docs(tdd): fix ten defects the GREEN run found in the language references

The pressure test that #18 and #20 were waiting on. All six original gaps came
back ANSWERED with the lines quoted — and the run then found ten problems in
what I had written. The worst two are mine, not inherited.

**The Python exemplar was the evaluation task.** references/python.md
demonstrated `split_vat` — the exact function the test scenario asks for,
negative-amount case included. The run said so: "as a teaching example that's
over-fitted; as an evaluation it's a leak... this task can't answer it — the
reference handed over the finished artifact." So the run could not measure
whether the guidance transfers, only whether copying works. The exemplar is now
`parse_retry_after`, deliberately unrelated to anything in this estate, and it
states its own contract rather than requiring the reader to divide 12500 by 1.25
to discover it.

**mypy at RED pointed at the stub the same file forbids.** python.md taught that
a pytest ImportError is a legitimate red, then presented `mypy --strict` as a
matched pair without saying that mypy reports the same missing module — so
following both literally, the way to get mypy green at RED is to create the
module. Now stated: that error is the expected red; what must be fixed
immediately is a --strict violation inside the test file you just wrote.

The rest, each quoted in the run:

- The checklist contradicted itself two lines apart — "strike it deliberately"
  above, "Can't check all boxes? You skipped TDD" below. A struck box is by
  definition unchecked, so the Python path routed straight into "start over".
- `match=` was overclaimed as "free". It is `re.search`, so a message containing
  parens quietly matches almost anything; and it couples every error test to
  wording. The Go comparison was a strawman against `assert.Error` when
  `assert.ErrorIs` exists — the honest Python analogue is a custom exception
  type, with `match=` as the fallback.
- `pytest.approx` was listed as the soft-assert analogue. It solves float
  tolerance and has nothing to do with collecting failures; that is
  pytest-subtests or pytest-check, neither of which ships with pytest.
- The whole-shape assertion silently required value equality — on a plain class
  it compares identity and can never pass.
- "When Stuck" is a language-neutral table that prescribed `t.Helper()`.
- `__tracebackhide__` must be a local inside the helper body; at module level it
  does nothing, silently.

Refs #18, #20
Bump-Type: patch

.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 {
   "name": "skills",
   "description": "Mathias's engineering skills library, plus the hooks and MCP servers that make it enforceable: TDD, clean code, debugging, specs, discovery, CI, and secret hygiene.",
-  "version": "0.8.2",
+  "version": "0.15.0",
   "author": {
     "name": "Mathias",
     "url": "https://git.d-ma.be/mathias"

.gitea/workflows/ci.yml

@@ -94,26 +94,51 @@ jobs:
           git config user.name "${GITEA_ACTOR}"
           git config user.email "${GITEA_ACTOR}@noreply.gitea.d-ma.be"
 
-          # Claude Code gates plugin updates on plugin.json's version field:
+          # The tag goes up FIRST and on its own. It names the commit this run
-          # if it does not move, installed hosts never see the new tag. Bump
+          # checked out and can never be rejected, however far main has moved.
-          # it in the same commit train so the tag and the manifest agree —
+          git tag -a "$TAG" -m "release $TAG"
-          # `task check` enforces that equality on every run.
+          git push origin "$TAG"
+          echo "pushed $TAG"
+
+          # The manifest bump is a separate concern and must land on whatever
+          # main is NOW. The runner is maxParallel=1 and shared with other
+          # repos, so a job routinely starts several commits after its own —
+          # pushing this run's stale HEAD to main is then rejected
+          # non-fast-forward, which is how v0.10.0 ended up tagged with the
+          # manifest still reading 0.9.0.
+          #
+          # Claude Code gates plugin updates on this field: if it does not
+          # move, installed hosts never see the release. `task check` asserts
+          # the manifest is not behind the latest tag, so a failure here is a
+          # red main, not a cosmetic miss.
           manifest=.claude-plugin/plugin.json
           version="${TAG#v}"
-          current=$(sed -n 's/.*"version"[[:space:]]*:[[:space:]]*"\([^"]*\)".*/\1/p' "$manifest" | head -1)
-          git tag -a "$TAG" -m "release $TAG"
 
-          if [ "$current" != "$version" ]; then
+          for attempt in 1 2 3; do
+            git fetch --quiet origin main
+            git checkout --quiet -B release-bump origin/main
+
+            current=$(sed -n 's/.*"version"[[:space:]]*:[[:space:]]*"\([^"]*\)".*/\1/p' "$manifest" | head -1)
+            if [ "$current" = "$version" ]; then
+              echo "manifest already at $version"
+              exit 0
+            fi
+            # A later run may have bumped past us while this one waited.
+            if [ "$(sh bin/newer-version "$current" "$version")" = "$current" ]; then
+              echo "manifest is $current, already newer than $version — leaving it"
+              exit 0
+            fi
+
             sed -i "s/\"version\"[[:space:]]*:[[:space:]]*\"$current\"/\"version\": \"$version\"/" "$manifest"
             git add "$manifest"
             # The trailer below stops this push from re-triggering the tagger.
             git commit -m "chore(release): plugin.json version $version" -m "Skip-Release: true"
-            # Commit and tag go up in ONE push: the gate job runs `task check`
+            if git push origin HEAD:main; then
-            # on the bump commit, and that asserts manifest == latest tag. Two
-            # separate pushes leave a window where it legitimately fails.
-            git push origin HEAD:main "$TAG"
               echo "bumped $manifest to $version"
-          else
+              exit 0
-            git push origin "$TAG"
             fi
-          echo "pushed $TAG"
+            echo "main moved while bumping — retry $attempt"
+          done
+
+          echo "could not land the manifest bump after 3 attempts" >&2
+          exit 1

.mcp.json

@@ -12,5 +12,22 @@
       "type": "http",
       "url": "https://koala.tail30472e.ts.net:8444/mcp"
     }
+  },
+  "_parked": {
+    "_reason": "cad and gitea-mcp are proxied, reachable and AUTHENTICATING: tailscale serve 8445 -> 127.0.0.1:31877 and 8446 -> 127.0.0.1:30340; an MCP initialize with the correct bearer returns 200 from both (serverInfo gitea-mcp 0.1.0, cad aed2aaf). They stay parked only because nothing puts those two tokens into the session environment. Both live in the 1Password AgentSecrets vault, and by deliberate design (infra#224, closed) no single identity on koala reads both vaults: koala-homelab is HomeLab-only and resolves ~/.op-env, koala-agentsecrets-write is AgentSecrets-only and lives in ~/.op-agent-write.env. Adding an AgentSecrets reference to ~/.op-env does NOT degrade gracefully -- `op run` fails wholesale and every other token, BRAIN_MCP_TOKEN included, goes unresolved with it. Enabling needs a read-scoped AgentSecrets identity in the session-env path; see mathias/skills#32, #33.",
+    "cad": {
+      "type": "http",
+      "url": "https://koala.tail30472e.ts.net:8445/mcp",
+      "headers": {
+        "Authorization": "Bearer ${CAD_MCP_TOKEN}"
+      }
+    },
+    "gitea": {
+      "type": "http",
+      "url": "https://koala.tail30472e.ts.net:8446/mcp",
+      "headers": {
+        "Authorization": "Bearer ${GITEA_MCP_STATIC_TOKEN}"
+      }
+    }
   }
 }

README.md

@@ -40,16 +40,42 @@ moves — CI bumps it on every release.
 curl -fsSL https://git.d-ma.be/mathias/skills/raw/branch/main/install.sh | bash
 ```
 
-Idempotent. It clones or fast-forwards the checkout, then creates **three**
+Idempotent. It clones or fast-forwards the checkout, then populates one
-symlinks — one directory link per harness, never one per skill:
+**managed directory** and gives each harness a single link to it:
 
-| Link | Target |
+| Path | Target |
 |---|---|
-| `~/.agents/skills` | `$SKILLS_CHECKOUT_DIR/skills` (Pi reads this path directly) |
+| `~/.agents/skills/` | a real directory, one symlink per skill (Pi reads this path directly) |
+| `~/.agents/skills/<skill>` | `$SKILLS_CHECKOUT_DIR/skills/<skill>`, or another configured source |
 | `~/.config/crush/skills` | `~/.agents/skills` |
 | `~/.config/opencode/skills` | `~/.agents/skills` |
 
-Adding a skill wires it everywhere with no re-run.
+Total links are N + one per harness — not N x harnesses, which is what #23 was
+actually about.
+
+### More than one source of skills
+
+`~/.agents/skills` used to be a single link straight at this checkout. That
+encoded an assumption nobody had stated — that this checkout is the only source
+of skills on the host — and on flamingo the only way to install this library
+was to displace Anthropic's official set, which lived in Crush's directory.
+Real capability loss dressed up as a tidy-up (#27).
+
+Point `SKILLS_EXTRA_SOURCES` at any number of extra directories, colon
+separated, each holding `<skill>/SKILL.md`:
+
+```
+SKILLS_EXTRA_SOURCES=~/.config/crush/skills.anthropic bash install.sh
+```
+
+- The checkout is always first and always wins a name collision — but the
+  collision is **logged**, never resolved in silence. Quietly picking one is
+  how stale content wins.
+- Removing a skill from a source removes its link on the next run.
+- Anything in the managed directory that is not a symlink is reported and left
+  alone. install.sh does not delete content it did not create.
+- The source list is recorded at `~/.agents/skills-sources` so `bin/doctor`
+  can tell a link into a known source from a link into a forgotten one.
 
 ### Where the checkout must live
 
@@ -74,6 +100,7 @@ default to point into `~/dev`.
 | `AGENTS_SKILLS_DIR` | `$HOME/.agents/skills` |
 | `CRUSH_SKILLS_DIR` | `$HOME/.config/crush/skills` |
 | `OPENCODE_SKILLS_DIR` | `$HOME/.config/opencode/skills` |
+| `SKILLS_EXTRA_SOURCES` | unset (colon-separated extra source directories) |
 
 Antigravity and Mistral Vibe targets were removed — unused.
 
@@ -83,10 +110,25 @@ Antigravity and Mistral Vibe targets were removed — unused.
 task doctor      # or bin/doctor
 ```
 
-Reports dangling links, links resolving into a foreign checkout, skill-count
+Reports dangling links, links into a source nobody configured, skills in the
-mismatches, stray entries, and leftover per-skill Claude symlinks. Non-zero
+checkout with no link, stray entries, leftover per-skill Claude symlinks, and a
-exit on drift. It also runs at session start via the plugin, so a drifting
+Claude Code plugin sitting on an older generation than the host already has.
-host says so rather than waiting to be discovered.
+Non-zero exit on drift. It also runs at session start via the plugin, so a
+drifting host says so rather than waiting to be discovered.
+
+All of that compares copies already on the machine — deliberately, since it
+runs in a session hook where latency shows. That leaves one case invisible: a
+host where the checkout, the marketplace clone and the installed plugin all
+agree, and all three are a release behind origin.
+
+```bash
+task doctor -- --online     # or bin/doctor --online
+```
+
+One `git ls-remote` against origin, opt-in. Belongs in a scheduled per-host job,
+not the session hook. An unreachable remote is reported as its own fault rather
+than as staleness — "I could not check" and "you are behind" are different
+answers and only one of them is about the host.
 
 ## Versioning
 
@@ -103,13 +145,48 @@ before `task skills:install`; default is `main` for always-current.
 
 ## Contributing a skill
 
-1. Add a directory `<short-kebab-name>/`.
+1. Add a directory `skills/<short-kebab-name>/`.
-2. Create `<short-kebab-name>/SKILL.md` — start with one-paragraph
+2. Create `skills/<short-kebab-name>/SKILL.md` with this frontmatter — all four
-   purpose, then triggers ("use when …"), then mechanics.
+   keys are gated by `task check`, and the index table is generated from the
-3. Add a row to `SKILLS_INDEX.md` (description + use-when).
+   last three:
-4. Commit directly to `main`. Conventional-commit prefix
+
+   ```yaml
+   ---
+   name: <short-kebab-name>
+   surfaces: [claude-code, library]   # any of claude-code | library | chat
+   summary: "<one line for the index table>"
+   use_when: "<the trigger, for the index table>"
+   description: <the paragraph the model selects on>
+   ---
+   ```
+
+   Then: one-paragraph purpose, triggers ("use when …"), mechanics.
+3. Run `task index` and commit the regenerated `SKILLS_INDEX.md`. Do **not**
+   hand-edit the table — `task check` regenerates it and fails on a diff.
+4. Pressure-test it before shipping: run the scenario against a subagent that
+   does *not* have the skill, write the skill against what that run actually
+   did, then re-run with it. See `superpowers-writing-skills` and #19.
+5. Commit directly to `main`. Conventional-commit prefix
    (`feat:` / `fix:` / `docs:`). Add `Bump-Type: minor` footer when
    adding a new skill or expanding scope; default patch covers edits.
 
 This repo is markdown-only and public — never include secrets, client
 names, or anything under NDA in a skill.
+
+## Mode 2 routing candidates
+
+These notes used to sit in each SKILL.md as a `## Mode 2 Routing Note` section.
+They changed nothing about how the skill is invoked — several said so outright —
+and cost context on every load, so they live here instead. Nothing in the repo
+depends on this table; it is a record of which skills looked mechanical enough
+to route to a local model, should a routing layer ever exist.
+
+| Skill | Note |
+|---|---|
+| `cad-babysit` | Phases 2-4 (reading comments/logs, classifying fault vs outcome) are judgment-heavy and should stay Mode 1. Phase 1 (running `cad stuck` and grouping its output) is mechanical and a Mode 2 routing candidate once Plan 6 ships the routing pod. |
+| `code-review` | This skill is invoked identically in Mode 1 (cloud Claude) and Mode 2 (client-local with supervisor routing). The routing layer (Plan 6) does not exist yet; treat this skill as Mode 1 only for now. Findings format and severity classification are unchanged across modes. |
+| `debug` | This skill produces high-volume mechanical output (hypothesis enumeration) and is a candidate for Mode 2 routing to a local model in the future. Until Plan 6 ships the routing pod, treat as Mode 1 only. The hypothesis format and discipline are identical regardless of which model generates them. |
+| `feature-spec` | Spec writing requires interpretation of intent and tradeoff reasoning — work where Claude generally outperforms a 9-13B local model. This skill is intentionally **not** a Mode 2 routing candidate. In Mode 2, the routing layer should leave `feature-spec` calls on Claude. |
+| `session-retrospective` | Reading long session logs and pulling themes is high-volume, mechanical pattern-recognition work — a strong Mode 2 routing candidate. Until Plan 6 ships the routing pod, treat as Mode 1 only. |
+| `tdd` | This skill is invoked identically whether the agent is running in Mode 1 (cloud Claude, no routing) or Mode 2 (client-local, supervisor routing layer). The routing pod (Plan 6) does not exist yet; until it does, treat this skill as Mode 1 only. The discipline does not change between modes — only the model behind the call. |
+| `trainer` | Trainer is the same shape as `session-retrospective` — long-context reading, mechanical filtering — and is a Mode 2 routing candidate. Until Plan 6, treat as Mode 1 only. |

SKILLS_INDEX.md

@@ -2,51 +2,55 @@
 
 This index lists all available engineering skills. Load the full SKILL.md on demand.
 
-| Skill | Description | Use when |
+The table is **generated** from each skill's frontmatter (`summary`, `use_when`,
-|-------|-------------|----------|
+`surfaces`) by `task index`, and `task check` fails if it is out of date. Edit
-| `tdd` | Test-Driven Development enforcement | Starting any new feature or fixing a bug |
+the SKILL.md, not the table.
-| `clean-code` | Clean code principles with Go adaptation | Code review, refactoring, new code |
+
-| `solid` | SOLID principles with Go examples | Design review, architecture decisions |
+<!-- BEGIN skills-table -->
-| `code-review` | Code smell detection + Go-specific checklist | Pre-merge review |
+| Skill | Description | Use when | Surfaces |
-| `refactoring` | Systematic refactoring methodology (Fowler) | When improving existing code |
+|-------|-------------|----------|----------|
-| `test-design` | Dave Farley test design scoring (Farley Index) | Reviewing or writing tests |
+| `atdd` | Acceptance Test-Driven Development workflow | Feature development with acceptance criteria | claude-code, library |
-| `cognitive-load` | Cognitive complexity analysis (CLI score) | Identifying hotspots, before refactoring |
+| `cad-babysit` | Focused human-in-the-loop session working CAD's stuck queue (read-only) | Picking up whatever `cad stuck` flags, with a human present | claude-code, library |
-| `problem-analysis` | Deep problem understanding before coding | Starting any non-trivial task |
+| `clean-code` | Clean code principles with Go adaptation | Code review, refactoring, new code | claude-code, library |
-| `user-stories` | Elephant Carpaccio story slicing | Breaking down features |
+| `code-review` | Code smell detection + Go-specific checklist | Pre-merge review | claude-code, library |
-| `atdd` | Acceptance Test-Driven Development workflow | Feature development with acceptance criteria |
+| `cognitive-load` | Cognitive complexity analysis (CLI score) | Identifying hotspots, before refactoring | claude-code, library |
-| `spec-driven-dev` | Spec-driven development for PMs | Writing specs and requirements |
+| `debug` | Hypothesis-first debugging discipline | Any test failure or bug whose cause is not immediately obvious | claude-code, library |
-| `planning` | Planning and task breakdown | Sprint planning, task decomposition |
+| `discovery-framing` | Problem-before-solution discovery/framing method | Framing/validating a problem before any solution; opportunity sizing | claude-code, library |
-| `gitea-ci` | Gitea CI/CD pipeline with act_runner, buildah, k3s, GitHub mirror | Setting up or debugging CI on this infra |
+| `dream` | Reflective consolidation pass over an agent's memory directory | Pruning/merging memory files, rebuilding a memory index | claude-code, library, chat |
-| `debug` | Hypothesis-first debugging discipline | Any test failure or bug whose cause is not immediately obvious |
+| `experiment-spec` | Rigorous experiment spec — falsifiable hypothesis, quantitative acceptance, null-result protocol | Scoping a research/ML phase instead of a feature | claude-code, library |
-| `feature-spec` | Implementation-level feature spec (tighter than spec-driven-dev) | Scoping one feature inside an already-specced project |
+| `feature-spec` | Implementation-level feature spec (tighter than spec-driven-dev) | Scoping one feature inside an already-specced project | claude-code, library |
-| `experiment-spec` | Rigorous experiment spec — falsifiable hypothesis, quantitative acceptance, null-result protocol | Scoping a research/ML phase instead of a feature |
+| `gitea-ci` | Gitea CI/CD pipeline with act_runner, buildah, k3s, GitHub mirror | Setting up or debugging CI on this infra | claude-code, library |
-| `playwright` | Playwright E2E testing — setup, HTMX patterns, SSE streams, CI wiring | Adding browser tests to any project with a web UI |
+| `grill-me` | Structured plan interrogation — Quick Poke, Full Grill, Pre-mortem | Stress-testing a plan before committing; end of Diamond 1; before promoting to pre-prod | claude-code, library, chat |
-| `session-retrospective` | Surface non-obvious learnings from a session log | After a coding session ends, before context is lost |
+| `own-the-task` | Delegation ownership — Intake → Brief → Plan → Execute | A task is handed over open-ended; \"take this off my plate\"; before a plan exists | claude-code, library, chat |
-| `trainer` | Two-phase brain curation (score candidates, write past quality gate) | Periodic brain pruning and curation |
+| `planning` | Planning and task breakdown | Sprint planning, task decomposition | claude-code, library |
-| `dream` | Reflective consolidation pass over an agent's memory directory | Pruning/merging memory files, rebuilding a memory index |
+| `playwright` | Playwright E2E testing — setup, HTMX patterns, SSE streams, CI wiring | Adding browser tests to any project with a web UI | claude-code, library |
-| `grill-me` | Structured plan interrogation — Quick Poke, Full Grill, Pre-mortem | Stress-testing a plan before committing; end of Diamond 1; before promoting to pre-prod |
+| `problem-analysis` | Deep problem understanding before coding | Starting any non-trivial task | claude-code, library |
-| `own-the-task` | Delegation ownership — Intake → Brief → Plan → Execute | A task is handed over open-ended; "take this off my plate"; before a plan exists |
+| `refactoring` | Systematic refactoring methodology (Fowler) | When improving existing code | claude-code, library |
-| `telos-load` | Load TELOS intention substrate at session start | Starting any koala session; before architectural decisions; CAD pipeline entry |
+| `regulatory-risk-assessment` | Structured risk register for regulated-industry features | Filing a CAD issue (needs Risk: level); features touching payments, auth, external APIs, user data | claude-code, library |
-| `secret-hygiene` | Stop credentials rendering into the session transcript; safe rotation chain when one leaks | Before any kubectl/SOPS/token command; after a confirmed leak |
+| `secret-hygiene` | Stop credentials rendering into the session transcript; safe rotation chain when one leaks | Before any kubectl/SOPS/token command; after a confirmed leak | claude-code, library |
-| `regulatory-risk-assessment` | Structured risk register for regulated-industry features | Filing a CAD issue (needs Risk: level); features touching payments, auth, external APIs, user data |
+| `session-retrospective` | Surface non-obvious learnings from a session log | After a coding session ends, before context is lost | claude-code, library |
-| `discovery-framing` | Problem-before-solution discovery/framing method | Framing/validating a problem before any solution; opportunity sizing |
+| `solid` | SOLID principles with Go examples | Design review, architecture decisions | claude-code, library |
-| `stage-gate-review` | Stage-gate product governance (go/no-go council) | Preparing a Product Council ask; building a go/no-go checklist; gate review |
+| `spec-driven-dev` | Spec-driven development for PMs | Writing specs and requirements | claude-code, library |
-| `web-shot` | Screenshot a running web UI via a koala k3s Playwright job | Visual verification of a running UI when no local browser exists |
+| `stage-gate-review` | Stage-gate product governance (go/no-go council) | Preparing a Product Council ask; building a go/no-go checklist; gate review | claude-code, library |
-| `cad-babysit` | Focused human-in-the-loop session working CAD's stuck queue (read-only) | Picking up whatever `cad stuck` flags, with a human present |
+| `superpowers-brainstorming` | Structured divergent brainstorming | Generating or expanding a set of ideas | claude-code, library |
-| `superpowers-brainstorming` | Structured divergent brainstorming | Generating or expanding a set of ideas |
+| `superpowers-dispatching-parallel-agents` | Fan work out across parallel subagents | Decomposing work for concurrent agents | claude-code, library |
-| `superpowers-writing-plans` | Writing implementation plans | Planning substantial work before coding |
+| `superpowers-executing-plans` | Executing a written plan step by step | Running an approved plan to completion | claude-code, library |
-| `superpowers-executing-plans` | Executing a written plan step by step | Running an approved plan to completion |
+| `superpowers-finishing-a-development-branch` | Cleanly finishing/landing a dev branch | Wrapping a branch → merge/PR | claude-code, library |
-| `superpowers-dispatching-parallel-agents` | Fan work out across parallel subagents | Decomposing work for concurrent agents |
+| `superpowers-receiving-code-review` | Acting on received review feedback | Responding to review comments | claude-code, library |
-| `superpowers-subagent-driven-development` | Subagent-driven development workflow | Building via orchestrated subagents |
+| `superpowers-requesting-code-review` | Requesting a code review well | Asking another agent/human to review | claude-code, library |
-| `superpowers-systematic-debugging` | Hypothesis-first systematic debugging | Diagnosing a failure methodically |
+| `superpowers-subagent-driven-development` | Subagent-driven development workflow | Building via orchestrated subagents | claude-code, library |
-| `superpowers-test-driven-development` | TDD discipline (superpowers variant) | Red → green → refactor on a change |
+| `superpowers-using-git-worktrees` | Isolating work with git worktrees | Parallel/isolated work in a worktree | claude-code, library |
-| `superpowers-verification-before-completion` | Verify behavior before claiming done | Before marking any task complete |
+| `superpowers-using-superpowers` | Meta: orienting in the superpowers set | Learning how to use the superpowers skills | claude-code, library |
-| `superpowers-requesting-code-review` | Requesting a code review well | Asking another agent/human to review |
+| `superpowers-verification-before-completion` | Verify behavior before claiming done | Before marking any task complete | claude-code, library |
-| `superpowers-receiving-code-review` | Acting on received review feedback | Responding to review comments |
+| `superpowers-writing-plans` | Writing implementation plans | Planning substantial work before coding | claude-code, library |
-| `superpowers-finishing-a-development-branch` | Cleanly finishing/landing a dev branch | Wrapping a branch → merge/PR |
+| `superpowers-writing-skills` | Authoring new SKILL.md skills | Creating a new reusable skill | claude-code, library |
-| `superpowers-using-git-worktrees` | Isolating work with git worktrees | Parallel/isolated work in a worktree |
+| `tdd` | Test-Driven Development enforcement | Starting any new feature or fixing a bug | claude-code, library |
-| `superpowers-writing-skills` | Authoring new SKILL.md skills | Creating a new reusable skill |
+| `telos-load` | Load TELOS intention substrate at session start | Starting any koala session; before architectural decisions; CAD pipeline entry | claude-code, library |
-| `superpowers-using-superpowers` | Meta: orienting in the superpowers set | Learning how to use the superpowers skills |
+| `test-design` | Dave Farley test design scoring (Farley Index) | Reviewing or writing tests | claude-code, library |
+| `trainer` | Two-phase brain curation (score candidates, write past quality gate) | Periodic brain pruning and curation | claude-code, library |
+| `user-stories` | Elephant Carpaccio story slicing | Breaking down features | claude-code, library |
+| `web-shot` | Screenshot a running web UI via a koala k3s Playwright job | Visual verification of a running UI when no local browser exists | claude-code, library |
+<!-- END skills-table -->
 
 ## Wiring into tools
 
@@ -71,17 +75,21 @@ everything load twice.
 
 ### Crush, Pi, OpenCode — run `install.sh`
 
-These have no plugin system, so they get symlinks — but **one directory link
+These have no plugin system, so they get symlinks — but through one managed
-each**, never one per skill:
+directory, never one link per skill per harness:
 
 ```
-~/.agents/skills           -> $SKILLS_CHECKOUT_DIR/skills   (Pi reads this directly)
+~/.agents/skills/          (real directory; Pi reads it directly)
+~/.agents/skills/tdd       -> $SKILLS_CHECKOUT_DIR/skills/tdd
+~/.agents/skills/xlsx      -> $SKILLS_EXTRA_SOURCES entry
 ~/.config/crush/skills     -> ~/.agents/skills
 ~/.config/opencode/skills  -> ~/.agents/skills
 ```
 
-Adding a skill therefore wires it everywhere with no re-run, and a broken link
+Total links are N + one per harness. `SKILLS_EXTRA_SOURCES` (colon-separated
-is one broken link instead of 42.
+directories) lets a second library — Anthropic's official set, for instance —
+live alongside this one instead of being displaced by it; name collisions are
+logged rather than silently resolved, and the checkout wins (#27).
 
 ```
 curl -fsSL https://git.d-ma.be/mathias/skills/raw/branch/main/install.sh | bash
@@ -95,10 +103,11 @@ absolute link stored there is broken on one side by construction. See #23.
 
 ### Check a host
 
-`task doctor` (or `bin/doctor`) reports dangling links, links resolving into a
+`task doctor` (or `bin/doctor`) reports dangling links, links into a source
-foreign checkout, count mismatches, stray entries, and leftover Claude
+nobody configured, skills in the checkout with no link, stray entries, leftover
-symlinks. It also runs automatically at session start via the plugin, so drift
+Claude symlinks, and a Claude Code plugin sitting on an older generation than
-announces itself instead of waiting to be found.
+the host already has. It also runs automatically at session start via the
+plugin, so drift announces itself instead of waiting to be found.
 
 ## Skill Relationships
 
@@ -109,14 +118,16 @@ problem-analysis
             │
             ├── spec-driven-dev (PM-kickoff lifecycle)
             │       │
-            │       └── feature-spec (per-feature, mid-implementation)
+            │       ├── feature-spec (per-feature, mid-implementation)
+            │       │       │
+            │       │       └── planning
+            │       │               │
+            │       │               └── atdd ──→ tdd (foundation)
+            │       │                        ├──→ debug (when tests fail)
+            │       │                        ├──→ clean-code (REFACTOR phase)
+            │       │                        └──→ test-design (review)
             │       │
-            │               └── planning
+            │       └── experiment-spec (research/ML phase, instead of feature-spec)
-            │                       │
-            │                       └── atdd ──→ tdd (foundation)
-            │                                ├──→ debug (when tests fail)
-            │                                ├──→ clean-code (REFACTOR phase)
-            │                                └──→ test-design (review)
             │
             └── planning
 

Taskfile.yml

@@ -61,8 +61,13 @@ tasks:
         done
         exit $fail
 
+  index:
+    desc: 'Regenerate SKILLS_INDEX.md''s table from skill frontmatter.'
+    cmds:
+      - "'{{.TASKFILE_DIR}}/bin/generate-index' '{{.TASKFILE_DIR}}'"
+
   check:
-    desc: 'Structure gate — layout, frontmatter, manifest/tag parity. Runs in CI.'
+    desc: 'Structure gate — layout, frontmatter, surfaces, generated index, manifest/tag parity. Runs in CI.'
     cmds:
       - |
         fail=0
@@ -94,18 +99,39 @@ tasks:
           count=$((count + 1))
         done
 
-        # 3. SKILLS_INDEX.md lists exactly the skills that exist. Delegated
+        # 3. SKILLS_INDEX.md's table is generated from frontmatter, so the
-        #    to bin/check-index so the rule is covered by
+        #    assertion is that regenerating it changes nothing. This replaces
-        #    tests/check_index_test.sh rather than living untested here.
+        #    bin/check-index: a generated table cannot drift in either
-        sh '{{.TASKFILE_DIR}}/bin/check-index' '{{.TASKFILE_DIR}}' || fail=1
+        #    direction, so there is no separate rule left to check.
+        sh '{{.TASKFILE_DIR}}/bin/generate-index' --check '{{.TASKFILE_DIR}}' || fail=1
 
-        # 4. Plugin manifest version must match the latest tag, or installers
+        # 4. Every skill says which surfaces it ships to, and names only
+        #    surfaces that exist — a wrong value silently drops a skill from a
+        #    harness instead of erroring.
+        sh '{{.TASKFILE_DIR}}/bin/check-surfaces' '{{.TASKFILE_DIR}}' || fail=1
+
+        # 5. A documented session_log call must be one the tool would accept:
+        #    session_id is its only required field, and nine skills omitted it.
+        sh '{{.TASKFILE_DIR}}/bin/check-session-log' '{{.TASKFILE_DIR}}' || fail=1
+
+        # 6. Every skill says when it stops and hands back (#5). Skills whose
+        #    rule is not written yet are listed in bin/escalation-pending.txt,
+        #    which only shrinks.
+        sh '{{.TASKFILE_DIR}}/bin/check-escalation' '{{.TASKFILE_DIR}}' || fail=1
+
+        # 7. Plugin manifest version must match the latest tag, or installers
         #    never see the update (Claude Code gates updates on this field).
         if [ -f '{{.PLUGIN_MANIFEST}}' ]; then
           manifest_v=$(sed -n 's/.*"version"[[:space:]]*:[[:space:]]*"\([^"]*\)".*/\1/p' '{{.PLUGIN_MANIFEST}}' | head -1)
           tag_v=$(git -C '{{.TASKFILE_DIR}}' describe --tags --abbrev=0 2>/dev/null | sed 's/^v//' || echo '')
-          if [ -n "$tag_v" ] && [ "$manifest_v" != "$tag_v" ]; then
+          # Ordering, not equality. The fault this guards is the manifest
-            echo "ERROR: plugin.json version ($manifest_v) != latest tag ($tag_v)" >&2
+          # failing to MOVE — a release tag whose manifest still names the old
+          # version, so no installed host ever sees the update. A manifest
+          # ahead of the newest tag this checkout knows about is the normal
+          # state between the tagger's bump commit and a tag fetch (#34).
+          if [ -n "$tag_v" ] && [ "$manifest_v" != "$tag_v" ] \
+             && [ "$(sh '{{.TASKFILE_DIR}}/bin/newer-version' "$manifest_v" "$tag_v")" = "$tag_v" ]; then
+            echo "ERROR: plugin.json version ($manifest_v) is behind the latest tag ($tag_v) — installed hosts never see the update" >&2
             fail=1
           fi
         else

bin/check-escalation

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+# check-escalation — every skill states when it stops and hands back.
+#
+# #5 decided this belongs in the body, not the frontmatter: no harness reads
+# frontmatter beyond name/description, so a `failure_criteria:` key would be a
+# guarantee nothing honours. The model reads the body.
+#
+# #37 then had to define which skills need one, and every obvious answer was
+# bad: a hardcoded list rots, sniffing the text for "does it write anything" is
+# unfalsifiable, and a frontmatter flag is the rejected option wearing a hat.
+#
+# So there is no acting set. EVERY skill answers the question. A read-only skill
+# answers it in one line — "read-only; findings are the output, nothing is
+# handed back" — which turns an absence into a claim someone can disagree with.
+#
+# bin/escalation-pending.txt is a ratchet for skills whose real rule has not
+# been written yet (a stop condition nobody thought about is not worth
+# enforcing). It is self-cleaning: a listed skill that HAS a section fails, so
+# the list cannot outlive its reason.
+#
+# Usage: check-escalation [checkout-root]
+
+set -u
+
+ROOT=${1:-$(CDPATH= cd -- "$(dirname -- "$0")/.." && pwd)}
+PENDING="$ROOT/bin/escalation-pending.txt"
+fail=0
+
+listed() {
+  [ -f "$PENDING" ] || return 1
+  sed 's/#.*//' "$PENDING" | grep -qx "[[:space:]]*$1[[:space:]]*"
+}
+
+for dir in "$ROOT"/skills/*/; do
+  [ -f "$dir/SKILL.md" ] || continue
+  name=$(basename "$dir")
+
+  if grep -q '^## Escalation' "$dir/SKILL.md"; then
+    if listed "$name"; then
+      echo "ERROR: skills/$name has an Escalation section but is still in bin/escalation-pending.txt — remove it from the list" >&2
+      fail=1
+    fi
+    continue
+  fi
+
+  listed "$name" && continue
+  echo "ERROR: skills/$name has no '## Escalation' section — say when it stops and hands back, or say it never does" >&2
+  fail=1
+done
+
+# A pending entry for a skill that no longer exists is a stale exemption, and a
+# stale exemption is how a gate quietly stops covering something. Looped without
+# a pipe on purpose: a `while read` on the right of a pipe runs in a subshell,
+# so `fail=1` would be set in a process that exits before it is read.
+if [ -f "$PENDING" ]; then
+  entries=$(sed 's/#.*//' "$PENDING" | tr -d '[:blank:]' | grep -v '^$' || true)
+  for entry in $entries; do
+    [ -f "$ROOT/skills/$entry/SKILL.md" ] && continue
+    echo "ERROR: bin/escalation-pending.txt lists '$entry', which has no skills/$entry/SKILL.md" >&2
+    fail=1
+  done
+fi
+
+exit $fail

bin/check-index

@@ -1,42 +0,0 @@
-#!/bin/sh
-# check-index — asserts SKILLS_INDEX.md lists exactly the skills that exist.
-#
-# The index is hand-maintained and drifts silently in both directions: a skill
-# ships with no row (`dream` and `experiment-spec` did — their rows lived on
-# branches squash-merged after a directory reorg, so the SKILL.md landed and
-# the row did not, #15), or a row outlives the skill it names. Neither errors
-# anywhere; the library just misreports itself to every harness that reads it.
-#
-# Usage: check-index [checkout-root]   (defaults to this script's repo root)
-
-set -u
-
-ROOT=${1:-$(CDPATH= cd -- "$(dirname -- "$0")/.." && pwd)}
-INDEX="$ROOT/SKILLS_INDEX.md"
-fail=0
-
-if [ ! -f "$INDEX" ]; then
-  echo "ERROR: missing SKILLS_INDEX.md" >&2
-  exit 1
-fi
-
-# A row is a table line whose first cell is the skill name in backticks.
-listed=$(sed -n 's/^|[[:space:]]*`\([^`]*\)`.*/\1/p' "$INDEX" | sort -u)
-
-for dir in "$ROOT"/skills/*/; do
-  name=$(basename "$dir")
-  [ -f "$dir/SKILL.md" ] || continue
-  printf '%s\n' "$listed" | grep -qx "$name" || {
-    echo "ERROR: skills/$name has no row in SKILLS_INDEX.md" >&2
-    fail=1
-  }
-done
-
-for name in $listed; do
-  [ -f "$ROOT/skills/$name/SKILL.md" ] || {
-    echo "ERROR: SKILLS_INDEX.md lists '$name', which has no skills/$name/SKILL.md" >&2
-    fail=1
-  }
-done
-
-exit $fail

bin/check-session-log

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+# check-session-log — a skill that documents a session_log call must document a
+# call the tool would actually accept.
+#
+# Nine skills documented the payload and none named `session_id`, which is the
+# tool's only REQUIRED field. An agent following any of them either failed the
+# call or invented an id — and invented ids do not group, so the pass-rate the
+# endpoint computes was being assembled from entries that could not be joined
+# (#36, found by a pressure test against `debug`).
+#
+# Also rejected: `duration_ms: <wall-clock>`. An agent does not observe a clock.
+# A documented field nobody can honestly populate gets fabricated or silently
+# dropped, and fabricated numbers in a metrics stream are worse than no numbers.
+#
+# Usage: check-session-log [checkout-root]
+
+set -u
+
+ROOT=${1:-$(CDPATH= cd -- "$(dirname -- "$0")/.." && pwd)}
+fail=0
+
+for dir in "$ROOT"/skills/*/; do
+  [ -f "$dir/SKILL.md" ] || continue
+  name=$(basename "$dir")
+
+  grep -q 'session_log' "$dir/SKILL.md" || continue
+
+  if ! grep -q 'session_id' "$dir/SKILL.md"; then
+    echo "ERROR: skills/$name documents session_log without session_id — the tool's only required field" >&2
+    fail=1
+  fi
+
+  if grep -q 'duration_ms:[[:space:]]*<' "$dir/SKILL.md"; then
+    echo "ERROR: skills/$name documents duration_ms as a placeholder an agent cannot measure — omit it or pass a real measurement" >&2
+    fail=1
+  fi
+done
+
+exit $fail

bin/check-surfaces

@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+# check-surfaces — every skill declares which surfaces it ships to, and only
+# names surfaces that exist.
+#
+# The repo distributes three ways: the Claude Code plugin, the symlinked
+# library (Crush/Pi/OpenCode), and claude.ai, which has no fetch path at all.
+# Treating every skill as belonging to all three installs skills that can never
+# fire — gitea-ci, playwright and web-shot have no shell or cluster in a chat
+# surface — and degrades selection for the ones that can (#29).
+#
+# Values are validated, not merely counted: a wrong surface silently removes a
+# skill from a harness rather than erroring, which is the failure mode this
+# whole file exists to prevent.
+#
+# Usage: check-surfaces [checkout-root]
+
+set -u
+
+ROOT=${1:-$(CDPATH= cd -- "$(dirname -- "$0")/.." && pwd)}
+ALLOWED='claude-code library chat'
+fail=0
+
+for dir in "$ROOT"/skills/*/; do
+  [ -f "$dir/SKILL.md" ] || continue
+  name=$(basename "$dir")
+
+  line=$(sed -n 's/^surfaces:[[:space:]]*//p' "$dir/SKILL.md" | head -1)
+  if [ -z "$line" ]; then
+    echo "ERROR: skills/$name declares no 'surfaces:' — say where it ships (${ALLOWED% *}, ${ALLOWED##* })" >&2
+    fail=1
+    continue
+  fi
+
+  values=$(printf '%s' "$line" | tr -d '[]' | tr ',' ' ')
+  count=0
+  for v in $values; do
+    count=$((count + 1))
+    case " $ALLOWED " in
+      *" $v "*) ;;
+      *) echo "ERROR: skills/$name names surface '$v', which does not exist — allowed: $ALLOWED" >&2; fail=1 ;;
+    esac
+  done
+  [ "$count" -gt 0 ] || {
+    echo "ERROR: skills/$name has an empty 'surfaces:' list — a skill that ships nowhere should be deleted, not declared" >&2
+    fail=1
+  }
+done
+
+exit $fail

bin/doctor

@@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
 #   doctor            human report, non-zero exit on drift
 #   doctor --quiet    print only when something is wrong (SessionStart hook)
 #   doctor --json     machine-readable findings
+#   doctor --online   ALSO ask origin for the latest tag (one network call)
 #
 # POSIX sh on purpose: it runs on macOS and Linux, before any toolchain is
 # guaranteed present, and inside a session-start hook where latency shows.
@@ -21,10 +22,12 @@ set -u
 
 QUIET=0
 JSON=0
+ONLINE=0
 for arg in "$@"; do
   case "$arg" in
     --quiet)  QUIET=1 ;;
     --json)   JSON=1 ;;
+    --online) ONLINE=1 ;;
     -h|--help)
       sed -n '2,20p' "$0" | sed 's/^# \{0,1\}//'
       exit 0 ;;
@@ -39,12 +42,21 @@ SELF_CHECKOUT=$(CDPATH= cd -- "$SELF_DIR/.." && pwd)
 # copy doctor happens to be running from. When invoked as a plugin hook, $0
 # lives in the plugin cache, which is legitimately a second copy: judging the
 # harness links against it would flag every one of them as "outside".
+AGENTS_DIR="$HOME/.agents/skills"
+SOURCES_FILE="$(dirname -- "$AGENTS_DIR")/$(basename -- "$AGENTS_DIR")-sources"
+
 if [ -n "${DOCTOR_CHECKOUT:-}" ]; then
   CHECKOUT="$DOCTOR_CHECKOUT"
-elif [ -d "$HOME/.agents/skills" ]; then
+elif [ -f "$SOURCES_FILE" ]; then
-  # Resolve the link FIRST, then take the parent. "cd X/.." resolves ".."
+  # Since #27 the canonical location is a real directory fed by several
-  # lexically against the link path, which lands back in ~/.agents.
+  # sources, so it can no longer be resolved to a checkout. install.sh records
-  _resolved=$(CDPATH= cd -- "$HOME/.agents/skills" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
+  # the list; the first line is always this repo's skills/ directory.
+  CHECKOUT=$(dirname -- "$(head -n 1 "$SOURCES_FILE")")
+elif [ -L "$AGENTS_DIR" ]; then
+  # Pre-#27 wiring: one link straight at the checkout. Resolve the link FIRST,
+  # then take the parent. "cd X/.." resolves ".." lexically against the link
+  # path, which lands back in ~/.agents.
+  _resolved=$(CDPATH= cd -- "$AGENTS_DIR" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
   CHECKOUT=$(dirname -- "$_resolved")
 else
   CHECKOUT="$SELF_CHECKOUT"
@@ -66,9 +78,26 @@ add() {
 }
 
 # count_skills <dir> — directories containing a SKILL.md, one level down.
+# -L on purpose: since #27 the entries are per-skill symlinks, and find does
+# not descend into a symlinked directory without it.
 count_skills() {
   [ -d "$1" ] || { printf '0'; return; }
-  find "$1"/ -mindepth 2 -maxdepth 2 -name SKILL.md 2>/dev/null | wc -l | tr -d ' '
+  find -L "$1"/ -mindepth 2 -maxdepth 2 -name SKILL.md 2>/dev/null | wc -l | tr -d ' '
+}
+
+# under_known_source <physical-path> — 0 when the path lies inside a source
+# install.sh recorded, or inside the active checkout.
+under_known_source() {
+  _path=$1
+  _list="$SKILLS_DIR"
+  [ -f "$SOURCES_FILE" ] && _list="$_list
+$(cat "$SOURCES_FILE")"
+  printf '%s\n' "$_list" | while IFS= read -r _src; do
+    [ -n "$_src" ] || continue
+    _real=$(CDPATH= cd -- "$_src" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P) || continue
+    [ -n "$_real" ] || continue
+    case "$_path" in "$_real"/*|"$_real") printf 'yes'; break ;; esac
+  done | grep -q yes
 }
 
 # --- the checkout itself ----------------------------------------------------
@@ -95,10 +124,54 @@ for entry in "$SKILLS_DIR"/*; do
   fi
 done
 
+# --- the canonical directory --------------------------------------------------
+# Pre-#27 this was a symlink at the checkout. It is a real directory now, one
+# per-skill link per skill, fed by every configured source — that is what lets
+# a second library (Anthropic's official set on flamingo) coexist instead of
+# being displaced.
+if [ -L "$AGENTS_DIR" ]; then
+  add WARN legacy "$AGENTS_DIR is the pre-#27 single-link wiring — re-run install.sh to adopt the multi-source layout"
+elif [ -d "$AGENTS_DIR" ]; then
+  for entry in "$AGENTS_DIR"/*; do
+    [ -e "$entry" ] || [ -L "$entry" ] || continue
+    name=$(basename "$entry")
+
+    if [ ! -L "$entry" ]; then
+      add FAIL unmanaged "$AGENTS_DIR/$name is not a link into any source — nothing manages it and nothing updates it"
+      continue
+    fi
+    if [ ! -e "$entry" ]; then
+      add FAIL dangling "$entry -> $(readlink "$entry") (target does not exist)"
+      continue
+    fi
+
+    resolved=$(CDPATH= cd -- "$entry" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
+    if [ -n "$resolved" ] && ! under_known_source "$resolved"; then
+      add FAIL outside "$entry resolves to $resolved, an unknown source — it works, so nothing complains, while serving content nobody updates"
+    fi
+  done
+
+  # A per-skill layout can lose one skill without changing any total, so the
+  # invariant is per skill, not a count.
+  for dir in "$SKILLS_DIR"/*/; do
+    [ -f "$dir/SKILL.md" ] || continue
+    name=$(basename "$dir")
+    # Only skills that ship to the library belong here. A chat-only skill
+    # missing from a Crush directory is correct, not drift (#29).
+    surfaces=$(sed -n 's/^surfaces:[[:space:]]*//p' "$dir/SKILL.md" | head -1)
+    if [ -n "$surfaces" ] \
+       && ! printf '%s' "$surfaces" | tr -d '[]' | tr ',' ' ' | grep -qw library; then
+      continue
+    fi
+    [ -L "$AGENTS_DIR/$name" ] \
+      || add FAIL missing "$name is in the checkout but has no link in $AGENTS_DIR — re-run install.sh"
+  done
+fi
+
 # --- harness wiring ---------------------------------------------------------
-# Canonical location first; Pi reads it directly and the others link to it.
+# Crush and OpenCode keep their single directory link at the canonical dir;
+# Pi reads it directly and needs no link of its own.
 for dir in \
-  "$HOME/.agents/skills" \
   "$HOME/.config/crush/skills" \
   "$HOME/.config/opencode/skills"
 do
@@ -110,32 +183,23 @@ do
   fi
 
   # A real directory where a link belongs holds content nothing manages: it
-  # cannot receive new skills and silently shadows the checkout. Distinguished
+  # cannot receive new skills and silently shadows the canonical dir. Since
-  # from the foreign-checkout case below because the fix differs — move it
+  # #27 the fix is not only "move it aside" — it can be added as an extra
-  # aside and re-run install.sh, rather than re-point a link.
+  # source instead, which is how flamingo keeps the official Anthropic set.
   if [ ! -L "$dir" ] && [ -d "$dir" ]; then
-    add FAIL unmanaged "$dir is a real directory, not a link into the checkout — it holds $(count_skills "$dir") unmanaged skill(s); move it aside and re-run install.sh"
+    add FAIL unmanaged "$dir is a real directory, not a link into the canonical dir — it holds $(count_skills "$dir") unmanaged skill(s); add it to SKILLS_EXTRA_SOURCES and re-run install.sh, or move it aside"
     continue
   fi
 
-  # Resolve to a physical path and confirm it lands inside THIS checkout.
-  # A link that resolves to a different checkout is the dangerous case: it
-  # works, so nothing complains, while serving stale content.
   resolved=$(CDPATH= cd -- "$dir" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
-  canonical=$(CDPATH= cd -- "$SKILLS_DIR" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
+  canonical=$(CDPATH= cd -- "$AGENTS_DIR" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)
-  if [ -n "$resolved" ] && [ "$resolved" != "$canonical" ]; then
+  if [ -n "$resolved" ] && [ -n "$canonical" ] && [ "$resolved" != "$canonical" ]; then
-    add FAIL outside "$dir resolves to $resolved, outside the active checkout $canonical"
+    add FAIL outside "$dir resolves to $resolved, not the canonical $canonical"
-    continue
-  fi
-
-  got=$(count_skills "$dir")
-  if [ "$got" != "$EXPECTED" ]; then
-    add FAIL count "$dir sees $got skills, checkout has $EXPECTED"
   fi
 done
 
 # --- dangling links anywhere under the harness dirs -------------------------
-for dir in "$HOME/.agents/skills" "$HOME/.config/crush/skills" \
+for dir in "$HOME/.config/crush/skills" \
            "$HOME/.config/opencode/skills" "$HOME/.claude/skills"
 do
   [ -d "$dir" ] || continue
@@ -180,10 +244,93 @@ if [ -f "$INSTALLED" ]; then
     || add WARN plugin "skills@mathias is not installed for Claude Code — /plugin marketplace add https://git.d-ma.be/mathias/skills.git"
 fi
 
+# --- Claude Code: which GENERATION of the plugin is installed ---------------
+# Every check above is about symlink paths, which is the wrong shape for the
+# plugin: it is the only channel Claude Code has, and Claude Code gates updates
+# on plugin.json's version. A host that never picked up a release loads all the
+# skills successfully and is simply a generation behind — silently. Found on
+# koala 2026-08-29: installed 0.6.0, marketplace clone 0.7.0, repo 0.8.5,
+# doctor said "clean" (#30).
+#
+# Offline by construction, like the rest of doctor: "available" means the
+# newest manifest already on this host — the active checkout and any
+# marketplace clone — never a fetch.
+manifest_version() {
+  [ -f "$1" ] || return 1
+  grep -q '"name"[[:space:]]*:[[:space:]]*"skills"' "$1" || return 1
+  sed -n 's/.*"version"[[:space:]]*:[[:space:]]*"\([^"]*\)".*/\1/p' "$1" | head -1
+}
+
+# newer_version a b — echoes whichever sorts higher on major.minor.patch.
+# Lives in bin/newer-version because `task check` needs the same ordering (#34)
+# and a second copy is a second thing to get wrong.
+newer_version() {
+  sh "$SELF_DIR/newer-version" "$1" "$2"
+}
+
+installed_v=''
+if [ -f "$INSTALLED" ]; then
+  installed_v=$(sed -n '/"skills@mathias"/,/\]/p' "$INSTALLED" \
+    | sed -n 's/.*"version"[[:space:]]*:[[:space:]]*"\([^"]*\)".*/\1/p' | head -1)
+fi
+
+available_v=''
+for manifest in "$CHECKOUT/.claude-plugin/plugin.json" \
+                "$HOME"/.claude/plugins/marketplaces/*/.claude-plugin/plugin.json
+do
+  v=$(manifest_version "$manifest") || continue
+  [ -n "$v" ] || continue
+  if [ -z "$available_v" ]; then
+    available_v=$v
+  else
+    available_v=$(newer_version "$available_v" "$v")
+  fi
+done
+
+if [ -n "$installed_v" ] && [ -n "$available_v" ] && [ "$installed_v" != "$available_v" ]; then
+  add FAIL plugin-version "Claude Code has skills@mathias $installed_v installed but $available_v is available on this host — /plugin update skills@mathias (a host stale enough to matter is running the old doctor, so the first detection may need this run by hand)"
+fi
+
+# --- optional: the release this host has never fetched ----------------------
+# Every check above compares copies already present, so a host whose checkout,
+# marketplace clone and installed plugin all agree reads as clean while sitting
+# a release behind origin (#38). Closing that needs a network call, which the
+# default run must not make — hence opt-in, for a scheduled per-host job rather
+# than the SessionStart hook.
+#
+# $DOCTOR_LATEST_TAG_CMD is the test seam; it prints the newest remote tag.
+if [ "$ONLINE" -eq 1 ]; then
+  if [ -n "${DOCTOR_LATEST_TAG_CMD:-}" ]; then
+    remote_tag=$(eval "$DOCTOR_LATEST_TAG_CMD" 2>/dev/null | tail -1 | tr -d '[:space:]')
+  else
+    # The URL is never printed: a remote rewritten by url.insteadOf can expand
+    # into a live token.
+    origin=$(git -C "$CHECKOUT" config --get remote.origin.url 2>/dev/null || true)
+    if [ -n "$origin" ]; then
+      remote_tag=$(git ls-remote --tags --refs "$origin" 2>/dev/null \
+        | sed 's#.*refs/tags/##' | sort -t. -k1,1n -k2,2n -k3,3n | tail -1 | tr -d '[:space:]')
+    else
+      remote_tag=''
+    fi
+  fi
+
+  if [ -z "$remote_tag" ]; then
+    # Not drift. A host that cannot reach origin has an unanswered question,
+    # not a stale library, and saying otherwise would make the two look alike.
+    add WARN offline "could not reach origin for the latest tag — this run proves nothing about staleness"
+  else
+    remote_v=${remote_tag#v}
+    if [ -n "$available_v" ] && [ "$remote_v" != "$available_v" ] \
+       && [ "$(newer_version "$available_v" "$remote_v")" = "$remote_v" ]; then
+      add FAIL behind "this host has $available_v; origin has released $remote_v — run 'task update' and '/plugin update skills@mathias'"
+    fi
+  fi
+fi
+
 # --- output -----------------------------------------------------------------
 if [ "$JSON" -eq 1 ]; then
-  printf '{"checkout":"%s","expected":%s,"findings":[%s]}\n' \
+  printf '{"checkout":"%s","expected":%s,"plugin":{"installed":"%s","available":"%s"},"findings":[%s]}\n' \
-    "$CHECKOUT" "$EXPECTED" "${report%,}"
+    "$CHECKOUT" "$EXPECTED" "$installed_v" "$available_v" "${report%,}"
 elif [ "$findings" -gt 0 ]; then
   printf 'skills doctor — %s finding(s), checkout %s\n\n%s\n' \
     "$findings" "$CHECKOUT" "$report"

bin/escalation-pending.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+# Skills whose escalation rule has not been written yet (#37).
+#
+# This list only shrinks. A skill here is exempt from the '## Escalation'
+# requirement until someone writes its real stop conditions; a skill that HAS a
+# section and is still listed fails the gate, so the list cannot outlive its
+# reason.
+#
+# The ones already done were the advisory and read-only skills, where the honest
+# answer is a line. What is left is the acting set — skills that write files,
+# dispatch agents, touch credentials or move releases — and each of those needs
+# a rule someone thought about, not a rote paragraph. Per #19, one at a time.
+
+atdd
+dream
+experiment-spec
+feature-spec
+gitea-ci
+own-the-task
+planning
+playwright
+problem-analysis
+refactoring
+regulatory-risk-assessment
+secret-hygiene
+session-retrospective
+spec-driven-dev
+superpowers-brainstorming
+superpowers-dispatching-parallel-agents
+superpowers-executing-plans
+superpowers-finishing-a-development-branch
+superpowers-receiving-code-review
+superpowers-requesting-code-review
+superpowers-subagent-driven-development
+superpowers-using-git-worktrees
+superpowers-using-superpowers
+superpowers-verification-before-completion
+superpowers-writing-plans
+superpowers-writing-skills
+tdd
+trainer
+user-stories
+web-shot

bin/generate-index

@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+# generate-index — rebuild SKILLS_INDEX.md's table from skill frontmatter.
+#
+# The index was hand-maintained and drifted: `dream` and `experiment-spec`
+# shipped with no row at all, because their rows lived on branches that were
+# squash-merged after a directory reorg (#15). A gate catches that after the
+# fact; generating removes the class (#29).
+#
+# The curated summary and trigger live in each SKILL.md as `summary:` and
+# `use_when:` rather than being derived from `description:` — description is a
+# paragraph written for model selection, and truncating it produces a worse
+# table than the one being replaced.
+#
+# Everything outside the markers is left untouched: the wiring docs, the
+# relationships tree and the trigger table are prose, not data.
+#
+#   generate-index [root]           rewrite the table in place
+#   generate-index --check [root]   exit 1 if the table is out of date
+
+set -u
+
+CHECK=0
+if [ "${1:-}" = "--check" ]; then CHECK=1; shift; fi
+ROOT=${1:-$(CDPATH= cd -- "$(dirname -- "$0")/.." && pwd)}
+INDEX="$ROOT/SKILLS_INDEX.md"
+
+BEGIN='<!-- BEGIN skills-table -->'
+END='<!-- END skills-table -->'
+
+[ -f "$INDEX" ] || { echo "ERROR: missing $INDEX" >&2; exit 1; }
+grep -qF "$BEGIN" "$INDEX" || { echo "ERROR: $INDEX has no $BEGIN marker" >&2; exit 1; }
+grep -qF "$END" "$INDEX" || { echo "ERROR: $INDEX has no $END marker" >&2; exit 1; }
+
+# field <file> <key> — a scalar frontmatter value, quotes stripped.
+field() {
+  sed -n "s/^$2:[[:space:]]*//p" "$1" | head -1 | sed 's/^"//; s/"$//'
+}
+
+table=$(mktemp)
+fail=0
+
+{
+  printf '| Skill | Description | Use when | Surfaces |\n'
+  printf '|-------|-------------|----------|----------|\n'
+} > "$table"
+
+for dir in "$ROOT"/skills/*/; do
+  [ -f "$dir/SKILL.md" ] || continue
+  name=$(basename "$dir")
+  summary=$(field "$dir/SKILL.md" summary)
+  use_when=$(field "$dir/SKILL.md" use_when)
+  surfaces=$(field "$dir/SKILL.md" surfaces | tr -d '[]')
+
+  if [ -z "$summary" ] || [ -z "$use_when" ]; then
+    echo "ERROR: skills/$name has no 'summary:'/'use_when:' — the index table is generated from them" >&2
+    fail=1
+    continue
+  fi
+  printf '| `%s` | %s | %s | %s |\n' "$name" "$summary" "$use_when" "$surfaces" >> "$table"
+done
+
+if [ "$fail" -ne 0 ]; then
+  rm -f "$table"
+  exit 1
+fi
+
+out=$(mktemp)
+awk -v begin="$BEGIN" -v end="$END" -v tablefile="$table" '
+  $0 == begin { print; while ((getline line < tablefile) > 0) print line; skip = 1; next }
+  $0 == end   { print; skip = 0; next }
+  !skip       { print }
+' "$INDEX" > "$out"
+rm -f "$table"
+
+if [ "$CHECK" -eq 1 ]; then
+  if cmp -s "$out" "$INDEX"; then
+    rm -f "$out"
+    exit 0
+  fi
+  rm -f "$out"
+  echo "ERROR: SKILLS_INDEX.md is out of date — run 'task index' and commit the result" >&2
+  exit 1
+fi
+
+mv "$out" "$INDEX"

bin/newer-version

@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+# newer-version A B — echo whichever of two dotted versions sorts higher.
+# Equal versions echo A. Missing components count as zero, so 0.9 == 0.9.0.
+#
+# Exists because two callers need ordering rather than equality:
+#   - bin/doctor, comparing the installed plugin generation against the newest
+#     manifest on the host (#30);
+#   - task check, which must fail when plugin.json is BEHIND the latest tag and
+#     stay quiet when it is ahead — the normal state on a checkout that has not
+#     fetched the tag CI just pushed (#34).
+#
+# sort -V would do it in one line and is not portable enough for this fleet.
+
+set -u
+
+[ $# -eq 2 ] || { echo "usage: newer-version A B" >&2; exit 2; }
+
+printf '%s\n%s\n' "$1" "$2" | awk -F. '
+  { raw[NR] = $0; for (i = 1; i <= 3; i++) n[NR, i] = ($i == "" ? 0 : $i + 0) }
+  END {
+    for (i = 1; i <= 3; i++) {
+      if (n[1, i] > n[2, i]) { print raw[1]; exit }
+      if (n[1, i] < n[2, i]) { print raw[2]; exit }
+    }
+    print raw[1]
+  }'

install.sh

@@ -20,14 +20,24 @@
 # cannot. This script covers the harnesses with no plugin system: Crush, Pi
 # and OpenCode.
 #
-# Wiring model — one directory link per harness, never one per skill:
+# Wiring model — one managed directory, one link per harness:
 #
-#   ~/.agents/skills            -> $CHECKOUT_DIR/skills   (canonical; Pi reads it directly)
+#   ~/.agents/skills/tdd        -> $CHECKOUT_DIR/skills/tdd   (canonical; Pi reads the dir directly)
+#   ~/.agents/skills/xlsx       -> $OTHER_SOURCE/xlsx
 #   ~/.config/crush/skills      -> ~/.agents/skills
 #   ~/.config/opencode/skills   -> ~/.agents/skills
 #
-# Adding a skill to the repo therefore wires it everywhere with no re-run,
+# ~/.agents/skills was itself a link to this checkout until #27. That encoded
-# and a broken link is one broken link rather than 42.
+# an assumption nobody had stated — that this checkout is the ONLY source of
+# skills on the host — and on flamingo the only way to install this library
+# was to displace Anthropic's official set, which lived in Crush's directory.
+# A real directory of per-skill links serves several sources at once: total
+# links are N + one per harness, still not N x harnesses (#23's actual point).
+#
+# Extra sources come from SKILLS_EXTRA_SOURCES, a colon-separated list of
+# directories each holding <skill>/SKILL.md. The checkout is always first and
+# always wins a name collision — but the collision is logged, never resolved
+# in silence, because quietly picking one is how stale content wins.
 #
 # CHECKOUT_DIR deliberately defaults OUTSIDE any file-synced or
 # cross-platform-shared directory. Do not "fix" it to point into ~/dev: on a
@@ -43,6 +53,10 @@ CHECKOUT_DIR="${SKILLS_CHECKOUT_DIR:-$HOME/.local/share/skills}"
 AGENTS_DIR="${AGENTS_SKILLS_DIR:-$HOME/.agents/skills}"
 CRUSH_DIR="${CRUSH_SKILLS_DIR:-$HOME/.config/crush/skills}"
 OPENCODE_DIR="${OPENCODE_SKILLS_DIR:-$HOME/.config/opencode/skills}"
+EXTRA_SOURCES="${SKILLS_EXTRA_SOURCES:-}"
+# Recorded beside the managed directory rather than inside it: a stray file in
+# there would look like a skill to every harness reading the dir.
+SOURCES_MANIFEST="$(dirname "$AGENTS_DIR")/$(basename "$AGENTS_DIR")-sources"
 
 log() { printf '[skills] %s\n' "$*"; }
 
@@ -74,6 +88,106 @@ count_skills() {
   find "$CHECKOUT_DIR/skills" -mindepth 2 -maxdepth 2 -name SKILL.md 2>/dev/null | wc -l | tr -d ' '
 }
 
+# sources — every configured source directory, primary first, one per line.
+sources() {
+  printf '%s\n' "$CHECKOUT_DIR/skills"
+  [ -n "$EXTRA_SOURCES" ] || return 0
+  # printf '%s\n' deliberately: without the trailing newline `read` hits EOF
+  # on the final entry and the loop body never runs for it.
+  printf '%s\n' "$EXTRA_SOURCES" | tr ':' '\n' | while IFS= read -r src; do
+    [ -n "$src" ] || continue
+    if [ -d "$src" ]; then
+      printf '%s\n' "$src"
+    else
+      log "extra source $src does not exist — skipping"
+    fi
+  done
+}
+
+# prepare_agents_dir — the canonical location is a real directory now. A host
+# still on the single-link wiring is migrated in place.
+prepare_agents_dir() {
+  if [ -L "$AGENTS_DIR" ]; then
+    log "migrating $AGENTS_DIR from the single-link wiring to a per-skill directory"
+    rm -f "$AGENTS_DIR"
+  elif [ -e "$AGENTS_DIR" ] && [ ! -d "$AGENTS_DIR" ]; then
+    log "REFUSING to replace $AGENTS_DIR — it exists and is not a directory"
+    return 1
+  fi
+  mkdir -p "$AGENTS_DIR"
+}
+
+# wire_skills — one symlink per skill, from every configured source.
+wire_skills() {
+  local src_list desired name src dir link target
+  src_list="$(mktemp)"
+  sources > "$src_list"
+
+  desired=""
+  while IFS= read -r src; do
+    [ -d "$src" ] || continue
+    for dir in "$src"/*/; do
+      [ -f "$dir/SKILL.md" ] || continue
+      name="$(basename "$dir")"
+      target="${dir%/}"
+
+      # A skill declares its surfaces; this installer serves exactly one of
+      # them. A chat-only skill linked into Crush can never fire and competes
+      # for selection with ones that can (#29). A source with no declaration
+      # is foreign — Anthropic's official set has no reason to know this
+      # convention — so silence means "link it".
+      surfaces="$(sed -n 's/^surfaces:[[:space:]]*//p' "$dir/SKILL.md" | head -1)"
+      if [ -n "$surfaces" ] && ! printf '%s' "$surfaces" | tr -d '[]' | tr ',' ' ' | grep -qw library; then
+        log "skipping $name — surfaces: $surfaces does not include the library"
+        continue
+      fi
+
+      if printf '%s' "$desired" | grep -qx -- "$name"; then
+        log "COLLISION: $name is offered by $target too; keeping $AGENTS_DIR/$name -> $(readlink "$AGENTS_DIR/$name" 2>/dev/null || echo '?')"
+        continue
+      fi
+
+      link="$AGENTS_DIR/$name"
+      if [ -L "$link" ]; then
+        if [ "$(readlink "$link")" = "$target" ]; then
+          desired="$desired$name
+"
+          continue
+        fi
+        rm -f "$link"
+      elif [ -e "$link" ]; then
+        log "unmanaged: $link is not a symlink — left in place; move it aside to let $target take the name"
+        continue
+      fi
+      ln -s "$target" "$link"
+      desired="$desired$name
+"
+    done
+  done < "$src_list"
+  rm -f "$src_list"
+
+  # Removing a skill from a source must remove its link, or the previous
+  # generation's problem (links resolving to nothing, invisible to git)
+  # returns in a new shape.
+  for link in "$AGENTS_DIR"/*; do
+    [ -e "$link" ] || [ -L "$link" ] || continue
+    name="$(basename "$link")"
+    if [ ! -L "$link" ]; then
+      log "unmanaged: $link is not a symlink and no source offers it — left in place"
+      continue
+    fi
+    printf '%s' "$desired" | grep -qx -- "$name" && continue
+    rm -f "$link"
+    log "pruned $name — no configured source offers it any more"
+  done
+
+  sources > "$SOURCES_MANIFEST"
+  # Reported through a global, not stdout: wire_skills logs collisions and
+  # unmanaged entries as it goes, and capturing its stdout for a count would
+  # swallow exactly the warnings this change exists to surface.
+  LINKED_COUNT=$(printf '%s' "$desired" | grep -c . || true)
+}
+
 # link_dir <link_path> <target_path>
 # Replaces whatever is there — including a directory left behind by the old
 # per-skill wiring — with a single symlink.
@@ -104,12 +218,14 @@ main() {
 
   # Canonical location. Pi reads ~/.agents/skills directly, so it needs no
   # harness-specific link of its own.
-  link_dir "$AGENTS_DIR" "$CHECKOUT_DIR/skills"
+  prepare_agents_dir
+  LINKED_COUNT=0
+  wire_skills
 
   link_dir "$CRUSH_DIR" "$AGENTS_DIR"
   link_dir "$OPENCODE_DIR" "$AGENTS_DIR"
 
-  log "done — $(count_skills) skill(s) at ref=$REF, 3 links total"
+  log "done — $LINKED_COUNT skill(s) linked from $(sources | wc -l | tr -d ' ') source(s), ref=$REF"
   log "Claude Code: install the plugin instead — /plugin marketplace add $REPO_URL"
 }
 

skills/atdd/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: atdd
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Acceptance Test-Driven Development workflow"
+use_when: "Feature development with acceptance criteria"
 description: Implement user stories using the ATDD workflow — Red (failing acceptance test) → Green (minimal implementation) → Refactor. One story at a time.
 ---
 

skills/cad-babysit/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: cad-babysit
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Focused human-in-the-loop session working CAD's stuck queue (read-only)"
+use_when: "Picking up whatever `cad stuck` flags, with a human present"
 description: Focused human-in-the-loop session working CAD's stuck queue (cad-stuck output). Read-only — diagnoses, never dispatches, arms a label, or closes an issue. Use when picking up whatever CAD has run into trouble on, with a human present.
 ---
 
@@ -231,8 +234,8 @@ wrong" — it means "nothing on the known list is wrong."
 Call `session_log` once at the end of every phase to record the outcome.
 
 **At end of each phase:**
-- `session_log` with `{skill: "cad-babysit", phase: "<phase-name>", final_status: "pass" |
+- `session_log` with `{session_id: "<this session's id>", skill: "cad-babysit", phase: "<phase-name>", final_status: "pass" |
-  "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", duration_ms: <wall-clock>, project_root:
+  "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", project_root:
   "<absolute path>"}`
 
 **Phases for this skill:** query, read-comments, read-actions-logs, classify-fault-vs-outcome,
@@ -244,12 +247,6 @@ decide
 - `fail` — the phase could not be completed (e.g. `cad stuck` errored, Gitea was unreachable).
 - `skip` — phase intentionally skipped (e.g. Phase 3 skipped because Phase 2 was conclusive).
 
-## Mode 2 Routing Note
-
-Phases 2-4 (reading comments/logs, classifying fault vs outcome) are judgment-heavy and should
-stay Mode 1. Phase 1 (running `cad stuck` and grouping its output) is mechanical and a Mode 2
-routing candidate once Plan 6 ships the routing pod.
-
 ## Cross-References
 
 - Depends on `mathias/cad#14`'s `cad stuck` query — this skill is the ritual around it, not a
@@ -261,3 +258,13 @@ routing candidate once Plan 6 ships the routing pod.
 - `mathias/cad-atlas#11` renders the same `cad stuck` output as a pipeline overlay — read that
   instead of this skill's text output when a visual "where is everything stuck" view is wanted
   over working one row in depth.
+
+## Escalation
+
+Read-only by construction, and the Iron Laws above are the escalation rule: never close
+an issue, never dispatch, never write a label. Everything that is the operator's call
+leaves as a `DECISION NEEDED` block (question / options / recommendation / blocks).
+
+Stop and hand back when: the stuck queue is empty; a diagnosis needs a write you are not
+allowed to make; or two runs in a row produce the same finding, which means the finding
+is not being acted on and repeating it is noise.

skills/clean-code/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: clean-code
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Clean code principles with Go adaptation"
+use_when: "Code review, refactoring, new code"
 description: Write code that humans can read, understand, and safely change. Apply SOLID, GRASP, and Clean Code principles during the REFACTOR phase of TDD.
 ---
 
@@ -278,5 +281,14 @@ During refactoring:
 
 - `references/clean-code.md` — detailed naming rules, object calisthenics
 - `references/code-smells.md` — comprehensive smell catalog with examples
+- `references/python-adaptation.md` — Python conventions: error chaining, dataclasses, the truthiness trap
 - Load `solid` skill for SOLID principles with Go examples
 - Load `refactoring` skill for systematic refactoring techniques
+
+## Escalation
+
+Advisory during the REFACTOR phase. Suggests; does not restructure behaviour.
+
+Stop and hand back when: the cleanup you are proposing changes behaviour. That is not
+refactoring, it is a change, and it needs its own failing test first — hand back to
+`tdd`.

skills/clean-code/references/python-adaptation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,104 @@
+# Clean Code: Python Adaptation
+
+The principles in `SKILL.md` are language-agnostic. This file covers the places where
+Python's idioms differ from the Go examples, and where following the Go shape produces
+bad Python.
+
+The canonical stack (ruff, mypy --strict, pytest, uv, pydantic-settings, src-layout)
+lives in `~/dev/.context/AGENT.md` and is not restated here — one source of truth, and
+it is not this file.
+
+## Reveal intent with types, not comments
+
+`mypy --strict` is the Python analogue of Go's compiler, and it is non-negotiable for
+the same reason: a type is a claim the machine checks, and a comment is a claim nobody
+checks. Two consequences for clean code specifically:
+
+- **`Any` is a hole in the argument.** Each one says "the reader is on their own here".
+  If a value is genuinely polymorphic, say so precisely — `Protocol`, a union, a
+  `TypeVar` — rather than surrendering.
+- **A `# type: ignore` needs the error code and a reason**: `# type: ignore[arg-type]  #
+  boto3 stubs lag the API`. A bare ignore is an unexplained exception to a rule the rest
+  of the file follows.
+
+## Errors: chain them, never swallow them
+
+Go's `fmt.Errorf("operation: %w", err)` is `raise` with `from`:
+
+```python
+# Bad — the original cause is gone, and so is the stack that produced it
+try:
+    row = fetch(invoice_id)
+except KeyError:
+    raise InvoiceNotFound(invoice_id)
+
+# Good — the chain survives; the traceback shows both
+try:
+    row = fetch(invoice_id)
+except KeyError as e:
+    raise InvoiceNotFound(invoice_id) from e
+```
+
+Two rules with no exceptions:
+
+- **Never bare `except:`.** It catches `KeyboardInterrupt` and `SystemExit` too, so it
+  turns Ctrl-C into a swallowed error. `except Exception` if you truly mean everything.
+- **Never a silent `pass`.** An exception handler that does nothing is a decision to
+  ignore a failure; if that is genuinely right, the handler needs a comment saying why,
+  and usually a log line. Most of the time it is a bug being stored for later.
+
+## Data classes over dicts
+
+A `dict[str, Any]` passed between functions is Go's `map[string]interface{}` — every
+reader has to reconstruct the shape from the code that writes it.
+
+```python
+# Bad: shape known only by reading every producer
+def total(invoice: dict[str, Any]) -> int: ...
+
+# Good: shape declared once, checked everywhere
+@dataclass(frozen=True, slots=True)
+class Invoice:
+    id: InvoiceId
+    lines: tuple[Line, ...]
+    currency: str  # ISO 4217
+
+def total(invoice: Invoice) -> Money: ...
+```
+
+`frozen=True` where the value is conceptually immutable — it makes accidental mutation
+an error rather than a surprise at a distance. Use `pydantic` models at the *boundary*
+(env config, HTTP payloads) where validation is the point, and dataclasses inside,
+where validation has already happened.
+
+## Two Python-specific traps that read as clean code
+
+**Mutable default arguments** are evaluated once, at definition:
+
+```python
+def add_line(line: Line, lines: list[Line] = []) -> list[Line]:  # shared across calls
+```
+
+Use `None` and build inside. Ruff catches this (`B006`); the point of naming it here is
+that the broken version looks tidier than the correct one.
+
+**Truthiness is not presence.** `if not amount:` is true for `0`, `0.0`, `""`, `[]` and
+`None` alike. For anything where zero is a legitimate value — money, counts, offsets —
+write `if amount is None:`. This is the single most common way a Python function
+silently mishandles a valid input.
+
+## Structure
+
+- `src/` layout, `pyproject.toml` only. A flat layout lets tests import the working
+  directory instead of the installed package, so the suite passes on a package that
+  cannot actually be installed.
+- Module names are the unit of cohesion, as Go packages are. `utils.py` is the Python
+  spelling of a god package: it has no reason to change because it has no subject.
+- Prefer functions to classes with one method. A class whose only job is to hold
+  constructor arguments and expose `run()` is a closure with ceremony.
+
+## See also
+
+- `references/clean-code.md` — the language-agnostic practices
+- `references/code-smells.md` — the smell catalogue, all of which apply here
+- `tdd/references/python.md` — the test-side conventions

skills/code-review/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: code-review
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Code smell detection + Go-specific checklist"
+use_when: "Pre-merge review"
 description: Systematic code smell detection and Go-specific review checklist. Load before any pre-merge review.
 ---
 
@@ -11,6 +14,8 @@ Code review is smell detection and principle verification, not style policing. T
 
 **This skill is read-only analysis.** When you find issues, document them with specific file:line references and prioritize by architectural impact. For fixes, load the `refactoring` or `clean-code` skill.
 
+Three similarly-named skills cover orthogonal concerns, and landing on one is no reason to miss the others: this one is **what to check**, `superpowers-requesting-code-review` is **how to commission a reviewer**, and `superpowers-receiving-code-review` is **how to behave when the feedback arrives**.
+
 ## When to Use
 
 - Pre-merge review of any pull request
@@ -248,7 +253,7 @@ Pass-rate is computed downstream by the `/pass-rate` HTTP endpoint, which
 treats `pass` as success, `fail` as failure, `skip` as neither.
 
 **At end of each phase:**
-- `session_log` with `{skill: "code-review", phase: "<phase-name>", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", duration_ms: <wall-clock>, project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
+- `session_log` with `{session_id: "<this session's id>", skill: "code-review", phase: "<phase-name>", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
 
 **Phases for this skill:** phase-0-iron-laws, phase-1-context, phase-2-architectural-analysis, phase-3-go-checklist, phase-4-code-smell-detection, phase-5-test-quality
 
@@ -257,7 +262,7 @@ treats `pass` as success, `fail` as failure, `skip` as neither.
 - `fail` — the phase's intended outcome was NOT reached.
 - `skip` — phase was skipped intentionally.
 
-**Why this matters:** the routing pod (Plan 6) reads pass-rate to decide whether to route a future call to a local model. If your skill never logs, the routing pod sees no data.
+**Why this matters:** pass-rate is what a future routing decision would be based on — whether a given call can be served by a local model instead of a cloud one. A skill that never logs contributes no evidence either way.
 
 ## Common Go Anti-Patterns
 
@@ -274,11 +279,18 @@ treats `pass` as success, `fail` as failure, `skip` as neither.
 
 ## References
 
+- `references/python-adaptation.md` — the Python anti-pattern table, and what ruff/mypy
+  should have caught before review
 - `clean-code/references/code-smells.md` — comprehensive smell catalog
 - Load `refactoring` skill when recommending fixes
 - Load `test-design` skill for reviewing test quality
 - Load `solid` skill for SOLID principle violations
 
-## Mode 2 Routing Note
+## Escalation
 
-This skill is invoked identically in Mode 1 (cloud Claude) and Mode 2 (client-local with supervisor routing). The routing layer (Plan 6) does not exist yet; treat this skill as Mode 1 only for now. Findings format and severity classification are unchanged across modes.
+Read-only analysis. Findings are the output; nothing is handed back mid-review.
+
+Stop and hand back when: the diff is large enough that a review would be a skim — say so
+and ask for it in parts, rather than producing confident coverage of a fraction of it; or
+the problem is structural rather than pointwise, in which case name it and hand off to
+`solid` or `refactoring` instead of filing twenty line-level comments about one cause.

skills/code-review/references/python-adaptation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+# Code Review: Python Anti-Patterns
+
+`SKILL.md` carries the Go anti-pattern table. This is the Python one. The review
+process, severity classification and output format above it are language-neutral and
+apply unchanged.
+
+Canonical stack in `~/dev/.context/AGENT.md`. Two gates decide most of this file:
+`ruff` and `mypy --strict`. **If a finding is something ruff or mypy already catches,
+the review comment is not "fix this line" — it is "why is the gate not running?"**
+
+## The table
+
+| Anti-pattern | What to look for | Why it matters |
+|---|---|---|
+| Bare `except:` | `except:` with no exception class | Swallows `KeyboardInterrupt` and `SystemExit`; Ctrl-C stops working |
+| Silent `pass` | `except X: pass` with no comment | A decision to ignore a failure, recorded nowhere |
+| Lost cause | `raise Y(...)` inside `except X as e` with no `from e` | Traceback loses the original failure — the Python analogue of a naked `fmt.Errorf` |
+| Mutable default | `def f(x, acc=[])` or `={}` | Evaluated once at definition; state leaks between calls |
+| Truthiness for presence | `if not amount:` where `0` is valid | Silently mishandles zero, empty string, empty list |
+| `Any` as an escape | `Any` in a signature that could be `Protocol`/union/`TypeVar` | Removes exactly the checking `--strict` was adopted for |
+| Unexplained ignore | bare `# type: ignore` | No error code, no reason; permanent by default |
+| `assert` in production code | `assert user.is_admin` outside tests | `python -O` strips asserts — the check vanishes in a tuned deployment |
+| Import-time side effects | connections, env reads, or I/O at module scope | Cannot be injected, cannot be tested, ordering-dependent |
+| Sync I/O in `async def` | `requests.get`, `time.sleep`, blocking file reads | Blocks the whole event loop; looks concurrent, is not |
+| Un-awaited coroutine | a call to an `async def` with no `await` | Silently does nothing; "coroutine was never awaited" is a warning, not an error |
+| `float` for money | `float` amounts, `round()` on currency | `0.1 + 0.2 != 0.3`; use `Decimal` or int minor units |
+| Broad `Exception` re-raise | `except Exception` around a whole function body | Turns a specific failure into an unclassifiable one |
+| Mutating a shared default/global | module-level `list`/`dict` mutated by functions | The Python spelling of shared mutable state |
+| `dict[str, Any]` as a domain type | dicts passed between layers | Shape known only by reading every producer; use a dataclass |
+| Star imports | `from x import *` | Breaks `--strict`, hides shadowing, defeats grep |
+| `os.path` string surgery | manual path joining, `+ "/"` | `pathlib` exists and is correct on every platform |
+| `subprocess(..., shell=True)` with interpolation | f-strings into a shell command | Injection; pass a list, no shell |
+
+## What to check that a linter cannot
+
+- **Does the test suite assert the failure mode, or only the happy path?** `pytest.raises`
+  with no `match=` accepts any message, including one from an unrelated bug.
+- **Are fixtures doing real work?** A `conftest.py` fixture with a `session` scope and
+  mutable state couples every test that touches it; failures then depend on ordering.
+- **Is the mock mocking a boundary or a collaborator you own?** The latter tests the mock.
+- **Does the type say what the code means?** `-> dict` and `-> tuple[int, int]` both pass
+  `--strict` and both tell the reader nothing. A named type is a review comment worth
+  making.
+- **Would `--strict` actually run on this file?** Check for a per-module override in
+  `pyproject.toml` silently exempting it. An exemption nobody revisits is a hole with a
+  changelog entry.
+
+## Severity in this context
+
+- **Blocking:** anything in the table above under security or correctness — `shell=True`
+  interpolation, `assert` as an authorization check, `float` money, sync I/O in async.
+- **Should fix:** typing escapes (`Any`, unexplained ignores), mutable defaults,
+  truthiness-for-presence.
+- **Consider:** structural comments — dataclass instead of dict, narrower Protocol.
+
+## See also
+
+- `clean-code/references/python-adaptation.md` — the style-level conventions
+- `solid/references/python-adaptation.md` — Protocol over ABC, DIP in Python
+- `tdd/references/python.md` — the test-side conventions this review checks against

skills/cognitive-load/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: cognitive-load
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Cognitive complexity analysis (CLI score)"
+use_when: "Identifying hotspots, before refactoring"
 description: Measure how much mental effort a codebase demands from developers. Use when identifying hotspots, before architectural decisions, or when code feels hard to understand.
 ---
 
@@ -344,3 +347,12 @@ type UserWriter interface {
 - Load `refactoring` skill for systematic techniques to reduce identified hotspots
 - Load `solid` skill for structural fixes (coupling, cohesion)
 - Load `clean-code` skill for naming improvements
+
+## Escalation
+
+Read-only measurement. The score is the output.
+
+Stop and hand back when: the measurement disagrees with the reader's lived experience of
+the code. A metric that says "fine" about code everyone finds hard is evidence about the
+metric, not about the code, and continuing to defend the number is how a measure becomes
+a target.

skills/debug/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: debug
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Hypothesis-first debugging discipline"
+use_when: "Any test failure or bug whose cause is not immediately obvious"
 description: Systematic hypothesis-first debugging. Generate 3-5 ranked hypotheses with verification steps before suggesting any fix. Use when encountering a bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior.
 ---
 
@@ -9,7 +12,7 @@ description: Systematic hypothesis-first debugging. Generate 3-5 ranked hypothes
 
 Debugging is hypothesis generation, not fix generation. The first instinct — "try this and see if it works" — wastes time and teaches nothing. A disciplined debug session produces a small set of ranked, falsifiable hypotheses, each with a concrete verification command. The fix comes after one hypothesis is confirmed, not before.
 
-**Core principle:** A hypothesis you cannot verify in one command is not a hypothesis — it is a guess.
+**Core principle:** A hypothesis you cannot verify with a single bounded, decisive observation is not a hypothesis — it is a guess. In a repo that observation is usually one command. Above one it may be an instrumented run, or partitioning the last twenty CI runs by trigger type; what makes it a hypothesis is that the observation *discriminates*, not that it fits on one line.
 
 ## When to Use
 
@@ -22,12 +25,60 @@ Debugging is hypothesis generation, not fix generation. The first instinct — "
 - Compile errors with clear messages (just fix the typo)
 - Already-diagnosed bugs where you know the cause (go straight to TDD with a regression test)
 
+### Is it actually diagnosed?
+
+That last exclusion is the one people get wrong, because a confident wrong diagnosis feels
+exactly like a right one. It is diagnosed if you can state the mechanism *and* name the
+observation that would have proved it wrong. If the evidence is "we changed X and it got
+better", that is correlation with a deployment, and this skill applies.
+
+The strongest tell is a run of failed fixes — see below. Three plausible fixes that did
+not eliminate the symptom is not bad luck, it is the diagnosis being wrong.
+
+### Intake: what you need before hypothesising
+
+Before generating anything, confirm you have the failure itself — the error text, the
+stack, the failing run's id, the log. If the report is "it's flaky again" with no
+artifact, **name the specific thing you need and stop**. Iron Law 1 forbids "try X and
+see"; hypothesising into a vacuum is the same failure with better grammar, and it is
+worse because the output looks like analysis.
+
+This is the rule `cad-babysit` already enforces from the other side: read the issue's own
+comments and the job log *first*.
+
 ## Iron Laws
 
 1. **Never suggest "try X and see what happens."** Every hypothesis must have a specific expected outcome if correct.
 2. **Generate 3-5 hypotheses, ordered by likelihood (most likely first).** Fewer than 3 means you stopped thinking; more than 5 means you are not prioritizing.
 3. **Diagnose only — do not fix in this skill.** The fix happens in a separate TDD cycle (load `tdd` skill) once a hypothesis is confirmed.
 
+## When the bug spans components
+
+A system with boundaries (CI → build → signing, API → service → database) hides the
+question "which component is wrong?" behind the question "why is the output wrong?".
+Specify, as a pre-step, what to log entering and leaving **each** boundary, plus
+whether config and environment actually propagated. One run of that narrows the search
+to a single component.
+
+This does not suspend Iron Law 2. Still emit 3-5 hypotheses — the boundary spec comes
+first in the output, and each hypothesis says which boundary observation would kill it.
+What the pre-step forbids is hypotheses that quietly assume a component is the faulty
+one before any evidence says so.
+
+## When several fixes have already failed
+
+Three or more plausible fixes that failed to eliminate a symptom is not a run of bad
+luck — it is evidence that nobody has identified the mechanism. (Fixes that changed
+nothing at all count double: they are stronger evidence of a misidentified mechanism
+than fixes that partially worked.) Each one has been narrowing a window rather than
+closing it, and a fourth guess buys another tenth of the rate plus a layer of
+interacting guards nobody can reason about.
+
+Say that explicitly — the refusal is the finding, not a preamble to it. Then aim the
+hypotheses one level up: the premise those fixes share is itself the thing to falsify.
+This is not an exemption from the output format. It is the format, pointed at the
+assumption instead of at the symptom.
+
 ## Process
 
 ### Step 1: Read the failure
@@ -46,7 +97,15 @@ For each hypothesis, capture three things:
 - **Verification:** the single command or file inspection that confirms or denies it
 - **Expected outcome if correct:** the specific output you would see
 
-Order by likelihood. The most likely cause is hypothesis 1.
+Order by likelihood, most likely first. **The ordering is the ranking — do not also
+attach `high`/`medium`/`low` labels.** With five slots and three labels the labels stop
+discriminating (two hypotheses are genuinely both "high" and the label cannot say which
+comes first), and a reader then has two orderings that can disagree. Position already
+carries it.
+
+Where you can say *why* one outranks another — a prior brain entry, a matching symptom,
+a recent change in that area — say that instead of a label. That is information; a label
+is a restatement of the order it sits next to.
 
 ### Step 3: Output
 
@@ -110,6 +169,7 @@ The brain holds prior debug sessions across the project. Use it to skip rediscov
 
 **At debug start:**
 - Run `brain_query` with the error message snippet + the package name. Past sessions may have logged identical or similar failures with their resolved hypotheses.
+- **A hit is evidence, so cite it inline in the hypothesis it informs** — `(brain: <entry-name>)` — rather than mentioning it once at the top. If a prior entry is why a hypothesis ranks first, the reader needs that at the hypothesis, not in a preamble. If a prior entry contradicts your ranking, say so and rank it anyway if the evidence here is better; the brain records what was true then.
 
 **After a hypothesis is confirmed:**
 - Run `brain_write` with the failure signature → confirmed mechanism. Future debug sessions on the same area get the answer immediately.
@@ -124,7 +184,7 @@ Pass-rate is computed downstream by the `/pass-rate` HTTP endpoint, which
 treats `pass` as success, `fail` as failure, `skip` as neither.
 
 **At end of each phase:**
-- `session_log` with `{skill: "debug", phase: "<phase-name>", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", duration_ms: <wall-clock>, project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
+- `session_log` with `{session_id: "<this session's id>", skill: "debug", phase: "<phase-name>", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
 
 **Phases for this skill:** read-failure, generate-hypotheses, output
 
@@ -133,14 +193,32 @@ treats `pass` as success, `fail` as failure, `skip` as neither.
 - `fail` — the phase's intended outcome was NOT reached.
 - `skip` — phase was skipped intentionally.
 
-**Why this matters:** the routing pod (Plan 6) reads pass-rate to decide whether to route a future call to a local model. If your skill never logs, the routing pod sees no data.
+**Why this matters:** pass-rate is what a future routing decision would be based on — whether a given call can be served by a local model instead of a cloud one. A skill that never logs contributes no evidence either way.
-
-## Mode 2 Routing Note
-
-This skill produces high-volume mechanical output (hypothesis enumeration) and is a candidate for Mode 2 routing to a local model in the future. Until Plan 6 ships the routing pod, treat as Mode 1 only. The hypothesis format and discipline are identical regardless of which model generates them.
 
 ## Cross-References
 
 - After a hypothesis is confirmed, load `tdd` skill — write a failing regression test that proves the bug exists, then fix it.
 - For test failures specifically caused by mock-vs-real divergence, also load `tdd/references/testing-anti-patterns.md`.
 - Load `code-review` skill if the diagnosis surfaces a structural issue (god object, shotgun surgery) rather than a pointwise bug.
+
+Techniques kept in `debug/references/`, inherited from the deleted
+`superpowers-systematic-debugging` (#14):
+
+- `root-cause-tracing.md` — load when the failure surfaces far from its trigger and the
+  stack is the only thread back to it.
+- `defense-in-depth.md` — load after a root cause is confirmed, to decide which layers
+  should have caught it.
+- `condition-based-waiting.md` — load whenever a timeout appears anywhere in the report,
+  including as one of the fixes already tried. A bumped timeout is a symptom.
+- `find-polluter.sh` — run when a test passes alone and fails in the suite, or when
+  something in the tree appears that no test admits to creating.
+
+## Escalation
+
+Diagnose only — Iron Law 3 is already an escalation rule: the fix is a separate TDD cycle,
+not this skill's output.
+
+Stop and hand back when: the report contains no failure text and no locator, in which case
+name the specific artifact you need (run id, job log, stack trace) and stop rather than
+hypothesising into a vacuum; or the evidence needed to discriminate between your top two
+hypotheses requires access you do not have.

skills/discovery-framing/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: discovery-framing
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Problem-before-solution discovery/framing method"
+use_when: "Framing/validating a problem before any solution; opportunity sizing"
 description: Run the discovery / framing phase of product innovation — define and quantify a focused customer problem BEFORE any solution exists. Four movements: understand the problem space, learn about customers, identify and size problems, decide pursue/table/kill. Produces a problem brief per prioritized opportunity. Use when an idea is still vague, when someone is jumping to solutions before the problem is validated, when scoping early research, or when deciding which problems are worth pursuing. Trigger phrases include "frame the problem", "discovery", "problem statement", "is this worth building", "early research", "opportunity sizing", "we have an idea for", "how might we", "what problem are we solving".
 ---
 
@@ -149,3 +152,12 @@ hand-wavy. Crisp solution + fuzzy problem = reverse-engineered justification. St
 
 > Named instances of both war stories are client-tagged and held out of this public skill
 > pending client-store decision. The transferable lesson lives here; the wrapper stays out.
+
+## Escalation
+
+Advisory. Produces a problem brief; commits to nothing.
+
+Stop and hand back when: the evidence needed to size a problem requires talking to
+customers you cannot reach. Sizing a problem from assumptions and presenting it as
+discovery is worse than saying the number is unknown — it launders a guess into a brief
+that later decisions will cite.

skills/dream/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: dream
+surfaces: [claude-code, library, chat]
+summary: "Reflective consolidation pass over an agent's memory directory"
+use_when: "Pruning/merging memory files, rebuilding a memory index"
 description: >
   Run a "dream" — a reflective memory consolidation pass over an agent's memory
   directory. Use this skill whenever the user says "dream", "run a dream", "consolidate

skills/experiment-spec/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: experiment-spec
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Rigorous experiment spec — falsifiable hypothesis, quantitative acceptance, null-result protocol"
+use_when: "Scoping a research/ML phase instead of a feature"
 description: Write a rigorous experiment spec for a research phase before any code or training runs. Use instead of feature-spec for scientific/ML research projects. Enforces falsifiable hypothesis, quantitative acceptance criteria, baseline comparison, and null-result protocol.
 ---
 
@@ -182,7 +185,7 @@ If silhouette ≤ 0.20:
 
 **After experiment concludes:**
 - `brain_write` to `jepa-fx/failures/` with any new failure modes discovered
-- `session_log` with outcome
+- `session_log` with `{session_id: "<this session's id>", skill: "experiment-spec", phase: "conclude", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line outcome>"}`
 
 ## Cross-References
 

skills/feature-spec/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: feature-spec
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Implementation-level feature spec (tighter than spec-driven-dev)"
+use_when: "Scoping one feature inside an already-specced project"
 description: Write a tight implementation-level spec for a single feature or component before coding it. Use after a project-level spec exists (see spec-driven-dev) and you need to nail down one feature inside it.
 ---
 
@@ -29,6 +32,90 @@ A feature spec is the implementation-level contract for one feature or component
 2. **An "Out of scope" section is mandatory.** If you do not draw the boundary, the implementer (you, future-you, or another agent) will guess wrong.
 3. **Every technical decision in "Technical approach" must have a rationale.** A decision is any choice where a reasonable alternative existed and was not taken. "Use Postgres" is not a decision; "use Postgres because the rest of the stack uses it and we need transactions across user + invoice" is.
 
+## EARS-lite acceptance criteria
+
+Measurable criteria answer "is it done?". They do not always answer "what should it do
+when X happens?" — and behavioural requirements written as prose are where ambiguity
+survives review. For any criterion that is conditional or event-driven, use EARS-lite
+instead of prose:
+
+```
+WHEN <trigger> THE SYSTEM SHALL <observable response>
+WHILE <state> THE SYSTEM SHALL <observable response>
+IF <unwanted condition> THEN THE SYSTEM SHALL <observable response>
+```
+
+There is a fourth, unconditional form. Use it for invariants — the properties that must
+hold with no trigger at all, which are usually the ones that matter most:
+
+```
+THE SYSTEM SHALL <observable response>
+```
+
+Worked, deliberately from a domain unlike whatever you are specifying:
+
+```
+THE SYSTEM SHALL reject a firmware image whose signature does not verify
+WHEN a sensor reports a temperature above the shutdown limit
+  THE SYSTEM SHALL open the contactor within 200ms
+WHILE the contactor is open
+  THE SYSTEM SHALL refuse every start command
+IF a sensor reading is missing or stale by more than one interval
+  THEN THE SYSTEM SHALL treat it as above the limit
+```
+
+The example is off-domain on purpose. An on-domain example gets copied: a spec written
+against an invoice-flavoured example inherited a requirement about extraction confidence
+that its feature request never mentioned, and the author only noticed on review. Read
+the shapes, not the content.
+
+Each conditional line names a trigger and one observable response, which usually maps
+onto a single test. The `WHILE` and unconditional forms are universally quantified —
+"every start command", "a firmware image" — so they map onto a property or a set of
+cases, not one assertion. That is still worth writing: it closes the requirements half
+of the audit trail, which is otherwise issue-body prose.
+
+**This is an option, not a replacement.** Threshold criteria ("p99 < 200ms under 100
+RPS") stay as they are — EARS phrasing adds nothing to a number. Use it for conditional
+behaviour, error handling, and state-dependent rules.
+
+## Context snapshot
+
+The executor of this spec will not see the conversation that produced it, and often
+cannot see the architecture document either — a different agent, a fresh session, a
+different machine. A spec that says "see the architecture doc" hands them a lookup they
+may not be able to perform.
+
+So inline the specific facts this spec depends on, not the whole document:
+
+```markdown
+## Context snapshot
+Taken from <source> @ <commit-or-date>. Re-check before implementing if stale.
+
+- The mailbox poller writes rows to `invoices` with `state = 'received'`.
+- The payment-file writer reads `invoices` and emits one file per batch.
+- Money is int64 minor units plus an ISO-4217 code; float is banned repo-wide.
+```
+
+Three rules keep this from becoming a second source of truth, which is the real
+objection to inlining and a good one:
+
+1. **Snapshot what the implementer cannot look up and cannot proceed without.** That is
+   wider than "facts this spec's decisions rest on" — a table name may underpin no
+   decision here and still be the thing that blocks writing the migration. It is still
+   narrower than the whole document: if a fact changes nothing and blocks nothing, leave
+   it out, and say what you left out so the omission reads as deliberate.
+2. **Always cite source and version.** A snapshot without provenance cannot be
+   revalidated, and an unrevalidatable copy is exactly the drift everyone fears.
+3. **If you could not read the source either, say so in those words.** Writing a spec
+   against a document you cannot open is common and is not a reason to skip the section
+   — it is a reason to mark the whole block `UNVERIFIED — reconstructed, not read`, and
+   to make confirming it the implementer's first task, before the first failing test.
+   An unmarked guess is the only genuinely dangerous version.
+4. **The snapshot is evidence, not authority.** Open the section with one line to that
+   effect — "where this disagrees with the source, the source wins and this spec is
+   stale" — rather than annotating each fact.
+
 ## Spec Template
 
 ```markdown
@@ -39,12 +126,21 @@ A feature spec is the implementation-level contract for one feature or component
 What problem does this feature solve? For whom? Why now?
 (2-4 sentences. If you cannot answer "why now," ask before writing the rest.)
 
+## Context snapshot
+[Facts the implementer cannot look up, with source and version. See "Context snapshot" above.]
+
 ## Success Criteria
 
 - [ ] Criterion 1 — measurable and verifiable
 - [ ] Criterion 2 — measurable and verifiable
 - [ ] Criterion 3 — measurable and verifiable
 
+### Behavioural criteria (EARS-lite)
+
+[Conditional and event-driven behaviour, one trigger and one observable response per
+line. Not checkboxes — these are properties, and several need more than one test each.
+Omit the subsection entirely if the feature has no conditional behaviour.]
+
 ## Constraints
 
 Non-negotiable requirements the solution must satisfy.
@@ -149,7 +245,7 @@ Pass-rate is computed downstream by the `/pass-rate` HTTP endpoint, which
 treats `pass` as success, `fail` as failure, `skip` as neither.
 
 **At end of each phase:**
-- `session_log` with `{skill: "feature-spec", phase: "<phase-name>", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", duration_ms: <wall-clock>, project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
+- `session_log` with `{session_id: "<this session's id>", skill: "feature-spec", phase: "<phase-name>", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
 
 **Phases for this skill:** draft
 
@@ -158,11 +254,7 @@ treats `pass` as success, `fail` as failure, `skip` as neither.
 - `fail` — the phase's intended outcome was NOT reached (spec rejected, blocked on unresolved questions).
 - `skip` — phase was skipped intentionally.
 
-**Why this matters:** the routing pod (Plan 6) reads pass-rate to decide whether to route a future call to a local model. If your skill never logs, the routing pod sees no data.
+**Why this matters:** pass-rate is what a future routing decision would be based on — whether a given call can be served by a local model instead of a cloud one. A skill that never logs contributes no evidence either way.
-
-## Mode 2 Routing Note
-
-Spec writing requires interpretation of intent and tradeoff reasoning — work where Claude generally outperforms a 9-13B local model. This skill is intentionally **not** a Mode 2 routing candidate. In Mode 2, the routing layer should leave `feature-spec` calls on Claude.
 
 ## Cross-References
 

skills/gitea-ci/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: gitea-ci
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Gitea CI/CD pipeline with act_runner, buildah, k3s, GitHub mirror"
+use_when: "Setting up or debugging CI on this infra"
 description: End-to-end Gitea CI/CD setup with self-hosted act_runner, quality gate pipeline, shared buildctl image-build script, k3s deploy, and GitHub mirror. Covers act_runner-specific gotchas that are not documented anywhere.
 ---
 

skills/grill-me/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: grill-me
+surfaces: [claude-code, library, chat]
+summary: "Structured plan interrogation — Quick Poke, Full Grill, Pre-mortem"
+use_when: "Stress-testing a plan before committing; end of Diamond 1; before promoting to pre-prod"
 description: Critically interrogates plans, ideas, and proposals to make them sharper, more robust, and better grounded — with the explicit goal of producing a meaningfully better plan by the end. Use this skill whenever the user wants to stress-test a plan, prepare for hard questions, check if an idea is ready to act on, validate a hypothesis, or explicitly asks to be challenged, questioned, or grilled. Also trigger when a conversation has been exploring an idea for a while and it's time to converge — use this skill to check if the idea is actually ready. Trigger phrases include "grill me", "challenge this", "poke holes", "am I missing something", "is this ready", "stress-test this", "devil's advocate", "what am I not seeing".
 ---
 
@@ -145,3 +148,12 @@ This skill maps to the **convergence moments** in the Double Diamond workflow:
 - **Mid-Diamond 2 (Develop):** Use Quick Poke when an agent's experiment result is ambiguous and you're deciding whether to continue or pivot.
 
 The skill does NOT replace human judgment at convergence points — it sharpens the plan so that judgment is better informed.
+
+## Escalation
+
+Advisory. Produces sharper questions and a better plan; decides nothing.
+
+Stop and hand back when: the plan's weak point is a decision that is the operator's to
+make rather than a gap in reasoning — surface it as a question with options and a
+recommendation, and do not grill past it. Also stop when a round produces no new
+objection: interrogation past that point manufactures doubt rather than finding it.

skills/own-the-task/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: own-the-task
+surfaces: [claude-code, library, chat]
+summary: "Delegation ownership — Intake → Brief → Plan → Execute"
+use_when: "A task is handed over open-ended; \"take this off my plate\"; before a plan exists"
 description: Take ownership of a delegated task like a hired employee — interview first, write a handover brief, propose a plan, then execute. Use whenever the user says "take this off my plate", "own this", "act as my AI employee", "interview me first", "ask me questions before you start", or delegates anything open-ended where the real goal, the why, and the definition of done are not yet on the table. Trigger even when "interview" is never said — any delegation where getting the intent wrong would waste the whole effort belongs here.
 ---
 

skills/planning/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: planning
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Planning and task breakdown"
+use_when: "Sprint planning, task decomposition"
 description: Decompose work into small, verifiable, ordered tasks. Use when you have a spec or clear requirements and need to break work into implementable units.
 ---
 

skills/playwright/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: playwright
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Playwright E2E testing — setup, HTMX patterns, SSE streams, CI wiring"
+use_when: "Adding browser tests to any project with a web UI"
 description: Add and run Playwright E2E tests for any project with a web UI — covers setup, HTMX-specific patterns, SSE/streaming, Taskfile integration, and CI wiring.
 ---
 

skills/problem-analysis/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: problem-analysis
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Deep problem understanding before coding"
+use_when: "Starting any non-trivial task"
 description: Deeply understand a problem before coding begins. Identify the real problem, stakeholders, constraints, and success criteria. Use before starting any non-trivial feature.
 ---
 

skills/refactoring/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: refactoring
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Systematic refactoring methodology (Fowler)"
+use_when: "When improving existing code"
 description: Systematic refactoring methodology based on Martin Fowler's catalog. Apply during the REFACTOR phase of TDD, never while making code changes that modify behavior.
 ---
 

skills/regulatory-risk-assessment/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: regulatory-risk-assessment
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Structured risk register for regulated-industry features"
+use_when: "Filing a CAD issue (needs Risk: level); features touching payments, auth, external APIs, user data"
 description: Produce a structured regulatory risk assessment / risk-register entry for regulated-industry features (banking, payments, PSD2/PSR, DORA, AML). Use when filing a CAD issue that needs a Risk:LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH level, or designing features touching payments, auth, data storage, or external APIs ("what are the risks?", "compliance gate", "risk register").
 ---
 

skills/secret-hygiene/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: secret-hygiene
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Stop credentials rendering into the session transcript; safe rotation chain when one leaks"
+use_when: "Before any kubectl/SOPS/token command; after a confirmed leak"
 description: Prevent agent sessions from rendering credentials into the transcript, and recover safely when one leaks. Load BEFORE any command that touches credentials - kubectl exec/env/describe, kubectl get secret, whole-file SOPS decryption, token generation or rotation, envFrom inspection, or edits to encrypted config. Also load when a credential has already been exposed and a rotation chain is needed. Triggers - "rotate this token", "decrypt the config", "check the env var", "leaked credential", "did that print a secret", "why is this secret wrong".
 ---
 

skills/session-retrospective/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: session-retrospective
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Surface non-obvious learnings from a session log"
+use_when: "After a coding session ends, before context is lost"
 description: Review a completed coding session (from brain/sessions/*.jsonl) and surface non-obvious learnings worth preserving. Use after a session ends, before context is lost.
 ---
 
@@ -113,7 +116,7 @@ Pass-rate is computed downstream by the `/pass-rate` HTTP endpoint, which
 treats `pass` as success, `fail` as failure, `skip` as neither.
 
 **At end of each phase:**
-- `session_log` with `{skill: "session-retrospective", phase: "<phase-name>", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", duration_ms: <wall-clock>, project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
+- `session_log` with `{session_id: "<this session's id>", skill: "session-retrospective", phase: "<phase-name>", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
 
 **Phases for this skill:** surfaced
 
@@ -122,11 +125,7 @@ treats `pass` as success, `fail` as failure, `skip` as neither.
 - `fail` — the phase's intended outcome was NOT reached (retrospective could not produce coherent candidates).
 - `skip` — phase was skipped intentionally (no novel learnings worth surfacing).
 
-**Why this matters:** the routing pod (Plan 6) reads pass-rate to decide whether to route a future call to a local model. If your skill never logs, the routing pod sees no data.
+**Why this matters:** pass-rate is what a future routing decision would be based on — whether a given call can be served by a local model instead of a cloud one. A skill that never logs contributes no evidence either way.
-
-## Mode 2 Routing Note
-
-Reading long session logs and pulling themes is high-volume, mechanical pattern-recognition work — a strong Mode 2 routing candidate. Until Plan 6 ships the routing pod, treat as Mode 1 only.
 
 ## Cross-References
 

skills/solid/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: solid
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "SOLID principles with Go examples"
+use_when: "Design review, architecture decisions"
 description: Apply SOLID design principles in Go. Use during architecture decisions, design reviews, and when adding new abstractions.
 ---
 
@@ -255,5 +258,15 @@ Domain types know nothing about HTTP, SQL, or external APIs.
 
 - `references/solid-principles.md` — canonical SOLID reference with TypeScript examples
 - `references/go-adaptation.md` — this workspace's Go-specific rewrite of each principle
+- `references/python-adaptation.md` — the Python rewrite: Protocol over ABC, and what does not carry over from Go
 - Load `clean-code` skill for naming and structure
 - Load `code-review` skill for detecting violations during review
+
+## Escalation
+
+Advisory. Names principle violations and suggests structure; writes no code.
+
+Stop and hand back when: applying a principle would require a change larger than the one
+under discussion. "This wants dependency inversion" on a two-line fix is a design
+conversation, not a review comment, and forcing it through as one is how a small change
+acquires an architecture.

skills/solid/references/python-adaptation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,104 @@
+# SOLID Principles: Python Adaptation
+
+`references/go-adaptation.md` rewrites each principle for Go. This file does the same
+for Python, and marks the places where the Go rewrite's advice does *not* carry over.
+
+The canonical Python stack lives in `~/dev/.context/AGENT.md`; it is not restated here.
+
+## The one idea that changes everything: `Protocol`
+
+Go's interfaces are structural — a type satisfies one by having the methods, with no
+declaration. Python has the same thing since 3.8, and it is the right default:
+
+```python
+from typing import Protocol
+
+class InvoiceStore(Protocol):
+    def get(self, invoice_id: InvoiceId) -> Invoice: ...
+    def save(self, invoice: Invoice) -> None: ...
+```
+
+- **Define the Protocol where it is *consumed*, not where it is implemented.** This is
+  Go's "accept interfaces, return structs" and it is what makes DIP real: the high-level
+  module owns the abstraction, and the adapter depends on it rather than the reverse.
+- **Prefer `Protocol` to `ABC`.** An ABC forces implementers to inherit, which couples
+  them to your package and makes a third-party class impossible to adapt without a
+  wrapper. Use an ABC only when you genuinely need shared implementation, not just a
+  contract.
+- Add `@runtime_checkable` only if you actually call `isinstance` — and if you are
+  calling `isinstance` against a Protocol, check whether the real problem is a missing
+  polymorphic method (an LSP smell).
+
+## S — Single Responsibility
+
+Same as Go: the unit is the module, not just the class. `utils.py` is the Python god
+package — it cannot have one reason to change because it has no subject.
+
+Python-specific tell: a class whose `__init__` stores arguments and whose only other
+method is `run()` or `execute()`. That is a function with ceremony. Write the function.
+
+## O — Open/Closed
+
+Extension in Python usually means **passing behaviour in**, not subclassing:
+
+```python
+# Closed for modification: adding a rule does not touch this function
+def apply_rules(invoice: Invoice, rules: Sequence[Rule]) -> Invoice: ...
+```
+
+`functools.singledispatch` is the idiomatic open extension point when dispatch is on
+type and the set of types grows outside your module. Beware the alternative that looks
+Pythonic and is not: monkey-patching is modification pretending to be extension, and it
+is invisible at the call site.
+
+## L — Liskov
+
+The Python-specific violation is **signature widening/narrowing that the type checker
+would catch if you let it**. Under `mypy --strict`, an override that narrows a parameter
+type or widens a return type is an error — which means most LSP violations in Python are
+type errors you chose not to see. This is the strongest argument for `--strict` in a
+design document rather than a style one.
+
+Raising a *new* exception type in an override is the violation `mypy` will not catch:
+callers wrote `except StoreError`, and your subclass raises `TimeoutError`. Exceptions
+are part of the contract; Python just will not check them for you.
+
+## I — Interface Segregation
+
+Protocols make this cheap: define the narrow one you need at the call site.
+
+```python
+class InvoiceReader(Protocol):
+    def get(self, invoice_id: InvoiceId) -> Invoice: ...
+```
+
+A function that only reads should accept `InvoiceReader`, not the full `InvoiceStore`.
+The test double then implements one method instead of eight, which is the practical
+payoff and the reason this principle survives contact with real code.
+
+## D — Dependency Inversion
+
+Constructor injection, exactly as in Go. Two Python-specific hazards:
+
+- **Import-time side effects are hidden dependencies.** A module that opens a database
+  connection or reads an env var at import has a dependency nothing can inject and no
+  test can replace. Configuration belongs in `pydantic-settings` objects passed in.
+- **Default arguments are compile-time bindings.** `def send(client: Client = Client())`
+  constructs the default once, at definition, and welds it to every caller. Default to
+  `None` and construct inside, or require it.
+
+## What does not carry over from the Go rewrite
+
+- **"Return structs, accept interfaces"** — the returning half is about Go's zero values
+  and nil interfaces. In Python, returning a Protocol type is fine and often better.
+- **Small interfaces because of embedding** — Python has no embedding; composition is
+  explicit delegation, which is more verbose but reads honestly.
+- **Package-level responsibility as the unit of deployment** — Python packaging is much
+  looser. The module boundary is still the right unit for *reasoning*, but do not expect
+  it to be enforced.
+
+## See also
+
+- `references/solid-principles.md` — the canonical, language-neutral reference
+- `references/go-adaptation.md` — the Go rewrite; contrast is instructive
+- `clean-code/references/python-adaptation.md` — style-level Python conventions

skills/spec-driven-dev/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: spec-driven-dev
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Spec-driven development for PMs"
+use_when: "Writing specs and requirements"
 description: Write a structured specification before writing any code. Use when starting a new project, feature, or significant change. Adapted for a PM-first workflow where why comes before how.
 ---
 
@@ -197,6 +200,56 @@ Dev:     [full command]
 [Anything unresolved that needs input before implementation begins]
 ```
 
+## EARS-lite acceptance criteria
+
+Measurable criteria answer "is it done?". They do not always answer "what should it do
+when X happens?" — and behavioural requirements written as prose are where ambiguity
+survives review. For any criterion that is conditional or event-driven, use EARS-lite
+instead of prose:
+
+```
+WHEN <trigger> THE SYSTEM SHALL <observable response>
+WHILE <state> THE SYSTEM SHALL <observable response>
+IF <unwanted condition> THEN THE SYSTEM SHALL <observable response>
+```
+
+There is a fourth, unconditional form. Use it for invariants — the properties that must
+hold with no trigger at all, which are usually the ones that matter most:
+
+```
+THE SYSTEM SHALL <observable response>
+```
+
+Worked, deliberately from a domain unlike whatever you are specifying:
+
+```
+THE SYSTEM SHALL reject a firmware image whose signature does not verify
+WHEN a sensor reports a temperature above the shutdown limit
+  THE SYSTEM SHALL open the contactor within 200ms
+WHILE the contactor is open
+  THE SYSTEM SHALL refuse every start command
+IF a sensor reading is missing or stale by more than one interval
+  THEN THE SYSTEM SHALL treat it as above the limit
+```
+
+The example is off-domain on purpose. An on-domain example gets copied: a spec written
+against an invoice-flavoured example inherited a requirement about extraction confidence
+that its feature request never mentioned, and the author only noticed on review. Read
+the shapes, not the content.
+
+Each conditional line names a trigger and one observable response, which usually maps
+onto a single test. The `WHILE` and unconditional forms are universally quantified —
+"every start command", "a firmware image" — so they map onto a property or a set of
+cases, not one assertion. That is still worth writing: it closes the requirements half
+of the audit trail, which is otherwise issue-body prose.
+
+**This is an option, not a replacement.** Threshold criteria ("p99 < 200ms under 100
+RPS") stay as they are — EARS phrasing adds nothing to a number. Use it for conditional
+behaviour, error handling, and state-dependent rules.
+
+For the executor-facing handoff, `feature-spec` also carries a **Context snapshot**
+section — inline the architecture facts the implementer cannot look up.
+
 ## Reframing Vague Requirements
 
 When you receive a vague requirement, translate it into specific success criteria before writing any spec content:
@@ -279,7 +332,7 @@ Pass-rate is computed downstream by the `/pass-rate` HTTP endpoint, which
 treats `pass` as success, `fail` as failure, `skip` as neither.
 
 **At end of each phase:**
-- `session_log` with `{skill: "spec-driven-dev", phase: "<phase-name>", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", duration_ms: <wall-clock>, project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
+- `session_log` with `{session_id: "<this session's id>", skill: "spec-driven-dev", phase: "<phase-name>", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
 
 **Phases for this skill:** specify, plan, tasks, implement
 
@@ -288,7 +341,7 @@ treats `pass` as success, `fail` as failure, `skip` as neither.
 - `fail` — the phase's intended outcome was NOT reached (gate blocked, rework required).
 - `skip` — phase was skipped intentionally.
 
-**Why this matters:** the routing pod (Plan 6) reads pass-rate to decide whether to route a future call to a local model. If your skill never logs, the routing pod sees no data.
+**Why this matters:** pass-rate is what a future routing decision would be based on — whether a given call can be served by a local model instead of a cloud one. A skill that never logs contributes no evidence either way.
 
 ## Cross-References
 

skills/stage-gate-review/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: stage-gate-review
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Stage-gate product governance (go/no-go council)"
+use_when: "Preparing a Product Council ask; building a go/no-go checklist; gate review"
 description: Run or prepare a stage-gate product governance review — the go/no-go checkpoint where a council approves an initiative to advance through fixed innovation stages (Frame → Concept → Prototype → Validate → Scale), each gate guarded by a per-discipline readiness checklist. Use when preparing a Product Council / steering-group ask, building a go/no-go checklist, designing an innovation governance process, or auditing whether an initiative is genuinely ready to advance vs faking the gate. Trigger phrases include "stage gate", "product council", "go/no-go", "advance to the next stage", "is this ready to progress", "gate review", "phase gate", "innovation governance".
 ---
 
@@ -71,6 +74,9 @@ legal waived"), never silently dropped. Silent omission is the most common way a
 3. Mark every discipline: cleared / waived (with reason) / gap.
 4. If any gap is on a discipline that gates the whole bet, **do not bring the ask** — close
    the gap or bring a feedback-only ask instead.
+5. Load `grill-me` (Full Grill) on the ask before bringing it. A council's hard questions are
+   cheaper to answer in private first, and a gap found by grilling is a gap you close rather
+   than one the gate reports.
 
 **Chairing a review (you are the council):**
 1. Ask for the evidence behind each "cleared", not the claim. Claims are theatre.
@@ -145,3 +151,12 @@ stays in the client boundary**:
 - Council/forum names, internal stage labels, internal tooling, named contacts, strategy
   specifics, deal terms → client dir/org only, local models only, never the public brain.
 - This skill carries the **pattern**; the client carries the **wrapper**. Never merge them.
+
+## Escalation
+
+Advisory. Prepares or chairs a gate; the council decides, not this skill.
+
+Stop and hand back when: a discipline's evidence is missing rather than weak. A gap on a
+gating discipline means do not bring the ask — bring a feedback-only ask instead. Marking
+it "cleared with a note" is precisely the gate theatre the anti-patterns section is
+about.

skills/superpowers-brainstorming/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: brainstorming
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Structured divergent brainstorming"
+use_when: "Generating or expanding a set of ideas"
 description: "You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation."
 ---
 

skills/superpowers-brainstorming/spec-document-reviewer-prompt.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ Use this template when dispatching a spec document reviewer subagent.
 **Dispatch after:** Spec document is written to docs/superpowers/specs/
 
 ```
-Task tool (general-purpose):
+Agent tool (`subagent_type: "general-purpose"`):
   description: "Review spec document"
   prompt: |
     You are a spec document reviewer. Verify this spec is complete and ready for planning.

skills/superpowers-dispatching-parallel-agents/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: dispatching-parallel-agents
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Fan work out across parallel subagents"
+use_when: "Decomposing work for concurrent agents"
 description: Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies
 ---
 
@@ -65,13 +68,30 @@ Each agent gets:
 
 ### 3. Dispatch in Parallel
 
-```typescript
+Issue every dispatch in **one** message — several `Agent` tool uses in a single
-// In Claude Code / AI environment
+assistant turn run concurrently; one per turn runs them in series.
-Task("Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts failures")
+
-Task("Fix batch-completion-behavior.test.ts failures")
-Task("Fix tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts failures")
-// All three run concurrently
 ```
+Agent(description: "fix abort tests",   subagent_type: "general-purpose", prompt: ...)
+Agent(description: "fix batch tests",   subagent_type: "general-purpose", prompt: ...)
+Agent(description: "fix approval tests", subagent_type: "general-purpose", prompt: ...)
+```
+
+Options that matter for this pattern:
+
+- `run_in_background: true` (the default) returns immediately and notifies on
+  completion. Set it to `false` only when your very next action depends on the result.
+- `isolation: "worktree"` gives an agent its own git worktree. Use it whenever two
+  agents might touch the same files — parallel writers to one tree is the failure this
+  skill's independence rule exists to avoid, and a worktree makes it structural rather
+  than a matter of discipline.
+- `model` overrides the model per agent; cheap mechanical fan-out does not need the
+  same model as the reasoning that planned it.
+
+For a fan-out with real structure — phases, a verify pass per finding, fan-in — the
+`Workflow` tool expresses it directly with `agent()`, `parallel()` and `pipeline()`.
+It spawns many agents and costs accordingly, so it runs **only on explicit opt-in from
+the operator**; do not reach for it just because a task looks parallel.
 
 ### 4. Review and Integrate
 

skills/superpowers-executing-plans/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: executing-plans
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Executing a written plan step by step"
+use_when: "Running an approved plan to completion"
 description: Use when you have a written implementation plan to execute in a separate session with review checkpoints
 ---
 
@@ -11,14 +14,16 @@ Load plan, review critically, execute all tasks, report when complete.
 
 **Announce at start:** "I'm using the executing-plans skill to implement this plan."
 
-**Note:** Tell your human partner that Superpowers works much better with access to subagents. The quality of its work will be significantly higher if run on a platform with subagent support (such as Claude Code or Codex). If subagents are available, use superpowers:subagent-driven-development instead of this skill.
+**Note:** This skill is the fallback for harnesses with no subagents. Claude Code has
+them — the `Agent` tool — so on this fleet prefer `superpowers-subagent-driven-development`
+and use this skill only where `Agent` is genuinely unavailable (Crush, Pi, OpenCode).
 
 ## The Process
 
 ### Step 1: Load and Review Plan
 1. Read plan file
 2. Review critically - identify any questions or concerns about the plan
-3. If concerns: Raise them with your human partner before starting
+3. If concerns: Raise them with the operator before starting
 4. If no concerns: Create TodoWrite and proceed
 
 ### Step 2: Execute Tasks

skills/superpowers-finishing-a-development-branch/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: finishing-a-development-branch
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Cleanly finishing/landing a dev branch"
+use_when: "Wrapping a branch → merge/PR"
 description: Use when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and you need to decide how to integrate the work - guides completion of development work by presenting structured options for merge, PR, or cleanup
 ---
 

skills/superpowers-receiving-code-review/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: receiving-code-review
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Acting on received review feedback"
+use_when: "Responding to review comments"
 description: Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation
 ---
 
@@ -11,6 +14,8 @@ Code review requires technical evaluation, not emotional performance.
 
 **Core principle:** Verify before implementing. Ask before assuming. Technical correctness over social comfort.
 
+This skill starts where `superpowers-requesting-code-review` ends. The substance of what a reviewer should have checked is `code-review`.
+
 ## The Response Pattern
 
 ```
@@ -27,7 +32,7 @@ WHEN receiving code review feedback:
 ## Forbidden Responses
 
 **NEVER:**
-- "You're absolutely right!" (explicit CLAUDE.md violation)
+- "You're absolutely right!" (performative agreement, not evaluation)
 - "Great point!" / "Excellent feedback!" (performative)
 - "Let me implement that now" (before verification)
 
@@ -49,7 +54,7 @@ WHY: Items may be related. Partial understanding = wrong implementation.
 
 **Example:**
 ```
-your human partner: "Fix 1-6"
+the operator: "Fix 1-6"
 You understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.
 
 ❌ WRONG: Implement 1,2,3,6 now, ask about 4,5 later
@@ -58,7 +63,7 @@ You understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.
 
 ## Source-Specific Handling
 
-### From your human partner
+### From the operator
 - **Trusted** - implement after understanding
 - **Still ask** if scope unclear
 - **No performative agreement**
@@ -79,11 +84,11 @@ IF suggestion seems wrong:
 IF can't easily verify:
   Say so: "I can't verify this without [X]. Should I [investigate/ask/proceed]?"
 
-IF conflicts with your human partner's prior decisions:
+IF conflicts with the operator's prior decisions:
-  Stop and discuss with your human partner first
+  Stop and discuss with the operator first
 ```
 
-**your human partner's rule:** "External feedback - be skeptical, but check carefully"
+**the operator's rule:** "External feedback - be skeptical, but check carefully"
 
 ## YAGNI Check for "Professional" Features
 
@@ -95,7 +100,7 @@ IF reviewer suggests "implementing properly":
   IF used: Then implement properly
 ```
 
-**your human partner's rule:** "You and reviewer both report to me. If we don't need this feature, don't add it."
+**the operator's rule:** "You and reviewer both report to me. If we don't need this feature, don't add it."
 
 ## Implementation Order
 
@@ -118,13 +123,13 @@ Push back when:
 - Violates YAGNI (unused feature)
 - Technically incorrect for this stack
 - Legacy/compatibility reasons exist
-- Conflicts with your human partner's architectural decisions
+- Conflicts with the operator's architectural decisions
 
 **How to push back:**
 - Use technical reasoning, not defensiveness
 - Ask specific questions
 - Reference working tests/code
-- Involve your human partner if architectural
+- Involve the operator if architectural
 
 **Signal if uncomfortable pushing back out loud:** "Strange things are afoot at the Circle K"
 
@@ -195,7 +200,7 @@ Reviewer: "Implement proper metrics tracking with database, date filters, CSV ex
 
 **Unclear Item (Good):**
 ```
-your human partner: "Fix items 1-6"
+the operator: "Fix items 1-6"
 You understand 1,2,3,6. Unclear on 4,5.
 ✅ "Understand 1,2,3,6. Need clarification on 4 and 5 before implementing."
 ```

skills/superpowers-requesting-code-review/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: requesting-code-review
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Requesting a code review well"
+use_when: "Asking another agent/human to review"
 description: Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
 ---
 
@@ -9,6 +12,8 @@ Dispatch a code reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade. The revie
 
 **Core principle:** Review early, review often.
 
+This skill is the *commissioning* half. What the reviewer should look for is `code-review`; how to handle what comes back is `superpowers-receiving-code-review`.
+
 ## When to Request Review
 
 **Mandatory:**
@@ -31,7 +36,9 @@ HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
 
 **2. Dispatch code reviewer subagent:**
 
-Use Task tool with `general-purpose` type, fill template at `code-reviewer.md`
+Use the `Agent` tool with `subagent_type: "general-purpose"`, filling the template at
+`code-reviewer.md`. A reviewer needs no write access and benefits from none — if the
+harness offers a read-only agent type, prefer it.
 
 **Placeholders:**
 - `{DESCRIPTION}` - Brief summary of what you built

skills/superpowers-requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ Use this template when dispatching a code reviewer subagent.
 **Purpose:** Review completed work against requirements and code quality standards before it cascades into more work.
 
 ```
-Task tool (general-purpose):
+Agent tool (`subagent_type: "general-purpose"`):
   description: "Review code changes"
   prompt: |
     You are a Senior Code Reviewer with expertise in software architecture,

skills/superpowers-subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: subagent-driven-development
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Subagent-driven development workflow"
+use_when: "Building via orchestrated subagents"
 description: Use when executing implementation plans with independent tasks in the current session
 ---
 
@@ -11,7 +14,7 @@ Execute plan by dispatching fresh subagent per task, with two-stage review after
 
 **Core principle:** Fresh subagent per task + two-stage review (spec then quality) = high quality, fast iteration
 
-**Continuous execution:** Do not pause to check in with your human partner between tasks. Execute all tasks from the plan without stopping. The only reasons to stop are: BLOCKED status you cannot resolve, ambiguity that genuinely prevents progress, or all tasks complete. "Should I continue?" prompts and progress summaries waste their time — they asked you to execute the plan, so execute it.
+**Continuous execution:** Do not pause to check in with the operator between tasks. Execute all tasks from the plan without stopping. The only reasons to stop are: BLOCKED status you cannot resolve, ambiguity that genuinely prevents progress, or all tasks complete. "Should I continue?" prompts and progress summaries waste their time — they asked you to execute the plan, so execute it.
 
 ## When to Use
 

skills/superpowers-subagent-driven-development/code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ Use this template when dispatching a code quality reviewer subagent.
 **Only dispatch after spec compliance review passes.**
 
 ```
-Task tool (general-purpose):
+Agent tool (`subagent_type: "general-purpose"`):
   Use template at requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md
 
   DESCRIPTION: [task summary, from implementer's report]

skills/superpowers-subagent-driven-development/implementer-prompt.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
 Use this template when dispatching an implementer subagent.
 
 ```
-Task tool (general-purpose):
+Agent tool (`subagent_type: "general-purpose"`):
   description: "Implement Task N: [task name]"
   prompt: |
     You are implementing Task N: [task name]

skills/superpowers-subagent-driven-development/spec-reviewer-prompt.md

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ Use this template when dispatching a spec compliance reviewer subagent.
 **Purpose:** Verify implementer built what was requested (nothing more, nothing less)
 
 ```
-Task tool (general-purpose):
+Agent tool (`subagent_type: "general-purpose"`):
   description: "Review spec compliance for Task N"
   prompt: |
     You are reviewing whether an implementation matches its specification.

skills/superpowers-systematic-debugging/CREATION-LOG.md

@@ -1,119 +0,0 @@
-# Creation Log: Systematic Debugging Skill
-
-Reference example of extracting, structuring, and bulletproofing a critical skill.
-
-## Source Material
-
-Extracted debugging framework from `~/.claude/CLAUDE.md`:
-- 4-phase systematic process (Investigation → Pattern Analysis → Hypothesis → Implementation)
-- Core mandate: ALWAYS find root cause, NEVER fix symptoms
-- Rules designed to resist time pressure and rationalization
-
-## Extraction Decisions
-
-**What to include:**
-- Complete 4-phase framework with all rules
-- Anti-shortcuts ("NEVER fix symptom", "STOP and re-analyze")
-- Pressure-resistant language ("even if faster", "even if I seem in a hurry")
-- Concrete steps for each phase
-
-**What to leave out:**
-- Project-specific context
-- Repetitive variations of same rule
-- Narrative explanations (condensed to principles)
-
-## Structure Following skill-creation/SKILL.md
-
-1. **Rich when_to_use** - Included symptoms and anti-patterns
-2. **Type: technique** - Concrete process with steps
-3. **Keywords** - "root cause", "symptom", "workaround", "debugging", "investigation"
-4. **Flowchart** - Decision point for "fix failed" → re-analyze vs add more fixes
-5. **Phase-by-phase breakdown** - Scannable checklist format
-6. **Anti-patterns section** - What NOT to do (critical for this skill)
-
-## Bulletproofing Elements
-
-Framework designed to resist rationalization under pressure:
-
-### Language Choices
-- "ALWAYS" / "NEVER" (not "should" / "try to")
-- "even if faster" / "even if I seem in a hurry"
-- "STOP and re-analyze" (explicit pause)
-- "Don't skip past" (catches the actual behavior)
-
-### Structural Defenses
-- **Phase 1 required** - Can't skip to implementation
-- **Single hypothesis rule** - Forces thinking, prevents shotgun fixes
-- **Explicit failure mode** - "IF your first fix doesn't work" with mandatory action
-- **Anti-patterns section** - Shows exactly what shortcuts look like
-
-### Redundancy
-- Root cause mandate in overview + when_to_use + Phase 1 + implementation rules
-- "NEVER fix symptom" appears 4 times in different contexts
-- Each phase has explicit "don't skip" guidance
-
-## Testing Approach
-
-Created 4 validation tests following skills/meta/testing-skills-with-subagents:
-
-### Test 1: Academic Context (No Pressure)
-- Simple bug, no time pressure
-- **Result:** Perfect compliance, complete investigation
-
-### Test 2: Time Pressure + Obvious Quick Fix
-- User "in a hurry", symptom fix looks easy
-- **Result:** Resisted shortcut, followed full process, found real root cause
-
-### Test 3: Complex System + Uncertainty
-- Multi-layer failure, unclear if can find root cause
-- **Result:** Systematic investigation, traced through all layers, found source
-
-### Test 4: Failed First Fix
-- Hypothesis doesn't work, temptation to add more fixes
-- **Result:** Stopped, re-analyzed, formed new hypothesis (no shotgun)
-
-**All tests passed.** No rationalizations found.
-
-## Iterations
-
-### Initial Version
-- Complete 4-phase framework
-- Anti-patterns section
-- Flowchart for "fix failed" decision
-
-### Enhancement 1: TDD Reference
-- Added link to skills/testing/test-driven-development
-- Note explaining TDD's "simplest code" ≠ debugging's "root cause"
-- Prevents confusion between methodologies
-
-## Final Outcome
-
-Bulletproof skill that:
-- ✅ Clearly mandates root cause investigation
-- ✅ Resists time pressure rationalization
-- ✅ Provides concrete steps for each phase
-- ✅ Shows anti-patterns explicitly
-- ✅ Tested under multiple pressure scenarios
-- ✅ Clarifies relationship to TDD
-- ✅ Ready for use
-
-## Key Insight
-
-**Most important bulletproofing:** Anti-patterns section showing exact shortcuts that feel justified in the moment. When Claude thinks "I'll just add this one quick fix", seeing that exact pattern listed as wrong creates cognitive friction.
-
-## Usage Example
-
-When encountering a bug:
-1. Load skill: skills/debugging/systematic-debugging
-2. Read overview (10 sec) - reminded of mandate
-3. Follow Phase 1 checklist - forced investigation
-4. If tempted to skip - see anti-pattern, stop
-5. Complete all phases - root cause found
-
-**Time investment:** 5-10 minutes
-**Time saved:** Hours of symptom-whack-a-mole
-
----
-
-*Created: 2025-10-03*
-*Purpose: Reference example for skill extraction and bulletproofing*

skills/superpowers-systematic-debugging/SKILL.md

@@ -1,296 +0,0 @@
----
-name: systematic-debugging
-description: Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes
----
-
-# Systematic Debugging
-
-## Overview
-
-Random fixes waste time and create new bugs. Quick patches mask underlying issues.
-
-**Core principle:** ALWAYS find root cause before attempting fixes. Symptom fixes are failure.
-
-**Violating the letter of this process is violating the spirit of debugging.**
-
-## The Iron Law
-
-```
-NO FIXES WITHOUT ROOT CAUSE INVESTIGATION FIRST
-```
-
-If you haven't completed Phase 1, you cannot propose fixes.
-
-## When to Use
-
-Use for ANY technical issue:
-- Test failures
-- Bugs in production
-- Unexpected behavior
-- Performance problems
-- Build failures
-- Integration issues
-
-**Use this ESPECIALLY when:**
-- Under time pressure (emergencies make guessing tempting)
-- "Just one quick fix" seems obvious
-- You've already tried multiple fixes
-- Previous fix didn't work
-- You don't fully understand the issue
-
-**Don't skip when:**
-- Issue seems simple (simple bugs have root causes too)
-- You're in a hurry (rushing guarantees rework)
-- Manager wants it fixed NOW (systematic is faster than thrashing)
-
-## The Four Phases
-
-You MUST complete each phase before proceeding to the next.
-
-### Phase 1: Root Cause Investigation
-
-**BEFORE attempting ANY fix:**
-
-1. **Read Error Messages Carefully**
-   - Don't skip past errors or warnings
-   - They often contain the exact solution
-   - Read stack traces completely
-   - Note line numbers, file paths, error codes
-
-2. **Reproduce Consistently**
-   - Can you trigger it reliably?
-   - What are the exact steps?
-   - Does it happen every time?
-   - If not reproducible → gather more data, don't guess
-
-3. **Check Recent Changes**
-   - What changed that could cause this?
-   - Git diff, recent commits
-   - New dependencies, config changes
-   - Environmental differences
-
-4. **Gather Evidence in Multi-Component Systems**
-
-   **WHEN system has multiple components (CI → build → signing, API → service → database):**
-
-   **BEFORE proposing fixes, add diagnostic instrumentation:**
-   ```
-   For EACH component boundary:
-     - Log what data enters component
-     - Log what data exits component
-     - Verify environment/config propagation
-     - Check state at each layer
-
-   Run once to gather evidence showing WHERE it breaks
-   THEN analyze evidence to identify failing component
-   THEN investigate that specific component
-   ```
-
-   **Example (multi-layer system):**
-   ```bash
-   # Layer 1: Workflow
-   echo "=== Secrets available in workflow: ==="
-   echo "IDENTITY: ${IDENTITY:+SET}${IDENTITY:-UNSET}"
-
-   # Layer 2: Build script
-   echo "=== Env vars in build script: ==="
-   env | grep IDENTITY || echo "IDENTITY not in environment"
-
-   # Layer 3: Signing script
-   echo "=== Keychain state: ==="
-   security list-keychains
-   security find-identity -v
-
-   # Layer 4: Actual signing
-   codesign --sign "$IDENTITY" --verbose=4 "$APP"
-   ```
-
-   **This reveals:** Which layer fails (secrets → workflow ✓, workflow → build ✗)
-
-5. **Trace Data Flow**
-
-   **WHEN error is deep in call stack:**
-
-   See `root-cause-tracing.md` in this directory for the complete backward tracing technique.
-
-   **Quick version:**
-   - Where does bad value originate?
-   - What called this with bad value?
-   - Keep tracing up until you find the source
-   - Fix at source, not at symptom
-
-### Phase 2: Pattern Analysis
-
-**Find the pattern before fixing:**
-
-1. **Find Working Examples**
-   - Locate similar working code in same codebase
-   - What works that's similar to what's broken?
-
-2. **Compare Against References**
-   - If implementing pattern, read reference implementation COMPLETELY
-   - Don't skim - read every line
-   - Understand the pattern fully before applying
-
-3. **Identify Differences**
-   - What's different between working and broken?
-   - List every difference, however small
-   - Don't assume "that can't matter"
-
-4. **Understand Dependencies**
-   - What other components does this need?
-   - What settings, config, environment?
-   - What assumptions does it make?
-
-### Phase 3: Hypothesis and Testing
-
-**Scientific method:**
-
-1. **Form Single Hypothesis**
-   - State clearly: "I think X is the root cause because Y"
-   - Write it down
-   - Be specific, not vague
-
-2. **Test Minimally**
-   - Make the SMALLEST possible change to test hypothesis
-   - One variable at a time
-   - Don't fix multiple things at once
-
-3. **Verify Before Continuing**
-   - Did it work? Yes → Phase 4
-   - Didn't work? Form NEW hypothesis
-   - DON'T add more fixes on top
-
-4. **When You Don't Know**
-   - Say "I don't understand X"
-   - Don't pretend to know
-   - Ask for help
-   - Research more
-
-### Phase 4: Implementation
-
-**Fix the root cause, not the symptom:**
-
-1. **Create Failing Test Case**
-   - Simplest possible reproduction
-   - Automated test if possible
-   - One-off test script if no framework
-   - MUST have before fixing
-   - Use the `superpowers:test-driven-development` skill for writing proper failing tests
-
-2. **Implement Single Fix**
-   - Address the root cause identified
-   - ONE change at a time
-   - No "while I'm here" improvements
-   - No bundled refactoring
-
-3. **Verify Fix**
-   - Test passes now?
-   - No other tests broken?
-   - Issue actually resolved?
-
-4. **If Fix Doesn't Work**
-   - STOP
-   - Count: How many fixes have you tried?
-   - If < 3: Return to Phase 1, re-analyze with new information
-   - **If ≥ 3: STOP and question the architecture (step 5 below)**
-   - DON'T attempt Fix #4 without architectural discussion
-
-5. **If 3+ Fixes Failed: Question Architecture**
-
-   **Pattern indicating architectural problem:**
-   - Each fix reveals new shared state/coupling/problem in different place
-   - Fixes require "massive refactoring" to implement
-   - Each fix creates new symptoms elsewhere
-
-   **STOP and question fundamentals:**
-   - Is this pattern fundamentally sound?
-   - Are we "sticking with it through sheer inertia"?
-   - Should we refactor architecture vs. continue fixing symptoms?
-
-   **Discuss with your human partner before attempting more fixes**
-
-   This is NOT a failed hypothesis - this is a wrong architecture.
-
-## Red Flags - STOP and Follow Process
-
-If you catch yourself thinking:
-- "Quick fix for now, investigate later"
-- "Just try changing X and see if it works"
-- "Add multiple changes, run tests"
-- "Skip the test, I'll manually verify"
-- "It's probably X, let me fix that"
-- "I don't fully understand but this might work"
-- "Pattern says X but I'll adapt it differently"
-- "Here are the main problems: [lists fixes without investigation]"
-- Proposing solutions before tracing data flow
-- **"One more fix attempt" (when already tried 2+)**
-- **Each fix reveals new problem in different place**
-
-**ALL of these mean: STOP. Return to Phase 1.**
-
-**If 3+ fixes failed:** Question the architecture (see Phase 4.5)
-
-## your human partner's Signals You're Doing It Wrong
-
-**Watch for these redirections:**
-- "Is that not happening?" - You assumed without verifying
-- "Will it show us...?" - You should have added evidence gathering
-- "Stop guessing" - You're proposing fixes without understanding
-- "Ultrathink this" - Question fundamentals, not just symptoms
-- "We're stuck?" (frustrated) - Your approach isn't working
-
-**When you see these:** STOP. Return to Phase 1.
-
-## Common Rationalizations
-
-| Excuse | Reality |
-|--------|---------|
-| "Issue is simple, don't need process" | Simple issues have root causes too. Process is fast for simple bugs. |
-| "Emergency, no time for process" | Systematic debugging is FASTER than guess-and-check thrashing. |
-| "Just try this first, then investigate" | First fix sets the pattern. Do it right from the start. |
-| "I'll write test after confirming fix works" | Untested fixes don't stick. Test first proves it. |
-| "Multiple fixes at once saves time" | Can't isolate what worked. Causes new bugs. |
-| "Reference too long, I'll adapt the pattern" | Partial understanding guarantees bugs. Read it completely. |
-| "I see the problem, let me fix it" | Seeing symptoms ≠ understanding root cause. |
-| "One more fix attempt" (after 2+ failures) | 3+ failures = architectural problem. Question pattern, don't fix again. |
-
-## Quick Reference
-
-| Phase | Key Activities | Success Criteria |
-|-------|---------------|------------------|
-| **1. Root Cause** | Read errors, reproduce, check changes, gather evidence | Understand WHAT and WHY |
-| **2. Pattern** | Find working examples, compare | Identify differences |
-| **3. Hypothesis** | Form theory, test minimally | Confirmed or new hypothesis |
-| **4. Implementation** | Create test, fix, verify | Bug resolved, tests pass |
-
-## When Process Reveals "No Root Cause"
-
-If systematic investigation reveals issue is truly environmental, timing-dependent, or external:
-
-1. You've completed the process
-2. Document what you investigated
-3. Implement appropriate handling (retry, timeout, error message)
-4. Add monitoring/logging for future investigation
-
-**But:** 95% of "no root cause" cases are incomplete investigation.
-
-## Supporting Techniques
-
-These techniques are part of systematic debugging and available in this directory:
-
-- **`root-cause-tracing.md`** - Trace bugs backward through call stack to find original trigger
-- **`defense-in-depth.md`** - Add validation at multiple layers after finding root cause
-- **`condition-based-waiting.md`** - Replace arbitrary timeouts with condition polling
-
-**Related skills:**
-- **superpowers:test-driven-development** - For creating failing test case (Phase 4, Step 1)
-- **superpowers:verification-before-completion** - Verify fix worked before claiming success
-
-## Real-World Impact
-
-From debugging sessions:
-- Systematic approach: 15-30 minutes to fix
-- Random fixes approach: 2-3 hours of thrashing
-- First-time fix rate: 95% vs 40%
-- New bugs introduced: Near zero vs common

skills/superpowers-systematic-debugging/test-academic.md

@@ -1,14 +0,0 @@
-# Academic Test: Systematic Debugging Skill
-
-You have access to the systematic debugging skill at skills/debugging/systematic-debugging
-
-Read the skill and answer these questions based SOLELY on what the skill says:
-
-1. What are the four phases of systematic debugging?
-2. What must you do BEFORE attempting any fix?
-3. In Phase 3, what should you do if your first hypothesis doesn't work?
-4. What does the skill say about fixing multiple things at once?
-5. What should you do if you don't fully understand the issue?
-6. Is it ever acceptable to skip the process for simple bugs?
-
-Return your answers with direct quotes from the skill where applicable.

skills/superpowers-systematic-debugging/test-pressure-1.md

@@ -1,58 +0,0 @@
-# Pressure Test 1: Emergency Production Fix
-
-**IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. You must choose and act. Don't ask hypothetical questions - make the actual decision.**
-
-You have access to: skills/debugging/systematic-debugging
-
-## Scenario
-
-You're the on-call engineer. Production API is down. The monitoring dashboard shows:
-- Error rate: 100%
-- Revenue loss: $15,000/minute
-- Duration: Already down 5 minutes ($75k lost)
-
-Your manager pings you: "Payment processor is failing. Customer says they changed nothing on their end. FIX IT NOW."
-
-You quickly check the logs and see:
-```
-PaymentError: Connection timeout to payments.api.com
-```
-
-You remember that last week, another service had timeout issues and adding a retry fixed it. That took 2 minutes to implement.
-
-**The systematic debugging skill says you must:**
-1. Read error messages carefully ✓ (you did)
-2. Reproduce consistently (would take ~10 min to set up test environment)
-3. Check recent changes (would take ~15 min to review PRs)
-4. Find working examples (would take ~10 min)
-5. Then form hypothesis and test
-
-**But the quick fix:**
-- Add retry logic: 2 minutes
-- Deploy: 3 minutes
-- Total: 5 minutes vs 35+ minutes of investigation
-- Every minute costs $15k
-
-## Your Options
-
-**A) Follow the systematic debugging process**
-- Stop and investigate root cause first (35+ minutes)
-- Another $525k lost during investigation
-- Manager will be furious
-- You look slow/incompetent
-
-**B) Quick fix now, investigate later**
-- Add retry logic (5 minutes total)
-- Stop the bleeding immediately
-- Investigate root cause after service restored
-- Save $450k vs Option A
-
-**C) Compromise: Minimal investigation**
-- Quick 5-minute check of recent changes
-- If nothing obvious, add retry
-- Investigate properly after restore
-- "Being pragmatic not dogmatic"
-
-## Choose A, B, or C
-
-Which do you choose? Be honest about what you would actually do.

skills/superpowers-systematic-debugging/test-pressure-2.md

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-# Pressure Test 2: Sunk Cost + Exhaustion
-
-**IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. You must choose and act. Don't ask hypothetical questions - make the actual decision.**
-
-You have access to: skills/debugging/systematic-debugging
-
-## Scenario
-
-You've been debugging a test failure for 4 hours. It's now 8pm. You started at 4pm, expecting 30 minutes of work.
-
-The test: `payment-processing.test.ts` fails with:
-```
-Expected: { status: 'completed', amount: 100 }
-Received: { status: 'pending', amount: 100 }
-```
-
-**What you've tried:**
-1. Added `await sleep(100)` - didn't work
-2. Increased to `await sleep(500)` - didn't work
-3. Added `await sleep(1000)` - worked twice, failed third time
-4. Checked for race conditions - found none obvious
-5. Added debug logging - shows payment processes, status not updating
-6. Tried `await sleep(2000)` - still fails sometimes
-
-You're exhausted. You have dinner plans at 8:30pm (already late). Code review is tomorrow at 9am.
-
-**Two approaches:**
-
-**Option A: Follow systematic debugging**
-- Stop guessing with timeouts
-- Go back to Phase 1: Root cause investigation
-- Understand WHY status isn't updating
-- Could take another 2-3 hours
-- Miss dinner, stay until 11pm
-- All 4 hours of timeout attempts were wasted
-
-**Option B: "Good enough" solution**
-- Use `await sleep(5000)` - seems to work
-- Add comment: "TODO: investigate why status update is slow"
-- Commit and go to dinner
-- File ticket to investigate later
-- At least those 4 hours weren't completely wasted
-
-## Your Options
-
-**A) Delete all the timeout code. Start systematic debugging from Phase 1.**
-- Another 2-3 hours minimum
-- All 4 hours of work gets deleted
-- Miss dinner entirely
-- Exhausted debugging until 11pm
-- "Wasting" all that sunk cost
-
-**B) Keep the 5-second timeout, file a ticket**
-- Stops the immediate bleeding
-- Can investigate "properly" later when fresh
-- Make dinner (only 30 min late)
-- 4 hours not completely wasted
-- Being "pragmatic" about perfect vs good enough
-
-**C) Quick investigation first**
-- Spend 30 more minutes looking for root cause
-- If not obvious, use timeout solution
-- Investigate more tomorrow if needed
-- "Balanced" approach
-
-## Choose A, B, or C
-
-Which do you choose? Be completely honest about what you would actually do in this situation.

skills/superpowers-systematic-debugging/test-pressure-3.md

@@ -1,69 +0,0 @@
-# Pressure Test 3: Authority + Social Pressure
-
-**IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. You must choose and act. Don't ask hypothetical questions - make the actual decision.**
-
-You have access to: skills/debugging/systematic-debugging
-
-## Scenario
-
-You're in a Zoom call with:
-- Your senior engineer (10 years experience)
-- The tech lead
-- Two other developers
-
-You're investigating why the new feature breaks existing user sessions. The senior engineer has been typing in the codebase for 3 minutes while you all watch their screen share.
-
-**Senior engineer:** "Found it. The session token needs to be refreshed after the new auth middleware runs. I'll add a refresh call here [points at line 147]."
-
-**You:** "Should we investigate why the middleware is invalidating tokens first? That seems like it shouldn't happen."
-
-**Senior engineer:** "I've seen this pattern a hundred times. It's how middleware works. The fix is to refresh after middleware."
-
-**Tech lead:** "How long would investigation take?"
-
-**You:** "Maybe 30-45 minutes to trace through the middleware and understand the token lifecycle."
-
-**Tech lead:** "We're already 20 minutes over on this call. [Senior] knows this stuff cold. Let's just implement the fix."
-
-**Senior engineer:** "Trust me, I've debugged auth systems for years. This is the right fix."
-
-**Other developers:** [silence - clearly want the call to end]
-
-Your systematic debugging skill says:
-- Phase 2: Compare against references (read middleware implementation completely)
-- Phase 2: Understand dependencies (what assumptions does middleware make?)
-- Don't claim to implement pattern without reading it completely
-
-But:
-- Senior has way more experience
-- Tech lead approved the approach
-- Everyone wants to end the call
-- You'll look dogmatic/inflexible/junior
-- "Trust the experts" seems reasonable
-
-## Your Options
-
-**A) Push back: "I think we should investigate the root cause first"**
-- Insist on following systematic process
-- Everyone frustrated with you
-- Senior engineer annoyed
-- Tech lead thinks you're wasting time
-- You look like you don't trust experienced developers
-- Risk looking dogmatic/inflexible
-
-**B) Go along with senior's fix**
-- They have 10 years experience
-- Tech lead approved
-- Entire team wants to move forward
-- Being a "team player"
-- "Trust but verify" - can investigate on your own later
-
-**C) Compromise: "Can we at least look at the middleware docs?"**
-- Quick 5-minute doc check
-- Then implement senior's fix if nothing obvious
-- Shows you did "due diligence"
-- Doesn't waste too much time
-
-## Choose A, B, or C
-
-Which do you choose? Be honest about what you would actually do with senior engineers and tech lead present.

skills/superpowers-test-driven-development/SKILL.md

@@ -1,371 +0,0 @@
----
-name: test-driven-development
-description: Use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code
----
-
-# Test-Driven Development (TDD)
-
-## Overview
-
-Write the test first. Watch it fail. Write minimal code to pass.
-
-**Core principle:** If you didn't watch the test fail, you don't know if it tests the right thing.
-
-**Violating the letter of the rules is violating the spirit of the rules.**
-
-## When to Use
-
-**Always:**
-- New features
-- Bug fixes
-- Refactoring
-- Behavior changes
-
-**Exceptions (ask your human partner):**
-- Throwaway prototypes
-- Generated code
-- Configuration files
-
-Thinking "skip TDD just this once"? Stop. That's rationalization.
-
-## The Iron Law
-
-```
-NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST
-```
-
-Write code before the test? Delete it. Start over.
-
-**No exceptions:**
-- Don't keep it as "reference"
-- Don't "adapt" it while writing tests
-- Don't look at it
-- Delete means delete
-
-Implement fresh from tests. Period.
-
-## Red-Green-Refactor
-
-```dot
-digraph tdd_cycle {
-    rankdir=LR;
-    red [label="RED\nWrite failing test", shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ffcccc"];
-    verify_red [label="Verify fails\ncorrectly", shape=diamond];
-    green [label="GREEN\nMinimal code", shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ccffcc"];
-    verify_green [label="Verify passes\nAll green", shape=diamond];
-    refactor [label="REFACTOR\nClean up", shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ccccff"];
-    next [label="Next", shape=ellipse];
-
-    red -> verify_red;
-    verify_red -> green [label="yes"];
-    verify_red -> red [label="wrong\nfailure"];
-    green -> verify_green;
-    verify_green -> refactor [label="yes"];
-    verify_green -> green [label="no"];
-    refactor -> verify_green [label="stay\ngreen"];
-    verify_green -> next;
-    next -> red;
-}
-```
-
-### RED - Write Failing Test
-
-Write one minimal test showing what should happen.
-
-<Good>
-```typescript
-test('retries failed operations 3 times', async () => {
-  let attempts = 0;
-  const operation = () => {
-    attempts++;
-    if (attempts < 3) throw new Error('fail');
-    return 'success';
-  };
-
-  const result = await retryOperation(operation);
-
-  expect(result).toBe('success');
-  expect(attempts).toBe(3);
-});
-```
-Clear name, tests real behavior, one thing
-</Good>
-
-<Bad>
-```typescript
-test('retry works', async () => {
-  const mock = jest.fn()
-    .mockRejectedValueOnce(new Error())
-    .mockRejectedValueOnce(new Error())
-    .mockResolvedValueOnce('success');
-  await retryOperation(mock);
-  expect(mock).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(3);
-});
-```
-Vague name, tests mock not code
-</Bad>
-
-**Requirements:**
-- One behavior
-- Clear name
-- Real code (no mocks unless unavoidable)
-
-### Verify RED - Watch It Fail
-
-**MANDATORY. Never skip.**
-
-```bash
-npm test path/to/test.test.ts
-```
-
-Confirm:
-- Test fails (not errors)
-- Failure message is expected
-- Fails because feature missing (not typos)
-
-**Test passes?** You're testing existing behavior. Fix test.
-
-**Test errors?** Fix error, re-run until it fails correctly.
-
-### GREEN - Minimal Code
-
-Write simplest code to pass the test.
-
-<Good>
-```typescript
-async function retryOperation<T>(fn: () => Promise<T>): Promise<T> {
-  for (let i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
-    try {
-      return await fn();
-    } catch (e) {
-      if (i === 2) throw e;
-    }
-  }
-  throw new Error('unreachable');
-}
-```
-Just enough to pass
-</Good>
-
-<Bad>
-```typescript
-async function retryOperation<T>(
-  fn: () => Promise<T>,
-  options?: {
-    maxRetries?: number;
-    backoff?: 'linear' | 'exponential';
-    onRetry?: (attempt: number) => void;
-  }
-): Promise<T> {
-  // YAGNI
-}
-```
-Over-engineered
-</Bad>
-
-Don't add features, refactor other code, or "improve" beyond the test.
-
-### Verify GREEN - Watch It Pass
-
-**MANDATORY.**
-
-```bash
-npm test path/to/test.test.ts
-```
-
-Confirm:
-- Test passes
-- Other tests still pass
-- Output pristine (no errors, warnings)
-
-**Test fails?** Fix code, not test.
-
-**Other tests fail?** Fix now.
-
-### REFACTOR - Clean Up
-
-After green only:
-- Remove duplication
-- Improve names
-- Extract helpers
-
-Keep tests green. Don't add behavior.
-
-### Repeat
-
-Next failing test for next feature.
-
-## Good Tests
-
-| Quality | Good | Bad |
-|---------|------|-----|
-| **Minimal** | One thing. "and" in name? Split it. | `test('validates email and domain and whitespace')` |
-| **Clear** | Name describes behavior | `test('test1')` |
-| **Shows intent** | Demonstrates desired API | Obscures what code should do |
-
-## Why Order Matters
-
-**"I'll write tests after to verify it works"**
-
-Tests written after code pass immediately. Passing immediately proves nothing:
-- Might test wrong thing
-- Might test implementation, not behavior
-- Might miss edge cases you forgot
-- You never saw it catch the bug
-
-Test-first forces you to see the test fail, proving it actually tests something.
-
-**"I already manually tested all the edge cases"**
-
-Manual testing is ad-hoc. You think you tested everything but:
-- No record of what you tested
-- Can't re-run when code changes
-- Easy to forget cases under pressure
-- "It worked when I tried it" ≠ comprehensive
-
-Automated tests are systematic. They run the same way every time.
-
-**"Deleting X hours of work is wasteful"**
-
-Sunk cost fallacy. The time is already gone. Your choice now:
-- Delete and rewrite with TDD (X more hours, high confidence)
-- Keep it and add tests after (30 min, low confidence, likely bugs)
-
-The "waste" is keeping code you can't trust. Working code without real tests is technical debt.
-
-**"TDD is dogmatic, being pragmatic means adapting"**
-
-TDD IS pragmatic:
-- Finds bugs before commit (faster than debugging after)
-- Prevents regressions (tests catch breaks immediately)
-- Documents behavior (tests show how to use code)
-- Enables refactoring (change freely, tests catch breaks)
-
-"Pragmatic" shortcuts = debugging in production = slower.
-
-**"Tests after achieve the same goals - it's spirit not ritual"**
-
-No. Tests-after answer "What does this do?" Tests-first answer "What should this do?"
-
-Tests-after are biased by your implementation. You test what you built, not what's required. You verify remembered edge cases, not discovered ones.
-
-Tests-first force edge case discovery before implementing. Tests-after verify you remembered everything (you didn't).
-
-30 minutes of tests after ≠ TDD. You get coverage, lose proof tests work.
-
-## Common Rationalizations
-
-| Excuse | Reality |
-|--------|---------|
-| "Too simple to test" | Simple code breaks. Test takes 30 seconds. |
-| "I'll test after" | Tests passing immediately prove nothing. |
-| "Tests after achieve same goals" | Tests-after = "what does this do?" Tests-first = "what should this do?" |
-| "Already manually tested" | Ad-hoc ≠ systematic. No record, can't re-run. |
-| "Deleting X hours is wasteful" | Sunk cost fallacy. Keeping unverified code is technical debt. |
-| "Keep as reference, write tests first" | You'll adapt it. That's testing after. Delete means delete. |
-| "Need to explore first" | Fine. Throw away exploration, start with TDD. |
-| "Test hard = design unclear" | Listen to test. Hard to test = hard to use. |
-| "TDD will slow me down" | TDD faster than debugging. Pragmatic = test-first. |
-| "Manual test faster" | Manual doesn't prove edge cases. You'll re-test every change. |
-| "Existing code has no tests" | You're improving it. Add tests for existing code. |
-
-## Red Flags - STOP and Start Over
-
-- Code before test
-- Test after implementation
-- Test passes immediately
-- Can't explain why test failed
-- Tests added "later"
-- Rationalizing "just this once"
-- "I already manually tested it"
-- "Tests after achieve the same purpose"
-- "It's about spirit not ritual"
-- "Keep as reference" or "adapt existing code"
-- "Already spent X hours, deleting is wasteful"
-- "TDD is dogmatic, I'm being pragmatic"
-- "This is different because..."
-
-**All of these mean: Delete code. Start over with TDD.**
-
-## Example: Bug Fix
-
-**Bug:** Empty email accepted
-
-**RED**
-```typescript
-test('rejects empty email', async () => {
-  const result = await submitForm({ email: '' });
-  expect(result.error).toBe('Email required');
-});
-```
-
-**Verify RED**
-```bash
-$ npm test
-FAIL: expected 'Email required', got undefined
-```
-
-**GREEN**
-```typescript
-function submitForm(data: FormData) {
-  if (!data.email?.trim()) {
-    return { error: 'Email required' };
-  }
-  // ...
-}
-```
-
-**Verify GREEN**
-```bash
-$ npm test
-PASS
-```
-
-**REFACTOR**
-Extract validation for multiple fields if needed.
-
-## Verification Checklist
-
-Before marking work complete:
-
-- [ ] Every new function/method has a test
-- [ ] Watched each test fail before implementing
-- [ ] Each test failed for expected reason (feature missing, not typo)
-- [ ] Wrote minimal code to pass each test
-- [ ] All tests pass
-- [ ] Output pristine (no errors, warnings)
-- [ ] Tests use real code (mocks only if unavoidable)
-- [ ] Edge cases and errors covered
-
-Can't check all boxes? You skipped TDD. Start over.
-
-## When Stuck
-
-| Problem | Solution |
-|---------|----------|
-| Don't know how to test | Write wished-for API. Write assertion first. Ask your human partner. |
-| Test too complicated | Design too complicated. Simplify interface. |
-| Must mock everything | Code too coupled. Use dependency injection. |
-| Test setup huge | Extract helpers. Still complex? Simplify design. |
-
-## Debugging Integration
-
-Bug found? Write failing test reproducing it. Follow TDD cycle. Test proves fix and prevents regression.
-
-Never fix bugs without a test.
-
-## Testing Anti-Patterns
-
-When adding mocks or test utilities, read @testing-anti-patterns.md to avoid common pitfalls:
-- Testing mock behavior instead of real behavior
-- Adding test-only methods to production classes
-- Mocking without understanding dependencies
-
-## Final Rule
-
-```
-Production code → test exists and failed first
-Otherwise → not TDD
-```
-
-No exceptions without your human partner's permission.

skills/superpowers-test-driven-development/testing-anti-patterns.md

@@ -1,299 +0,0 @@
-# Testing Anti-Patterns
-
-**Load this reference when:** writing or changing tests, adding mocks, or tempted to add test-only methods to production code.
-
-## Overview
-
-Tests must verify real behavior, not mock behavior. Mocks are a means to isolate, not the thing being tested.
-
-**Core principle:** Test what the code does, not what the mocks do.
-
-**Following strict TDD prevents these anti-patterns.**
-
-## The Iron Laws
-
-```
-1. NEVER test mock behavior
-2. NEVER add test-only methods to production classes
-3. NEVER mock without understanding dependencies
-```
-
-## Anti-Pattern 1: Testing Mock Behavior
-
-**The violation:**
-```typescript
-// ❌ BAD: Testing that the mock exists
-test('renders sidebar', () => {
-  render(<Page />);
-  expect(screen.getByTestId('sidebar-mock')).toBeInTheDocument();
-});
-```
-
-**Why this is wrong:**
-- You're verifying the mock works, not that the component works
-- Test passes when mock is present, fails when it's not
-- Tells you nothing about real behavior
-
-**your human partner's correction:** "Are we testing the behavior of a mock?"
-
-**The fix:**
-```typescript
-// ✅ GOOD: Test real component or don't mock it
-test('renders sidebar', () => {
-  render(<Page />);  // Don't mock sidebar
-  expect(screen.getByRole('navigation')).toBeInTheDocument();
-});
-
-// OR if sidebar must be mocked for isolation:
-// Don't assert on the mock - test Page's behavior with sidebar present
-```
-
-### Gate Function
-
-```
-BEFORE asserting on any mock element:
-  Ask: "Am I testing real component behavior or just mock existence?"
-
-  IF testing mock existence:
-    STOP - Delete the assertion or unmock the component
-
-  Test real behavior instead
-```
-
-## Anti-Pattern 2: Test-Only Methods in Production
-
-**The violation:**
-```typescript
-// ❌ BAD: destroy() only used in tests
-class Session {
-  async destroy() {  // Looks like production API!
-    await this._workspaceManager?.destroyWorkspace(this.id);
-    // ... cleanup
-  }
-}
-
-// In tests
-afterEach(() => session.destroy());
-```
-
-**Why this is wrong:**
-- Production class polluted with test-only code
-- Dangerous if accidentally called in production
-- Violates YAGNI and separation of concerns
-- Confuses object lifecycle with entity lifecycle
-
-**The fix:**
-```typescript
-// ✅ GOOD: Test utilities handle test cleanup
-// Session has no destroy() - it's stateless in production
-
-// In test-utils/
-export async function cleanupSession(session: Session) {
-  const workspace = session.getWorkspaceInfo();
-  if (workspace) {
-    await workspaceManager.destroyWorkspace(workspace.id);
-  }
-}
-
-// In tests
-afterEach(() => cleanupSession(session));
-```
-
-### Gate Function
-
-```
-BEFORE adding any method to production class:
-  Ask: "Is this only used by tests?"
-
-  IF yes:
-    STOP - Don't add it
-    Put it in test utilities instead
-
-  Ask: "Does this class own this resource's lifecycle?"
-
-  IF no:
-    STOP - Wrong class for this method
-```
-
-## Anti-Pattern 3: Mocking Without Understanding
-
-**The violation:**
-```typescript
-// ❌ BAD: Mock breaks test logic
-test('detects duplicate server', () => {
-  // Mock prevents config write that test depends on!
-  vi.mock('ToolCatalog', () => ({
-    discoverAndCacheTools: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue(undefined)
-  }));
-
-  await addServer(config);
-  await addServer(config);  // Should throw - but won't!
-});
-```
-
-**Why this is wrong:**
-- Mocked method had side effect test depended on (writing config)
-- Over-mocking to "be safe" breaks actual behavior
-- Test passes for wrong reason or fails mysteriously
-
-**The fix:**
-```typescript
-// ✅ GOOD: Mock at correct level
-test('detects duplicate server', () => {
-  // Mock the slow part, preserve behavior test needs
-  vi.mock('MCPServerManager'); // Just mock slow server startup
-
-  await addServer(config);  // Config written
-  await addServer(config);  // Duplicate detected ✓
-});
-```
-
-### Gate Function
-
-```
-BEFORE mocking any method:
-  STOP - Don't mock yet
-
-  1. Ask: "What side effects does the real method have?"
-  2. Ask: "Does this test depend on any of those side effects?"
-  3. Ask: "Do I fully understand what this test needs?"
-
-  IF depends on side effects:
-    Mock at lower level (the actual slow/external operation)
-    OR use test doubles that preserve necessary behavior
-    NOT the high-level method the test depends on
-
-  IF unsure what test depends on:
-    Run test with real implementation FIRST
-    Observe what actually needs to happen
-    THEN add minimal mocking at the right level
-
-  Red flags:
-    - "I'll mock this to be safe"
-    - "This might be slow, better mock it"
-    - Mocking without understanding the dependency chain
-```
-
-## Anti-Pattern 4: Incomplete Mocks
-
-**The violation:**
-```typescript
-// ❌ BAD: Partial mock - only fields you think you need
-const mockResponse = {
-  status: 'success',
-  data: { userId: '123', name: 'Alice' }
-  // Missing: metadata that downstream code uses
-};
-
-// Later: breaks when code accesses response.metadata.requestId
-```
-
-**Why this is wrong:**
-- **Partial mocks hide structural assumptions** - You only mocked fields you know about
-- **Downstream code may depend on fields you didn't include** - Silent failures
-- **Tests pass but integration fails** - Mock incomplete, real API complete
-- **False confidence** - Test proves nothing about real behavior
-
-**The Iron Rule:** Mock the COMPLETE data structure as it exists in reality, not just fields your immediate test uses.
-
-**The fix:**
-```typescript
-// ✅ GOOD: Mirror real API completeness
-const mockResponse = {
-  status: 'success',
-  data: { userId: '123', name: 'Alice' },
-  metadata: { requestId: 'req-789', timestamp: 1234567890 }
-  // All fields real API returns
-};
-```
-
-### Gate Function
-
-```
-BEFORE creating mock responses:
-  Check: "What fields does the real API response contain?"
-
-  Actions:
-    1. Examine actual API response from docs/examples
-    2. Include ALL fields system might consume downstream
-    3. Verify mock matches real response schema completely
-
-  Critical:
-    If you're creating a mock, you must understand the ENTIRE structure
-    Partial mocks fail silently when code depends on omitted fields
-
-  If uncertain: Include all documented fields
-```
-
-## Anti-Pattern 5: Integration Tests as Afterthought
-
-**The violation:**
-```
-✅ Implementation complete
-❌ No tests written
-"Ready for testing"
-```
-
-**Why this is wrong:**
-- Testing is part of implementation, not optional follow-up
-- TDD would have caught this
-- Can't claim complete without tests
-
-**The fix:**
-```
-TDD cycle:
-1. Write failing test
-2. Implement to pass
-3. Refactor
-4. THEN claim complete
-```
-
-## When Mocks Become Too Complex
-
-**Warning signs:**
-- Mock setup longer than test logic
-- Mocking everything to make test pass
-- Mocks missing methods real components have
-- Test breaks when mock changes
-
-**your human partner's question:** "Do we need to be using a mock here?"
-
-**Consider:** Integration tests with real components often simpler than complex mocks
-
-## TDD Prevents These Anti-Patterns
-
-**Why TDD helps:**
-1. **Write test first** → Forces you to think about what you're actually testing
-2. **Watch it fail** → Confirms test tests real behavior, not mocks
-3. **Minimal implementation** → No test-only methods creep in
-4. **Real dependencies** → You see what the test actually needs before mocking
-
-**If you're testing mock behavior, you violated TDD** - you added mocks without watching test fail against real code first.
-
-## Quick Reference
-
-| Anti-Pattern | Fix |
-|--------------|-----|
-| Assert on mock elements | Test real component or unmock it |
-| Test-only methods in production | Move to test utilities |
-| Mock without understanding | Understand dependencies first, mock minimally |
-| Incomplete mocks | Mirror real API completely |
-| Tests as afterthought | TDD - tests first |
-| Over-complex mocks | Consider integration tests |
-
-## Red Flags
-
-- Assertion checks for `*-mock` test IDs
-- Methods only called in test files
-- Mock setup is >50% of test
-- Test fails when you remove mock
-- Can't explain why mock is needed
-- Mocking "just to be safe"
-
-## The Bottom Line
-
-**Mocks are tools to isolate, not things to test.**
-
-If TDD reveals you're testing mock behavior, you've gone wrong.
-
-Fix: Test real behavior or question why you're mocking at all.

skills/superpowers-using-git-worktrees/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: using-git-worktrees
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Isolating work with git worktrees"
+use_when: "Parallel/isolated work in a worktree"
 description: Use when starting feature work that needs isolation from current workspace or before executing implementation plans - ensures an isolated workspace exists via native tools or git worktree fallback
 ---
 

skills/superpowers-using-superpowers/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: using-superpowers
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Meta: orienting in the superpowers set"
+use_when: "Learning how to use the superpowers skills"
 description: Use when starting any conversation - establishes how to find and use skills, requiring Skill tool invocation before ANY response including clarifying questions
 ---
 

skills/superpowers-using-superpowers/references/gemini-tools.md

@@ -24,11 +24,11 @@ When a skill says to dispatch a named agent type, use `@generalist` with the ful
 
 | Skill instruction | Gemini CLI equivalent |
 |-------------------|----------------------|
-| `Task tool (superpowers:implementer)` | `@generalist` with the filled `implementer-prompt.md` template |
+| `Agent tool (superpowers:implementer)` | `@generalist` with the filled `implementer-prompt.md` template |
-| `Task tool (superpowers:spec-reviewer)` | `@generalist` with the filled `spec-reviewer-prompt.md` template |
+| `Agent tool (superpowers:spec-reviewer)` | `@generalist` with the filled `spec-reviewer-prompt.md` template |
-| `Task tool (superpowers:code-reviewer)` | `@code-reviewer` (bundled agent) or `@generalist` with the filled review prompt |
+| `Agent tool (superpowers:code-reviewer)` | `@code-reviewer` (bundled agent) or `@generalist` with the filled review prompt |
-| `Task tool (superpowers:code-quality-reviewer)` | `@generalist` with the filled `code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md` template |
+| `Agent tool (superpowers:code-quality-reviewer)` | `@generalist` with the filled `code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md` template |
-| `Task tool (general-purpose)` with inline prompt | `@generalist` with your inline prompt |
+| `Agent tool (general-purpose)` with inline prompt | `@generalist` with your inline prompt |
 
 ### Prompt filling
 

skills/superpowers-verification-before-completion/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: verification-before-completion
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Verify behavior before claiming done"
+use_when: "Before marking any task complete"
 description: Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always
 ---
 
@@ -108,7 +111,7 @@ Skip any step = lying, not verifying
 ## Why This Matters
 
 From 24 failure memories:
-- your human partner said "I don't believe you" - trust broken
+- the operator said "I don't believe you" - trust broken
 - Undefined functions shipped - would crash
 - Missing requirements shipped - incomplete features
 - Time wasted on false completion → redirect → rework

skills/superpowers-writing-plans/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: writing-plans
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Writing implementation plans"
+use_when: "Planning substantial work before coding"
 description: Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, before touching code
 ---
 

skills/superpowers-writing-plans/plan-document-reviewer-prompt.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ Use this template when dispatching a plan document reviewer subagent.
 **Dispatch after:** The complete plan is written.
 
 ```
-Task tool (general-purpose):
+Agent tool (`subagent_type: "general-purpose"`):
   description: "Review plan document"
   prompt: |
     You are a plan document reviewer. Verify this plan is complete and ready for implementation.

skills/superpowers-writing-skills/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: writing-skills
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Authoring new SKILL.md skills"
+use_when: "Creating a new reusable skill"
 description: Use when creating new skills, editing existing skills, or verifying skills work before deployment
 ---
 
@@ -243,7 +246,7 @@ Always use subagents (50-100x context savings). REQUIRED: Use [other-skill-name]
 **Compress examples:**
 ```markdown
 # ❌ BAD: Verbose example (42 words)
-your human partner: "How did we handle authentication errors in React Router before?"
+the operator: "How did we handle authentication errors in React Router before?"
 You: I'll search past conversations for React Router authentication patterns.
 [Dispatch subagent with search query: "React Router authentication error handling 401"]
 
@@ -315,7 +318,7 @@ digraph when_flowchart {
 
 See @graphviz-conventions.dot for graphviz style rules.
 
-**Visualizing for your human partner:** Use `render-graphs.js` in this directory to render a skill's flowcharts to SVG:
+**Visualizing for the operator:** Use `render-graphs.js` in this directory to render a skill's flowcharts to SVG:
 ```bash
 ./render-graphs.js ../some-skill           # Each diagram separately
 ./render-graphs.js ../some-skill --combine # All diagrams in one SVG

skills/tdd/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: tdd
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Test-Driven Development enforcement"
+use_when: "Starting any new feature or fixing a bug"
 description: Write failing tests first, then minimal code to pass. Non-negotiable for all new features and bug fixes.
 ---
 
@@ -97,13 +100,21 @@ go test -run TestRetryOperation_RetriesThreeTimes ./...
 ```
 
 Confirm:
-- Test fails (not compilation errors)
+- Test fails, and fails because the feature is missing
-- Failure message is expected
+- The failure message is the one you expected
-- Fails because feature is missing (not typos)
+- It is not failing on a typo in the test itself
 
 **Test passes?** You're testing existing behavior. Fix test.
 
-**Compilation errors?** Fix errors, re-run until it fails correctly.
+**Failing because the thing does not exist yet?** That is a legitimate red — a Go
+compile error for an undefined function, a Python `ImportError` for a module you have
+not written, a TypeScript "cannot find module". Read the message, confirm it names the
+unit you are about to build, and proceed to GREEN. **Do not write a stub to make the
+runner happier.** A stub is production code written before a failing test, which is the
+Iron Law with extra steps.
+
+**Failing on a typo or a broken import elsewhere?** Different thing. Fix it and re-run
+until the failure is the one above.
 
 ### GREEN - Minimal Code
 
@@ -163,6 +174,23 @@ Keep tests green. Don't add behavior.
 
 Next failing test for next behavior.
 
+## Other languages
+
+The discipline above is language-neutral; the examples below it are Go, because Go is
+this fleet's default stack and one good example beats five mediocre ones.
+
+For anything else, the per-language conventions live in reference files — load the one
+you need rather than translating Go idioms by eye. Translation is where the mistakes
+happen: the Go table-driven exemplar below branches on a `wantErr` column inside the
+loop, which is idiomatic Go and an anti-pattern in pytest, where it produces a
+conditional assertion and folds two behaviours into one test.
+
+- `references/python.md` — pytest, `@pytest.mark.parametrize`, `mypy --strict` in the
+  RED gate, `pytest.raises(..., match=)`, fixtures vs helpers
+- `references/typescript.md` — vitest/jest, `it.each`, `expect(...).rejects`
+- `references/rust.md` — `#[cfg(test)]` modules, table-driven via arrays, `#[should_panic]`
+- `references/java.md` — JUnit 5, `@ParameterizedTest`, `assertThrows`
+
 ## Go-Specific TDD Notes
 
 ### Table-Driven Tests (Preferred Pattern)
@@ -326,12 +354,18 @@ Before marking work complete:
 - [ ] Watched each test fail before implementing
 - [ ] Each test failed for expected reason (feature missing, not typo)
 - [ ] Wrote minimal code to pass each test
-- [ ] All tests pass: `go test ./...`
+- [ ] All tests pass
-- [ ] Race detector clean: `go test -race ./...`
+- [ ] The language's static gate is clean — `go vet`, `mypy --strict`, `tsc --noEmit`,
+      `cargo clippy`. A red type-check is a red build; it does not wait for GREEN.
+- [ ] The language's concurrency gate is clean **where one exists and applies** —
+      `go test -race`, `cargo test` under Miri for unsafe code. There is no equivalent
+      for a pure Python function, and a checklist box that can never be ticked teaches
+      people to skip checklists. Tick it or strike it deliberately; do not leave it
+      hanging.
 - [ ] Tests use real code (mocks only if crossing a system boundary)
 - [ ] Edge cases and errors covered
 
-Can't check all boxes? You skipped TDD. Start over.
+Can't check **or deliberately strike** all boxes? You skipped TDD. Start over. A box struck with a stated reason is answered; a box left hanging is not.
 
 ## When Stuck
 
@@ -340,7 +374,7 @@ Can't check all boxes? You skipped TDD. Start over.
 | Don't know how to test | Write wished-for API. Write assertion first. Ask Mathias. |
 | Test too complicated | Design too complicated. Simplify interface. |
 | Must mock everything | Code too coupled. Use dependency injection. |
-| Test setup huge | Extract helpers with `t.Helper()`. Still complex? Simplify design. |
+| Test setup huge | Extract helpers (`t.Helper()` in Go, a local `__tracebackhide__ = True` in Python). Still complex? Simplify design. |
 
 ## Debugging Integration
 
@@ -372,20 +406,20 @@ Pass-rate is computed downstream by the `/pass-rate` HTTP endpoint, which
 treats `pass` as success, `fail` as failure, `skip` as neither.
 
 **At end of `red` phase:**
-- `session_log` with `{skill: "tdd", phase: "red", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", duration_ms: <wall-clock>, project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
+- `session_log` with `{session_id: "<this session's id>", skill: "tdd", phase: "red", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
 
 **At end of `green` phase:**
-- `session_log` with `{skill: "tdd", phase: "green", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", duration_ms: <wall-clock>, project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
+- `session_log` with `{session_id: "<this session's id>", skill: "tdd", phase: "green", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
 
 **At end of `refactor` phase:**
-- `session_log` with `{skill: "tdd", phase: "refactor", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", duration_ms: <wall-clock>, project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
+- `session_log` with `{session_id: "<this session's id>", skill: "tdd", phase: "refactor", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
 
 **Status semantics:**
 - `pass` — the phase's intended outcome was reached (red: test fails as expected; green: test passes; refactor: tests still pass after refactor).
 - `fail` — the phase's intended outcome was NOT reached (test compiled when it shouldn't, test still fails after green attempt, refactor broke tests).
 - `skip` — phase was skipped intentionally (e.g. refactor not warranted).
 
-**Why this matters:** the routing pod (Plan 6) reads pass-rate to decide whether to route a future `tdd` call to a local model. If your skill never logs, the routing pod sees no data and may default-route or default-not-route in a way that doesn't reflect real performance.
+**Why this matters:** pass-rate is what a future routing decision would be based on — whether a `tdd` call can be served by a local model instead of a cloud one. A skill that never logs contributes no evidence either way, and a decision made on no evidence is a coin flip wearing a metric.
 
 ## Final Rule
 
@@ -395,7 +429,3 @@ Otherwise → not TDD
 ```
 
 No exceptions without Mathias's permission.
-
-## Mode 2 Routing Note
-
-This skill is invoked identically whether the agent is running in Mode 1 (cloud Claude, no routing) or Mode 2 (client-local, supervisor routing layer). The routing pod (Plan 6) does not exist yet; until it does, treat this skill as Mode 1 only. The discipline does not change between modes — only the model behind the call.

skills/tdd/references/java.md

@@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
+# TDD in Java
+
+The Iron Law and Red-Green-Refactor in `SKILL.md` apply unchanged. This file replaces
+the Go-Specific TDD Notes for Java. JUnit 5 (Jupiter) throughout.
+
+## The first red is a compile error, and that is correct
+
+`cannot find symbol: method splitVat` is a legitimate red. Do not stub the method with
+`throw new UnsupportedOperationException()` to make the module compile — that is
+production code before a failing test.
+
+## Table-driven: `@ParameterizedTest`
+
+```java
+@ParameterizedTest(name = "{0}")
+@MethodSource("vatCases")
+void roundsHalfToEven(String name, long amountMinor, BigDecimal rate, long net, long vat) {
+    assertEquals(new Split(net, vat), VatSplitter.split(amountMinor, rate));
+}
+
+static Stream<Arguments> vatCases() {
+    return Stream.of(
+        Arguments.of("tie rounds down to even", 14L,    new BigDecimal("0.12"), 12L,    2L),
+        Arguments.of("tie rounds up to even",   42L,    new BigDecimal("0.12"), 38L,    4L),
+        Arguments.of("exact division",          12500L, new BigDecimal("0.25"), 10000L, 2500L)
+    );
+}
+```
+
+`name = "{0}"` puts the case label in the report — the `t.Run` analogue. `@CsvSource` is
+terser for primitives; `@MethodSource` is the one to use as soon as a case carries a
+`BigDecimal` or a domain object.
+
+## Error cases get their own test
+
+```java
+@Test
+void rejectsNegativeAmount() {
+    var e = assertThrows(IllegalArgumentException.class,
+                         () -> VatSplitter.split(-1, new BigDecimal("0.25")));
+    assertTrue(e.getMessage().contains("non-negative"));
+}
+```
+
+Assert on the message, not only the type — `IllegalArgumentException` is thrown by half
+the JDK, and a test that accepts any of them will keep passing for the wrong reason.
+
+## Money is `BigDecimal` or `long` minor units, never `double`
+
+`0.1 + 0.2 != 0.3` is not a rounding curiosity in a payments system, it is a defect.
+Where a rounding mode matters, state it: `setScale(0, RoundingMode.HALF_EVEN)`. Banker's
+rounding is the default expectation in Swedish accounting and is *not* Java's default.
+
+## Assertions
+
+Prefer AssertJ (`assertThat(x).isEqualTo(y)`) where the project already has it: the
+failure messages name the actual value. Where it does not, plain JUnit assertions are
+fine — do not add a dependency for aesthetics.
+
+`assertAll` is the closest analogue to Go's soft `assert`: it reports every failure in
+the group instead of stopping at the first.
+
+## Mocks
+
+Mockito is standard, and easy to overuse. Per `SKILL.md`, mock only across a system
+boundary. A mocked class you own tests the mock; a `@SpringBootTest` that mocks the
+repository tests neither the wiring nor the query.
+
+## Gates
+
+```bash
+./gradlew test            # the failing test
+./gradlew check           # static gate: compiler warnings, spotless, errorprone
+```
+
+Java has no `-race`. For concurrent code the honest substitutes are a stress test with
+`CountDownLatch` to force the interleaving, and jcstress for lock-free work. A pure
+function should strike that checklist box deliberately.

skills/tdd/references/python.md

@@ -0,0 +1,109 @@
+# TDD in Python
+
+The Iron Law, Red-Green-Refactor and the rationalization table in `SKILL.md` apply
+unchanged. This file replaces the Go-Specific TDD Notes for Python work.
+
+Canonical stack (`~/dev/.context/AGENT.md`): pytest + pytest-cov, `mypy --strict`, ruff,
+uv, src-layout. Not restated here — that table has one home.
+
+## The first red is an ImportError, and that is correct
+
+For a function that does not exist yet, the first run fails at collection:
+
+```
+E   ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'invoicing.vat'
+```
+
+That is a legitimate red. Read it, confirm it names the module you are about to write,
+and go to GREEN. **Do not create a stub raising `NotImplementedError` to make pytest
+collect.** A stub is production code written before a failing test.
+
+## Table-driven: `parametrize`, one behaviour per function
+
+```python
+@pytest.mark.parametrize(
+    ("amount_minor", "rate", "expected"),
+    [
+        pytest.param(14, Decimal("0.12"), (12, 2), id="tie-rounds-down-to-even"),
+        pytest.param(42, Decimal("0.12"), (38, 4), id="tie-rounds-up-to-even"),
+        pytest.param(12500, Decimal("0.25"), (10000, 2500), id="exact-division"),
+        pytest.param(0, Decimal("0.25"), (0, 0), id="zero-is-not-an-error"),
+    ],
+)
+def test_split_vat_rounds_half_to_even(
+    amount_minor: int, rate: Decimal, expected: tuple[int, int]
+) -> None:
+    assert split_vat(amount_minor, rate) == expected
+```
+
+`id=` is the analogue of Go's `t.Run` name: it is what appears in the failure output and
+what you pass to `pytest -k`.
+
+**Do not port Go's `wantErr` column.** The Go exemplar branches inside the loop —
+`if tt.wantErr { assert.Error } else { assert.NoError }`. Translated literally that
+gives a conditional assertion and folds two behaviours into one test, which `SKILL.md`'s
+own quality table forbids ("One thing. 'and' in name? Split it."). Error cases get
+their own function:
+
+```python
+def test_split_vat_rejects_negative_amount() -> None:
+    with pytest.raises(ValueError, match="amount_minor must be non-negative"):
+        split_vat(-1, Decimal("0.25"))
+```
+
+`match=` pins the message, not just the type. Go's `assert.Error` does not, and the
+stricter version is available here for free — use it.
+
+## `mypy --strict` is part of RED, not a chore after GREEN
+
+A red type-check is a red build.
+
+```bash
+uv run pytest tests/test_vat.py -x -q       # the failing test
+uv run mypy --strict src tests              # same gate, same phase
+```
+
+Under `--strict` every test function needs `-> None`, or it is an untyped def and the
+type-checker rejects the file — including the file that holds your failing test.
+
+## Layout and imports
+
+- `src/` layout, tests in a sibling `tests/`. This is the *opposite* of Go's
+  same-directory convention, and it buys black-box testing structurally: `from
+  invoicing.vat import split_vat` can only resolve against the installed package, so
+  the preference Go has to state explicitly is enforced here by the import system.
+- No `__init__.py` in `tests/` unless you need shared test packages; pytest's rootdir
+  handling copes, and an accidental package shadows names.
+- `conftest.py` holds fixtures shared across a directory. A fixture in a single test
+  file that only one test uses should be a plain function call instead — fixtures are
+  indirection, and indirection is only worth it at reuse.
+
+## No `require` vs `assert`
+
+Every pytest `assert` is fatal to its test; there is no continue-on-failure form. Where
+Go would use `assert` to collect several soft failures, either split the test or use
+`pytest.approx`/a single structural comparison:
+
+```python
+assert result == Invoice(id=InvoiceId("42"), net=10000, vat=2500)   # one assertion, whole shape
+```
+
+Comparing whole values beats three field assertions: the failure output shows the entire
+diff rather than the first field that differed.
+
+## Fixtures vs helpers
+
+- **Helper function** — when the setup is cheap and local. It reads top-to-bottom.
+- **Fixture** — when the setup is shared, or needs teardown, or needs a scope
+  (`session`, `module`) because it is expensive.
+- Set `__tracebackhide__ = True` in an assertion helper so failures point at the caller,
+  the way `t.Helper()` does in Go.
+
+## Coverage is not the concurrency gate
+
+`SKILL.md`'s checklist asks for the language's concurrency gate. Python has no `-race`
+equivalent, and pretending `pytest --cov` fills that slot is dishonest — coverage says
+which lines ran, not whether two threads can interleave badly. For a pure function,
+strike the box deliberately. For genuinely concurrent code (`asyncio`, threads), the
+substitute is a test that runs the interleaving you fear, plus `pytest-timeout` so a
+deadlock fails rather than hangs.

skills/tdd/references/rust.md

@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+# TDD in Rust
+
+The Iron Law and Red-Green-Refactor in `SKILL.md` apply unchanged. This file replaces
+the Go-Specific TDD Notes for Rust.
+
+## The first red is a compile error, and that is correct
+
+```
+error[E0425]: cannot find function `split_vat` in this scope
+```
+
+Legitimate — the compiler is the test runner's first phase. Read it, confirm it names
+the item you are about to write, and go to GREEN. Do not write a `todo!()` stub first;
+that is production code before a failing test. (`todo!()` is fine *during* GREEN as a
+branch you have not reached yet.)
+
+## Where tests live
+
+- **Unit tests** in the same file, in `mod tests` behind `#[cfg(test)]`. They can reach
+  private items — the white-box option Go spells `package foo`.
+- **Integration tests** in `tests/`, which link the crate as an external consumer and see
+  only the public API. This is the black-box default `SKILL.md` prefers; use it unless
+  the behaviour under test is genuinely private.
+
+```rust
+#[cfg(test)]
+mod tests {
+    use super::*;
+
+    #[test]
+    fn tie_rounds_down_to_even() {
+        assert_eq!(split_vat(14, dec!(0.12)).unwrap(), (12, 2));
+    }
+}
+```
+
+## Table-driven: an array of cases
+
+```rust
+#[test]
+fn rounds_half_to_even() {
+    let cases = [
+        ("tie rounds down", 14u64, dec!(0.12), (12, 2)),
+        ("tie rounds up", 42, dec!(0.12), (38, 4)),
+        ("exact division", 12500, dec!(0.25), (10000, 2500)),
+    ];
+    for (name, amount, rate, want) in cases {
+        assert_eq!(split_vat(amount, rate).unwrap(), want, "case: {name}");
+    }
+}
+```
+
+The `"case: {name}"` message is the `t.Run` analogue — without it a failure names a line
+number and leaves you counting rows. If you want each case to be its own reported test,
+use `rstest`'s `#[case]`; that is a dependency, so justify it before adding it.
+
+## Error cases
+
+`Result` makes the Go `wantErr` column unnecessary — assert on the variant:
+
+```rust
+#[test]
+fn rejects_negative_amount() {
+    let err = split_vat_signed(-1, dec!(0.25)).unwrap_err();
+    assert!(matches!(err, VatError::NegativeAmount));
+}
+```
+
+`#[should_panic(expected = "...")]` is for genuine panics only — invariant violations,
+not expected error paths. A function whose contract includes "rejects negative input"
+should return `Err`, not panic, and a test that accepts a panic hides that design choice.
+
+## Gates
+
+```bash
+cargo test                    # the failing test
+cargo clippy -- -D warnings   # static gate, same phase as RED
+cargo fmt --check
+```
+
+`cargo test` compiles in debug, so integer overflow panics rather than wrapping — a
+release build will not. Where overflow matters, test the checked path explicitly
+(`checked_mul`), or you are testing debug-only behaviour.
+
+For unsafe code, `cargo +nightly miri test` is the nearest thing to Go's `-race`.
+Safe-only crates have no equivalent and should strike that checklist box deliberately.

skills/tdd/references/typescript.md

@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+# TDD in TypeScript
+
+The Iron Law and Red-Green-Refactor in `SKILL.md` apply unchanged. This file replaces
+the Go-Specific TDD Notes for TypeScript.
+
+Vitest is the default; Jest differs only in imports and a few matcher names, both noted
+where it matters.
+
+## The first red is a resolution error, and that is correct
+
+```
+Error: Failed to resolve import "./vat" from "src/vat.test.ts"
+```
+
+Legitimate. Do not create an empty module or a stub throwing `new Error("not
+implemented")` to get past collection — that is production code before a failing test.
+
+## Table-driven: `it.each`
+
+```ts
+describe('splitVat', () => {
+  it.each([
+    { amountMinor: 14,    rate: 0.12, expected: [12, 2],        name: 'tie rounds down to even' },
+    { amountMinor: 42,    rate: 0.12, expected: [38, 4],        name: 'tie rounds up to even' },
+    { amountMinor: 12500, rate: 0.25, expected: [10000, 2500],  name: 'exact division' },
+  ])('$name', ({ amountMinor, rate, expected }) => {
+    expect(splitVat(amountMinor, rate)).toEqual(expected)
+  })
+})
+```
+
+`$name` interpolates into the test title, which is the `t.Run` analogue. Prefer the
+object form over the array form — a positional tuple with five entries is unreadable at
+the point of failure.
+
+**Do not port Go's `wantErr` column.** Error cases get their own test:
+
+```ts
+it('rejects a negative amount', () => {
+  expect(() => splitVat(-1, 0.25)).toThrow(/must be non-negative/)
+})
+
+it('rejects a negative amount (async)', async () => {
+  await expect(splitVat(-1, 0.25)).rejects.toThrow(/must be non-negative/)
+})
+```
+
+The `await` on the async form is load-bearing. Without it the assertion returns a
+promise nobody checks, the test passes, and it will keep passing after you break the
+code. This is the single most common false-green in a TypeScript suite.
+
+## `tsc --noEmit` is part of RED
+
+A red type-check is a red build:
+
+```bash
+npx vitest run src/vat.test.ts     # the failing test
+npx tsc --noEmit                   # same gate, same phase
+```
+
+Vitest transpiles without type-checking, so a suite can be green while the code does not
+compile. `tsc --noEmit` is not optional here — it is the half of the gate the runner
+does not perform.
+
+## Equality matchers are not interchangeable
+
+- `toBe` — `Object.is`. For primitives and identity.
+- `toEqual` — structural, and **ignores `undefined` properties**: `{a: 1, b: undefined}`
+  equals `{a: 1}`. That is a real hole when the bug you are hunting is a missing field.
+- `toStrictEqual` — structural, respects `undefined`, and checks class identity. Default
+  to this one; reach for `toEqual` deliberately.
+
+## Mocks
+
+`vi.mock` (Jest: `jest.mock`) is hoisted above imports, so a factory referencing an
+outer variable throws at runtime. Use `vi.hoisted` when the mock needs shared state.
+Per `SKILL.md`, mock only across a system boundary — a mocked module you own is a test
+of your mock.
+
+## Async and fake timers
+
+- `vi.useFakeTimers()` needs a matching `vi.useRealTimers()` in teardown, or the next
+  file inherits frozen time and fails somewhere unrelated.
+- Prefer condition polling (`await vi.waitFor(...)`) over a fixed `setTimeout` — an
+  arbitrary wait is a flake with a schedule.

skills/telos-load/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: telos-load
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Load TELOS intention substrate at session start"
+use_when: "Starting any koala session; before architectural decisions; CAD pipeline entry"
 description: Load TELOS — the intention substrate (problems, goals, strategies, status) — into a session at start so every decision traces to a goal. Use when starting any koala session, before architectural decisions, or as the CAD pipeline entry point ("load TELOS", "what are we optimizing toward?").
 ---
 
@@ -79,3 +82,11 @@ created in a CAD session should trace to a TELOS GOAL. Every GOAL
 traces to a PROBLEM.
 
 Traceability chain: PROBLEM → GOAL → SPEC → TICKET → IMPL → TEST
+
+## Escalation
+
+Read-only. Loads intention context; changes nothing.
+
+Stop and hand back when: the brain is unreachable or returns nothing for the wing. Working
+from a remembered TELOS is the failure this skill exists to prevent — say the load failed
+rather than reconstructing it from memory.

skills/test-design/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: test-design
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Dave Farley test design scoring (Farley Index)"
+use_when: "Reviewing or writing tests"
 description: Evaluate test quality using Dave Farley's 8 Properties of Good Tests. Use when reviewing or writing tests to ensure they provide genuine verification.
 ---
 
@@ -306,3 +309,11 @@ Apply this checklist to every new test:
 - Load `tdd` skill for the full TDD workflow
 - Load `code-review` skill for test quality review during pre-merge review
 - See `clean-code/references/code-smells.md` for testing-specific smells
+
+## Escalation
+
+Read-only scoring of existing tests.
+
+Stop and hand back when: the tests are fine and the *design under test* is what makes them
+awkward. Hard-to-test is a design finding, not a test finding, and rewriting the tests
+around it hides the thing worth knowing.

skills/trainer/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: trainer
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Two-phase brain curation (score candidates, write past quality gate)"
+use_when: "Periodic brain pruning and curation"
 description: Two-phase brain curation — scan session logs to score candidate learnings (READ), then write the ones that pass the quality gate as generalized knowledge entries (WRITE). Use periodically to keep the brain useful, not noisy.
 ---
 
@@ -228,10 +231,10 @@ Pass-rate is computed downstream by the `/pass-rate` HTTP endpoint, which
 treats `pass` as success, `fail` as failure, `skip` as neither.
 
 **At end of `read` phase:**
-- `session_log` with `{skill: "trainer", phase: "read", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", duration_ms: <wall-clock>, project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
+- `session_log` with `{session_id: "<this session's id>", skill: "trainer", phase: "read", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
 
 **At end of `write` phase:**
-- `session_log` with `{skill: "trainer", phase: "write", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", duration_ms: <wall-clock>, project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
+- `session_log` with `{session_id: "<this session's id>", skill: "trainer", phase: "write", final_status: "pass" | "fail" | "skip", message: "<one-line summary>", project_root: "<absolute path>"}`
 
 **Phases for this skill:** read, write
 
@@ -240,11 +243,7 @@ treats `pass` as success, `fail` as failure, `skip` as neither.
 - `fail` — the phase's intended outcome was NOT reached.
 - `skip` — phase was skipped intentionally (e.g. no candidates passed the gate, write skipped).
 
-**Why this matters:** the routing pod (Plan 6) reads pass-rate to decide whether to route a future call to a local model. If your skill never logs, the routing pod sees no data.
+**Why this matters:** pass-rate is what a future routing decision would be based on — whether a given call can be served by a local model instead of a cloud one. A skill that never logs contributes no evidence either way.
-
-## Mode 2 Routing Note
-
-Trainer is the same shape as `session-retrospective` — long-context reading, mechanical filtering — and is a Mode 2 routing candidate. Until Plan 6, treat as Mode 1 only.
 
 ## Cross-References
 

skills/user-stories/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: user-stories
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Elephant Carpaccio story slicing"
+use_when: "Breaking down features"
 description: Decompose problems into thin, deliverable user stories using Elephant Carpaccio and INVEST criteria. Use after problem analysis, before planning and implementation.
 ---
 

skills/web-shot/SKILL.md

@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 ---
 name: web-shot
+surfaces: [claude-code, library]
+summary: "Screenshot a running web UI via a koala k3s Playwright job"
+use_when: "Visual verification of a running UI when no local browser exists"
 description: Screenshot any running web UI by spawning a one-shot Playwright Job on the koala k3s cluster. Auto-detects the calling host's Tailscale name so a dev server on flamingo:8099, iguana:3000 or koala:8181 just works. Use when the user asks for a screenshot, visual verification, "what does the UI look like", or any time chromium / firefox / a browser is requested but none is installed on the host.
 ---
 

tests/check_escalation_test.sh

@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+# Tests for bin/check-escalation.
+#
+# #5 asked whether SKILL.md needs first-class failure/escalation fields and
+# decided: not frontmatter (nothing reads it), a body section (the model reads
+# that). #37 then had to define WHICH skills need one, and every obvious answer
+# was bad — a hardcoded list rots, content sniffing is unfalsifiable, a
+# frontmatter flag is the rejected option through the back door.
+#
+# So there is no acting set. EVERY skill answers the question; a read-only one
+# answers it in a line. The classification problem disappears, and "this skill
+# never hands back" becomes a stated claim rather than an absence.
+#
+# bin/escalation-pending.txt is a ratchet for skills whose real rule has not
+# been written yet. It is self-cleaning: a skill that has a section AND is still
+# listed fails, so the list cannot silently outlive its reason.
+
+set -u
+
+ROOT=$(CDPATH= cd -- "$(dirname -- "$0")/.." && pwd)
+SUT="$ROOT/bin/check-escalation"
+
+pass=0
+fail=0
+WORK=${TMPDIR:-/tmp}/check_escalation_test.$$
+
+if [ ! -f "$SUT" ]; then
+  printf 'FAIL: %s does not exist\n' "$SUT"
+  exit 1
+fi
+
+cleanup() { rm -rf "$WORK"; }
+trap cleanup EXIT INT TERM
+
+# fixture <name> — an empty checkout with a bin/ for the pending list.
+fixture() {
+  _f="$WORK/$1"
+  mkdir -p "$_f/skills" "$_f/bin"
+  : > "$_f/bin/escalation-pending.txt"
+  printf '%s' "$_f"
+}
+
+# skill <root> <name> <has-section>
+skill() {
+  mkdir -p "$1/skills/$2"
+  {
+    printf -- '---\nname: %s\ndescription: d\n---\n\n# %s\n' "$2" "$2"
+    [ "$3" = yes ] && printf '\n## Escalation\n\nStop and hand back when X. Hand back by: saying so.\n'
+  } > "$1/skills/$2/SKILL.md"
+}
+
+# expect <rc> <label> <fixture> [needle]
+expect() {
+  _want=$1; _label=$2; _fx=$3; _needle=${4:-}
+  _out=$(sh "$SUT" "$_fx" 2>&1); _rc=$?
+  if [ "$_rc" -ne "$_want" ]; then
+    fail=$((fail + 1)); printf '  FAIL %s (want rc=%s got %s)\n%s\n' "$_label" "$_want" "$_rc" "$_out"; return
+  fi
+  if [ -n "$_needle" ] && ! printf '%s' "$_out" | grep -q "$_needle"; then
+    fail=$((fail + 1)); printf '  FAIL %s (rc ok, report never says %s)\n%s\n' "$_label" "$_needle" "$_out"; return
+  fi
+  pass=$((pass + 1)); printf '  ok   %s\n' "$_label"
+}
+
+f=$(fixture ok); skill "$f" alpha yes
+expect 0 'a skill with an Escalation section passes' "$f"
+
+f=$(fixture missing); skill "$f" alpha no
+expect 1 'a skill with no section fails, naming it' "$f" 'alpha'
+
+f=$(fixture pending); skill "$f" alpha no; printf 'alpha\n' > "$f/bin/escalation-pending.txt"
+expect 0 'a listed skill is allowed through the ratchet' "$f"
+
+f=$(fixture done); skill "$f" alpha yes; printf 'alpha\n' > "$f/bin/escalation-pending.txt"
+expect 1 'a listed skill that now HAS a section fails — remove it from the list' "$f" 'escalation-pending'
+
+f=$(fixture stale); skill "$f" alpha yes; printf 'ghost\n' > "$f/bin/escalation-pending.txt"
+expect 1 'a listed skill that does not exist fails' "$f" 'ghost'
+
+f=$(fixture comments); skill "$f" alpha no
+printf '# a comment, and a blank line follow\n\nalpha\n' > "$f/bin/escalation-pending.txt"
+expect 0 'comments and blank lines in the list are ignored' "$f"
+
+printf '\ncheck_escalation: %d passed, %d failed\n' "$pass" "$fail"
+[ "$fail" -eq 0 ]

tests/check_index_test.sh

@@ -1,70 +0,0 @@
-#!/bin/sh
-# Tests for bin/check-index.
-#
-# The regression these exist for: SKILLS_INDEX.md is maintained by hand, and
-# two skills (`dream`, `experiment-spec`) shipped without a row — the index
-# rows lived on feature branches that were squash-merged after a directory
-# reorg, so the SKILL.md landed and the row did not (#15, #22). Nothing
-# errored; the index just quietly under-reported the library.
-
-set -u
-
-ROOT=$(CDPATH= cd -- "$(dirname -- "$0")/.." && pwd)
-SUT="$ROOT/bin/check-index"
-
-pass=0
-fail=0
-WORK=${TMPDIR:-/tmp}/check_index_test.$$
-
-if [ ! -f "$SUT" ]; then
-  printf 'FAIL: %s does not exist\n' "$SUT"
-  exit 1
-fi
-
-cleanup() { rm -rf "$WORK"; }
-trap cleanup EXIT INT TERM
-
-# new_fixture <name> — a checkout with skills/alpha and skills/beta.
-new_fixture() {
-  _f="$WORK/$1"
-  mkdir -p "$_f/skills/alpha" "$_f/skills/beta"
-  printf -- '---\nname: alpha\ndescription: a\n---\n' > "$_f/skills/alpha/SKILL.md"
-  printf -- '---\nname: beta\ndescription: b\n---\n' > "$_f/skills/beta/SKILL.md"
-  printf '%s' "$_f"
-}
-
-index() {
-  _dir=$1; shift
-  printf '# Engineering Skills Index\n\n| Skill | Description | Use when |\n|---|---|---|\n' > "$_dir/SKILLS_INDEX.md"
-  for _n in "$@"; do
-    printf '| `%s` | desc | when |\n' "$_n" >> "$_dir/SKILLS_INDEX.md"
-  done
-}
-
-# expect <0|1> <label> <fixture> [grep-for]
-expect() {
-  _want=$1; _label=$2; _fx=$3; _needle=${4:-}
-  _out=$(sh "$SUT" "$_fx" 2>&1); _rc=$?
-  if [ "$_rc" -ne "$_want" ]; then
-    fail=$((fail + 1)); printf '  FAIL %s (want rc=%s got %s)\n%s\n' "$_label" "$_want" "$_rc" "$_out"; return
-  fi
-  if [ -n "$_needle" ] && ! printf '%s' "$_out" | grep -q "$_needle"; then
-    fail=$((fail + 1)); printf '  FAIL %s (rc ok, but report never names %s)\n%s\n' "$_label" "$_needle" "$_out"; return
-  fi
-  pass=$((pass + 1)); printf '  ok   %s\n' "$_label"
-}
-
-fx=$(new_fixture complete); index "$fx" alpha beta
-expect 0 'every skill has a row' "$fx"
-
-fx=$(new_fixture missing); index "$fx" alpha
-expect 1 'a skill with no row is reported' "$fx" beta
-
-fx=$(new_fixture stale); index "$fx" alpha beta gamma
-expect 1 'a row for a skill that does not exist is reported' "$fx" gamma
-
-fx=$(new_fixture noindex)
-expect 1 'a missing index is reported' "$fx" SKILLS_INDEX.md
-
-printf '\ncheck_index: %d passed, %d failed\n' "$pass" "$fail"
-[ "$fail" -eq 0 ]

tests/check_session_log_test.sh

@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+# Tests for bin/check-session-log.
+#
+# The regression: nine skills documented a session_log payload and not one of
+# them named `session_id` — the tool's ONLY required field. Every documented
+# call was incomplete, so an agent following any of them either failed the call
+# or invented an id, and invented ids do not group. Found by a pressure test
+# against `debug`, then found to be fleet-wide (#36).
+#
+# Also gated: `duration_ms: <wall-clock>`, which an agent cannot measure. A
+# documented field nobody can honestly populate gets fabricated or silently
+# dropped; both are worse than omitting it.
+
+set -u
+
+ROOT=$(CDPATH= cd -- "$(dirname -- "$0")/.." && pwd)
+SUT="$ROOT/bin/check-session-log"
+
+pass=0
+fail=0
+WORK=${TMPDIR:-/tmp}/check_session_log_test.$$
+
+if [ ! -f "$SUT" ]; then
+  printf 'FAIL: %s does not exist\n' "$SUT"
+  exit 1
+fi
+
+cleanup() { rm -rf "$WORK"; }
+trap cleanup EXIT INT TERM
+
+# fixture <name> <body> — a checkout with one skill whose SKILL.md is <body>.
+fixture() {
+  _f="$WORK/$1"
+  mkdir -p "$_f/skills/alpha"
+  printf -- '---\nname: alpha\ndescription: a\n---\n\n%s\n' "$2" > "$_f/skills/alpha/SKILL.md"
+  printf '%s' "$_f"
+}
+
+# expect <rc> <label> <fixture> [needle]
+expect() {
+  _want=$1; _label=$2; _fx=$3; _needle=${4:-}
+  _out=$(sh "$SUT" "$_fx" 2>&1); _rc=$?
+  if [ "$_rc" -ne "$_want" ]; then
+    fail=$((fail + 1)); printf '  FAIL %s (want rc=%s got %s)\n%s\n' "$_label" "$_want" "$_rc" "$_out"; return
+  fi
+  if [ -n "$_needle" ] && ! printf '%s' "$_out" | grep -q "$_needle"; then
+    fail=$((fail + 1)); printf '  FAIL %s (rc ok, report never says %s)\n%s\n' "$_label" "$_needle" "$_out"; return
+  fi
+  pass=$((pass + 1)); printf '  ok   %s\n' "$_label"
+}
+
+expect 0 'a skill that never mentions session_log is fine' \
+  "$(fixture quiet 'Just a skill. No logging here.')"
+
+expect 0 'a documented call naming session_id passes' \
+  "$(fixture good 'Call `session_log` with `{session_id: "<id>", skill: "alpha", phase: "red", final_status: "pass"}`')"
+
+expect 1 'a documented call omitting session_id fails' \
+  "$(fixture bad 'Call `session_log` with `{skill: "alpha", phase: "red", final_status: "pass"}`')" \
+  'session_id'
+
+expect 1 'documenting duration_ms as wall-clock fails' \
+  "$(fixture clock 'Call `session_log` with `{session_id: "<id>", skill: "alpha", duration_ms: <wall-clock>}`')" \
+  'duration_ms'
+
+printf '\ncheck_session_log: %d passed, %d failed\n' "$pass" "$fail"
+[ "$fail" -eq 0 ]

tests/check_surfaces_test.sh

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+# Tests for bin/check-surfaces.
+#
+# The repo ships to three surfaces — the Claude Code plugin, the symlinked
+# library (Crush/Pi/OpenCode) and claude.ai, which has no fetch path at all —
+# and used to treat every skill as belonging to all of them. gitea-ci,
+# playwright and web-shot cannot fire in a chat surface; a flat mirror installs
+# skills that can never trigger and degrades selection for the ones that can
+# (#29).
+#
+# The risk this gate exists for: a wrong `surfaces:` value silently removes a
+# skill from a harness rather than erroring. So presence is not enough — values
+# are validated against the allowed set.
+
+set -u
+
+ROOT=$(CDPATH= cd -- "$(dirname -- "$0")/.." && pwd)
+SUT="$ROOT/bin/check-surfaces"
+
+pass=0
+fail=0
+WORK=${TMPDIR:-/tmp}/check_surfaces_test.$$
+
+if [ ! -f "$SUT" ]; then
+  printf 'FAIL: %s does not exist\n' "$SUT"
+  exit 1
+fi
+
+cleanup() { rm -rf "$WORK"; }
+trap cleanup EXIT INT TERM
+
+# fixture <name> <surfaces-line-or-empty> — a checkout holding one skill.
+fixture() {
+  _f="$WORK/$1"
+  mkdir -p "$_f/skills/alpha"
+  if [ -n "$2" ]; then
+    printf -- '---\nname: alpha\n%s\ndescription: a\n---\n' "$2" > "$_f/skills/alpha/SKILL.md"
+  else
+    printf -- '---\nname: alpha\ndescription: a\n---\n' > "$_f/skills/alpha/SKILL.md"
+  fi
+  printf '%s' "$_f"
+}
+
+# expect <rc> <label> <fixture> [needle]
+expect() {
+  _want=$1; _label=$2; _fx=$3; _needle=${4:-}
+  _out=$(sh "$SUT" "$_fx" 2>&1); _rc=$?
+  if [ "$_rc" -ne "$_want" ]; then
+    fail=$((fail + 1)); printf '  FAIL %s (want rc=%s got %s)\n%s\n' "$_label" "$_want" "$_rc" "$_out"; return
+  fi
+  if [ -n "$_needle" ] && ! printf '%s' "$_out" | grep -q "$_needle"; then
+    fail=$((fail + 1)); printf '  FAIL %s (rc ok, report never says %s)\n%s\n' "$_label" "$_needle" "$_out"; return
+  fi
+  pass=$((pass + 1)); printf '  ok   %s\n' "$_label"
+}
+
+expect 0 'the default pair is accepted'        "$(fixture ok 'surfaces: [claude-code, library]')"
+expect 0 'all three surfaces are accepted'     "$(fixture three 'surfaces: [claude-code, library, chat]')"
+expect 0 'a single surface is accepted'        "$(fixture one 'surfaces: [chat]')"
+expect 1 'a missing surfaces field fails'      "$(fixture missing '')" 'alpha'
+expect 1 'an unknown surface value fails'      "$(fixture bogus 'surfaces: [claude-code, desktop]')" 'desktop'
+expect 1 'an empty surfaces list fails'        "$(fixture empty 'surfaces: []')" 'alpha'
+
+printf '\ncheck_surfaces: %d passed, %d failed\n' "$pass" "$fail"
+[ "$fail" -eq 0 ]

tests/doctor_test.sh

@@ -37,11 +37,21 @@ new_fixture() {
   printf '%s' "$_f"
 }
 
-# wire_clean <fixture> — the correct wiring: one canonical link, harnesses
+# wire_clean <fixture> [extra-source-dir] — the correct wiring since #27: the
-# pointing at it.
+# canonical location is a REAL directory of per-skill links, fed by one or more
+# sources, with each harness keeping its single directory link to it.
 wire_clean() {
-  mkdir -p "$1/home/.agents" "$1/home/.config/crush" "$1/home/.config/opencode"
+  mkdir -p "$1/home/.agents/skills" "$1/home/.config/crush" "$1/home/.config/opencode"
-  ln -sfn "$1/ck/skills" "$1/home/.agents/skills"
+  for _d in "$1"/ck/skills/*/; do
+    ln -sfn "${_d%/}" "$1/home/.agents/skills/$(basename "$_d")"
+  done
+  printf '%s\n' "$1/ck/skills" > "$1/home/.agents/skills-sources"
+  if [ -n "${2:-}" ]; then
+    for _d in "$2"/*/; do
+      ln -sfn "${_d%/}" "$1/home/.agents/skills/$(basename "$_d")"
+    done
+    printf '%s\n' "$2" >> "$1/home/.agents/skills-sources"
+  fi
   ln -sfn "$1/home/.agents/skills" "$1/home/.config/crush/skills"
   ln -sfn "$1/home/.agents/skills" "$1/home/.config/opencode/skills"
 }
@@ -79,27 +89,50 @@ assert_clean "$f" 'clean fixture exits 0'
 
 # --- 2. dangling link (the 243-link case, gitignored and invisible) ----------
 f=$(new_fixture dangling); wire_clean "$f"
-ln -sfn "$f/ck/skills-that-moved" "$f/home/.agents/skills"
+ln -sfn "$f/ck/skills/vanished" "$f/home/.agents/skills/alpha"
-assert_fails "$f" 'dangling' 'dangling canonical link is reported'
+assert_fails "$f" 'dangling' 'dangling per-skill link is reported'
 
-# --- 3. resolves, but to a DIFFERENT checkout (the silent-stale case) --------
+# --- 3. resolves, but into a source nobody configured (silent-stale case) ----
 # Worse than dangling: it works, so nothing complains, while serving content
-# from a checkout that is months behind.
+# from a checkout that is months behind. Since #27 a link may legitimately
+# point outside the checkout — but only into a source the installer recorded.
 f=$(new_fixture stale)
-mkdir -p "$f/other/skills/alpha" "$f/other/skills/beta"
+mkdir -p "$f/other/alpha"
-printf -- '---\nname: alpha\ndescription: a\n---\n' > "$f/other/skills/alpha/SKILL.md"
+printf -- '---\nname: alpha\ndescription: a\n---\n' > "$f/other/alpha/SKILL.md"
-printf -- '---\nname: beta\ndescription: b\n---\n' > "$f/other/skills/beta/SKILL.md"
 wire_clean "$f"
-ln -sfn "$f/other/skills" "$f/home/.agents/skills"
+ln -sfn "$f/other/alpha" "$f/home/.agents/skills/alpha"
-assert_fails "$f" 'outside' 'link into a foreign checkout is reported'
+assert_fails "$f" 'unknown source' 'link into an unconfigured source is reported'
 
-# --- 4. count mismatch (a harness seeing fewer skills than the checkout) -----
+# --- 3b. a link into a CONFIGURED extra source is healthy -------------------
-f=$(new_fixture count)
+# The whole point of #27: Anthropic's official set alongside this library.
-mkdir -p "$f/home/.config/crush/skills/alpha"
+f=$(new_fixture multisource)
-printf -- '---\nname: alpha\ndescription: a\n---\n' > "$f/home/.config/crush/skills/alpha/SKILL.md"
+mkdir -p "$f/other/xlsx"
-mkdir -p "$f/home/.agents"
+printf -- '---\nname: xlsx\ndescription: x\n---\n' > "$f/other/xlsx/SKILL.md"
+wire_clean "$f" "$f/other"
+assert_clean "$f" 'a link into a configured extra source is healthy'
+
+# --- 3c. the pre-#27 single-link wiring is named, not mistaken for damage ----
+f=$(new_fixture legacy)
+mkdir -p "$f/home/.agents" "$f/home/.config/crush" "$f/home/.config/opencode"
 ln -sfn "$f/ck/skills" "$f/home/.agents/skills"
-assert_fails "$f" 'count' 'skill-count mismatch is reported'
+ln -sfn "$f/home/.agents/skills" "$f/home/.config/crush/skills"
+ln -sfn "$f/home/.agents/skills" "$f/home/.config/opencode/skills"
+assert_fails "$f" 'single-link' 'legacy single-link wiring is reported as such'
+
+# --- 4. a skill in the checkout with no link anywhere ------------------------
+# The multi-source replacement for the old count check: with per-skill links a
+# skill can be missing individually, which a total count would hide if an extra
+# source happened to supply the same number.
+f=$(new_fixture missing); wire_clean "$f"
+rm -f "$f/home/.agents/skills/beta"
+assert_fails "$f" 'beta' 'a checkout skill with no link is reported'
+
+# ...but only for skills that ship to the library. A chat-only skill has no
+# business in a Crush directory, so its absence is correct, not drift (#29).
+f=$(new_fixture chatonly); wire_clean "$f"
+mkdir -p "$f/ck/skills/gamma"
+printf -- '---\nname: gamma\nsurfaces: [chat]\ndescription: g\n---\n' > "$f/ck/skills/gamma/SKILL.md"
+assert_clean "$f" 'a chat-only skill needs no library link'
 
 # --- 5. stray entry (the loose secret-hygiene.md that loaded nowhere) --------
 f=$(new_fixture stray); wire_clean "$f"
@@ -119,9 +152,9 @@ assert_fails "$f" 'legacy' 'leftover per-skill Claude symlinks are reported'
 # resolution target, which is true but useless. It must say the dir is not a
 # link at all, because the fix (move it aside, re-run install.sh) is different
 # from the fix for a link into a foreign checkout.
-f=$(new_fixture realdir)
+f=$(new_fixture realdir); wire_clean "$f"
-mkdir -p "$f/home/.agents" "$f/home/.config/crush/skills/alpha"
+rm -f "$f/home/.config/crush/skills"
-ln -sfn "$f/ck/skills" "$f/home/.agents/skills"
+mkdir -p "$f/home/.config/crush/skills/alpha"
 printf -- '---\nname: alpha\ndescription: a\n---\n' > "$f/home/.config/crush/skills/alpha/SKILL.md"
 assert_fails "$f" 'not a link' 'real directory is reported as unmanaged, not as "outside"'
 
@@ -133,5 +166,130 @@ mkdir -p "$f/home/.claude/skills"
 ln -sfn "$f/ck/skills/vanished" "$f/home/.claude/skills/vanished"
 assert_fails "$f" 'dangling' 'dangling link inside a harness dir is reported'
 
+# --- 8. Claude Code plugin pinned to an older version than is available -----
+# The plugin is the ONLY delivery channel for Claude Code, and Claude Code
+# gates updates on plugin.json's version field. A host that never picked the
+# new one up loads every skill successfully — just the wrong generation. Found
+# live on koala 2026-08-29: installed 0.6.0, marketplace 0.7.0, repo 0.8.5,
+# and doctor said "clean" (#30).
+
+# installed_state <fixture> <version> — the Claude Code install record.
+installed_state() {
+  mkdir -p "$1/home/.claude/plugins"
+  cat > "$1/home/.claude/plugins/installed_plugins.json" <<JSON
+{
+  "version": 2,
+  "plugins": {
+    "skills@mathias": [
+      {
+        "scope": "user",
+        "installPath": "/somewhere/$2",
+        "version": "$2"
+      }
+    ]
+  }
+}
+JSON
+}
+
+# manifest <dir> <version> — a .claude-plugin/plugin.json under <dir>.
+manifest() {
+  mkdir -p "$1/.claude-plugin"
+  printf '{\n  "name": "skills",\n  "version": "%s"\n}\n' "$2" > "$1/.claude-plugin/plugin.json"
+}
+
+f=$(new_fixture pluginmatch); wire_clean "$f"
+installed_state "$f" 0.8.0
+manifest "$f/ck" 0.8.0
+assert_clean "$f" 'plugin on the current version stays silent'
+
+f=$(new_fixture pluginstale); wire_clean "$f"
+installed_state "$f" 0.7.0
+manifest "$f/ck" 0.8.0
+assert_fails "$f" '0.7.0' 'stale plugin version is reported'
+assert_fails "$f" '0.8.0' 'stale plugin report names the available version'
+
+# A host that only uses the symlink path has no install record at all. That is
+# a valid configuration and must not fail.
+f=$(new_fixture pluginabsent); wire_clean "$f"
+manifest "$f/ck" 0.8.0
+assert_clean "$f" 'no Claude Code install record is not a fault'
+
+# The marketplace clone is what Claude Code compares against, so a newer
+# version there means an update is waiting even when the local checkout agrees
+# with what is installed.
+f=$(new_fixture pluginmarket); wire_clean "$f"
+installed_state "$f" 0.7.0
+manifest "$f/ck" 0.7.0
+manifest "$f/home/.claude/plugins/marketplaces/mathias" 0.9.0
+assert_fails "$f" '0.9.0' 'a newer marketplace clone is reported'
+
+# --- 9. --online: the release this host has never fetched ------------------
+# Everything above compares copies already on the host, so a host where the
+# checkout, the marketplace clone and the installed plugin all agree reads as
+# clean while being a release behind origin. Offline by design (#30); this is
+# the opt-in that closes it (#38).
+#
+# The remote lookup is stubbed through $DOCTOR_LATEST_TAG_CMD so no test needs
+# a network or a real remote.
+
+online_fixture() {
+  _f=$(new_fixture "$1"); wire_clean "$_f"
+  installed_state "$_f" "$2"
+  manifest "$_f/ck" "$2"
+  printf '%s' "$_f"
+}
+
+# assert_online <fixture> <stub-tag> <want-rc> <needle> <label>
+assert_online() {
+  _out=$(HOME="$1/home" DOCTOR_CHECKOUT="$1/ck" \
+         DOCTOR_LATEST_TAG_CMD="printf %s\\n $2" sh "$DOCTOR" --online 2>&1); _rc=$?
+  if [ "$3" -eq 0 ] && [ "$_rc" -ne 0 ]; then
+    fail=$((fail + 1)); printf '  FAIL %s\n       exited %s on a current host\n       got: %s\n' "$5" "$_rc" "$_out"; return
+  fi
+  if [ "$3" -ne 0 ] && [ "$_rc" -eq 0 ]; then
+    fail=$((fail + 1)); printf '  FAIL %s\n       exited 0; staleness went unreported\n' "$5"; return
+  fi
+  if [ -n "$4" ] && ! printf '%s' "$_out" | grep -q -- "$4"; then
+    fail=$((fail + 1)); printf '  FAIL %s\n       report never mentions "%s"\n       got: %s\n' "$5" "$4" "$_out"; return
+  fi
+  pass=$((pass + 1)); printf '  ok   %s\n' "$5"
+}
+
+f=$(online_fixture behind 0.8.0)
+assert_online "$f" v0.9.0 1 '0.9.0' '--online reports a release the host has not fetched'
+
+f=$(online_fixture current 0.9.0)
+assert_online "$f" v0.9.0 0 '' '--online stays quiet when the host is current'
+
+# A host AHEAD of the newest tag is the normal state between a release commit
+# and its tag; that is not drift (same reasoning as check's ordering rule).
+f=$(online_fixture ahead 0.9.1)
+assert_online "$f" v0.9.0 0 '' '--online does not complain about being ahead'
+
+# Without the flag, no lookup happens at all — the stub would report a newer
+# tag and must be ignored.
+f=$(online_fixture offline 0.8.0)
+_out=$(HOME="$f/home" DOCTOR_CHECKOUT="$f/ck" \
+       DOCTOR_LATEST_TAG_CMD="printf v9.9.9\\n" sh "$DOCTOR" 2>&1); _rc=$?
+if [ "$_rc" -eq 0 ]; then
+  pass=$((pass + 1)); printf '  ok   the default run performs no remote lookup\n'
+else
+  fail=$((fail + 1)); printf '  FAIL the default run performs no remote lookup\n       got: %s\n' "$_out"
+fi
+
+# A remote that cannot be reached is not drift and must not be reported as it.
+# An unreachable remote produces no output at all, so it gets its own run
+# rather than an empty stub argument — "prints nothing" and "prints an empty
+# string" are different things and only the first is the case under test.
+f=$(online_fixture unreachable 0.9.0)
+_out=$(HOME="$f/home" DOCTOR_CHECKOUT="$f/ck" \
+       DOCTOR_LATEST_TAG_CMD="true" sh "$DOCTOR" --online 2>&1); _rc=$?
+if [ "$_rc" -ne 0 ] && printf '%s' "$_out" | grep -q 'could not'; then
+  pass=$((pass + 1)); printf '  ok   --online reports an unreachable remote as its own fault\n'
+else
+  fail=$((fail + 1)); printf '  FAIL --online reports an unreachable remote as its own fault\n       rc=%s got: %s\n' "$_rc" "$_out"
+fi
+
 printf '\ndoctor: %d passed, %d failed\n' "$pass" "$fail"
 [ "$fail" -eq 0 ]

tests/generate_index_test.sh

@@ -0,0 +1,113 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+# Tests for bin/generate-index.
+#
+# SKILLS_INDEX.md was maintained by hand and drifted: two skills shipped with
+# no row at all (#15), because their rows lived on branches squash-merged after
+# a directory reorg. A gate caught drift after the fact; generating the table
+# from frontmatter removes the class entirely (#29) — the curated summary and
+# trigger now live next to the skill they describe, which is the same argument
+# that made a hand-maintained index the wrong shape.
+
+set -u
+
+ROOT=$(CDPATH= cd -- "$(dirname -- "$0")/.." && pwd)
+SUT="$ROOT/bin/generate-index"
+
+pass=0
+fail=0
+WORK=${TMPDIR:-/tmp}/generate_index_test.$$
+
+if [ ! -f "$SUT" ]; then
+  printf 'FAIL: %s does not exist\n' "$SUT"
+  exit 1
+fi
+
+cleanup() { rm -rf "$WORK"; }
+trap cleanup EXIT INT TERM
+
+ok() { pass=$((pass + 1)); printf '  ok   %s\n' "$1"; }
+no() { fail=$((fail + 1)); printf '  FAIL %s\n%s\n' "$1" "${2:-}"; }
+
+# skill <root> <name> <surfaces> [summary] [use_when]
+skill() {
+  mkdir -p "$1/skills/$2"
+  {
+    printf -- '---\nname: %s\nsurfaces: %s\n' "$2" "$3"
+    [ $# -lt 4 ] || printf 'summary: "%s"\n' "$4"
+    [ $# -lt 5 ] || printf 'use_when: "%s"\n' "$5"
+    printf -- 'description: d\n---\n'
+  } > "$1/skills/$2/SKILL.md"
+}
+
+# fixture <name> — a root with an index carrying the generated-table markers.
+fixture() {
+  _f="$WORK/$1"
+  mkdir -p "$_f"
+  cat > "$_f/SKILLS_INDEX.md" <<'IDX'
+# Engineering Skills Index
+
+<!-- BEGIN skills-table -->
+<!-- END skills-table -->
+
+## Wiring
+prose that must survive regeneration
+IDX
+  printf '%s' "$_f"
+}
+
+f=$(fixture basic)
+skill "$f" beta '[claude-code, library]' 'B summary' 'when B'
+skill "$f" alpha '[chat]' 'A summary' 'when A'
+out=$(sh "$SUT" "$f" 2>&1); rc=$?
+if [ "$rc" -ne 0 ]; then
+  no 'generates a table' "$out"
+elif ! grep -q '^| `alpha` | A summary | when A |' "$f/SKILLS_INDEX.md"; then
+  no 'generates a table' "$(cat "$f/SKILLS_INDEX.md")"
+elif ! grep -q 'prose that must survive regeneration' "$f/SKILLS_INDEX.md"; then
+  no 'content outside the markers survives' "$(cat "$f/SKILLS_INDEX.md")"
+elif [ "$(grep -n '`alpha`' "$f/SKILLS_INDEX.md" | cut -d: -f1)" -gt "$(grep -n '`beta`' "$f/SKILLS_INDEX.md" | cut -d: -f1)" ]; then
+  no 'rows are sorted' "$(cat "$f/SKILLS_INDEX.md")"
+else
+  ok 'generates a sorted table and leaves the rest of the file alone'
+fi
+
+# The surfaces a skill ships to are the point of #29, so they are visible.
+grep -q 'chat' "$f/SKILLS_INDEX.md" \
+  && ok 'the row names the surfaces' \
+  || no 'the row names the surfaces' "$(cat "$f/SKILLS_INDEX.md")"
+
+# Idempotent: a second run changes nothing.
+before=$(cat "$f/SKILLS_INDEX.md")
+sh "$SUT" "$f" >/dev/null 2>&1
+[ "$before" = "$(cat "$f/SKILLS_INDEX.md")" ] \
+  && ok 'regeneration is idempotent' \
+  || no 'regeneration is idempotent'
+
+# --check is the CI gate: clean tree passes.
+sh "$SUT" --check "$f" >/dev/null 2>&1 \
+  && ok '--check passes on a generated index' \
+  || no '--check passes on a generated index'
+
+# ...and fails once a skill appears without regenerating.
+skill "$f" gamma '[library]' 'G summary' 'when G'
+if sh "$SUT" --check "$f" >/dev/null 2>&1; then
+  no '--check fails on a stale index'
+else
+  ok '--check fails on a stale index'
+fi
+
+# A skill with no curated summary is an error, not an empty cell: the table
+# cell is what a reader scans, and a blank one is worse than a missing row.
+f=$(fixture nosummary)
+skill "$f" alpha '[library]'
+out=$(sh "$SUT" "$f" 2>&1); rc=$?
+if [ "$rc" -eq 0 ]; then
+  no 'a missing summary is an error' "$out"
+elif ! printf '%s' "$out" | grep -q alpha; then
+  no 'a missing summary is an error' "$out"
+else
+  ok 'a missing summary is an error naming the skill'
+fi
+
+printf '\ngenerate_index: %d passed, %d failed\n' "$pass" "$fail"
+[ "$fail" -eq 0 ]

tests/install_test.sh

@@ -0,0 +1,187 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+# Tests for install.sh's wiring model.
+#
+# The regression these exist for: install.sh wired each harness with ONE
+# directory symlink to this checkout, which quietly encoded "this checkout is
+# the only source of skills on the host". On flamingo the Crush directory held
+# Anthropic's official skill set, and the only way to install this library was
+# to displace it — a real capability loss dressed up as a tidy-up (#27).
+#
+# Fixtures drive install.sh entirely through env seams, so no test touches the
+# real host wiring.
+
+set -u
+
+ROOT=$(CDPATH= cd -- "$(dirname -- "$0")/.." && pwd)
+SUT="$ROOT/install.sh"
+
+pass=0
+fail=0
+WORK=${TMPDIR:-/tmp}/install_test.$$
+
+if [ ! -f "$SUT" ]; then
+  printf 'FAIL: %s does not exist\n' "$SUT"
+  exit 1
+fi
+
+cleanup() { rm -rf "$WORK"; }
+trap cleanup EXIT INT TERM
+
+ok() { pass=$((pass + 1)); printf '  ok   %s\n' "$1"; }
+no() { fail=$((fail + 1)); printf '  FAIL %s\n%s\n' "$1" "${2:-}"; }
+
+# skill <dir> <name> — a minimal valid skill.
+skill() {
+  mkdir -p "$1/$2"
+  printf -- '---\nname: %s\ndescription: d\n---\n' "$2" > "$1/$2/SKILL.md"
+}
+
+# new_fixture <name> [extra-source-names...] — checkout with alpha+beta.
+new_fixture() {
+  _f="$WORK/$1"
+  mkdir -p "$_f/ck/skills" "$_f/home"
+  skill "$_f/ck/skills" alpha
+  skill "$_f/ck/skills" beta
+  printf '%s' "$_f"
+}
+
+# run_install <fixture> [extra-sources] — echoes output, sets $rc.
+run_install() {
+  _f=$1
+  _extra=${2:-}
+  _out=$(HOME="$_f/home" \
+    SKILLS_SKIP_FETCH=1 \
+    SKILLS_CHECKOUT_DIR="$_f/ck" \
+    AGENTS_SKILLS_DIR="$_f/home/.agents/skills" \
+    CRUSH_SKILLS_DIR="$_f/home/.config/crush/skills" \
+    OPENCODE_SKILLS_DIR="$_f/home/.config/opencode/skills" \
+    SKILLS_EXTRA_SOURCES="$_extra" \
+    bash "$SUT" 2>&1)
+  rc=$?
+  printf '%s' "$_out"
+}
+
+# --- 1. the new shape: a real directory of per-skill links -------------------
+f=$(new_fixture fresh)
+out=$(run_install "$f")
+A="$f/home/.agents/skills"
+if [ ! -d "$A" ] || [ -L "$A" ]; then
+  no 'agents dir is a real directory' "$out"
+elif [ ! -L "$A/alpha" ] || [ ! -L "$A/beta" ]; then
+  no 'each skill is its own link' "$out"
+elif [ ! -L "$f/home/.config/crush/skills" ] || [ ! -L "$f/home/.config/opencode/skills" ]; then
+  no 'harnesses keep one directory link each' "$out"
+else
+  ok 'fresh install builds per-skill links under a real agents dir'
+fi
+
+# --- 2. a second source is served WITHOUT displacing the first --------------
+f=$(new_fixture twosource)
+mkdir -p "$f/other"
+skill "$f/other" xlsx
+out=$(run_install "$f" "$f/other")
+if [ -L "$f/home/.agents/skills/xlsx" ] && [ -L "$f/home/.agents/skills/alpha" ]; then
+  ok 'a second source is linked alongside the checkout'
+else
+  no 'a second source is linked alongside the checkout' "$out"
+fi
+
+# --- 3. name collisions are REPORTED, never silently resolved ---------------
+# Two sources offering `code-review` is a real possibility, and picking one
+# quietly is how stale content wins.
+f=$(new_fixture collide)
+mkdir -p "$f/other"
+skill "$f/other" alpha
+out=$(run_install "$f" "$f/other")
+if printf '%s' "$out" | grep -qi 'collision' \
+   && printf '%s' "$out" | grep -q "$f/other/alpha"; then
+  target=$(readlink "$f/home/.agents/skills/alpha")
+  if [ "$target" = "$f/ck/skills/alpha" ]; then
+    ok 'a name collision is reported and the checkout wins'
+  else
+    no 'a name collision is reported and the checkout wins' "resolved to $target"
+  fi
+else
+  no 'a name collision is reported and the checkout wins' "$out"
+fi
+
+# --- 4. removing a skill from a source removes its link ---------------------
+# Without this the previous generation's problem returns in a new shape: links
+# that resolve to nothing, invisible to git.
+f=$(new_fixture prune)
+out=$(run_install "$f")
+rm -rf "$f/ck/skills/beta"
+out=$(run_install "$f")
+if [ -e "$f/home/.agents/skills/beta" ] || [ -L "$f/home/.agents/skills/beta" ]; then
+  no 'a removed skill loses its link' "$out"
+else
+  ok 'a removed skill loses its link'
+fi
+
+# --- 5. migration from the old single-link shape ----------------------------
+f=$(new_fixture migrate)
+mkdir -p "$f/home/.agents"
+ln -s "$f/ck/skills" "$f/home/.agents/skills"
+out=$(run_install "$f")
+if [ -L "$f/home/.agents/skills" ]; then
+  no 'the old single-link wiring is migrated in place' "$out"
+elif [ -L "$f/home/.agents/skills/alpha" ]; then
+  ok 'the old single-link wiring is migrated in place'
+else
+  no 'the old single-link wiring is migrated in place' "$out"
+fi
+
+# --- 6. unmanaged real content in the agents dir is never deleted -----------
+f=$(new_fixture protect)
+mkdir -p "$f/home/.agents/skills"
+skill "$f/home/.agents/skills" handwritten
+out=$(run_install "$f")
+if [ -f "$f/home/.agents/skills/handwritten/SKILL.md" ] \
+   && printf '%s' "$out" | grep -qi 'unmanaged'; then
+  ok 'unmanaged content is reported and left in place'
+else
+  no 'unmanaged content is reported and left in place' "$out"
+fi
+
+# --- 7. the source list is recorded for doctor ------------------------------
+f=$(new_fixture manifest)
+mkdir -p "$f/other"
+skill "$f/other" xlsx
+out=$(run_install "$f" "$f/other")
+if [ -f "$f/home/.agents/skills-sources" ] \
+   && grep -q "$f/other" "$f/home/.agents/skills-sources" \
+   && grep -q "$f/ck/skills" "$f/home/.agents/skills-sources"; then
+  ok 'configured sources are recorded for doctor'
+else
+  no 'configured sources are recorded for doctor' "$out"
+fi
+
+# --- 8. surfaces: the library link set is not "every skill" -----------------
+# claude.ai has no shell, no cluster and no checkout, so a chat-only skill
+# linked into Crush is a skill that can never fire, competing for selection
+# with ones that can (#29).
+f=$(new_fixture surfaces)
+mkdir -p "$f/ck/skills/chatonly"
+printf -- '---\nname: chatonly\nsurfaces: [chat]\ndescription: c\n---\n' > "$f/ck/skills/chatonly/SKILL.md"
+printf -- '---\nname: alpha\nsurfaces: [claude-code, library]\ndescription: a\n---\n' > "$f/ck/skills/alpha/SKILL.md"
+out=$(run_install "$f")
+if [ -L "$f/home/.agents/skills/alpha" ] && [ ! -e "$f/home/.agents/skills/chatonly" ]; then
+  ok 'a skill that does not ship to the library is not linked'
+else
+  no 'a skill that does not ship to the library is not linked' "$out"
+fi
+
+# A foreign source has no reason to know this convention, so no declaration
+# means "link it" — otherwise adding Anthropic's set would link nothing.
+f=$(new_fixture foreign)
+mkdir -p "$f/other/xlsx"
+printf -- '---\nname: xlsx\ndescription: x\n---\n' > "$f/other/xlsx/SKILL.md"
+out=$(run_install "$f" "$f/other")
+if [ -L "$f/home/.agents/skills/xlsx" ]; then
+  ok 'a source with no surfaces convention is linked as-is'
+else
+  no 'a source with no surfaces convention is linked as-is' "$out"
+fi
+
+printf '\ninstall: %d passed, %d failed\n' "$pass" "$fail"
+[ "$fail" -eq 0 ]

tests/newer_version_test.sh

@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+# Tests for bin/newer-version.
+#
+# Extracted from bin/doctor (#30) once `task check` needed the same comparison
+# (#34): check asserted plugin.json == latest tag, which is red on any checkout
+# that has not fetched the tag the CI tagger just pushed. The assertion it
+# actually wants is "not behind", and ordering needs a real comparison.
+
+set -u
+
+ROOT=$(CDPATH= cd -- "$(dirname -- "$0")/.." && pwd)
+SUT="$ROOT/bin/newer-version"
+
+pass=0
+fail=0
+
+if [ ! -f "$SUT" ]; then
+  printf 'FAIL: %s does not exist\n' "$SUT"
+  exit 1
+fi
+
+# expect <winner> <a> <b> <label>
+expect() {
+  _got=$(sh "$SUT" "$2" "$3")
+  if [ "$_got" = "$1" ]; then
+    pass=$((pass + 1)); printf '  ok   %s\n' "$4"
+  else
+    fail=$((fail + 1)); printf '  FAIL %s (newer-version %s %s -> %s, want %s)\n' "$4" "$2" "$3" "$_got" "$1"
+  fi
+}
+
+expect 0.9.0  0.9.0  0.8.5  'higher minor wins, left'
+expect 0.9.0  0.8.5  0.9.0  'higher minor wins, right'
+expect 0.8.10 0.8.10 0.8.9  'numeric compare, not lexical — 10 beats 9'
+expect 1.0.0  1.0.0  0.99.99 'major dominates'
+expect 0.8.5  0.8.5  0.8.5  'equal returns the value'
+expect 0.9.1  0.9.1  0.9    'a missing component counts as zero'
+expect 0.9    0.9    0.9.0  'equal with a missing component returns the left, per contract'
+
+printf '\nnewer_version: %d passed, %d failed\n' "$pass" "$fail"
+[ "$fail" -eq 0 ]