, or insufficient detail (a strong `needs-info` signal). A confirmed repro makes a much stronger agent brief.
+2. **Recommend.** Tell the maintainer your category and state recommendation with reasoning, plus a brief codebase summary relevant to the request — including whether it's already implemented. Wait for direction.
 
-4. **Grill (if needed).** If the issue needs fleshing out, run a `/grill-with-docs` session.
+3. **Verify the claim.** Before any grilling, check that the claim holds up. For a bug, reproduce it from the reporter's steps. For a PR, confirm the diff does what it claims — check it out, run the relevant tests or commands. Report what happened: confirmed (with code path), failed, or insufficient detail (a strong `needs-info` signal). A confirmed verification makes a much stronger agent brief.
+
+4. **Grill (if needed).** If the request needs fleshing out, run the `/grilling` and `/domain-modeling` skills together — grill it into shape a round of questions at a time, sharpening domain terms and updating `CONTEXT.md`/ADRs inline as decisions land.
 
 5. **Apply the outcome:**
    - `ready-for-agent` — post an agent brief comment ([AGENT-BRIEF.md](AGENT-BRIEF.md)).
    - `ready-for-human` — same structure as an agent brief, but note why it can't be delegated (judgment calls, external access, design decisions, manual testing).
    - `needs-info` — post triage notes (template below).
-   - `wontfix` (bug) — polite explanation, then close.
-   - `wontfix` (enhancement) — write to `.out-of-scope/`, link to it from a comment, then close ([OUT-OF-SCOPE.md](OUT-OF-SCOPE.md)).
+   - `wontfix` — close, with the comment depending on *why*:
+     - **Already implemented** — the change already exists in the codebase. Point to where it lives; do **not** write to `.out-of-scope/` (that KB is for *rejected* requests, not built ones).
+     - **Rejected (bug)** — polite explanation, then close.
+     - **Rejected (enhancement)** — write to `.out-of-scope/`, link to it from a comment, then close ([OUT-OF-SCOPE.md](OUT-OF-SCOPE.md)).
    - `needs-triage` — apply the role. Optional comment if there's partial progress.
 
 ## Quick state override
@@ -100,4 +109,4 @@ Capture everything resolved during grilling under "established so far" so the wo
 
 ## Resuming a previous session
 
-If prior triage notes exist on the issue, read them, check whether the reporter has answered any outstanding questions, and present an updated picture before continuing. Don't re-ask resolved questions.
+If prior triage notes exist on the issue or PR, read them, check whether the reporter has answered any outstanding questions, and present an updated picture before continuing. Don't re-ask resolved questions.

.agents/skills/triage/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Triage"
+  short_description: "Move issues through triage roles"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

.agents/skills/wait-what/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+name: wait-what
+description: Stop. That last message did not land — re-pitch it.
+disable-model-invocation: true
+---
+
+Wait — I don't understand where you've got to here. Re-pitch that: give me a little bit of context, talk in ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English, and use the ubiquitous language from `CONTEXT.md`.

.agents/skills/wait-what/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Wait What"
+  short_description: "Re-pitch that — simpler, with the context I'm missing"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

.agents/skills/wayfinder/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,128 @@
+---
+name: wayfinder
+description: Plan a huge chunk of work — more than one agent session can hold — as a shared map of decision tickets on your issue tracker, and resolve them one at a time until the way to the destination is clear.
+disable-model-invocation: true
+---
+
+A loose idea has arrived — too big for one agent session, and wrapped in fog: the way from here to the **destination** isn't visible yet. Wayfinding is about finding that way, not charging at the destination. This skill charts the way as a **shared map** on the repo's issue tracker, then works its **decision tickets** — questions whose resolution is a decision, not slices of a build to execute — one at a time until the route is clear.
+
+The destination varies per effort, and naming it is the first act of charting — it shapes every ticket. It might be a spec to hand off and iterate on, a decision to lock before planning starts, or a change made in place like a data-structure migration. The map is domain-agnostic — engineering work, course content, whatever fits the shape.
+
+## Plan, don't do
+
+Wayfinder is **planning** by default: each ticket resolves a decision, and the map is done when the way is clear — nothing left to decide before someone goes and does the thing. The pull to just do the work is usually the signal you've reached the edge of the map and it's time to hand off. An effort can override this in its **Notes** — carrying execution into the map itself — but absent that, produce decisions, not deliverables.
+
+## Refer by name
+
+Every map and ticket is an issue, so it has a **name** — its title. In everything the human reads — narration, the map's Decisions-so-far — refer to it by that name, never by a bare id, number, or slug. A wall of `#42, #43, #44` is illegible; names read at a glance. The id and URL don't vanish — a name wraps its link — but they ride _inside_ the name, never stand in for it.
+
+## The Map
+
+The map is a single issue on this repo's issue tracker, labelled `wayfinder:map` — the canonical artifact. Its tickets are child issues of the map.
+
+The map is an **index**, not a store. It lists the decisions made and points at the tickets that hold their detail; a decision lives in exactly one place — its ticket — so the map never restates it, only gists it and links.
+
+**Where the map, its child tickets, blocking, and frontier queries physically live is tracker-specific.** The issue tracker should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not. Consult the tracker doc's "Wayfinding operations" section for how _this_ repo expresses them. If no tracker has been provided, default to the local-markdown tracker.
+
+### The map body
+
+The whole map at low resolution, loaded once per session. Open tickets are **not** listed — they are open child issues, found by query.
+
+```markdown
+## Destination
+
+<what reaching the end of this map looks like — the spec, decision, or change this effort is finding its way to. One or two lines; every session orients to it before choosing a ticket.>
+
+## Notes
+
+<domain; skills every session should consult; standing preferences for this effort>
+
+## Decisions so far
+
+<!-- the index — one line per closed ticket: enough to judge relevance, then zoom the link for the detail the ticket holds -->
+
+- [<closed ticket title>](link) — <one-line gist of the answer>
+
+## Not yet specified
+
+<!-- see "Fog of war": in-scope fog you can't ticket yet; graduates as the frontier advances -->
+
+## Out of scope
+
+<!-- see "Out of scope": work ruled beyond the destination; closed, never graduates -->
+```
+
+### Tickets
+
+Each ticket is a **child issue** of the map; the tracker's issue id is its identity. Its body is the question, sized to one 100K token agent session:
+
+```markdown
+## Question
+
+<the decision or investigation this ticket resolves>
+```
+
+Each ticket carries a `wayfinder:<type>` label — one of `research`, `prototype`, `grilling`, `task` (see [Ticket Types](#ticket-types)).
+
+A session **claims** a ticket by assigning it to the dev driving the map, **first**, before any work, so concurrent sessions skip it. That assignee _is_ the claim: an open, unassigned ticket is unclaimed.
+
+Blocking uses the tracker's **native** dependency relationship — essential because it renders the frontier _visually_ in the tracker's own UI, so the human sees what's takeable without opening the map. Only a tracker that lacks native blocking falls back to a body convention. A ticket is **unblocked** when every ticket blocking it is closed; the **frontier** is the open, unblocked, unclaimed children — the edge of the known.
+
+The answer isn't part of the body — it's recorded on resolution (see [Work through the map](#work-through-the-map)). Assets created while resolving a ticket are linked from the issue, not pasted in.
+
+## Ticket Types
+
+Every ticket is either **HITL** — human in the loop, worked _with_ a human who speaks for themselves — or **AFK**, driven by the agent alone. A HITL ticket only resolves through that live exchange; the agent never stands in for the human's side of it (a grilling agent that answers its own questions has broken this).
+
+- **Research** (AFK): Reading documentation, third-party APIs, or local resources like knowledge bases to surface a fact a decision waits on. Resolved by a `/research` **subagent**. Use when knowledge outside the current working directory is required.
+- **Prototype** (HITL): Raise the fidelity of the discussion by making a cheap, rough, concrete artifact to react to — an outline, a rough take, a stub, or UI/logic code via the /prototype skill. Links the prototype as an asset. Use when "how should it look" or "how should it behave" is the key question.
+- **Grilling** (HITL): Conversation. The default case. Always invoke the /grilling and /domain-modeling skills.
+- **Task** (HITL or AFK): Manual work that must happen before a _decision_ can be made — nothing to decide, prototype, or research, but the discussion is blocked until it's done. Signing up for a service so its API can be judged, provisioning access, moving data so its shape can be seen. This is the one type that _does_ rather than decides — and it earns its place by unblocking a decision, not by delivering the destination. The agent drives it alone where it can (AFK); otherwise it hands the human a precise checklist (HITL). Resolved when the work is done; the answer records what was done and any resulting facts (credentials location, new URLs, row counts) later tickets depend on.
+
+## Fog of war
+
+The map is _deliberately_ incomplete: don't chart what you can't yet see. Beyond the live tickets lies the **fog of war** — the dim view of decisions and investigations you can tell are coming but can't yet pin down, because they hang on questions still open. Resolving a ticket clears the fog ahead of it, graduating whatever's now specifiable into fresh tickets — one at a time, until the way to the destination is clear and no tickets remain.
+
+The map's **Not yet specified** section is where that dim view is written down: the suspected question, the area to revisit later. It's the undiscovered frontier _toward_ the destination — everything here is in scope, just not sharp enough to ticket. Write as loosely or as fully as the view allows; it doubles as a signpost for collaborators reading where the effort is headed.
+
+**Fog or ticket?** The test is whether you can state the question precisely now — _not_ whether you can answer it now.
+
+- **Ticket when** the question is already sharp — even if it's blocked and you can't act on it yet.
+- **Not yet specified when** you can't yet phrase it that sharply. Don't pre-slice the fog into ticket-sized pieces: it's coarser than a ticket, and one patch may graduate into several tickets, or none, once the frontier reaches it.
+
+**Not yet specified** excludes what's already decided (Decisions so far), what's already a live ticket, and what's out of scope (the next section).
+
+## Out of scope
+
+Fog only ever gathers _toward_ the destination. The destination fixes the scope, so work beyond it is **out of scope** — it isn't fog, and it doesn't belong in **Not yet specified**. It gets its own **Out of scope** section on the map: work you've consciously ruled out of _this_ effort. Scope, not sharpness, lands it here.
+
+Out-of-scope work never graduates — the frontier stops at the destination — so it returns only if the destination is redrawn, and then as a fresh effort, not a resumption.
+
+Ruling something out of scope is a scoping act, not a step on the route. When a ticket that already exists turns out to sit past the destination — mis-scoped in while charting, or exposed by a resolution — **close it** (a closed ticket is unambiguously off the frontier) and leave one line in the **Out of scope** section: the gist plus why it's out of scope, linking the closed ticket. It stays out of **Decisions so far**, which records the route actually walked — a scope boundary isn't a step on it.
+
+## Invocation
+
+Two modes. Either way, **never resolve more than one ticket per session** — with the exception of research tickets.
+
+### Chart the map
+
+User invokes with a loose idea.
+
+1. **Name the destination.** Run a `/grilling` and `/domain-modeling` session to pin down what this map is finding its way to — the spec, decision, or change. The destination fixes the scope, so it's settled first.
+2. **Map the frontier.** Grill again, **breadth-first** this time: fan out across the whole space rather than deep on any one thread, surfacing the open decisions and the first steps takeable now. **If this surfaces no fog** — the way to the destination is already clear, the whole journey small enough for one session — you don't need a map. Stop and ask the user how they'd like to proceed.
+3. **Create the map** (label `wayfinder:map`): Destination and Notes filled in, Decisions-so-far empty, the fog sketched into **Not yet specified**.
+4. **Create the tickets you can specify now** as child issues of the map — then wire blocking edges in a **second pass** (issues need ids before they can reference each other). Wiring sorts them into the frontier and the blocked; everything you can't yet specify stays in the fog — the **Not yet specified** section.
+5. **Fire the research subagents.** For each `research` ticket you just created, spin up a `/research` subagent to resolve it in parallel, capturing its findings on a throwaway `research/<name>` branch with a context pointer from the ticket.
+6. Stop — charting is one session's work; it hand-resolves nothing.
+
+### Work through the map
+
+User invokes with a map (URL or number). A ticket is **optional** — without one, you pick the next decision, not the user.
+
+1. Load the **map** — the low-res view, not every ticket body.
+2. Choose the ticket. If the user named one, use it. Otherwise take the first frontier ticket in order. **Claim it**: assign it to yourself before any work.
+3. Resolve it — **zoom as needed**: fetch the full body of any related or closed ticket on demand; invoke the skills the `## Notes` block names. If in doubt, use `/grilling` and `/domain-modeling`.
+4. Record the resolution: post the answer as a **resolution comment**, **close** the issue, and **append a context pointer** to the map's Decisions-so-far.
+5. Add newly-surfaced tickets (create-then-wire); graduate any fog the answer has made specifiable, clearing each graduated patch from **Not yet specified** so it lives only as its new ticket. If the answer reveals a ticket — this one or another — sits beyond the destination, **rule it out of scope** rather than resolving it on the route. If the decision invalidates other parts of the map, update or delete those tickets.
+
+The user may run unblocked tickets in parallel, so expect other sessions to be editing the tracker concurrently.

.agents/skills/wayfinder/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Wayfinder"
+  short_description: "Map a large effort as decision tickets"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

.agents/skills/wizard/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+---
+name: wizard
+description: Generate an interactive bash wizard that walks a human through steps only they can perform. Use when provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, walking an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, or running a one-off migration or cutover. Don't invoke this for steps the agent can perform itself.
+---
+
+# Wizard
+
+A **wizard** is a bash script that walks a human, step by step, through a manual procedure that's tedious to do by hand and tedious to re-explain to an AI every time. It opens each URL, says exactly what to click and copy, captures the values, writes them where they belong (`.env`, GitHub secrets), confirms at every stage, and shows how many stages are left. It might configure third-party services, run a one-off migration, or move the project from one state to another.
+
+The delightful UX is already solved by [template.sh](template.sh) — stage-by-stage progress, confirmation gates, cross-platform URL opening (including WSL), hidden secret entry, idempotent `.env` upserts, `gh secret`/`gh variable` writes, and a closing summary. **Your job is only to scope the procedure and author its stages.** The library above the `STAGES` marker is identical in every wizard; that consistency is the point — never hand-edit it.
+
+A wizard is ephemeral by default — built for one run, saved to a scratch or `scripts/` path, deleted when the job's done. Commit it only when the user wants a repeatable setup path that should live in the repo.
+
+## Process
+
+### 1. Scope the procedure
+
+Work out every manual step the human must take and every value that gets captured along the way. Read the repo first — don't ask cold:
+
+- For setup: `.env`, `.env.example`, `.env.*`, `README`, `docker-compose*`, framework config, and `.github/workflows/*` (every `secrets.*` / `vars.*` reference is a value the wizard must produce).
+- For a migration or transition: the current state, the target state, and the irreversible actions between them.
+
+Then show the user the ordered list of stages and the values each produces, and confirm — they may add, drop, or reorder.
+
+**Done when:** every stage is named in order, and for each captured value you know (a) where the human gets it, (b) where it's written (`.env`, a GitHub secret, both, or nowhere — some stages are pure actions), and (c) whether it's secret (hidden entry) or public.
+
+### 2. Map each stage's journey
+
+For each stage, write the precise path a human follows: which URL to open, what to do there, where a value is shown, which variable it fills — e.g. "Dashboard → Developers → API keys → Reveal test key → copy". Where you don't actually know the current UI or the exact command, say so and ask the user or check the docs — never invent steps that may not exist.
+
+**Done when:** every stage traces to concrete instructions a stranger could follow.
+
+### 3. Author the wizard
+
+Copy `template.sh` to the target path. Replace the example stage with one `stage` per step, in dependency order. Use the library helpers — `stage`, `say`/`step`, `open_url`, `ask`/`ask_secret`, `write_env`, `set_secret`/`set_var`, `pause`/`confirm` — and set `TOTAL_STAGES` to the number of stages you wrote.
+
+Hold the bar the template sets: open the URL before asking for its value, use `ask_secret` for anything secret, `write_env` every persisted value, `set_secret` only the values CI actually needs, and `confirm` before any irreversible action. Each `stage` clears the screen so only the current step is visible — keep a stage to one focused task so nothing the human needs scrolls away. Don't touch the library above the marker.
+
+### 4. Verify and hand off
+
+- `bash -n <script>`; run `shellcheck` if available.
+- `chmod +x <script>`.
+- Don't run it end-to-end yourself — it opens browsers and blocks on human input. Trace it statically instead: every value from step 1 is captured and lands where step 1 said, and every `set_secret` name exactly matches a `secrets.*` reference in CI.
+- Tell the user how to run it. If it's a repeatable setup path, commit it and link it from the README so the next person runs the script instead of asking an AI.

.agents/skills/wizard/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Wizard"
+  short_description: "Generate an interactive setup wizard"

.agents/skills/wizard/template.sh

@@ -0,0 +1,204 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env bash
+#
+# A wizard — walks a human through a manual procedure step by step.
+# Generated by the /wizard skill.
+#
+# Everything above the "STAGES" marker is the wizard library: do not hand-edit
+# it. Author the per-step stages below the marker.
+
+set -euo pipefail
+
+# ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+# Wizard library — delightful, consistent UX. Identical across every wizard.
+# ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+if [[ -t 1 ]] && command -v tput >/dev/null 2>&1 && [[ "$(tput colors 2>/dev/null || echo 0)" -ge 8 ]]; then
+  BOLD=$(tput bold); DIM=$(tput dim); RESET=$(tput sgr0)
+  BLUE=$(tput setaf 4); GREEN=$(tput setaf 2); YELLOW=$(tput setaf 3); RED=$(tput setaf 1)
+else
+  BOLD=""; DIM=""; RESET=""; BLUE=""; GREEN=""; YELLOW=""; RED=""
+fi
+
+# Author sets this at the top of the stages section.
+TOTAL_STAGES=0
+
+_STAGE_INDEX=0
+ENV_FILE="${ENV_FILE:-.env}"
+WRITTEN_ENV=()    # KEYs written to ENV_FILE this run
+WRITTEN_SECRET=() # secret NAMEs set this run
+SKIPPED=()        # things we couldn't do (e.g. gh missing)
+
+# _clear — wipe the terminal so only the current step is on screen. No-op when
+# output isn't a terminal, so piped logs stay readable.
+_clear() {
+  [[ -t 1 ]] || return 0
+  if command -v tput >/dev/null 2>&1; then tput clear; else printf '\033[2J\033[3J\033[H'; fi
+}
+
+# banner "Title" — opening frame: what this wizard does.
+banner() {
+  _clear
+  printf '\n%s%s  %s%s\n' "$BOLD" "$BLUE" "$1" "$RESET"
+  printf '%s  %s stages%s\n\n' "$DIM" "$TOTAL_STAGES" "$RESET"
+  printf '%s  You drive the browser; this wizard tells you exactly what to do and\n' "$DIM"
+  printf '  captures the values you copy back. Stop any time with Ctrl-C and re-run\n'
+  printf '  later — it remembers values already saved.%s\n' "$RESET"
+  pause "Ready to start?"
+}
+
+# stage "Name" — clear the screen, then announce a stage and show progress.
+# Clearing keeps only the current step on screen.
+stage() {
+  _clear
+  _STAGE_INDEX=$((_STAGE_INDEX + 1))
+  printf '\n%s%s▸ Stage %s/%s · %s%s\n' \
+    "$BOLD" "$BLUE" "$_STAGE_INDEX" "$TOTAL_STAGES" "$1" "$RESET"
+}
+
+# say "..." — a plain instruction line.
+say()  { printf '  %s\n' "$1"; }
+# step "..." — a numbered-feeling action the human takes in the browser.
+step() { printf '  %s•%s %s\n' "$BLUE" "$RESET" "$1"; }
+note() { printf '  %s%s%s\n' "$DIM" "$1" "$RESET"; }
+warn() { printf '  %s⚠ %s%s\n' "$YELLOW" "$1" "$RESET"; }
+
+# open_url URL — open in the human's browser, cross-platform incl. WSL.
+open_url() {
+  local url="$1"
+  printf '  %s↗ opening%s %s\n' "$GREEN" "$RESET" "$url"
+  { if   command -v wslview     >/dev/null 2>&1; then wslview "$url"
+    elif command -v explorer.exe >/dev/null 2>&1; then explorer.exe "$url"
+    elif command -v xdg-open    >/dev/null 2>&1; then xdg-open "$url"
+    elif command -v open        >/dev/null 2>&1; then open "$url"
+    else warn "couldn't open a browser — visit it manually: $url"; fi
+  } >/dev/null 2>&1 || warn "couldn't open a browser — visit it manually: $url"
+}
+
+# pause "msg" — wait for the human to confirm they've done the manual part.
+pause() {
+  printf '  %s%s%s ' "$DIM" "${1:-Press Enter to continue}" "$RESET"
+  read -r _ || true
+}
+
+# confirm "question" — y/N gate; returns success on yes.
+confirm() {
+  local reply=""
+  printf '  %s? %s [y/N] ' "$YELLOW" "$1"
+  read -r reply || true
+  [[ "$reply" =~ ^[Yy] ]]
+}
+
+# _existing KEY — current value of KEY in ENV_FILE, if any.
+_existing() {
+  [[ -f "$ENV_FILE" ]] || return 1
+  local line; line=$(grep -E "^${1}=" "$ENV_FILE" | tail -n1) || return 1
+  printf '%s' "${line#*=}"
+}
+
+# ask KEY "Prompt" — read a value into $KEY. Offers the existing .env value as
+# a default on re-runs (Enter keeps it). Visible input (non-secret).
+ask() {
+  local key="$1" prompt="$2" current input
+  current=$(_existing "$key" || true)
+  if [[ -n "$current" ]]; then
+    printf '  %s%s%s %s[Enter keeps current]%s ' "$BOLD" "$prompt" "$RESET" "$DIM" "$RESET"
+  else
+    printf '  %s%s%s ' "$BOLD" "$prompt" "$RESET"
+  fi
+  read -r input || true
+  [[ -z "$input" && -n "$current" ]] && input="$current"
+  printf -v "$key" '%s' "$input"
+}
+
+# ask_secret KEY "Prompt" — like ask, but input is hidden.
+ask_secret() {
+  local key="$1" prompt="$2" current input
+  current=$(_existing "$key" || true)
+  if [[ -n "$current" ]]; then
+    printf '  %s%s%s %s[Enter keeps current]%s ' "$BOLD" "$prompt" "$RESET" "$DIM" "$RESET"
+  else
+    printf '  %s%s%s ' "$BOLD" "$prompt" "$RESET"
+  fi
+  read -rs input || true
+  printf '\n'
+  [[ -z "$input" && -n "$current" ]] && input="$current"
+  printf -v "$key" '%s' "$input"
+}
+
+# write_env KEY VALUE — upsert KEY=VALUE into ENV_FILE (creates it; replaces
+# any existing line). Idempotent.
+write_env() {
+  local key="$1" value="$2" tmp
+  touch "$ENV_FILE"
+  tmp=$(mktemp)
+  grep -vE "^${key}=" "$ENV_FILE" > "$tmp" || true
+  printf '%s=%s\n' "$key" "$value" >> "$tmp"
+  mv "$tmp" "$ENV_FILE"
+  WRITTEN_ENV+=("$key")
+  printf '  %s✓ wrote%s %s → %s\n' "$GREEN" "$RESET" "$key" "$ENV_FILE"
+}
+
+# set_secret NAME VALUE — set a GitHub Actions repo secret via gh. Falls back
+# to a warning (and records it) if gh is unavailable or unauthenticated.
+set_secret() {
+  local name="$1" value="$2"
+  if command -v gh >/dev/null 2>&1 && gh auth status >/dev/null 2>&1; then
+    if printf '%s' "$value" | gh secret set "$name" >/dev/null 2>&1; then
+      WRITTEN_SECRET+=("$name")
+      printf '  %s✓ set%s GitHub secret %s\n' "$GREEN" "$RESET" "$name"
+      return
+    fi
+  fi
+  SKIPPED+=("GitHub secret $name (set it manually: gh secret set $name)")
+  warn "skipped GitHub secret $name — gh not ready; set it later"
+}
+
+# set_var NAME VALUE — set a GitHub Actions repo variable (non-secret).
+set_var() {
+  local name="$1" value="$2"
+  if command -v gh >/dev/null 2>&1 && gh auth status >/dev/null 2>&1; then
+    if gh variable set "$name" --body "$value" >/dev/null 2>&1; then
+      printf '  %s✓ set%s GitHub variable %s\n' "$GREEN" "$RESET" "$name"
+      return
+    fi
+  fi
+  SKIPPED+=("GitHub variable $name")
+  warn "skipped GitHub variable $name — gh not ready; set it later"
+}
+
+# finish — clear, then a closing summary of everything configured.
+finish() {
+  _clear
+  printf '\n%s%s  ✓ Setup complete%s\n' "$BOLD" "$GREEN" "$RESET"
+  (( ${#WRITTEN_ENV[@]} ))    && note "wrote ${#WRITTEN_ENV[@]} value(s) to $ENV_FILE: ${WRITTEN_ENV[*]}"
+  (( ${#WRITTEN_SECRET[@]} )) && note "set ${#WRITTEN_SECRET[@]} GitHub secret(s): ${WRITTEN_SECRET[*]}"
+  if (( ${#SKIPPED[@]} )); then
+    printf '\n'; warn "still to do by hand:"
+    for s in "${SKIPPED[@]}"; do note "  - $s"; done
+  fi
+  printf '\n'
+}
+
+# ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+# STAGES — author this section. One stage() per step the human takes.
+# Replace the example below. Set TOTAL_STAGES to match the stages you write.
+# ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+TOTAL_STAGES=1
+
+banner "Stripe setup"
+
+# ── Example stage: replace with your real steps ───────────────────────────
+stage "Stripe — API keys"
+say "We'll grab your Stripe test keys and store them for local dev + CI."
+open_url "https://dashboard.stripe.com/test/apikeys"
+step "On the API keys page, copy the Publishable key (starts pk_test_)."
+ask STRIPE_PUBLISHABLE_KEY "Paste the publishable key:"
+step "Click 'Reveal test key' on the Secret key row, then copy it."
+ask_secret STRIPE_SECRET_KEY "Paste the secret key:"
+write_env STRIPE_PUBLISHABLE_KEY "$STRIPE_PUBLISHABLE_KEY"
+write_env STRIPE_SECRET_KEY "$STRIPE_SECRET_KEY"
+set_secret STRIPE_SECRET_KEY "$STRIPE_SECRET_KEY"   # CI needs this one
+# ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+finish

.agents/skills/write-a-skill/SKILL.md

@@ -1,117 +0,0 @@
----
-name: write-a-skill
-description: Create new agent skills with proper structure, progressive disclosure, and bundled resources. Use when user wants to create, write, or build a new skill.
----
-
-# Writing Skills
-
-## Process
-
-1. **Gather requirements** - ask user about:
-   - What task/domain does the skill cover?
-   - What specific use cases should it handle?
-   - Does it need executable scripts or just instructions?
-   - Any reference materials to include?
-
-2. **Draft the skill** - create:
-   - SKILL.md with concise instructions
-   - Additional reference files if content exceeds 500 lines
-   - Utility scripts if deterministic operations needed
-
-3. **Review with user** - present draft and ask:
-   - Does this cover your use cases?
-   - Anything missing or unclear?
-   - Should any section be more/less detailed?
-
-## Skill Structure
-
-```
-skill-name/
-├── SKILL.md           # Main instructions (required)
-├── REFERENCE.md       # Detailed docs (if needed)
-├── EXAMPLES.md        # Usage examples (if needed)
-└── scripts/           # Utility scripts (if needed)
-    └── helper.js
-```
-
-## SKILL.md Template
-
-```md
----
-name: skill-name
-description: Brief description of capability. Use when [specific triggers].
----
-
-# Skill Name
-
-## Quick start
-
-[Minimal working example]
-
-## Workflows
-
-[Step-by-step processes with checklists for complex tasks]
-
-## Advanced features
-
-[Link to separate files: See [REFERENCE.md](REFERENCE.md)]
-```
-
-## Description Requirements
-
-The description is **the only thing your agent sees** when deciding which skill to load. It's surfaced in the system prompt alongside all other installed skills. Your agent reads these descriptions and picks the relevant skill based on the user's request.
-
-**Goal**: Give your agent just enough info to know:
-
-1. What capability this skill provides
-2. When/why to trigger it (specific keywords, contexts, file types)
-
-**Format**:
-
-- Max 1024 chars
-- Write in third person
-- First sentence: what it does
-- Second sentence: "Use when [specific triggers]"
-
-**Good example**:
-
-```
-Extract text and tables from PDF files, fill forms, merge documents. Use when working with PDF files or when user mentions PDFs, forms, or document extraction.
-```
-
-**Bad example**:
-
-```
-Helps with documents.
-```
-
-The bad example gives your agent no way to distinguish this from other document skills.
-
-## When to Add Scripts
-
-Add utility scripts when:
-
-- Operation is deterministic (validation, formatting)
-- Same code would be generated repeatedly
-- Errors need explicit handling
-
-Scripts save tokens and improve reliability vs generated code.
-
-## When to Split Files
-
-Split into separate files when:
-
-- SKILL.md exceeds 100 lines
-- Content has distinct domains (finance vs sales schemas)
-- Advanced features are rarely needed
-
-## Review Checklist
-
-After drafting, verify:
-
-- [ ] Description includes triggers ("Use when...")
-- [ ] SKILL.md under 100 lines
-- [ ] No time-sensitive info
-- [ ] Consistent terminology
-- [ ] Concrete examples included
-- [ ] References one level deep

.agents/skills/writing-for-agents/SKILL-MECHANICS.md

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+# Skill mechanics
+
+The skill-specific branch of [`writing-for-agents`](SKILL.md): what changes when the document is a skill — frontmatter, the invocation choice, and router skills. Everything else about writing it is the universal reference in `SKILL.md`.
+
+## Invocation
+
+Two choices, trading the two loads:
+
+- A **model-invoked** skill keeps a `description`, so the agent can fire it autonomously — and other skills can reach it. You can still type its name: model-invocation always _includes_ user reach; a description only ever adds agent discovery, never removes the human's. The description is the skill's top-level context pointer, forced to stay loaded at all times — permanent context load in exchange for discoverability. A model-invoked skill whose content is all reference is also one home for shared reference: another skill can invoke it, so reference needed by several skills lives in one place. Mechanics: omit `disable-model-invocation`, and write a model-facing description carrying the trigger branches (the pointer-writing rules in `SKILL.md` apply in full).
+- A **user-invoked** skill strips the description from the agent's reach: only the human typing its name can invoke it, and no other skill can. Zero context load, but it spends cognitive load — you are the index that must remember it exists. Mechanics: set `disable-model-invocation: true`; the `description` becomes human-facing — a one-line summary, trigger lists stripped.
+
+Pick model-invocation only when the agent must reach the skill on its own, or another skill must. If it only ever fires by hand, make it user-invoked and pay no context load.
+
+Shared reference that two user-invoked skills both need can live in neither — with no descriptions, neither can fire the other. Push it to a plain file outside the skill system: external reference any skill can point at.
+
+## Splitting by invocation
+
+The invocation cut of splitting (the sequence cut lives in `SKILL.md`): split off a model-invoked skill when you have a distinct leading word that should trigger it on its own — a trigger word you actually use in your prompts — or another skill must reach it. You pay context load for the new always-loaded description, so that independent reach has to be worth it.
+
+## Router skills
+
+When user-invoked skills multiply past what you can remember, that piled-up cognitive load is cured by a **router skill**: one user-invoked skill that names the others and when to reach for each, so the human has one skill to remember instead of many. It can only hint, never fire them: user-invoked skills have no description, so nothing but the human can reach them.

.agents/skills/writing-for-agents/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
+---
+name: writing-for-agents
+description: Writing documents for agents. Use when creating or editing skills, or modifying AGENTS.md or CLAUDE.md.
+---
+
+Reference for writing any document an agent consumes — a skill, an `AGENTS.md` / `CLAUDE.md`, a doc reached by a pointer. The packaging differs; the writing does not: the same levers make each one predictable — the agent taking the same _process_ every run, not producing the same output.
+
+When the document you're writing is a skill, read [`SKILL-MECHANICS.md`](SKILL-MECHANICS.md) for frontmatter, invocation choice, and router skills.
+
+## Context pointers
+
+A **context pointer** is a reference held in the agent's context that names some out-of-context material and encodes the condition for reaching it. A skill's description is one; a line in `AGENTS.md` naming a doc is the same object. The pointer's _wording_, not its target, decides when the agent reaches the material — and how reliably. A must-have target behind a weakly worded pointer is a variance bug: sharpen the wording first, and inline the material only if sharpening fails.
+
+A pointer does two jobs — state what the material is, and list the **branches** that should trigger reaching it (a branch is a distinct case the document handles, so different runs take different paths through it). Every word of an always-loaded pointer costs on every turn, so it earns even harder pruning than the body:
+
+- **Front-load the leading word** — the pointer is where it does its triggering work.
+- **One trigger per branch.** Synonyms that rename a single branch are one branch written twice; collapse them and keep only genuinely distinct branches.
+- **Cut identity the body already carries.**
+
+## The two loads
+
+Every document and pointer you add spends one of two budgets:
+
+- **Context load** — the cost of always-loaded material on the agent's window: an `AGENTS.md` line, a skill description, anything sitting in context every turn, spending tokens and attention whether or not it fires.
+- **Cognitive load** — the cost on the human: which documents exist and when to reach for each. The human is the index. Not a cost to minimise — it is the price of human agency; spend it where human judgement matters, remove it where it does not.
+
+Material reached only through a pointer escapes context load at the price of the pointer's own line; material with no pointer at all rides entirely on cognitive load.
+
+## Information hierarchy
+
+A document is built from two content types — **steps** (the ordered actions the agent performs) and **reference** (definitions, rules, facts consulted on demand) — that mix freely: all steps (a recipe), all reference (a review's rules, this skill), or both. The core decision is where each piece sits on the **information hierarchy**, a ladder ranked by how immediately the agent needs the material:
+
+1. **In-file step** — the primary tier: what the agent does, in order.
+2. **In-file reference** — consulted on demand. Often a legitimately flat peer-set (every rule of a review on one rung) — a fine arrangement, not a smell.
+3. **Disclosed reference** — pushed out into a separate file, reached by a context pointer, loaded only when the pointer fires. Spans a sibling file in the same folder through fully external reference that lives anywhere and any document can point at.
+
+Push too little down and the top bloats; push too much and you hide material the agent actually needs. That tension is the whole decision.
+
+**Progressive disclosure** is the move down the ladder — out of the main file and behind a pointer — so the top stays legible. Not primarily a token optimisation: it is how the hierarchy is protected. Branching is the cleanest disclosure test: inline what every branch needs, and push behind a pointer what only some branches reach. When a document has steps, in-file reference that should be disclosed buries them and turns attending to them into a coin-flip — a variance lever, not just a legibility one.
+
+**Co-location** is the within-file companion: where the ladder decides _how far down_ a piece sits, co-location decides _what sits beside it_ once there. Keep a concept's definition, rules, and caveats under one heading rather than scattered, so reading one part brings its neighbours with it. The test: the document should read like documentation written for the agent — grouped material reads that way; scattered material does not. (Distinct from duplication: that repeats one meaning in two places; scattering fragments one meaning across many.)
+
+**Sprawl** is the failure mode here: a document simply too long, even when every line is live and unique. Attention thins across the excess, and every extra line is one more to keep relevant. The cure is the ladder: disclose reference behind pointers, and split by branch or sequence so each path carries only what it needs.
+
+## Steps and completion criteria
+
+Every step ends on a **completion criterion** — the condition that tells the agent the work is done. Two properties make it a lever:
+
+- **Clarity** — can the agent tell done from not-done? A vague bound ("understanding reached") invites **premature completion**: ending the step before it is genuinely done, attention slipping to _being done_. The visible steps still ahead — the **post-completion steps** — supply the pull; the criterion's clarity is the resistance. Defend in order: **sharpen the bound first** (local and cheap); only if it is irreducibly fuzzy _and_ you observe the rush, hide the later steps by splitting the sequence — and hiding only works across a real context boundary (a hand-off or a subagent dispatch; an inline call leaves the later steps in context and clears nothing).
+- **Demand** — how much it requires. "Every modified model accounted for" forces thorough work where "produce a change list" does not. Demand drives **legwork** — the digging the agent does within the work, latent in the wording rather than written as its own step — and it is not step-bound: "every rule applied" binds a body of flat reference just as "every step done" binds a sequence, which is how an all-reference document still carries an exhaustiveness bar.
+
+The strongest criteria are both checkable and exhaustive.
+
+## When to split
+
+Splitting one document into two spends one of the two loads, so split only when the cut earns it:
+
+- **By sequence** — split a run of steps where the post-completion steps tempt the agent to rush the one in front of it. Keeping them out of view drives more legwork on the current task. Beware the reverse: merging sequences exposes each step's later steps to what follows, inviting premature completion.
+- **By invocation** — skill-specific: see [`SKILL-MECHANICS.md`](SKILL-MECHANICS.md).
+
+## Leading words
+
+A **leading word** is a compact concept already living in the model's pretraining that the agent thinks with while running the document (_lesson_, _fog of war_, _tracer bullets_). Repeated as a token, never as a sentence, it accumulates a distributed definition and anchors a whole region of behaviour in the fewest tokens, by recruiting priors the model already holds. Coining your own works if you define it clearly, but a made-up word recruits no priors — you pay in definition tokens what a pretrained word gives free; reach for an existing word first.
+
+It anchors twice. In the body, _execution_: the agent reaches for the same behaviour every time the word appears, and inside flat reference it focuses attention on a class of thing to look for. In a pointer, _invocation_: when the same word lives in your prompts, your docs, and your codebase, the agent links that shared language to the material and reaches it more reliably.
+
+Hunt for opportunities to refactor with leading words. A triad spelled out at three sites, a pointer spending a sentence to gesture at one idea — each is a passage begging to collapse into a single token:
+
+- "fast, deterministic, low-overhead" → _tight_ (a _tight_ loop).
+- "a loop you believe in" → _red_ — a fuzzy gate becomes a binary observable state (the loop goes _red_ on the bug, or it doesn't).
+
+You win twice: fewer tokens, and a sharper hook for the agent to hang its thinking on. Assume every document is carrying restatements that leading words retire — go find them.
+
+**Negation** is the failure mode beside this lever: steering by prohibition drags the forbidden behaviour into context and makes it _more_ available, not less. _Don't think of an elephant_, and the elephant is all there is; the negation is a weak modifier the strongly-activated concept overruns, so the ban half-reads as an instruction to do the thing. Prompt the **positive** — state the target behaviour ("write one-line comments") so the banned one is never spoken. A prohibition earns its place only as a hard guardrail you cannot phrase positively; even then, pair it with the positive target so attention lands on what to do.
+
+## Pruning
+
+- Keep each meaning in a **single source of truth**: one authoritative place, so changing the behaviour is a one-place edit. **Duplication** — the same meaning in more than one place — costs maintenance and tokens, and inflates a meaning's prominence on the ladder past its real rank. (The accidental inverse of a leading word, which repeats a token on purpose, never the meaning.)
+- The **environment** is a source of truth too — `package.json` scripts, config files, the directory layout, `--help` output — and a document that restates it is a **cache**: a copy of a lookup, earning its load only when the lookup is expensive. Cache what the agent cannot find by looking: the unwritten convention, the reason behind a choice, the gotcha no config confesses. Leave the one-file, one-command lookups to the environment, where they cannot go stale.
+- Check every line for **relevance**: does it still bear on what the document does? A line loses relevance by never bearing on the task (mere exposition, or a branch that should be disclosed) or by going stale as the behaviour or world it describes changes. Shorter documents are easier to keep relevant. Without a pruning discipline the default fate is **sediment**: stale layers that settle because adding feels safe and removing feels risky, until you must core down through them to find what is still live.
+- Hunt **no-ops** sentence by sentence: an instruction the model already obeys by default pays load to say nothing. The test — does it change behaviour versus the default? — is model-relative, not reader-relative: two people disagreeing about a no-op disagree about the default, and settle it by running the document, not by debate. When a sentence fails, delete the whole sentence rather than trim words from it. The test also grades leading words: a word too weak to beat the default (_be thorough_ when the agent is already thorough-ish) is a no-op, and the fix is a stronger word (_relentless_), not a different technique.

.agents/skills/writing-for-agents/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Writing for Agents"
+  short_description: "Write documents agents consume"

.agents/skills/zoom-out/SKILL.md

@@ -1,7 +0,0 @@
----
-name: zoom-out
-description: Tell the agent to zoom out and give broader context or a higher-level perspective. Use when you're unfamiliar with a section of code or need to understand how it fits into the bigger picture.
-disable-model-invocation: true
----
-
-I don't know this area of code well. Go up a layer of abstraction. Give me a map of all the relevant modules and callers, using the project's domain glossary vocabulary.

.claude/commands/opsx/apply.md

@@ -1,12 +1,15 @@
 ---
 name: "OPSX: Apply"
-description: Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change (Experimental)
-category: Workflow
-tags: [workflow, artifacts, experimental]
+description: "Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change (Experimental)"
+allowed-tools: Bash(openspec:*)
+category: "Workflow"
+tags: ["workflow", "artifacts", "experimental"]
 ---
 
 Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change.
 
+**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`, `view`). Once selected, treat `--store <id>` as sticky for the rest of the workflow. Every unscoped example of those commands below is shorthand: before running it, append the flag. For example, run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json --store "<id>"`, not the unscoped form shown below. Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
+
 **Input**: Optionally specify a change name (e.g., `/opsx:apply add-auth`). If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
 
 **Steps**
@@ -16,7 +19,7 @@ Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change.
    If a name is provided, use it. Otherwise:
    - Infer from conversation context if the user mentioned a change
    - Auto-select if only one active change exists
-   - If ambiguous, run `openspec list --json` to get available changes and use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select
+   - If ambiguous, run `openspec list --json` to get available changes and ask the user to select one
 
    Always announce: "Using change: <name>" and how to override (e.g., `/opsx:apply <other>`).
 
@@ -26,6 +29,7 @@ Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change.
    ```
    Parse the JSON to understand:
    - `schemaName`: The workflow being used (e.g., "spec-driven")
+   - `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, and `actionContext`: planning scope and edit constraints
    - Which artifact contains the tasks (typically "tasks" for spec-driven, check status for others)
 
 3. **Get apply instructions**
@@ -35,23 +39,43 @@ Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change.
    ```
 
    This returns:
-   - Context file paths (varies by schema)
+   - `contextFiles`: artifact ID -> array of concrete file paths (varies by schema - could be proposal/specs/design/tasks or spec/tests/implementation/docs)
    - Progress (total, complete, remaining)
    - Task list with status
    - Dynamic instruction based on current state
+   - Optional `context`: current required project instruction input from the selected root
+   - Optional `operationGuidance`: current advisory guidance for apply
 
    **Handle states:**
-   - If `state: "blocked"` (missing artifacts): show message, suggest using `/opsx:continue`
+   - If `state: "blocked"` (missing artifacts): show message, suggest using `/opsx:continue` (if it is not installed, run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json` to see the next artifact and `openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json` for how to create it)
    - If `state: "all_done"`: congratulate, suggest archive
    - Otherwise: proceed to implementation
 
+   Treat `context` as a required prompt-level input. Read and consider it, and
+   apply relevant project facts, conventions, and constraints while implementing.
+   Treat `operationGuidance` as optional additive advice. Read and consider every
+   entry, and follow entries that are applicable and compatible with the built-in
+   workflow.
+
+   Keep both fields separate from CLI-returned state, missing artifacts, tasks,
+   progress, `contextFiles`, and the built-in `instruction`. They are not
+   evidence of task completion, do not replace the built-in instruction, and do
+   not permit bypassing a blocked state. If context conflicts with the built-in
+   instruction, an explicit user choice, or a CLI-controlled value, report the
+   conflict and preserve the controlling value. If guidance is inapplicable or
+   conflicts with those controlling inputs, do not follow it and explain why.
+   These are prompt-level behavior contracts, not enforceable checks.
+
 4. **Read context files**
 
-   Read the files listed in `contextFiles` from the apply instructions output.
+   Read every file path listed under `contextFiles` from the apply instructions output.
    The files depend on the schema being used:
    - **spec-driven**: proposal, specs, design, tasks
    - Other schemas: follow the contextFiles from CLI output
 
+   Do not copy `context` or `operationGuidance` verbatim into implementation
+   files or planning artifacts unless the user separately asks for that content.
+
 5. **Show current progress**
 
    Display:
@@ -143,6 +167,11 @@ What would you like to do?
 - Update task checkbox immediately after completing each task
 - Pause on errors, blockers, or unclear requirements - don't guess
 - Use contextFiles from CLI output, don't assume specific file names
+- Do not use context or operation guidance as proof that a task is complete
+- Apply relevant project context; report conflicts with controlling workflow inputs
+- Consider every guidance entry; explain any inapplicable or conflicting advice
+- Do not copy runtime context or operation guidance into implementation files or planning artifacts
+- Preserve CLI-controlled blocked/ready/all-done behavior and completion criteria
 
 **Fluid Workflow Integration**
 

.claude/commands/opsx/archive.md

@@ -1,24 +1,59 @@
 ---
 name: "OPSX: Archive"
-description: Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow
-category: Workflow
-tags: [workflow, archive, experimental]
+description: "Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow"
+allowed-tools: Bash(openspec:*)
+category: "Workflow"
+tags: ["workflow", "archive", "experimental"]
 ---
 
 Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow.
 
+**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`, `view`). Once selected, treat `--store <id>` as sticky for the rest of the workflow. Every unscoped example of those commands below is shorthand: before running it, append the flag. For example, run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json --store "<id>"`, not the unscoped form shown below. Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
+
+`<capability-path>` is the spec directory relative to `specs/` (for example, `user-auth` or `identity/user-auth`). Preserve the full path from each delta spec when resolving its main spec.
+
 **Input**: Optionally specify a change name after `/opsx:archive` (e.g., `/opsx:archive add-auth`). If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
 
 **Steps**
 
-1. **If no change name provided, prompt for selection**
+1. **Select the change**
 
-   Run `openspec list --json` to get available changes. Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** to let the user select.
+   If a name is provided, use it. Otherwise:
+   - Infer from conversation context if the user mentioned a change
+   - Auto-select if only one active change exists
+   - If ambiguous, run `openspec list --json` to get available changes and ask the user to select one
 
-   Show only active changes (not already archived).
+   When prompting, show only active changes (not already archived).
    Include the schema used for each change if available.
 
-   **IMPORTANT**: Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose.
+   Always announce: "Using change: <name>" and how to override (e.g., `/opsx:archive <other>`).
+
+   **Load current archive inputs before the existing archive checks:**
+
+   After resolving the selected change and planning root, run:
+   ```bash
+   openspec instructions archive --change "<name>" --json
+   ```
+   Keep the same selected-root flags on this command. This lookup is advisory and
+   optional: it only supplies extra prompt inputs, so it must never block archiving.
+   If it exits non-zero or returns invalid JSON — for example on an older CLI that
+   does not support this command yet — continue the archive workflow with no
+   context and no operation guidance. Do not report an error and do not stop.
+
+   A successful response may omit both optional fields. Treat `context` as a
+   required prompt-level input: read and consider it, and apply relevant project
+   facts, conventions, and constraints. Treat `operationGuidance` as optional
+   additive advice: read and consider every entry, and follow entries that are
+   applicable and compatible with the built-in archive workflow.
+
+   Keep both fields separate from built-in steps, explicit user choices, resolved
+   paths, CLI checks, and command contracts. If context conflicts with one of those
+   controlling inputs, report the conflict and preserve the controlling value. If
+   guidance is inapplicable or conflicts with a controlling input, do not follow it
+   and explain why. Do not infer replacement paths, skipped prompts, or flags from
+   either field, and do not copy their text verbatim into specs, change artifacts,
+   or archive summaries unless the user separately asks for it. These are
+   prompt-level behavior contracts, not enforceable checks.
 
 2. **Check artifact completion status**
 
@@ -26,9 +61,10 @@ Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow.
 
    Parse the JSON to understand:
    - `schemaName`: The workflow being used
-   - `artifacts`: List of artifacts with their status (`done` or other)
+   - `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`: path and scope context
+   - `artifacts`: List of artifacts with their status (`done`, `skipped`, or other)
 
-   **If any artifacts are not `done`:**
+   **If any artifacts are neither `done` nor `skipped`** (skipped artifacts satisfy the requirement - the change declares skip_specs):
    - Display warning listing incomplete artifacts
    - Prompt user for confirmation to continue
    - Proceed if user confirms
@@ -48,10 +84,13 @@ Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow.
 
 4. **Assess delta spec sync state**
 
-   Check for delta specs at `openspec/changes/<name>/specs/`. If none exist, proceed without sync prompt.
+   Use `artifactPaths.specs.existingOutputPaths` from status JSON as the only
+   delta-spec source. If the `specs` entry is missing or
+   `existingOutputPaths` is empty, proceed without a sync prompt and do not infer
+   delta specs from other artifacts.
 
    **If delta specs exist:**
-   - Compare each delta spec with its corresponding main spec at `openspec/specs/<capability>/spec.md`
+   - Compare each delta spec with its corresponding main spec at `<planningHome.root>/openspec/specs/<capability-path>/spec.md` (use the store-aware `planningHome.root` from step 2, not a hardcoded repo path)
    - Determine what changes would be applied (adds, modifications, removals, renames)
    - Show a combined summary before prompting
 
@@ -59,23 +98,46 @@ Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow.
    - If changes needed: "Sync now (recommended)", "Archive without syncing"
    - If already synced: "Archive now", "Sync anyway", "Cancel"
 
-   If user chooses sync, use Task tool (subagent_type: "general-purpose", prompt: "Use Skill tool to invoke openspec-sync-specs for change '<name>'. Delta spec analysis: <include the analyzed delta spec summary>"). Proceed to archive regardless of choice.
+   Route on the answer:
+   - "Cancel" — stop, do not archive
+   - "Archive without syncing" or "Archive now" — proceed to archive
+   - "Sync now" or "Sync anyway" — sync, then verify (below)
+   - Anything else — ask again rather than archiving
+
+   Before a selected sync writes any main spec, run
+   `openspec instructions specs --change "<name>" --json` once with the same
+   selected-root flags. Require a zero exit status and valid artifact-instruction
+   JSON. If the lookup fails or returns invalid JSON, report the error and stop
+   before writing any main spec or moving the change. A valid response with omitted
+   `rules` is the no-rules case. Apply returned `rules` only to the content and
+   form of main specs produced by this merge; do not use them as archive guidance,
+   change CLI behavior, or copy the rule text into any output file.
+
+   Then run the `/opsx:sync` workflow inline (agent-driven intelligent merge) for change '<name>', passing the delta spec analysis and the fetched specs-rule snapshot from above, and wait for it to finish. The inline sync must reuse that snapshot without fetching `specs` instructions again. Do not delegate it to a background task — step 5 would move `changeRoot` out from under a sync that is still reading it, leaving the change archived and the main specs never updated. If your agent can only run it by delegation, delegate synchronously and wait for the result.
+
+   Then re-run the comparison from the top of this step against every capability that has a delta spec in `artifactPaths.specs.existingOutputPaths` — not only the ones the sync reports it touched. A successful sync leaves nothing left to apply, so each capability must now read as already synced:
+   - ADDED requirements present
+   - MODIFIED requirements carrying the scenario and description changes named in the delta, with their other scenarios intact
+   - REMOVED requirements gone — and where this sync retired a capability (removed its last requirement, leaving `## Requirements` empty), its main spec deleted rather than left empty; a spec the sync deliberately kept and reported is also a match
+   - RENAMED requirements present under the new name and absent under the old one
+
+   If the sync failed, or any capability does not match, report what differs and stop — do not archive. Nothing has moved and `changeRoot` is intact, so the user can fix the mismatch or re-run the sync and start the archive again.
 
 5. **Perform the archive**
 
-   Create the archive directory if it doesn't exist:
+   Create an `archive` directory under `planningHome.changesDir` if it doesn't exist:
    ```bash
-   mkdir -p openspec/changes/archive
+   mkdir -p "<planningHome.changesDir>/archive"
    ```
 
-   Generate target name using current date: `YYYY-MM-DD-<change-name>`
+   Generate the target name: use the change name as-is when it already starts with a `YYYY-MM-DD-` prefix; otherwise prepend the current date as `YYYY-MM-DD-<change-name>`. Never stack a second date (same rule as `openspec archive`).
 
    **Check if target already exists:**
    - If yes: Fail with error, suggest renaming existing archive or using different date
-   - If no: Move the change directory to archive
+   - If no: Move `changeRoot` to the archive directory
 
    ```bash
-   mv openspec/changes/<name> openspec/changes/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>
+   mv "<changeRoot>" "<planningHome.changesDir>/archive/<target-name>"
    ```
 
 6. **Display summary**
@@ -89,12 +151,12 @@ Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow.
 
 **Output On Success**
 
-```
+```markdown
 ## Archive Complete
 
 **Change:** <change-name>
 **Schema:** <schema-name>
-**Archived to:** openspec/changes/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>/
+**Archived to:** the archive path derived from `planningHome.changesDir`/<target-name>/
 **Specs:** ✓ Synced to main specs
 
 All artifacts complete. All tasks complete.
@@ -102,12 +164,12 @@ All artifacts complete. All tasks complete.
 
 **Output On Success (No Delta Specs)**
 
-```
+```markdown
 ## Archive Complete
 
 **Change:** <change-name>
 **Schema:** <schema-name>
-**Archived to:** openspec/changes/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>/
+**Archived to:** the archive path derived from `planningHome.changesDir`/<target-name>/
 **Specs:** No delta specs
 
 All artifacts complete. All tasks complete.
@@ -115,12 +177,12 @@ All artifacts complete. All tasks complete.
 
 **Output On Success With Warnings**
 
-```
+```markdown
 ## Archive Complete (with warnings)
 
 **Change:** <change-name>
 **Schema:** <schema-name>
-**Archived to:** openspec/changes/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>/
+**Archived to:** the archive path derived from `planningHome.changesDir`/<target-name>/
 **Specs:** Sync skipped (user chose to skip)
 
 **Warnings:**
@@ -133,11 +195,11 @@ Review the archive if this was not intentional.
 
 **Output On Error (Archive Exists)**
 
-```
+```markdown
 ## Archive Failed
 
 **Change:** <change-name>
-**Target:** openspec/changes/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>/
+**Target:** the archive path derived from `planningHome.changesDir`/<target-name>/
 
 Target archive directory already exists.
 
@@ -148,10 +210,16 @@ Target archive directory already exists.
 ```
 
 **Guardrails**
-- Always prompt for change selection if not provided
+- Announce the selected change; prompt for selection when it is ambiguous
 - Use artifact graph (openspec status --json) for completion checking
 - Don't block archive on warnings - just inform and confirm
 - Preserve .openspec.yaml when moving to archive (it moves with the directory)
 - Show clear summary of what happened
-- If sync is requested, use the Skill tool to invoke `openspec-sync-specs` (agent-driven)
+- If sync is requested, run the `/opsx:sync` workflow inline (agent-driven)
+- Never archive while a spec sync is still in flight — run the sync inline and verify the main specs before moving `changeRoot`
 - If delta specs exist, always run the sync assessment and show the combined summary before prompting
+- Apply relevant runtime context and report conflicts; operation guidance remains advisory
+- Consider every guidance entry and explain any inapplicable or conflicting advice
+- Existing CLI checks, resolved paths, prompts, and command contracts are unchanged
+- Artifact rules constrain only the specs being written and are never operation guidance
+- Never copy runtime context, operation guidance, or artifact-rule text verbatim into output files

.claude/commands/opsx/explore.md

@@ -1,16 +1,19 @@
 ---
 name: "OPSX: Explore"
 description: "Enter explore mode - think through ideas, investigate problems, clarify requirements"
-category: Workflow
-tags: [workflow, explore, experimental, thinking]
+allowed-tools: Bash(openspec:*)
+category: "Workflow"
+tags: ["workflow", "explore", "experimental", "thinking"]
 ---
 
 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 and create a change proposal. 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 and create a change proposal. You MAY create OpenSpec artifacts (proposals, designs, specs) if the user asks—that's capturing thinking, not implementing. For a new change, scaffold it first as described below.
 
 **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.
 
+**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`, `view`). Once selected, treat `--store <id>` as sticky for the rest of the workflow. Every unscoped example of those commands below is shorthand: before running it, append the flag. For example, run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json --store "<id>"`, not the unscoped form shown below. Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
+
 **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"
@@ -59,10 +62,10 @@ Depending on what the user brings, you might:
 │     Use ASCII diagrams liberally        │
 ├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
 │                                         │
-│   ┌────────┐         ┌────────┐        │
-│   │ State  │────────▶│ State  │        │
-│   │   A    │         │   B    │        │
-│   └────────┘         └────────┘        │
+│      ┌────────┐         ┌────────┐      │
+│      │ State  │────────▶│ State  │      │
+│      │   A    │         │   B    │      │
+│      └────────┘         └────────┘      │
 │                                         │
 │   System diagrams, state machines,      │
 │   data flows, architecture sketches,    │
@@ -94,6 +97,12 @@ This tells you:
 - Their names, schemas, and status
 - What the user might be working on
 
+Then read the project's own context from the resolved root - `<root.path>/openspec/config.yaml` (or `config.yml`). Use the `root.path` returned above, and skip this if neither file exists:
+- `context`: project background - tech stack, conventions, constraints
+- `rules`: keyed by artifact id - the entries for an artifact apply only when you write that artifact
+
+Ground your thinking in these. They are constraints for you to follow, not content to reproduce: do NOT copy them into the conversation or into any artifact you create.
+
 If the user mentioned a specific change name, read its artifacts for context.
 
 ### When no change exists
@@ -103,15 +112,23 @@ Think freely. When insights crystallize, you might offer:
 - "This feels solid enough to start a change. Want me to create a proposal?"
 - Or keep exploring - no pressure to formalize
 
+If the user asks you to capture the exploration as a new change, transition seamlessly into the requested capture:
+
+1. Run `openspec new change "<name>"` (with `--store <id>` when applicable) before creating any artifacts. Never create a new change directory under `openspec/changes/` by hand; the CLI scaffold creates required metadata such as `.openspec.yaml`. Keep the selected `--store <id>` on every applicable follow-up `status` and `instructions` command.
+2. Run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json` (append the confirmed `--store "<id>"` only for a registered standalone store), then process the requested artifacts in dependency order. For each requested artifact that is `ready`, run `openspec instructions "<artifact-id>" --change "<name>" --json` (append the confirmed `--store "<id>"` only for a registered standalone store). Before creating a requested artifact, evaluate any condition in its own `instruction` against the explored change; record a deliberate skip instead when the condition does not apply. If a requested artifact is blocked by a direct prerequisite the user did not request, run `openspec instructions "<prerequisite-id>" --change "<name>" --json` (append the confirmed `--store "<id>"` only for a registered standalone store) for that prerequisite whether it is `ready` or `blocked`. If its own `instruction` states a condition, evaluate that condition against the explored change and record a deliberate skip only when the condition does not apply. If the condition applies, or the prerequisite is not conditional, treat it as a normal prerequisite and ask before expanding the capture. Do not create an unrequested prerequisite unless the user approves.
+3. Follow the returned `template` and `instruction` fields. Read completed dependency files listed in `dependencies`, and apply `context` and `rules` as constraints without copying them into the artifact. If the instruction delegates creation to a specific skill or command, invoke it; otherwise write the artifact to `resolvedOutputPath`, using the instruction to choose a concrete path when it is a glob. Verify that the selected concrete output exists.
+4. After creating each artifact, re-run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json` (append the confirmed `--store "<id>"` only for a registered standalone store) and continue until every requested artifact is `done`, `skipped`, or was deliberately skipped because its own `instruction` stated a condition that did not apply. Tell the user about a deliberate conditional skip, remember it, and do not reconsider it. Dependencies are enablers, not gates: if a requested artifact is still `blocked` only because you deliberately skipped a conditional prerequisite, run `openspec instructions "<artifact-id>" --change "<name>" --json` (append the confirmed `--store "<id>"` only for a registered standalone store) despite the blocked status, then create it using step 3 only when those recorded conditional skips are its sole missing dependencies. If a requested artifact is blocked by a prerequisite the user did not ask to capture and cannot be conditionally skipped, explain that dependency and ask before expanding the capture.
+
+Capture the artifact(s) the user requested without asking them to invoke another workflow command. If they asked only to start a change, stop after scaffolding and show its status.
+
 ### When a change exists
 
 If the user mentions a change or you detect one is relevant:
 
-1. **Read existing artifacts for context**
-   - `openspec/changes/<name>/proposal.md`
-   - `openspec/changes/<name>/design.md`
-   - `openspec/changes/<name>/tasks.md`
-   - etc.
+1. **Resolve and read existing artifacts for context**
+   - Run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`.
+   - Use `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext` from the status JSON.
+   - Read existing files from `artifactPaths.<artifact>.existingOutputPaths`.
 
 2. **Reference them naturally in conversation**
    - "Your design mentions using Redis, but we just realized SQLite fits better..."
@@ -119,14 +136,16 @@ If the user mentions a change or you detect one is relevant:
 
 3. **Offer to capture when decisions are made**
 
-   | Insight Type | Where to Capture |
-   |--------------|------------------|
-   | New requirement discovered | `specs/<capability>/spec.md` |
-   | Requirement changed | `specs/<capability>/spec.md` |
-   | Design decision made | `design.md` |
-   | Scope changed | `proposal.md` |
-   | New work identified | `tasks.md` |
-   | Assumption invalidated | Relevant artifact |
+   `<capability-path>` is the spec directory relative to `specs/` (for example, `user-auth` or `identity/user-auth`). Preserve an existing capability's full path and follow the project's established organization for new capabilities.
+
+    | Insight Type               | Where to Capture                    |
+    |----------------------------|-------------------------------------|
+    | New requirement discovered | `specs/<capability-path>/spec.md` |
+    | Requirement changed        | `specs/<capability-path>/spec.md` |
+    | Design decision made       | `design.md`                       |
+    | Scope changed              | `proposal.md`                     |
+    | New work identified        | `tasks.md`                        |
+    | Assumption invalidated     | Relevant artifact                   |
 
    Example offers:
    - "That's a design decision. Capture it in design.md?"
@@ -168,6 +187,7 @@ When things crystallize, you might offer a summary - but it's optional. Sometime
 - **Don't rush** - Discovery is thinking time, not task time
 - **Don't force structure** - Let patterns emerge naturally
 - **Don't auto-capture** - Offer to save insights, don't just do it
+- **Don't manually scaffold changes** - Never create a new change directory under `openspec/changes/` by hand. Always use `openspec new change "<name>"` (with `--store <id>` when applicable) so required metadata such as `.openspec.yaml` is created before writing artifacts.
 - **Do visualize** - A good diagram is worth many paragraphs
 - **Do explore the codebase** - Ground discussions in reality
 - **Do question assumptions** - Including the user's and your own

.claude/commands/opsx/propose.md

@@ -1,51 +1,81 @@
 ---
 name: "OPSX: Propose"
-description: Propose a new change - create it and generate all artifacts in one step
-category: Workflow
-tags: [workflow, artifacts, experimental]
+description: "Propose a new change - create it and generate all artifacts in one step"
+allowed-tools: Bash(openspec:*)
+category: "Workflow"
+tags: ["workflow", "artifacts", "experimental"]
 ---
 
 Propose a new change - create the change and generate all artifacts in one step.
 
-I'll create a change with artifacts:
+**Planning boundary**: This workflow creates planning artifacts only. The user request that selected or triggered this workflow authorizes planning only, even if it asks to build or fix something. Do not edit project code. After the planning artifacts are complete, stop. Do not start implementation in the same response, even if the initial request asks for it. Wait for a new user request after the artifacts are presented; then start the apply workflow.
+
+I'll create a change with the artifacts your schema defines. With the default spec-driven schema that is:
 - proposal.md (what & why)
+- `specs/<capability-path>/spec.md` (what the system must do - a delta, not the main spec)
 - design.md (how)
 - tasks.md (implementation steps)
 
-When ready to implement, run /opsx:apply
+`<capability-path>` is the spec directory relative to `specs/` (for example, `user-auth` or `identity/user-auth`). Preserve an existing capability's full path and follow the project's established organization for new capabilities.
+
+When the user is ready to implement, they must start the apply workflow explicitly.
 
 ---
 
+**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`, `view`). Once selected, treat `--store <id>` as sticky for the rest of the workflow. Every unscoped example of those commands below is shorthand: before running it, append the flag. For example, run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json --store "<id>"`, not the unscoped form shown below. Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
+
 **Input**: The argument after `/opsx:propose` is the change name (kebab-case), OR a description of what the user wants to build.
 
 **Steps**
 
-1. **If no input provided, ask what they want to build**
+1. **Understand the request and clarify material ambiguity**
 
-   Use the **AskUserQuestion tool** (open-ended, no preset options) to ask:
+   If no input is provided, ask the user (open-ended, no preset options):
    > "What change do you want to work on? Describe what you want to build or fix."
 
    From their description, derive a kebab-case name (e.g., "add user authentication" → `add-user-auth`).
 
    **IMPORTANT**: Do NOT proceed without understanding what the user wants to build.
 
-2. **Create the change directory**
+   If the request contains ambiguity that would materially affect scope, externally observable behavior, compatibility, or acceptance criteria, ask the user before creating the change. For minor details, make a reasonable assumption and record it in the planning artifacts.
+
+2. **Determine the workflow schema**
+
+   Use the configured default schema unless the user explicitly requests a different workflow.
+
+   **Use a different schema only if the user:**
+   - Explicitly requests a specific schema by name → use `--schema <schema-name>`
+   - Asks to "show workflows" or asks "what workflows" exist → resolve the authoritative root by running `openspec context --json` from the current working directory. If the user explicitly selected a registered store, use `openspec context --json --store "<store-id>"`. Then run `openspec schemas --json` with its working directory set to the returned `root.path` and let them choose. This preserves roots selected by a local `store:` pointer or the global `defaultStore`; `schemas` does not accept `--store`. If context reports only `no_openspec_root`, run `openspec schemas --json` from the current working directory instead. Do not use this fallback for invalid or unavailable stores.
+
+   Otherwise, omit `--schema` to preserve the configured default.
+
+3. **Create the change directory**
+
+   Choose one schema form below. If a registered store is selected, append `--store "<store-id>"` to that command and each later OpenSpec command shown below that accepts `--store`.
+
+   Using the configured default:
    ```bash
    openspec new change "<name>"
    ```
-   This creates a scaffolded change at `openspec/changes/<name>/` with `.openspec.yaml`.
 
-3. **Get the artifact build order**
+   Using an explicitly requested schema:
+   ```bash
+   openspec new change "<name>" --schema "<schema-name>"
+   ```
+   This creates a scaffolded change in the planning home resolved by the CLI with `.openspec.yaml`.
+
+4. **Get the artifact build order**
    ```bash
    openspec status --change "<name>" --json
    ```
    Parse the JSON to get:
    - `applyRequires`: array of artifact IDs needed before implementation (e.g., `["tasks"]`)
-   - `artifacts`: list of all artifacts with their status and dependencies
+   - `artifacts`: list of all artifacts, each with its `status` and its `requires` edges (the artifact IDs it directly depends on)
+   - `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`: path and scope context. Use these instead of assuming repo-local paths.
 
-4. **Create artifacts in sequence until apply-ready**
+5. **Create every artifact in the required set**
 
-   Use the **TodoWrite tool** to track progress through the artifacts.
+   Use a todo list to track progress through the artifacts.
 
    Loop through artifacts in dependency order (artifacts with no pending dependencies first):
 
@@ -59,23 +89,30 @@ When ready to implement, run /opsx:apply
         - `rules`: Artifact-specific rules (constraints for you - do NOT include in output)
         - `template`: The structure to use for your output file
         - `instruction`: Schema-specific guidance for this artifact type
-        - `outputPath`: Where to write the artifact
+        - `skipped`/`warning`: present when the change declares skip_specs and this artifact must NOT be created - stop and pick another artifact
+        - `resolvedOutputPath`: Resolved path or pattern to write the artifact
         - `dependencies`: Completed artifacts to read for context
-      - Read any completed dependency files for context
-      - Create the artifact file using `template` as the structure
+      - Read any completed dependency files for context - always re-read them from disk, even if you saw them earlier in the conversation (the user may have edited them)
+      - If the `instruction` field delegates creation to a specific skill or command, invoke it to produce the artifact instead of writing the file yourself, then verify the artifact file exists at `resolvedOutputPath`
+      - Otherwise create the artifact file using `template` as the structure and write it to `resolvedOutputPath`. If `resolvedOutputPath` is a glob, follow `instruction` to choose the concrete file path
       - Apply `context` and `rules` as constraints - but do NOT copy them into the file
       - Show brief progress: "Created <artifact-id>"
 
-   b. **Continue until all `applyRequires` artifacts are complete**
+   b. **Continue until every artifact in the required set exists (not just `apply.requires`)**
       - After creating each artifact, re-run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`
-      - Check if every artifact ID in `applyRequires` has `status: "done"` in the artifacts array
-      - Stop when all `applyRequires` artifacts are done
+      - The required set is `applyRequires` plus every artifact reachable from those by following the `requires` edges in `status --json` - walk them transitively (spec-driven closes over proposal, specs, design, tasks). Leave artifacts outside that set alone
+      - `status` is file-existence only, so an `applyRequires` artifact reading `done` does NOT mean its dependencies exist - writing `tasks.md` early marks `tasks` done while `specs` was never written. Use each artifact's `requires` edges, not its `status`, to build the required set: a `done` artifact still lists what it depends on
+      - An artifact already reading `status: "skipped"` is satisfied: the change declares `skip_specs` in `.openspec.yaml`, so its files must NOT exist. Never try to create one
+      - Create every artifact in the required set that is missing, then re-check - creating one can unblock others
+      - Skip one only when `status` already reports it `skipped`, or when its own `instruction` says it is conditional: run `openspec instructions <artifact-id> --change "<name>" --json` and skip only if its `instruction` field marks it optional (e.g. "create only if..."). Spec-driven's `design.md` qualifies; `specs` qualifies only via the `skipped` status above, never by your own judgment. Tell the user, and do not reconsider it
+      - Dependencies are enablers, not gates: if a required artifact is still `blocked` only because you skipped a conditional dependency, write it anyway
+      - Stop when every artifact in the required set is `done`, `skipped`, or was deliberately skipped
 
    c. **If an artifact requires user input** (unclear context):
-      - Use **AskUserQuestion tool** to clarify
+      - Ask the user to clarify
       - Then continue with creation
 
-5. **Show final status**
+6. **Show final status**
    ```bash
    openspec status --change "<name>"
    ```
@@ -84,13 +121,14 @@ When ready to implement, run /opsx:apply
 
 After completing all artifacts, summarize:
 - Change name and location
-- List of artifacts created with brief descriptions
-- What's ready: "All artifacts created! Ready for implementation."
-- Prompt: "Run `/opsx:apply` to start implementing."
+- List of artifacts created with brief descriptions, plus any conditional artifact you skipped and why
+- What's ready: "All artifacts needed for implementation are ready."
+- Prompt: "The artifacts are ready for review. When you are ready, run `/opsx:apply`."
 
 **Artifact Creation Guidelines**
 
-- Follow the `instruction` field from `openspec instructions` for each artifact type
+- Follow the `instruction` field from `openspec instructions` for each artifact type - it is the authoritative guidance, even for familiar artifact names
+- If the `instruction` field directs you to use a specific skill or command to create the artifact, invoke it instead of writing the artifact directly
 - The schema defines what each artifact should contain - follow it
 - Read dependency artifacts for context before creating new ones
 - Use `template` as the structure for your output file - fill in its sections
@@ -99,8 +137,9 @@ After completing all artifacts, summarize:
   - These guide what you write, but should never appear in the output
 
 **Guardrails**
-- Create ALL artifacts needed for implementation (as defined by schema's `apply.requires`)
-- Always read dependency artifacts before creating a new one
-- If context is critically unclear, ask the user - but prefer making reasonable decisions to keep momentum
+- The request that invoked this workflow authorizes planning only. Any implementation or apply instruction in that request does not carry forward. Do NOT implement the change, start the apply workflow, or edit project code during this workflow. After presenting the artifacts, stop and wait for a new user request to start the apply workflow
+- Create every artifact the apply phase transitively depends on, not just the ids listed in `apply.requires`
+- Always read dependency artifacts before creating a new one - re-read from disk, not from conversation memory (files may have changed since you last saw them)
+- Ask about ambiguities that would materially change scope, externally observable behavior, compatibility, or acceptance criteria; for minor details, make reasonable assumptions and record them
 - If a change with that name already exists, ask if user wants to continue it or create a new one
 - Verify each artifact file exists after writing before proceeding to next

.claude/commands/opsx/sync.md

@@ -0,0 +1,258 @@
+---
+name: "OPSX: Sync"
+description: "Sync delta specs from a change to main specs"
+allowed-tools: Bash(openspec:*)
+category: "Workflow"
+tags: ["workflow", "specs", "experimental"]
+---
+
+Sync delta specs from a change to main specs.
+
+This is an **agent-driven** operation - you will read delta specs and directly edit main specs to apply the changes. This allows intelligent merging (e.g., adding a scenario without copying the entire requirement).
+
+**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`, `view`). Once selected, treat `--store <id>` as sticky for the rest of the workflow. Every unscoped example of those commands below is shorthand: before running it, append the flag. For example, run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json --store "<id>"`, not the unscoped form shown below. Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
+
+`<capability-path>` is the spec directory relative to `specs/` (for example, `user-auth` or `identity/user-auth`). Preserve the full path from each delta spec when resolving its main spec.
+
+**Input**: Optionally specify a change name after `/opsx:sync` (e.g., `/opsx:sync add-auth`). If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
+
+**Steps**
+
+1. **Select the change**
+
+   If a name is provided, use it. Otherwise:
+   - Infer from conversation context if the user mentioned a change
+   - Auto-select if only one active change exists
+   - If ambiguous, run `openspec list --json` to get available changes and ask the user to select one
+
+   When prompting, show changes that have delta specs (under `specs/` directory).
+
+   Always announce: "Using change: <name>" and how to override (e.g., `/opsx:sync <other>`).
+
+2. **Resolve change context**
+
+   Run:
+   ```bash
+   openspec status --change "<name>" --json
+   ```
+
+   The JSON includes `planningHome.root`. Main specs live under `<planningHome.root>/openspec/specs/` — use that (store-aware) root for every main-spec path below, not a hardcoded repo path. When a store is selected it points at the store, not the current repository.
+
+3. **Find delta specs**
+
+   Use `artifactPaths.specs.existingOutputPaths` from the status JSON as the
+   only source of delta spec paths. If the `specs` entry is missing or
+   `existingOutputPaths` is empty, report that there are no delta specs to sync,
+   do not infer them from other artifacts, and stop without requesting artifact
+   instructions or writing a main spec.
+
+   Sync every path in `existingOutputPaths` unless the caller narrowed the set.
+   A caller narrows it by naming an explicit list of complete entries from
+   `existingOutputPaths` — copy those absolute values verbatim. Archive does
+   this inline, and a user can too (for example, by selecting the entry ending
+   in `/specs/billing/invoices/spec.md`).
+   Then sync only the named paths and leave the remaining delta specs untouched:
+   bulk archive excludes a delta whose implementation it could not find, and
+   syncing it anyway would write a main spec the caller deliberately withheld.
+   Carry that narrowed selection through step 4; never widen it back to the full
+   list. If a named path is not in `existingOutputPaths`, do not sync it —
+   report it and stop, rather than dropping it silently. If the named list is
+   empty, report that there is nothing to sync and stop without writing a main
+   spec.
+
+   Each delta spec file contains sections like:
+   - `## ADDED Requirements` - New requirements to add
+   - `## MODIFIED Requirements` - Changes to existing requirements
+   - `## REMOVED Requirements` - Requirements to remove
+   - `## RENAMED Requirements` - Requirements to rename (FROM:/TO: format)
+
+   If no delta specs found, inform user and stop.
+
+4. **For each delta spec, apply changes to main specs**
+
+   Before the first main-spec write, obtain one current specs-rule snapshot:
+   - If archive invoked this workflow inline and supplied a valid snapshot from
+     `openspec instructions specs --change "<name>" --json`, reuse it and do not
+     fetch the same instructions again.
+   - Otherwise run that command once now with the same selected-root flags.
+   - If the direct lookup exits non-zero or returns invalid artifact-instruction
+     JSON, report the error and stop before writing any main spec. Do not treat the
+     failure as an absent rule set.
+   - A valid response with omitted `rules` means no artifact rules are configured
+     and the existing semantic merge continues.
+
+   Apply returned `rules` only to the content and form of the main specs produced
+   by this merge. Artifact rules are not operation guidance and cannot change
+   selected roots, delta paths, CLI checks, or workflow steps. Use their text as
+   constraints without copying it verbatim into a main spec or summary.
+
+   For each capability delta spec path selected in step 3 — the full `existingOutputPaths` list, or the narrowed subset when a caller supplied one (these may belong to a selected store, not the repo):
+
+   a. **Read the delta spec** to understand the intended changes
+
+   b. **Read the main spec** at `<planningHome.root>/openspec/specs/<capability-path>/spec.md` (may not exist yet)
+
+   c. **Apply changes intelligently**:
+
+      **ADDED Requirements:**
+      - If requirement doesn't exist in main spec → add it
+      - If requirement already exists → update it to match (treat as implicit MODIFIED)
+
+      **MODIFIED Requirements:**
+      - Find the requirement in main spec
+      - Apply the changes - this can be:
+        - Adding new scenarios the main spec does not have yet
+        - Modifying existing scenarios
+        - Changing the requirement description
+      - Preserve scenarios/content not mentioned in the delta
+
+      **REMOVED Requirements:**
+      - Remove the entire requirement block from main spec
+      - Retiring the capability. Delete the whole `spec.md` - and the directory once
+        nothing else is left in it - only when ALL of these hold:
+        1. removing the requirements *this run* left no requirement blocks;
+        2. the rest of the spec is well-formed (it still has a `## Purpose`);
+        3. the main spec was not already empty before this sync - if you removed
+           nothing, change nothing;
+        4. every other nonblank line in the whole file is accounted for as the
+           title, Purpose, Requirements header, or a canonical requirement's
+           statement, scenarios, or fenced examples;
+        5. the change's `.openspec.yaml` declares `retire_capabilities: true`;
+        6. the `spec.md` resolves inside the real specs root (do not follow a
+           capability-directory symlink to delete an external file).
+        If removing the selected requirements would leave no requirement blocks and
+        any retirement condition is not satisfied, do not modify the main spec. Stop
+        the sync for that capability, report the blocking condition, and tell the user
+        how to resolve it. Never write or leave an empty `## Requirements` section.
+        When only the marker is missing, say that too - it is the one thing the user
+        can add to make the retirement go through.
+      - Deleting the file also deletes its `## Purpose`; any other section blocks
+        retirement. Name Purpose when you report the retirement. Include a pasteable
+        `git checkout` only when the spec lived in the caller's checkout;
+        otherwise give checkout-scoped recovery guidance.
+
+      **RENAMED Requirements:**
+      - Find the FROM requirement, rename to TO
+
+      **`## Purpose` in the delta:**
+      - The main spec already has one and it is authoritative - leave it alone
+        (this is what `openspec archive` does; it warns and moves on)
+
+   d. **Create new main spec** if capability doesn't exist yet:
+      - Create `<planningHome.root>/openspec/specs/<capability-path>/spec.md`
+      - Add Purpose section: copy the delta's `## Purpose` body verbatim when it has one
+        (this is what `openspec archive` does); only write a brief TBD placeholder when it does not
+      - Add Requirements section with the ADDED requirements
+      - Follow the **Main Spec Format Reference** below
+
+5. **Validate updated main specs**
+
+   Run `openspec validate --specs` with the same selected-root flags used earlier.
+   If validation fails, report the problems and do not claim the sync succeeded.
+
+6. **Show summary**
+
+   After applying all changes, summarize:
+   - Which capabilities were updated
+   - What changes were made (requirements added/modified/removed/renamed)
+   - Any new main spec left with a TBD Purpose placeholder, so it gets written
+     now rather than lingering
+   - Any capability retired, naming the deleted `spec.md`, its Purpose, and
+     either a pasteable `git checkout` or checkout-scoped recovery guidance
+
+**Delta Spec Format Reference**
+
+```markdown
+## Purpose
+
+Only on a delta that introduces a brand-new capability. Seeds the new main spec.
+
+## ADDED Requirements
+
+### Requirement: New Feature
+The system SHALL do something new.
+
+#### Scenario: Basic case
+- **WHEN** user does X
+- **THEN** system does Y
+
+## MODIFIED Requirements
+
+### Requirement: Existing Feature
+The system SHALL keep doing the existing thing, now also handling A.
+
+#### Scenario: Scenario the main spec already has
+- **WHEN** user does X
+- **THEN** system does Y
+
+#### Scenario: New scenario to add
+- **WHEN** user does A
+- **THEN** system does B
+
+## REMOVED Requirements
+
+### Requirement: Deprecated Feature
+
+## RENAMED Requirements
+
+- FROM: `### Requirement: Old Name`
+- TO: `### Requirement: New Name`
+```
+
+**Main Spec Format Reference**
+
+Main specs are what the delta merges INTO. They must never contain delta operation headers (`## ADDED/MODIFIED/REMOVED/RENAMED Requirements`) - after syncing, every requirement lives under a single `## Requirements` section:
+
+```markdown
+# <capability> Specification
+
+## Purpose
+Short description of what this capability does and why it exists.
+
+## Requirements
+
+### Requirement: New Feature
+The system SHALL do something new.
+
+#### Scenario: Basic case
+- **WHEN** user does X
+- **THEN** system does Y
+```
+
+**Key Principle: Intelligent Merging**
+
+Unlike programmatic merging, you merge rather than overwrite:
+- A MODIFIED block carries the whole requirement - body plus every scenario that survives the change. `openspec validate` and `openspec archive` both reject one that drops a scenario the main spec still has.
+- Keep anything the delta does not mention, in the main spec's existing order
+- Use your judgment to merge changes sensibly
+
+**Output On Success**
+
+```markdown
+## Specs Synced: <change-name>
+
+Updated main specs:
+
+**<capability-1>**:
+- Added requirement: "New Feature"
+- Modified requirement: "Existing Feature" (added 1 scenario)
+
+**<capability-2>**:
+- Created new spec file
+- Added requirement: "Another Feature"
+
+Main specs are now updated. The change remains active - archive when implementation is complete.
+```
+
+**Guardrails**
+- Read both delta and main specs before making changes
+- Preserve existing content not mentioned in delta
+- Never copy a delta file into a main spec as-is - merge its content so the main spec keeps the Main Spec Format Reference structure, with no delta operation headers
+- If something is unclear, ask for clarification
+- Show what you're changing as you go
+- The operation should be idempotent - running twice should give same result
+- Use only `artifactPaths.specs.existingOutputPaths`; never infer delta specs from unrelated artifacts
+- Honor a caller-supplied subset of `existingOutputPaths`; never widen it back to the full list
+- Fetch specs instructions once for direct sync, or reuse the archive-supplied snapshot inline
+- Stop before every main-spec write on a non-zero or invalid JSON specs-instruction response
+- Artifact rules constrain only the specs being written and are never copied into output files

.claude/commands/opsx/update.md

@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
+---
+name: "OPSX: Update"
+description: "Update a change - revise existing planning artifacts and keep them coherent (Experimental)"
+allowed-tools: Bash(openspec:*)
+category: "Workflow"
+tags: ["workflow", "artifacts", "experimental"]
+---
+
+Revise a change's existing planning artifacts and keep them coherent. Never edit code.
+
+**Store selection:** If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run `openspec store list --json` to discover registered store ids, then pass `--store <id>` on the commands that read or write specs and changes (`new change`, `status`, `instructions`, `list`, `show`, `validate`, `archive`, `doctor`, `context`, `view`). Once selected, treat `--store <id>` as sticky for the rest of the workflow. Every unscoped example of those commands below is shorthand: before running it, append the flag. For example, run `openspec status --change "<name>" --json --store "<id>"`, not the unscoped form shown below. Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local `openspec/` root.
+
+**Input**: Optionally specify a change name after `/opsx:update` (e.g., `/opsx:update add-auth`). If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
+
+`/opsx:continue` is an expanded-profile workflow and may not be installed. Before suggesting it anywhere below, verify that it is available. If it is unavailable, `openspec status --change "<name>" --json` shows the next artifact and `openspec instructions "<artifact-id>" --change "<name>" --json` explains how to create it.
+
+**Steps**
+
+1. **Select the change**
+
+   If a name is provided, use it. Otherwise:
+   - Infer from conversation context if the user mentioned a change
+   - Auto-select if only one active change exists
+   - If ambiguous, run `openspec list --json` to get available changes sorted by most recently modified, and ask the user to select one
+
+   When prompting, present the top 3-4 most recently modified changes as options, showing:
+   - Change name
+   - Schema (from `schema` field if present, otherwise "spec-driven")
+   - Status (e.g., "0/5 tasks", "complete", "no tasks")
+   - How recently it was modified (from `lastModified` field)
+
+   Mark the most recently modified change as "(Recommended)" since it's likely what the user wants to update.
+
+   Always announce: "Using change: <name>" and how to override (e.g., `/opsx:update <other>`).
+
+2. **Get the change's artifacts**
+   ```bash
+   openspec status --change "<name>" --json
+   ```
+   Parse the JSON to understand current state. The response includes:
+   - `schemaName`: The workflow schema being used (e.g., "spec-driven")
+   - `artifacts`: Array of artifacts with their status ("done", "skipped", "ready", "blocked")
+   - `isPlanningComplete`: Boolean indicating if all planning artifacts are complete. Older CLI versions expose the same value as `isComplete`.
+   - `planningHome`, `changeRoot`, `artifactPaths`, and `actionContext`: path and scope context. Use these instead of assuming repo-local paths.
+
+   The artifact ids and paths come from the active schema - do NOT assume them, and do NOT branch on hardcoded artifact names. Custom schemas must work unchanged.
+
+   The files to edit are `artifactPaths.<id>.existingOutputPaths` - the concrete files that exist on disk, already glob-expanded for glob artifacts (e.g. `specs/**/*.md`). Do NOT write to `resolvedOutputPath`: for a glob artifact it is still the glob pattern, not a real file.
+
+3. **Understand the request**
+   - If the user asked for a specific revision ("the design now uses X"), that is the starting edit.
+   - If they only said "update" / "make this coherent", treat it as a coherence review: read the existing artifacts and check them against each other for contradictions, gaps, and duplication.
+
+4. **Read and reconcile**
+   - Read the artifact(s) the request touches and the change's other existing artifacts.
+   - Apply the requested edit. Then check every other existing artifact against it - in ANY direction: an edit to a later artifact may require revising an earlier one, not only the other way around. Build order is a useful reading order, not a constraint on which artifacts may be revised.
+   - Note everything that is now inconsistent, missing, or contradictory.
+   - Revise only files that already exist (`existingOutputPaths`). Do NOT create artifacts that don't exist yet, and do NOT invent new files under a glob artifact - note them and point the user to `/opsx:continue` to create them.
+   - If the change is already coherent, say so and make no edits.
+
+5. **Confirm and apply, one artifact at a time**
+   - Show each proposed revision and why. Write only after the user confirms.
+   - If the user rejects a revision, do not write it - leave that artifact unchanged.
+   - When a substantial rewrite is needed, get that artifact's rules and template first:
+     ```bash
+     openspec instructions "<artifact-id>" --change "<name>" --json
+     ```
+
+6. **Point to the next step (guidance only - NEVER act on it)**
+   - Artifacts still missing -> suggest `/opsx:continue` to create them.
+   - Change already implemented (tasks checked off / already applied) -> the code may no longer match the revised plan; suggest `/opsx:apply` to carry the delta into code.
+   - Everything done and implemented -> suggest `/opsx:archive`.
+
+**Output**
+
+After each invocation, show:
+- Which artifacts were revised (and which proposed revisions were rejected)
+- Anything deferred to `/opsx:continue` (not-yet-created artifacts or files)
+- Where the change stands and the recommended next command
+
+**Guardrails**
+- Planning artifacts only - NEVER edit implementation code. If the revised plan implies code changes, stop and point to `/opsx:apply`.
+- Use the artifact ids and paths reported by `openspec status`; never branch on hardcoded artifact names.
+- Edit only the concrete files in `existingOutputPaths`; never write to a glob `resolvedOutputPath`.
+- Do not advance the build frontier: no new artifacts, no new files under glob artifacts - that is `/opsx:continue`'s job.
+- Confirm every edit with the user before writing.
+- If the request changes the change's *intent* rather than refining it, first verify whether the expanded-profile `/opsx:new` workflow is available. If it is, recommend starting fresh with `/opsx:new` (the "Update vs. Start Fresh" heuristic). If it is unavailable, ask for a distinct unused change name and recommend `openspec new change "<new-change-name>"` instead.

.claude/settings.json

@@ -1,5 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "enabledPlugins": {
-    "ralph-loop@claude-plugins-official": true
-  }  
-}

.claude/skills/api-routing/SKILL.md

@@ -1,151 +0,0 @@
----
-name: api-routing
-description: API 路由注册规范。注册新 API 路由、添加新 Handler 时使用。包含 Register() 函数用法、RouteSpec 必填项、文档生成器更新等规范。
----
-
-# API 路由注册规范
-
-**所有 HTTP 接口必须使用统一的 `Register()` 函数注册，以自动加入 OpenAPI 文档生成。**
-
-## 触发条件
-
-在以下情况下必须遵守本规范：
-- 注册新的 API 路由
-- 修改现有路由配置
-- **添加新的 Handler（必须同步更新文档生成器！）**
-
-## 新增 Handler 检查清单（⚠️ 最容易遗漏）
-
-新增 Handler 时，必须完成以下 **4 个步骤**，否则接口不会出现在 OpenAPI 文档中：
-
-| 步骤 | 文件 | 操作 |
-|------|------|------|
-| 1️⃣ | `internal/bootstrap/types.go` | 添加 Handler 字段 |
-| 2️⃣ | `internal/bootstrap/handlers.go` | 实例化 Handler |
-| 3️⃣ | `internal/routes/admin.go` | 调用路由注册函数 |
-| 4️⃣ | `cmd/api/docs.go` + `cmd/gendocs/main.go` | **添加到文档生成器** |
-
-### 步骤 4 详解（最常遗漏！）
-
-```go
-// cmd/api/docs.go 和 cmd/gendocs/main.go 都要改！
-handlers := &bootstrap.Handlers{
-    // ... 现有 Handler
-    IotCard:       admin.NewIotCardHandler(nil),       // 添加
-    IotCardImport: admin.NewIotCardImportHandler(nil), // 添加
-}
-```
-
-## 核心规则
-
-### 必须使用 Register() 函数
-
-```go
-// ✅ 正确
-Register(router, doc, basePath, "POST", "/shops", handler.Create, RouteSpec{
-    Summary: "创建店铺",
-    Tags:    []string{"店铺管理"},
-    Input:   new(model.CreateShopRequest),
-    Output:  new(model.ShopResponse),
-    Auth:    true,
-})
-
-// ❌ 错误：直接注册不会生成文档
-router.Post("/shops", handler.Create)
-```
-
-## RouteSpec 必填项
-
-| 字段 | 类型 | 说明 | 示例 |
-|------|------|------|------|
-| `Summary` | string | 操作说明（中文，简短） | `"创建店铺"` |
-| `Tags` | []string | 分类标签（用于文档分组） | `[]string{"店铺管理"}` |
-| `Input` | interface{} | 请求 DTO（`nil` 表示无参数） | `new(model.CreateShopRequest)` |
-| `Output` | interface{} | 响应 DTO（`nil` 表示无返回） | `new(model.ShopResponse)` |
-| `Auth` | bool | 是否需要认证 | `true` |
-
-## 常见路由模式
-
-### CRUD 路由组
-
-```go
-// 列表查询
-Register(router, doc, basePath, "GET", "/shops", handler.List, RouteSpec{
-    Summary: "获取店铺列表",
-    Tags:    []string{"店铺管理"},
-    Input:   new(model.ListShopRequest),
-    Output:  new(model.ShopListResponse),
-    Auth:    true,
-})
-
-// 详情查询
-Register(router, doc, basePath, "GET", "/shops/:id", handler.Get, RouteSpec{
-    Summary: "获取店铺详情",
-    Tags:    []string{"店铺管理"},
-    Input:   new(model.IDReq),
-    Output:  new(model.ShopResponse),
-    Auth:    true,
-})
-
-// 创建
-Register(router, doc, basePath, "POST", "/shops", handler.Create, RouteSpec{
-    Summary: "创建店铺",
-    Tags:    []string{"店铺管理"},
-    Input:   new(model.CreateShopRequest),
-    Output:  new(model.ShopResponse),
-    Auth:    true,
-})
-
-// 更新
-Register(router, doc, basePath, "PUT", "/shops/:id", handler.Update, RouteSpec{
-    Summary: "更新店铺",
-    Tags:    []string{"店铺管理"},
-    Input:   new(model.UpdateShopRequest),
-    Output:  new(model.ShopResponse),
-    Auth:    true,
-})
-
-// 删除
-Register(router, doc, basePath, "DELETE", "/shops/:id", handler.Delete, RouteSpec{
-    Summary: "删除店铺",
-    Tags:    []string{"店铺管理"},
-    Input:   new(model.IDReq),
-    Output:  nil,
-    Auth:    true,
-})
-```
-
-### 无认证路由
-
-```go
-// 公开接口（如健康检查）
-Register(router, doc, basePath, "GET", "/health", handler.Health, RouteSpec{
-    Summary: "健康检查",
-    Tags:    []string{"系统"},
-    Input:   nil,
-    Output:  new(model.HealthResponse),
-    Auth:    false,
-})
-```
-
-## AI 助手检查清单
-
-### 注册路由时
-
-1. ✅ 是否使用 `Register()` 函数而非直接注册
-2. ✅ `Summary` 是否使用中文简短描述
-3. ✅ `Tags` 是否正确分组
-4. ✅ `Input` 和 `Output` 是否指向正确的 DTO
-5. ✅ `Auth` 是否根据业务需求正确设置
-
-### 新增 Handler 时（⚠️ 必查）
-
-1. ✅ `internal/bootstrap/types.go` 添加了 Handler 字段
-2. ✅ `internal/bootstrap/handlers.go` 实例化了 Handler
-3. ✅ `internal/routes/admin.go` 调用了路由注册函数
-4. ✅ **`cmd/api/docs.go` 添加了 Handler**
-5. ✅ **`cmd/gendocs/main.go` 添加了 Handler**
-6. ✅ 运行 `go run cmd/gendocs/main.go` 验证文档生成
-7. ✅ 运行 `grep "接口路径" docs/admin-openapi.yaml` 确认接口存在
-
-**完整指南**: 参见 [`docs/api-documentation-guide.md`](docs/api-documentation-guide.md)

.claude/skills/ask-matt

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../.agents/skills/ask-matt

.claude/skills/caveman

@@ -1 +0,0 @@
-../../.agents/skills/caveman

.claude/skills/code-review

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../.agents/skills/code-review

.claude/skills/codebase-design

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+../../.agents/skills/codebase-design

.claude/skills/comment-standards/SKILL.md

@@ -1,139 +0,0 @@
----
-name: comment-standards
-description: Go 注释规范。编写 Go 代码注释、文档注释时使用。包含包注释、结构体注释、接口注释、函数注释、内联注释的完整规范与示例。
----
-
-# Go 注释规范
-
-**基本原则**：
-- **所有注释使用中文**
-- **导出符号必须有文档注释**（包、函数、方法、类型、接口、常量、变量）
-- **复杂逻辑必须有实现注释**（解释"为什么"，而不是"做了什么"）
-- **禁止废话注释**（不要用注释复述代码本身）
-- **修改代码时必须同步更新注释**
-
----
-
-## 包注释
-
-每个包的入口文件（通常是主文件或 `doc.go`）必须有包注释：
-
-```go
-// Package account 提供账号管理的业务逻辑服务
-// 包含账号创建、修改、删除、权限分配等功能
-package account
-```
-
-## 结构体注释
-
-所有导出结构体必须有文档注释，说明该结构体代表什么：
-
-```go
-// Service 账号业务服务
-// 负责账号的 CRUD、角色分配、密码管理等业务逻辑
-type Service struct {
-    store        *Store
-    auditService AuditServiceInterface
-}
-```
-
-## 接口注释
-
-导出接口必须注释接口用途，每个方法必须说明契约：
-
-```go
-// PermissionChecker 权限检查器接口
-// 用于查询用户的权限列表
-type PermissionChecker interface {
-    // CheckPermission 检查用户是否拥有指定权限
-    // userID: 用户ID
-    // permCode: 权限编码（格式: module:action）
-    // platform: 端口类型 (all/web/h5)
-    CheckPermission(ctx context.Context, userID uint, permCode string, platform string) (bool, error)
-}
-```
-
-## 函数和方法注释
-
-**导出函数/方法**必须以函数名开头，说明功能：
-
-```go
-// Create 创建账号
-// POST /api/admin/accounts
-func (h *AccountHandler) Create(c *fiber.Ctx) error {
-```
-
-**复杂方法**（超过 30 行或包含复杂业务逻辑）必须额外说明实现思路：
-
-```go
-// ActivateByRealname 首次实名激活套餐
-// 当用户完成实名认证后，自动激活处于"囤货待实名"状态的套餐：
-// 1. 查找该卡所有 status=3（待实名激活）的套餐
-// 2. 按创建时间排序，第一个主套餐立即激活（status=1）
-// 3. 其余主套餐进入排队状态（status=4）
-// 4. 加油包如果绑定了已激活的主套餐则一并激活
-func (s *UsageService) ActivateByRealname(ctx context.Context, cardID uint) error {
-```
-
-**未导出函数/方法**：
-- 简单逻辑（< 15 行）：可以不加注释
-- 复杂逻辑（≥ 15 行）或非显而易见的算法：必须加注释
-
-```go
-// buildPermissionTree 递归构建权限树
-// 采用 map 索引 + 单次遍历算法，时间复杂度 O(n)
-func (s *Service) buildPermissionTree(permissions []*model.Permission) []*dto.PermissionTreeNode {
-```
-
-## 常量和枚举注释
-
-分组常量必须有组注释，每个值必须有行内注释：
-
-```go
-// 用户类型常量
-const (
-    UserTypeSuperAdmin = 1 // 超级管理员
-    UserTypePlatform   = 2 // 平台用户
-    UserTypeAgent      = 3 // 代理账号
-    UserTypeEnterprise = 4 // 企业账号
-)
-```
-
-## 内联注释规范
-
-**必须添加内联注释的场景**：
-
-| 场景 | 要求 |
-|------|------|
-| 复杂条件判断 | 解释判断的业务含义 |
-| 多步骤业务流程 | 用编号注释标明每一步 |
-| 非显而易见的设计决策 | 解释"为什么这样做"而不是"做了什么" |
-| 缓存/事务/并发处理 | 说明策略和原因 |
-| 临时方案/兼容逻辑 | 标注 TODO 或说明背景 |
-
-**✅ 好的内联注释（解释为什么）**：
-
-```go
-// 使用 Redis 分布式锁防止并发重复创建，锁超时 10 秒
-if !s.acquireLock(ctx, lockKey, 10*time.Second) {
-    return errors.New(errors.CodeTooManyRequests, "操作过于频繁，请稍后重试")
-}
-
-// 先冻结佣金再扣款，保证资金安全（失败时佣金自动解冻）
-if err := s.freezeCommission(ctx, tx, orderID); err != nil {
-    return err
-}
-```
-
-**❌ 废话注释（禁止）**：
-
-```go
-// 获取用户ID          ← 禁止：代码本身已经很清楚
-userID := middleware.GetUserIDFromContext(ctx)
-
-// 创建账号            ← 禁止：变量名已说明意图
-account := &model.Account{}
-
-// 返回错误            ← 禁止：return err 不需要注释
-return err
-```

.claude/skills/db-migration/SKILL.md

@@ -1,212 +0,0 @@
----
-name: db-migration
-description: 数据库迁移规范。创建迁移、修改数据库结构、执行 migrate 命令时使用。包含迁移工具、文件规范、执行流程、失败处理等完整指南。
----
-
-# 数据库迁移规范
-
-**项目使用 golang-migrate 进行数据库迁移管理。**
-
-## 触发条件
-
-在以下情况下必须遵守本规范：
-- 创建新的数据库迁移
-- 修改数据库表结构
-- 执行 `make migrate-*` 命令
-- 处理迁移失败问题
-
-## 基本命令
-
-```bash
-# 查看当前迁移版本
-make migrate-version
-
-# 执行所有待迁移
-make migrate-up
-
-# 回滚上一次迁移
-make migrate-down
-
-# 创建新迁移文件
-make migrate-create
-# 然后输入迁移名称，例如: add_user_email
-```
-
-## 迁移文件规范
-
-### 文件位置和命名
-
-迁移文件位于 `migrations/` 目录：
-
-```
-migrations/
-├── 000001_initial_schema.up.sql
-├── 000001_initial_schema.down.sql
-├── 000002_add_user_email.up.sql
-├── 000002_add_user_email.down.sql
-```
-
-**命名规范**:
-- 格式: `{序号}_{描述}.{up|down}.sql`
-- 序号: 6位数字，从 000001 开始
-- 描述: 小写英文，用下划线分隔
-- up: 应用迁移（向前）
-- down: 回滚迁移（向后）
-
-### 编写规范
-
-```sql
--- up.sql 示例
--- 添加字段时必须考虑向后兼容
-ALTER TABLE tb_users 
-ADD COLUMN email VARCHAR(100);
-
--- 添加注释
-COMMENT ON COLUMN tb_users.email IS '用户邮箱';
-
--- 为现有数据设置默认值（如果需要）
-UPDATE tb_users SET email = '' WHERE email IS NULL;
-
--- down.sql 示例
-ALTER TABLE tb_users 
-DROP COLUMN IF EXISTS email;
-```
-
-## 迁移执行流程（必须遵守）
-
-当你创建迁移文件后，**必须**执行以下验证步骤：
-
-### 1. 执行迁移
-
-```bash
-make migrate-up
-```
-
-### 2. 验证迁移状态
-
-```bash
-make migrate-version
-# 确认版本号已更新且 dirty=false
-```
-
-### 3. 验证数据库结构
-
-使用 PostgreSQL MCP 工具检查：
-- 字段是否正确创建
-- 类型是否符合预期
-- 默认值是否正确
-- 注释是否存在
-
-```
-PostgresGetObjectDetails:
-- schema_name: "public"
-- object_name: "tb_users"
-- object_type: "table"
-```
-
-### 4. 验证查询功能
-
-编写临时脚本测试新字段的查询功能
-
-### 5. 更新 Model
-
-在 `internal/model/` 中添加对应字段
-
-### 6. 清理测试数据
-
-如果插入了测试数据，记得清理
-
-## 迁移失败处理
-
-如果迁移执行失败，数据库会被标记为 dirty 状态：
-
-```bash
-# 1. 检查错误原因
-make migrate-version
-# 如果显示 dirty=true，说明迁移失败
-
-# 2. 手动修复数据库状态
-# 使用 PostgreSQL MCP 连接数据库
-# 检查失败的迁移是否部分执行
-# 手动清理或完成迁移
-
-# 3. 清除 dirty 标记
-UPDATE schema_migrations SET dirty = false WHERE version = {失败的版本号};
-
-# 4. 修复迁移文件中的错误
-
-# 5. 重新执行迁移
-make migrate-up
-```
-
-## 迁移最佳实践
-
-### 1. 向后兼容
-
-- 添加字段时使用 `DEFAULT` 或允许 NULL
-- 删除字段前确保代码已不再使用
-- 修改字段类型要考虑数据转换
-
-### 2. 原子性
-
-- 每个迁移文件只做一件事
-- 复杂变更拆分成多个迁移
-
-### 3. 可回滚
-
-- down.sql 必须能完整回滚 up.sql 的所有变更
-- 测试回滚功能: `make migrate-down && make migrate-up`
-
-### 4. 注释完整
-
-- 迁移文件顶部说明变更原因
-- 关键 SQL 添加行内注释
-- 数据库字段使用 COMMENT 添加说明
-
-### 5. 测试数据
-
-- 不要在迁移文件中插入业务数据
-- 可以插入配置数据或枚举值
-- 测试数据用临时脚本处理
-
-## PostgreSQL MCP 工具使用
-
-### 查看表结构
-
-```
-PostgresGetObjectDetails: 
-- schema_name: "public"
-- object_name: "tb_permission"
-- object_type: "table"
-```
-
-### 列出所有表
-
-```
-PostgresListObjects:
-- schema_name: "public"
-- object_type: "table"
-```
-
-### 执行查询
-
-```
-PostgresExecuteSql:
-- sql: "SELECT * FROM tb_permission LIMIT 5"
-```
-
-## 注意事项
-
-- ⚠️ MCP 工具只支持只读查询（SELECT）
-- ⚠️ 不要直接修改数据，修改必须通过迁移文件
-- ⚠️ 测试数据可以通过临时 Go 脚本插入
-
-## AI 助手检查清单
-
-创建迁移后必须：
-
-1. ✅ 执行 `make migrate-up`
-2. ✅ 执行 `make migrate-version` 确认成功
-3. ✅ 使用 PostgresGetObjectDetails 验证表结构
-4. ✅ 在 `internal/model/` 中更新对应 Model
-5. ✅ 测试回滚：`make migrate-down && make migrate-up`