Add issue triage workflows

New issues get needs-triage. Issues labelled needs-info close after
14 days with no reply; a reply puts them back in needs-triage.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <[email protected]>

.agents/adr/0001-explicit-setup-pointer-only-for-hard-dependencies.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+# Explicit `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` pointer only for hard dependencies
+
+Engineering skills depend on per-repo config (issue tracker, triage label vocabulary, domain doc layout) seeded by `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`. Some skills cannot meaningfully function without that config: they have to publish to a specific issue tracker or apply a specific label string. Others only use it to sharpen output (vocabulary, ADR awareness) and degrade gracefully without it.
+
+We split these into **hard-dependency** and **soft-dependency** skills:
+
+- **Hard dependency** (`to-tickets`, `to-spec`, `triage`): include an explicit one-liner: _"… should have been provided to you; run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not."_ Without the mapping, output is wrong, not just fuzzy.
+- **Soft dependency** (`diagnose`, `tdd`, `improve-codebase-architecture`): reference "the project's domain glossary" and "ADRs in the area you're touching" in vague prose only. If the docs aren't there, the skill still works; output is just less sharp.
+
+The split keeps soft-dependency skills token-light and avoids cargo-culting the setup pointer into places where it isn't load-bearing.

.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md

@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+# Ship the skill set as a native Claude Code plugin; defer a native Codex plugin
+
+These skills have always been installable via [skills.sh](https://skills.sh/mattpocock/skills) (`npx skills add mattpocock/skills`), which copies editable skill files into a user's project across Claude Code, Codex, and other Agent-Skills-standard harnesses. A recurring request is a **plug-and-play** distribution: subscribe to the set as a read-only, always-current bundle you don't edit, rather than a fork you own. That is exactly what native plugin systems provide.
+
+We ship a native **Claude Code plugin** and, for now, **defer** a native **Codex plugin**. The split is forced by how each ecosystem's plugin manifest selects skills, against this repo's bucketed layout.
+
+## The constraint: bucketed skills vs. single-path selection
+
+Skills live in bucket folders under `skills/`: `engineering/` and `productivity/` are **promoted** (shipped); `misc/`, `personal/`, `in-progress/`, and `deprecated/` are **not**. A plugin must expose only the promoted set, which spans two of those bucket folders.
+
+- **Claude Code**: `.claude-plugin/plugin.json` accepts `skills` as an **array of explicit skill-directory paths**. We list the promoted skills one by one, exclude everything else with zero ambiguity, and add `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json` so the repo is its own single-plugin marketplace. Verified end to end: `claude plugin validate . --strict` passes, and `marketplace add` → `install` resolves all promoted skills.
+
+- **Codex**: `.codex-plugin/plugin.json` accepts `skills` only as a **single path string** (arrays are rejected with `missing or invalid plugin.json`), and Codex discovers `SKILL.md` files recursively under it. There is no way to name two bucket folders, or to curate a subset, from one path. Two escape hatches were tested and rejected:
+  - Pointing at `./skills/` would also ship `deprecated/`, `in-progress/`, `personal/`, and `misc/`: retired, draft, and personal skills we deliberately don't promote.
+  - A curated flat directory of **symlinks** into the buckets does not survive install: Codex copies the plugin tree into its cache and **drops symlinks**, so the skills arrive empty.
+
+The only robust ways to give Codex a single promoted-only path are (a) **restructure** so `skills/` contains only promoted skills (moving the non-promoted buckets out, a large blast radius across `CLAUDE.md`, `scripts/link-skills.sh`, the bucket READMEs, and the local dev workflow that relies on `in-progress/` and `personal/`), or (b) **commit duplicate copies** of promoted skills into a flat directory (a sync burden and a second source of truth). Both are structural decisions, not something to bundle into shipping the Claude plugin. This is very likely the original, half-remembered reason a plugin wasn't shipped earlier: the manifest formats didn't cleanly express a curated subset of a bucketed repo.
+
+## Decision
+
+- Ship the **Claude Code plugin** now (`.claude-plugin/plugin.json` + `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json`), curated to the promoted set, as the headline v1.2 deliverable.
+- Keep **skills.sh** as the universal installer: it already serves Codex and other harnesses today, so no Codex user is left without an install path.
+- **Defer** the native Codex plugin until we decide between restructuring `skills/` to promoted-only vs. committing a generated flat copy. Revisit when Codex either supports a `skills` array / include-list or preserves symlinks on install.
+
+## Invariants this creates
+
+- Every promoted skill has an entry in `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`'s `skills` array (this already stood as a `CLAUDE.md` rule; it now also gates the plugin's contents).
+- `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`'s `version` tracks `package.json`'s version: bump both together on release. Claude uses the plugin `version` to decide when installed users see an update.
+
+## Update, 2026-08-05
+
+`mattpocock-skills` was accepted into **Claude Code's official marketplace** (configured name `claude-plugins-official`, source repo `anthropics/claude-plugins-official`), which every Claude Code install has by default. `claude plugins install mattpocock-skills` is now the documented route, and the `marketplace add` → `install` path above is superseded. The install wording lives in [.agents/install-block.md](../install-block.md).
+
+The official listing points at this repo's git URL and reads `.claude-plugin/plugin.json` directly, so it does not depend on `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json`. That file is retained only as a fallback for installing the repo directly (an unreleased commit, or a fork).
+
+Verified 2026-08-05, on Claude Code 2.1.222, against the live listing:
+
+- `claude plugins install mattpocock-skills` resolves with no marketplace added first, and reports `mattpocock-skills@claude-plugins-official`.
+- `claude plugin details mattpocock-skills` then reports version 1.2.0 and loads the promoted skills.
+- The listing's `source` is `{"source": "url", "url": "https://github.com/mattpocock/skills.git", "sha": …}`: the **sha is pinned**, so a release reaches installed users when that pin moves, not the moment we tag. At the time of writing the pin sits two commits behind `main`, which is why it lists 22 skills rather than the 24 in `plugin.json`.
+- The in-session `/plugin install mattpocock-skills` was **not** exercised: `/plugin` is unavailable in headless (`claude -p`) sessions. It runs the same resolver as the CLI, and the documented example form is `/plugin install <name>@claude-plugins-official`.

.agents/install-block.md

@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+# The canonical install block
+
+One install story, one wording. `README.md`, `.changeset/*`, and every page under `docs/` must say **this** and nothing else. Change it here first, then propagate.
+
+`mattpocock-skills` is listed in **Claude Code's official marketplace** (configured name `claude-plugins-official`, source repo `anthropics/claude-plugins-official`), which every Claude Code install has out of the box. There is no marketplace to add first. Official Anthropic marketplaces have auto-update enabled by default ([discover-plugins](https://code.claude.com/docs/en/discover-plugins)), so "updates arrive automatically" is a true claim, not a hope.
+
+## Claude Code: the plugin
+
+<canonical-block name="claude-code">
+
+```bash
+claude plugins install mattpocock-skills
+```
+
+Or, from inside a session:
+
+```
+/plugin install mattpocock-skills
+```
+
+It's in Claude Code's official marketplace, so there's nothing to add first, and updates arrive automatically.
+
+</canonical-block>
+
+## Codex, and other agents: skills.sh
+
+The plugin is Claude Code only. Everywhere else, [skills.sh](https://skills.sh/mattpocock/skills) copies editable skill files into the project. Use the whole-set form on `README.md`:
+
+<canonical-block name="skills-sh-whole-set">
+
+```bash
+npx skills@latest add mattpocock/skills
+```
+
+Pick the skills you want, and which coding agents to install them on. **The installer lets you choose which skills to take: make sure `setup-matt-pocock-skills` is one of them.**
+
+</canonical-block>
+
+…and the single-skill form wherever one skill is named on its own. Note that **`docs/` pages are not a consumer of this block**: ai-hero renders the install widget above the body, so a page that writes the commands out duplicates it. See [writing-docs.md](./writing-docs.md).
+
+<canonical-block name="skills-sh-one-skill">
+
+```bash
+npx skills@latest add mattpocock/skills --skill=<name>
+```
+
+```bash
+npx skills@latest update <name>
+```
+
+</canonical-block>
+
+`skills@latest` is the pinned spelling in all three. The pages under `docs/` used to carry their own copy of these commands; those blocks are now deleted rather than corrected, because the site renders the install commands itself.
+
+## The two routes are exclusive
+
+The plugin is a managed, read-only bundle you subscribe to. skills.sh writes files you own and edit. Installing both leaves the user with every skill twice: always say "pick one".
+
+## Not the install story
+
+`.claude-plugin/marketplace.json` makes the repo its own single-plugin marketplace (`/plugin marketplace add mattpocock/skills`, then `/plugin install mattpocock-skills@mattpocock`). The official listing supersedes it. It is kept as a fallback for installing the repo directly (an unreleased commit, or a fork), and is **not** documented to users.

.agents/invocation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+# Model-invoked vs user-invoked
+
+Every `SKILL.md` in this repo is a skill. The one axis that splits them is **invocation**, who can reach it:
+
+- **User-invoked**: reachable **only by the human typing its name**. Set `disable-model-invocation: true` in the frontmatter (Claude Code) and `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` in `agents/openai.yaml` (Codex). The `description` is **human-facing**: a one-line summary read by a person browsing slash-commands. Strip trigger lists ("Use when the user says…").
+- **Model-invoked**: reachable by **model or user**. The default: omit `disable-model-invocation` and the `policy` block from `agents/openai.yaml`. The `description` is **model-facing** and keeps rich trigger phrasing ("Use when the user wants…, mentions…, asks for…") so auto-invocation fires. The test for whether a skill should stay model-invoked: _could the model usefully reach for this autonomously?_ (Reuse is the reason to extract a skill, not the test.)
+
+Each harness excludes a user-invoked skill from the model's reach in its own way, so nothing but the human can fire it: no other skill can. A user-invoked skill may invoke model-invoked skills, but it can never reach another user-invoked skill.
+
+Every skill also carries an `agents/openai.yaml` beside its `SKILL.md`. It holds Codex UI metadata: `interface.display_name` and `interface.short_description` for the skill picker, and, for user-invoked skills, the `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` that pairs with `disable-model-invocation`. Keep the two in sync: a skill is user-invoked in both harnesses or neither.
+
+Bucket `README.md`s and the top-level `README.md` group entries into **User-invoked** and **Model-invoked**.
+
+## Dependencies between them
+
+Dependencies are expressed as an explicit instruction to **call the Skill tool** with the named skill (`Call the Skill tool with "grilling"`), not deep `../other-skill/FILE.md` cross-references, and not a bare `/skill`-style mention left for the model to interpret. Naming the tool is what gets it fired: most harnesses expose skill invocation as a tool the model calls, and spelling that out gets a higher hit rate than dropping a `/name` into prose and hoping it's read as a command. Dropping the leading `/` also keeps this harness-neutral rather than less: a skill name on its own carries no assumption about which harness's trigger syntax it belongs to. Shared reference docs live inside the skill that owns them; other skills reach that material by calling the Skill tool with it, not by linking across folders.
+
+This is about **operative** instructions: a skill's own steps telling the agent to go run another skill right now. Router prose that just names skills for a human to pick from (`ask-matt`, bucket `README.md`s) isn't invoking anything, so it keeps `/skill`-style names as plain labels.
+
+The Skill tool takes one skill per call. A step that needs two skills is two calls, not one call with two names: say so (`Call the Skill tool twice, for "grilling" and "domain-modeling"`), not "call it with X and Y," which reads as a single call taking both.
+
+This whole convention only holds when the named skill is **model-invoked**. A user-invoked skill can never be reached this way, full stop: per the invariant above, no other skill can call it, including by naming it to the Skill tool. When a step's precondition is a user-invoked skill (e.g. `setup-matt-pocock-skills`), phrase it as an instruction for the human to act on: "tell the user to run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`", never as a Skill tool call.
+
+## Passive vs active domain work
+
+Merely _reading_ `GLOSSARY.md` for vocabulary is a one-line prose pointer, not the `domain-modeling` skill. Only the active build/sharpen discipline (challenge terms, edge-case scenarios, write ADRs, update `GLOSSARY.md` inline) is `domain-modeling`.

.agents/writing-docs.md

@@ -0,0 +1,96 @@
+# Writing docs pages
+
+Every skill in `engineering/` and `productivity/` has a human-facing **docs page** at `docs/<bucket>/<skill-name>.md`. The docs tree mirrors those two bucket folders under `skills/`. It is published at `https://aihero.dev/skills-<skill-name>`; the URL is always `skills-<skill-name>` regardless of bucket, so the docs path is repo organisation only. The page is not the skill and not a copy of `SKILL.md`. Only these two buckets are promoted; the rest (`misc/`, `in-progress/`, `deprecated/`) ship no docs page.
+
+Most of these skills are **user-invoked**: the agent will never fire them for you, so *you* are the index that has to remember they exist and when to reach for them. That memory is **cognitive load**. The job of a docs page is to relieve it: to orient one reader around one skill so they can hold it in their head, know when to reach for it, and see where it sits in the system. The pages are collectively a distributed router; each is a node.
+
+Act whenever a promoted skill is added, renamed, or has its behaviour changed: create or re-sync its docs page. A rename moves the file too (`docs/<bucket>/<old>.md` → `docs/<bucket>/<new>.md`), because the published URL tracks the name; a skill that moves between `engineering/` and `productivity/` moves its docs file to the matching folder. Skills in `misc/`, `in-progress/`, and `deprecated/` get no page, because none of those buckets is promoted. A skill moving *out* of one of them into `engineering/` or `productivity/` gains a page; one moving the other way loses it. A promoted skill that is removed outright keeps its page as an **archived** page: leave the body as it was and open it with a blockquote notice (`> **Archived.** ...`) naming the version it was removed in and any replacement, so the published URL keeps resolving.
+
+Because these pages are published on `aihero.dev`, **every link is absolute**: never a repo-relative path. A link to another skill points at `https://aihero.dev/skills-<name>`; a link into the repo points at its full `https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/...` URL. A relative link that works in the repo breaks once published.
+
+There is no H1. The published page takes its title from the slug.
+
+## Page structure
+
+Fill the template below, keeping its order. The **fixed frame** (`## What it does`, `## When to reach for it`, `## Where it fits`) appears on every page. `## Prerequisites` and the free-form substance sections carry only what this particular skill needs; delete the rest.
+
+Four sections make a page worth reading: `What it does`, `When to reach for it`, `Common questions`, `It's working if`. The first two orient the reader; the last two are where the page stops summarising the skill and starts answering the reader's own situation. Each of the last two has a bar to clear, below, but treat a page that clears neither as unfinished, not as finished-and-short.
+
+**A page carries no install commands.** The ai-hero page template renders the install widget itself (a copy button, the single-skill command, the whole-set command, and the update line) above the body. A page that also writes them out shows the reader the same command twice, and the two copies drift: the hand-written pair on every page went stale against the widget beside it. Install wording is a property of the site, not of the page. If it needs changing, change it in ai-hero; the canonical wording lives in [the install block](./install-block.md).
+
+<page-template>
+
+## What it does
+
+One or two plain-language paragraphs. Lead with the skill's one-sentence job, then state the **defining constraint**: the single fact that makes this skill behave differently from the obvious default (for `to-spec`: it does not interview the user again, it synthesises what is already known). Write it as a plain declarative sentence, never a labelled aside like "The defining constraint:" or "The key thing:"; the formula reads as filler. This line is the most valuable on the page; never omit it.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+How and when you reach for the skill, in two beats that are both effectively always present:
+
+- **Invocation mode.** State whether you type it or the agent fires it. A user-invoked skill: "You invoke this by typing `/<name>`, and the agent won't reach for it on its own." A model-invoked skill: "Type `/<name>`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when a task fits."
+- **Trigger boundary.** The index entry: "reach for this when …". Where the skill is confusable with a sibling, add the other half: "for <X> instead, use [<sibling>](https://aihero.dev/skills-<sibling>)."
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+Optional: include only when the skill needs something in place to be functional; omit the heading entirely otherwise. Covers: a **workspace it writes into** (a stateful skill like `grill-with-docs` writes `GLOSSARY.md` and ADRs; `teach` builds a whole directory, so say what it writes and where), **prior setup** (`triage`/`to-spec`/`to-tickets` need `setup-matt-pocock-skills` to have configured an issue tracker), or **repo-specific tooling**. A stateless skill that runs anywhere has no prerequisites, so drop the section.
+
+## <free-form middle>
+
+One to three short sections, in the skill's *own vocabulary*, that make it click. Choose whatever headings fit the skill: the loop it runs, the artifact it produces, the fork it makes, the one anti-pattern it kills. There is no prescribed heading; the skills are too heterogeneous for one.
+
+The single non-negotiable: **surface the skill's leading word / defining idea** (`tight` feedback loop, `deep module`, throwaway-code-answers-a-question, red-green). It pays off twice: the reader learns what the skill *is*, and learns the word they'll later think with to *reach for* it.
+
+## Common questions
+
+The questions readers really ask about this skill, each in bold with the answer in the lines beneath it. No sub-headings.
+
+An observed question always beats an invented one, so go and find them before you write any:
+
+- **The wiki.** If `~/repos/matt/personal-wiki` exists on this machine, it is the richest source there is. Its `wiki/audience/` area is organised around what the audience wants, discusses, and **is confused by**: read `wiki/index.md` first for the registry of pages, then the pages bearing on this skill. Every page carries `sources:` linkbacks to the original X, Discord, GitHub, and email threads; the wiki is a secondary source, so quote the asker's own question rather than the wiki's summary of it. Skip this bullet where the directory does not exist.
+- **This repo's issues.** `gh issue list --repo mattpocock/skills --search "<skill-name>" --state all`. A question filed twice is a question the page owes an answer to.
+- **`CHANGELOG.md`.** Anything renamed, moved, or behaviourally changed generates a "where did it go?" that the page has to answer.
+
+Where the hunt comes up thin, the section may also carry a question a reader would plainly ask, but **the count stays honest to the evidence**. A well-discussed skill earns six; an obscure one earns one or two, or none at all. Padding a thin skill out to match a rich one is how the section fills with questions nobody has, and an invented question teaches the reader nothing.
+
+Order them by how often each comes up, sharpest first, and say the unflattering thing where it is true: a very long grilling session usually means the scope was too big; a model asked to write its own skill produces something verbose. Omit the heading where there is nothing worth answering.
+
+## It's working if
+
+A few bullets naming what the reader sees when the skill is doing its job. The bar on each is that the reader can check it without opening `SKILL.md`: a signal in their own work, or in the trace in front of them. "The document gets shorter as it gets better" passes; "the library section is byte-identical to `template.sh`" is a compliance check on the skill's internals wearing this section's name. Include it wherever the tells are crisp; omit the heading where they stay vague.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+Always present. Situate the skill in the system in a sentence or two:
+
+- **Role.** Name it: a **chain step** (`grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review`), a **run-once setup** (`setup-matt-pocock-skills`), **periodic maintenance** (`improve-codebase-architecture`, "every few days"), or a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone** (`diagnosing-bugs`, `prototype`, `handoff`). A standalone's map is one honest sentence, which is far better than omitting the section.
+- **Neighbours.** The one or two siblings that matter, each with a because-clause, linked absolutely.
+- **The map.** Point to [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt), the router over the whole set, so this page stays a node and never has to redraw the graph.
+
+</page-template>
+
+## Conventions
+
+- Explain the **why**, not the process. The page orients and situates the skill; it never reproduces the `SKILL.md` steps or template dumps: a human choosing a tool does not need the runbook.
+- **Never name the author.** The page is a technical document, not a record of who said what. "Matt says", "Matt's own answer", "his position is", a quoted reply: all of it goes. A finding from the question hunt is worth keeping; its attribution is not. State the substance as a plain claim about the skill ("the fix is a direct instruction: …", "the split comes down to session count") and drop the frame. The reader is deciding whether to use a tool; an opinion carries the same weight either way, and an attributed one dates as soon as the position moves. Quoting a *user* stays fine: "one user reported …" is evidence about the skill in the wild, and stays anonymous.
+- Use the skill's **leading words** (_seam_, _deep module_, _tracer bullet_) so the page and the skill speak one language.
+- **Use the [AI Coding Dictionary](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary)'s term where one exists, and link its first use on the page.** The dictionary is the house vocabulary for AI coding: _context window_, _subagent_, _harness_, _primary source_, _agent mode_. Prefer its word over a synonym you invent. Link the first occurrence of each term to `https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/<slug>` (the slug is the term lowercased with non-alphanumerics as hyphens: _context window_ → `context-window`), and leave every later occurrence unlinked. Link only where the word carries the dictionary's sense: a domain *model*, background *context* or an auth *token* is a different word that happens to match. Never link inside a heading, a code span, or an existing link, and never link a word that names a skill in this repo rather than the concept. For the full term list, read `~/repos/ai/ai-coding-dictionary/dictionary/` if it exists on this machine (one file per term, the filename *is* the term), and otherwise [mattpocock/dictionary-of-ai-coding](https://github.com/mattpocock/dictionary-of-ai-coding), which is the source of truth either way.
+- **Branches go in a table or a list, never in a paragraph.** Where the page presents a choice (two artifacts the skill can produce, four situations that trigger it, five options at a boundary), the reader is scanning for the one row that matches their situation. A paragraph makes them read all of it to find out. A short markdown table (condition in the left column, what to do in the right) or a bulleted list gives it back in one glance. This applies wherever the branch appears, most often in `## When to reach for it` and the free-form middle.
+- Keep the page itself low-load. It is documentation *about* low-cognitive-load skills; furniture (spare headings, restated links) is the thing it is arguing against.
+
+## Done when
+
+- The page exists at `docs/<bucket>/<name>.md`, and no stale page survives a rename or bucket move.
+- The page carries no source link and writes no install command of its own.
+- `## What it does` states the defining constraint, as plain prose rather than a labelled aside.
+- The page names no author and quotes no author: every claim stands on its own.
+- `## When to reach for it` states invocation mode and the trigger boundary.
+- `## Where it fits` names the role and links to `ask-matt`.
+- A prerequisite (workspace, prior setup, tooling) is stated where one exists, and the section is absent where none does.
+- The middle surfaces the leading word.
+- Every AI Coding Dictionary term the page uses is spelt the dictionary's way, and its first use (and only its first use) links to the dictionary entry.
+- Every multi-way branch is a table or a list, not a paragraph the reader has to read in full.
+- The hunt for real questions ran (the wiki, the issues, the changelog), and `## Common questions` is sized to what it found, not padded to match a richer skill's page.
+- Every `## It's working if` bullet is checkable without opening `SKILL.md`.
+- The sections appear in the template's order.
+- Every link is absolute, and every one resolves.

.claude-plugin/marketplace.json

@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+{
+  "name": "mattpocock",
+  "owner": {
+    "name": "Matt Pocock",
+    "url": "https://www.aihero.dev"
+  },
+  "description": "Matt Pocock's skills for real engineering, as an installable Claude Code plugin.",
+  "plugins": [
+    {
+      "name": "mattpocock-skills",
+      "source": "./",
+      "description": "Matt Pocock's agent skills for real engineering (grilling, spec/ticket flows, TDD, code review, domain modelling and more).",
+      "category": "engineering",
+      "keywords": [
+        "engineering",
+        "skills",
+        "tdd",
+        "code-review",
+        "grilling"
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+}

.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,5 +1,23 @@
 {
   "name": "mattpocock-skills",
+  "version": "1.3.1",
+  "description": "Matt Pocock's agent skills for real engineering: grilling, spec/ticket flows, TDD, code review, domain modelling and more. Plug-and-play, not vibe coding.",
+  "author": {
+    "name": "Matt Pocock",
+    "url": "https://www.aihero.dev"
+  },
+  "homepage": "https://www.aihero.dev/s/skills-newsletter",
+  "repository": "https://github.com/mattpocock/skills",
+  "license": "MIT",
+  "keywords": [
+    "engineering",
+    "skills",
+    "tdd",
+    "code-review",
+    "grilling",
+    "domain-modeling",
+    "productivity"
+  ],
   "skills": [
     "./skills/engineering/ask-matt",
     "./skills/engineering/diagnosing-bugs",
@@ -8,15 +26,25 @@
     "./skills/engineering/improve-codebase-architecture",
     "./skills/engineering/setup-matt-pocock-skills",
     "./skills/engineering/tdd",
-    "./skills/engineering/to-issues",
-    "./skills/engineering/to-prd",
+    "./skills/engineering/to-spec",
+    "./skills/engineering/to-tickets",
+    "./skills/engineering/wayfinder",
+    "./skills/engineering/implement",
+    "./skills/engineering/implement-spec",
     "./skills/engineering/prototype",
+    "./skills/engineering/research",
     "./skills/engineering/domain-modeling",
     "./skills/engineering/codebase-design",
+    "./skills/engineering/code-review",
+    "./skills/engineering/pr",
+    "./skills/engineering/retro",
+    "./skills/engineering/wizard",
     "./skills/productivity/grill-me",
     "./skills/productivity/grilling",
     "./skills/productivity/handoff",
     "./skills/productivity/teach",
-    "./skills/productivity/writing-great-skills"
+    "./skills/productivity/to-questionnaire",
+    "./skills/productivity/wait-what",
+    "./skills/productivity/writing-for-agents"
   ]
 }

.github/workflows/needs-info.yml

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+name: Close needs-info
+
+# Closes issues labelled `needs-info` after 14 days with no reply.
+# Touches only issues with that label. Never marks anything stale on its own.
+# A comment after the label goes on removes `needs-info` and puts the issue
+# back in `needs-triage`, so add the label after you ask your question.
+
+on:
+  schedule:
+    - cron: "30 1 * * *"
+  workflow_dispatch:
+
+permissions: {}
+
+jobs:
+  close:
+    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
+    permissions:
+      issues: write
+      actions: write # the action keeps its state in the Actions cache
+    steps:
+      - uses: actions/stale@v10
+        with:
+          only-issue-labels: needs-info
+          stale-issue-label: needs-info
+          days-before-issue-stale: -1
+          days-before-issue-close: 14
+          days-before-pr-stale: -1
+          days-before-pr-close: -1
+          remove-issue-stale-when-updated: true
+          labels-to-add-when-unstale: needs-triage
+          close-issue-reason: not_planned
+          close-issue-message: >
+            Closing this because we asked for more information 14 days ago
+            and have not heard back. Thank you for the report. If you can add
+            the details, comment here and we will reopen it.
+            See [CONTRIBUTING.md](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md)
+            for what a good report includes.

.github/workflows/release.yml

@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ jobs:
       - name: Create Version Pull Request
         uses: changesets/action@v1
         with:
-          version: npx changeset version
+          version: npm run version
           publish: npx changeset tag
           commit: "chore: version skills"
           title: "chore: version skills"

.github/workflows/triage-label.yml

@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+name: Triage label
+
+# Every new issue gets `needs-triage`, so nothing skips the queue.
+# The issue forms already add it; this catches issues opened any other way.
+
+on:
+  issues:
+    types: [opened]
+
+permissions: {}
+
+jobs:
+  label:
+    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
+    permissions:
+      issues: write
+    steps:
+      - name: Add needs-triage
+        run: gh issue edit "$NUMBER" --add-label needs-triage
+        env:
+          GH_TOKEN: ${{ github.token }}
+          GH_REPO: ${{ github.repository }}
+          NUMBER: ${{ github.event.issue.number }}

.gitignore

@@ -1 +1,2 @@
 node_modules
+.claude

.out-of-scope/mainstream-issue-trackers-only.md

@@ -4,11 +4,11 @@
 
 ## Why this is out of scope
 
-Every issue-tracker backend hard-codes a CLI shape into the skills (commands, flags, output parsing). Each new backend is permanent maintenance surface — it has to keep working as the tool's CLI evolves, and it has to keep being tested against `/to-prd`, `/to-issues`, `/triage`, and friends. That cost is only worth paying for trackers a meaningful fraction of users actually have.
+Every issue-tracker backend hard-codes a CLI shape into the skills (commands, flags, output parsing). Each new backend is permanent maintenance surface, because it has to keep working as the tool's CLI evolves, and it has to keep being tested against `/to-spec`, `/to-tickets`, `/triage`, and friends. That cost is only worth paying for trackers a meaningful fraction of users actually have.
 
 "Mainstream" is a judgment call, not a numeric bar:
 
-- GitHub, GitLab, and Backlog.md are the kind of tools we'd consider mainstream — broadly known, widely used, well past the experimental phase.
+- GitHub, GitLab, and Backlog.md are the kind of tools we'd consider mainstream: broadly known, widely used, well past the experimental phase.
 - A brand-new agent-focused tool with a few hundred GitHub stars is not, no matter how interesting the design.
 
 Stars, age, and download counts are useful signals when making the call but none of them is the rule. The rule is: would a typical engineer recognise this tool and have plausibly chosen it for their team?
@@ -22,4 +22,4 @@ Neither requires the core skills to know about the specific tool.
 
 ## Prior requests
 
-- #99 — "Add dex as an issue tracker backend" (dex was ~3 months old and ~300 stars at the time of the request)
+- #99: "Add dex as an issue tracker backend" (dex was ~3 months old and ~300 stars at the time of the request)

.out-of-scope/question-limits.md

@@ -4,15 +4,15 @@ The `/grill-me` skill (and grilling sessions inside other skills) does not enfor
 
 ## Why this is out of scope
 
-Grilling is intentionally open-ended. The point is to keep digging until each branch of the decision tree is resolved — some plans need three questions, some need fifty. A fixed cap would either cut off useful exploration on hard problems or feel arbitrary on easy ones.
+Grilling is intentionally open-ended. The point is to keep digging until each branch of the decision tree is resolved: some plans need three questions, some need fifty. A fixed cap would either cut off useful exploration on hard problems or feel arbitrary on easy ones.
 
 If a session feels too long, the right escape hatches already exist:
 
 - The user can stop the session at any time and accept the current state of the plan.
-- The user can tell the model to wrap up, summarise, and move on — natural-language steering is the intended control surface, not a numeric limit.
+- The user can tell the model to wrap up, summarise, and move on, since natural-language steering is the intended control surface, not a numeric limit.
 
 Adding a hard cap would also conflate two different failure modes: a model that asks too many questions because the plan is genuinely under-specified (working as intended) vs. a model that asks redundant or low-value questions (a prompt-quality issue, not a quantity issue). The fix for the latter belongs in the skill prompt, not in a counter.
 
 ## Prior requests
 
-- #44 — "Codex just asked me 200 questions"
+- #44: "Codex just asked me 200 questions"

.out-of-scope/setup-skill-verify-mode.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ This project will not add a dedicated verify/check mode (or a separate verify sk
 
 ## Why this is out of scope
 
-A second skill — or a `--verify` flag — for checking whether `docs/agents/*.md` artifacts still match the seed-template schema would duplicate work the existing setup skill already handles in conversation.
+A second skill (or a `--verify` flag) for checking whether `docs/agents/*.md` artifacts still match the seed-template schema would duplicate work the existing setup skill already handles in conversation.
 
 The intended workflow is: **run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` and tell it to verify your current setup.** The skill is prompt-driven, so the maintainer can scope it to a verification pass ("don't rewrite anything, just check my existing files against the current seed templates and report drift") without needing a separate code path. Adding a flag or a sibling skill would split the surface area of a feature that's already expressible through the natural-language entry point.
 
@@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ Keeping configuration management to a single skill also avoids the maintenance c
 
 ## Prior requests
 
-- #106 — Feature request: verify/check mode for setup-matt-pocock-skills
+- #106: Feature request: verify/check mode for setup-matt-pocock-skills

AGENTS.md

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+CLAUDE.md

CHANGELOG.md

@@ -1,5 +1,287 @@
 # mattpocock-skills
 
+## 1.3.1
+
+### Patch Changes
+
+- [#1121](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/1121) [`c5b9869`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/c5b98691982c4f0d3a5e40ab09566b3b84721e00) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - `ask-matt` no longer says `diagnosing-bugs` hands off to `improve-codebase-architecture` from a post-mortem; that step was removed. It now points you at `/retro` once the fix is in, to ask what would have prevented the bug, and at `/improve-codebase-architecture` where the finding is a missing seam. The `diagnosing-bugs` docs page drops the same stale hand-off. Thanks @Ygilany for spotting it ([#1117](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/1117)).
+
+## 1.3.0
+
+### Minor Changes
+
+- [#1120](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/1120) [`2aecca1`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/2aecca12ea9ff047f76c8178cb64dfeafd192abe) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Graduate **`implement-spec`** into the **Engineering** bucket, so it ships in the Claude Code plugin, gets a docs page, and is routed by `ask-matt` as the parallel alternative to per-ticket `implement`.
+
+  `implement-spec` (user-invoked) implements a whole spec in one run. It reads the tickets as a **task graph**, runs implementer subagents in their own worktrees across the ready **frontier**, and lands everything on one **integration branch**, closing out with `code-review`. Ahead of graduating:
+
+  - The goal is now the integration branch, not a PR. A draft PR opens only when the issue tracker closes work through PRs or you ask for one, and only after the first merge (a branch with no commits ahead of main can't open one). Without a PR, the tickets are resolved the way the tracker closes work.
+  - It points at the issue tracker like its siblings, telling you to run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` when none has been provided, rather than silently defaulting to `gh`.
+  - Each implementer confirms its worktree is based on the integration branch, builds its ticket with `tdd`, and merges the integration tip into its own branch before reporting done, so each merge is a fast-forward.
+
+- [#1120](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/1120) [`2aecca1`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/2aecca12ea9ff047f76c8178cb64dfeafd192abe) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Graduate **`pr`** into the **Engineering** bucket, so it ships in the Claude Code plugin, gets a docs page, and is routed by `ask-matt` as the PR-body close-out.
+
+  `pr` (model-invoked) is the shape a pull request body should take: a summary as the smallest visual that makes the change clear (pseudocode, a call tree, a file tree, Mermaid, a diff), before/after evidence that it works, and a merge-danger call (one-way or two-way door, plus blast radius). The Summary visuals are adapted from Dex Horthy's `show-me`, credited in the skill's `CREDITS.md`.
+
+- [#1120](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/1120) [`2aecca1`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/2aecca12ea9ff047f76c8178cb64dfeafd192abe) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Graduate **`retro`** into the **Engineering** bucket, so it ships in the Claude Code plugin, gets a docs page, and is routed by `ask-matt` as the last step of the main flow, after `code-review`.
+
+  `retro` (user-invoked) looks back at a coding session and suggests changes to the agent's environment rather than the code: navigation pointers, automated checks, coding standards, steering files, tool economy, information access. It classifies each coding-standards finding first: a mechanical violation gets a deterministic check (a linter rule, a pre-commit hook, or a CI job), and `CODING_STANDARDS.md` is kept for genuine judgement calls. A repo with no guardrail at all is a finding in its own right.
+
+- [#1120](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/1120) [`daa01d8`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/daa01d8aa68ad5c61b68970ec2018d0ce9567be6) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Remove the **`resolving-merge-conflicts`** skill. It's no longer needed, and nothing replaces it: the agent works through an in-progress merge or rebase conflict without a dedicated skill. It leaves the Claude Code plugin, the README and the `ask-matt` router. Its docs page at `https://aihero.dev/skills-resolving-merge-conflicts` stays up, marked archived.
+
+- [#1120](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/1120) [`006a52b`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/006a52be23e0178375e083e30535fa8224471f3e) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Rename the `CONTEXT.md`/`CONTEXT-MAP.md` domain-doc convention to `GLOSSARY.md`/`GLOSSARY-MAP.md` everywhere the skills read and write it (`domain-modeling`, `grill-with-docs`, `improve-codebase-architecture`, `setup-matt-pocock-skills`, `triage`, `tdd`, `diagnosing-bugs`, `ask-matt`, `codebase-design`, `wait-what`, `pr`), plus the docs pages and this repo's own root glossary.
+
+  If you have an existing `CONTEXT.md` (or `CONTEXT-MAP.md`) from before this change, `git mv` it to the new name: the skills only look for `GLOSSARY.md`/`GLOSSARY-MAP.md` going forward.
+
+### Patch Changes
+
+- [#848](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/848) [`f02e2ed`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/f02e2ed3624d031272f8547742d23bf6bca8b072) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - domain-modeling: trigger on discussing codebase terminology and on writing or editing a GLOSSARY.md or an ADR directly, replacing the narrower "pin down domain terminology or a ubiquitous language" / "record an architectural decision" phrasing. Also drops the "another skill needs to maintain the domain model" caveat, since that's the invoking skill's job to state explicitly, not this description's.
+
+- [#911](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/911) [`4f28947`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/4f289474bad013fe2be8f8769d733f59d9103d6b) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Quote the `description` front matter in `to-spec`, `code-review`, `setup-matt-pocock-skills`, `writing-fragments`, `writing-shape`, and `wait-what`. An unquoted colon-space left over from the em-dash sweep in [#905](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/905) made each block invalid YAML, so `skills.sh` skipped all six during discovery and they couldn't be listed or installed via `npx skills`.
+
+- [#917](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/917) [`85f83d3`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/85f83d3fde1d3a90d5c9a657f6998c79a6c37308) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - grilling: update the round template so consecutive questions are separated by a horizontal rule (`---`) instead of running together.
+
+- [#879](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/879) [`d419977`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/d419977fe07d9e1607d3523f3579310bbb076b93) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - grilling: remove em-dashes from `SKILL.md`, replacing them with colons and semicolons so the instructions read as plain text.
+
+- [#905](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/905) [`e6e9577`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/e6e957797d8cceb5b351c0dc840369523f9fb8fb) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Remove every em-dash from the repo's prose (docs, `SKILL.md` files, ADRs, `README.md`, scripts, JSON/YAML metadata), hand-rewriting each sentence with a comma, colon, period, parentheses, or conjunction rather than mechanically substituting the character. `CLAUDE.md`/`AGENTS.md` now says not to reintroduce them.
+
+- [#878](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/878) [`e3e547b`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/e3e547b57d549110a0aa6ff40fd7b871c01c76c9) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Standardize cross-skill invocation on an explicit "call the Skill tool" instruction instead of bare `/skill`-style prose, across `code-review`, `diagnosing-bugs`, `grill-with-docs`, `grill-me`, `improve-codebase-architecture`, `tdd`, `to-spec`, `to-tickets`, `triage`, and `wayfinder`.
+
+  - A skill that names another skill in prose ("run the `/grilling` skill") does not reliably cause it to load. This is the documented rough edge behind `grill-with-docs`'s most-reported problem. Naming the tool directly (`Call the Skill tool with "grilling"`) is intended to raise the hit rate. Dropping the leading `/` also makes the instruction harness-neutral rather than less: it no longer assumes Claude Code's trigger syntax.
+  - A step needing more than one skill now says so as multiple calls ("Call the Skill tool twice, for `grilling` and `domain-modeling`"), not one call carrying two names.
+  - Documents the convention in `.agents/invocation.md` for future skills to follow.
+
+- [#880](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/880) [`1dab982`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/1dab98299c3b81f560026c01b7ebf55ed5d91373) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Stop skills from trying to reach user-invoked skills through the Skill tool: fix cross-skill references that violated the "no other skill can call it" invariant in `.agents/invocation.md`, in `to-spec`, `wayfinder`, `to-tickets`, `triage`, `code-review`, and `diagnosing-bugs`.
+
+  - `to-spec`, `wayfinder`, `to-tickets`, `triage`, and `code-review` each carried a precondition ("...run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not") that PR [#878](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/878) rewrote into a literal `Call the Skill tool with "setup-matt-pocock-skills"` instruction. `setup-matt-pocock-skills` is user-invoked, so none of these skills (user-invoked or model-invoked) can call it. Reworded all five as instructions for the agent to tell the human to run it instead.
+  - `diagnosing-bugs`'s Phase 6 post-mortem hand off to `improve-codebase-architecture` (also user-invoked) the same way, from an autonomous, often-unattended bug-fixing flow with no human in the loop to catch the failed call. Removed the hand-off outright rather than softening it, since it rarely fired in practice. Phase 6 is now "Cleanup" only; the mechanical checklist is untouched.
+  - Added a carve-out paragraph to `.agents/invocation.md`'s "Dependencies between them" section: the `Call the Skill tool with "name"` convention only applies when the named skill is model-invoked. This is the section PR [#878](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/878) introduced without reconciling it against the user-invoked/model-invoked invariant stated eight lines above it; the gap is most of why this bug reached six call sites instead of one.
+
+  Fixes [#453](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/453).
+
+- [#904](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/904) [`594f0f8`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/594f0f83188921a60d45d63d6cdac509de20df2c) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - wait-what: follow `GLOSSARY-MAP.md` to the right `GLOSSARY.md` when a repo indexes multiple contexts that way instead of keeping a single root `GLOSSARY.md`.
+
+## 1.2.3
+
+### Patch Changes
+
+- [#779](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/779) [`efce423`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/efce423018fc6468a3239621f1c1bcaacc723801) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Make `diagnosing-bugs` redact secrets.
+
+  - Add a **Redact** section to `SKILL.md`. The skill has the agent show commands, outputs and captured artifacts; the section makes redaction the first move on each — write `<REDACTED>`, build loops against env vars so the credential stays in the environment, and quote only the signal-carrying lines of a captured artifact.
+  - The Phase 1 completion criterion said "paste the invocation and its output". It now says show it redacted, and Phase 1 asks the user for a **redacted** captured artifact.
+  - Note in `scripts/hitl-loop.template.sh` that `capture` prints its value back to the terminal, so it takes observations while signing in stays a `step`.
+
+- [#781](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/781) [`14bfbbd`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/14bfbbd8654a8d2910299e1a004c19c1979687d8) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Drop Claude Code's tool and agent-type names from the subagent-dispatch instructions in `code-review`, `codebase-design`, and `improve-codebase-architecture`, so the step is followable on Codex and other harnesses.
+
+- [#783](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/783) [`c0fd1e9`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/c0fd1e973e040347d424e09934099f1bd6c2dee0) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - wizard: remove the time estimate. The template drops `TOTAL_MINUTES` and the time-remaining display, `stage` takes a name only, and progress is counted in stages.
+
+## 1.2.2
+
+### Patch Changes
+
+- [#766](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/766) [`4aaccb5`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/4aaccb58d40559d7e3c59a029b2290ae5ba538de) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Make `writing-for-agents` model-invokable in Codex again.
+
+  - Drop `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` from `agents/openai.yaml`. Codex filtered the skill out of the model-visible skills list, so its description could not trigger it — only an explicit `$writing-for-agents` mention worked.
+  - Update the stale `interface.display_name` and `interface.short_description`, which still named the old `writing-great-skills` skill.
+  - Move the skill from the **User-invoked** list to the **Model-invoked** list in `README.md` and `skills/productivity/README.md`.
+
+## 1.2.0
+
+### Minor Changes
+
+- [#551](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/551) [`697d4ce`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/697d4ce9742da558fd1ba6697c8e9775e2e302dd) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Add Codex metadata alongside each skill's Claude Code frontmatter so the set works in both harnesses without generated copies.
+
+  - Add an `agents/openai.yaml` beside every `SKILL.md` with Codex UI metadata (`interface.display_name`, `interface.short_description`).
+  - Mark every user-invoked skill with `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false`, the Codex analog of `disable-model-invocation: true`, so Codex excludes it from implicit invocation while explicit `$skill` invocation still works.
+  - Document the dual-harness invocation model in `.agents/invocation.md`, `CLAUDE.md`, and the promoted-bucket READMEs.
+  - Add `AGENTS.md` as a symlink to `CLAUDE.md` so Codex reads the same repo instructions.
+
+- [#593](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/593) [`0f2bdbd`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/0f2bdbdb06220d2df3718b8f0483157c6c8a8600) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Graduate **`to-questionnaire`** out of `in-progress/` into the **Productivity** bucket, so it ships in the plugin. It turns a decision you can't answer alone into a Markdown questionnaire for the one person who can — filled in async, or worked through together in a meeting.
+
+  Its defining move is that it grills you about the **send**, not the subject: a normal grilling session interrogates the topic, which is exactly what you can't answer here, so the interview asks only who the questionnaire is going to and what you need back, then aims every question at the gap between the two.
+
+  Now wired as a promoted skill — plugin entry, top-level + Productivity READMEs under **User-invoked**, a docs page at `docs/productivity/to-questionnaire.md`, and a Standalone route in `ask-matt` framing it as the inverse of `/grill-me` (mine someone else, not yourself).
+
+- [#680](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/680) [`b3376f8`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/b3376f8d39848dd08572ec2667da4739a67c8c04) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Graduate **`wizard`** out of `in-progress/` into the **Engineering** bucket, so it ships in the plugin — and make it model-invoked. It generates an interactive bash script that walks a human through a manual procedure — third-party setup, a one-off migration, an A→B state transition — opening each URL, saying what to click, capturing the values, and writing them into `.env` files and GitHub Actions secrets.
+
+  The delightful UX is pre-solved by the bundled `template.sh` (progress with time-remaining, confirmation gates, cross-platform URL opening including WSL, hidden secret entry, idempotent `.env` upserts, `gh secret`/`gh variable` writes with graceful degradation, closing skip summary). Everything above the `STAGES` marker is a fixed library that's never hand-edited — the skill's job is only to scope the procedure and author its **stages**.
+
+  Engineering rather than Productivity: it reads `.env*`, `docker-compose*`, framework config and every `secrets.*`/`vars.*` reference in `.github/workflows/` to scope itself, writes CI secrets, and verifies its output with `bash -n` and `shellcheck`.
+
+  Because it is model-invoked, the agent can reach for it the moment it hits a step only a human can perform, instead of dumping numbered instructions into the chat and hoping you follow them. Typing `/wizard` works exactly as before — model-invocation only ever _adds_ the agent's reach. The description is written as the pointer that decides when it fires: what it produces, four trigger branches (provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, walking an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, a one-off migration or cutover), and an explicit non-trigger — don't invoke it for steps the agent can perform itself. Work an agent can do, an agent should do; the wizard is for the clicks, approvals and dashboard trips you would not hand to one. The stage-list confirmation before a line is written now doubles as the proposal when the agent fires it mid-build.
+
+  Now wired as a promoted skill — plugin entry, top-level + Engineering READMEs under **Model-invoked**, a docs page at `docs/engineering/wizard.md`, and a Standalone route in `ask-matt` for the steps only a human can take. Model-invocation also puts it out of the reach of [#693](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/693), which drops user-invoked skills from the listing on Claude's desktop and web surfaces.
+
+- [#763](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/763) [`77d207e`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/77d207ef03219cc603e2832e1159cbdd1c91818e) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Reshape the **`prototype`** skill around two ideas: the demo is **a single shareable HTML file**, and the prototype is **a primary source**.
+
+  The logic branch now produces one self-contained file (plain HTML/CSS/JS, no build, no server) instead of a terminal app — a non-developer can open it by double-click and drive it in their own domain language: a labelled state panel, always-available free-play buttons, and a set of tabbed **guided walkthroughs**, each a scenario with the ordered buttons to press underneath it. The portable pure-logic module still lifts into the real code; the HTML shell is the throwaway.
+
+  Throwaway no longer means deleted. Rather than being removed once it has answered its question, the prototype is captured as runnable evidence on a throwaway branch (`prototype/<name>`) out of main, with a context pointer to it left on the implementation issue — so the main branch keeps only the validated decision while the exploration stays findable. The answer (verdict + question) is still captured durably in an issue/ADR/commit.
+
+- [#536](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/536) [`42a5b70`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/42a5b70fcacc7baff1977b13f3919fb2f63af14e) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Ship the skill set as a native **Claude Code plugin**, listed in Claude Code's official marketplace. You can now subscribe to the promoted skills as a managed, read-only bundle instead of copying editable files:
+
+  ```bash
+  claude plugins install mattpocock-skills
+  ```
+
+  Or, from inside a session:
+
+  ```
+  /plugin install mattpocock-skills
+  ```
+
+  There is no marketplace to add first — the official marketplace is configured by default.
+
+  `.claude-plugin/plugin.json` carries the full plugin metadata (version, description, author, license, keywords) and the explicit list of promoted skills. `skills.sh` remains the universal installer (and the path for Codex and other harnesses today); a native Codex plugin is deferred — see `.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md` for why.
+
+- [#751](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/751) [`355fa74`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/355fa7420b418af838998f7ec4365ceda1c8dfcc) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Add **`wait-what`** — a one-word corrective for model verbosity. Type it the moment a message doesn't land, and the agent re-pitches it: a little context, ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English, and the ubiquitous language from your `CONTEXT.md`. User-invoked, three lines long.
+
+  The mechanism is the name. Concision skills fail by growing — a 400-line skill still leaves the model verbose — so this one is a single precise leading word and nothing else. Names that describe the _output_ (`/tldr`, `/no-fluff`) make the model clip words and lose you further; naming the _listener's_ state asks for both halves at once, fewer words **and** the context you were missing. It also reuses the leading words already in your global `CLAUDE.md`, so the skill, `CLAUDE.md` and every `CONTEXT.md` reach for the same tokens.
+
+  It repairs one message; it doesn't prevent the next one. The cure for jargon is a shared language built upfront with `/grill-with-docs`; this is what you reach for when you don't have one yet.
+
+- [#763](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/763) [`77d207e`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/77d207ef03219cc603e2832e1159cbdd1c91818e) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Name the `/wayfinder` unit a **decision ticket**, and burn research tickets down with subagents.
+
+  People kept reading a wayfinder ticket as an ordinary _implementation_ ticket — a slice of a build to execute — when wayfinder uses them as **decision tickets**: questions whose resolution is a decision. The skill description and its opening line now introduce the term (and say what makes it one), with the `ask-matt` / engineering README blurbs and the docs page matching — while "ticket" stays the everyday word once the term is established. `CONTEXT.md` records **Decision ticket** as a domain term, so the "avoid: ticket" guidance no longer contradicts wayfinder's deliberate use of the word.
+
+  Research tickets are no longer parked for a separately-launched session. Research stays a real ticket type — it's a genuine shared blocker that downstream decisions hang on, and that dependency is exactly what the frontier's blocking edges exist to render. What changes is how it's resolved: because research is AFK, charting doesn't stop and read it. After creating the tickets, the charting session fires a `/research` subagent for each research ticket to burn it down in parallel, capturing the findings on a throwaway `research/<name>` branch with a context pointer. Research tickets are the one exception to _one ticket per session_.
+
+- [#763](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/763) [`77d207e`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/77d207ef03219cc603e2832e1159cbdd1c91818e) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - **Breaking:** rename **`writing-great-skills`** → **`writing-for-agents`**, restructure it, and add a new leading word.
+
+  The reference now covers any document an agent consumes — skills, `AGENTS.md` / `CLAUDE.md`, docs reached by a pointer — not just skills. `GLOSSARY.md` is merged into `SKILL.md` (one authoritative treatment per term; the `_Avoid_` synonym lists and the standalone Predictability definition are gone); the skill-only mechanics (frontmatter, model- vs user-invoked, router skills, the invocation cut of splitting) are disclosed to a new `SKILL-MECHANICS.md`. The skill is now **model-invoked**: it fires when creating or editing skills or modifying `AGENTS.md`/`CLAUDE.md`. `ask-matt`'s pointer updated. Reinstall under the new name; the old name is gone (no alias).
+
+  The pruning section gains **cache**. Single source of truth now reaches past the document into the environment — `package.json` scripts, config files, directory layout, `--help` output are themselves authoritative, so a doc that restates them is a cache of a lookup, earning its load only when the lookup is expensive. The positive target: cache what the agent cannot find by looking (unwritten conventions, the reason behind a choice, gotchas no config confesses), and leave one-file, one-command lookups to the environment, where they cannot go stale.
+
+- [#533](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/533) [`45afd80`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/45afd8074a8b7de5fe073845d080fa9dd6c429fa) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Add a YAGNI scoping filter to the **`improve-codebase-architecture`** skill's Explore step. Instead of scanning the whole repo evenly, it now scopes to where change is actually landing: if you name a direction it takes it, otherwise it reads the last ~20 commit messages to bias exploration toward actively-developed paths. A deepening opportunity in code nobody touches is a refactor you'll never cash in — the leverage only pays off where you keep editing — so the report stops tidying dormant corners of the repo.
+
+### Patch Changes
+
+- [#763](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/763) [`77d207e`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/77d207ef03219cc603e2832e1159cbdd1c91818e) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Sharpen `/ask-matt` — the router now covers phase boundaries, the two wayfinder mistakes, and two skills it never mentioned.
+
+  **Phase boundaries.** A **phase** is a chunk of work inside a session — the grilling, the implementation, the QA — and the boundary between two of them is where you decide what to do with the context you've built. The two-bullet `Crossing sessions` section is replaced by a decision tree carrying all five options in order (**continue**, `/clear`, `/handoff`, **subagent**, `/compact`), with the reasoning disclosed in a new `PHASE-BOUNDARIES.md`. Three fixes come with it:
+
+  - **`/handoff` was oversold.** It read as the general bridge between context windows. It's narrow: you need it only when something has to _travel_ — a new harness, a new directory, a colleague, or a side task forked mid-phase. What it buys is portability.
+  - **`/compact` is the default, not the first reach.** It sits at the bottom of the tree, after the four cheaper or more precise questions above it. Starting there produces a session that's confidently wrong about whatever the summary flattened.
+  - **Two branches were missing entirely.** **Continue** is the one to rule out first — it's the only move that keeps the conversation as a primary source rather than a summary of one — and a **subagent** handles anything scoped tightly enough to run AFK.
+
+  Context hygiene's escape hatch now says `/compact` rather than `/handoff` (same harness, same directory, at a boundary — the handoff clause doesn't apply), and the smart zone figure is updated from ~120k to ~150k tokens.
+
+  **Wayfinder routing.** The two mistakes people most often make with the heaviest, most cognitively demanding flow:
+
+  - **Over-reaching for it.** It's slower and denser than a single grill, so it's flagged as the heaviest flow and reserved for the idea that genuinely won't fit one session — a well-scoped feature belongs on `/grill-with-docs`, not here.
+  - **Losing the way at the handoff.** When the map clears, wayfinder hands off, it doesn't build: merge onto the main flow at `/to-spec` (which collapses the map's linked decisions into a buildable plan) rather than looping the map straight into `/implement`. Straight-to-`/implement` is only for efforts that turned out genuinely small.
+
+  **Missing routes.** `/grilling` and `/resolving-merge-conflicts` were absent from the router altogether and are now in it, and `grill-me` splits from `grill-with-docs` on whether you are in a working directory.
+
+- [#502](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/502) [`44eed54`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/44eed545186ffd0263e8004867750b80cfddd215) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Make `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` friendlier and align the local-markdown tracker with the current spec.
+
+  - **Triage labels** are now asked about only when the `triage` skill is installed, and then as a single recommended-yes question ("keep the default triage labels?") instead of an override interrogation. When `triage` isn't installed, the section — and `docs/agents/triage-labels.md` — are skipped.
+  - **External PRs as a request surface** is no longer a setup question. The GitHub/GitLab templates still carry the flag, defaulted off; a user can flip it in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` later.
+  - **Domain docs** default to single-context without asking; multi-context is only offered when the repo shows monorepo signals.
+  - **Local-markdown tickets** are now one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md` — never a single combined `tickets.md`. `/to-tickets` and the local issue-tracker template now agree, and the spec file is `spec.md` (not `PRD.md`) to match `/to-spec`.
+
+  Docs pages for `setup-matt-pocock-skills` and `to-tickets` re-synced.
+
+- [#532](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/532) [`170ad48`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/170ad48655825783d0193e850e31a9aac957bb95) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Reword **`grilling`** for general use. Its description and body no longer scope the interview to a software plan: "this plan" → "this", "enact the plan" → "act on it", and "exploring the codebase" → "exploring the environment". The technique is unchanged; it now reads as a stress-test of any plan, decision, or idea.
+
+- [#593](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/593) [`a4b2009`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/a4b2009a1a3ac9575506c10b4c84f08f9bba7a38) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Rework **`grilling`** from one-question-at-a-time to round-by-round. It now maps the decision tree and asks the whole **frontier** — every question whose prerequisites are already settled — in a single numbered round, then recomputes the frontier from the user's answers and asks the next round. Same 13 questions land in ~3 rounds instead of 13. Facts the environment can answer are dispatched to background sub-agents so research never blocks the round: only questions downstream of a running exploration wait for it. The session ends when the frontier is empty.
+
+  Every question in a round is emitted in one fixed shape — `❓ **Q1** - **<title>**`, then the body (prose or multiple choices), then the recommendation on its own `➡️` line. A round reads as a scannable numbered list with each recommendation visually separated from the question, so you can answer by number instead of quoting questions back.
+
+  `grill-me`, `grill-with-docs` and `triage` run the frontier a round at a time as well — `triage`'s grill step and `grilling`'s Codex `short_description` now say so instead of describing the old rhythm. The opt-out for one-question-at-a-time (a line in your global `CLAUDE.md`) is unchanged.
+
+- [#752](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/752) [`c66bdee`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/c66bdeeee002d81e3f8b21403c07f9a0d7bea6da) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Remove six skills from the repo. None of them was in the Claude Code plugin, but all six were installable through [skills.sh](https://skills.sh/mattpocock/skills), which serves every skill in the repo — so this is what leaves that listing, and where each one went.
+
+  Four retired skills, each already absorbed by a skill that does the job better:
+
+  - **`ubiquitous-language`** → **`/domain-modeling`**, which builds and maintains the whole domain model rather than dumping a glossary from one conversation.
+  - **`design-an-interface`** → **`/codebase-design`**. Nothing is lost: the "design it twice" technique — parallel sub-agents generating radically different designs, from Ousterhout — ships inside that skill as `DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md`.
+  - **`qa`** → **`/triage`** and **`/to-tickets`**.
+  - **`request-refactor-plan`** → **`/to-spec`** and **`/improve-codebase-architecture`**.
+
+  And two that were only ever mine — tied to my own machine and never meant for anyone else. The `personal/` bucket goes with them:
+
+  - **`edit-article`**
+  - **`obsidian-vault`**, which hardcoded a path to my own Obsidian vault.
+
+  `skills/deprecated/` stays as a bucket, now empty. `skills/in-progress/` is unchanged and is now described for what it actually is: a beta channel, published on purpose, installable one skill at a time through skills.sh.
+
+- [#734](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/734) [`a2f9333`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/a2f9333669ff53db762c87ecda5a15442060a3be) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Finish the `to-prd` → `to-spec` rename: "spec" is now the only term in the shipped text.
+
+  - **`to-spec`** no longer opens with "you may know this document as a PRD" — the parenthetical is dropped from the skill and its docs page. The local-markdown tracker template drops the same hedge.
+  - **`code-review`** talks about the originating issue/spec rather than issue/PRD, in its frontmatter description, its two-axis summary, and the spec-source search order. Both READMEs re-synced.
+  - **The GitHub and GitLab tracker templates** now say "Issues and specs for this repo live as GitHub/GitLab issues" — they had been left on "PRDs" when the local template was updated, so the stale term propagated into every repo they were written into.
+  - **`docs/engineering/research.md`** pointed at `https://aihero.dev/skills-to-prd`, a dead slug for the renamed skill; it now links `to-spec` like the other nineteen docs pages do.
+
+  The CHANGELOG and existing changesets still name PRDs where they document the rename itself, which is correct.
+
+## 1.1.0
+
+### Minor Changes
+
+- [#406](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/406) [`930a450`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/930a450089f77a49af09001d955db8452a4b867d) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Bring the **`ask-matt`** router up to date with the full skill set. It now maps five skills it was missing: **`tdd`** (woven into the main flow as the red-green engine `implement` drives), **`diagnosing-bugs`** (a new "Something's broken" on-ramp — there was previously no route for a bug), **`domain-modeling`** and **`codebase-design`** (a new "Vocabulary underneath" section), and **`grilling`** (the shared interview primitive). `prototype` is fleshed out as a standalone and the description broadens from "user-invoked skills" to "the skills". A maintenance rule is added to `CLAUDE.md` so any future skill add/rename/remove or flow change triggers an `ask-matt` re-check, beside the existing docs-page re-sync rule.
+
+- [#464](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/464) [`639df6e`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/639df6e7386dfddc739b2aecdeff37a876f2483b) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Promote and harden **`code-review`**. The in-progress **`review`** skill is renamed to **`code-review`** and moved from `in-progress/` into `engineering/`: it now ships in the plugin, is listed in the top-level and Engineering READMEs (Model-invoked), and has a docs page at `docs/engineering/code-review.md`. The `/implement` skill and docs point at `/code-review`.
+
+  It also gains an always-on **Fowler smell baseline** on its Standards axis — a curated ~12 high-signal "Bad Smells in Code" (Mysterious Name, Duplicated Code, Feature Envy, Data Clumps, Primitive Obsession, Repeated Switches, Shotgun Surgery, Divergent Change, Speculative Generality, Message Chains, Middle Man, Refused Bequest) inlined into `SKILL.md` as a fixed baseline alongside whatever the repo documents, not a new third axis. Two binding rules keep it safe: a documented repo standard overrides the baseline, and every smell is reported as a judgement call, never a hard violation.
+
+- [#464](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/464) [`639df6e`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/639df6e7386dfddc739b2aecdeff37a876f2483b) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Sharpen **`grilling`** on two fronts.
+
+  **A confirmation gate.** The agent won't enact the plan until you confirm the shared understanding has been reached — turning the skill's existing "shared understanding" completion criterion into an explicit stop-gate. The `description` also recruits the pretrained **`grill`** leading word ("Grill the user relentlessly") to sharpen invocation, and the docs page is re-synced.
+
+  **Facts vs. decisions.** Grilling now splits _facts_ (look them up — explore the codebase) from _decisions_ (put each one to the human and wait for their answer). The old blanket line — "if a question can be answered by exploring the codebase, explore the codebase instead" — was written for the live-human case, but once another skill runs grilling inside a resolve-the-ticket frame it read as license to answer _decisions_ autonomously too. Separating the two keeps a grilling agent from racing ahead and answering its own questions.
+
+- [#463](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/463) [`af6d692`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/af6d6922c3e2b5288eef155346cbe319e4ed3bd0) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Add two adjacent Steering failure modes to **`writing-great-skills`**, both about how language you think of as "off" still steers the agent. **Negation** — the _elephant_ — is steering by prohibition: naming what _not_ to do drags the forbidden behaviour into context and makes it _more_ available, not less (_don't think of an elephant_), so the cure is to prompt the **positive**. **Negative Space** — the void — is blindness to the steering done by what you leave _out_: every decision a skill declines is delegated to the agent's priors rather than left neutral, so the cure is to read a draft for its silences and decide each omission deliberately (fill it, or leave it open as a real **branch**). Kept as two entries, not one — they carry different diagnostics and different cures — each a full `GLOSSARY.md` entry plus a `SKILL.md` failure-mode bullet, matching how every other failure mode is carried.
+
+- [`850873c`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/850873cd73d5f81826ebf512ad35d2b1e113001f) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Make the **`prototype`** skill model-invoked, so the agent can reach for it autonomously (and other skills can too). Its description is rewritten around the leading word _prototype_ — throwaway code that answers a design question — with one trigger per branch (state/logic sanity-check, or UI exploration).
+
+- [#409](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/409) [`0d74d01`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/0d74d01cbc64ca27778a49b38599f70c534e76a0) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Add the **`research`** skill — a small, model-invoked skill that spins up a **background agent** to investigate a question against **primary sources** (official docs, source code, specs, first-party APIs), then leaves a single cited Markdown file wherever the repo keeps such notes. It's delegable reading legwork: you keep working while it reads, and get back a document to grill, plan, or design against. Listed in the top-level and Engineering READMEs (Model-invoked), added to `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`, given a docs page at `docs/engineering/research.md`, and routed as a Standalone in `ask-matt`.
+
+- [#469](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/469) [`a0329ba`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/a0329ba95751f58566ed7ab484475917a68f1629) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Split the **`to-issues`** skill into a lean **Process** and a **Reference** section, and teach it to handle a **wide refactor** — a single mechanical change (like renaming a column) whose **blast radius** fans across the whole codebase, breaking thousands of call sites at once so no vertical slice can land green. The drafting step now points at two co-located reference blocks: the **Vertical slice rules** for ordinary tracer bullets, and **Wide refactors**, which slices the change by **expand–contract** (expand the new form beside the old, migrate call sites in batches sized by blast radius, then contract the old form away) so CI stays green batch to batch — or, when it can't, only at a final integrate-and-verify issue. The issue body template moves into Reference too.
+
+- [#464](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/464) [`386d4ff`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/386d4ff719a7c420ad1454232d0436b01f1b8c17) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Unify the planning skills. **`to-prd` is renamed to `to-spec`** — "spec" is now the single through-line term (it still opens with "you may know this document as a PRD" for discoverability). **`to-plan` and `to-issues` are merged into one `to-tickets` skill, and `to-issues` is deleted.**
+
+  `to-tickets` breaks a plan, spec, or conversation into a set of **tickets** — tracer-bullet vertical slices, each declaring its **blocking edges**. That one artifact reads two ways depending on the tracker `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` configured: a **local file** (`tickets.md`) writes the edges as text and you work it top-to-bottom by hand; a **real tracker** writes them as native blocking links, so any ticket whose blockers are done is on the frontier and several agents can run at once. The edges live in the ticket either way — the medium only decides whether anything acts on them in parallel.
+
+  Publishing prefers the tracker's **native sub-issues** for parent → slice and **native blocking edges** for `Blocked by` where the tracker supports them, keeping the `## Parent` / `## Blocked by` body sections as the fallback. The "What to build" template points at where a `/prototype`'s code lives rather than inlining a snippet from it.
+
+  `ask-matt`'s main flow now routes `idea → /to-spec → /to-tickets → /implement`, and there are human-facing docs pages at `docs/engineering/to-spec.md` and `docs/engineering/to-tickets.md`.
+
+- [#464](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/464) [`0557d57`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/0557d57579d9b3d39839fdaf8d4a6542b17539ce) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Settle wayfinder's place in the docs as a **situational on-ramp**, not the new main entry flow — the grill-led _idea → ship_ chain stays the front door (crowning wayfinder as the default spine is a v2-sized move, not a 1.1). The **`ask-matt`** router now names wayfinder's concrete triggers — a greenfield project or a huge feature build, too big for one session — and the two grill front doors (**`grill-me`**, **`grill-with-docs`**) signpost _up_ to wayfinder for the effort that's too big to hold in one session, so the on-ramp is discoverable from where a reader actually starts.
+
+- [#464](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/464) [`639df6e`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/639df6e7386dfddc739b2aecdeff37a876f2483b) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Graduate and reframe **`wayfinder`** — the skill for planning a huge chunk of work, more than one agent session can hold. It moves out of `in-progress/` into `engineering/` (plugin entry, top-level + Engineering READMEs under **User-invoked**, a docs page at `docs/engineering/wayfinder.md`, and a route in `ask-matt`), landing as a mature skill. The rename and reframe that got it there:
+
+  - **`decision-mapping` is renamed to `wayfinder`**, invoked as `/wayfinder`. "Decision map" was jargony and inaccurate — only one ticket type is actually a decision. The reframe charts a route through a foggy problem instead, giving one coherent leading-word frame — **fog of war**, **frontier**, **the map** — rather than an invented term layered on top.
+  - **Destination as the leading word.** Wayfinding finds the _way_ to a destination; it doesn't charge at building it. Naming the destination is the first act of charting — it fixes the scope and shapes every ticket — so the map gains a `## Destination` field every session orients to, and triage pins it before any ticket exists.
+  - **Plan, don't do.** The map produces **decisions, not deliverables**; it's done when nothing is left to decide before someone builds the thing. An effort can override this in its Notes.
+  - **The map is an index, not a store.** A decision lives in exactly one place — its ticket — so the map only gists and links, never restates; graduating fog into a ticket clears the graduated patch so nothing lingers in two places.
+  - **Collaborative by default.** The map moves off a local Markdown file onto the repo's issue tracker: a single `wayfinder:map` issue whose tickets are its child issues — one shared URL the team can watch. Sessions load the map at low resolution and zoom into tickets on demand. Wayfinder stays tracker-agnostic (GitHub, GitLab, local-markdown) behind a pointer in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`, and `setup-matt-pocock-skills` seeds the "Wayfinding operations" section.
+  - **Claim by assignment, not a label.** A session claims a ticket by assigning it to the driving dev — the assignee _is_ the claim — freeing the label vocabulary to `wayfinder:<type>` alone.
+  - **Native blocking.** Blocking prefers the tracker's native dependency relationship, which renders the frontier visually in the tracker's own UI so the human sees what's takeable without opening the map. GitHub and GitLab templates spell out the native recipe, with a body-convention fallback.
+  - **Fog vs. out of scope, split.** Two plainly-named map sections — `## Not yet specified` (in-scope fog that graduates as the frontier advances) and `## Out of scope` (work ruled beyond the destination, closed, never graduating) — so beyond-destination work no longer reads as takeable frontier.
+  - **A fourth `task` ticket type.** For literal manual work that blocks a decision (provisioning access, moving data, signing up for a service) — the one type that _does_ rather than decides, earning its place by unblocking a decision.
+  - **HITL / AFK ticket classification.** Every ticket type is **HITL** (human in the loop — grilling, prototype) or **AFK** (agent alone — research; task is either). A HITL ticket only resolves through the live exchange, so "wait for the human" falls out of the label — a grilling agent that answers its own questions has, by definition, broken HITL. (This fixes students' reports of `/wayfinder` grilling _itself_ instead of the human.)
+  - **No-fog early exit restored.** If the opening breadth-first grilling surfaces no fog, the journey is small enough for one session — so it stops and asks how you'd like to proceed rather than building a map nobody needs.
+
+### Patch Changes
+
+- [#464](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/464) [`639df6e`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/639df6e7386dfddc739b2aecdeff37a876f2483b) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Reshape **`tdd`** into a reference-only skill and add a missing anti-pattern.
+
+  **Reference-only.** The red → green → refactor loop is anchored by leading words the model already holds, so the step-by-step Workflow was largely restating the loop. Dropped the Workflow and per-cycle checklist; folded their one durable idea — vertical slices / tracer bullets — into the Anti-patterns section and a short Rules-of-the-loop list. Introduced **seam** as the leading word for where tests go: test only at pre-agreed seams, confirmed with the user before any test is written. Also dropped the refactor stage — TDD is now red → green; refactoring belongs to the review stage, so the refactor rule and `refactoring.md` moved out (its home is `code-review`).
+
+  **Tautological tests.** Added the tautological-test anti-pattern: a test whose assertion is recomputed the way the code computes it passes by construction and gives zero confidence — distinct from the implementation-coupling anti-pattern already covered. Added as a peer at the same sites: a Philosophy principle (expected values must come from an independent source of truth), a checklist gate, and a BAD/GOOD example pair in `tests.md`.
+
+- [`e00eadb`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/e00eadb4bb32c3d5a631ead1a5ed5d6a7c5f74e2) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Extend the **`triage`** skill to triage external pull requests, treating a PR as an issue with attached code that runs through the same roles and state machine. PRs flow inline alongside issues (gated by a per-repo setup toggle), discovery surfaces only external PRs, the bug-only "reproduce" step is generalized into a single "verify the claim" step, and a redundancy check resolves already-implemented requests to `wontfix` without polluting the out-of-scope knowledge base. `setup-matt-pocock-skills` gains the PRs-as-a-request-surface toggle for GitHub/GitLab.
+
+- [#472](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/pull/472) [`d869d45`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/d869d45afc32beab1c2d1350f8de5e81589512cd) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Fix **`wayfinder`** hardcoding the issue-tracker doc path, which broke the indirection the rest of the suite relies on.
+
+  `to-issues`, `to-prd`, and `triage` never name a path — they resolve the tracker through the `### Issue tracker` block that `setup-matt-pocock-skills` writes into `CLAUDE.md` / `AGENTS.md`, which points at the tracker doc wherever it lives. Wayfinder instead pinned the literal `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`, so in a repo that keeps its agent docs elsewhere it silently fell back to the local-markdown tracker — even one whose `CLAUDE.md` clearly declares GitHub issues. It now resolves the doc via that same pointer and reads its "Wayfinding operations" section by name, keeping the indirection consistent across the suite.
+
+## 1.0.1
+
+### Patch Changes
+
+- [`d20ee26`](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/commit/d20ee2684e2a9442698ac3c1e0f2c5b68c4cf296) Thanks [@mattpocock](https://github.com/mattpocock)! - Make the **`teach`** skill reuse-first. Lessons are now built from reusable **components** in `./assets/` — stylesheets, quiz widgets, simulators, diagram helpers. Reuse is the default: the agent reads `./assets/` before authoring a lesson, builds from what's there, and extracts anything new and reusable into a component rather than inlining it.
+
 ## 1.0.0
 
 ### Major Changes

CLAUDE.md

@@ -1,16 +1,25 @@
 Skills are organized into bucket folders under `skills/`:
 
-- `engineering/` — daily code work
-- `productivity/` — daily non-code workflow tools
-- `misc/` — kept around but rarely used
-- `personal/` — tied to my own setup, not promoted
-- `in-progress/` — drafts not yet ready to ship
-- `deprecated/` — no longer used
+- `engineering/`: daily code work
+- `productivity/`: daily non-code workflow tools
+- `misc/`: kept around but rarely used, not promoted
+- `in-progress/`: beta: public on purpose, feedback wanted, not shipped in the plugin
+- `deprecated/`: no longer used
 
-Every skill in `engineering/`, `productivity/`, or `misc/` must have a reference in the top-level `README.md` and an entry in `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`. Skills in `personal/`, `in-progress/`, and `deprecated/` must not appear in either.
+Every skill in `engineering/` or `productivity/` (the **promoted** buckets) must have a reference in the top-level `README.md` and an entry in `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`'s `skills` array (the Claude Code plugin ships exactly the promoted set). Skills in `misc/`, `in-progress/`, and `deprecated/` must not appear in either.
+
+Install commands are copied verbatim from [.agents/install-block.md](./.agents/install-block.md). `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json` makes the repo its own single-plugin marketplace (a fallback the install block explains, not the documented route). Run `claude plugin validate . --strict` after touching either manifest. Why a Claude plugin but not (yet) a Codex one lives in [.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md](./.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md).
 
 Each skill entry in the top-level `README.md` must link the skill name to its `SKILL.md`.
 
-Each bucket folder has a `README.md` that lists every skill in the bucket with a one-line description, with the skill name linked to its `SKILL.md`. Bucket `README.md`s and the top-level `README.md` group entries into **User-invoked** and **Model-invoked**.
+Each bucket folder has a `README.md` that lists every skill in the bucket with a one-line description, with the skill name linked to its `SKILL.md`. The promoted buckets' `README.md`s and the top-level `README.md` group entries into **User-invoked** and **Model-invoked**; non-promoted bucket `README.md`s (`misc/`, `in-progress/`) use a flat list.
 
-Every `SKILL.md` is either user-invoked (`disable-model-invocation: true`, reachable only by the human) or model-invoked (model- or user-reachable). For the full definitions, description conventions, and why a user-invoked skill can invoke model-invoked skills but never another user-invoked one, see [docs/invocation.md](./docs/invocation.md).
+Skills in `engineering/` and `productivity/` also have a human-facing docs page at `docs/<bucket>/<skill-name>.md` (the docs tree mirrors those two bucket folders under `skills/`). The published URL is `https://aihero.dev/skills-<skill-name>` regardless of bucket: the docs path is repo organisation only. When you add, rename, or change the behaviour of a skill in `engineering/` or `productivity/`, create or re-sync its docs page following [.agents/writing-docs.md](./.agents/writing-docs.md). A finished page carries four sections: **What it does**, **When to reach for it**, **Common questions**, and **It's working if**. `writing-docs.md` holds the template, the section order, and where to hunt for the questions. Skills in the non-promoted buckets (`misc/`, `in-progress/`, `deprecated/`) get **no** docs page. The one exception is a promoted skill removed outright: its page stays, marked archived (see `writing-docs.md`).
+
+Every `SKILL.md` is either user-invoked (`disable-model-invocation: true` plus `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` in `agents/openai.yaml`, reachable only by the human) or model-invoked (model- or user-reachable). See [.agents/invocation.md](./.agents/invocation.md).
+
+[`ask-matt`](./skills/engineering/ask-matt/SKILL.md) is the router that maps every user-reachable skill and how they relate. The same trigger that re-syncs a docs page applies to it: whenever you add, rename, remove, or change how a user-reachable skill fits the flows, re-read `ask-matt`'s `SKILL.md` and update it so the map stays accurate: a new skill it never mentions, or a stale one it still routes to, is a router that lies.
+
+To (re)link every skill outside `deprecated/` and `misc/` into the local harness skill directories (`~/.claude/skills`, `~/.agents/skills`), run `scripts/link-skills.sh`. Each entry is a symlink into this repo, so a `git pull` keeps installed skills current; re-run the script after adding, removing, or renaming a skill.
+
+No em-dashes anywhere in this repo's prose (`SKILL.md` files, docs, `README.md`, `CHANGELOG.md`, ADRs, changesets, code comments). Where a sentence reaches for one, rewrite it instead with a comma, colon, period, parentheses, or a conjunction, whichever the sentence actually wants; never do a blind character substitution.

CONTEXT.md

@@ -1,26 +0,0 @@
-# Matt Pocock Skills
-
-A collection of agent skills (slash commands and behaviors) loaded by Claude Code. Skills are organized into buckets and consumed by per-repo configuration emitted by `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`.
-
-## Language
-
-**Issue tracker**:
-The tool that hosts a repo's issues — GitHub Issues, Linear, a local `.scratch/` markdown convention, or similar. Skills like `to-issues`, `to-prd`, `triage`, and `qa` read from and write to it.
-_Avoid_: backlog manager, backlog backend, issue host
-
-**Issue**:
-A single tracked unit of work inside an **Issue tracker** — a bug, task, PRD, or slice produced by `to-issues`.
-_Avoid_: ticket (use only when quoting external systems that call them tickets)
-
-**Triage role**:
-A canonical state-machine label applied to an **Issue** during triage (e.g. `needs-triage`, `ready-for-afk`). Each role maps to a real label string in the **Issue tracker** via `docs/agents/triage-labels.md`.
-
-## Relationships
-
-- An **Issue tracker** holds many **Issues**
-- An **Issue** carries one **Triage role** at a time
-
-## Flagged ambiguities
-
-- "backlog" was previously used to mean both the *tool* hosting issues and the *body of work* inside it — resolved: the tool is the **Issue tracker**; "backlog" is no longer used as a domain term.
-- "backlog backend" / "backlog manager" — resolved: collapsed into **Issue tracker**.

GLOSSARY.md

@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+# Matt Pocock Skills
+
+A collection of agent skills (slash commands and behaviors) loaded by Claude Code. Skills are organized into buckets and consumed by per-repo configuration emitted by `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`.
+
+## Language
+
+**Issue tracker**:
+The tool that hosts a repo's issues: GitHub Issues, Linear, a local `.scratch/` markdown convention, or similar. Skills like `to-tickets`, `to-spec`, and `triage` read from and write to it.
+_Avoid_: backlog manager, backlog backend, issue host
+
+**Issue**:
+A single tracked unit of work inside an **Issue tracker**: a bug, task, spec, or slice produced by `to-tickets`.
+_Avoid_: ticket (use only when quoting external systems that call them tickets, or for a **Decision ticket**, see below)
+
+**Decision ticket**:
+A `wayfinder` unit: a child **Issue** of a `wayfinder:map` holding a *question* whose resolution is a decision, not a slice of a build to execute. The **decision** qualifier is what keeps it distinct from an implementation ticket; `wayfinder` introduces the term, then uses "ticket".
+
+**Triage role**:
+A canonical state-machine label applied to an **Issue** during triage (e.g. `needs-triage`, `ready-for-afk`). Each role maps to a real label string in the **Issue tracker** via `docs/agents/triage-labels.md`.
+
+## Relationships
+
+- An **Issue tracker** holds many **Issues**
+- An **Issue** carries one **Triage role** at a time
+- A **Decision ticket** is an **Issue** (a child of a `wayfinder:map`)
+
+## Flagged ambiguities
+
+- "backlog" was previously used to mean both the *tool* hosting issues and the *body of work* inside it. Resolved: the tool is the **Issue tracker**; "backlog" is no longer used as a domain term.
+- "backlog backend" / "backlog manager". Resolved: collapsed into **Issue tracker**.

README.md

@@ -22,22 +22,64 @@ If you want to keep up with changes to these skills, and any new ones I create,
 
 [Sign Up To The Newsletter](https://www.aihero.dev/s/skills-newsletter)
 
-## Quickstart (30-second setup)
+## Installation (30-second setup)
 
-1. Run the skills.sh installer:
+Two ways in, two philosophies. **The [Claude Code plugin](https://code.claude.com/docs/en/plugins)** installs the whole set as a managed, read-only bundle that updates when I ship, so you subscribe rather than fork. **[skills.sh](https://skills.sh/mattpocock/skills)** copies editable skill files into your project, so you can hack on them and make them your own. Pick one: installing both leaves you with every skill twice.
+
+### 1. Get the skills
+
+<details>
+<summary><strong>Claude Code</strong></summary>
+
+```bash
+claude plugins install mattpocock-skills
+```
+
+Or, from inside a session:
+
+```
+/plugin install mattpocock-skills
+```
+
+It's in Claude Code's official marketplace, so there's nothing to add first, and updates arrive automatically.
+
+</details>
+
+<details>
+<summary><strong>Codex, and other agents</strong></summary>
 
 ```bash
 npx skills@latest add mattpocock/skills
 ```
 
-2. Pick the skills you want, and which coding agents you want to install them on. **Make sure you select `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`**.
+Pick the skills you want, and which coding agents to install them on. **The installer lets you choose which skills to take, so make sure `setup-matt-pocock-skills` is one of them.**
 
-3. Run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` in your agent. It will:
-   - Ask you which issue tracker you want to use (GitHub, Linear, or local files)
-   - Ask you what labels you apply to tickets when you triage them (`/triage` uses labels)
-   - Ask you where you want to save any docs we create
+A native Codex plugin is on the roadmap (see [`.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md`](./.agents/adr/0002-ship-as-a-claude-code-plugin.md)).
 
-4. Bam - you're ready to go.
+</details>
+
+<details>
+<summary><strong>For tinkerers</strong></summary>
+
+Use the same installer, on any agent, including Claude Code:
+
+```bash
+npx skills@latest add mattpocock/skills
+```
+
+It writes the skills into your repo as ordinary files you own and can edit. Nothing updates behind your back; pull my latest changes when you want them with `npx skills update`.
+
+</details>
+
+### 2. Run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`
+
+In your agent, run it once per repo. It will:
+
+- Ask you which issue tracker you want to use (GitHub, Linear, or local files)
+- Ask you what labels you apply to tickets when you triage them (`/triage` uses labels)
+- Ask you where you want to save any docs we create
+
+### 3. Bam - you're ready to go.
 
 ## Why These Skills Exist
 
@@ -77,7 +119,7 @@ I felt the same tension with my agents. Agents are usually dropped into a projec
 Example
 </summary>
 
-Here's an example [`CONTEXT.md`](https://github.com/mattpocock/course-video-manager/blob/076a5a7a182db0fe1e62971dd7a68bcadf010f1c/CONTEXT.md), from my `course-video-manager` repo. Which one is easier to read?
+Here's an example [glossary](https://github.com/mattpocock/course-video-manager/blob/076a5a7a182db0fe1e62971dd7a68bcadf010f1c/CONTEXT.md) (still named `CONTEXT.md` at that pinned commit, from before the skills renamed the convention), from my `course-video-manager` repo. Which one is easier to read?
 
 - **BEFORE**: "There's a problem when a lesson inside a section of a course is made 'real' (i.e. given a spot in the file system)"
 - **AFTER**: "There's a problem with the materialization cascade"
@@ -113,7 +155,7 @@ For automated tests, a red-green-refactor loop is critical. This is where the ag
 
 I've built a **[`/tdd`](./skills/engineering/tdd/SKILL.md) skill** you can slot into any project. It encourages red-green-refactor and gives the agent plenty of guidance on what makes good and bad tests.
 
-For debugging, I've also built a **[`/diagnosing-bugs`](./skills/engineering/diagnosing-bugs/SKILL.md)** skill that wraps best debugging practices into a simple loop.
+For debugging, I've also built a **[`/diagnosing-bugs`](./skills/engineering/diagnosing-bugs/SKILL.md)** skill that wraps best debugging practices into a disciplined loop, gated phase by phase.
 
 ### #4: We Built A Ball Of Mud
 
@@ -131,9 +173,9 @@ For debugging, I've also built a **[`/diagnosing-bugs`](./skills/engineering/dia
 
 This is built in to every layer of these skills:
 
-- [`/to-prd`](./skills/engineering/to-prd/SKILL.md) quizzes you about which modules you're touching before creating a PRD
+- [`/to-spec`](./skills/engineering/to-spec/SKILL.md) quizzes you about which modules you're touching before creating a spec
 
-And crucially, [`/improve-codebase-architecture`](./skills/engineering/improve-codebase-architecture/SKILL.md) helps you rescue a codebase that has become a ball of mud. I recommend running it on your codebase once every few days.
+And crucially, [`/improve-codebase-architecture`](./skills/engineering/improve-codebase-architecture/SKILL.md) surveys a codebase for deepening opportunities and hands you the candidates. I recommend running it on your codebase once every few days. It is a survey, not a rescue: on a genuinely old codebase it will find real candidates, but it won't untangle the mud for you.
 
 ### Summary
 
@@ -141,7 +183,7 @@ Software engineering fundamentals matter more than ever. These skills are my bes
 
 ## Reference
 
-These split on one axis — who can invoke them. **User-invoked** skills are reachable only when you type them (e.g. `/grill-me`); their job is to orchestrate. **Model-invoked** skills can be invoked by you _or_ reached for automatically by the agent when the task fits; they hold the reusable discipline. A user-invoked skill may invoke model-invoked skills, but never another user-invoked one.
+These split on one axis: who can invoke them. **User-invoked** skills are reachable only when you type them (e.g. `/grill-me`); their job is to orchestrate. **Model-invoked** skills can be invoked by you _or_ reached for automatically by the agent when the task fits; they hold the reusable discipline. A user-invoked skill may invoke model-invoked skills, but never another user-invoked one.
 
 ### Engineering
 
@@ -149,21 +191,29 @@ Skills I use daily for code work.
 
 **User-invoked**
 
-- **[ask-matt](./skills/engineering/ask-matt/SKILL.md)** — Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the user-invoked skills in this repo.
-- **[grill-with-docs](./skills/engineering/grill-with-docs/SKILL.md)** — Grilling session that also builds your project's domain model, sharpening terminology and updating `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs inline.
-- **[triage](./skills/engineering/triage/SKILL.md)** — Move issues through a state machine of triage roles.
-- **[improve-codebase-architecture](./skills/engineering/improve-codebase-architecture/SKILL.md)** — Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.
-- **[setup-matt-pocock-skills](./skills/engineering/setup-matt-pocock-skills/SKILL.md)** — Configure this repo for the engineering skills (issue tracker, triage labels, domain doc layout). Run once per repo before using the other engineering skills.
-- **[to-issues](./skills/engineering/to-issues/SKILL.md)** — Break any plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues using vertical slices.
-- **[to-prd](./skills/engineering/to-prd/SKILL.md)** — Turn the current conversation into a PRD and publish it to the issue tracker. No interview — just synthesizes what you've already discussed.
-- **[prototype](./skills/engineering/prototype/SKILL.md)** — Build a throwaway prototype to flesh out a design — either a runnable terminal app for state/business-logic questions, or several radically different UI variations toggleable from one route.
+- **[ask-matt](./skills/engineering/ask-matt/SKILL.md)**: Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the user-invoked skills in this repo.
+- **[grill-with-docs](./skills/engineering/grill-with-docs/SKILL.md)**: Grilling session that also builds your project's domain model, sharpening terminology and updating `GLOSSARY.md` and ADRs inline.
+- **[triage](./skills/engineering/triage/SKILL.md)**: Move issues through a state machine of triage roles.
+- **[improve-codebase-architecture](./skills/engineering/improve-codebase-architecture/SKILL.md)**: Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.
+- **[setup-matt-pocock-skills](./skills/engineering/setup-matt-pocock-skills/SKILL.md)**: Configure this repo for the engineering skills (issue tracker, triage labels, domain doc layout). Run once per repo before using the other engineering skills.
+- **[to-spec](./skills/engineering/to-spec/SKILL.md)**: Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the issue tracker. No interview, just synthesizes what you've already discussed.
+- **[to-tickets](./skills/engineering/to-tickets/SKILL.md)**: Break any plan, spec, or conversation into a set of tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its blocking edges, written as text in a local file, or as native blocking links on a real tracker.
+- **[implement](./skills/engineering/implement/SKILL.md)**: Build the work described by a spec or set of tickets, driving `/tdd` at pre-agreed seams and closing out with `/code-review` before committing.
+- **[implement-spec](./skills/engineering/implement-spec/SKILL.md)**: Implement a whole spec on one integration branch. Works the tickets as a task graph, running implementer subagents across the ready frontier for maximum concurrency, then closes out with `/code-review`.
+- **[wayfinder](./skills/engineering/wayfinder/SKILL.md)**: Plan a huge chunk of work, more than one agent session can hold, as a shared map of decision tickets on the issue tracker, and resolve them one at a time until the way to the destination is clear.
+- **[retro](./skills/engineering/retro/SKILL.md)**: Suggest improvements to the coding agent's environment (navigation, automated checks, coding standards, steering files, tooling) after a session, most severe first.
 
 **Model-invoked**
 
-- **[diagnosing-bugs](./skills/engineering/diagnosing-bugs/SKILL.md)** — Disciplined diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions: reproduce → minimise → hypothesise → instrument → fix → regression-test.
-- **[tdd](./skills/engineering/tdd/SKILL.md)** — Test-driven development with a red-green-refactor loop. Builds features or fixes bugs one vertical slice at a time.
-- **[domain-modeling](./skills/engineering/domain-modeling/SKILL.md)** — Actively build and sharpen a project's domain model — challenge terms against the glossary, stress-test with edge-case scenarios, and update `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs inline.
-- **[codebase-design](./skills/engineering/codebase-design/SKILL.md)** — Shared discipline and vocabulary for designing deep modules: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface, placed at a clean seam, testable through that interface.
+- **[prototype](./skills/engineering/prototype/SKILL.md)**: Build a throwaway prototype to answer a design question, either a single shareable HTML file for state/logic questions, or several radically different UI variations toggleable from one route.
+- **[diagnosing-bugs](./skills/engineering/diagnosing-bugs/SKILL.md)**: Disciplined diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions: build a feedback loop that goes red on this bug → minimise → hypothesise → instrument → fix → regression-test.
+- **[research](./skills/engineering/research/SKILL.md)**: Investigate a question against high-trust primary sources and capture the findings as a cited Markdown file in the repo, run as a background agent.
+- **[tdd](./skills/engineering/tdd/SKILL.md)**: Test-driven development with a red-green-refactor loop. Builds features or fixes bugs one vertical slice at a time.
+- **[domain-modeling](./skills/engineering/domain-modeling/SKILL.md)**: Actively build and sharpen a project's domain model: challenge terms against the glossary, stress-test with edge-case scenarios, and update `GLOSSARY.md` and ADRs inline.
+- **[codebase-design](./skills/engineering/codebase-design/SKILL.md)**: Shared discipline and vocabulary for designing deep modules: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface, placed at a clean seam, testable through that interface.
+- **[code-review](./skills/engineering/code-review/SKILL.md)**: Two-axis review of the diff since a fixed point: **Standards** (does it follow the repo's coding standards, plus a Fowler smell baseline?) and **Spec** (does it faithfully implement the originating issue/spec?), run as parallel sub-agents so neither pollutes the other.
+- **[pr](./skills/engineering/pr/SKILL.md)**: The shape a pull request body should take: a summary as the smallest visual that makes the change clear, before/after evidence that it works, and a merge-danger call (one-way or two-way door, plus blast radius).
+- **[wizard](./skills/engineering/wizard/SKILL.md)**: Generate an interactive bash wizard that walks a human through steps only they can perform: provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, walking an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, or running a one-off migration or cutover.
 
 ### Productivity
 
@@ -171,20 +221,13 @@ General workflow tools, not code-specific.
 
 **User-invoked**
 
-- **[grill-me](./skills/productivity/grill-me/SKILL.md)** — Get relentlessly interviewed about a plan or design until every branch of the decision tree is resolved.
-- **[handoff](./skills/productivity/handoff/SKILL.md)** — Compact the current conversation into a handoff document so another agent can continue the work.
-- **[teach](./skills/productivity/teach/SKILL.md)** — Teach the user a new skill or concept over multiple sessions, using the current directory as a stateful teaching workspace.
-- **[writing-great-skills](./skills/productivity/writing-great-skills/SKILL.md)** — Reference for writing and editing skills well: the vocabulary and principles that make a skill predictable.
+- **[grill-me](./skills/productivity/grill-me/SKILL.md)**: Get relentlessly interviewed about a plan or design until every branch of the design tree is resolved.
+- **[handoff](./skills/productivity/handoff/SKILL.md)**: Compact the current conversation into a handoff document so another agent can continue the work.
+- **[teach](./skills/productivity/teach/SKILL.md)**: Teach the user a new skill or concept over multiple sessions, using the current directory as a stateful teaching workspace.
+- **[to-questionnaire](./skills/productivity/to-questionnaire/SKILL.md)**: Turn a decision you can't answer alone into a Markdown questionnaire for the one person who can, filled in async, or together over a meeting. It grills you about the send (who it's for, what you need back), not the subject.
+- **[wait-what](./skills/productivity/wait-what/SKILL.md)**: Fire this the moment a message doesn't land. The agent re-pitches it with the context you're missing, in plain English, using your `GLOSSARY.md` vocabulary.
 
 **Model-invoked**
 
-- **[grilling](./skills/productivity/grilling/SKILL.md)** — Interview the user relentlessly about a plan or design until every branch of the decision tree is resolved. The reusable loop behind `grill-me` and `grill-with-docs`.
-
-### Misc
-
-Tools I keep around but rarely use.
-
-- **[git-guardrails-claude-code](./skills/misc/git-guardrails-claude-code/SKILL.md)** — Set up Claude Code hooks to block dangerous git commands (push, reset --hard, clean, etc.) before they execute.
-- **[migrate-to-shoehorn](./skills/misc/migrate-to-shoehorn/SKILL.md)** — Migrate test files from `as` type assertions to @total-typescript/shoehorn.
-- **[scaffold-exercises](./skills/misc/scaffold-exercises/SKILL.md)** — Create exercise directory structures with sections, problems, solutions, and explainers.
-- **[setup-pre-commit](./skills/misc/setup-pre-commit/SKILL.md)** — Set up Husky pre-commit hooks with lint-staged, Prettier, type checking, and tests.
+- **[grilling](./skills/productivity/grilling/SKILL.md)**: Interview the user relentlessly about a plan, decision, or idea until every branch of the design tree is resolved. The reusable interview primitive behind `grill-me`, `grill-with-docs`, `triage`, `wayfinder` and `improve-codebase-architecture`.
+- **[writing-for-agents](./skills/productivity/writing-for-agents/SKILL.md)**: Writing documents for agents: skills, AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md, and any doc an agent reaches by a pointer.

docs/adr/0001-explicit-setup-pointer-only-for-hard-dependencies.md

@@ -1,10 +0,0 @@
-# Explicit `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` pointer only for hard dependencies
-
-Engineering skills depend on per-repo config (issue tracker, triage label vocabulary, domain doc layout) seeded by `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`. Some skills cannot meaningfully function without that config — they have to publish to a specific issue tracker or apply a specific label string. Others only use it to sharpen output (vocabulary, ADR awareness) and degrade gracefully without it.
-
-We split these into **hard-dependency** and **soft-dependency** skills:
-
-- **Hard dependency** (`to-issues`, `to-prd`, `triage`) — include an explicit one-liner: _"… should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if not."_ Without the mapping, output is wrong, not just fuzzy.
-- **Soft dependency** (`diagnose`, `tdd`, `improve-codebase-architecture`) — reference "the project's domain glossary" and "ADRs in the area you're touching" in vague prose only. If the docs aren't there, the skill still works; output is just less sharp.
-
-The split keeps soft-dependency skills token-light and avoids cargo-culting the setup pointer into places where it isn't load-bearing.

docs/engineering/ask-matt.md

@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
+## What it does
+
+`ask-matt` is the router over the skills in this repo. You describe the situation you are in (an idea you cannot start, a pile of incoming bug reports, a [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) that has run long), and it names the skill or the sequence of skills that fits, plus where the human decisions in that sequence sit.
+
+It recommends and stops. It does not grill, write a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec), open a file or fire the skill it just named; what you get back is the next thing to type, and you type it. It is also a hand-written map of the skills in this repo rather than a scan of what you have installed, so it will not route you over your own skills or another author's.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You invoke this by typing `/ask-matt`; the agent won't reach for it on its own.
+
+| Your situation | What the router gives back |
+| --- | --- |
+| An idea, and no idea where to start | The head of the main flow, and whether the build is small enough to skip the spec |
+| Bugs and requests arriving from other people | The [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage) on-ramp, and why [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) you generated yourself don't belong on it |
+| Two skills that look interchangeable | The line between them, and it is usually one concrete test rather than a matter of taste. [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me) or [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) turns on whether you are in a working directory; [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) or [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) turns on whether the effort fits one session |
+| A long session and a decision about the [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) | The ordered tree over the five options at a phase boundary |
+| A skill you have already picked | Nothing useful. Invoke that skill directly. |
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+The router names skills; it does not install them. Everything it points at has to be installed for the recommendation to be actionable, and it only knows the promoted skills in this repo.
+
+The tracker-dependent routes (triage, `to-spec`, `to-tickets`, `implement`) assume [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills) has already configured an issue tracker in the repo. The router recommends them even before that has happened.
+
+## Flows, not skills
+
+The skill's leading word is **flow**, a path *through* the skills rather than a single skill. When you name your situation, the router places you at a step on a flow. That is a different answer from "here is the skill that matches your keywords". There are five kinds of route, and the skill itself describes them in full:
+
+- **The main flow**, idea to ship. Grill, spec, tickets, implement (one ticket at a time, or the whole task graph in parallel with [implement-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement-spec)), review, then [retro](https://aihero.dev/skills-retro), which feeds what the build taught back into the agent's environment. It has two branches. One is a prototype detour, for when a question needs runnable code to settle it. The other is the spec-and-tickets split, which is only worth its cost when the build spans more than one session.
+- **On-ramps**, for a situation that generates work and then merges onto the main flow: incoming bug reports, something broken, or an effort too foggy and too large to hold in one session.
+- **Codebase health**, upkeep rather than feature work. [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) surveys the code for deepening opportunities, and each one it finds re-enters the main flow as an idea.
+- **Standalones**, which sit off every flow and which you use on their own: the prototype, the questionnaire, the research run.
+- **A vocabulary layer underneath**, the two references the other skills pull in when the words rather than the process are the problem.
+
+## The phase boundary
+
+The skill's other key idea is the **phase boundary**. A phase is a chunk of work inside a session (the [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling), the implementation, the QA), and the boundary between two of them is the only place the question "what do I do with this context?" belongs. Mid-phase there is nothing to decide: continue, or split what is left into [subagents](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent).
+
+| Option | Take it when |
+| --- | --- |
+| **Continue** | The next phase wants this one verbatim, or you have [smart zone](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/smart-zone) left. It is the only move that keeps the session as a [primary source](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/primary-source), so rule it out first |
+| **`/clear`** | Everything behind you is disposable. The cheapest option, and you cannot undo it if you were wrong |
+| **[handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff)** | Something has to travel: a new [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness), a new directory, a colleague, a side task forked mid-phase |
+| **Subagent** | The task is scoped tightly enough to run with you [away from the keyboard](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/afk) |
+| **`/compact`** | None of the above. It is the default, and the tree often ends here |
+
+People often get two of these wrong, which is why the router gives the order and not only the list. `/handoff` looks like the general way to move between context windows, but it is not. All it gives you is portability. `/compact` is the last option in the tree, not the first, because each of the four options above it is cheaper or more precise.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**Isn't there just a list of the skills in the right order?**
+
+People keep asking for one in the README. This skill is that list. A static table would say `wayfinder → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review → retro` and be wrong for most situations. The important parts are the branches: is there a codebase, does the build span sessions, can talking settle this question. The cost is that the router is maintained by hand, so it lags behind the repo. `/grilling` shipped long before the router named it.
+
+**It told me half the skills aren't installed.**
+
+This is a known bug, and it is not fixed. Most of the skills the router routes you through set `disable-model-invocation: true`, which means the harness leaves them out of the skill list it injects into the agent's context. The agent reads that list as exhaustive and reports them missing. In one reported session, it declared the whole spec-and-tickets flow absent and rerouted to bare `/grilling` and `/tdd`. Sixteen of the plugin's twenty-seven skills carry the flag, so this is the common case rather than an edge. They are installed. Type the slash command anyway, or check `.claude-plugin/plugin.json`, which is the authority on what is present.
+
+**It described a skill's behaviour, and the skill doesn't do that.**
+
+This is also a real bug, and also not fixed. The router answers from its own one-line summary of each skill rather than from the skill. One detailed report tracked three instances in a single session, including a recommendation to skip [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) based only on the summary "turn the thread into a spec". The router never opened `to-spec/SKILL.md`. In every case it verified only after the user pushed back, and never on its own initiative. Skipping `to-spec` there cost a real seam check, and the tickets that came out undercounted the work. When the router states something about another skill that you will act on, ask it to open that `SKILL.md` first. The same applies to questions the map does not cover at all, such as whether to use [plan mode](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent-mode): that answer is the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model)'s inference, not something written down here.
+
+**Why is it prose instead of a numbered checklist?**
+
+It is a fair complaint. An open issue argues that most of the routing is deterministic and that the narrative makes it hard to scan. Nothing stops you asking for the compressed form: "just give me the sequence" gets you the sequence. The prose carries the conditional part: the branches, where a human decision is expected, and where to clear or compact between steps. A flat checklist drops exactly that.
+
+**Can it route over my own skills, or another author's?**
+
+No. Three separate proposals have asked for a router that reads your local `skills/` directory and recommends from whatever is installed. `ask-matt` is not that. It is a map of one set, maintained by hand, and it knows nothing about skills you wrote or installed from elsewhere.
+
+**It told me to edit a SKILL.md.**
+
+That advice is often correct, but the edit rarely lasts. Someone asked it how to make [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) close tickets, was told to add a line to the skill, and saw the problem at once. `npx skills update` overwrites the file, and the plugin install is read-only. Put standing behaviour in your own `CLAUDE.md` or `AGENTS.md`, or say it in the invocation. Changes you make in the prompt survive updates. People point the flow at Linear instead of GitHub this way, or ask it which open tickets could run in parallel.
+
+**It named a skill I don't have, or missed one I do.**
+
+Check the changelog for a rename before assuming it is gone. `writing-great-skills` became [writing-for-agents](https://aihero.dev/skills-writing-for-agents) with no alias, `to-prd` became [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), and `pathfinder` became [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder). Four skills were retired outright into the skills that absorbed them: `ubiquitous-language`, `design-an-interface`, `qa` and `request-refactor-plan`. If it misses a skill you have, that is the router's own lag, described above.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- It ends by naming what to type and stops there, instead of starting the work itself.
+- The route it gives back mentions where to clear or compact context and where you are expected to review, not just a list of skill names.
+- Where two skills are close, it says which one and why the other is wrong for you.
+- Any claim it makes about another skill's behaviour shows up in the trace as it reading that skill's `SKILL.md`.
+- You recognise your own situation in what it hands back, rather than the nearest generic scenario.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`ask-matt` is a **standalone router** that sits over the whole set. It is never a step in a chain. It points into every chain, and the other docs pages link back to it so none of them has to redraw the graph. From here you most often land on [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), the head of the main flow, or [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage), the on-ramp for work that arrived rather than work you started.
+
+It is a [secondary source](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/secondary-source) over the skills it describes. Where the router and a `SKILL.md` disagree, the `SKILL.md` is right.

docs/engineering/code-review.md

@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+## What it does
+
+`code-review` reviews the diff between `HEAD` and a fixed point you name (a commit, a branch, a tag, `main`, `HEAD~5`) along two axes. **Standards** asks whether the code follows how this repo writes code. **Spec** asks whether the code does what the originating issue or [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec) asked for. Each axis runs in its own [sub-agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent) so neither sees the other's reasoning.
+
+The skill never merges or re-ranks the two axes. The report ends with a worst issue *per axis* and declines to name a single winner across them. A change can pass one axis and fail the other. Code that follows every convention but implements the wrong thing passes Standards and fails Spec. Code that does exactly what the [ticket](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) asked but breaks the repo's conventions does the reverse. A blended verdict lets the passing axis hide the failing one.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+Type `/code-review`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when you ask to review a branch, a PR, work in progress, or anything "since X".
+
+| Your situation | Reach for |
+| --- | --- |
+| A diff exists and you want to know if it is built right *and* is the right thing | `code-review` |
+| You want bugs hunted in the diff: null paths, races, off-by-one | Claude Code's own built-in review, not this one (see the name clash below) |
+| Nothing is written yet and you want it written test-first | [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) |
+| A whole spec needs building, review included | [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement), which calls this skill itself |
+| The whole codebase has drifted, not one diff | [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) |
+| Something is broken and you do not know why | [diagnosing-bugs](https://aihero.dev/skills-diagnosing-bugs) |
+
+You must supply the fixed point. If you do not, the skill asks for one rather than guessing. Before it spawns anything, it checks that the ref resolves and that the diff is not empty, so a mistyped branch name fails in front of you instead of inside two sub-agents.
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+The Standards axis needs nothing. It reads whatever the repo documents (`CODING_STANDARDS.md`, `CONTRIBUTING.md`, and the like) and falls back on a built-in baseline when the repo documents nothing.
+
+The Spec axis needs a spec to exist and be findable. It looks in this order:
+
+1. Issue references in the commit messages (`#123`, `Closes #45`, a GitLab `!67`), fetched through `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`.
+2. A path you pass in as an argument.
+3. A spec file under `docs/`, `specs/`, or `.scratch/` matching the branch or feature name.
+4. Asking you.
+
+Step 1 depends on `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`, which [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills) writes. Without it the axis still works if you hand it a path. With no spec at all, the skill skips the Spec sub-agent and the report says "no spec available" rather than inventing requirements.
+
+## The two axes
+
+| | Standards | Spec |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+| Question | Is it built right? | Is it the right thing? |
+| Reads | The repo's documented standards, plus the smell baseline | The originating issue or spec |
+| Reports | Documented breaches (can be hard), and smells (always judgement calls) | Missing or partial requirements, scope creep, requirements implemented wrongly |
+| Every finding cites | The standards file and the rule, or the named smell plus the hunk | The line of the spec |
+
+This design exists to avoid a generic review skill that does not know your standards. Such a skill flags what is deliberate in your codebase and misses the invariants your codebase depends on. So the repo's own documentation is the [primary source](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/primary-source) on the Standards axis, and **the repo always overrides**.
+
+The **smell baseline** sits under the repo's standards. It is twelve code smells from chapter 3 of Fowler's _Refactoring_: Mysterious Name, Duplicated Code, Feature Envy, Data Clumps, Primitive Obsession, Repeated Switches, Shotgun Surgery, Divergent Change, Speculative Generality, Message Chains, Middle Man, Refused Bequest. Each is a labelled heuristic ("possible Feature Envy"), never a hard violation. Each states what the smell is and how to fix it, so a finding comes with a fix attached rather than only a complaint. Both axes skip anything your linter already enforces.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**It collides with Claude Code's own `/code-review`. What do I do?**
+
+This is the most reported problem with the skill, and it is not fixed. Claude Code ships its own `/code-review`, which does something different: it hunts bugs in the diff, where this one checks spec compliance and repo standards. When you install this library, one of them wins, and which one depends on how you installed:
+
+- **Plugin marketplace.** Every skill gets a `mattpocock-skills:` prefix, and the built-in becomes hard to reach at the unqualified name.
+- **Plain skills install.** The local file wins, and this skill shadows the built-in.
+
+One answer is to remove Claude Code's built-in skills entirely. That saves a lot of [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context), and the collision stops mattering. The shadowing itself is arguably a Claude Code [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness) bug (a skill author should be free to name a skill anything), so the other answer is to rename the local copy. `npx skills update` undoes an edit to the frontmatter or a renamed directory. The durable workaround users report is to fork the skill to a new name and drop `code-review` from the managed set. Keep a note of the commit you forked from so you can re-sync by hand.
+
+**Its sub-agents keep invoking `/code-review` again and spawn more agents.**
+
+This is a known open bug. Several people have reproduced it, in more than one harness. The Standards and Spec prompts do not forbid delegation, so a sub-agent can find the skill again and fan out again. One report reached more than 50 agents. The fix people have applied on forks is one line appended to both sub-agent briefs: "Do not invoke `/code-review` or spawn additional agents: perform this review directly." Some prefer to handle it at the harness level so every skill inherits the guard. Neither is in the shipped skill yet. If you run this unattended, watch the agent count.
+
+**Should I run it in the same [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) that wrote the code?**
+
+Prefer a fresh one. As one reader put it: "Same context reviewing itself isn't review, it's confirmation bias with a slash command." An agent that reviews in the authoring session has every assumption that shaped the code in its context. An independent reviewer would not have that context. This is also why people ask for [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) without its built-in review step, because that step runs the review inside the session that just wrote the diff. The independent version is to invoke `/code-review` yourself from a clean session.
+
+**After every ticket, or once at the end?**
+
+Both work, and the skill does not decide for you. Per-ticket keeps each diff small enough that the Spec axis has one clear spec to check against, which is the mode `implement` uses. Batching to the end of a branch catches interactions between tickets that the per-ticket passes each miss. If you are unsure, review per ticket and run one final pass against the branch point.
+
+**Can I trust the findings?**
+
+Not without checking. Sub-agent output is a hypothesis, not evidence. One team reported a dozen breaking changes that prose-based reviews had missed. The skill combines the two reports as they are, or lightly cleaned. It does not re-verify each claim against the files, so a finding can cite the wrong location or overstate an impact. Read the citation on each finding before you act on it. The skill requires every finding to carry a citation (a standards rule, a smell plus its hunk, or a spec line), and that is what makes the findings checkable.
+
+**Why does it find new problems every single time I run it?**
+
+Each fix adds new code to review, and the judgement-call half of the Standards axis gives different results from run to run. One reader described the loop: "/code-review and /improve-code-architecture always find new stuff every time. I implement fixes, rerun these skills, and again and again." There is no convergence guarantee. Treat a pass as a list of leads. Act on the ones with a cited rule behind them, then stop. Do not run it in a loop until it comes back clean, because it never will.
+
+**Does it review my uncommitted work?**
+
+No. It diffs `<fixed-point>...HEAD`. The three-dot form measures from the merge-base and excludes staged and working-tree changes. If `implement` has not made an interim commit, the review cannot see the work that is about to go into the next commit. Commit first, then review, then amend or add a fixup.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- It refuses to start on a bad ref or an empty diff, before any sub-agent is spawned.
+- The report arrives as two separate blocks under `## Standards` and `## Spec`, not one merged list.
+- Every Standards finding names either a rule in one of your repo's files or one of the twelve smells, with the hunk quoted; every Spec finding quotes a line of the spec.
+- The closing summary gives a worst issue per axis and declines to pick an overall winner.
+- With no spec available, the Spec block says so instead of listing requirements it inferred from the code.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`code-review` is the review step near the tail of the build chain: `grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review → retro`. It also stands alone on any branch or PR you point it at.
+
+- [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) is the closest neighbour. It drives the build and calls this skill as its own closing review before committing. [implement-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement-spec) does the same once, over the whole integration branch.
+- [retro](https://aihero.dev/skills-retro) comes after it and tunes it. When a session shows the review missing a class of mistake, `retro` proposes the check or the `CODING_STANDARDS.md` rule the Standards axis then reads.
+- [pr](https://aihero.dev/skills-pr) writes the pull request body once the reviewed work goes up.
+- [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) and [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) produce the document the Spec axis checks against, so a vague spec makes that axis vague.
+- [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) is the whole-codebase counterpart, because this skill only looks at one diff.
+
+[ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes across the whole set when you are unsure which skill the situation wants.

docs/engineering/codebase-design.md

@@ -0,0 +1,88 @@
+## What it does
+
+`codebase-design` fixes the words you use to design a module: **module**, **interface**, **depth**, **seam**, **adapter**, **leverage**, **locality**. It defines each one precisely, bans the loose substitutes ("component", "service", "API", "boundary"), and states the handful of principles that follow from them.
+
+It is a reference, not a process. It runs no loop, produces no artifact, and never stops to ask you a question. Every other skill that touches design uses its vocabulary. On its own, it gives you the words and stops. Know this before you invoke it. If you point a [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) at a skill with no process and no stopping rule and say "go", the agent invents a process. The questions below show what that looks like.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+Type `/codebase-design`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when a design task fits.
+
+Reach for it when you already know which code you're redesigning and you need to think about its shape: where the seam goes, how small the interface can get, whether an extraction removes complexity from its callers. Also use it to settle an argument about what a design word means.
+
+Several skills are close to it. Pick by the problem you have:
+
+| The problem | The skill |
+|---|---|
+| The shape of one module: its interface, its seam, its depth | `codebase-design` |
+| The *words of the domain*: "account" means three things, two people mean different things by "cancellation" | [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) |
+| You don't yet know *which* module to redesign | [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) (the survey that finds candidates) |
+| You want the design argued with, not just named | [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) |
+| There's a concrete behaviour to build and you want tests that survive a refactor | [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) |
+
+## The vocabulary
+
+The glossary is the skill. The skill defines every term against the others, and gives each one the word it replaces.
+
+| Term | What it means | Don't say |
+|---|---|---|
+| **Module** | Anything with an interface and an implementation. Deliberately scale-agnostic: a function, a class, a package, a slice spanning tiers. | unit, component, service |
+| **Interface** | Everything a caller must know to use it correctly: the type signature, plus invariants, ordering constraints, error modes, required config, performance characteristics. | API, signature |
+| **Depth** | Leverage at the interface: how much behaviour a caller or a test can exercise per unit of interface they have to learn. **Deep**: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface. **Shallow**: the interface is nearly as complex as the implementation. | none |
+| **Seam** | Michael Feathers' term: a place you can alter behaviour without editing in that place. It is the *location* of an interface, and where to put it is its own decision, separate from what goes behind it. | boundary |
+| **Adapter** | A concrete thing satisfying an interface at a seam. It names a role, not a kind of thing: an in-memory fake and a Postgres repo are both adapters. | none |
+| **Leverage** | What callers get from depth: more capability per unit of interface learned. | none |
+| **Locality** | What maintainers get from depth: changes, bugs and verification stay in one place, so one fix covers every caller. | none |
+
+The skill does *not* define depth as the ratio of implementation lines to interface lines, which is Ousterhout's own definition. That metric rewards padding the implementation, so the skill uses depth-as-leverage instead.
+
+## The four principles
+
+- **Depth is a property of the interface, not the implementation.** A deep module can be built internally from small swappable parts. Callers just don't see them. A module can have internal seams its own tests use, and one external seam at its interface.
+- **The deletion test.** Imagine deleting the module. If complexity disappears, the module was a pass-through. If it reappears across N callers, the module was hiding real complexity.
+- **The interface is the test surface.** Callers and tests cross the same seam. If you want to test *past* the interface, the module is the wrong shape.
+- **One adapter means a hypothetical seam. Two adapters means a real one.** Don't cut a seam until something varies across it. A single-adapter seam is just indirection.
+
+Two supporting files go further, and the skill reads them on demand rather than up front. [DEEPENING.md](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/blob/main/skills/engineering/codebase-design/DEEPENING.md) classifies a candidate's dependencies into four categories (in-process, local-substitutable, remote-but-owned, true-external), because the category decides how you test the deepened module across its seam. [DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/blob/main/skills/engineering/codebase-design/DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md) starts parallel [sub-agents](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent) to produce three or more radically different interfaces for the same module, then compares them on depth, locality and seam placement.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**How do I actually build a deep module in TypeScript?**
+
+This is the most-asked question about the skill and the skill does not answer it. It defines what a deep module *is*; it says nothing about how to stop a stray import from reaching past the interface. [Issue #458](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/458) put it plainly: "let's say we're happy with the interface, it hides the details, etc. But how do we enforce it? I think without linting or clear guardrails, humans and LLMs alike will start making it messy over time." The answer in that thread gave three options: wrap it in a class or IIFE and accept that the class gets enormous; make it a package in a monorepo and accept the monorepo tooling; or use a linter like [dependency-cruiser](https://github.com/sverweij/dependency-cruiser) to forbid imports that bypass the interface. Of these mechanisms, Effect is the best and dependency-cruiser the second-best. There is a `setup-ts-deep-modules` skill in the repo's `in-progress/` bucket that lays down a `src/packages/<name>/index.ts` convention, but it is a beta-channel skill with no docs page, and it ships no lint rule.
+
+**I pointed a session at it and it burned 100k [tokens](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/token) redesigning things I never asked about.**
+
+This is a known problem, filed as [issue #449](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/449). The skill is model-invoked and describes itself as vocabulary, but nothing in it hard-stops an agent from treating it as a runnable process. Told to "resume in /codebase-design and drive the open decisions", an agent picked the part of the skill closest to a process: the parallel sub-agents in `DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md`. It re-explored code a previous session had already mapped, and worked for a long time before it asked anything. This skill has none of the guardrails a driver skill has (checkpoints, one question at a time, no auto-advance), because it is a reference. The workaround is to invoke a driver skill (`/grill-with-docs`, `/improve-codebase-architecture` or `/tdd`) and use `codebase-design` as its vocabulary. The issue is open.
+
+**Where did `design-an-interface` go? And is there an `/interface-design` skill?**
+
+This skill replaced `design-an-interface` and took over its content. Nothing is missing. Its "design it twice" technique (parallel sub-agents generating radically different designs, from Ousterhout) ships here as `DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md`. Separately, several people have asked for a dedicated `/interface-design` skill for the deep-module/thin-interface philosophy; this skill already covers that philosophy, and no separate skill is planned. If you came looking for either name, this is the page.
+
+**Isn't this a file-structure convention, such as folders, barrel files, feature slices?**
+
+No. People have pushed back on this many times, and the skill has not changed. [Issue #95](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/95) proposed a formalised fractal-tree file structure as the concrete implementation of deep modules; the reply was that the two are independent: "deep modules are about the design of the interface and accessing through a strict interface, no matter what the file system looks like. It seems perfectly possible that you could have shallow modules with this approach." The same came up in #458: "I think you might be tying the concept of modules too closely to the file system. The file system can certainly be a useful hint to the shape of modules, but there's no need to use the file system in the construction of deep modules." The glossary defines **module** as scale-agnostic on purpose.
+
+**Does `tdd` actually use this vocabulary?**
+
+It does now, but for a long time it did not. v1.0 removed the inline deep-module notes from `tdd` in favour of this shared skill, but nobody added a pointer to replace them, so `tdd` defined "seam" for itself and referenced nothing. The pointer is now in `tdd`, and the agent follows it when the open question is the shape of the interface, not the tests. `tdd` still owns "seam" as the boundary you *test* at; this skill owns the module shape behind it.
+
+**Does the design-it-twice pattern work outside Claude Code?**
+
+Not cleanly. `DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md` says "spawn 3+ sub-agents in parallel using the Agent tool", and "Agent" is the name of a Claude Code [tool](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/tool). The repo ships metadata for other [harnesses](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness), including Codex, and those may have no tool with that name. So the parallel-design phase is less portable than the skill's metadata suggests. [Issue #564](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/564) tracks this, and it is open.
+
+**Can I add my own concepts to the glossary, such as connascence, module secrets, [progressive disclosure](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/progressive-disclosure)?**
+
+People have proposed those. [Issue #180](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/180) adds Parnas's module secrets and Page-Jones's connascence as a naming layer for *what* is leaking across a seam, with a working diff attached; [issue #303](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/303) proposes progressive disclosure inside the implementation, so a module that is deep at its public interface also has structure inside it. Both are open and unmerged. The shipped glossary is small on purpose, and the skill itself gives the reason: consistent language is the whole point, and a term nobody uses consistently is worse than no term.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- The design conversation stops producing the words "component", "service" and "boundary", and starts producing "module", "interface" and "seam".
+- Someone can point at a proposed extraction and say whether it passes the deletion test, without hedging.
+- A proposed seam comes with a second adapter named, not just the first one.
+- Discussion of an interface covers invariants, ordering and error modes, not only the type signature.
+- Invoking it does not start a session. If the agent begins reading files and proposing refactors from `/codebase-design` alone, it has mistaken the reference for a driver.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`codebase-design` is a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone**, and the vocabulary layer underneath the engineering skills rather than a step in any chain. Its closest neighbour is [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling), the parallel reference for the *problem domain*'s words rather than the module's shape. The two are usually wanted together, since naming a deep module well needs both. [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) is the other: it surveys a codebase for deepening candidates and writes every one of them in this glossary, so it finds the module and you design it in this skill's words. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/engineering/diagnosing-bugs.md

@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+## What it does
+
+`diagnosing-bugs` runs a six-phase diagnosis on a hard bug or a performance regression: build a repro, minimise it, rank hypotheses, instrument, fix with a regression test, clean up.
+
+It will not let the agent form a theory until a **tight** feedback loop exists: one named command, already run once, that goes red on *this* bug and green when it is fixed. Given a bug report, a coding agent by default reads code and guesses. This skill blocks that. If no red-capable command exists, there is no Phase 2. That single gate is what the skill is for. Once the loop exists, everything after it (bisection, hypothesis-testing, instrumentation) is mechanical.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+Type `/diagnosing-bugs`, or the agent reaches for it on its own when a task fits. It is model-invoked, and fires on "diagnose" or "debug this", or on a report that something is broken, throwing, failing, or slow.
+
+Reach for it on the hard ones: a bug you can't solve at first look, an intermittent flake, a regression introduced between two known-good states. It is slow and thorough on purpose, so it is the wrong tool for a question you want answered in one message.
+
+| Your situation | Where to go |
+| --- | --- |
+| A specific defect you can describe as a symptom | This skill |
+| A slow endpoint or a timing regression with a known before-and-after | This skill. It has a performance branch (measure a baseline, then bisect) |
+| "Where are the bottlenecks in this codebase?", no specific symptom | Not this skill. It diagnoses one known failure, it does not audit |
+| A raw bug report from someone else, not yet confirmed or written up | [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage) first |
+| Throwaway code to answer a design question, not chase a defect | [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype) |
+| Building a planned behaviour test-first | [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) |
+| Asking what would have prevented the bug, once it is fixed | [retro](https://aihero.dev/skills-retro), run in the same session |
+| No good seam exists to lock the bug down | [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture), which you start yourself |
+
+## The tight loop is the skill
+
+Phase 1 gets the most effort because it is the only hard phase. The skill lists ways to build the loop, roughly in order of preference:
+
+1. A failing test at whatever seam reaches the bug.
+2. A curl or HTTP script against a running dev server.
+3. A CLI invocation with a fixture input, diffed against a known-good snapshot.
+4. A headless browser script asserting on DOM, console, or network.
+5. A replayed capture: a saved request, payload, or event log, run through the code path in isolation.
+6. A throwaway harness: a minimal subset of the system, one function call.
+7. A property or fuzz loop, for "sometimes wrong output".
+8. A bisection harness you can hand to `git bisect run`.
+9. A differential loop: same input, old version against new.
+10. A [human-in-the-loop](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/human-in-the-loop) bash script, last resort. The skill ships `scripts/hitl-loop.template.sh` for this: the agent runs the script, you follow prompts in your terminal, and your answers come back as parseable output.
+
+*A* loop is not the goal. **Tight** is: fast (seconds), deterministic (same verdict every run), sharp (asserts your exact symptom, not "didn't crash"), and runnable by the agent without you. A 30-second flaky loop is barely better than none. For a bug that only shows up sometimes, the target is not a clean repro but a **higher reproduction rate**: loop the trigger, parallelise, add stress, inject sleeps, until the flake rate is high enough to debug against.
+
+When the agent cannot build one, the skill tells it to stop and say so, list what it tried, and ask you for [environment](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/environment) access, a captured artifact, or permission to add temporary instrumentation. It must not go on to form hypotheses anyway.
+
+## The gates between phases
+
+The phases are gates, not a checklist. The agent cannot enter a phase until a specific condition is true.
+
+| Gate | What has to be true |
+| --- | --- |
+| Into Phase 2 | A named command, already run and pasted with its output, that can go red on this bug |
+| Into Phase 3 | The repro is reproduced *and* minimised: every remaining element is needed to reproduce the bug |
+| Into Phase 4 | 3–5 ranked, falsifiable hypotheses exist, each stating its prediction, shown to you before any is tested |
+| Into Phase 5 | Probes map to a specific prediction, one variable at a time, every debug log has a tag like `[DEBUG-a4f2]`, so one grep finds them all for cleanup |
+| Done | The original repro no longer reproduces, the instrumentation is gone, and the commit message names the hypothesis that turned out correct |
+
+Phase 5 has one exception. The agent writes the regression test before the fix, but only if a **correct seam** exists for it: one where the test exercises the real bug pattern as it occurs at the call site. Where the only available seam is too shallow, the skill tells the agent to say so instead of writing a test that gives false confidence. The missing seam is itself a finding, and the agent records it instead of hiding it.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**It fires on quick questions where I just wanted a direct answer.**
+This is the most-reported problem with the skill. On GPT-5.6-Sol especially, users report it triggering on a plain description of a problem: "the model triggers the rather formal diagnosing-bugs skill instead. It then goes on to construct a reproduction scenario (often building a mock scenario with limited value) before giving me a response or suggestion. This results in considerable reply delays." Four separate people reported the same problem on [issue #578](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/578). The accepted fix is to start with a lighter approach and move to the full diagnosis only when the problem needs it, but that change has not shipped. The skill is tuned for Claude Code's invocation behaviour, and a [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) with a lower activation threshold fires it too often. Until the fix ships, the workaround is to say what you want ("just answer this, don't diagnose") or to disable model invocation for it in your [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness).
+
+**Can I point it at a codebase and ask where the performance problems are?**
+No. It diagnoses one failure you can already name. Its performance branch is for a regression with a symptom (establish a baseline measurement, then bisect, measure first and fix second), not for a proactive sweep. A skill for the proactive version was [proposed and closed](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/431); no skill does it now.
+
+**Does it stop and ask me before it writes the fix?**
+No. Only Phase 3 has a human checkpoint: the ranked hypothesis list is shown to you before any is tested, and the agent continues with its own ranking if you are away. There is no gate between instrumentation and the fix, so the agent can start writing code before you have agreed with its root cause. [Issue #124](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/124) asks for that gate and is still open. If you want it, say so when you invoke the skill.
+
+**I already ran `/triage` on this bug report. Is this the same work again?**
+Partly, and neither skill says so. As one reader put it: "Triage's step 3 is essentially a shallow, bounded instance of diagnosing-bugs Phase 1–2, but neither file mentions the other." Triage does a bounded "is this actually a bug, and what is the surface" pass; this skill does the thorough version. Running triage first is not wasted, because its verification often gives you most of Phase 1's raw material. But expect this skill to redo that work in full, and expect no cross-reference to tell you so.
+
+**Will the repro output it pastes leak secrets?**
+It might. The skill asks the agent to paste the invocation and its output, and to request artifacts like HAR files, log dumps, and core dumps. No instruction tells the agent to sanitise them. [Issue #674](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/674) raises exactly this (credentials, tokens, cookies, and personal data copied into a chat, an issue, or a PR) and proposes a redaction guardrail. It is open and unimplemented. Treat redaction as your job for now, particularly before the output goes anywhere public.
+
+**My security scanner flagged this skill as high risk.**
+Snyk flags it, and the flag is a false positive. It is the only skill in the set that ships an executable shell script (`hitl-loop.template.sh`) alongside instructions to run it and to curl a dev server. A shipped `.sh` file, instructions to run it, and outbound HTTP together are enough to trigger a static scanner. The script itself is about 30 lines of `read -r -p` prompts that pause for human input. The scanner rates what the skill could do, not a proven exploit.
+
+**What happened to `/diagnose`?**
+v1.0.0 renamed it to `/diagnosing-bugs`. The old name no longer exists. Anything of yours that chains `/diagnose` (a wrapper skill, a saved prompt) needs updating.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- It shows you a command and its red output before it offers a single theory. If theory arrives first, the skill is not running.
+- The failure it reproduces is the one you reported, not a nearby one it found on the way.
+- It shrinks the repro before it starts guessing, and can tell you why it needs each remaining piece.
+- It shows you a ranked list of 3–5 hypotheses, each with a prediction you could falsify, before it tests any of them.
+- Every debug log it adds carries a tag like `[DEBUG-a4f2]`, and a grep for that tag comes back empty when it declares done.
+- The commit or PR message names which hypothesis was right.
+- When it cannot lock the bug down with a test, it says so instead of writing a shallow one.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`diagnosing-bugs` is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone. You start it when something is broken, and it ends when the fix and its regression test are in. It keeps no state and needs no prior setup. [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes "Something's broken" here.
+
+Two neighbours matter. [retro](https://aihero.dev/skills-retro) comes after it: once the fix is in, run it in the same session to ask what would have prevented the bug, while the session has more information than it had at the start. `diagnosing-bugs` never invokes `retro` itself, because `retro` is user-invoked. [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage) comes before it for bugs that arrive as raw reports from other people, and does a shallower version of the same first two phases.

docs/engineering/domain-modeling.md

@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+## What it does
+
+`domain-modeling` builds and sharpens a project's **ubiquitous language** while you are designing. It challenges a term that conflicts with the glossary, asks for a precise word where you used a vague one, and tests a relationship against a concrete scenario until the boundaries are exact.
+
+It is the **active** discipline, not the passive one. Any skill can read `GLOSSARY.md` to borrow its vocabulary. This skill is for when you are *changing* the model, which is why it interrupts you. It writes a term into `GLOSSARY.md` at the moment you settle it, in the middle of the conversation, rather than producing a tidy glossary at the end. A glossary written at the end is a summary of a [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session); the inline version is the session's output.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+Type `/domain-modeling`, or the agent reaches for it automatically when a task fits. In practice, automatic invocation is the weakest part of the skill. When `grill-with-docs` or `wayfinder` say to load it, [models](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) often load `grilling` and skip this one. If a [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) session runs and `GLOSSARY.md` is unchanged at the end, that is what happened. Invoke it by name alongside the other skill.
+
+Reach for it when the *words* are the problem:
+
+| The situation | The move |
+| --- | --- |
+| Two people mean different things by "cancellation" | `domain-modeling`: pick the canonical term, list the other under `_Avoid_` |
+| "Account" is doing three jobs in three files | `domain-modeling`: split it into Customer and User |
+| You just made a hard-to-reverse architectural choice | `domain-modeling`: it offers an ADR, if the choice clears the bar |
+| The module's *shape* is the problem: where the seam goes, how deep the interface is | [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design) |
+| You want the whole plan interrogated before you build | [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), which drives this skill underneath |
+| You want a term looked up, not changed | Nothing. Read `GLOSSARY.md`. It is a file. |
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+None up front. The skill writes into two places and creates both lazily:
+
+- **`GLOSSARY.md`** at the repo root. The skill creates it when you settle the first term. In a repo with a `GLOSSARY-MAP.md` at the root, terms go into the per-context `GLOSSARY.md` the map points at instead.
+- **`docs/adr/`**. The skill creates it with the first ADR that clears the bar.
+
+Nothing needs to exist before you start, and the skill creates nothing in advance.
+
+## Two artifacts, two bars
+
+The glossary and the ADR have different bars. Most of the trouble with this skill comes from mixing them up.
+
+| | `GLOSSARY.md` | `docs/adr/NNNN-slug.md` |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+| Holds | Terms. What a thing **is**, in one or two sentences, with rejected synonyms under `_Avoid_` | One decision, in one to three sentences: context, choice, reason |
+| Bar to write | A vague term became canonical | **All three**: hard to reverse, surprising without context, the result of a real trade-off |
+| Written | Inline, the moment the term is settled | Offered, not assumed |
+| Never holds | Implementation details, a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec), a scratch pad, general programming concepts | A diary of every choice made this session |
+
+Miss any one of the ADR's three tests and there is no ADR. An easily-reversed decision will just get reversed; an unsurprising one is nobody's question; one with no real alternative records that you did the obvious thing.
+
+The `GLOSSARY.md` rule matters most, because it is the one that breaks in practice. **It is a glossary and nothing else.** Left unchecked, models treat "write to `GLOSSARY.md`" as permission to persist every answer you give, and the file turns into a running spec. This is the most-reported problem with the skill, across several models.
+
+## Cross-referencing, and where it stops
+
+When you state how something works, the skill checks the code and points out any contradiction. *"Your code cancels entire Orders, but you just said partial cancellation is possible, which is right?"* The skill makes the language and the code agree, out loud, before it changes either.
+
+It cross-references **code** and the committed `GLOSSARY.md` and ADRs, and nothing else. It does not search your issue tracker. If your team argued out a naming collision and settled it in a closed issue months ago, the skill raises it again as if it were new. There is [an open request](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/717) to fix this. Until then, the workaround is to put the instruction in your own `docs/agents/domain.md`, which the skills already read.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**My `GLOSSARY.md` is 500 lines. 1,000. 3,000. What do I do?**
+The size is a symptom. The cause is that the file has taken in implementation detail and decisions that never belonged in a glossary. The fix is a direct instruction: `/grill-with-docs make my GLOSSARY.md more concise and remove any implementation details from it`. Run it against a bloated file and most of it goes. Only split it with a `GLOSSARY-MAP.md` once the file is lean and still covers two domains that a reader would not want to hold at once. Splitting a bloated file gives you several bloated files. The skill's guidance here is not yet strong enough to prevent the growth in the first place, and the issue tracking that is still open.
+
+**Why is it `GLOSSARY.md` and not `GLOSSARY.md`?**
+This is the most-argued naming question in the whole skill set and it has no settled answer. The case against the current name is good: if it is "a glossary and nothing else", `GLOSSARY.md` says so, and, as one reader put it, "with ai agents everything is [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context)". The case for it is the map: `GLOSSARY-MAP.md` pointing at several `GLOSSARY.md` files reads naturally in a way `GLOSSARY-MAP.md` does not, and `context` is the standing DDD word for a bounded area of the model. At least one person maintains a local fork purely to rename the file. You can do the same, but every other skill in the set looks for `GLOSSARY.md`, so a rename means patching all of them.
+
+**Where did `/ubiquitous-language` go?**
+It was removed, and it was not deprecated. Its job moved into `domain-modeling`, which maintains the whole model continuously rather than dumping a glossary out of one conversation. Vocabulary enforcement now matters more, not less. It runs underneath grilling, triage and mapping rather than as a separate pass you have to remember.
+
+**How do I get a glossary for a codebase that has none?**
+Ask for it explicitly rather than waiting for it to accumulate. `/grill-with-docs help me scaffold my existing repo with a GLOSSARY.md` is the documented route. Expect a long interrogation. One user reported more than 50 questions before the file was in shape. Incidental use builds the glossary far too slowly on a brownfield repo.
+
+**Can I keep the domain model and use my own ADR format?**
+Not cleanly today. The glossary half and the ADR half ship in one skill, so a team with an established ADR convention (different template, different location, different naming) gets instructions that conflict with its house style. The current options are to copy the skill locally and edit it, or to override the ADR conventions in your repo's own agent docs. Splitting the two apart is [an open request](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/557).
+
+**Does a glossary actually earn its keep? It is one more artifact to review, and it can go stale.**
+Sometimes it does not. DDD gets less useful the closer it gets to the implementation. The payoff is upstream, in naming and concept alignment, not in aggregates and layer ceremony. Synonym control matters at naming boundaries: module names, table names, status enums, issue titles, CLI commands. It matters much less in ordinary prose. There is also an objection that domain terms compress communication *between humans* who already share them, and that an agent responds the same way to the plain-English description. On that reading, the glossary's value is keeping you and your reviewers aligned with what the agent is doing, not making the agent better. On a one-day build, skip it. And an unreviewed, agent-authored glossary is worse than none: it fills with confident claims that later sessions treat as true.
+
+**Can it turn my vague prompts into domain language for me?**
+No, and there is no plan for a skill that does. A domain language you do not understand yourself is meaningless once written down. This skill enforces precision once you have the understanding; it does not invent vocabulary you do not have. The related trap is using domain words without doing the modelling. The right nouns on top of the wrong concepts produce output that reads as correct and is not.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- It stops you mid-sentence to ask which of two things you meant, instead of picking one and moving on.
+- `GLOSSARY.md` changes **during** the conversation, not in a burst at the end.
+- It refuses to write an ADR for something you could undo tomorrow, and says which of the three tests failed.
+- New entries define what a thing *is* in one or two sentences and name the words you are giving up under `_Avoid_`.
+- It quotes your code back at you when your code and your sentence disagree.
+- `GLOSSARY.md` gets shorter as often as it gets longer.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`domain-modeling` is a **model-invoked reference** that runs *underneath* other skills more often than it runs on its own. [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) drives it through a grilling session, [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) loads it while charting a map, [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage) uses it to keep [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) in the project's own words, and [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) calls it as decisions settle. Its closest sibling is [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design). Together they are the vocabulary layer under everything else, this one for the *domain*, that one for the module's *shape*. It is also reachable directly, when you want the discipline without committing to the steps of whatever skill would normally load it. When you are unsure which skill fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/engineering/grill-with-docs.md

@@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
+## What it does
+
+`grill-with-docs` interviews you about a plan or design until you and the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) share one understanding of it, and writes the vocabulary and the hard decisions into your repo while it does. It is the same interview [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me) runs (a round of questions, then wait, then the next round), pointed at a codebase.
+
+It is **[stateful](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/stateful)**. Every other grilling skill leaves the [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) in your head; this one leaves files on disk. When a term resolves, the skill writes it to `GLOSSARY.md` at once, not in a batch at the end. When a decision passes three gates, the skill writes it as an ADR. That is the whole difference, and it also causes most of the trouble people have with the skill. The artifacts are real files in a real repo, so they can be missing when you expected them, and they can drift when more than one person writes them.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You invoke this by typing `/grill-with-docs`, and the agent won't reach for it on its own.
+
+Reach for it at the start of a change, in a repo, when the plan is still fuzzy and the words for the thing are not settled yet. It is the single-session tool. Which grilling skill you want depends on what is in front of you:
+
+| What you have | Reach for |
+| --- | --- |
+| You aren't working in a working directory at all | [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me) |
+| A repo, and a change you can settle in one session | `grill-with-docs` |
+| An effort too big to hold in one session (a greenfield build, a large feature) | [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) |
+| A repo with no domain docs at all, and no particular feature in mind | `grill-with-docs`, aimed at the repo rather than a change |
+| A decision blocked on knowledge in someone else's head | [to-questionnaire](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-questionnaire) |
+
+The wayfinder split comes down to session count: `/grill-with-docs` for single-session planning, `/wayfinder` for multi-session planning.
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+The skill writes into your repo, so you need to be somewhere it is safe to write. Resolved terms go to a `GLOSSARY.md` glossary at the root, or to the relevant context's `GLOSSARY.md`, if a `GLOSSARY-MAP.md` at the root marks the repo as multi-context. Decisions go to `docs/adr/`. The skill creates both only when it needs them. Nothing exists until the first term or decision is settled, so you set up nothing in advance.
+
+It also needs two other skills present, because its own `SKILL.md` is one line that delegates to them. [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) supplies the interview, and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) supplies the writing. Installing `grill-with-docs` alone gets you a skill that does not work.
+
+## The paper trail
+
+Three things come out of a session, and they are not equal.
+
+| What resolved | Where it lands |
+| --- | --- |
+| A term: the project's own word for a thing | `GLOSSARY.md`, inline, the moment it resolves |
+| A decision that is hard to reverse, surprising without context, and a real trade-off | An ADR under `docs/adr/` |
+| Everything else you decided | The conversation, and nowhere else |
+
+That third row is the one that catches people out. `GLOSSARY.md` is only a glossary. It holds no implementation details, no [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec), and no scratch notes. An ADR needs all three conditions at once, so most decisions do not qualify and most sessions produce none. A session that yields a sharper glossary and zero ADRs is working as designed, but it means most of what you agreed exists only in the [context window](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-window) you agreed it in. Hand that same conversation to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) rather than [clearing](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/clearing) it.
+
+The glossary is the main output. This skill builds domain language: the project's own words, agreed once, so you, the agent and your colleagues do not have to work them out again. Not everyone agrees that this improves agent performance. The strongest objection is that a term and its plain-English expansion get the same result from the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model), and that the vocabulary mainly shortens communication between the humans who share it. On that view the glossary is still valuable, but the value goes to the humans.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**Should I use this or `/wayfinder`?**
+Scope decides it. Use this for anything you can settle in one session; use [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) when the effort is too big to hold in one, and it charts the work as a map of decision [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) first. Wayfinder is slower and denser, and reaching for it on a well-scoped feature is the common mistake. It does not replace this skill, and it can start a grilling session for the parts of the map that suit one.
+
+**It ran, but no `GLOSSARY.md` and no ADRs appeared.**
+There are two known causes. The first is that nothing qualified. ADRs need all three gates, and a session about a change with no new vocabulary has nothing to write. The second is a real bug. When the skill runs inside another orchestration layer (a spec-driven-development wrapper, a multi-agent framework, a rule that invokes it as a step in someone else's pipeline), users report that the file-writing half silently does not happen, while the interview still runs. The bug is filed and unfixed. If you are in that setup, check the working directory before you trust the session's output.
+
+**It asked everything at once, with no recommendations, and never mentioned `GLOSSARY.md`.**
+That is the skill failing to load its two dependencies. Because `SKILL.md` is a one-line delegation, an agent that does not pick up [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) guesses at what grilling means, and you get every question at once with no structure. Partial loading is more confusing. `grilling` loads, `domain-modeling` does not, and you get a good interview with no paper trail. How often it happens depends on the model and the [effort](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/effort) level, and it is the most reported problem with this skill. If you suspect it, ask the agent directly which skills it loaded.
+
+**Where did all my other decisions go?**
+Into the conversation only. This is the most serious open complaint about the skill. The glossary is not a spec, most answers do not earn an ADR, and no record links each resolved answer to a spec, a ticket and a test. Later steps soften precise answers (ordering guarantees, negative requirements, numeric defaults) into weaker prose, and the result can look complete while missing the thing you decided. For now, keep the session and feed it straight to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec). Then re-read the spec against your own answers rather than assuming it captured them.
+
+**Can I point it at an existing repo that has no docs at all?**
+Yes. This is the right skill for a codebase with no ADRs, no domain language and no design principles: invoke it and say "help me document my repo". Users often pair it with [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) for building or repairing a `GLOSSARY.md`. Expect to steer it. It reads code and asks you about what it finds, and you decide which of the words already in the codebase are the right ones.
+
+**What should I do when the session ends?**
+The skill's closing message is often open-ended, which is a known problem. In the main flow the answer is [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), in the same conversation. If the change is small enough to build immediately, go straight to [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) instead.
+
+**Why is it called that?**
+Nobody is happy with the name. There is an open suggestion to rename it `grill-domain-model`, which describes the behaviour more accurately. Nothing has moved on it. If a rename ever lands, the docs page moves with it and the URL changes.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- `GLOSSARY.md` changes *during* the session, term by term, rather than appearing in one lump at the end.
+- The glossary reads as pure vocabulary (your project's words with tight definitions) and contains no implementation detail or spec-like prose.
+- Questions the codebase can answer get answered by reading the codebase, not asked of you.
+- You get few or no ADRs, and the ones you get are decisions you would be annoyed to have to argue again.
+- It challenges a word you used because your existing glossary defines it differently.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`grill-with-docs` is the head of the main build chain:
+
+```txt
+grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review → retro
+```
+
+It comes before anything is written down as a spec. It produces the shared understanding and settled vocabulary that [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) then synthesises without interviewing you again. Its close neighbours are [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me), the same interview with no repo and no files, and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling), the glossary-and-ADR discipline it drives; both use the [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) primitive for the interview. Upstream of it, [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) charts efforts too large for one session and can hand parts of the map back down to it. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/engineering/implement-spec.md

@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+## What it does
+
+`implement-spec` takes a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec) and its [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) and lands the whole thing in one run. The orchestrating [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) hands each ticket to an implementer [subagent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent) working in its own git worktree, merges each finished branch into a single **integration branch**, runs [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) over the result, and resolves the tickets.
+
+It reads the tickets as a **task graph**, not a list. Blocking edges decide what can start, so at any moment there is a **frontier** of tickets whose blockers have all landed, and every ticket on the frontier runs at once. That is the difference from working the tickets one by one. The graph's shape sets the pace, not the tickets' order on the tracker.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You invoke this by typing `/implement-spec`, and the agent won't reach for it on its own.
+
+| Your situation | Reach for |
+| --- | --- |
+| A spec, split into tickets with blocking edges, that you want landed in one run | `/implement-spec` |
+| One ticket at a time, in your own [context window](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-window), [clearing](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/clearing) between tickets | [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) |
+| A spec that isn't split into tickets yet | [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) first |
+| A small piece of work with no real graph to it | [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) directly |
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+- **An issue tracker.** The skill reads the tickets from, and resolves them on, the tracker [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills) configured. If none has been configured, it stops and tells you to run that first rather than guessing.
+- **Tickets with blocking edges**, as [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) writes them. Without edges the graph is flat and every ticket starts at once.
+- **A [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness) that runs subagents in the background and gives each one a git worktree.** The skill exists to run tickets at the same time, so on a harness that runs subagents one at a time, it is only a slower `implement`.
+
+## The integration branch
+
+Everything lands on one branch. Each implementer:
+
+1. confirms its worktree is based on the integration branch before it starts,
+2. builds its ticket with [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd), red-green one slice at a time,
+3. merges the integration branch tip into its own branch before reporting done, so landing it is a fast-forward.
+
+The tracker decides whether a pull request exists at all. If your tracker closes work through PRs, or you ask for one, the skill opens a draft PR after the first merge and marks it ready at the end. Otherwise the run stops on the integration branch with every ticket resolved the way your tracker closes work, which works fully offline against a local markdown tracker.
+
+Implementers talk to the orchestrator through [context pointers](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-pointer) (the spec, the ticket, shared exploration notes, earlier commits) rather than pasted summaries. This keeps each subagent's prompt small and leaves room in the orchestrator's window for the graph.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**How is this different from running `/implement` on each ticket myself?**
+
+This is the question the skill exists to answer. Before it shipped, people kept building their own versions, and one user described the need: they wanted "subagents implement the tickets" instead of having "to individually create new session and tell them to implement a ticket one by one, when a spec may contain over 5 tickets." With `implement` you are the dispatcher: one [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) per ticket, clearing in between, and keeping track yourself of which tickets are unblocked. `implement-spec` hands that job to one orchestrating session. The price is that you no longer read each ticket's work as it lands; you review the integration branch at the end. To start a run, clear the context and type `/implement-spec` with a pointer to the spec (an issue number or a file path). For a small change with no real graph, skip it and use `implement` directly.
+
+**Does it need GitHub? I want it to stop at the branch.**
+
+No, not any more. One user who liked the in-progress version had exactly this complaint: "it creates a PR at the end, which requires an online repository like GitHub. I wish it could do the same work offline and stop at the branch where all the work is merged." The run now ends on the integration branch. A PR opens only when the configured tracker closes work through PRs or you ask for one, so on a local markdown tracker the run ends with every ticket resolved and the work merged on the branch.
+
+**Its review and fix loop ran for hours, or kept "fixing" tickets that hadn't been built yet.**
+
+Both happen when `code-review` runs anywhere other than the one point the skill gives it. It compares the code against the whole spec, so it only makes sense once every ticket has landed. If it runs mid-run, every unbuilt ticket reads as a failure. The agent then builds that ticket, and that triggers another review. At the end, the skill runs `code-review` once and sends every finding to one fix subagent, but it doesn't yet say when to stop after that fix. One user reported a five-ticket feature where "the review and fix loop took roughly four hours". If you see a second broad review start, tell it to run focused checks for the fixed findings and stop. Expect that first review to find real problems. The run's output is a draft that the review completes, not something to ship on its own.
+
+**Does it drive tdd like implement does?**
+
+It does now, though it didn't at first. Users running the in-progress version noticed that "the implementer subagents don't inherit the /tdd directive", so red-green stopped as soon as they scaled up from one ticket to a whole spec. Each implementer now builds its ticket with `tdd`. There is still no step where you agree seams interactively, as there is in an `implement` session, so name the seams in the spec or the tickets if you want them pinned.
+
+**Two implementers running in parallel collided on the same file, or picked different names for the same thing.**
+
+Worktrees don't remove collisions; they postpone them to merge time. A blocking edge written from ticket text is a guess about which files each ticket will touch, and two tickets on "different parts of the codebase" still share a message catalogue, a config registry, or a type. Each implementer sees only its own ticket and the shared notes, never the other's work in progress, so one user's web and mobile tickets added the same string as `blockedSince` and `blockedOn`. When two frontier tickets touch one shared file, either add a blocking edge between them so they run one after the other, or have the exploration notes fix the exact names each ticket adds.
+
+**Blocked tickets never start, even after their blocker has merged.**
+
+This is a known problem on GitHub. The tracker's blocked-by count only drops when a blocker *closes*, and tickets typically close when the PR merges, which is the end of the run. The tracker is the right source for the starting graph but a stale one mid-run. Tell the orchestrator to track which tickets have merged into the integration branch itself and compute the frontier from that.
+
+**Does this replace Sandcastle or an AFK script?**
+
+No. People ask because the skills now reach into implementation: "is Sandcastle still relevant? Your skills now seem to be able to handle implementation as well." `implement-spec` puts an agent in charge of orchestration inside one harness session, which needs no infrastructure and lets you watch and steer. For work that is truly [AFK](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/afk), a deterministic loop ([Sandcastle](https://github.com/mattpocock/sandcastle), a shell script, a CI job) is faster, cheaper, and more reliable, because no agent makes the orchestration decisions.
+
+**A ticket's key test was skipped inside its worktree, and it reported green.**
+
+A worktree holds only what git tracks. Tests that read gitignored fixtures, local databases, or credentials can silently skip there. For a ticket whose verification depends on untracked material, tell the orchestrator to run it in the main checkout instead.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- Several implementers are running at once whenever the graph allows, not one after another.
+- A ticket starts as soon as its last blocker lands on the integration branch, not when the whole run ends.
+- Every ticket's trace shows `tdd` running, with a failing test before the code.
+- Merges into the integration branch are fast-forwards, not conflict resolutions.
+- The run ends on one branch with every ticket resolved, and a PR only if your tracker wanted one.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`implement-spec` is the build step of the main chain, as the parallel alternative to running [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) once per ticket:
+
+```txt
+grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement-spec → retro
+```
+
+Its neighbours are [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets), which declares the blocking edges it reads as a task graph, and [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review), which it runs over the integration branch before closing out. [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) is the router over the whole set when you are not sure which flow you are in.

docs/engineering/implement.md

@@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
+## What it does
+
+`implement` builds work that has already been decided. You point it at a [ticket](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket), a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec), or the plan you just agreed in the conversation, and it writes the code, drives [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) at the seams, typechecks as it goes, runs [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) at the end, and commits to the current branch.
+
+It never reopens the plan. There is no interview, no clarifying round, no proposal of a different approach. Whatever was settled upstream is the input, and the skill's whole job is to turn that into a commit. That is what separates it from typing "build this" at a fresh [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent), which often redesigns the work while it builds it.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You invoke this by typing `/implement` yourself, and the agent won't reach for it on its own. It ships with `disable-model-invocation: true`, so no other skill can call it either. Wherever [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) or [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) says "then `/implement` per ticket", that is an instruction to you, not something the agent will do unprompted.
+
+Where the work currently lives decides whether this is the right skill:
+
+| The work is… | Reach for |
+| --- | --- |
+| A ticket on the tracker | `/implement #42`, one ticket per [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session), [clearing](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/clearing) context between tickets |
+| A spec, not yet split up, and the build spans sessions | [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) first, then `/implement` per ticket |
+| A spec, and the build is small | `/implement` directly against the spec |
+| Only in the conversation you just had, and it's still small | `/implement` right there, in the same window |
+| Not written down anywhere yet | [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), or [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me) if there's no codebase |
+| One concrete behaviour you want test-first, with no spec | [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) directly |
+| Already built, and you want it checked | [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) directly |
+
+The same-session case is worth naming because the skill's own first line doesn't cover it. `SKILL.md` says "the spec or tickets", which pushes the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) to look for a file that doesn't exist. If the plan lives only in the thread, say so when you invoke it.
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+`implement` commits to the branch you are on. It does not create one, and it does not ask. Check you are on the branch you want the work on before you start.
+
+If the tickets came from [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets), [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills) configured the tracker they live on. `code-review` reads the same configuration to find the originating spec at close-out.
+
+## What one run does
+
+A run has five steps, in order:
+
+1. Read the ticket or spec and work out the seams.
+2. Drive [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) at the pre-agreed seams, one red-green slice at a time.
+3. Typecheck often, run single test files as it goes.
+4. Run the full test suite once, at the end.
+5. Run [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review), then commit to the current branch.
+
+One run covers one ticket. The tickets [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) produces are tracer-bullet vertical slices sized to fit a single fresh [context window](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-window), so the intended rhythm is: clear context, implement one ticket, commit, clear again. Each ticket is self-contained, so you can discard the previous ticket's context.
+
+## Pre-agreed seams
+
+The skill's central idea is the **seam**, the public boundary you observe behaviour at without reaching inside. Tests live at seams. When the seam is agreed before any code exists, the tests last, and you can rewrite the implementation underneath without changing them.
+
+The "pre-agreed" part matters, and it is also the skill's weakest point. Nothing inside `implement` agrees the seams. `tdd` is the skill that asks, and it refuses to write a test at an unconfirmed seam. So in practice the agreement happens either upstream in the spec, or in the first exchange of the run. If it happens nowhere, the run becomes "just write the code" and nothing warns you. Naming the seams in the spec is what stops that.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**It finished, but my ticket is still open and the acceptance criteria are still unchecked.**
+
+Correct, and expected. `implement` has no completion step. It ends at the commit and never touches the work item. This is the same on GitHub Issues and on the local markdown tracker, so it is not a tracker integration problem. It also does not act on the findings `code-review` produced, and does not tick the `- [ ]` boxes on the originating issue. Close the ticket and reconcile the criteria yourself. This matters most on a dependency chain, because `to-tickets` defines the frontier as tickets whose blockers are all closed. If nothing gets closed, nothing ever becomes visibly unblocked.
+
+**Can I point it at all my tickets at once, or run several in parallel?**
+
+Not with `/implement`: one invocation, one ticket. For a whole spec in one run, use [implement-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement-spec), which gives each ticket on the ready frontier to a [subagent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent) in its own worktree, then merges the results onto one integration branch. Running several `/implement` sessions side by side in one checkout is worse than unsupported. One field report describes a `git commit --amend` in one session landing on another session's commit, a stash vanishing from `refs/stash`, and commits landing on the wrong branch, all in a single afternoon across three issues. The sessions share one working directory, one index, and one HEAD. Users work around this with git worktrees, but `refs/stash` is shared across worktrees too, so worktrees alone do not fix the stash case.
+
+**Can it open a pull request instead of committing?**
+
+Not built in. It commits straight to the current branch. Several people find this too eager, because the code lands before they can verify it works. There is no configuration flag and no PR mode. People override it in the invocation ("commit to a branch and open a PR") or by editing their local copy of the skill. When the agent does write the PR, [pr](https://aihero.dev/skills-pr) shapes its body.
+
+**`code-review` says it cannot see my changes.**
+
+`code-review` reviews `git diff <fixed-point>...HEAD`, which excludes staged and working-tree changes. `implement` runs it before committing, so unless an interim commit already exists there is nothing in that diff to review. Multiple people have reported this and it is unfixed on both sides. Commit first, then review against the point you branched from.
+
+Separately, some people do not want the review inside the run at all, because an agent reviewing the code it just wrote is biased toward its own solution. Running [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) in a fresh session against a fixed point is a valid alternative. The same bias is why that skill runs its two axes in separate sub-agents.
+
+**One ticket burned 150k tokens. Am I using it wrong?**
+
+Probably not. The ticket is more likely too big. A run does codebase exploration, a red-green loop per seam, a full suite, and a review, so a non-trivial ticket exceeding 100k [tokens](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/token) is normal rather than a sign something broke. The fix is upstream. Right-size the tickets in [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) so each fits one fresh window. If a single ticket keeps going over, split it rather than raising the [effort](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/effort) level.
+
+**`/implement #2` in a fresh session worked on something completely unrelated.**
+
+The agent resolves `#2` against whatever numbered list it can see. In a fresh session that may be a todo file, a checklist, or another work list rather than the configured tracker. The agent does not stop when the match is uncertain, so the mistake is not obvious until the work has started. Pass the full reference, the issue URL or `owner/repo#2`, and ask it to confirm the title back before it begins.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- The session opens by reading the ticket or spec and restating what it will build, rather than asking you what to build.
+- You can see an actual `/tdd` invocation in the trace, not just tests appearing in the diff.
+- Typechecks and single test files run repeatedly during the run, and the full suite runs once near the end.
+- The run reaches a commit on your current branch without you prompting it to carry on.
+- The diff is one ticket's worth of change: a vertical slice through every layer, not several tickets swept together.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`implement` is the build step of the main chain:
+
+```txt
+grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review → retro
+```
+
+Its neighbours are [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets), which produces the tickets it consumes and declares the blocking edges that decide their order; [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd), which it drives internally at each seam; and [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review), which it runs before committing. It sits downstream of the planning skills and trusts them. It does not re-validate the shape of what it was handed, so a badly-structured map or a horizontally-layered ticket gets built as written.
+
+That trust is why [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) merges onto the chain at [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) rather than looping its map straight into `implement`. Go straight to `implement` from a map only when the effort turned out small.
+
+[ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) is the router over the whole set when you are not sure which flow you are in.

docs/engineering/improve-codebase-architecture.md

@@ -0,0 +1,113 @@
+## What it does
+
+`improve-codebase-architecture` surveys a codebase for **deepening opportunities**. These are places where a shallow module (an interface nearly as complex as the thing it hides) could become a deep one. It writes them up as a self-contained HTML report, and then [grills](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) you through the one you pick.
+
+It never changes the code. The whole run produces a conversation and one HTML file in your OS temp directory. You do the refactor later, in a separate [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session), through the normal build flow. This makes it a survey, not a refactoring tool, so you can run it on a codebase you are not ready to touch yet.
+
+Two filters stop the report from becoming generic cleanup advice. First, every candidate must pass the **deletion test**: if you removed this module, would its complexity move behind a smaller interface, or spread across the callers? Only the first case gets a card. Second, unless you point it at a specific area, it reads recent commit history first and focuses the scan on paths that change often. A deepening in code that nobody touches is a refactor that never pays back.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You invoke this by typing `/improve-codebase-architecture`; the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) will not reach for it on its own.
+
+It is not a step in the main build loop. You run it periodically to queue up more work that improves the codebase. People use it in four situations:
+
+| Situation | How it is used |
+| --- | --- |
+| Routine upkeep | Run it every few days, or when you have a spare moment, so the structure does not decay between features. |
+| Before a big build | Point it at the [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec) and ask "how can we make this change easy?" This is the most effective prompt for it. |
+| Brownfield audit | Run it on a large, unstructured or [vibe-coded](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/vibe-coding) repo to find out what shape it is in. |
+| Legacy test work | Use it to find the missing seams before you write tests against untestable code. |
+
+Where it is confusable with siblings:
+
+- To design one module you have already chosen, use [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design). This skill finds the module to work on, and `codebase-design` is where you design it.
+- For a whole effort too big to hold in one session, use [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder).
+- For "this specific thing is broken," use [diagnosing-bugs](https://aihero.dev/skills-diagnosing-bugs). It sends you back here when the real finding is that there is no good seam to lock the bug down.
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+None to run it. If `GLOSSARY.md` or ADRs in `docs/adr/` exist, it reads them and uses your domain's own nouns. A candidate then reads as "deepen the Order intake module," not "refactor the FooBarHandler."
+
+It writes in two places. The report goes to `<tmpdir>/architecture-review-<timestamp>.html`, outside the repo. During the grilling loop it adds or sharpens terms in `GLOSSARY.md`, and creates that file if it does not exist. It also offers to record a rejected candidate as an ADR, so a future run does not suggest it again.
+
+## Depth, and the report that hunts for it
+
+The skill rests on one idea: **depth**. A deep module puts a lot of behaviour behind a small, stable interface. A shallow module exposes its implementation through an interface nearly as wide as the code beneath it. The report looks for three forms of shallowness:
+
+- Pure functions extracted only for testability, while the real bugs are in how callers use them (no **locality**).
+- Modules that leak across their **seams**.
+- A concept you cannot understand without opening five files.
+
+For each one, it proposes the deepening that fixes it.
+
+Each candidate is a card with the files involved, the friction, a plain-English solution, the benefit in terms of **locality** and **leverage**, a before/after diagram, and a strength badge.
+
+| Badge | What it means for you |
+| --- | --- |
+| `Strong` | The deletion test passes clearly and the friction is real. Take these seriously. |
+| `Worth exploring` | Plausible deepening, but the payoff depends on where the code is going next. |
+| `Speculative` | Included for completeness. You can ignore most of these. |
+
+The report ends with a **Top recommendation**, the candidate it would do first. Then the skill stops and asks which candidate you want to explore. At that point you have decided nothing, and no code has changed.
+
+## What happens after you pick one
+
+When you pick a candidate, a [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) session starts on it. It covers the constraints, what goes behind the seam, which tests survive, and what the deepened interface should look like. The output of that session is a decision, not a diff. From there the normal flow applies: take the decision into [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), then [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets), then [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement).
+
+## Common questions
+
+**It grilled me for an hour about one idea instead of showing me options. Can I turn that off?**
+
+Yes. Say so when you invoke it ("don't grill me, just show the report"). This is the most common complaint about the skill. One user liked it as "a convenient way to get a thorough analysis of improvements," but after the grilling loop was added, found it "borderline unusable." In their sessions it proposed a single solution and then asked "10's or 100's of questions." The design intent is that the report comes first, and the grilling starts only on a candidate you chose. But weaker [models](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) skip straight to an interview about the first idea they had. Results in that thread vary a lot by model. It is an open issue, and the skill does not yet have a documented no-grill mode.
+
+**The report opened as unstyled raw HTML with no diagrams. What happened?**
+
+The report loads Tailwind and Mermaid from CDNs, so it needs network access when you open it. If something blocks those scripts, the page breaks with no error. In the reported case, a security hook required SRI hashes. The agent added them, but the CDN served different bytes to the browser than to the `curl` that computed the hash, so the browser blocked the script. Offline and locked-down environments have the same problem. The agent cannot see it, because it never renders the page. As a workaround, ask for inline CSS and hand-built SVG diagrams instead of the CDN setup. This is an open issue.
+
+**It gave me twelve candidates. Do I work through them in the same session or start a new one?**
+
+Use one candidate per session. If you work through several in one conversation, the [context window](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-window) fills with the report, the grilling, the domain-model edits and the code changes all at once. The report is only a temp file, so carry the candidate forward, not the file. Pick one, grill it, and take the decision into `/to-spec`. Turn the rest into [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) that you can pick up separately later. Put the chosen improvement into a spec instead of going straight to implementation. People ask this often, and the skill itself documents no workflow for it.
+
+**How should I prompt it?**
+
+Prompt it with the next thing you are building. If a big build is coming up, point it at the spec and ask "how can we make this change easy?" A run with no prompt looks for hot spots on its own. That is fine for routine upkeep, but a direction makes the report actionable.
+
+**Does it work on a large legacy codebase?**
+
+Partly. It works well on big existing codebases that lack consistent structure, and it is the recommended upkeep tool after any one-time structural setup. But users with out-of-control projects report it "helped a little but still doesn't seem to cut it." One developer with an eight-year-old legacy codebase reported that the model went in circles, though the same skill produces a clean graph on a tidy repo. There is no dedicated `/refactor` skill for that case yet. If the codebase has no shared vocabulary, run [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) first to create one. That usually makes this skill's output much better.
+
+**How is this different from `/codebase-design`?**
+
+`/codebase-design` is a reference, not a session driver. It supplies the vocabulary (module, interface, depth, seam, adapter, leverage, locality), and this skill uses it. If you give a fresh agent `/codebase-design` as the task, it fails in a known way. It has no process of its own to follow, so the agent invents one, explores the code again, and runs for a very long time before it asks you anything. Run this skill, and let it use that one.
+
+**Will it ever tell me the codebase is fine?**
+
+Rarely, so know that before you start. The skill exists to output findings, so it tends to produce candidates instead of concluding that nothing is wrong. Use the strength badges to correct for this. If every candidate in a report is `Speculative`, the skill found nothing.
+
+**Does it work in Codex or another harness?**
+
+Partly. The exploration step names Claude Code's `Agent` tool with `subagent_type=Explore` directly. A [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness) without that tool may skip the parallel exploration instead of using its own equivalent. The skill still runs, but the scan is less thorough. Someone has proposed a harness-neutral rewrite, but it is not merged.
+
+**How do I actually implement deep modules in TypeScript?**
+
+The skill does not ship a good answer. People often ask for a `TYPESCRIPT.md` with concrete file and module layouts for the principles, and it does not exist. The skill tells you where a deepening belongs and what goes behind the seam. You must turn that into a package or directory structure yourself.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- The candidates name your domain's concepts, not invented class names: "the Order intake module," not "the FooBarHandler."
+- The candidates are in files you edited recently, not in parts of the repo nobody touches.
+- No code changed during the run. The only new file is the HTML report in your temp directory.
+- It stops after the report and asks which candidate you want. It does not continue on its own.
+- Each card explains the payoff as locality or leverage, and says which tests get simpler, not just "this is cleaner."
+- When you reject a candidate for a lasting reason, it offers to record an ADR, so the next run does not suggest it again.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`improve-codebase-architecture` is **periodic maintenance**. You run it every few days, outside any chain, to queue up work, not to do it. Its neighbours:
+
+- [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design) owns the depth-and-seam vocabulary that every candidate uses.
+- [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) walks the decision tree after you choose a candidate.
+- [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) keeps `GLOSSARY.md` and the ADRs current as you make the decision.
+
+Its output is an idea, which goes back into the main build flow at [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) or [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec). Its counterpart at the end of the main flow is [retro](https://aihero.dev/skills-retro). This skill improves the code the agent works in, and `retro` improves the environment around it (checks, standards, steering files) after a build. For which skill fits a situation, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) is the router over the whole set.

docs/engineering/pr.md

@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+## What it does
+
+`pr` defines the shape of a pull request body: a **Summary** that shows the change, **Evidence** that it works, and a **Merge Danger** call on how risky it is to land. It is a format reference, not a workflow. It does not push a branch, open the PR, or decide what goes into it. It tells the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) what the body should look like when it writes one.
+
+The summary is a visual, not a paragraph. A default PR body describes the diff in prose. This one picks the **smallest view** that makes the key point clear (pseudocode, a call tree, a component tree, a file tree, a Mermaid diagram, or a shaped diff) and keeps the words around it brief. The reviewer already has the diff open, so the body shows them its shape before they read it.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+Type `/pr`, or the agent reaches for it automatically whenever it is writing a PR body.
+
+| Your situation | Reach for |
+| --- | --- |
+| A branch is ready and needs a body a reviewer can scan | `pr` |
+| The code is written but nobody has reviewed it yet | [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) first, then `pr` |
+| The PR is open and review comments are coming back | Nothing in this set yet; `pr` only writes the body |
+
+## The template
+
+Three sections, in this order:
+
+- **Summary**: one or more small visuals, each placed next to the short text it supports. Use one, sometimes several, rarely all of them. Keep only the calls, files, props, and boundaries the reviewer needs.
+- **Evidence**: a before and after. A screenshot is the strongest evidence when the change is visual and the [environment](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/environment) can take one. Otherwise, use the exact test that failed and now passes, written as pseudocode, or the console output that changed.
+- **Merge Danger**: whether the change is a **one-way door** or a **two-way door**, and its **blast radius**. A two-way door is cheap to reverse; a one-way door (a destructive migration, a public API removal, a hard-to-reverse decision) is not. Blast radius names what could break if the change is wrong: layout shift, consumers of an API, mobile responsiveness.
+
+The door call is the leading idea. It changes "is this safe to merge?" from a gut feeling into a stated claim the reviewer can disagree with. It also tells them where to spend their [human review](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/human-review). Skim a two-way door with a small blast radius, and read a one-way door slowly.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**Can I trust the agent's own door call?**
+
+Not blindly, and that is the point of stating it. The agent that wrote the change is the one grading it, so be most suspicious when it says "two-way, small blast radius". The diff also often hides whether a change can be reversed. As one user put it, "rolling back a commit won't unsend a batch of emails", and a flagged rollout stays two-way only until the first write lands in the new format. The skill gives the agent a definition (destructive actions and hard-to-reverse decisions are one-way), not a checklist, so check the Merge Danger line most carefully. Two things help: make sure the agent has the [ticket](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) or [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec) in front of it, not just the diff, and write down the changes your repo always treats as one-way (schema migrations, anything that ships outward or deletes) where the agent will read them before it makes the call.
+
+**Does it open the PR for me?**
+
+No. `pr` covers only the body. [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) ends by committing to the current branch. Requests for a skill or option that opens the PR (a `/to-pr`, or `implement` opening a PR instead of committing) are still open proposals. One user's workaround is a one-sentence local override of `implement` that tells it to open a PR. [implement-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement-spec) is the exception: it opens a draft PR when your issue tracker closes work through PRs or when you ask for one. Because `pr` is model-invoked, the agent uses this shape for the body whenever you ask it to open a PR.
+
+**Won't it just produce another wall of text and diagrams?**
+
+The skill is designed to prevent that, but it can still happen. Users' complaint about agent PR bodies is consistent: "a long summary but all I need to know is what changed, how it was verified, what could break, and whether it's safe to merge." The skill tells the agent to skip preambles, keep prose brief, and pick the smallest view, usually one visual and rarely all of them. If you still get a stack of diagrams, the agent has ignored that. If the body is huge because the diff is huge, the problem is the size of the PR, and `pr` will not split it for you.
+
+**My repo already has a PR template. Which one wins?**
+
+Neither, by default. `pr` has its own template and does not look for `.github/pull_request_template.md` or anything like it. Several users asked for the skill to use the repo's template. If you do nothing, the agent has two competing instructions for the same document. Settle it in your repo's agent docs, for example by filling the repo template and putting Summary, Evidence and Merge Danger under it.
+
+**Is the output HTML? Why doesn't the Mermaid diagram render?**
+
+The output is a markdown PR body, not an HTML page. GitHub and GitLab render Mermaid blocks in a PR description, but a terminal does not, so the diagram looks like raw text while the agent is still showing it to you locally. Users on CLI harnesses have worked around that with an ASCII Mermaid renderer or by having the agent attach an HTML version to the PR. Mermaid is one of six views. A call tree, file tree or shaped diff reads the same everywhere.
+
+**Can it sort through the review comments that come back?**
+
+No. It writes the body and stops. Users have asked more than once for a way to triage comments from other developers or review bots (which are worth acting on, which are non-issues). This skill does not do that.
+
+**Does it keep the body up to date as the PR changes?**
+
+No. It writes the body at one point in time, and a PR that changes under review leaves that body stale. Ask the agent to rewrite the body after a large change. The agent is writing a PR body again, so it uses the same shape.
+
+**My change has no UI. What goes in Evidence?**
+
+Everything except the screenshot. The screenshot is the strongest evidence only when the change is visual. For a migration, a background job or a refactor, the evidence is the exact test that failed before and passes now, or the console output that changed. "Tests are green" on its own is a claim, not a before and after.
+
+**Can it mark the body as written by an LLM?**
+
+Not by itself. One user's approach is a standing instruction in the repo's agent docs that every issue, comment, and PR the agent writes ends with a disclosure line. That rule belongs in the repo, where it covers everything the agent posts, rather than in a template for one kind of document.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- You can tell what the PR changes from the Summary visual alone, before opening the diff.
+- The body has no preamble: it starts at the Summary heading.
+- The Evidence section shows a before and an after, not a claim that tests pass.
+- Every PR states a door and a blast radius, and the one-way doors are the ones you slow down on.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`pr` comes between review and retro when the build ships as a pull request: `to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review → pr → retro`. It is model-invoked, so it also fires on its own any time the agent writes a PR body outside that chain.
+
+- [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) runs before it, because a PR body should describe a diff that has already been reviewed.
+- [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) produces the commits the body describes.
+
+[ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes across the whole set when you are unsure which skill the situation wants.

docs/engineering/prototype.md

@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+## What it does
+
+`prototype` writes **throwaway code that answers a question**: does this state model feel right, or what should this screen look like. The question comes first and decides what you build. A prototype that answers the wrong question is wasted, however good it looks.
+
+Throwaway is a constraint on how the code is *written*, not a promise to destroy it. No tests, no error handling beyond what makes it run, no abstractions, no persistence, because none of that helps you learn the one thing you're trying to learn. Two things survive. The answer goes into the real code, and the prototype goes onto a branch out of main as evidence for the answer.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+Type `/prototype`, or the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) reaches for it automatically when a task fits.
+
+Reach for it the moment you hit a question you can't settle by talking: a state machine whose edge cases you can't hold in your head, a screen you can't picture until you see three versions side by side. [Grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) sessions grow long on these questions. The agent rephrases, you guess, and the scope grows. Stop grilling, build the throwaway version, look at it, then answer in one line. If instead something already built is misbehaving and you want to know why, use [diagnosing-bugs](https://aihero.dev/skills-diagnosing-bugs); prototyping explores what to build, not why the built thing is broken.
+
+You will also arrive here without choosing to. [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) files `prototype` decision [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) on its map, and you work one with this skill.
+
+## Two branches
+
+The question picks the branch, and the branches produce different artifacts:
+
+- **"Does this logic / state model feel right?"**: a **single shareable HTML file**. One self-contained page, no build and no server, that someone opens by double-clicking. It carries a labelled state panel that re-renders after every click, free-play buttons for poking at the model in any order, and tabbed **guided walkthroughs** (one scenario per tab, each with the ordered buttons to press underneath it). Everything is labelled in domain language, so you can hand it to a designer, a PM or a domain expert and let them try the model themselves. The logic behind the page is a small pure module (a reducer, a machine, a set of functions) with no DOM code in it, so you can move the validated version straight into the real code.
+- **"What should this look like?"**: several **radically different** UI variations on one route, switchable from a floating bottom bar and a `?variant=` URL param. Variants must disagree about structure, not colour; three card grids with small tweaks answer nothing. They render inside a real page wherever possible, against real data and real density, because a variant judged on an empty page always looks fine.
+
+Both keep state in memory, start with no setup, and show you the full state after every step. The moment you find yourself hardening one (adding a test, wiring the real database, generalising for a case you might want later), you have stopped prototyping.
+
+## The prototype is a primary source
+
+A finished prototype leaves two things, and they go to different places.
+
+You record the **answer** (the verdict plus the question it settled) somewhere permanent: a commit message, an ADR, the implementation issue. Main keeps the answer, in the real code.
+
+The **prototype** is the runnable evidence the answer came from, and you do not delete it. It doesn't belong in main either, because nobody maintains it and it goes stale fast. So you commit it to a throwaway `prototype/<name>` branch out of main, never merge it, and leave a [context pointer](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-pointer) to that branch on the implementation issue. Main stays clean, and whoever picks the work up next can find and re-run the prototype.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**Wait, isn't the prototype supposed to be deleted?**
+Not any more. It used to be: build it, keep the answer, bin the code. The strongest objection to that was not about speed. It was *who picks up the work next [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session), and what do they have to work from?* A prose summary of a prototype loses the thing that made it convincing. So the skill now treats the prototype as a [primary source](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/primary-source). It lands on a `prototype/<name>` branch out of main and the implementation issue points at it. What changed is where the code lives, not the discipline; it still never merges into main.
+
+**It used to build a terminal app. Where did that go?**
+The logic branch now emits a single shareable HTML file instead. A terminal app can only be driven by someone with the repo cloned and a runtime installed, which rules out the people whose opinion the prototype needs: the designer, the PM, the domain expert who knows what the state model is supposed to mean. One self-contained file that opens by double-click and still works after being emailed can be driven by anyone. The pure logic module underneath is unchanged, and is still the part you move into the real code.
+
+**An agent told me to `/prototype` when I should have been implementing.**
+This is a known naming problem. An agent that does not know the flow reads `prototype`, a generic and appealing word, as "the obvious next step" once tickets exist. So agents recommend it by name even where the design was settled in conversation. If you already know what to build, the next step is `/implement`, per ticket. Reach for a prototype only when a specific design question is unresolved and talking won't resolve it.
+
+**Should I prototype the whole application before building any of its production features (say, to demo it to prospects)?**
+That is a different artifact that happens to share this skill's name. A prototype here is scoped to one question, and "what is the whole app?" isn't one. A full-app prototype has no natural stopping point, so it drifts into being the production app: the cleanup pass never happens, and code written under prototype rules (no tests, no error handling) ends up in front of users. If you need a sales demo, build it as a demo on purpose and be explicit that none of it is production. If you need to settle a design question, cut it down to that question.
+
+**How do I run it in its own session?**
+A prototype lives in its own directory and generates a lot of [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) you don't want in the thread that asked the question, so run it somewhere else and bring back only the answer. Use [handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff) to move the work into that session and to bring the answer back.
+
+**Isn't this the fastest possible way to burn tokens?**
+It can be, if you prototype questions you could have answered by talking, or let one prototype sprawl across a whole feature. The comparison that matters isn't tokens against zero; it's [tokens](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/token) against building the wrong state model and finding out after it has production callers. Keep the question narrow and the run short, and the spend stays proportionate.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- You can say in one sentence what question the prototype exists to answer, and it's written at the top of the demo, not just in your head.
+- Someone who doesn't read code can drive the logic demo. They open the file, press the buttons in a walkthrough tab, and describe what they see in their own words.
+- Someone says "wait, that shouldn't be possible" or "huh, I assumed X". That's a bug in the *idea*, which is what the prototype is for.
+- The UI variants disagree about layout and information hierarchy, not just colour and copy, and the feedback you get is "the header from B with the sidebar from C".
+- It is answered in one sitting. If you're still building it a day later, the question was too big; split it.
+- When it's over, main contains the decision and none of the prototype, and the implementation issue points at the branch that still holds it.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`prototype` is a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone**: you use it to settle one design question, then go back to your work. Another skill also runs it.
+
+The skill that runs it most is [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder). A wayfinder map is made of **decision tickets**, and `prototype` is one of the four types a ticket can be: the one used when the blocking question is "how should this look" or "how should it behave", which no amount of discussion resolves. When a discussion is vague, wayfinder makes something concrete to react to, and this skill builds that thing. The answer resolves a prototype ticket, and the map links to the prototype as an asset.
+
+The other neighbours are upstream and downstream of that. [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me) and [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) answer grillable questions; the ungrillable ones come here instead, and the one-line answer goes back into the interview. Downstream, a validated state model or UI direction becomes settled input for [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), which can inline the decision-rich snippet the prototype produced rather than describing it in prose. For anything else, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you over the whole set.

docs/engineering/research.md

@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+## What it does
+
+`research` answers a question by reading the sources that own the answer, then leaves a cited Markdown file in the repo. It works only from **[primary sources](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/primary-source)**: official docs, source code, specs, first-party APIs. It follows every claim back to the source that owns it, so it will not repeat a blog post's account of an API when the API's own docs are reachable.
+
+It does not answer you in the conversation. The output is a file, written where the repo already keeps such notes, with a link on each claim. You get a document you can react to, hand to another agent, or throw away, rather than an answer that is gone when the [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) ends.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+Type `/research`, or the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) reaches for it automatically when a task turns into reading legwork.
+
+Reach for it when the next step is *finding something out* from outside the working directory (how a third-party API behaves, what a spec says, whether a version claim holds), and you'd rather not stall your own thread doing the reading. What you need decides which skill:
+
+| What you need | Reach for |
+| --- | --- |
+| An external fact a decision is waiting on | `research` |
+| A decision made *with* you, by interview | [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) |
+| A durable architecture decision, written into `GLOSSARY.md` and ADRs | [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) |
+| To find out whether an approach works in your codebase | [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype) |
+| A plan too big to hold in one session | [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) |
+
+The line between `research` and `grill-with-docs` is the **shelf life of what comes back**. Research produces short-lived facts, such as what this library's auth mechanism does as of this week. An ADR records a decision you keep. If what you are producing is a decision rather than a fact, you are [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling), not researching.
+
+## Delegated legwork
+
+The reading runs as a **background agent**. You keep working while it follows each claim to its primary source, writes one Markdown file, and reports back. Research is legwork you delegate, not thinking you outsource. You get a document to grill, plan, or design against, and you still make the decision.
+
+Nothing stops the background agent from spawning another background agent of its own. This is the skill's best-documented problem.
+
+The repo decides where the file goes, not the skill. It follows whatever convention already exists for notes. If there is none, it picks a sensible place and tells you where. It writes one file per run.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**It spawned a second research agent. Is that meant to happen?**
+
+No. This is an open bug, [issue #530](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/530). The skill tells its caller to spin up a background agent but does not restrict the agent type. So the caller spawns a `general-purpose` agent, which has the `Agent` tool and the same instructions, and follows them again. One reporter measured a single research task costing roughly 450k [tokens](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/token) across three overlapping runs, and the duplicate finished half an hour later where the user could not see it. It also happens outside Claude Code. Users confirmed the same nesting in Codex with GPT-5.6-sol. There is no shipped fix. Users have patched their own installed copy with a line telling an agent that is already a [subagent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent) to do the work itself, That helps, but it is only an instruction, not a structural fix. After you invoke the skill, watch your background task list and stop the duplicate.
+
+The opposite failure also happens. If your own global instructions forbid an agent from re-delegating work, the background agent declines the task, and the skill does nothing without telling you.
+
+**Where should the file live, and should I commit it?**
+
+The skill puts the file where the repo already keeps notes and has no further opinion. The community view is mostly settled: keep ADRs, not research files. One Discord thread on this question put it most clearly: "ADRs yes. Everything else archive or delete after done. It otherwise becomes cruft of work and can poison future repo reads if you've drifted away from the spec/research." A research file records what was true on the day it was written, so a stale one is worse than none. On balance, these files don't belong in git, and there is no standard home for them. People use Obsidian, a separate knowledge repo, or the issue tracker instead.
+
+**What counts as a "high-trust" primary source, and who decides?**
+
+The [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) does. The skill names the *kinds* of source that qualify (official docs, source code, specs, first-party APIs), and there is no allowlist, no domain gate, and no verification pass. This was the loudest objection when the skill was first proposed, and nobody has answered it publicly: "Five research subagents pointed at junk just gives you five confident wrong answers faster. How are you gating what counts as high-trust sources?" Your only protection is the citation on each claim. Follow two or three of them. If they land on a summary of the thing rather than the thing, the run failed.
+
+**Does a later session reuse what an earlier run found?**
+
+No. Nothing loads a past research file automatically. The file stays in the repo until a human or a skill points at it. This was the strongest early challenge to the design: "the value's the markdown becoming context the agent re-reads later, not the fetch itself. A write-once dead file is just a fancy search." The shipped skill does not solve it. In practice, the file is useful only when you feed it into the next step yourself: attach it to a spec, quote it into a grilling session, point a [ticket](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) at it.
+
+**Why not just ask the agent to go read the docs?**
+
+You can, and a two-line prompt saying exactly that was the practice this skill replaced. The skill gives you two things the prompt does not. It runs in the background, so your session's [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) stays clean. And the primary-source constraint and the cited-file output are the same every time, rather than depending on how you phrased the prompt. Compared with a [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness)'s own deep-research mode, the difference is the file and the primary-source rule, not the search. If a two-line prompt gets you what you need on a small question, use the two-line prompt.
+
+**When does it stop reading?**
+
+The skill has no stopping criterion. This shows up as two complaints that look opposite but have the same cause: agents that go far too deep, and agents that cover a topic broadly but miss the one detail that mattered. One practitioner put it as "deep-research skills are a bit too deep sometimes. And telling an agent to research usually results in missing crucial details." You have to set the scope. A narrow, answerable question (one API, one behaviour, one version claim) comes back far better than "research X".
+
+**`/wayfinder` created research tickets. Do I resolve those myself?**
+
+No, it now fires them for you. In the unreleased changes since v1.1, a charting session spawns one `/research` subagent per research ticket and runs them in parallel. Each one records its findings on a throwaway `research/<name>` branch, with a [context pointer](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-pointer) from the ticket. Research tickets are the one exception to wayfinder's one-ticket-per-session rule, because they are [AFK](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/afk): nothing waits on you. Those branches have two known problems. Users have seen the subagent open a draft PR from a branch that is never meant to merge ([issue #576](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/576)). And deleting the branch later breaks the context pointers in the tickets.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- Your own session keeps going. If you are sitting watching it read, the delegation didn't happen.
+- Exactly one new background task appears. A second one with a near-identical name is the nesting bug.
+- One new Markdown file shows up, in the folder the repo already uses for notes, and the agent tells you the path.
+- Every claim in it carries a link, and following two at random lands you on an official doc, a spec, or the source file itself, not on someone's write-up of it.
+- You can make the decision you were stuck on from the file alone, without going back to the sources yourself.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`research` is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone. It feeds the thinking skills and is not a step in the build chain. You take its file *into* the flow. [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) and [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) ask sharper questions when they already have the facts, and [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) can synthesise against it. [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) is the one skill that invokes it directly. It resolves each research ticket on its map with a `/research` subagent. For the whole map, see [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt).

docs/engineering/resolving-merge-conflicts.md

@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+> **Archived.** This skill was removed from the plugin in v1.3.0 and is no longer maintained. Nothing replaces it: the agent works through a merge or rebase conflict without a dedicated skill. The page stays up for reference.
+
+## What it does
+
+`resolving-merge-conflicts` works through an in-progress git merge or rebase, hunk by hunk, then runs the project's own checks and finishes the operation with a commit.
+
+It refuses to treat a conflict as a text problem. Before touching a hunk it traces each side back to its **[primary source](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/primary-source)** (the commit message, the PR, the original issue), so it is choosing between two intents rather than between two blocks of text, and it preserves both wherever they are compatible. Where they are not, it picks the side matching the merge's stated goal and names the trade-off. It invents no new behaviour to hide a clash, and it never uses `--abort`. It always takes the merge to a finished commit.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+Type `/resolving-merge-conflicts`, or the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) reaches for it automatically when a task fits.
+
+Reach for it when git has already stopped on conflicts it could not resolve itself. It is scoped to the conflict in front of you, not to anything either side of it:
+
+| Your situation | Skill |
+| --- | --- |
+| Mid-merge or mid-rebase, conflict markers in the tree | This one |
+| Merge finished, something now misbehaves for reasons you can't see | [diagnosing-bugs](https://aihero.dev/skills-diagnosing-bugs) |
+| Planning how to slice work so branches collide less | Neither: see the parallel-work question below |
+
+## Primary sources over `ours` and `theirs`
+
+The skill exists to prevent resolving by flag: `--ours`, `--theirs`, or hand-deleting whichever block looks less important, so the markers go away and the build compiles. That resolution can be syntactically perfect and still silently drop a change somebody made on purpose.
+
+You cannot preserve an intent you have not read. So the work starts in the history (commits, PRs, [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket)) and only then moves to the diff. The check step exists for the same reason. The skill finds the repo's own [automated checks](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/automated-check) and runs them before committing, because a merge is the easiest place in git to produce code that satisfies both branches and passes neither's tests.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**Claude Code already resolves conflicts pretty well on its own. Why does this need a skill?**
+
+The added value is the "find the primary sources" and "run feedback loops" steps, which you otherwise have to prompt by hand every time. An unprompted agent will usually produce a plausible resolution from the diff alone and stop there. The skill's value is the two steps it will not let the agent skip: reading why each side exists, and running the checks afterwards. That is a small gain over a good [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model), and that is intended. At least one reader has predicted this is a whole skill that becomes a no-op as models improve.
+
+**Should I keep parallel agents off the same files to avoid conflicts in the first place?**
+
+Mostly no. Zoning files off between parallel tasks costs more than it saves, because agents are good enough at merge conflicts that the tradeoff is not as harsh as it looks. The one piece of discipline worth keeping is to do large refactors first. A large rename landing after ten branches have forked off it is the case that stays expensive.
+
+One caveat from a user report on parallel worktrees: when sibling [sessions](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) each build a ticket in their own tree, the merge back is best done by the session that wrote the change, because it is the one that already knows the intent. If one agent resolves everybody's conflicts at the end, it loses the [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) that step 2 of this skill must then rebuild.
+
+**Why never `--abort`?**
+
+Aborting throws away the resolution work and returns you to the same conflict, unchanged, the next time you try. The skill is written for the case where the merge is going to happen. If you have decided it should not happen, that is a decision to make before invoking, not a branch inside the loop.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- The agent quotes commit messages, PRs or issues at you while resolving, not just diff hunks.
+- Every hunk ends up with both sides' behaviour, or with an explicit note naming what was dropped and why.
+- Nothing appears in the result that was on neither branch.
+- The agent found typecheck, tests and format and ran them green *before* the commit, not after you noticed something broken.
+- You end on a clean tree with the operation completed, including every remaining commit in a multi-commit rebase.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+A reach-for-it-anytime standalone with no dependencies on any other skill: it starts when git stalls and ends when the tree is clean and committed. Its only real neighbour is [diagnosing-bugs](https://aihero.dev/skills-diagnosing-bugs), which takes over at the point where a merge resolved cleanly but the merged code misbehaves: a diagnosis problem, not a conflict one. It is outside the main idea-to-ship flow, so [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) is the map for what runs before and after it.

docs/engineering/retro.md

@@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
+## What it does
+
+`retro` looks back over a coding [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) and suggests improvements to the agent's **[environment](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/environment)**, so the next run goes better. It reads the session's own record (the current one by default, or one you point it at in the session logs). It finds the moments where the agent struggled, and gives you a list of candidate fixes, most severe first.
+
+It changes the environment, not the code. Take the bug the agent shipped, the file it needed twenty [tool calls](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/tool-call) to find, or the rule the reviewer missed. `retro` does not fix any of them directly. It asks what in the repo let them happen, and proposes the check, pointer, or standard that prevents them next time. It also only proposes. Nothing changes until you pick a candidate.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You invoke this by typing `/retro`, and the agent won't reach for it on its own.
+
+Reach for it at the end of a session that was harder than it should have been. For example, the agent searched too long for something, made a mistake a tool could have caught, or needed information it could not get. A smooth session has little to teach, and the findings come from the difficult ones. If you want a verdict on the code the session produced, use [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) instead.
+
+## Where the findings land
+
+Each candidate belongs to one category, and the category decides where the fix goes:
+
+| What went wrong in the session | Fix it with |
+| --- | --- |
+| The agent took a long time to find a file or fact | A **navigation pointer** from a file it already reads |
+| It made a mistake a tool could have caught | An **[automated check](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/automated-check)**: lint rule, type, test, pre-commit hook, CI job |
+| The reviewer missed a judgement-call mistake | A rule in `CODING_STANDARDS.md` for the reviewer agent |
+| `AGENTS.md` or `CLAUDE.md` is large | Move its steering out, into standards or checks |
+| A tool call was expensive for what it returned | Streamline the tool, or replace it |
+| A steering file is full of lines that change nothing | Delete the **no-ops** |
+| The agent needed information it couldn't reach | Widen its access: tee the dev server log to a file, give read-only access to a service |
+
+The leading idea is that standards belong to the **reviewer**, not the implementer. The implementing agent has the most context pressure, because it explores, writes code, and debugs failures. The reviewing agent gets a diff and nothing else. So a new rule goes where there is room to apply it, which is review. It never goes in [AGENTS.md](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agents-md), which loads into every session's [context window](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-window) whether it is relevant or not.
+
+Before `retro` writes any rule, it classifies the violation. A **mechanical** violation (a banned API, an import shape, a file-location rule) gets a deterministic check, because a check can fail and a sentence in a standards file can't. Only real judgement calls, which no linter can enforce, become prose. If the repo has no guardrail at all (no pre-commit hook, and no CI job that runs lint, typecheck, and tests), `retro` reports that as a finding of its own.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**Does it write the lint rule itself, or wait for a yes? Can I wire it to run after every session?**
+
+It waits. `retro` only proposes. Nothing changes until you pick a candidate, so it edits nothing by hand and installs no hook automatically. This is deliberate. One user asked for exactly this after being "burned by auto-hooks that blocked good changes." It takes judgement to decide what deserves a permanent check, so the skill stays [human-in-the-loop](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/human-in-the-loop) and user-invoked. Some users do run it after every implementation run. But a smooth session has little to teach, so a run after every session mostly produces rules nobody needed. There is no dry-run mode. A proposed check is code like any other, so try it against the repo before you let it block merges.
+
+**Won't this pile up lint rules forever? Does it ever suggest removing one?**
+
+Partly, and this is its weakest spot. It can remove prose: no-ops in steering files, and steering in `AGENTS.md` or `CLAUDE.md` that belongs in standards or a check. It flags these for deletion when the files are large. It judges them against the one session it reads, so treat each one as a candidate for the deletion test, not a verdict. It does not audit the lint rules, hooks, or CI jobs it proposed last month. It sees one session, so it cannot tell you that a rule now fires too often or that the bug behind it is gone. You must still prune checks yourself. A rule that fires constantly on good code is the sign to remove it.
+
+**Won't it just invent generic advice to fill its categories?**
+
+This is the strongest criticism of it. One user found that "once the job is finished, the AI tends to forget the struggles from the middle of the session and invents generic advice to satisfy the retro categories." Every candidate must come from the session's own record, so the advice is specific to that session. This has a cost as well as a benefit. It rarely invents something irrelevant, but it can give too much weight to whatever this one session was about. Discard any candidate you can't trace to a specific moment. Treat the severity order as a first draft too, because a quiet, expensive mistake can rank below a loud, cheap one.
+
+**My session is long. Run it now, or start fresh?**
+
+By default it reviews the current session. That is the best case, because the struggles are still in the context window. If the session has already moved out of the [smart zone](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/smart-zone), [clear](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/clearing) it, and point a fresh `/retro` at the previous session in the session logs.
+
+**The agent keeps making the same mistake. Should I add a line to `CLAUDE.md`?**
+
+Usually not, and `retro` pushes back on this more than anything else. A line in `CLAUDE.md` loads into every session, gives less weight to everything else in the file, and goes out of date as the code changes. If the mistake is mechanical, the fix is a check that fails. If it is a judgement call, it goes in the coding standards the reviewer reads. `AGENTS.md` and `CLAUDE.md` are for navigation pointers and little else. For the same reason, `retro` is not a [memory system](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/memory-system). It does not store what happened. It changes the environment so the mistake cannot happen again.
+
+**My setup mentions `CODING_STANDARDS.md` and I don't have one. Where does it come from?**
+
+No skill ships the file. The first time a session finds a judgement-call rule for the reviewer, `retro` proposes to create it. After you accept, [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) reads it. Any other standards doc you already keep, such as `CONTRIBUTING.md`, works the same way.
+
+**How is it different from `improve-codebase-architecture`?**
+
+The input is different. [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) needs only the code, and looks for structural improvements to it. `retro` needs a session history, and improves the environment the agent works in, not the code. You use both; neither replaces the other.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- Every candidate points back to a specific moment in the session, not a generic best practice.
+- Repeat mistakes turn into failing checks, and your `AGENTS.md` gets shorter over time, not longer.
+- If a check already existed but was not connected, the finding is to connect it, not a proposal to build a new one.
+- The next session on the same kind of task finds what it needs faster.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`retro` is the last step of the main chain, where you review how the chain went:
+
+```txt
+grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review → retro
+```
+
+Run it after a build worth learning from, in the same session or pointed at that session's log. You can skip it after a smooth build.
+
+- [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) is the reviewer agent that `retro` most often tunes. New coding standards go where its Standards axis reads them.
+- [writing-for-agents](https://aihero.dev/skills-writing-for-agents) sets the writing style for every steering file and skill that `retro` proposes, and `retro` loads it before it starts.
+
+[ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes across the whole set when you are unsure which skill the situation needs.

docs/engineering/setup-matt-pocock-skills.md

@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+## What it does
+
+`setup-matt-pocock-skills` answers three questions about one repo: where issues live, what the triage labels are called, and where the domain docs sit. It records the answers as markdown files under `docs/agents/`.
+
+Those files are the only thing that varies between repos. The skills themselves are identical everywhere. They read `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` at run time and do what it says. That is why the set is not tied to GitHub, and why you never edit a skill file to point it at another tracker. Invoking it with "link the skills to a custom issue tracker" works with anything you can connect to programmatically, with no changes to the skills.
+
+It is a prompt-driven skill, not a deterministic script. It reads your `git remote`, `CLAUDE.md` and `GLOSSARY.md`, proposes what it found, and waits for you to confirm before it writes anything.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You invoke this by typing `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`; the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) won't reach for it on its own. Its metadata marks it non-invokable on purpose, so no other skill can fire it for you.
+
+Reach for it once per repo, before the first use of any other engineering skill. If [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage), [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) or [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) start guessing where your issues go, or apply labels your tracker doesn't have, this repo has not been set up yet. You can run it in a repo halfway through a project. The skill reads what is already there, so no earlier work is lost.
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+It writes into the repo you run it in:
+
+| It writes | Where |
+| --- | --- |
+| `issue-tracker.md` | `docs/agents/` |
+| `domain.md` | `docs/agents/` |
+| `triage-labels.md` | `docs/agents/`, only when the `triage` skill is installed |
+| An `## Agent skills` block | whichever of `CLAUDE.md` or `AGENTS.md` already exists |
+
+You commit all of it as markdown. There is no user-level or global mode. The config lives in the repo, so every repo gets its own copy.
+
+## The three decisions
+
+It starts each section with the recommended answer, and skips any question its exploration already answered. Most runs need only two confirmations.
+
+| Decision | What it proposes | When it asks |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+| **Issue tracker** | the one matching your `git remote` | always, because this is the one real choice |
+| **Triage labels** | keep the five canonical names (`needs-triage`, `needs-info`, `ready-for-agent`, `ready-for-human`, `wontfix`) | only if the `triage` skill is installed |
+| **Domain docs** | single-context: one `GLOSSARY.md` plus `docs/adr/` at the root | only if it spots monorepo signals, and then it offers a multi-context `GLOSSARY-MAP.md` |
+
+The tracker options:
+
+| Option | Where issues live | Needs |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+| **GitHub** | the repo's GitHub Issues | the `gh` CLI |
+| **GitLab** | the repo's GitLab Issues | the `glab` CLI |
+| **Local markdown** | files under `.scratch/<feature>/` in this repo | nothing, not even a remote |
+| **Other** | wherever you say | one paragraph from you describing the workflow |
+
+The first three ship as templates in the skill and work out of the box. Local markdown is a full option, not a fallback. The skill supports a solo project with no remote. One caveat: don't use local markdown if you use GitHub. They are alternatives, so pick one.
+
+"Other" is a full option too. It is how Jira, Linear, Azure DevOps and Beads all work. You describe the workflow, the skill records your prose in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`, and the downstream skills follow the prose. Users have already built this: a Jira-over-[MCP](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/mcp) variant, a Gitea CLI shaped like `gh`, a hand-built local dashboard.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**Do I have to use GitHub?**
+
+No. GitHub, GitLab and local markdown under `.scratch/` all ship as ready-made templates, and anything else works through the "other" path. This is the most-repeated question, in roughly these words: *"hard locked to github"*, *"can I use GitLab / Jira"*, *"what about Azure DevOps"*. The answer is always the same: setup chooses the tracker, not the skill.
+
+**Do I need to re-run it after updating the skills?**
+
+The direct answer after v1.1 was yes. The skill's own closing message is softer. It tells you to re-run only to switch trackers or start over. Both are defensible. The seed templates change between versions, so a `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` from an older release can go out of date against the skills that now read it. If a downstream skill does something different from what the docs describe, re-run setup. It is cheap.
+
+**It wrote to `CLAUDE.md`, but I'm on Codex.**
+
+This is a known gap, and still open. The file-selection rule is "edit `CLAUDE.md` if it exists, else `AGENTS.md`". It checks which file exists, not which [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness) is running. In a repo with a `CLAUDE.md` left over from Claude Code, the skill writes its `## Agent skills` block to a file Codex never reads. Users have two workarounds: move the block to `AGENTS.md` by hand, or keep `AGENTS.md` canonical and make `CLAUDE.md` a one-line pointer at it. If neither file exists, the skill asks you which to create instead of picking one. This has confused people who expected it to decide.
+
+**It didn't create my triage labels.**
+
+It doesn't. `docs/agents/triage-labels.md` is a *mapping*: it tells `/triage` which strings in your tracker correspond to the five canonical roles. It does not run `gh label create`. On a fresh GitHub repo the labels do not exist yet, and users have filed this as a bug more than once. Two consequences:
+
+- If your tracker already uses the canonical names, the mapping is an identity table and there is nothing to configure. That is the intended common case, not a missing step.
+- This skill does not create [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder)'s `wayfinder:map` and `wayfinder:<type>` labels either, and `gh issue create --label <missing>` fails instead of creating the label. Create them by hand before the first wayfinder run on a GitHub repo.
+
+**Can I configure the other skills' behaviour here ([grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) cadence, question format, tone)?**
+
+No. It configures three things: tracker, labels, doc layout. Users have asked to make it the place for per-user preferences. The answer is that skills stay opinionated and take no per-user config. Preferences belong in your `CLAUDE.md` as plain instructions, which every skill already reads.
+
+**Can I keep the config in `~/.claude` instead of committing it to every repo?**
+
+Not today. A user who runs the skills across many repos has an open request for this, but no user-level mode exists. Every repo carries its own `docs/agents/`.
+
+**Isn't it strange to have a skill that configures the other skills?**
+
+One long-standing complaint says yes, in these words: *"having a skill to set up the other skill does not feel right to me: that means the LLM is configuring its own skills."* The trade-off is real. Without a setup step, every skill that touches issues would need its own copy of the tracker instructions. The output is markdown you can read and edit, and that limits the risk. You can read every file it wrote and change it by hand. Make day-to-day changes that way, not with another run.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` and `docs/agents/domain.md` exist, plus `triage-labels.md` if `triage` is installed.
+- An `## Agent skills` section appears in the instruction file your harness reads, with a one-line summary pointing at each of those files.
+- The tracker it proposed matches the remote you use, and the label strings match labels that exist in your tracker.
+- Afterwards, `/to-tickets` publishes without asking you where issues live, and `/triage` applies labels rather than inventing them.
+- Nothing in the skill files themselves changed. If setup edited a `SKILL.md`, something went wrong.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`setup-matt-pocock-skills` is the **run-once setup** for the engineering flow, the precondition everything else assumes rather than a step in the chain. Its neighbours are its readers: [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage), which applies the label vocabulary written here; [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) and [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets), which publish into the tracker named here; and [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder), which reads the "Wayfinding operations" section of the same tracker file to learn how to store maps and child [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket). [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) later fills in the domain-doc layout that setup records. It creates `GLOSSARY.md` and ADRs only when you resolve a term or decision, so a repo with no domain docs after setup is normal. For which skill to reach for next, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes the whole set.

docs/engineering/tdd.md

@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+## What it does
+
+`tdd` builds a feature or fixes a bug test-first: one failing test, then just enough code to pass it, then the next behaviour. It carries the standards that make that loop produce tests worth keeping: what a good test is, where tests go, what mocks are for, and the three anti-patterns that make a suite worthless.
+
+It writes no test at a seam you have not agreed to first. Before any test exists, it names the public boundaries it intends to test at and stops for your confirmation. Testing effort is finite, and this step spends it on the critical paths instead of on every edge case. `tdd` is also a **reference**, not a driver. It contains the rules of the loop, and something else (you, or [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement)) runs the [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) that applies them.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+Type `/tdd`, or the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) reaches for it automatically when a task fits: building a feature or fixing a bug test-first, or when you say "red-green-refactor".
+
+Reach for it when there is a concrete behaviour to build, with an input and an observable output, and you want tests that survive a refactor.
+
+| Your situation | Where to go |
+| --- | --- |
+| A behaviour with defined inputs and outputs (business logic, a request/response contract, a transformation, validation) | `tdd` |
+| The behaviour isn't pinned down yet | [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), which also agrees the test seams before any code is written |
+| The question is really the shape of the interface, not the tests | [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design) |
+| You have a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec) or [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) and want the whole build run for you | [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement), which drives `tdd` per ticket |
+| Config, wiring, glue, type annotations, straight CRUD delegation | Nothing here fits well; see the open gap below |
+
+That last row is a real gap. The skill decides *where* the seams go, but nothing in it decides *whether* a change is worth the loop at all. If you run it on a change with no independent source of truth to assert against, you get a test that restates the implementation. That is the tautological anti-pattern the skill warns about, reached from the other direction. It is [issue #746](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/746), and it is open. Until it closes, you make that call yourself, or write the rule into your `CLAUDE.md`.
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+[codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design) needs to be installed. `tdd` used to carry its own deep-module and interface-design notes; v1.0 deleted them in favour of the shared skill, and `tdd` now uses its interface-design vocabulary. Nothing else; the skill is [stateless](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/stateless) and writes no files of its own.
+
+## The loop, and the seam it runs at
+
+The skill rests on three terms.
+
+**Red-green.** Write the failing test, then only enough code to pass it. Do not write code for the test after next. There is no refactor phase. The skill dropped it in June 2026 because agents almost never performed it, and because review and implementation work better as separate sessions. Refactoring belongs to [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review).
+
+**Vertical slice.** Write one test at one seam, then the minimal implementation, then repeat. The first cycle is a **tracer bullet** that proves a single path end to end. The opposite is horizontal slicing: all the tests first, then all the code. Tests written in bulk verify *imagined* behaviour. They check the shape of things rather than what a user does, and they commit you to a test structure before you understand the implementation.
+
+**Pre-agreed seam.** A seam is the public boundary you observe behaviour at without reaching inside. The rule has no exceptions. No test goes at an unconfirmed seam. In the full chain the seams are agreed earlier, during [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec): "`/tdd` is told to only work at pre-agreed test seams, `/code-review` checks that only agreed-upon test seams were used." Invoked on its own, `tdd` asks you directly.
+
+The three anti-patterns it is written to prevent:
+
+| Anti-pattern | The tell |
+| --- | --- |
+| Implementation-coupled | The test breaks when you rename an internal function, though behaviour did not change. Mocked internal collaborators, asserted call counts, database queries used to verify instead of the interface. |
+| Tautological | The expected value is computed the way the code computes it, so the test passes by construction. Expected values have to come from somewhere else: a known-good literal, a worked example, the spec. |
+| Horizontal slicing | A batch of tests landed before any implementation. |
+
+Mocks are for system boundaries only: external APIs, time, randomness, sometimes the filesystem or the database. Never mock your own modules.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**Why doesn't it refactor? The description says "red-green-refactor".**
+
+Because the refactor step was removed and the description was not. The removal was deliberate. Agents almost never did the step, and keeping implementation and review in separate sessions works better. Whether the result still counts as TDD by the book matters less than whether the loop produces better code. The mismatch between the trigger phrase and the body is filed as [issue #589](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/589) and is still open, so "red-green-refactor" continues to work as a phrase that fires the skill. What you get is red-green, with refactoring in [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review).
+
+**It asked me to choose a test seam and I had no idea which to pick.**
+
+This is the most-reported friction with the skill ([issue #607](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/607)). The prompt lists candidate seams by name only, with nothing about what each one catches or misses, so you are choosing between labels. There is no fix shipped yet. The practical workaround is to ask the agent for the trade-offs before answering: what does the component-level seam miss that the integration seam catches, and how much slower is it. It is also why the chain agrees seams up front in `to-spec`, where you have the whole feature in view rather than one prompt.
+
+**It wrote the implementation before the test, even though the skill says red first.**
+
+It happens. One user pushed the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) on it and got an unusually honest answer: "I knew the skill said 'one test at a time, watch it fail for the right reason'. I read it. I just defaulted to my normal habit." The skill accepts this. No instruction makes an agent comply 100% of the time, and stricter wording restricts the agent's creativity for little gain. The loop is worth running even when the agent does not follow it strictly, because the results are still better overall. If strict adherence matters for a particular slice, watch the run rather than trusting the skill to enforce it.
+
+**Should it write browser or end-to-end tests first?**
+
+Usually not, and the skill will not stop it. A user reported the agent writing a Playwright test first, then spending a long loop re-running it and concluding the *test* was broken for a feature that did not exist yet. Browser tests are slow enough that the red-green feedback loop stops paying for itself. State in your repo's `CLAUDE.md` that browser tests come after the behaviour works.
+
+**Does `/tdd` replace `/implement`, or the course's `/do-work`?**
+
+No. `/tdd` documents the methodology; `/implement` is a simple work→feedback→commit loop and is the direct stand-in for `/do-work`. The course's single `/do-work` step is now split across `/implement`, `/tdd` and `/code-review`. If you are asking which one to run against a ticket, the answer is almost always `/implement`.
+
+**Where did the deep-modules and interface-design guidance go?**
+
+Into [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design) in v1.0, generalised so several skills share one vocabulary. `refactoring.md` left at the same time; refactoring is now [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review)'s job, and that skill carries the Fowler smell baseline.
+
+**Does it know about my other tickets?**
+
+No. Run against one ticket, it can propose work that belongs to a sibling ticket, because it has no view of the rest of the issue graph ([issue #129](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/129)). This is not `tdd`'s job. Passing the spec alongside the ticket helps; right-sizing the tickets in the first place helps more.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- It stops and names the seams it intends to test at, and waits, before any test file exists.
+- One test appears, goes red, gets just enough code to pass, and only then does the next test appear, not a batch of tests followed by a batch of code.
+- Test names read as capabilities ("user can checkout with valid cart"), not as internals ("checkout calls paymentService.process").
+- Expected values in assertions are literals you can trace to the spec, not values recomputed the way the code computes them.
+- Renaming an internal function breaks nothing in the suite.
+- Mocks appear only at external boundaries (the payment API, the clock) and never around your own modules.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`tdd` runs inside the build step of the main chain; it is not a step of its own:
+
+```txt
+grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review → retro
+```
+
+[to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) agrees the test seams up front, [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) drives `tdd` per ticket, and [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) checks afterwards that only the agreed seams were used, and owns the refactoring `tdd` no longer does. Its other neighbour is [codebase-design](https://aihero.dev/skills-codebase-design), the shared source of the seam and deep-module vocabulary that `tdd` uses. You can also reach for it on its own, whenever there is a concrete behaviour to build and no full spec in play. When you are unsure which skill fits your situation, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/engineering/to-spec.md

@@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
+## What it does
+
+`to-spec` turns the conversation you have just had into a **[spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec)**, and publishes it to your issue tracker as a single issue.
+
+It does not interview you. When you reach for it, the deciding is already done. So it synthesises what is known (from the thread, the codebase, your `GLOSSARY.md` and ADRs) and does not start a new round of questions. The spec records decisions you already made. It is not a place to make new ones.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You invoke this by typing `/to-spec`; the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) won't reach for it on its own.
+
+Reach for it when the build is too big for one agent [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) and must be split across several. That is the whole trigger:
+
+| Where you are | What to run |
+| --- | --- |
+| You haven't decided anything yet | [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) first |
+| Decided, and the work fits one [context window](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-window) | [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement): skip the spec |
+| Decided, and the work spans several sessions | `/to-spec`, then [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) |
+| A [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) map has cleared | `/to-spec #<map_issue>` |
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+`to-spec` publishes the spec as an issue, so [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills) must first configure a tracker and the triage-label vocabulary for this repo. Either kind of tracker works: a real tracker like GitHub, or local markdown files under `.scratch/`, which work with no extra setup.
+
+## The spec is a decision record
+
+The spec exists because context windows end. You settled many things while [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling): the shape of the solution, the choices you argued through, and what you deliberately refused. All of that is in one conversation that you are about to clear. The spec keeps it.
+
+So the spec does not validate or decide anything. It records what you decided, in your project's own vocabulary, so a fresh session can pick up the work without you explaining it again. If the spec states something you never said, that is a defect.
+
+## Seams before prose
+
+Before it writes anything, `to-spec` sketches the **seams** where the feature will be tested, and checks them with you. It prefers existing seams to new ones, and picks the highest seam it can. The ideal number of seams for a change is one.
+
+Other skills use those agreed seams later. [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) works only at seams you agreed in advance. [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review) reviews the diff against the spec, so a seam nobody agreed to shows up as a review finding. Both connections go through this document. That is why you should take the seam conversation seriously here, and not leave it for implementation.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**Where did `/to-prd` go?**
+It is this skill, renamed in v1.1. "Spec" is now the one term used throughout, and the old `to-prd` slug no longer works, so reinstall under the new name. The old vocabulary is replaced by the pair *spec* and *tickets*. The spec is the destination and the decisions that fix it. The [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) are the steps that get there. If you change direction, delete the unfinished tickets and keep the spec.
+
+**Why does the spec get the `ready-for-agent` label? I don't want an agent implementing off it.**
+The label means "no further triage needed": the document is complete enough for an agent to work from. It marks an input, not a work order. But [AFK](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/afk) agents that poll for `ready-for-agent` cannot see that difference. They will try to build the whole spec in one run instead of picking up the ticket slices. This is the most-reported problem with the skill. Until it changes, exclude the parent spec explicitly in your AFK agent's prompt, or remove the label after `/to-tickets` has run.
+
+**Why not go straight from grilling to `/to-tickets` and skip the spec?**
+Often you should. The spec is worth its step only on multi-session work. Its value is that the tickets are disposable and the spec is not. Each ticket is sized for one fresh context window and then gets deleted or closed, while the spec stays as the one place that records the reasoning behind them. On a single-session change, that gives you nothing, and you pay for an extra synthesis step where the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) can drift. Go from grilling to `/implement`.
+
+**I just finished a wayfinder map. What do I feed it?**
+Give it the main map issue, `/to-spec #<map_issue>`, not the individual decision tickets. [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) produces decisions spread across a map, not deliverables. `to-spec` collapses them into one document you can build from. If you loop the map straight into `/implement`, you lose that step.
+
+**Is the spec for me to review, or is it just for the agent?**
+Mostly for the agent, and it reads that way: complete, dense, and full of references. Read the seams and the out-of-scope section. In those two places, a wrong decision is cheapest to catch now and most expensive to find later. People do complain about reading the whole thing, and there is no summary mode. But if the spec surprises you, the grilling was too shallow; the spec is not too long.
+
+**Do I keep the spec frozen once tickets start, or let the agent rewrite it?**
+Nothing keeps it in sync. In practice it is a snapshot of what you knew at that moment, and it goes out of date the first time implementation teaches you something. Treat it as disposable after the work ships. Your `GLOSSARY.md` and ADRs are the files meant to last. If you learn something during implementation that should last, put it there, not in an edited spec.
+
+**My work is a refactor or a module boundary, not a feature. Does the template fit?**
+Less well, and this is a known limitation. The template relies heavily on user stories, which do not fit architectural work. You end up writing stories nobody asked for around decisions that are really about interfaces and invariants. Use the implementation-decisions and testing-decisions sections instead. Record the lasting architectural decisions as ADRs through [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), not in the spec.
+
+**Will it check the tracker for related work, or cite the ADRs it's respecting?**
+No to both. It reads and follows the ADRs for the area it touches, but it does not link them. It also does not search the tracker for overlapping issues before it writes, so a spec can duplicate work that someone already filed, and nothing warns you. If the area is busy, search the tracker yourself first.
+
+**`/to-tickets` couldn't read my spec: it kept truncating.**
+A tracker issue may not return a very large spec in full, and there is no local copy to use instead. To fix this, do not [clear](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/clearing) or [compact](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/compaction) between `/to-spec` and `/to-tickets`. Run them in the same window, and `/to-tickets` never has to fetch the spec again.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- It starts writing instead of asking you a new round of questions.
+- It shows you the seams before it writes, and proposes as few as it can.
+- It uses your project's nouns, not generic product-management boilerplate.
+- You remember making every decision in it. It invented nothing to fill a section.
+- The out-of-scope section lists real things. The things you refused are usually the most useful lines on the page.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`to-spec` is a step in the main build chain, but only on the multi-session branch of it:
+
+```txt
+grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review → retro
+```
+
+Upstream, [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) makes the decisions that this skill only records, and a finished [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) map joins the chain here. Downstream, [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) cuts the spec into tracer-bullet tickets for [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) to build. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/engineering/to-tickets.md

@@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
+## What it does
+
+`to-tickets` takes a plan, a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec), or the conversation you are in, and breaks it into a set of **[tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket)** on your issue tracker. Each ticket declares its **blocking edges**: the other tickets that have to finish before it can start.
+
+Every ticket is a **tracer bullet**: a narrow but complete path through every layer of the change (schema, API, UI, tests) that you can demo on its own as soon as it lands. This is what makes the skill different from the obvious way to split work, which is to cut one layer at a time and integrate at the end. It also sizes each ticket to fit in a single fresh [context window](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-window), because a [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) that has never seen your spec will pick the ticket up.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You invoke this by typing `/to-tickets`. The [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) won't reach for it on its own.
+
+| Where you are | What to run |
+| --- | --- |
+| You have a spec issue and the build spans several sessions | `/to-tickets`, or `/to-tickets #<spec_issue>` |
+| The plan is only in the conversation, never written up | `/to-tickets` reads the thread directly, no spec needed |
+| The whole change fits in one context window | [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement), skip the tickets |
+| Nothing is decided yet | [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), then [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) |
+| A [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) map has cleared | [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) first, to collapse the map, then `/to-tickets` |
+
+Tickets that `to-tickets` produced are agent-ready by construction. Don't run [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage) over them. Triage is for work that arrived from someone else.
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+`to-tickets` publishes into a tracker, so [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills) must have configured one for this repo, along with the triage-label vocabulary. Either kind works: a real tracker like GitHub or Linear, or local markdown files under `.scratch/`, which work with no extra setup.
+
+## Tracer bullets, not layers
+
+A **horizontal** slice ships one layer of the change. Nothing works until every layer has landed, and each ticket's acceptance criteria have to reach into work that another ticket owns. A **vertical** slice (the tracer bullet) ships one thin path through all the layers at once, so it is verifiable alone and owns everything it grades.
+
+This is the rule people break most often. One team ran a 26-ticket stack sliced by layer (corpus, producer, aggregator, selector) and got roughly twenty agent runs per closed ticket, about three quarters of them rework. Their own post-mortem traced every failure class back to the horizontal slicing rather than to the implementations.
+
+Two things happen before anything is published. `to-tickets` looks for prefactoring (the principle "make the change easy, then make the easy change") and orders that work first. Then it presents the breakdown as a numbered list and quizzes you on it: is the granularity right, are the blocking edges real, should anything merge or split. Nothing reaches the tracker until you approve, and that quiz is the place to push back.
+
+## Blocking edges
+
+The edges are the point of the artifact. They work in two ways, depending on the tracker:
+
+| Tracker | Where the edges live | How you work them |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+| Local markdown | Text in one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, numbered blockers-first | Top to bottom, by hand |
+| A real tracker (GitHub, Linear) | Native blocking links, or sub-issues where the tracker has them | Any ticket whose blockers are done is on the **frontier** and can be grabbed |
+
+The edges live in the ticket either way. The tracker only decides whether anything can act on them in parallel. `to-tickets` produces the artifact; running it (one session at a time, or a fleet) is your job, not the skill's.
+
+## The wide-refactor exception
+
+One shape breaks the tracer-bullet rule. A **wide refactor** is a single mechanical change (rename a column, retype a shared symbol) whose **blast radius** covers the whole codebase. One edit breaks thousands of call sites, so no vertical slice can land green.
+
+`to-tickets` sequences that as **expand–contract** instead:
+
+- **Expand**: add the new form beside the old, so nothing breaks.
+- **Migrate**: move call sites over in batches sized by blast radius (per package, per directory), one ticket per batch, each blocked by the expand. CI stays green because the old form still exists.
+- **Contract**: delete the old form once no caller remains, in a ticket blocked by every migrate batch.
+
+Where even the batches can't stay green alone, they share an integration branch and all block a final integrate-and-verify ticket. CI only has to be green at that ticket.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**It produced twelve tickets for a three-line change.**
+Over-decomposition is the most reported problem with this skill, and many users see it. The [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) defaults to atomic units and loses the grouping that would make them meaningful. The quiz step is where you fix this. Ask it to merge tickets, and it will. There is also a lower limit. If the whole change fits in one context window, you don't need this skill at all. Go straight to [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement).
+
+**The tickets came out one per layer: all the schema in one, all the API in another.**
+This is the failure the vertical-slice rule is written against, and the skill still produces it sometimes. Catch it at the quiz step by asking one question per ticket: what can I demo when this is done? A ticket with no answer is a horizontal slice. Some people add a "demo path" line to each ticket for this reason, and report that it pushes the model toward vertical slices.
+
+**On GitHub the tickets weren't created as sub-issues of the spec issue.**
+This is a known bug, and it is not fixed. It has been reported across a dozen runs and several models, [most fully in issue #554](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/554), and it is worse on Codex than on Claude. `gh` has supported this natively since v2.94: `gh issue create --parent <n>`, and `gh issue edit <parent> --add-sub-issue <n>` after the fact. Until the tracker template prefers those, the reliable fix is to add the parent links yourself after a run.
+
+**"Blocked by" was written into the issue body instead of a real blocking link.**
+This is the same kind of problem, [reported in issue #513](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/513), where the agent even stated that GitHub has no native blocking relationship at all. It does: `gh issue create --blocked-by 12,15`. Because the skill publishes blockers first, their numbers are always available at creation time. The body text is meant to be the fallback for trackers with no native edge, not the default.
+
+**Where do the local tickets go? The v1.1 notes said a root-level `tickets.md`.**
+They did, and that was a bug. A single shared file also caused race conditions when parallel agents wrote to it. Local mode now writes one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature-slug>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md`, in dependency order, matching the layout the local tracker template already described. The `NN` prefix is a real ticket ID, so `/implement 03` works instead of retyping a long title.
+
+**It kept truncating when it tried to read my spec.**
+A very large spec can outgrow what a tracker issue serves back cleanly. There is no local copy to fall back on, so the agent spends [tool calls](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/tool-call) fetching chunks again and never reaches the end. Don't [clear](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/clearing) or [compact](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/compaction) between `/to-spec` and `/to-tickets`. Run them in the same context window and the agent never has to fetch the spec back.
+
+**The acceptance criteria graded nothing: some passed before any work was done.**
+The template asks for criteria and says nothing about whether they can fail, so this happens. Three shapes recur: a criterion already true at the base commit, a criterion that only work in another ticket can satisfy, and one that restates the request rather than deriving from the artifact. Vertical slicing prevents most of it, because a slice that delivers new behaviour fails at the base commit by construction. The check is still worth doing by hand. For each criterion, name the observation that would show it false, and confirm it fails at the commit the implementer starts from.
+
+**The tickets are published. How do I actually run them?**
+The skill stops at the artifact, and there is no auto-dispatch mode. Dispatch is manual: look at the board, count the tickets with no open blockers, and open that many agent sessions. Give each ticket a fresh context, and clear between them. [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) does not reliably close or check off the ticket when it finishes, on GitHub or in local markdown, so you update the ticket's state yourself.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- Every ticket has an answer to "what can I demo when this is done?", and the answer is behaviour, not a layer.
+- The list comes back to you numbered, with a "Blocked by" line on each, before anything is published.
+- The ticket at the top has no blockers and can be started immediately.
+- Nothing in a ticket body is a file path or a line number, except a snippet a prototype produced.
+- Each ticket reads like something a fresh session could finish without you in the room.
+- Prefactoring, where it found any, is at the front of the order rather than mixed into feature tickets.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`to-tickets` is a step in the main build chain:
+
+```txt
+grill-with-docs → to-spec → to-tickets → implement → code-review → retro
+```
+
+Upstream is [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), which hands it a settled spec to slice against. Keep both in one context window, with no clear between them. Downstream is [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement), which builds one ticket per fresh session, driving [tdd](https://aihero.dev/skills-tdd) for the tests and closing with [code-review](https://aihero.dev/skills-code-review). [implement-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement-spec) is the other way down. It reads the same blocking edges as a task graph and builds every ready ticket in parallel on one integration branch. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/engineering/triage.md

@@ -0,0 +1,109 @@
+## What it does
+
+`triage` works through the issues on your project's tracker. It moves each one through a small state machine of **triage roles** (a category role and a state role). Each issue ends as an agent-ready brief, a specific question for the reporter, or a closed issue with a recorded reason.
+
+It is only for issues **you didn't create**. That means raw bug reports, incoming feature requests, or an external pull request that arrived unannounced: work that came into the tracker from outside, in whatever shape the reporter left it. [Tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket) from [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) are already agent-ready, so if you run `triage` over them, you waste the work. The rule is simple: `/triage` is only for incoming issues, not for issues you created yourself.
+
+It also differs from labelling by hand because it recommends and then waits. It gives you its category and state call with reasoning, plus what it found in the codebase, and applies nothing until you tell it to.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You invoke this by typing `/triage` and then describing what you want in plain language. The [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) won't reach for it on its own. Examples: "Show me anything that needs my attention", "let's look at #42", "move #42 to ready-for-agent".
+
+| What you have | Where to go |
+| --- | --- |
+| A tracker full of raw reports from other people | `/triage` |
+| A rough idea of your own, nothing written down | [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) |
+| A settled conversation to turn into a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec) | [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) |
+| A spec to split into agent-ready tickets | [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) |
+| A confirmed bug that needs a root cause, not a label | [diagnosing-bugs](https://aihero.dev/skills-diagnosing-bugs) |
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+`triage` reads and writes your issue tracker, so [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills) must first configure that tracker and its label vocabulary. The role names below are **canonical**. The label strings in your tracker may differ, and setup provides the mapping. If your tracker already uses the canonical names exactly, you have nothing to map and nothing to set up.
+
+The tracker config also decides whether external pull requests count as a request surface, and who counts as external. That flag is off by default, and setup no longer asks about it. To bring PRs into scope, turn it on in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`.
+
+## The state machine
+
+Every triaged item ends with exactly one category role and one state role. There are two categories: `bug` (something is broken) and `enhancement` (new feature or improvement). There are five states:
+
+| State | Means |
+| --- | --- |
+| `needs-triage` | You need to evaluate it. An unlabelled issue normally lands here first. |
+| `needs-info` | Waiting on the reporter. Returns to `needs-triage` when they reply. |
+| `ready-for-agent` | Fully specified, with an agent brief attached. An [AFK](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/afk) agent can take it. |
+| `ready-for-human` | The same brief, plus why an agent can't do it: judgment, external access, manual testing. |
+| `wontfix` | Closed, with the reason recorded. |
+
+That is the whole vocabulary. The rule of exactly one state role per item keeps the queries simple. The states are also the most-requested area of the [skill](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/skill). Users have asked for a state for work that is specified but blocked on another issue, a `deferred` state for work that waits on a future trigger, and a terminal `implemented` state. None of those has shipped. See the questions below.
+
+`wontfix` has three cases. The difference matters because only one of them writes to the knowledge base:
+
+| Why you're closing it | What happens |
+| --- | --- |
+| Already implemented | A comment that points to where the feature already lives. Nothing goes into `.out-of-scope/`, because it's a built feature, not a rejected one, and a file there would break the dedup checks. |
+| Rejected bug | Polite explanation, then close. |
+| Rejected enhancement | A file in `.out-of-scope/`, linked from the closing comment, then close. |
+
+`.out-of-scope/` holds one markdown file per rejected **concept**, not per issue. Each file is a short design document, not a database row. It says what was rejected, why, and lists every issue that asked for it. `triage` reads the whole directory before it evaluates anything. It matches by concept, not keyword, so "night theme" matches `dark-mode.md`. When it finds a match, it shows you the old decision and asks if you still agree with it, instead of arguing the request again from the start.
+
+## Verify before you brief
+
+Before any [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling), `triage` checks that the claim holds. For a bug, it reproduces it from the reporter's steps. For a PR, it checks out the branch and runs the relevant tests. Then it reports one of three results:
+
+- Confirmed, with the code path.
+- Failed to reproduce.
+- Not enough detail to try. This is the strongest `needs-info` signal there is.
+
+In the same pass, it runs two more checks against the codebase. The **redundancy** check asks if the feature is already implemented, and searches by domain concept, not by the reporter's wording. The **prior rejection** check asks if `.out-of-scope/` already says no. Both checks are cheap, and a hit on either produces a `wontfix`.
+
+All of this work makes one artifact good: the **agent brief**. This is the structured comment that `triage` posts when an issue moves to `ready-for-agent`. After `triage` posts it, the brief is the contract and the original report is only context. Briefs are **durable** rather than precise, because an issue can sit in `ready-for-agent` for weeks while the code changes. So a brief names types, signatures and behavioural contracts, and never file paths or line numbers. A confirmed reproduction makes a much stronger brief than a guess.
+
+## A PR is an issue with attached code
+
+If the tracker treats external pull requests as a request surface, they go through the same machine, with the same categories, states and transitions. The states apply to the diff. `ready-for-agent` means a brief is attached and an agent should take the next step on the code. `ready-for-human` means a person can merge it. A brief on a PR describes what is left to do to the existing diff, not how to build the thing from nothing.
+
+Discovery shows only *external* PRs, because a collaborator's in-progress branch is not triage work. That filter applies only to discovery. If you name a PR explicitly, `triage` handles it, whoever wrote it. One known problem: the GitHub template's command to list external PRs asks `gh pr list` for an `authorAssociation` field that `gh` does not expose, so the command fails ([#468](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/468)).
+
+## Common questions
+
+**I ran `/to-spec` and `/to-tickets`, and now those tickets are sitting there untriaged. Do I run `/triage` over them?**
+No. They are already agent-ready. `to-tickets` applies the `ready-for-agent` label when it publishes them, so an AFK runner picks them up without another pass. The user who hit this had run the spec flow and seen `needs-triage` on the output, and their AFK runner ignored everything. `triage` is the on-ramp for work that arrives from outside. The spec flow is the lane for work you start yourself. The two meet at `ready-for-agent`, not before.
+
+**Is `triage` still relevant now that there's a `to-spec` → `to-tickets` → `implement` flow?**
+Only if you have inbound work. `triage` is older than that flow and does a different job: it handles reports other people filed. If everything in your tracker came from your own planning, you will rarely use it. If you maintain anything public, or your team files bugs to you, it is where that work starts. The main use is open-source repos that take issues from external contributors.
+
+**The agent tried to apply `ready-for-agent` and `gh` said the label doesn't exist.**
+This is a known open bug ([#616](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/616)). `setup-matt-pocock-skills` writes the label vocabulary into `docs/agents/triage-labels.md`, but does not create the labels in your tracker. Create the five state labels and two category labels yourself, once, with `gh label create` or the tracker's UI, and the error stops. The issue links to a community fix branch that has not been merged.
+
+**Five states aren't enough. What about blocked, or deferred, or implemented?**
+This is the most-filed gap on the skill. It comes in three forms:
+
+- An issue that is fully specified but waits on another issue to close ([#139](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/139)). The reporter said `ready-for-agent` is "technically true" there but misleading, so an agent picks it up and gets stuck.
+- Future work that is intended but waits on a trigger, so it is not actionable yet ([#297](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/297)).
+- A terminal state for "implemented, awaiting verification". Without it, an AFK runner can queue finished tickets again.
+
+The blocked case is accepted as real, but the name is undecided (`blocked` versus `paused`). None of it has shipped. As a workaround, people add a repo-local extra label next to the category. The state slot then holds an accurate value, but the skill does not know about the extra label. One community fork goes further and adds `needs-slicing`, `tracking` and effort labels. That works, but it belongs to that fork, not to the skill.
+
+**How is this different from `/diagnosing-bugs`?**
+The verification step here is shallow on purpose. It answers "is this real, and roughly where does it live", and does not look for a root cause. If a bug does not reproduce from the reporter's steps in a few minutes, use `needs-info`, or use [diagnosing-bugs](https://aihero.dev/skills-diagnosing-bugs) if you want to investigate it now. Neither skill's text mentions the other yet. A user reported that gap, and it is still open.
+
+**Can I point it at my whole backlog and let it run?**
+You can ask, but watch what it reads. The "show what needs attention" pass is a cheap listing for *selection*. You pick one issue, and then `triage` gathers full [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) on that issue. If you run it across twenty issues at once, the agent can use that cheap listing as its only evidence without telling you. The listing returns issue bodies but not comments. One user hit exactly this. Three issues already had a comment that said "already fixed, recommend closing", and all three got new agent briefs instead. For a bulk pass, say explicitly that it must read the comments on each issue.
+
+**Does it work with Linear, or anything other than GitHub Issues?**
+Yes. The tracker is config, not a hard-coded assumption. People run it against Linear (through the `linear` CLI), GitLab, and plain markdown files under `.scratch/`. A common split is Linear for issues and planning, and GitHub for code and PRs. Skills that say "issue tracker" then map to Linear, and skills that say "PR" map to GitHub. The local-markdown tracker has an open template bug: the generated file can contain the acceptance criteria twice, once at the top level and once inside the agent brief ([#200](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/200)).
+
+## It's working if
+
+- Every item it touches ends with exactly one category role and one state role, never zero, and never two conflicting states.
+- It gives you a recommendation with reasoning and stops. It does not relabel the issue and move on.
+- It reproduced the bug, or checked out and ran the PR, before anything reached `ready-for-agent`.
+- The briefs it writes name types and behaviours, and contain no file paths and no line numbers.
+- When a request you rejected six months ago comes back, it tells you and quotes the old reason instead of triaging it again.
+- Every comment it posts starts with `> *This was generated by AI during triage.*`
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`triage` is an **on-ramp**, not a step in the main chain. The main flow starts from an idea you had (grill, spec, tickets, implement, review). `triage` is the parallel lane for work that came from someone else. Both lanes end at the same place: an issue labelled `ready-for-agent` with a brief on it. [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) picks that up the same way it picks up a ticket from [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets). When a request needs more detail before `triage` can brief it, `triage` runs [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) together, one round of questions at a time, so it records decisions in `GLOSSARY.md` and the ADRs as you make them. When you're not sure which lane you are in, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/engineering/wayfinder.md

@@ -0,0 +1,103 @@
+## What it does
+
+`wayfinder` takes an effort too big for one agent [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session). This is an idea whose **destination** you can name but whose route you cannot yet see. Wayfinder charts it as a shared **map** of **decision tickets** on your issue tracker, then resolves the tickets one at a time until the route is clear.
+
+It plans and does not build. Every ticket asks a question, and the answer is a decision, not a slice of a build. The map is finished when nothing is left to decide before someone builds the thing. This rule separates a wayfinder ticket from an ordinary implementation [ticket](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket), and it is the rule agents break most often. When the map clears, wayfinder hands off and does not continue into code.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You invoke this by typing `/wayfinder`; the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) won't reach for it on its own.
+
+It is the heaviest flow in the set, so the trigger is narrow. The effort must be larger than one agent session can hold, and the route to the destination must be unclear. The split is session count: `/grill-with-docs` for single-session planning, `/wayfinder` for multi-session planning.
+
+| What you have in front of you | What to run |
+| --- | --- |
+| A well-scoped feature you can settle in one sitting | [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me), or [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) when there is a codebase |
+| A greenfield project, or a build spanning many sessions, with the route still unclear | `/wayfinder` |
+| A thread where the deciding is already done | [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec): skip straight past the map |
+| A cleared wayfinder map | [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), then [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) and [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement) |
+| An existing session that has already grown too big | say "hand off to `/wayfinder`" ([handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff) bridges into a map as well as out of one) |
+
+Greenfield is not a requirement. People use wayfinder routinely on legacy and half-built codebases, and it can be more useful there, because much of the fog is "what is already true here" rather than "what should we do".
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+The map and its tickets live on the repo's issue tracker, so wayfinder needs the tracker setup from [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills). That step writes a "Wayfinding operations" section. The section describes how to express the map, its child tickets, blocking edges, and frontier queries on GitHub, GitLab, or local markdown. Wayfinder finds that doc through the pointer in your `CLAUDE.md` / `AGENTS.md`, not at a fixed path. With no tracker configured, it falls back to local markdown files.
+
+The tracker does real work. Its native blocking links show the frontier in the tracker's own UI. On a tracker without native dependency links (a self-hosted Gitea, say), wayfinder infers blockers from the map text. That works, but you must supervise it more closely.
+
+## The map, the fog, and the frontier
+
+The **map** is a single issue labelled `wayfinder:map`, and its tickets are its child issues. It is an **index, not a store**. A decision lives in exactly one place, its ticket, and the map only gives a one-line summary and a link. A session loads the map at low resolution and opens individual tickets when it needs them. This lets a map keep growing without every session loading its whole history.
+
+The map has four sections:
+
+- **Destination.** What the end of this map looks like. You name it first, before any ticket exists, because the destination fixes the scope you measure every ticket against.
+- **Decisions so far.** One line per closed ticket, each with a link to where the detail lives.
+- **Not yet specified.** This is the **fog of war**: decisions you can tell are coming but cannot yet phrase sharply. The test for fog versus ticket is whether you can state the question precisely *now*, not whether you can answer it. When you resolve a ticket, the fog ahead of it clears, and anything you can now specify graduates into a new ticket.
+- **Out of scope.** Work beyond the destination. Fog only gathers *toward* the destination, so out-of-scope work stays closed and never graduates.
+
+The **frontier** is the set of open, unblocked, unclaimed tickets (the edge of the known). A session claims a ticket by assigning it to itself before it does any work. The assignee *is* the claim, so concurrent sessions skip that ticket. Sessions refer to tickets by name, never by a bare `#42`, because a wall of issue numbers is hard to read in narration.
+
+## The four decision-ticket types
+
+Every ticket carries a `wayfinder:<type>` label. Each ticket is either **[HITL](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/human-in-the-loop)** (worked with a human who speaks for themselves) or **[AFK](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/afk)** (driven by the agent alone). A HITL ticket resolves only through the live exchange. An agent that answers its own [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) questions has broken it.
+
+| Type | Mode | Reach for it when | Resolved by |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- |
+| `grilling` | HITL | The default. The question can be settled by talking it through. | [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) plus [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling), in a fresh session |
+| `prototype` | HITL | "How should this look" or "how should this behave": a question talking cannot settle. | [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype), with a link from the ticket to the built artifact |
+| `research` | AFK | A fact outside the working directory is blocking a decision. | A [research](https://aihero.dev/skills-research) [subagent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent), started when you chart the map and run in parallel on a `research/<name>` branch |
+| `task` | Either | Nothing to decide, but manual work blocks a decision, such as provisioning access, signing up for a service, or moving data so you can see its shape. | The agent alone where it can, otherwise a precise checklist for the human |
+
+`task` is the only type that *does* rather than decides. It belongs on the map only because it unblocks a decision, never because it delivers part of the destination. This type goes wrong most often in practice. Agents read it as an implementation step and start to write product code inside the map.
+
+Research is the only exception to *one ticket per session*.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**How is this different from `/grill-with-docs`? Which should I start with?**
+Session count, not project size. `/grill-with-docs` is single-session planning; wayfinder is multi-session planning. If you can hold the whole thing in one conversation, grilling is cheaper and better, and wayfinder is slower and denser for that case. The community shorthand is that wayfinder only makes sense if the work does not fit into a single session. This is by far the most-asked wayfinder question. People keep asking it because the skill descriptions do not tell you where your own task sits on that line. You have to judge the session count yourself.
+
+**When it asks for the "destination", does it mean the end of this session or the end of everything?**
+The end of the whole map, not just the first session. The question reads ambiguously, but wayfinder is a multi-session tool by definition, so a session-scoped answer never makes sense. Typical destinations are a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec) to hand off, a decision to lock before planning starts, a proof of concept, or an in-place change such as a data migration.
+
+**The map is cleared. Didn't wayfinder already write the spec and make the tickets? Why do I still need `/to-spec` and `/to-tickets`?**
+No. Wayfinder's tickets are decision tickets, and by the time the map closes they are all closed too. What is left is a map full of linked decisions, which is not a build plan. [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) collapses those linked decisions into one spec (`/to-spec #<map_issue>`), and [to-tickets](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-tickets) slices that spec into tracer-bullet implementation tickets. If you loop the map straight into [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement), you skip the collapse and lose the linked detail. Go straight to implementation only when the effort turned out small. Some people run the shorter pipeline and report that it works. The two extra steps give you an explicit spec that a reviewer or a colleague can read, which matters more when you do not work alone.
+
+**My agent started writing production code in the middle of a wayfinder session.**
+This is the most-reported failure with this skill, and a real gap in the skill causes it. You can override wayfinder's "plan, don't do" default in the map's **Notes**. But the agent writes the Notes, so the constraint and its exemption live in a file that the constrained agent owns. One user watched an agent write "this map carries execution" into its own Notes. In later sessions the agent read that line back as permission and built on a live server. The skill has no hard stop for "I meant the default." Until it does, read the Notes on any map you did not chart yourself, keep implementation in separate sessions, and treat any `wayfinder:task` that looks like a slice of the build as mis-typed.
+
+**I charted 27 tickets, and by the time I got to the thirteenth, the rest no longer made sense.**
+This question is verbatim from a user report, and others report the same outcome. By default, wayfinder plans comprehensively. When later tickets rest on assumptions that earlier tickets invalidate, the map falls into the waterfall trap that critics accuse the skill of. Two things help. First, scope the map to a bounded destination, not to the whole product. Users report that maps scoped to one defined epic behave better than a sprawling "implement V1". The goal is to ship small increments, not to plan something very big. Second, [prototype](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/prototyping) aggressively. The route stays current because cheap concrete artifacts expose uncertainty before implementation depends on it. Wayfinder is "prototypemaxxing", not "planmaxxing".
+
+**Can I work several tickets in parallel?**
+The frontier shows you which tickets you can take, and blocking edges make parallel work safe on paper. In practice, one ticket at a time is the safer default. If you work two grilling tickets at once, one session can ask you a question you just answered in the other, because the sessions share no [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context). Prototype tickets have a known gap too. One user reported an agent that built three UI variations, chose one itself, and closed the ticket. That choice is yours, and the skill does not yet say so clearly enough. If you do run tickets in parallel, review the dependency graph yourself first.
+
+**Do I have to use GitHub Issues?**
+No. Any issue tracker works. GitHub has the best support, because its native sub-issues and blocking relationships make the frontier visible without opening the map. People also use GitLab, Linear, Jira and local markdown. There are two caveats. On a tracker with no native blocking, wayfinder infers the dependency graph from text, and you must correct it by hand. Local markdown puts the artifacts in your repo, which is not recommended, because material stored in the repo tends to persist by accident. Open-source maintainers hit the opposite problem (public trackers fill up with agent-generated planning tickets) and often choose local markdown anyway.
+
+**The grilling is exhausting. Every question is three paragraphs long.**
+This is the sharpest open complaint about wayfinder, and nobody has fixed it yet. One user broke it down this way: the verbosity itself causes decision exhaustion, and the length hides *why* the agent asks a question, so you lose the chain from decision to decision as the map grows. The verbosity looks like a property of the current set of [models](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) rather than of the skill. Users try two mitigations: a lower [reasoning effort](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/effort), and a plain-language instruction in your global `CLAUDE.md`. Expect to think hard here anyway. Wayfinder demands a lot of thinking from you, and that is most of its purpose, not a defect.
+
+**A decision I already closed turned out to be wrong. Do I edit the old ticket or make a new one?**
+There is no official guidance, and the agent's default is unhelpful. It tends to design around the bad decision instead of challenging it, so you must steer it yourself. What works is to tell wayfinder plainly what changed. It then updates the map, revises the affected tickets, and comments on the closed ones. You can recover from scope changes mid-map. But if you *designed* a map to change, that is a sign the scope is wrong.
+
+**Where did `decision-mapping` go?**
+It is this skill. v1.1 renamed it to `wayfinder`, and you invoke it as `/wayfinder`. "Decision map" was jargon, and it was also inaccurate, because only one of the four ticket types is a decision by itself. The new name gave the skill one consistent vocabulary (destination, fog of war, frontier, the map) instead of an invented term on top. The unit kept the word "decision": a wayfinder ticket is a **decision ticket**, so that people do not read it as an implementation ticket.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- The destination is written down and agreed before a single ticket exists.
+- Every open ticket reads as a question. Any ticket that reads "build the X" is either mis-typed or belongs downstream of the map.
+- You can look at your tracker and see which tickets are takeable without opening the map, because native blocking shows the frontier.
+- A session resolves one ticket, posts the answer as a resolution comment, closes it, and adds one line to the map's *Decisions so far*. Then it stops.
+- **Not yet specified** shrinks over time. When fog graduates into a ticket, it leaves that section and does not appear in both places.
+- When the opening breadth-first grill finds no fog at all, the skill stops and tells you the effort is small enough to skip the map.
+- The session that finishes the map points you toward a spec, not a pull request.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`wayfinder` is a **situational on-ramp**, not the default starting point. Most work still starts on the grill-led idea → ship chain. You use wayfinder when the idea is too big to hold in one session. It rejoins that chain at [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), because a cleared map hands off and does not build.
+
+Most of the work happens in other skills that wayfinder schedules. [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) and [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) resolve the default ticket type, [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype) resolves the tickets that talk cannot settle, and [research](https://aihero.dev/skills-research) runs as a subagent so its reading stays out of your session. [handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff) moves work in and out: into a map from a conversation that grew too big, and out of a map when a side quest appears mid-session. For anything else, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes over the whole set.

docs/engineering/wizard.md

@@ -0,0 +1,98 @@
+## What it does
+
+`wizard` generates an interactive bash script that walks a human, step by step, through a manual procedure: wiring up third-party services, running a one-off migration, moving a project from state A to state B. It opens each URL, says what to click and copy, captures what comes back, and writes it into `.env` files and GitHub Actions secrets.
+
+The [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) writes the script; it never runs it. You do, on your own machine. A wizard is a program, not a list of instructions. The script runs each step in order and keeps the values you enter. Your part is to click, paste, and press Enter.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You can type `/wizard`, and the agent can also reach for it on its own. When it hits a step you have to take (a key it can't mint, a dashboard it can't click), it builds you a wizard instead of writing the instructions into the chat, where they scroll away.
+
+Reach for it when the next thing blocking you is a trip through a dashboard:
+
+| Situation | What the wizard does |
+| --- | --- |
+| A new dev needs six services configured before the app boots | Opens each dashboard in order, captures the keys, writes them to `.env` and CI |
+| A one-off migration needs switches flipped in a specific order | Sequences the irreversible steps behind confirmation gates |
+| A project has to move from state A to state B once | Walks the transition and reports what it could not do |
+| You are about to write those steps into a README | Writes an executable version instead, which fails visibly when a step goes stale |
+
+Don't reach for it to *decide* what to build; for that, [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) and [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) are the tools.
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+None to generate one. The wizard it writes runs on bash, and uses `gh` when a stage sets a GitHub secret or variable. If `gh` is missing or not authenticated, the run does not fail. That stage shows a warning, and the closing summary tells you what to set by hand.
+
+## Stages
+
+A **stage** is one focused task on one screen. The script clears the terminal between stages, so a stage that overflows the screen loses the part that scrolled away. You author stages in dependency order and set `TOTAL_STAGES`, which drives the progress display.
+
+The [skill](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/skill) scopes the procedure before it writes any script. It reads the repo instead of asking cold: `.env*`, `docker-compose*`, framework config, and every `secrets.*` / `vars.*` reference in `.github/workflows/`. Each of those references is a value the wizard has to produce. It then shows you the ordered stage list to confirm. Only after you confirm does it map each stage to the exact path a human follows ("Dashboard → Developers → API keys → Reveal test key → copy"). Where it doesn't know the current UI, it asks you or checks the docs rather than inventing clicks.
+
+For each captured value, scoping decides where it goes:
+
+| Destination | When |
+| --- | --- |
+| `.env` only | Local dev needs it, CI doesn't |
+| GitHub secret | CI reads it, and it's sensitive |
+| GitHub variable | CI reads it, and it's public |
+| Both `.env` and a secret | Local dev and CI both need it |
+| Nowhere | The stage is a pure action: a switch flipped, a plan upgraded |
+
+## The template already solves the UX
+
+The [template](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/blob/main/skills/engineering/wizard/template.sh) ships the whole experience: progress with time remaining, confirmation gates, cross-platform URL opening including WSL, hidden entry for secrets, idempotent `.env` upserts, `gh secret` / `gh variable` writes, and a closing summary of everything it had to skip. Everything above the `STAGES` marker is a fixed library, identical in every wizard and never hand-edited. Because the library never changes, every wizard behaves the same way. The only work per wizard is to scope the procedure and author its stages.
+
+The agent that writes a wizard never runs it end to end, because the script opens browsers and waits for human input. The agent checks it statically instead: `bash -n`, `shellcheck` where available, and a trace that every value lands where scoping said it would, with every `set_secret` name matching a real `secrets.*` reference in CI. So the first run is yours, and that run is the test.
+
+## Ephemeral by default
+
+| What you have | What to do with the script |
+| --- | --- |
+| A one-off migration, a personal setup, a transition you'll never repeat | Save it to a scratch or `scripts/` path, run it, delete it |
+| A setup path the next person on the repo will also need | Commit it and link it from the README, so they run the script instead of re-asking an agent |
+
+## Common questions
+
+**Do my API keys end up in the model's context?**
+
+No. The agent writes a script; it doesn't run it. You run the script yourself, and it captures the key with hidden terminal entry and writes it straight to `.env` or `gh secret`. The wizard is a CLI, and the model is not connected to it. This holds only for values the wizard captures at runtime. If you paste a key into the chat while scoping the procedure, it's in the [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) like any other pasted text.
+
+**Can I go back and fix a value I mistyped?**
+
+Not mid-run. There is no back button. The stages run forward, and a wrong answer on stage 3 means Ctrl-C and re-run. Re-running is cheap, because any value already written to `.env` is offered back as a default, so you press Enter through the stages you got right and retype only the wrong one. Users asked for this in launch week, and it is still open: "loved it! One thing though, is there a way to go back and correct what you've entered?"
+
+There's a related open bug. Arrow keys in an `ask` prompt insert `^[[D` / `^[[C` instead of moving the cursor, because the prompt uses `read -r` rather than Readline ([issue #741](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/741)). Backspace works; arrow keys don't. Delete back to the mistake rather than moving the cursor into it.
+
+**Does it know what I've already set up?**
+
+Partly, and less than the launch reactions assumed. It reads the repo before it asks (your `.env` files, `docker-compose`, framework config, the `secrets.*` references in CI), so it scopes to values that are missing rather than starting from zero the way a README does. What it doesn't do is check the third-party service. If a key exists in your `.env` the wizard offers it back and Enter keeps it; if you already created the Stripe account but never saved the key, the wizard still sends you to the dashboard for it.
+
+**Where does it sit in the workflow, after grilling and the spec?**
+
+Nowhere in particular. It's a standalone, not a chain step. The common guess is `/grill-with-docs → /to-spec → /wizard`, and that sequence is fine, but the trigger is a manual procedure showing up, which can happen at any point: before you start, mid-build, or long after ship. It also works as a discovery tool. Scoping finds the hidden prerequisites of a task, like the three API keys you hadn't thought about, before you commit to the work.
+
+**Does it work outside Claude Code?**
+
+The script does. It's plain bash, and it runs the same whatever [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness) generated it. The skill itself is model-invoked, so it's listed everywhere: type `/wizard` in Claude Code or `$wizard` in Codex, or just describe the setup you're stuck on. Being model-invoked also keeps it clear of [#693](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/693), where Claude's desktop and web apps drop *user-invoked* skills from the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model)'s listing and report them as not installed.
+
+**Didn't this used to be user-invoked?**
+
+It did. It's now model-invoked, so the agent reaches for it unprompted when it hits a step you have to take. Nothing you could do before stopped working. Model invocation lets the agent call the skill as well as you, so `/wizard` behaves as it did. The change fixes one failure. Before, an agent that hit a credentials wall mid-build dumped six numbered steps into the chat for you to follow by hand. Now it writes a wizard.
+
+**It used to be in `in-progress/`. Where is it now?**
+
+`engineering/`, as of v1.2. It graduated out of the beta bucket and now ships in the plugin, so it arrives with the rest of the promoted set rather than needing an individual install. Its behaviour didn't change on graduation.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- You're shown an ordered list of stages, and the values each one produces, and asked to confirm, before any script exists.
+- Every URL is opened before the value from that page is asked for. You're never asked to paste something you haven't been sent to fetch.
+- Secrets are typed blind. Nothing sensitive echoes into your scrollback.
+- Each stage fits one screen. Nothing you still need has scrolled away.
+- Ctrl-C and re-run picks up where you left off, offering the values already saved as defaults.
+- The final screen lists what it wrote, and separately lists what it couldn't do and you have to finish by hand.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`wizard` is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone, sitting at the line where automation stops and a human has to click. Its nearest neighbour is [setup-matt-pocock-skills](https://aihero.dev/skills-setup-matt-pocock-skills), because both exist to get a repo into a working state. That one configures this skill set, and `wizard` generates a setup path for everything else. It also pairs with [implement](https://aihero.dev/skills-implement): when a build lands a feature that needs credentials or a manual cutover, a wizard covers the steps only a human can do. When you're unsure which skill fits the moment, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/invocation.md

@@ -1,18 +0,0 @@
-# Model-invoked vs user-invoked
-
-Every `SKILL.md` in this repo is a skill. The one axis that splits them is **invocation** — who can reach it:
-
-- **User-invoked** — reachable **only by the human typing its name**. Set `disable-model-invocation: true` in the frontmatter. The `description` is **human-facing**: a one-line summary read by a person browsing slash-commands. Strip trigger lists ("Use when the user says…").
-- **Model-invoked** — reachable by **model or user**. The default: omit `disable-model-invocation`. The `description` is **model-facing** and keeps rich trigger phrasing ("Use when the user wants…, mentions…, asks for…") so auto-invocation fires. The test for whether a skill should stay model-invoked: _could the model usefully reach for this autonomously?_ (Reuse is the reason to extract a skill, not the test.)
-
-Because a user-invoked skill has no description, nothing but the human can reach it — no other skill can fire it. So a user-invoked skill may invoke model-invoked skills, but it can never reach another user-invoked skill.
-
-Bucket `README.md`s and the top-level `README.md` group entries into **User-invoked** and **Model-invoked**.
-
-## Dependencies between them
-
-Dependencies are expressed as **`/skill`-style prose invocation** ("Run the `/grilling` skill"), not deep `../other-skill/FILE.md` cross-references. Shared reference docs live inside the skill that owns them; other skills reach that material by invoking the skill, not by linking across folders.
-
-## Passive vs active domain work
-
-Merely _reading_ `CONTEXT.md` for vocabulary is a one-line prose pointer, not the `domain-modeling` skill. Only the active build/sharpen discipline (challenge terms, edge-case scenarios, write ADRs, update `CONTEXT.md` inline) is `domain-modeling`.

docs/productivity/grill-me.md

@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
+## What it does
+
+`grill-me` takes a **loose idea** and interviews you until you can commit to it. You do not need a worked-out plan to start, because the [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) exists to produce one. It asks in **rounds**. Each round is the whole **frontier**, which is every question whose prerequisites you have already settled. So it never asks you something that depends on an answer it hasn't heard yet.
+
+It is **[stateless](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/stateless)**. It writes no files and leaves no workspace behind. The only result is a clearer version of the idea, in your own head.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You invoke this by typing `/grill-me`; the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) won't reach for it on its own. Start it in a **fresh conversation**, not on top of a plan you already had an agent write.
+
+Reach for it as soon as you have an idea worth taking seriously (a feature, a product direction, a business call, a piece of writing), and long before you have worked out what it involves. Vagueness is not a reason to wait, because the session exists to remove it. If you can already specify the thing precisely, you don't need to grill it.
+
+Which of the three grilling skills you want depends on what is in front of you:
+
+- **Anything, anywhere.** Use `grill-me`. It needs no repo and writes no files, and the subject doesn't have to be code.
+- **A codebase to align against.** Use [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs). It is the same interview, but [stateful](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/stateful): it reads your code and keeps what it learns in `GLOSSARY.md` and ADRs.
+- **Too big for one session.** Use [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder). It charts the effort as a map and runs grilling sessions inside it.
+
+Leave [plan mode](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent-mode) off. Plan mode makes the agent hurry to produce a plan, when you want it to keep asking questions.
+
+## It's a conversation, not an interview
+
+The skill asks the questions, but **you** own the scope. People often miss this. It is the difference between a session that turns an idea into decisions and one that produces confident nonsense.
+
+The failure mode is **passivity**: answering "agreed, agreed, agreed" for forty questions and coming out with a plan the agent wrote and you nodded at. It feels productive because it was long. But you decided nothing, and the result looks more certain than it is.
+
+Being active means steering. Push back on a question that is less detailed than you need. Say when the scope is drifting. Answer "I don't know" and mean it. This skill helps an engineer and does not replace one. The quality of the result depends on the quality of your answers, not on the number of questions.
+
+The opposite error is real but rarer: staying in the interview so long you never reach code.
+
+## Grillable and ungrillable
+
+Some questions can be answered by talking. Others can't, and no amount of grilling will get you there.
+
+"One long form or three pages?" and "how should this interaction feel?" are **ungrillable**. You need something to react to before you can answer them. When you hit one, stop grilling. Build the throwaway version with [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype), look at it, then come back and answer in one line.
+
+Sessions grow too long when you try to talk through an ungrillable question. The agent keeps rephrasing, you keep guessing, and the scope grows with the uncertainty.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- You disagree with something. A session with no pushback from you is a session you didn't need.
+- Questions arrive in a few rounds, not one at a time for a long time, and later rounds clearly build on what you said earlier.
+- You end up somewhere you didn't expect, because a question showed you a decision you had been making without noticing.
+- At the end you could defend each choice to someone who wasn't there.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**How many questions should I expect, and how do I know when it ends?**
+Count rounds, not questions. Forty-six questions across four rounds is an ordinary session. It ends when the frontier is empty: it has visited every branch, and nothing is left as an unstated assumption.
+
+**It asked me two hundred questions. What went wrong?**
+Usually the scope was too large. Ask the agent to break the work into smaller pieces first, then grill each one. Very long sessions also drift into the **[dumb zone](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/smart-zone)**, where the [context window](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-window) is full enough that the questions get worse.
+
+**Can I go back to one question at a time?**
+Yes. Add this to your global `CLAUDE.md`:
+
+```
+When grilling, ask one question at a time.
+```
+
+**What if I genuinely don't know the answer?**
+Say so. "I don't know" is a real answer, and a question you can't answer is usually a sign to prototype rather than to guess.
+
+**Do I start a fresh session before writing the spec?**
+No. The value of the session is the [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) you just built. Hand the same conversation straight to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec).
+
+**Does the model matter?**
+More than for most skills. Grilling depends on the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model)'s own knowledge of how systems break, so use your best one. Implementation mostly follows context, so a cheaper model is fine there.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`grill-me` is a **standalone you can run anywhere, on anything**. Because it is stateless, it is portable. It needs no repo, workspace, or setup, and does not assume the idea is about software. People use it for business decisions, for writing, and for what to do next: anything they cannot think through clearly on their own.
+
+Portability is the only difference from [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs). That skill runs the same interview, but reads a codebase to align against and records what it learns as `GLOSSARY.md` and ADRs. Both use the [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) skill underneath. `grill-me` is the user-invoked entry point that keeps no state.
+
+If what you grilled does turn out to be software, you can hand the same conversation to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) and carry on into the build flow (an option, not the point of the skill). When you're unsure which flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/productivity/grilling.md

@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
+## What it does
+
+`grilling` is the interview loop that stress-tests a plan, a decision, or an idea before anyone acts on it. It maps the subject as a **design tree**: every decision branches into the decisions that hang off it, and interviews you branch by branch until no assumption stays unstated.
+
+It does not ask one question at a time, and it does not ask everything at once. Each **round** asks the whole **frontier**: every decision whose prerequisites are already settled, and nothing else. Two questions never share a round if one depends on the other; a question that hinges on an answer still open belongs to a later round. Your answers settle decisions, the frontier moves outward, and the next round asks what that unblocked. Thirteen questions typically land in about three rounds rather than thirteen.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+Type `/grilling`, or the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) reaches for it on its own when a task fits. It is the only [skill](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/skill) in the grilling family that is model-invoked, so you rarely type it. Usually a skill you *did* type runs it for you.
+
+Typing `/grilling` directly gets you the plain interview and nothing else. Where you want something more than that:
+
+| What you have | Reach for |
+| --- | --- |
+| You aren't working in a working directory | [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me): the same [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session), under a name the agent will never fire by itself |
+| You are in a working directory | [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs): the same session, and it writes `GLOSSARY.md` and ADRs as it goes |
+| An effort too big to hold in one session | [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder): it charts a map and runs grilling inside the decision tickets |
+| A question that talking cannot settle: how something should look or feel | [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype): build the throwaway version, then come back |
+| A skill of your own that needs an interview | Invoke `/grilling` from it, rather than writing another interview |
+
+## The round, the frontier, and who decides
+
+The skill rests on three ideas.
+
+The **design tree** is the model of the subject: decisions with decisions hanging off them. The **frontier** is the set of decisions whose prerequisites are all settled: the only questions the agent can ask yet. A **round** is one frontier, asked in full and answered in full.
+
+Inside a round, every question has a fixed format: numbered and titled behind a `❓`, then the body, then the agent's recommended answer alone on a `➡️` line. This format lets you answer a round by number ("1 yes, 2 the second option, 3 no, here's why") instead of by quoting questions back. The format has one known problem. The recommendation sometimes argues *against* the question as it was worded, so agreeing with the recommendation means answering "no" to the question. When that happens, answer the recommendation and say so.
+
+The other half of the design is the split between facts and decisions. Facts are the skill's own job. When a frontier question needs something the [environment](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/environment) can settle, the agent dispatches a [sub-agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent) to find out rather than asking you. The round does not wait for that research; only the questions that depend on it wait. Decisions are yours, and the agent must wait for them. An agent running `grilling` that answers its own decisions has broken the skill. The session ends when the frontier is empty. The agent then waits for you to confirm a shared understanding before it acts on what you agreed.
+
+The frontier has one limit. The agent chooses it by judgement; it does not compute it from a graph. So it can put two questions in one round and only later find that one answer should have changed the other. The only guard is to tell it. That reopens the affected branch in the next round.
+
+## What lives here and what lives in the wrappers
+
+This page covers the mechanism. The wrapper skills' pages answer the questions people ask most often.
+
+| Question | Where it is answered |
+| --- | --- |
+| The tree, the frontier, rounds, the question format, facts vs decisions | Here |
+| How long a session should run, what to do with a question you can't answer by talking, how to avoid nodding along | [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me) |
+| What gets written to `GLOSSARY.md`, what becomes an ADR | [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) |
+
+## Common questions
+
+**Can I go back to one question at a time?**
+Yes, and a large part of the audience does. Add this to your global `CLAUDE.md`:
+
+```
+When grilling, ask one question at a time.
+```
+
+Not everyone prefers the round-based default. Users who read slowly, who work in a second language, or who use the sequential format to help them focus report that one question at a time works better for them. The opt-out is a supported setting, not a workaround.
+
+**Where did `/batch-grill-me` go?**
+Into this skill. Round-based questioning shipped briefly as a separate skill, then moved into `grilling` itself, so everything built on the primitive (`grill-me`, `grill-with-docs`, `triage`, `wayfinder`) got it at once. There is no `batch-grill-me` to install, and no separate sequential skill either; the `CLAUDE.md` line above is the way back to one-at-a-time.
+
+**Asking a whole round at once must lose the questions my earlier answers would have raised. Doesn't it?**
+This is the most common objection to rounds, and the frontier answers it. A round only contains questions that do not depend on each other, so no answer in a round can invalidate another question in that round. Your answers still change what comes after them, because the agent works out each next round from scratch. You do lose something, but less than "all questions at once" implies. See the frontier's limit above.
+
+**It ran out of questions and started building.**
+The confirmation gate exists for this. The skill is finished when you say the understanding is shared, not when the frontier empties. Weaker and faster [models](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) still skip the gate. Users report this most often on lower-effort or non-frontier models, which collapse "interview until shared understanding" into a couple of questions and an outline. If yours does it, the reliable fix is a line in your own `AGENTS.md` or `CLAUDE.md` telling the agent not to implement without permission.
+
+**It answered its own questions instead of asking me.**
+That is a bug in the run, and it is the reason the skill's text separates facts from decisions. It happens most when another skill runs `grilling` to resolve a ticket, and the agent takes that task as permission to keep moving. The same constraint is why there is no async mode. People have asked for a variant that reads a GitHub issue and posts one consolidated decision memo, and that is a different skill, because a grilling session that nobody answers has produced the agent's opinion rather than yours.
+
+**Can I cap the number of questions?**
+No, and a cap is out of scope on purpose. Some plans need three questions and some need fifty; a fixed ceiling either truncates the hard case or feels arbitrary on the easy one. The intended control is plain language. Tell it to wrap up, or stop and accept the plan where it stands. If a session is running very long, the cause is usually that the scope was too big; break the work up and grill the pieces.
+
+**I installed `grill-me` on its own and nothing happens.**
+`grill-me` is a one-line skill whose whole body is "run a `/grilling` session", so it needs this skill installed too. The same is true of `grill-with-docs`, which additionally needs [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling). Installing the whole set avoids the problem; installing selectively means installing the primitives as well.
+
+**`grill-with-docs` ran, but it never loaded `grilling`.**
+This is a real bug, still unfixed, and users report it across [harnesses](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness) and models. A skill that names another skill does not reliably cause that skill to load, and `grill-with-docs` names two. The sign is a session that asks everything at once with no recommendations. That means the model is improvising an interview rather than running this one. Asking the agent directly whether it loaded `grilling` and `domain-modeling` usually recovers it.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- A round arrives as a numbered list, each question with its recommendation on a separate `➡️` line, and you can answer the whole round by number.
+- Nothing in a round needs another question in the same round answered first.
+- Later rounds ask things the first round could not have asked.
+- It goes and looks facts up (reading files, dispatching a sub-agent) rather than asking you something it could have found out.
+- Research running in the background does not stall the round; only the questions that depend on it wait.
+- It stops at the end and asks you to confirm the understanding is shared, instead of starting work.
+- Question count stays high while round count stays low.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`grilling` is a **primitive**, not a step you schedule: the single source of truth for the interview technique, kept in one place so every skill that needs an interview reaches for it instead of inventing one. [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me) and [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) are its two user-invoked front doors, and `grill-with-docs` is where the main build chain begins, ahead of [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec). [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder) runs it to resolve decision tickets, [triage](https://aihero.dev/skills-triage) to grill a vague report into a workable one, and [improve-codebase-architecture](https://aihero.dev/skills-improve-codebase-architecture) to walk the tree once you have picked a candidate to deepen. When you are unsure which entry point fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/productivity/handoff.md

@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
+## What it does
+
+`handoff` compacts the conversation you are in into a **handoff document**: one markdown file, written to your OS's temporary directory rather than into the workspace, that a fresh [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) can read to pick the work up.
+
+What it gives you is **portability**, not compression, so the skill is narrower than it sounds. You need a file only when the work has to *travel*: to a new [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness), a new directory, a colleague, or a side task you want to fork off. If nothing is travelling, you do not need a handoff. Staying in the [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session), `/clear`, a [subagent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/subagent) and `/compact` cover the ordinary end-of-phase case, and `/compact` covers it more often than this skill does.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You invoke this by typing `/handoff`; the agent won't reach for it on its own. Pass a note about what the next session is for, and the skill writes the document for that purpose.
+
+There are four triggers, and only four:
+
+| Situation | Why a file |
+| --- | --- |
+| Swapping harness (Claude → Codex) | The new harness cannot see the old [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) |
+| Moving to a different directory or repo | A prototype directory is the common case |
+| Sending the work to a colleague | They need something they can read |
+| Forking a side task found mid-phase | You keep working; a second agent takes the fork |
+
+For anything else (same harness, same directory, you are done [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) and moving to implementation), use `/compact`. [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) has the ordered tree over all five options at a phase boundary.
+
+## Branching is the use people skip
+
+The skill's description reads like session resumption: write a summary, end here, resume there. Read that way, it looks like a worse `/compact`, so people skip it. The fork case is the one worth knowing. You **stay in your session** and hand a copy of the accumulated context to a second agent working in parallel.
+
+That is what the detour through [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype) uses. You are deep in a design conversation, you hit a question that only running code will settle, and you do not want to spend the thread you built on finding out. Hand off to a prototype session, get the answer, hand the answer back, and reference it from the original thread. The work crosses over twice, your original conversation stays live, and you re-explain nothing.
+
+Three of the five options at a phase boundary preserve different things: `/compact` preserves your intent, `/clear` preserves nothing, `/handoff` preserves the work's ability to move.
+
+## What travels, and what doesn't
+
+The document carries the live thread (what's in flight, why, and what's next) plus a **suggested skills** section naming what the next agent should reach for. The skill redacts secrets before it writes the file.
+
+It deliberately does not carry anything already written down. The document references specs, plans, ADRs, issues, commits and diffs by path or URL, and never copies them. That keeps the file small, and it keeps the settled detail in one place instead of two copies that drift apart.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**Handoff or compact?**
+`/compact` unless something is travelling. Staying on the same task is a compact, not a handoff. When the harness and directory stay the same and you need to stay in the loop, the phase-boundary tree ends at `/compact` most days. `/handoff` does not summarise better. Its advantage is that the result is a file you can carry somewhere `/compact` can't reach.
+
+**So what's the actual difference between compact, clear and handoff?**
+Each one preserves something different. `/compact` compresses this context and continues in a fresh window, so your intent survives. `/clear` empties the window and starts from nothing. That is correct when everything behind you is disposable, and you cannot undo it if it isn't. `/handoff` writes a portable file, so the work survives the move to somewhere else. All three turn a **[primary source](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/primary-source)** (the conversation as it happened) into a **[secondary source](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/secondary-source)** (a summary of it). Continuing is the only option that doesn't, which is why you rule it out first.
+
+**Where did my handoff file go?**
+It goes to the temp directory, which is the most-reported problem with the skill. The paths are long, they differ per OS, and on Windows agents sometimes take several attempts to find the right one. Ask for the path back and keep it before you move on. Temp is deliberate, because a handoff is a document in transit, not an artifact you maintain. Temp is also not durable, as the next question explains.
+
+**My handoff vanished between sessions.**
+Some environments clear temp between sessions (Codex is the reported case), and a reboot empties `/private/tmp`. If the next session isn't starting within the hour, or is starting under a different harness, copy the file somewhere durable yourself as soon as it's written. The same applies to anything the document *points at*: if a dispatch references other files in temp, the next agent can't follow it.
+
+**How do I actually hand it to the next agent?**
+Open the fresh session and point it at the path: read this file, then continue. Point at the file rather than pasting the summary into a shell command. The shell mangles a summary that contains backticks or `$(...)` when you interpolate it into `claude "<summary>"`. The usual result is silent truncation rather than an error, so the new agent starts with an incomplete brief and nothing tells you.
+
+**Is this the same as `/branch`, `--fork-session`, or the built-in `/handoff`?**
+They are similar, not identical. `/branch` isn't a shipped skill here; `/handoff` is the canonical name. A fork inherits an exact copy of the context; this skill produces a *targeted* compression aimed at a stated next task, in a file. Where a fork will do (same machine, same harness, same directory), a fork is less work. The file is the better choice when the destination is somewhere the fork can't go.
+
+**When does something belong in `CLAUDE.md` instead?**
+Ask whether it's true next month. `CLAUDE.md` is standing context about the project, loaded into every session whether it's relevant or not. A handoff is about one piece of work in flight and is useless once that work lands. If you keep re-explaining a fact, it belongs in `CLAUDE.md`. A half-finished task belongs in a handoff.
+
+**It captures the what, not the why.**
+This is a fair criticism, and people raise it often. Two things help. Pass the argument (tell it what the next session is for), so the skill keeps the reasoning that bears on *that* rather than flattening it. And watch for confident claims the session never verified, such as "X isn't built" or "Y is done". The next agent trusts the document and does not re-check it, so a belief written as a fact becomes a false premise for everything that follows. Read the document before you hand it over, and downgrade anything you only assumed.
+
+**Why is it a skill rather than a slash command?**
+Both work; they suit different situations. As a skill, it ships and updates through the same install path as everything else here, which makes it shareable. Its frontmatter, not the mechanism, is what stops the agent from firing it on its own.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- The document is a small fraction of the conversation, and the specs, issues and diffs appear in it as paths and URLs rather than as copied text.
+- You can read it cold, without the original session open, and know what to do next.
+- The fresh agent starts working instead of asking you to re-explain the setup.
+- In the fork case, your original session is unchanged when you come back to it.
+- The suggested-skills section names the skill you'd have reached for yourself.
+- Nothing in it is a key, a token, or a password.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`handoff` is a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone**. It works between sessions rather than inside a build chain. It is a narrow one, and you'll use it less often than the other four options at a phase boundary. Its closest neighbour is [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype), because a prototype lives in its own directory and the round trip out and back is the move this skill is for. When you're at a boundary and unsure whether to continue, clear, hand off, delegate or compact, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) has the tree that orders those five, and routes you across the rest of the set.

docs/productivity/teach.md

@@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
+## What it does
+
+`teach` turns the directory you run it in into a standing teaching workspace and teaches you one topic across many [sessions](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session), in short self-contained HTML lessons.
+
+It does not teach from what the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) already knows. It treats [parametric knowledge](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/parametric-knowledge) as untrusted. Before it teaches, it finds high-trust resources, records them in `RESOURCES.md`, and cites them inside every lesson. It is also [stateful](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/stateful). The mission, the resources, the lessons and the record of what you have learned all live as files in the directory, so the next session continues from those files, not from what is left of the last conversation.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You invoke this by typing `/teach`; the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) won't reach for it on its own.
+
+Reach for it when the learning is the project: a language, a framework, a codebase you have just joined, yoga, shaders, a certification. It is not the tool for one explanation in passing.
+
+| What you want | What to reach for |
+| --- | --- |
+| To learn a topic over weeks, with sessions that accumulate | `teach` |
+| One idea explained inside the session you are already in | Just ask, in that session |
+| The agent's last message re-pitched because it didn't land | [wait-what](https://aihero.dev/skills-wait-what) |
+| To sharpen thinking you already have, rather than acquire new material | [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me) |
+| A background agent to read [primary sources](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/primary-source) and leave you a cited document | [research](https://aihero.dev/skills-research) |
+| To learn something that came up mid-grilling, without derailing the [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) | [handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff) out to a teaching workspace, then `teach` there |
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+`teach` builds a directory rather than producing a file, and the skill assumes one mission per workspace, so run it somewhere you are happy to give over to a single topic. Keep it out of the project you are working in. A separate repo is the best home, better than a global `~/.learnings/` folder or the working project itself. A dedicated repo also lets you commit the lessons, which is how teams have shared them.
+
+What accumulates in that directory:
+
+| Path | What it holds |
+| --- | --- |
+| `MISSION.md` | Why you are learning this. Every other file depends on it. If it is missing, the first thing `teach` does is interview you until it isn't |
+| `RESOURCES.md` | The vetted sources it teaches from, split into Knowledge and Wisdom (communities) |
+| `lessons/*.html` | The numbered lessons: the primary unit of teaching |
+| `reference/*.html` | Compressed cheat-sheets, algorithms, glossaries: the documents you return to |
+| `learning-records/*.md` | ADR-style notes on what you have demonstrably learned, used to decide what to teach next |
+| `assets/*` | Reusable components, starting with a shared stylesheet, so the lessons look like one course |
+| `NOTES.md` | Your stated teaching preferences |
+
+Two notes on that list. A glossary suits most topics, but the skill ships a `GLOSSARY-FORMAT.md` that `SKILL.md` no longer links to, so you only get one if you ask ([issue #559](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/559)). And the agent does not always create the workspace where you expect, so read the first question below before you build a long course in it.
+
+## Storage strength, not fluency
+
+The word to think with is **storage strength**: long-term retention, as opposed to **fluency**, the in-the-moment recall that feels like mastery while you are reading and is gone a week later. `teach` builds the former through desirable difficulty: retrieval practice, spacing, interleaving. Knowledge comes first. At that stage difficulty works against you, because it uses up the working memory you need to understand. Then `teach` drills the skill through a tight feedback loop, and at that stage difficulty is the tool.
+
+Two things decide what you get taught. The **mission** (the concrete real-world reason you want this) is the basis of every lesson. Without it the lessons become abstract and nothing decides what comes next. From the mission and the learning records, `teach` picks the next lesson inside your **zone of proximal development**: hard enough to take effort, but not so far ahead that you cannot learn it.
+
+Storage strength is also why the skill pushes back instead of agreeing. A question that needs **wisdom** (real-world judgement) gets an attempted answer and then a pointer to a community where you can test it. The skill does not let you skip a quiz. One user reported saying "thanks a lot" and being told the drill was not finished.
+
+## Lessons, references and components
+
+A **lesson** is one self-contained HTML file, short enough to finish in a sitting, tied to the mission, giving one tangible win. It cites its sources, recommends one primary source to go and read yourself, and links to sibling lessons and reference documents.
+
+You rarely go back to a lesson, but you do go back to reference documents. So the short form of a lesson (the syntax table, the algorithm, the pose sequence, the glossary) belongs in `reference/`, not buried in the lesson that introduced it.
+
+Lessons are built from **components** in `assets/`: stylesheets, quiz widgets, simulators, diagram helpers. Reuse is the default. The agent reads `assets/` before authoring a lesson and builds from what is there. It writes anything new that a second lesson could use as a component, not inline. The shared stylesheet is the first component in every workspace, and it makes the lessons look like one course instead of many unrelated pages.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**Where does it put the files? Mine ended up in `~/.claude/skills`.**
+A real, open bug ([#377](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/377)). `SKILL.md` uses `./` for two different roots. `./MISSION-FORMAT.md` and its siblings sit next to `SKILL.md` in the installed skill. `./lessons/`, `./reference/`, `./learning-records/` and `./assets/` belong in your directory. An agent that resolves the first kind against the skill's install directory then resolves the second kind there too, and writes your course into the skill folder. Check where the first lesson landed before you build on it. When you start, name the directory instead of trusting the agent to understand "the current directory".
+
+**Do I stay in one session, or start a new one per lesson?**
+All three approaches work: staying in the same session, re-invoking `/teach` in a new session, or opening a new session in the same folder. Each lesson is its own invocation. The course state lives in the folder, not in the conversation. Common practice is to open a fresh session in the workspace and say `/teach next lesson for <topic>`.
+
+**How do I know it isn't teaching me something it made up?**
+You don't, on the skill's word alone. You read the primary sources. `teach` is not reliable enough to trust unchecked, and no skill built on an LLM is. The grounding (`RESOURCES.md`, citations in every lesson, one recommended primary source per lesson) makes it cheap to check a lesson. It does not remove the need to check. This failure has happened: one user learning a 2x2 Rubik's cube got made-up move sequences that don't solve it. In a case like that, check the model, the harness, the effort setting, and the source. Risk is highest in procedural domains with precise notation, and lowest where the output is immediately verifiable, like code you can run.
+
+**The correct quiz answer is always the first option.**
+Several people have confirmed this on Sonnet, Opus and GLM, and it is still unfixed. `SKILL.md` now requires every answer to be the same number of words. That removes a different clue (the correct answer used to be the only fully-reasoned one), but says nothing about position. One contributor tested an instruction-level fix for position, and the correct answer still landed in slot A 33 times out of 33 across nine lessons ([#335](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/335)). So the real fix is a quiz component in `assets/` that shuffles the answers, not better wording. Until that ships, ignore answer position. Your `assets/` directory is yours to change, so you can ask for a component that shuffles at render time as a local fix.
+
+**It assumed I already knew things, and used terms it never defined.**
+This is the most common real complaint. There is no assessment step. `teach` infers your level from the mission and the learning records, and in session one there are no learning records. One user running it inside a wayfinder pipeline put it plainly: "It never did grilling to establish my starting point so it made lots of assumptions of what I already knew." Another reported lessons that used undefined jargon, and a lesson about their hardware that covered what the hardware could do but never said what it couldn't. Two things help: state your prior knowledge and your gaps in the first message, and correct the level out loud when a lesson misses, because the correction becomes a learning record and steers the next one. An explicit knowledge-assessment step is a standing feature request ([#725](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/issues/725)), not shipped behaviour.
+
+**Does it do spaced repetition, and does it know when to stop teaching?**
+No to the first, and not reliably to the second. The skill designs lessons around spacing and interleaving, but nothing schedules a review, and there is no Anki or calendar integration. Users ask for both often. A related gap is exit criteria. As one user put it, `teach` "is good at making the next lesson, but not as good at knowing when to stop and switch to review or real practice." If you want review or drilling instead of new material, ask for it; the skill will not propose the switch on its own.
+
+**Is it only useful for code?**
+No. Most reported use is outside coding: Korean, Japanese formal register, piano, guitar, board game design, OpenSCAD, film plots, Azure and CCNA certifications, university exams, and children of eight and ten getting printable books on escape rooms and fire salamanders. Nothing in the skill is specific to programming. Mission, resources, zone of proximal development and drill work the same way in any domain. Within code, users report the most value from getting oriented in an unfamiliar codebase or a new team's stack, more than from learning a language from scratch.
+
+**Which model should I run it with?**
+There is no canonical answer, and the reported differences are large. Users report that higher [reasoning effort](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/effort) produces better lessons than the medium setting. One user ran the same skill through Copilot CLI with Codex and got a single 30-line HTML card where Claude Code produced a full lesson. It runs unmodified in Claude Cowork, if your organisation lets you add skills there. If the lessons come out thin, change model, [harness](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/harness) or effort before rewriting your prompt.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- The first thing it does in an empty directory is interview you about why you want this, rather than produce a lesson.
+- `RESOURCES.md` fills up before the lessons do, and each lesson names one primary source worth reading yourself.
+- Claims in a lesson carry links out. A lesson with no citations is the skill teaching from memory.
+- A lesson takes one sitting and leaves you able to do one thing you couldn't before.
+- Opening a fresh session in the folder and saying "next lesson" continues the course instead of restarting it.
+- `learning-records/` grows, and lessons stop re-teaching what you have already demonstrated.
+- The lessons look like one course: they link the stylesheet in `assets/` rather than each carrying its own.
+- A question that needs judgement gets you pointed at a forum, subreddit or class, not just an answer.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`teach` is a **reach-for-it-anytime standalone**. It is not a step in a build chain and shares no artifacts with the engineering flow; it works in its own directory for as long as you study the topic.
+
+Its one real neighbour is [handoff](https://aihero.dev/skills-handoff). Together they answer "what do I do if I'm being grilled about something I don't understand?" Don't stop the grilling to learn. `/handoff` to a teaching workspace, learn the topic there with `/teach`, then go back and continue where you left off. The nearby alternative is [research](https://aihero.dev/skills-research), for when what you want is a cited document rather than lessons and retention. When you are not sure which skill or flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you over the whole set.

docs/productivity/to-questionnaire.md

@@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
+## What it does
+
+`to-questionnaire` turns a decision you can't settle on your own into a **questionnaire**: a Markdown document you hand to the one person who holds what you're missing, for them to fill in async or for the two of you to work through in a meeting.
+
+It grills you about the **send**, never the subject. An interview about the topic is pointless, because not knowing the topic is why you're writing to someone else. So it asks the two things you can always answer (who this is going to, and what you need back from them) and aims every question in the document at the **gap** between the two.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You invoke this by typing `/to-questionnaire`; the [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) won't reach for it on its own.
+
+Reach for it when a decision is blocked on knowledge that lives in one other person's head: a client, a domain expert, an exec who owns the business rules, a colleague on a team you don't sit with. Which skill you want depends on where the answers are:
+
+| The answers are in… | Reach for |
+| --- | --- |
+| Your own head, unsharpened | [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me) |
+| The codebase | [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) |
+| Someone else's head | `to-questionnaire` |
+| Nobody's head yet, the question needs something to react to | [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype) |
+
+The common case is a [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) session that stalls because some of the questions it raised aren't yours to answer. Run `/to-questionnaire` in that same conversation to take those questions offline, then bring the answers back and carry on.
+
+## The send, not the subject
+
+The interview is two exchanges, and then it stops.
+
+- **Who is it going to?** Their role, their expertise, their relationship to you. This sets the tone and how much context the document has to carry. An outside client needs orienting; a teammate does not.
+- **What do you need back?** The concrete decisions or facts you can't resolve alone. This becomes the checklist for the finished document. Every item you name gets a question aimed at it.
+
+Everything after that is drafting. The skill writes the file to `to-questionnaire-<slug>.md` in the current directory. There is no setup, no workspace, and nothing to configure.
+
+## The document
+
+The document is a **discovery questionnaire**, because you lack the context and the recipient has it. That sets its shape:
+
+- A purpose line naming the decision that depends on it, and a short context section for a recipient who knows none of your background.
+- Questions ordered **most-important-first** and grouped under themed headings, because async means you may only get one pass.
+- One idea per question, never compound, with an answer stub beneath it and a *why this matters* line only where a question could be misread.
+- Explicit permission to answer "I don't know", because a flagged uncertainty is useful and a confident guess that reads like a fact is not.
+- A closing catch-all: anything we didn't ask that we should know?
+
+The document is deliberately not two things. It isn't **branching**. The questions are a flat, grouped list, not a tree that skips section D if you answered A. It isn't **multi-recipient** either. One run produces one document for one person.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**Does it read my grilling session and extract the questions from it?**
+Not as a step of its own. The skill has no ingest phase. It asks about the send, then drafts. What makes it work after a grilling session is that you run it in the **same conversation**, so the [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) is already in [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) and the drafting can draw on it. If you start it in a fresh session, it knows nothing about the grilling, and you supply the topic again yourself when you answer "what do you need back?".
+
+**The missing answers don't all live with the same person. Can it split them by recipient?**
+No. Step one asks for *the* recipient, singular, and the skill pitches the tone and context of the whole document at them. If three people hold three parts of the answer, run it three times, once per person. People have asked for one document that routes questions by discipline or role, but that did not ship.
+
+**Are the questions dependent: does it skip sections based on earlier answers?**
+No. The dependent-question design was explored and did not ship. The output is a static document: themed groups, most-important-first, every question live. The objection to it is fair. A [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) that plans more than two or three questions ahead of a real answer plans badly, and a branching document has to plan all of them ahead of every answer.
+
+**What if the recipient doesn't know either?**
+The document tells them to say so. It explicitly asks for "I don't know" and partial answers. A flagged uncertainty is worth more than a guess, because a vague answer and a confidently wrong one look identical once they're back in your context.
+
+**Does it send it anywhere (Slack, an issue tracker, email)?**
+No. It writes a Markdown file in the current directory and tells you the path. Delivery is yours: paste it into a [ticket](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket), drop it in a Slack thread, attach it to an email, or open it on a shared screen and work through it live. People have done all four by hand.
+
+**Isn't this just `/grill-me` in batch mode?**
+No. `grill-me` already asks in **rounds**. It asks the whole frontier of open questions at once, then recomputes it from your answers, so it already meets the "give me all the questions at once" need. `to-questionnaire` differs on another axis. It is about whose head the answers are in, not how the questions are delivered. To answer them yourself faster, use `grill-me`. To get them out of someone else, use this.
+
+**Couldn't I just ask the agent for this without a skill?**
+Yes, and plenty of people did before it existed: `OPEN_QUESTIONS.md` files, spreadsheets sent to clients, a "needs more info" ticket per unanswered question. The skill buys you two things: the interview never drifts onto the subject, and the document comes out in a shape a non-technical recipient can fill in. If you already have a house format that works, you don't need this.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- It asks about the recipient and about what you need back, then stops asking. If it asks about the subject itself, the skill has gone wrong.
+- Every item you named as "what I need back" is traceable to a question in the file.
+- The questions read as aimed at what the *recipient* knows, not as your own open questions copied down verbatim.
+- You could hand the file to someone who wasn't in the conversation and they would know why they got it and by when to reply.
+- The answers that come back are usable input for a new grilling round, rather than a fresh set of questions.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+`to-questionnaire` is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone. You use it where your own knowledge ends and the next move is to ask another person, not to run another skill. That is most often mid-flow, when planning has stalled on something that isn't yours to decide.
+
+Its neighbour is [grill-me](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-me), and the two differ on where the answers live. Grilling gets the answers from you; a questionnaire gets them from someone else. Feed what comes back into another grilling round, or into [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) or [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) if the work is heading for a build. When you're unsure which skill fits the moment, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/productivity/wait-what.md

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+## What it does
+
+You type `wait-what` when you did not understand a message. The [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) then re-pitches what it just said. It adds the context you were missing, writes in plain English, and uses the vocabulary from your project's `GLOSSARY.md`.
+
+The skill is three lines long. That is the design, not an unfinished draft. Skills against verbosity usually fail because they grow too long. A four-hundred-line concision skill still leaves the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) verbose, because the model copies the length of the skill, not its request. This one has a single precise leading word and nothing else.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+You invoke it by typing `/wait-what`. The agent will not reach for it on its own, and it shouldn't. Only you know when you stopped following.
+
+Use it as soon as you notice you're skimming. For example, the agent has started to use jargon it invented, put five acronyms in one sentence, or explained a decision whose premise you never saw. It fixes the conversation you're already in. To stop the jargon arriving at all, use [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), which builds the shared language upfront.
+
+## The name is the mechanism
+
+The leading word is **wait**. "Be concise" is an instruction about the agent's output, and the model obeys it by clipping words and losing you further. **Wait** is about *your* state. It says you stopped understanding here. An agent that hears "be brief" writes clipped fragments. An agent that hears "wait, you lost me" backs up and explains.
+
+That difference is the whole skill. Every popular fix for verbosity names the *output*: `/tldr`, `/no-fluff`, `/talk-normal`. The model over-corrects into clipped fragments that are shorter and no clearer. Naming the *listener* asks for both halves at once: fewer words **and** the context you were missing.
+
+The skill says re-pitch **that**, not "that last message". What lost you is usually bigger than one paragraph, so the agent decides how far back to go.
+
+## It plugs into the language you already have
+
+The body reuses the leading words already in your global `CLAUDE.md` and your project's `GLOSSARY.md`. ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English sets the register. The ubiquitous language supplies the nouns. The skill, `CLAUDE.md` and `GLOSSARY.md` use the same [tokens](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/token), so invoking it is not a new instruction. It is a reminder of one the agent already agreed to.
+
+If you have no `GLOSSARY.md` (and no `GLOSSARY-MAP.md` pointing to one for the context at hand), the skill still works. You lose only the domain-vocabulary half.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- The re-pitch is **shorter and clearer**, not shorter and blunter.
+- It adds the premise you were missing, instead of only deleting words.
+- Project nouns replace invented ones. The terms in your `GLOSSARY.md` come back.
+- You can use it twice in a row, and it does not degrade into terseness.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+You can use `wait-what` at any point, in any conversation, inside any other skill. It repairs one message after the fact. The real fix is a shared language agreed upfront, and that is [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs): a [grilling](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/grilling) session that runs [domain-modeling](https://aihero.dev/skills-domain-modeling) as it goes, so it records the words you both use in your `GLOSSARY.md`. If you're unsure which skill fits the moment, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/productivity/writing-for-agents.md

@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
+## What it does
+
+`writing-for-agents` is the reference for writing agent-facing documents: a skill, an `AGENTS.md` or `CLAUDE.md`, a [spec](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/spec), a runtime prompt, a README, any doc an [agent](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/agent) reads. The format differs, but the writing does not. The same levers make each one predictable, so the agent follows the same *process* on every run (not necessarily to the same output).
+
+Its default fix is to delete, not to explain. Ask an agent to write instructions for another agent and it spends most of its words explaining what the [model](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/model) already knows. Each of those lines is a **no-op**: it costs [context](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context) and changes no behaviour. This reference helps you find them, so it is as useful on a document you already have as on a blank file.
+
+It was called `writing-great-skills` until v1.1. The new name fits what it always was. Almost none of it is specific to skills. The skill-only mechanics (frontmatter, the model- versus user-invoked choice, router skills) live in a linked `SKILL-MECHANICS.md` that you read only when the document in front of you is a skill.
+
+## When to reach for it
+
+Type `/writing-for-agents`, or the agent reaches for it on its own when you're creating or editing a skill, or modifying `AGENTS.md` or `CLAUDE.md`.
+
+Reach for it by hand for everything else an agent reads: your docs, specs and [tickets](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/ticket), system and [AFK](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/afk) prompts. The test is one question: does an agent read this? It does not matter how the agent gets the document: a pointer names it, a human pastes it, or it is in the repo. To find out what a codebase contains, use [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs). This reference controls how a document reads, not what it knows.
+
+## The two loads
+
+The central idea is two budgets that every document and pointer spends:
+
+- **Context load**: the cost of always-loaded material on the agent's window: an `AGENTS.md` line, a skill description, anything sitting in context every [turn](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/turn) whether or not it fires.
+- **Cognitive load**: the cost to you of remembering which documents exist and when to reach for each. You are the index. Do not try to minimise this cost, because it is the price of human agency.
+
+Once you think in these two loads, most authoring decisions (split or don't, inline or disclose, point or push) become the same trade made in different places.
+
+## The levers
+
+- **[Context pointers](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/context-pointer)**: the reference held in context that names out-of-context material and encodes when to reach it. A skill description and an `AGENTS.md` line naming a doc are the same thing. The pointer's *wording*, not its target, decides how reliably the agent follows it.
+- **Information hierarchy**: the ladder from in-file step, to in-file reference, to disclosed reference behind a pointer. **[Progressive disclosure](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/progressive-disclosure)** is moving material down that ladder so the top stays easy to read.
+- **Completion criteria**: how clear and demanding each step's done-condition is, and the **legwork** that demand causes. They are the defence against **premature completion**.
+- **Leading words**: a compact concept already in the model's pretraining (*tight*, *red*, *tracer bullet*) that the agent thinks with while running the document. It works in two places. In the body it guides execution, and in the pointer it triggers invocation.
+- **Pruning**: single source of truth, relevance, and the no-op test applied sentence by sentence, against **duplication**, **sediment** and **sprawl**.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**Where did `/writing-great-skills` go?**
+It is this skill, renamed in v1.1. Users pointed it at `AGENTS.md`, docs, specs, tickets and runtime prompts long before the rename. Structure, leading words and pruning apply to any text an agent reads. There is no alias. Reinstall under the new name.
+
+**"Writing for agents": so the agent does the writing?**
+The other way round. You are the author; the agent is the reader. That is what makes it hard. You write for a reader that has already read everything, so explanation is waste and precision is the whole job.
+
+**Can't I just ask the agent to write it for me?**
+You can, and it will produce something verbose. Left alone the model explains what it already knows, and it will not apply the no-op test or reach for a leading word on its own. Use the reference to review the draft. Most of its value comes from that review pass.
+
+**I asked an agent to trim a document and it cut the functionality.**
+Agents told to "streamline" optimise for length, because length is the thing they can see. The no-op test checks behaviour, not style: delete the line and ask whether the agent's behaviour changed. When a sentence fails, delete the whole sentence rather than trim words from it, and settle a disagreement about it by running the document, not by arguing.
+
+**How do I know when it's done?**
+When it works, and you can no longer find duplication, sediment or no-ops. There is no automated eval. You check by running the document by hand and using the failure-mode vocabulary to diagnose problems. When a document misbehaves, the same vocabulary helps you fix it: name the failure mode first, then fix that.
+
+**Should this live in `CLAUDE.md` or somewhere else?**
+Ask which load you want to pay. `CLAUDE.md` loads into every [session](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/session) unconditionally. Material behind a pointer costs only the pointer's own line until it fires. Anything that applies in one session out of ten costs context load in the other nine.
+
+**Do I need to rewrite my documents for each new model?**
+Mostly no, and over-fitting to one model causes its own problems. Updating for a new model is usually another no-op pass rather than a rewrite.
+
+**My skill only works on the exact task I built it from.**
+The common method (do the work once, then have the agent write it up as a skill) fits that one run too closely, and the examples come out too specific. Keep the run as evidence, then generalise on purpose: strip what belonged to that repo and those files, and write for the class of task.
+
+**English isn't my first language. Do I lose the leading-word advantage?**
+No. Finding the word that packs the most behaviour into the fewest [tokens](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/token) is work the reference does for you.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- The document gets shorter as it gets better, and you are surprised how little is left.
+- You can point at a leading word and see it change the agent's behaviour in more than one place.
+- Nothing is stated twice, in any form. Duplication is the most reliable sign a document was never tested.
+- Reference that only one branch needs sits behind a pointer rather than in the main file.
+
+## Where it fits
+
+This is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone reference. It applies to the whole set, not to one skill. Every skill here was written with it, and it also covers the documents the other skills produce (a `GLOSSARY.md` and its ADRs, a spec, a ticket) once an agent has to read them. Its one direct caller is [retro](https://aihero.dev/skills-retro), which loads it before proposing any steering file or skill. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits a task, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you over the whole set.

package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "mattpocock-skills",
-  "version": "1.0.0",
+  "version": "1.3.1",
   "private": true,
   "description": "Matt Pocock's agent skills for real engineering",
   "repository": {
@@ -10,7 +10,8 @@
   "license": "MIT",
   "scripts": {
     "changeset": "changeset",
-    "version": "changeset version"
+    "version": "changeset version && node scripts/sync-plugin-version.mjs",
+    "check-plugin-version": "node scripts/sync-plugin-version.mjs --check"
   },
   "devDependencies": {
     "@changesets/changelog-github": "^0.7.0",

scripts/link-skills.sh

@@ -1,38 +1,62 @@
 #!/usr/bin/env bash
 set -euo pipefail
 
-# Links all skills in the repository to ~/.claude/skills, so that
-# they can be used by the local Claude CLI.
+# NOTE: This is a dev-only script, intended for use by maintainers of this repo.
+# It is not a supported installer. Modifications to it, or requests for
+# modifications, will not be approved.
+#
+# Links all skills in the repository into the local skill directories used by
+# each agent harness:
+#   - ~/.claude/skills: Claude Code
+#   - ~/.agents/skills: Codex and other Agent Skills-compatible harnesses
+# Each entry is a symlink into this repo, so a `git pull` is all that's needed
+# to keep installed skills up to date.
 
 REPO="$(cd "$(dirname "$0")/.." && pwd)"
-DEST="$HOME/.claude/skills"
+DESTS=("$HOME/.claude/skills" "$HOME/.agents/skills")
 
-# If ~/.claude/skills is a symlink that resolves into this repo, we'd end up
-# writing the per-skill symlinks back into the repo's own skills/ tree. Detect
-# and bail out instead of polluting the working copy.
-if [ -L "$DEST" ]; then
-  resolved="$(readlink -f "$DEST")"
-  case "$resolved" in
-    "$REPO"|"$REPO"/*)
-      echo "error: $DEST is a symlink into this repo ($resolved)." >&2
-      echo "Remove it (rm \"$DEST\") and re-run; the script will recreate it as a real dir." >&2
-      exit 1
-      ;;
-  esac
-fi
-
-mkdir -p "$DEST"
-
-find "$REPO/skills" -name SKILL.md -not -path '*/node_modules/*' -not -path '*/deprecated/*' -print0 |
+# Collect the repo's skills once, link into every destination. `deprecated/`
+# is retired, and `misc/` is kept around but rarely used and not promoted (see
+# each bucket's own README): neither belongs in a daily-driver skill
+# directory, so both are skipped here, same as everywhere else non-promoted
+# skills are kept out. `in-progress/` IS still linked: it's public on purpose,
+# feedback wanted, and this local install is exactly where that feedback loop
+# runs.
+names=()
+srcs=()
 while IFS= read -r -d '' skill_md; do
   src="$(dirname "$skill_md")"
-  name="$(basename "$src")"
-  target="$DEST/$name"
+  names+=("$(basename "$src")")
+  srcs+=("$src")
+done < <(find "$REPO/skills" -name SKILL.md -not -path '*/node_modules/*' -not -path '*/deprecated/*' -not -path '*/misc/*' -print0)
 
-  if [ -e "$target" ] && [ ! -L "$target" ]; then
-    rm -rf "$target"
+for DEST in "${DESTS[@]}"; do
+  # If $DEST is a symlink that resolves into this repo, we'd end up writing the
+  # per-skill symlinks back into the repo's own skills/ tree. Detect and bail
+  # out instead of polluting the working copy.
+  if [ -L "$DEST" ]; then
+    resolved="$(readlink -f "$DEST")"
+    case "$resolved" in
+      "$REPO"|"$REPO"/*)
+        echo "error: $DEST is a symlink into this repo ($resolved)." >&2
+        echo "Remove it (rm \"$DEST\") and re-run; the script will recreate it as a real dir." >&2
+        exit 1
+        ;;
+    esac
   fi
 
-  ln -sfn "$src" "$target"
-  echo "linked $name -> $src"
+  mkdir -p "$DEST"
+
+  for i in "${!names[@]}"; do
+    name="${names[$i]}"
+    src="${srcs[$i]}"
+    target="$DEST/$name"
+
+    if [ -e "$target" ] && [ ! -L "$target" ]; then
+      rm -rf "$target"
+    fi
+
+    ln -sfn "$src" "$target"
+    echo "linked $name -> $src ($DEST)"
+  done
 done

scripts/sync-plugin-version.mjs

@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env node
+// Copies package.json's version into .claude-plugin/plugin.json.
+// Runs as part of `npm run version`, immediately after `changeset version`.
+// With --check it changes nothing and exits 1 if the two versions differ.
+
+import { readFileSync, writeFileSync } from "node:fs";
+import { dirname, join } from "node:path";
+import { fileURLToPath } from "node:url";
+
+const repo = join(dirname(fileURLToPath(import.meta.url)), "..");
+const pluginPath = join(repo, ".claude-plugin", "plugin.json");
+
+const { version } = JSON.parse(readFileSync(join(repo, "package.json"), "utf8"));
+const source = readFileSync(pluginPath, "utf8");
+const plugin = JSON.parse(source);
+
+if (plugin.version === version) {
+  console.log(`plugin.json version is ${version} (already in sync)`);
+  process.exit(0);
+}
+
+if (process.argv.includes("--check")) {
+  console.error(
+    `plugin.json version is ${plugin.version}, package.json is ${version}. Run \`node scripts/sync-plugin-version.mjs\`.`,
+  );
+  process.exit(1);
+}
+
+// Rewrite only the version line, to keep the key order and the formatting.
+const updated = source.replace(
+  /("version"\s*:\s*")[^"]*(")/,
+  `$1${version}$2`,
+);
+
+if (JSON.parse(updated).version !== version) {
+  console.error(`Could not find a version field to replace in ${pluginPath}.`);
+  process.exit(1);
+}
+
+writeFileSync(pluginPath, updated);
+console.log(`plugin.json version ${plugin.version} -> ${version}`);

skills/deprecated/README.md

@@ -1,8 +1,3 @@
 # Deprecated
 
-Skills I no longer use.
-
-- **[design-an-interface](./design-an-interface/SKILL.md)** — Generate multiple radically different interface designs for a module using parallel sub-agents.
-- **[qa](./qa/SKILL.md)** — Interactive QA session where user reports bugs conversationally and the agent files GitHub issues.
-- **[request-refactor-plan](./request-refactor-plan/SKILL.md)** — Create a detailed refactor plan with tiny commits via user interview, then file it as a GitHub issue.
-- **[ubiquitous-language](./ubiquitous-language/SKILL.md)** — Extract a DDD-style ubiquitous language glossary from the current conversation.
+Skills I no longer use. This bucket is currently empty: a retired skill is deleted, and the changeset that removes it names whatever replaced it.

skills/deprecated/design-an-interface/SKILL.md

@@ -1,94 +0,0 @@
----
-name: design-an-interface
-description: Generate multiple radically different interface designs for a module using parallel sub-agents. Use when user wants to design an API, explore interface options, compare module shapes, or mentions "design it twice".
----
-
-# Design an Interface
-
-Based on "Design It Twice" from "A Philosophy of Software Design": your first idea is unlikely to be the best. Generate multiple radically different designs, then compare.
-
-## Workflow
-
-### 1. Gather Requirements
-
-Before designing, understand:
-
-- [ ] What problem does this module solve?
-- [ ] Who are the callers? (other modules, external users, tests)
-- [ ] What are the key operations?
-- [ ] Any constraints? (performance, compatibility, existing patterns)
-- [ ] What should be hidden inside vs exposed?
-
-Ask: "What does this module need to do? Who will use it?"
-
-### 2. Generate Designs (Parallel Sub-Agents)
-
-Spawn 3+ sub-agents simultaneously using Task tool. Each must produce a **radically different** approach.
-
-```
-Prompt template for each sub-agent:
-
-Design an interface for: [module description]
-
-Requirements: [gathered requirements]
-
-Constraints for this design: [assign a different constraint to each agent]
-- Agent 1: "Minimize method count - aim for 1-3 methods max"
-- Agent 2: "Maximize flexibility - support many use cases"
-- Agent 3: "Optimize for the most common case"
-- Agent 4: "Take inspiration from [specific paradigm/library]"
-
-Output format:
-1. Interface signature (types/methods)
-2. Usage example (how caller uses it)
-3. What this design hides internally
-4. Trade-offs of this approach
-```
-
-### 3. Present Designs
-
-Show each design with:
-
-1. **Interface signature** - types, methods, params
-2. **Usage examples** - how callers actually use it in practice
-3. **What it hides** - complexity kept internal
-
-Present designs sequentially so user can absorb each approach before comparison.
-
-### 4. Compare Designs
-
-After showing all designs, compare them on:
-
-- **Interface simplicity**: fewer methods, simpler params
-- **General-purpose vs specialized**: flexibility vs focus
-- **Implementation efficiency**: does shape allow efficient internals?
-- **Depth**: small interface hiding significant complexity (good) vs large interface with thin implementation (bad)
-- **Ease of correct use** vs **ease of misuse**
-
-Discuss trade-offs in prose, not tables. Highlight where designs diverge most.
-
-### 5. Synthesize
-
-Often the best design combines insights from multiple options. Ask:
-
-- "Which design best fits your primary use case?"
-- "Any elements from other designs worth incorporating?"
-
-## Evaluation Criteria
-
-From "A Philosophy of Software Design":
-
-**Interface simplicity**: Fewer methods, simpler params = easier to learn and use correctly.
-
-**General-purpose**: Can handle future use cases without changes. But beware over-generalization.
-
-**Implementation efficiency**: Does interface shape allow efficient implementation? Or force awkward internals?
-
-**Depth**: Small interface hiding significant complexity = deep module (good). Large interface with thin implementation = shallow module (avoid).
-
-## Anti-Patterns
-
-- Don't let sub-agents produce similar designs - enforce radical difference
-- Don't skip comparison - the value is in contrast
-- Don't implement - this is purely about interface shape
-- Don't evaluate based on implementation effort

skills/deprecated/qa/SKILL.md

@@ -1,130 +0,0 @@
----
-name: qa
-description: Interactive QA session where user reports bugs or issues conversationally, and the agent files GitHub issues. Explores the codebase in the background for context and domain language. Use when user wants to report bugs, do QA, file issues conversationally, or mentions "QA session".
----
-
-# QA Session
-
-Run an interactive QA session. The user describes problems they're encountering. You clarify, explore the codebase for context, and file GitHub issues that are durable, user-focused, and use the project's domain language.
-
-## For each issue the user raises
-
-### 1. Listen and lightly clarify
-
-Let the user describe the problem in their own words. Ask **at most 2-3 short clarifying questions** focused on:
-
-- What they expected vs what actually happened
-- Steps to reproduce (if not obvious)
-- Whether it's consistent or intermittent
-
-Do NOT over-interview. If the description is clear enough to file, move on.
-
-### 2. Explore the codebase in the background
-
-While talking to the user, kick off an Agent (subagent_type=Explore) in the background to understand the relevant area. The goal is NOT to find a fix — it's to:
-
-- Learn the domain language used in that area (check UBIQUITOUS_LANGUAGE.md)
-- Understand what the feature is supposed to do
-- Identify the user-facing behavior boundary
-
-This context helps you write a better issue — but the issue itself should NOT reference specific files, line numbers, or internal implementation details.
-
-### 3. Assess scope: single issue or breakdown?
-
-Before filing, decide whether this is a **single issue** or needs to be **broken down** into multiple issues.
-
-Break down when:
-
-- The fix spans multiple independent areas (e.g. "the form validation is wrong AND the success message is missing AND the redirect is broken")
-- There are clearly separable concerns that different people could work on in parallel
-- The user describes something that has multiple distinct failure modes or symptoms
-
-Keep as a single issue when:
-
-- It's one behavior that's wrong in one place
-- The symptoms are all caused by the same root behavior
-
-### 4. File the GitHub issue(s)
-
-Create issues with `gh issue create`. Do NOT ask the user to review first — just file and share URLs.
-
-Issues must be **durable** — they should still make sense after major refactors. Write from the user's perspective.
-
-#### For a single issue
-
-Use this template:
-
-```
-## What happened
-
-[Describe the actual behavior the user experienced, in plain language]
-
-## What I expected
-
-[Describe the expected behavior]
-
-## Steps to reproduce
-
-1. [Concrete, numbered steps a developer can follow]
-2. [Use domain terms from the codebase, not internal module names]
-3. [Include relevant inputs, flags, or configuration]
-
-## Additional context
-
-[Any extra observations from the user or from codebase exploration that help frame the issue — e.g. "this only happens when using the Docker layer, not the filesystem layer" — use domain language but don't cite files]
-```
-
-#### For a breakdown (multiple issues)
-
-Create issues in dependency order (blockers first) so you can reference real issue numbers.
-
-Use this template for each sub-issue:
-
-```
-## Parent issue
-
-#<parent-issue-number> (if you created a tracking issue) or "Reported during QA session"
-
-## What's wrong
-
-[Describe this specific behavior problem — just this slice, not the whole report]
-
-## What I expected
-
-[Expected behavior for this specific slice]
-
-## Steps to reproduce
-
-1. [Steps specific to THIS issue]
-
-## Blocked by
-
-- #<issue-number> (if this issue can't be fixed until another is resolved)
-
-Or "None — can start immediately" if no blockers.
-
-## Additional context
-
-[Any extra observations relevant to this slice]
-```
-
-When creating a breakdown:
-
-- **Prefer many thin issues over few thick ones** — each should be independently fixable and verifiable
-- **Mark blocking relationships honestly** — if issue B genuinely can't be tested until issue A is fixed, say so. If they're independent, mark both as "None — can start immediately"
-- **Create issues in dependency order** so you can reference real issue numbers in "Blocked by"
-- **Maximize parallelism** — the goal is that multiple people (or agents) can grab different issues simultaneously
-
-#### Rules for all issue bodies
-
-- **No file paths or line numbers** — these go stale
-- **Use the project's domain language** (check UBIQUITOUS_LANGUAGE.md if it exists)
-- **Describe behaviors, not code** — "the sync service fails to apply the patch" not "applyPatch() throws on line 42"
-- **Reproduction steps are mandatory** — if you can't determine them, ask the user
-- **Keep it concise** — a developer should be able to read the issue in 30 seconds
-
-After filing, print all issue URLs (with blocking relationships summarized) and ask: "Next issue, or are we done?"
-
-### 5. Continue the session
-
-Keep going until the user says they're done. Each issue is independent — don't batch them.

skills/deprecated/request-refactor-plan/SKILL.md

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
----
-name: request-refactor-plan
-description: Create a detailed refactor plan with tiny commits via user interview, then file it as a GitHub issue. Use when user wants to plan a refactor, create a refactoring RFC, or break a refactor into safe incremental steps.
----
-
-This skill will be invoked when the user wants to create a refactor request. You should go through the steps below. You may skip steps if you don't consider them necessary.
-
-1. Ask the user for a long, detailed description of the problem they want to solve and any potential ideas for solutions.
-
-2. Explore the repo to verify their assertions and understand the current state of the codebase.
-
-3. Ask whether they have considered other options, and present other options to them.
-
-4. Interview the user about the implementation. Be extremely detailed and thorough.
-
-5. Hammer out the exact scope of the implementation. Work out what you plan to change and what you plan not to change.
-
-6. Look in the codebase to check for test coverage of this area of the codebase. If there is insufficient test coverage, ask the user what their plans for testing are.
-
-7. Break the implementation into a plan of tiny commits. Remember Martin Fowler's advice to "make each refactoring step as small as possible, so that you can always see the program working."
-
-8. Create a GitHub issue with the refactor plan. Use the following template for the issue description:
-
-<refactor-plan-template>
-
-## Problem Statement
-
-The problem that the developer is facing, from the developer's perspective.
-
-## Solution
-
-The solution to the problem, from the developer's perspective.
-
-## Commits
-
-A LONG, detailed implementation plan. Write the plan in plain English, breaking down the implementation into the tiniest commits possible. Each commit should leave the codebase in a working state.
-
-## Decision Document
-
-A list of implementation decisions that were made. This can include:
-
-- The modules that will be built/modified
-- The interfaces of those modules that will be modified
-- Technical clarifications from the developer
-- Architectural decisions
-- Schema changes
-- API contracts
-- Specific interactions
-
-Do NOT include specific file paths or code snippets. They may end up being outdated very quickly.
-
-## Testing Decisions
-
-A list of testing decisions that were made. Include:
-
-- A description of what makes a good test (only test external behavior, not implementation details)
-- Which modules will be tested
-- Prior art for the tests (i.e. similar types of tests in the codebase)
-
-## Out of Scope
-
-A description of the things that are out of scope for this refactor.
-
-## Further Notes (optional)
-
-Any further notes about the refactor.
-
-</refactor-plan-template>

skills/deprecated/ubiquitous-language/SKILL.md

@@ -1,93 +0,0 @@
----
-name: ubiquitous-language
-description: Extract a DDD-style ubiquitous language glossary from the current conversation, flagging ambiguities and proposing canonical terms. Saves to UBIQUITOUS_LANGUAGE.md. Use when user wants to define domain terms, build a glossary, harden terminology, create a ubiquitous language, or mentions "domain model" or "DDD".
-disable-model-invocation: true
----
-
-# Ubiquitous Language
-
-Extract and formalize domain terminology from the current conversation into a consistent glossary, saved to a local file.
-
-## Process
-
-1. **Scan the conversation** for domain-relevant nouns, verbs, and concepts
-2. **Identify problems**:
-   - Same word used for different concepts (ambiguity)
-   - Different words used for the same concept (synonyms)
-   - Vague or overloaded terms
-3. **Propose a canonical glossary** with opinionated term choices
-4. **Write to `UBIQUITOUS_LANGUAGE.md`** in the working directory using the format below
-5. **Output a summary** inline in the conversation
-
-## Output Format
-
-Write a `UBIQUITOUS_LANGUAGE.md` file with this structure:
-
-```md
-# Ubiquitous Language
-
-## Order lifecycle
-
-| Term        | Definition                                              | Aliases to avoid      |
-| ----------- | ------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------- |
-| **Order**   | A customer's request to purchase one or more items      | Purchase, transaction |
-| **Invoice** | A request for payment sent to a customer after delivery | Bill, payment request |
-
-## People
-
-| Term         | Definition                                  | Aliases to avoid       |
-| ------------ | ------------------------------------------- | ---------------------- |
-| **Customer** | A person or organization that places orders | Client, buyer, account |
-| **User**     | An authentication identity in the system    | Login, account         |
-
-## Relationships
-
-- An **Invoice** belongs to exactly one **Customer**
-- An **Order** produces one or more **Invoices**
-
-## Example dialogue
-
-> **Dev:** "When a **Customer** places an **Order**, do we create the **Invoice** immediately?"
-> **Domain expert:** "No — an **Invoice** is only generated once a **Fulfillment** is confirmed. A single **Order** can produce multiple **Invoices** if items ship in separate **Shipments**."
-> **Dev:** "So if a **Shipment** is cancelled before dispatch, no **Invoice** exists for it?"
-> **Domain expert:** "Exactly. The **Invoice** lifecycle is tied to the **Fulfillment**, not the **Order**."
-
-## Flagged ambiguities
-
-- "account" was used to mean both **Customer** and **User** — these are distinct concepts: a **Customer** places orders, while a **User** is an authentication identity that may or may not represent a **Customer**.
-```
-
-## Rules
-
-- **Be opinionated.** When multiple words exist for the same concept, pick the best one and list the others as aliases to avoid.
-- **Flag conflicts explicitly.** If a term is used ambiguously in the conversation, call it out in the "Flagged ambiguities" section with a clear recommendation.
-- **Only include terms relevant for domain experts.** Skip the names of modules or classes unless they have meaning in the domain language.
-- **Keep definitions tight.** One sentence max. Define what it IS, not what it does.
-- **Show relationships.** Use bold term names and express cardinality where obvious.
-- **Only include domain terms.** Skip generic programming concepts (array, function, endpoint) unless they have domain-specific meaning.
-- **Group terms into multiple tables** when natural clusters emerge (e.g. by subdomain, lifecycle, or actor). Each group gets its own heading and table. If all terms belong to a single cohesive domain, one table is fine — don't force groupings.
-- **Write an example dialogue.** A short conversation (3-5 exchanges) between a dev and a domain expert that demonstrates how the terms interact naturally. The dialogue should clarify boundaries between related concepts and show terms being used precisely.
-
-<example>
-
-## Example dialogue
-
-> **Dev:** "How do I test the **sync service** without Docker?"
-
-> **Domain expert:** "Provide the **filesystem layer** instead of the **Docker layer**. It implements the same **Sandbox service** interface but uses a local directory as the **sandbox**."
-
-> **Dev:** "So **sync-in** still creates a **bundle** and unpacks it?"
-
-> **Domain expert:** "Exactly. The **sync service** doesn't know which layer it's talking to. It calls `exec` and `copyIn` — the **filesystem layer** just runs those as local shell commands."
-
-</example>
-
-## Re-running
-
-When invoked again in the same conversation:
-
-1. Read the existing `UBIQUITOUS_LANGUAGE.md`
-2. Incorporate any new terms from subsequent discussion
-3. Update definitions if understanding has evolved
-4. Re-flag any new ambiguities
-5. Rewrite the example dialogue to incorporate new terms

skills/engineering/README.md

@@ -4,22 +4,31 @@ Skills I use daily for code work.
 
 ## User-invoked
 
-Reachable only when you type them (`disable-model-invocation: true`).
+Reachable only when you type them (Claude Code: `disable-model-invocation: true`; Codex: `policy.allow_implicit_invocation: false` in `agents/openai.yaml`).
 
-- **[ask-matt](./ask-matt/SKILL.md)** — Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the user-invoked skills in this repo.
-- **[grill-with-docs](./grill-with-docs/SKILL.md)** — Grilling session that also builds your project's domain model, sharpening terminology and updating `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs inline.
-- **[triage](./triage/SKILL.md)** — Move issues through a state machine of triage roles.
-- **[improve-codebase-architecture](./improve-codebase-architecture/SKILL.md)** — Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.
-- **[setup-matt-pocock-skills](./setup-matt-pocock-skills/SKILL.md)** — Configure this repo for the engineering skills (issue tracker, triage labels, domain doc layout). Run once per repo.
-- **[to-issues](./to-issues/SKILL.md)** — Break any plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues using vertical slices.
-- **[to-prd](./to-prd/SKILL.md)** — Turn the current conversation into a PRD and publish it to the issue tracker.
-- **[prototype](./prototype/SKILL.md)** — Build a throwaway prototype — a runnable terminal app for state/logic questions, or several toggleable UI variations.
+- **[ask-matt](./ask-matt/SKILL.md)**: Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the user-invoked skills in this repo.
+- **[grill-with-docs](./grill-with-docs/SKILL.md)**: Grilling session that also builds your project's domain model, sharpening terminology and updating `GLOSSARY.md` and ADRs inline.
+- **[triage](./triage/SKILL.md)**: Move issues through a state machine of triage roles.
+- **[improve-codebase-architecture](./improve-codebase-architecture/SKILL.md)**: Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.
+- **[setup-matt-pocock-skills](./setup-matt-pocock-skills/SKILL.md)**: Configure this repo for the engineering skills (issue tracker, triage labels, domain doc layout). Run once per repo.
+- **[to-spec](./to-spec/SKILL.md)**: Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the issue tracker.
+- **[to-tickets](./to-tickets/SKILL.md)**: Break any plan, spec, or conversation into a set of tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its blocking edges, whether as text in a local file or as native blocking links on a real tracker.
+- **[implement](./implement/SKILL.md)**: Build the work described by a spec or set of tickets, driving `/tdd` at pre-agreed seams and closing out with `/code-review` before committing.
+- **[implement-spec](./implement-spec/SKILL.md)**: Implement a whole spec on one integration branch. Works the tickets as a task graph, running implementer subagents across the ready frontier for maximum concurrency, then closes out with `/code-review`.
+- **[wayfinder](./wayfinder/SKILL.md)**: Plan a huge chunk of work (more than one agent session can hold) as a shared map of decision tickets on the issue tracker, resolved one at a time until the way to the destination is clear.
+- **[retro](./retro/SKILL.md)**: Suggest improvements to the coding agent's environment (navigation, automated checks, coding standards, steering files, tooling) after a session, most severe first.
 
 ## Model-invoked
 
 Model- or user-reachable (rich trigger phrasing so the model can reach for them).
 
-- **[diagnosing-bugs](./diagnosing-bugs/SKILL.md)** — Disciplined diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions: reproduce → minimise → hypothesise → instrument → fix → regression-test.
-- **[tdd](./tdd/SKILL.md)** — Test-driven development with a red-green-refactor loop. Builds features or fixes bugs one vertical slice at a time.
-- **[domain-modeling](./domain-modeling/SKILL.md)** — Actively build and sharpen a project's domain model — challenge terms, stress-test with scenarios, update `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs inline.
-- **[codebase-design](./codebase-design/SKILL.md)** — Shared discipline and vocabulary for designing deep modules: small interfaces, clean seams, testable through the interface.
+- **[prototype](./prototype/SKILL.md)**: Build a throwaway prototype to answer a design question: a single shareable HTML file for state/logic, or several toggleable UI variations.
+
+- **[diagnosing-bugs](./diagnosing-bugs/SKILL.md)**: Disciplined diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions: build a feedback loop that goes red on this bug → minimise → hypothesise → instrument → fix → regression-test.
+- **[research](./research/SKILL.md)**: Investigate a question against high-trust primary sources and capture the findings as a cited Markdown file in the repo, run as a background agent.
+- **[tdd](./tdd/SKILL.md)**: Test-driven development with a red-green-refactor loop. Builds features or fixes bugs one vertical slice at a time.
+- **[domain-modeling](./domain-modeling/SKILL.md)**: Actively build and sharpen a project's domain model by challenging terms, stress-testing with scenarios, and updating `GLOSSARY.md` and ADRs inline.
+- **[codebase-design](./codebase-design/SKILL.md)**: Shared discipline and vocabulary for designing deep modules: small interfaces, clean seams, testable through the interface.
+- **[code-review](./code-review/SKILL.md)**: Two-axis review of the diff since a fixed point: **Standards** (does it follow the repo's coding standards, plus a Fowler smell baseline?) and **Spec** (does it faithfully implement the originating issue/spec?), run as parallel sub-agents.
+- **[pr](./pr/SKILL.md)**: The shape a pull request body should take: a summary as the smallest visual that makes the change clear, before/after evidence that it works, and a merge-danger call (one-way or two-way door, plus blast radius).
+- **[wizard](./wizard/SKILL.md)**: Generate an interactive bash wizard that walks a human through steps only they can perform: provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, walking an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, or running a one-off migration or cutover.

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

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

skills/engineering/ask-matt/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: ask-matt
-description: Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the user-invoked skills in this repo.
+description: Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the skills in this repo.
 disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
@@ -8,26 +8,34 @@ disable-model-invocation: true
 
 You don't remember every skill, so ask.
 
-A **flow** is a path through the skills. Most paths run along one **main flow**, and two **on-ramps** merge onto it. Everything else is standalone.
+A **flow** is a path through the skills. Most paths run along one **main flow**, and two **on-ramps** merge onto it. Everything else is standalone, or a vocabulary layer that runs underneath.
 
 ## The main flow: idea → ship
 
 The route most work travels. You have an idea and want it built.
 
-1. **`/grill-with-docs`** — sharpen the idea by interview. Start here when you **have a codebase**: it's stateful, retaining what it learns in `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs. (No codebase? Use `/grill-me` — see Standalone.)
-2. **Branch — can you settle every question in conversation?** If a question needs a runnable answer (state, business logic, a UI you have to see), detour through a prototype, bridged by **`/handoff`** in both directions (see Crossing sessions):
+1. **`/grill-with-docs`** sharpens the idea by interview. Start here whenever you are **working in a working directory**: it's stateful, retaining what it learns in `GLOSSARY.md` and ADRs. (No working directory? Use `/grill-me` instead, covered under Standalone. Both run the same `/grilling` primitive; `grill-with-docs` is the one that leaves a paper trail, which makes it the better of the two whenever a repo is there to leave it in.)
+2. **Branch: can you settle every question in conversation?** If a question needs a runnable answer (state, business logic, a UI you have to see), detour through a prototype, bridged by **`/handoff`** in both directions (a prototype lives in its own directory, which is exactly what `/handoff` is for; see Phase boundaries):
    - **`/handoff`** out, then open a fresh session against that file,
    - **`/prototype`** to answer the question with throwaway code,
    - **`/handoff`** back what you learned, and reference it from the original idea thread.
-3. **Branch — is this a multi-session build?**
-   - **Yes** → **`/to-prd`** (turn the thread into a PRD) → **`/to-issues`** (split the PRD into independently-grabbable issues). Because the issues are independent, **clear context between each one**: start a fresh session per issue and kick off **`/implement`** by passing it the PRD and the single issue to work on.
+3. **Branch: is this a multi-session build?**
+   - **Yes** → **`/to-spec`** (turn the thread into a spec), then **`/to-tickets`** to split it into tracer-bullet tickets, each declaring its **blocking edges**. Then work the tickets one of two ways:
+     - **`/implement`** per ticket, **`/clear`ing context between each one**. On a local tracker that's one file per ticket under `.scratch/<feature>/issues/`, worked blockers-first by hand; on a real tracker the edges become native blocking links, so any ticket whose blockers are done can be grabbed. Each ticket is self-contained, so the last one's context is disposable.
+     - **`/implement-spec`** for the whole spec in one run. It reads the tickets as a **task graph**, runs implementer subagents across the ready **frontier** in parallel, and lands everything on one **integration branch**. Reach for it when you'd rather orchestrate the build than drive each ticket yourself.
    - **No** → **`/implement`** right here, in the same context window.
 
+   Either way, the code gets built by driving **`/tdd`** (one red-green slice at a time) and closes out with **`/code-review`**, a two-axis review (Standards + Spec) of the diff. `/implement` runs both per ticket; `/implement-spec`'s implementers each drive `/tdd`, and it runs one `/code-review` over the integration branch. Reach for **`/tdd`** on its own when you just want to build a concrete behaviour test-first without a full spec, and **`/code-review`** on its own whenever you want to review a branch or PR against a fixed point.
+
+   When the work goes up as a pull request, **`/pr`** shapes the body: the smallest visual that shows the change, before/after evidence that it works, and a one-way or two-way door call. It's model-invoked, so the agent reaches for it whenever it writes a PR.
+
+4. **`/retro`** closes the loop. After a build, and especially one that went sideways, it looks back over the session and suggests changes to the agent's **environment**, not the code: navigation pointers, automated checks, the coding standards `/code-review` enforces, steering files, tooling. Mechanical mistakes become deterministic checks; judgement calls become coding standards. The next build then starts from a better environment.
+
 ### Context hygiene
 
-Keep steps 1–3 in **one unbroken context window** — don't compact or clear until after `/to-issues` — so the grilling, PRD, and issues all build on the same thinking. Each `/implement` then starts fresh, working from the issue.
+Keep steps 1–3 in **one unbroken context window** (don't compact or clear until after `/to-tickets`) so the grilling, spec, and tickets all build on the same thinking. Each `/implement` then starts fresh, working from the ticket. Run `/retro` in the session it's looking back on, before you clear; after clearing, point it at that session's log instead.
 
-The limit on this is the **[smart zone](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/smart-zone)**: the window (~120k tokens on state-of-the-art models) within which the model still reasons sharply. If a session approaches it before `/to-issues`, don't push on degraded — `/handoff` and continue in a fresh thread.
+The limit on this is the **[smart zone](https://www.aihero.dev/ai-coding-dictionary/smart-zone)**: the window (~150k tokens on state-of-the-art models) within which the model still reasons sharply. If a session approaches it before `/to-tickets`, don't push on degraded; `/compact` at the nearest phase boundary and carry on (see Phase boundaries).
 
 ## On-ramps
 
@@ -35,27 +43,53 @@ A starting situation that generates work, then merges onto the main flow.
 
 - **Bugs and requests piling up** → **`/triage`**. It moves issues through triage roles and produces agent-ready issues, which **`/implement`** later picks up.
 
-  Triage is only for issues **you didn't create** — bug reports, incoming feature requests, anything that arrives raw. Issues that `/to-issues` produced are already agent-ready, so **don't triage them**.
+  Triage is only for issues **you didn't create**: bug reports, incoming feature requests, anything that arrives raw. Tickets that `/to-tickets` produced are already agent-ready, so **don't triage them**.
+
+- **Something's broken** → **`/diagnosing-bugs`**. For the hard ones: the bug that resists a first glance, the intermittent flake, the regression that crept in between two known-good states. It refuses to theorise until it has a **tight feedback loop** (one command that already goes red on *this* bug), then fixes with a regression test. Once the fix is in, run **`/retro`** in the same session to ask what would have prevented the bug; where the real finding is that there's no good seam to lock it down, that's a job for **`/improve-codebase-architecture`**.
+
+- **A huge, foggy effort: a greenfield project or a huge feature build, too big for one session** → **`/wayfinder`**, the most cognitively demanding flow here. When the way from here to the destination isn't visible yet, it charts a **shared map** of **decision tickets** on the issue tracker and resolves them one at a time, producing **decisions, not deliverables**, until the fog is pushed back and the way is clear. Where **`/grill-with-docs`** sharpens an idea you can hold in one session, wayfinder is for the idea you can't, and it's slower and denser, so save it for exactly that, never a well-scoped feature.
+
+  When the map clears, **it hands off, it doesn't build**: merge onto the main flow at **`/to-spec`**, which collapses the map's linked decisions into a buildable plan, then `/to-tickets` and `/implement` as usual. Looping the map straight into `/implement` skips that collapse and throws the linked detail away, so go straight to `/implement` only when the effort turned out genuinely small.
 
 ## Codebase health
 
-Not feature work — upkeep.
+Not feature work, just upkeep.
 
-- **`/improve-codebase-architecture`** — run whenever you have a spare moment to keep the codebase good for agents to operate in. It surfaces deepening opportunities; picking one _generates an idea_ you can take into the main flow at `/grill-with-docs`.
+- **`/improve-codebase-architecture`** runs whenever you have a spare moment to keep the codebase good for agents to operate in. It surfaces **deepening opportunities**; picking one _generates an idea_ you can take into the main flow at `/grill-with-docs`. It's the survey that finds the candidates; **`/codebase-design`** (below) is the bench you design the chosen one on.
 
-## Crossing sessions
+## Vocabulary underneath
 
-- **`/handoff`** — when a thread is full or you need to branch off (e.g. into a `/prototype` session), this compacts the conversation into a markdown file. You don't continue in place — you **open a new session and reference that file** to carry the context across. It's the bridge between context windows, in either direction. Use it when you want a **fresh session** but need the **current conversation preserved**.
-- **`/compact`** (built-in) — stay in the **same conversation**, letting the earlier turns be summarized. Use it at **intentional breaks between phases**, when you don't mind losing the verbatim history. Don't compact mid-phase — the agent can lose its way. `/handoff` forks; `/compact` continues.
+Two model-invoked references that run *beneath* the other skills, each the single source of truth for its vocabulary. Reach for them directly when the **words**, not the process, are the problem; or let the skills above pull them in.
+
+- **`/domain-modeling`**: sharpen the project's *domain* language: challenge a fuzzy term, resolve an overloaded word ("account" doing three jobs), record a hard-to-reverse decision as an ADR. It's the active discipline `/grill-with-docs` drives to keep `GLOSSARY.md` a clean glossary.
+- **`/codebase-design`** is the deep-module vocabulary (module, interface, depth, seam, adapter, leverage, locality) for designing a module's *shape*: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface at a clean seam. `/tdd` and `/improve-codebase-architecture` both speak it.
+
+## Phase boundaries
+
+A **phase** is a chunk of work inside a session: the grilling, the implementation, the QA. At the **boundary** between two of them you have five options, and picking between them is the fuzziest decision in this whole map:
+
+- **Continue**: stay put. Costs nothing, loses nothing.
+- **`/clear`**: empty the window, when nothing here matters to what's next.
+- **`/handoff`** writes a portable markdown file. Narrow: only for a **new harness**, a **new directory**, a **colleague**, or forking a side task **mid-phase**. What it buys is portability.
+- **Subagent**: send a tightly-scoped task to its own window and get a report back.
+- **`/compact`** compresses this context and seeds a fresh session with it. The **default**, at the bottom of the tree rather than the first reach.
+
+Read [PHASE-BOUNDARIES.md](PHASE-BOUNDARIES.md) for the ordered tree: the five questions, the reasoning behind each branch, and why the primary-source cost makes **Continue** the one to rule out first. Make the decision **at** a boundary; mid-phase, continue or split the rest into subagents.
 
 ## Standalone
 
 Off the main flow entirely.
 
-- **`/grill-me`** — the same relentless interview as `/grill-with-docs`, but for when you have **no codebase**. Stateless: it saves nothing locally, builds no `CONTEXT.md`. Reach for it to sharpen any plan or design that doesn't live in a repo.
-- **`/teach`** — learn a concept over multiple sessions, using the current directory as a stateful workspace.
-- **`/writing-great-skills`** — reference for writing and editing skills well.
+- **`/grill-me`**: the same relentless interview as `/grill-with-docs`, but **stateless**: it saves nothing locally and builds no `GLOSSARY.md`. Reach for it when you are **not working in a working directory** (sharpening a plan, a design, a piece of writing, anything with no repo under it). If you are in a working directory, use `/grill-with-docs` instead: it runs the same interview and leaves a paper trail, so it is strictly the better one.
+- **`/grilling`** is the interview primitive itself: rounds, the frontier, facts are the agent's job and decisions are yours. `/grill-me` and `/grill-with-docs` are the two named ways in, and `/triage`, `/wayfinder` and `/improve-codebase-architecture` all run it internally. Reach for it directly only when you want the interview with no wrapper around it.
+- **`/prototype`** is a small, throwaway program that answers one design question: does this state model feel right, or what should this UI look like. Throwaway is a constraint on how the code is written, not a promise to destroy it: the answer folds into the real code, and the prototype itself is kept as a **primary source** on a `prototype/<name>` branch out of main, pointed at from the implementation issue. It's the detour in step 2 of the main flow, but reach for it any time a design question is hard to settle on paper.
+- **`/research`**: delegate reading legwork to a **background agent**: it investigates a question against **primary sources**, then leaves a cited Markdown file in the repo. Keep working while it reads. The file it produces is something to take *into* the main flow at `/grill-with-docs`, since research feeds the thinking rather than replacing it.
+- **`/to-questionnaire`** comes in when the thing blocking you isn't in your head or the codebase but in **someone else's**, and it writes them a questionnaire to fill in. It's the inverse of `/grill-me`: instead of interviewing you about the subject, it interviews you about the **send** (who it's going to, what you need back) and aims the questions at the gap. What comes back is material for `/grill-with-docs` or `/to-spec`.
+- **`/wizard`** is for the steps only a **human** can take: provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, clicking through an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, running a one-off migration or cutover. It generates an interactive bash script that opens each URL, captures each value, and writes it into `.env` and GitHub secrets, so the procedure stops being something you re-explain to an agent every time. Model-invoked, so the agent reaches for it the moment it hits a wall only you can pass. If the agent could just do it itself, it should; this is for where a human is genuinely in the loop.
+- **`/wait-what`** is the corrective for a message that didn't land. Use it mid-conversation, inside any other skill, and the agent re-pitches what it just said with the context you were missing, in plain English, using the `GLOSSARY.md` vocabulary. It works after the fact; `/grill-with-docs` is the upfront cure, because a shared language agreed early is what stops the jargon arriving at all.
+- **`/teach`**: learn a concept over multiple sessions, using the current directory as a stateful workspace.
+- **`/writing-for-agents`** is the reference for writing documents agents consume: skills, AGENTS.md, pointed-at docs.
 
 ## Precondition
 
-**`/setup-matt-pocock-skills`** — run before your first engineering flow to configure the issue tracker, triage labels, and doc layout the other skills assume. Custom issue trackers also work.
+**`/setup-matt-pocock-skills`**: run before your first engineering flow to configure the issue tracker, triage labels, and doc layout the other skills assume. Custom issue trackers also work.

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

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

skills/engineering/code-review/SKILL.md

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

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

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

skills/engineering/codebase-design/DEEPENING.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Deepening
 
-How to deepen a cluster of shallow modules safely, given its dependencies. Assumes the vocabulary in [SKILL.md](SKILL.md) — **module**, **interface**, **seam**, **adapter**.
+How to deepen a cluster of shallow modules safely, given its dependencies. Assumes the vocabulary in [SKILL.md](SKILL.md): **module**, **interface**, **seam**, **adapter**.
 
 ## Dependency categories
 
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ When assessing a candidate for deepening, classify its dependencies. The categor
 
 ### 1. In-process
 
-Pure computation, in-memory state, no I/O. Always deepenable — merge the modules and test through the new interface directly. No adapter needed.
+Pure computation, in-memory state, no I/O. Always deepenable: merge the modules and test through the new interface directly. No adapter needed.
 
 ### 2. Local-substitutable
 
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ Third-party services (Stripe, Twilio, etc.) you don't control. The deepened modu
 
 ## Testing strategy: replace, don't layer
 
-- Old unit tests on shallow modules become waste once tests at the deepened module's interface exist — delete them.
+- Old unit tests on shallow modules become waste once tests at the deepened module's interface exist; delete them.
 - Write new tests at the deepened module's interface. The **interface is the test surface**.
 - Tests assert on observable outcomes through the interface, not internal state.
-- Tests should survive internal refactors — they describe behaviour, not implementation. If a test has to change when the implementation changes, it's testing past the interface.
+- Tests should survive internal refactors, since they describe behaviour, not implementation. If a test has to change when the implementation changes, it's testing past the interface.

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

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 # Design It Twice
 
-When the user wants to explore alternative interfaces for a chosen deepening candidate, use this parallel sub-agent pattern. Based on "Design It Twice" (Ousterhout) — your first idea is unlikely to be the best.
+When the user wants to explore alternative interfaces for a chosen deepening candidate, use this parallel sub-agent pattern. Based on "Design It Twice" (Ousterhout): your first idea is unlikely to be the best.
 
-Uses the vocabulary in [SKILL.md](SKILL.md) — **module**, **interface**, **seam**, **adapter**, **leverage**.
+Uses the vocabulary in [SKILL.md](SKILL.md): **module**, **interface**, **seam**, **adapter**, **leverage**.
 
 ## Process
 
@@ -12,33 +12,33 @@ Before spawning sub-agents, write a user-facing explanation of the problem space
 
 - The constraints any new interface would need to satisfy
 - The dependencies it would rely on, and which category they fall into (see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md))
-- A rough illustrative code sketch to ground the constraints — not a proposal, just a way to make the constraints concrete
+- A rough illustrative code sketch to ground the constraints, not a proposal, just a way to make the constraints concrete
 
 Show this to the user, then immediately proceed to Step 2. The user reads and thinks while the sub-agents work in parallel.
 
 ### 2. Spawn sub-agents
 
-Spawn 3+ sub-agents in parallel using the Agent tool. Each must produce a **radically different** interface for the deepened module.
+Spawn 3+ sub-agents in parallel. Each must produce a **radically different** interface for the deepened module.
 
 Prompt each sub-agent with a separate technical brief (file paths, coupling details, dependency category from [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md), what sits behind the seam). The brief is independent of the user-facing problem-space explanation in Step 1. Give each agent a different design constraint:
 
-- Agent 1: "Minimize the interface — aim for 1–3 entry points max. Maximise leverage per entry point."
-- Agent 2: "Maximise flexibility — support many use cases and extension."
-- Agent 3: "Optimise for the most common caller — make the default case trivial."
+- Agent 1: "Minimize the interface: aim for 1–3 entry points max. Maximise leverage per entry point."
+- Agent 2: "Maximise flexibility: support many use cases and extension."
+- Agent 3: "Optimise for the most common caller: make the default case trivial."
 - Agent 4 (if applicable): "Design around ports & adapters for cross-seam dependencies."
 
-Include both [SKILL.md](SKILL.md) vocabulary and CONTEXT.md vocabulary in the brief so each sub-agent names things consistently with the architecture language and the project's domain language.
+Include both [SKILL.md](SKILL.md) vocabulary and GLOSSARY.md vocabulary in the brief so each sub-agent names things consistently with the architecture language and the project's domain language.
 
 Each sub-agent outputs:
 
-1. Interface (types, methods, params — plus invariants, ordering, error modes)
+1. Interface (types, methods, params, plus invariants, ordering, error modes)
 2. Usage example showing how callers use it
 3. What the implementation hides behind the seam
 4. Dependency strategy and adapters (see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md))
-5. Trade-offs — where leverage is high, where it's thin
+5. Trade-offs: where leverage is high, where it's thin
 
 ### 3. Present and compare
 
 Present designs sequentially so the user can absorb each one, then compare them in prose. Contrast by **depth** (leverage at the interface), **locality** (where change concentrates), and **seam placement**.
 
-After comparing, give your own recommendation: which design you think is strongest and why. If elements from different designs would combine well, propose a hybrid. Be opinionated — the user wants a strong read, not a menu.
+After comparing, give your own recommendation: which design you think is strongest and why. If elements from different designs would combine well, propose a hybrid. Be opinionated: the user wants a strong read, not a menu.

skills/engineering/codebase-design/SKILL.md

@@ -9,23 +9,23 @@ Design **deep modules**: a lot of behaviour behind a small interface, placed at
 
 ## Glossary
 
-Use these terms exactly — don't substitute "component," "service," "API," or "boundary." Consistent language is the whole point.
+Use these terms exactly: don't substitute "component," "service," "API," or "boundary." Consistent language is the whole point.
 
-**Module** — anything with an interface and an implementation. Deliberately scale-agnostic: a function, class, package, or tier-spanning slice. _Avoid_: unit, component, service.
+**Module**: anything with an interface and an implementation. Deliberately scale-agnostic: a function, class, package, or tier-spanning slice. _Avoid_: unit, component, service.
 
-**Interface** — everything a caller must know to use the module correctly: the type signature, but also invariants, ordering constraints, error modes, required configuration, and performance characteristics. _Avoid_: API, signature (too narrow — they refer only to the type-level surface).
+**Interface**: everything a caller must know to use the module correctly: the type signature, but also invariants, ordering constraints, error modes, required configuration, and performance characteristics. _Avoid_: API, signature (too narrow, they refer only to the type-level surface).
 
-**Implementation** — what's inside a module, its body of code. Distinct from **Adapter**: a thing can be a small adapter with a large implementation (a Postgres repo) or a large adapter with a small implementation (an in-memory fake). Reach for "adapter" when the seam is the topic; "implementation" otherwise.
+**Implementation**: what's inside a module, its body of code. Distinct from **Adapter**: a thing can be a small adapter with a large implementation (a Postgres repo) or a large adapter with a small implementation (an in-memory fake). Reach for "adapter" when the seam is the topic; "implementation" otherwise.
 
-**Depth** — leverage at the interface: the amount of behaviour a caller (or test) can exercise per unit of interface they have to learn. A module is **deep** when a large amount of behaviour sits behind a small interface, **shallow** when the interface is nearly as complex as the implementation.
+**Depth**: leverage at the interface. The amount of behaviour a caller (or test) can exercise per unit of interface they have to learn. A module is **deep** when a large amount of behaviour sits behind a small interface, **shallow** when the interface is nearly as complex as the implementation.
 
-**Seam** _(Michael Feathers)_ — a place where you can alter behaviour without editing in that place; the *location* at which a module's interface lives. Where to put the seam is its own design decision, distinct from what goes behind it. _Avoid_: boundary (overloaded with DDD's bounded context).
+**Seam** _(Michael Feathers)_: a place where you can alter behaviour without editing in that place; the *location* at which a module's interface lives. Where to put the seam is its own design decision, distinct from what goes behind it. _Avoid_: boundary (overloaded with DDD's bounded context).
 
-**Adapter** — a concrete thing that satisfies an interface at a seam. Describes *role* (what slot it fills), not substance (what's inside).
+**Adapter**: a concrete thing that satisfies an interface at a seam. Describes *role* (what slot it fills), not substance (what's inside).
 
-**Leverage** — what callers get from depth: more capability per unit of interface they learn. One implementation pays back across N call sites and M tests.
+**Leverage**: what callers get from depth. More capability per unit of interface they learn. One implementation pays back across N call sites and M tests.
 
-**Locality** — what maintainers get from depth: change, bugs, knowledge, and verification concentrate in one place rather than spreading across callers. Fix once, fixed everywhere.
+**Locality**: what maintainers get from depth. Change, bugs, knowledge, and verification concentrate in one place rather than spreading across callers. Fix once, fixed everywhere.
 
 ## Deep vs shallow
 
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ When designing an interface, ask:
 
 ## Principles
 
-- **Depth is a property of the interface, not the implementation.** A deep module can be internally composed of small, mockable, swappable parts — they just aren't part of the interface. A module can have **internal seams** (private to its implementation, used by its own tests) as well as the **external seam** at its interface.
+- **Depth is a property of the interface, not the implementation.** A deep module can be internally composed of small, mockable, swappable parts; they just aren't part of the interface. A module can have **internal seams** (private to its implementation, used by its own tests) as well as the **external seam** at its interface.
 - **The deletion test.** Imagine deleting the module. If complexity vanishes, it was a pass-through. If complexity reappears across N callers, it was earning its keep.
 - **The interface is the test surface.** Callers and tests cross the same seam. If you want to test *past* the interface, the module is probably the wrong shape.
 - **One adapter means a hypothetical seam. Two adapters means a real one.** Don't introduce a seam unless something actually varies across it.
@@ -105,10 +105,10 @@ Good interfaces make testing natural:
 ## Rejected framings
 
 - **Depth as ratio of implementation-lines to interface-lines** (Ousterhout): rewards padding the implementation. We use depth-as-leverage instead.
-- **"Interface" as the TypeScript `interface` keyword or a class's public methods**: too narrow — interface here includes every fact a caller must know.
+- **"Interface" as the TypeScript `interface` keyword or a class's public methods**: too narrow: interface here includes every fact a caller must know.
 - **"Boundary"**: overloaded with DDD's bounded context. Say **seam** or **interface**.
 
 ## Going deeper
 
-- **Deepening a cluster given its dependencies** — see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md): dependency categories, seam discipline, and replace-don't-layer testing.
-- **Exploring alternative interfaces** — see [DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md](DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md): spin up parallel sub-agents to design the interface several radically different ways, then compare on depth, locality, and seam placement.
+- **Deepening a cluster given its dependencies**, see [DEEPENING.md](DEEPENING.md): dependency categories, seam discipline, and replace-don't-layer testing.
+- **Exploring alternative interfaces**, see [DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md](DESIGN-IT-TWICE.md): spin up parallel sub-agents to design the interface several radically different ways, then compare on depth, locality, and seam placement.

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

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

skills/engineering/diagnosing-bugs/SKILL.md

@@ -7,20 +7,26 @@ description: Diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions. Use when
 
 A discipline for hard bugs. Skip phases only when explicitly justified.
 
-When exploring the codebase, read `CONTEXT.md` (if it exists) to get a clear mental model of the relevant modules, and check ADRs in the area you're touching.
+When exploring the codebase, read `GLOSSARY.md` (if it exists) to get a clear mental model of the relevant modules, and check ADRs in the area you're touching.
 
-## Phase 1 — Build a feedback loop
+## Redact
 
-**This is the skill.** Everything else is mechanical. If you have a **tight** pass/fail signal for the bug — one that goes red on _this_ bug — you will find the cause; bisection, hypothesis-testing, and instrumentation all just consume it. If you don't have one, no amount of staring at code will save you.
+This skill has you show commands, outputs and captured artifacts. **Redact every secret first**: write `<REDACTED>` in its place. Build loops against env vars, so the credential stays in the environment rather than in what you show. Captured artifacts carry auth headers: quote only the lines that carry the signal.
+
+If the redacted output is not enough to diagnose the bug, say so and ask the user.
+
+## Phase 1: Build a feedback loop
+
+**This is the skill.** Everything else is mechanical. If you have a **tight** pass/fail signal for the bug (one that goes red on _this_ bug), you will find the cause; bisection, hypothesis-testing, and instrumentation all just consume it. If you don't have one, no amount of staring at code will save you.
 
 Spend disproportionate effort here. **Be aggressive. Be creative. Refuse to give up.**
 
-### Ways to construct one — try them in roughly this order
+### Ways to construct one, in roughly this order
 
-1. **Failing test** at whatever seam reaches the bug — unit, integration, e2e.
+1. **Failing test** at whatever seam reaches the bug: unit, integration, e2e.
 2. **Curl / HTTP script** against a running dev server.
 3. **CLI invocation** with a fixture input, diffing stdout against a known-good snapshot.
-4. **Headless browser script** (Playwright / Puppeteer) — drives the UI, asserts on DOM/console/network.
+4. **Headless browser script** (Playwright / Puppeteer) that drives the UI and asserts on DOM/console/network.
 5. **Replay a captured trace.** Save a real network request / payload / event log to disk; replay it through the code path in isolation.
 6. **Throwaway harness.** Spin up a minimal subset of the system (one service, mocked deps) that exercises the bug code path with a single function call.
 7. **Property / fuzz loop.** If the bug is "sometimes wrong output", run 1000 random inputs and look for the failure mode.
@@ -38,48 +44,48 @@ Treat the loop as a product. Once you have _a_ loop, **tighten** it:
 - Can I make the signal sharper? (Assert on the specific symptom, not "didn't crash".)
 - Can I make it more deterministic? (Pin time, seed RNG, isolate filesystem, freeze network.)
 
-A 30-second flaky loop is barely better than no loop; a 2-second deterministic one is tight — a debugging superpower.
+A 30-second flaky loop is barely better than no loop; a 2-second deterministic one is tight, a debugging superpower.
 
 ### Non-deterministic bugs
 
-The goal is not a clean repro but a **higher reproduction rate**. Loop the trigger 100×, parallelise, add stress, narrow timing windows, inject sleeps. A 50%-flake bug is debuggable; 1% is not — keep raising the rate until it's debuggable.
+The goal is not a clean repro but a **higher reproduction rate**. Loop the trigger 100×, parallelise, add stress, narrow timing windows, inject sleeps. A 50%-flake bug is debuggable; 1% is not, so keep raising the rate until it's debuggable.
 
 ### When you genuinely cannot build a loop
 
-Stop and say so explicitly. List what you tried. Ask the user for: (a) access to whatever environment reproduces it, (b) a captured artifact (HAR file, log dump, core dump, screen recording with timestamps), or (c) permission to add temporary production instrumentation. Do **not** proceed to hypothesise without a loop.
+Stop and say so explicitly. List what you tried. Ask the user for: (a) access to whatever environment reproduces it, (b) a redacted captured artifact (HAR file, log dump, core dump, screen recording with timestamps), or (c) permission to add temporary production instrumentation. Do **not** proceed to hypothesise without a loop.
 
-### Completion criterion — a tight loop that goes red
+### Completion criterion: a tight loop that goes red
 
-Phase 1 is done when the loop is **tight** and **red-capable**: you can name **one command** — a script path, a test invocation, a curl — that you have **already run at least once** (paste the invocation and its output), and that is:
+Phase 1 is done when the loop is **tight** and **red-capable**: you can name **one command** (a script path, a test invocation, a curl) that you have **already run at least once** (show the invocation and its output, redacted), and that is:
 
-- [ ] **Red-capable** — it drives the actual bug code path and asserts the **user's exact symptom**, so it can go red on this bug and green once fixed. Not "runs without erroring" — it must be able to _catch this specific bug_.
-- [ ] **Deterministic** — same verdict every run (flaky bugs: a pinned, high reproduction rate, per above).
-- [ ] **Fast** — seconds, not minutes.
-- [ ] **Agent-runnable** — you can run it unattended; a human in the loop only via `scripts/hitl-loop.template.sh`.
+- [ ] **Red-capable**: it drives the actual bug code path and asserts the **user's exact symptom**, so it can go red on this bug and green once fixed. Not "runs without erroring"; it must be able to _catch this specific bug_.
+- [ ] **Deterministic**: same verdict every run (flaky bugs: a pinned, high reproduction rate, per above).
+- [ ] **Fast**: seconds, not minutes.
+- [ ] **Agent-runnable**: you can run it unattended; a human in the loop only via `scripts/hitl-loop.template.sh`.
 
-If you catch yourself reading code to build a theory before this command exists, **stop — jumping straight to a hypothesis is the exact failure this skill prevents.** No red-capable command, no Phase 2.
+If you catch yourself reading code to build a theory before this command exists, **stop: jumping straight to a hypothesis is the exact failure this skill prevents.** No red-capable command, no Phase 2.
 
-## Phase 2 — Reproduce + minimise
+## Phase 2: Reproduce + minimise
 
-Run the loop. Watch it go red — the bug appears.
+Run the loop. Watch it go red as the bug appears.
 
 Confirm:
 
-- [ ] The loop produces the failure mode the **user** described — not a different failure that happens to be nearby. Wrong bug = wrong fix.
+- [ ] The loop produces the failure mode the **user** described, not a different failure that happens to be nearby. Wrong bug = wrong fix.
 - [ ] The failure is reproducible across multiple runs (or, for non-deterministic bugs, reproducible at a high enough rate to debug against).
 - [ ] You have captured the exact symptom (error message, wrong output, slow timing) so later phases can verify the fix actually addresses it.
 
 ### Minimise
 
-Once it's red, shrink the repro to the **smallest scenario that still goes red**. Cut inputs, callers, config, data, and steps **one at a time**, re-running the loop after each cut — keep only what's load-bearing for the failure.
+Once it's red, shrink the repro to the **smallest scenario that still goes red**. Cut inputs, callers, config, data, and steps **one at a time**, re-running the loop after each cut, and keep only what's load-bearing for the failure.
 
 Why bother: a minimal repro shrinks the hypothesis space in Phase 3 (fewer moving parts left to suspect) and becomes the clean regression test in Phase 5.
 
-Done when **every remaining element is load-bearing** — removing any one of them makes the loop go green.
+Done when **every remaining element is load-bearing**: removing any one of them makes the loop go green.
 
 Do not proceed until you have reproduced **and** minimised.
 
-## Phase 3 — Hypothesise
+## Phase 3: Hypothesise
 
 Generate **3–5 ranked hypotheses** before testing any of them. Single-hypothesis generation anchors on the first plausible idea.
 
@@ -87,11 +93,11 @@ Each hypothesis must be **falsifiable**: state the prediction it makes.
 
 > Format: "If <X> is the cause, then <changing Y> will make the bug disappear / <changing Z> will make it worse."
 
-If you cannot state the prediction, the hypothesis is a vibe — discard or sharpen it.
+If you cannot state the prediction, the hypothesis is a vibe: discard or sharpen it.
 
-**Show the ranked list to the user before testing.** They often have domain knowledge that re-ranks instantly ("we just deployed a change to #3"), or know hypotheses they've already ruled out. Cheap checkpoint, big time saver. Don't block on it — proceed with your ranking if the user is AFK.
+**Show the ranked list to the user before testing.** They often have domain knowledge that re-ranks instantly ("we just deployed a change to #3"), or know hypotheses they've already ruled out. Cheap checkpoint, big time saver. Don't block on it; proceed with your ranking if the user is AFK.
 
-## Phase 4 — Instrument
+## Phase 4: Instrument
 
 Each probe must map to a specific prediction from Phase 3. **Change one variable at a time.**
 
@@ -105,9 +111,9 @@ Tool preference:
 
 **Perf branch.** For performance regressions, logs are usually wrong. Instead: establish a baseline measurement (timing harness, `performance.now()`, profiler, query plan), then bisect. Measure first, fix second.
 
-## Phase 5 — Fix + regression test
+## Phase 5: Fix + regression test
 
-Write the regression test **before the fix** — but only if there is a **correct seam** for it.
+Write the regression test **before the fix**, but only if there is a **correct seam** for it.
 
 A correct seam is one where the test exercises the **real bug pattern** as it occurs at the call site. If the only available seam is too shallow (single-caller test when the bug needs multiple callers, unit test that can't replicate the chain that triggered the bug), a regression test there gives false confidence.
 
@@ -121,7 +127,7 @@ If a correct seam exists:
 4. Watch it pass.
 5. Re-run the Phase 1 feedback loop against the original (un-minimised) scenario.
 
-## Phase 6 — Cleanup + post-mortem
+## Phase 6: Cleanup
 
 Required before declaring done:
 
@@ -129,6 +135,4 @@ Required before declaring done:
 - [ ] Regression test passes (or absence of seam is documented)
 - [ ] All `[DEBUG-...]` instrumentation removed (`grep` the prefix)
 - [ ] Throwaway prototypes deleted (or moved to a clearly-marked debug location)
-- [ ] The hypothesis that turned out correct is stated in the commit / PR message — so the next debugger learns
-
-**Then ask: what would have prevented this bug?** If the answer involves architectural change (no good test seam, tangled callers, hidden coupling) hand off to the `/improve-codebase-architecture` skill with the specifics. Make the recommendation **after** the fix is in, not before — you have more information now than when you started.
+- [ ] The hypothesis that turned out correct is stated in the commit / PR message, so the next debugger learns

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

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

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

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

skills/engineering/domain-modeling/ADR-FORMAT.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 ADRs live in `docs/adr/` and use sequential numbering: `0001-slug.md`, `0002-slug.md`, etc.
 
-Create the `docs/adr/` directory lazily — only when the first ADR is needed.
+Create the `docs/adr/` directory lazily: only when the first ADR is needed.
 
 ## Template
 
@@ -12,15 +12,15 @@ Create the `docs/adr/` directory lazily — only when the first ADR is needed.
 {1-3 sentences: what's the context, what did we decide, and why.}
 ```
 
-That's it. An ADR can be a single paragraph. The value is in recording *that* a decision was made and *why* — not in filling out sections.
+That's it. An ADR can be a single paragraph. The value is in recording *that* a decision was made and *why*, not in filling out sections.
 
 ## Optional sections
 
 Only include these when they add genuine value. Most ADRs won't need them.
 
-- **Status** frontmatter (`proposed | accepted | deprecated | superseded by ADR-NNNN`) — useful when decisions are revisited
-- **Considered Options** — only when the rejected alternatives are worth remembering
-- **Consequences** — only when non-obvious downstream effects need to be called out
+- **Status** frontmatter (`proposed | accepted | deprecated | superseded by ADR-NNNN`): useful when decisions are revisited
+- **Considered Options**: only when the rejected alternatives are worth remembering
+- **Consequences**: only when non-obvious downstream effects need to be called out
 
 ## Numbering
 
@@ -30,18 +30,18 @@ Scan `docs/adr/` for the highest existing number and increment by one.
 
 All three of these must be true:
 
-1. **Hard to reverse** — the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful
-2. **Surprising without context** — a future reader will look at the code and wonder "why on earth did they do it this way?"
-3. **The result of a real trade-off** — there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons
+1. **Hard to reverse**: the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful
+2. **Surprising without context**: a future reader will look at the code and wonder "why on earth did they do it this way?"
+3. **The result of a real trade-off**: there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons
 
-If a decision is easy to reverse, skip it — you'll just reverse it. If it's not surprising, nobody will wonder why. If there was no real alternative, there's nothing to record beyond "we did the obvious thing."
+If a decision is easy to reverse, skip it: you'll just reverse it. If it's not surprising, nobody will wonder why. If there was no real alternative, there's nothing to record beyond "we did the obvious thing."
 
 ### What qualifies
 
 - **Architectural shape.** "We're using a monorepo." "The write model is event-sourced, the read model is projected into Postgres."
 - **Integration patterns between contexts.** "Ordering and Billing communicate via domain events, not synchronous HTTP."
-- **Technology choices that carry lock-in.** Database, message bus, auth provider, deployment target. Not every library — just the ones that would take a quarter to swap out.
+- **Technology choices that carry lock-in.** Database, message bus, auth provider, deployment target. Not every library: just the ones that would take a quarter to swap out.
 - **Boundary and scope decisions.** "Customer data is owned by the Customer context; other contexts reference it by ID only." The explicit no-s are as valuable as the yes-s.
 - **Deliberate deviations from the obvious path.** "We're using manual SQL instead of an ORM because X." Anything where a reasonable reader would assume the opposite. These stop the next engineer from "fixing" something that was deliberate.
 - **Constraints not visible in the code.** "We can't use AWS because of compliance requirements." "Response times must be under 200ms because of the partner API contract."
-- **Rejected alternatives when the rejection is non-obvious.** If you considered GraphQL and picked REST for subtle reasons, record it — otherwise someone will suggest GraphQL again in six months.
+- **Rejected alternatives when the rejection is non-obvious.** If you considered GraphQL and picked REST for subtle reasons, record it; otherwise someone will suggest GraphQL again in six months.

skills/engineering/domain-modeling/GLOSSARY-FORMAT.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# CONTEXT.md Format
+# GLOSSARY.md Format
 
 ## Structure
 
@@ -31,18 +31,18 @@ _Avoid_: Client, buyer, account
 
 ## Single vs multi-context repos
 
-**Single context (most repos):** One `CONTEXT.md` at the repo root.
+**Single context (most repos):** One `GLOSSARY.md` at the repo root.
 
-**Multiple contexts:** A `CONTEXT-MAP.md` at the repo root lists the contexts, where they live, and how they relate to each other:
+**Multiple contexts:** A `GLOSSARY-MAP.md` at the repo root lists the contexts, where they live, and how they relate to each other:
 
 ```md
-# Context Map
+# Glossary Map
 
 ## Contexts
 
-- [Ordering](./src/ordering/CONTEXT.md) — receives and tracks customer orders
-- [Billing](./src/billing/CONTEXT.md) — generates invoices and processes payments
-- [Fulfillment](./src/fulfillment/CONTEXT.md) — manages warehouse picking and shipping
+- [Ordering](./src/ordering/GLOSSARY.md): receives and tracks customer orders
+- [Billing](./src/billing/GLOSSARY.md): generates invoices and processes payments
+- [Fulfillment](./src/fulfillment/GLOSSARY.md): manages warehouse picking and shipping
 
 ## Relationships
 
@@ -53,8 +53,8 @@ _Avoid_: Client, buyer, account
 
 The skill infers which structure applies:
 
-- If `CONTEXT-MAP.md` exists, read it to find contexts
-- If only a root `CONTEXT.md` exists, single context
-- If neither exists, create a root `CONTEXT.md` lazily when the first term is resolved
+- If `GLOSSARY-MAP.md` exists, read it to find contexts
+- If only a root `GLOSSARY.md` exists, single context
+- If neither exists, create a root `GLOSSARY.md` lazily when the first term is resolved
 
 When multiple contexts exist, infer which one the current topic relates to. If unclear, ask.

skills/engineering/domain-modeling/SKILL.md

@@ -1,11 +1,11 @@
 ---
 name: domain-modeling
-description: Build and sharpen a project's domain model. Use when the user wants to pin down domain terminology or a ubiquitous language, record an architectural decision, or when another skill needs to maintain the domain model.
+description: Build and sharpen a project's domain model. Use when discussing codebase terminology, writing or editing a GLOSSARY.md, or recording or editing an ADR.
 ---
 
 # Domain Modeling
 
-Actively build and sharpen the project's domain model as you design. This is the *active* discipline — challenging terms, inventing edge-case scenarios, and writing the glossary and decisions down the moment they crystallise. (Merely *reading* `CONTEXT.md` for vocabulary is not this skill — that's a one-line habit any skill can do. This skill is for when you're changing the model, not just consuming it.)
+Actively build and sharpen the project's domain model as you design. This is the *active* discipline: challenging terms, inventing edge-case scenarios, and writing the glossary and decisions down the moment they crystallise. (Merely *reading* `GLOSSARY.md` for vocabulary is not this skill: that's a one-line habit any skill can do. This skill is for when you're changing the model, not just consuming it.)
 
 ## File structure
 
@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ Most repos have a single context:
 
 ```
 /
-├── CONTEXT.md
+├── GLOSSARY.md
 ├── docs/
 │   └── adr/
 │       ├── 0001-event-sourced-orders.md
@@ -21,33 +21,33 @@ Most repos have a single context:
 └── src/
 ```
 
-If a `CONTEXT-MAP.md` exists at the root, the repo has multiple contexts. The map points to where each one lives:
+If a `GLOSSARY-MAP.md` exists at the root, the repo has multiple contexts. The map points to where each one lives:
 
 ```
 /
-├── CONTEXT-MAP.md
+├── GLOSSARY-MAP.md
 ├── docs/
 │   └── adr/                          ← system-wide decisions
 ├── src/
 │   ├── ordering/
-│   │   ├── CONTEXT.md
+│   │   ├── GLOSSARY.md
 │   │   └── docs/adr/                 ← context-specific decisions
 │   └── billing/
-│       ├── CONTEXT.md
+│       ├── GLOSSARY.md
 │       └── docs/adr/
 ```
 
-Create files lazily — only when you have something to write. If no `CONTEXT.md` exists, create one when the first term is resolved. If no `docs/adr/` exists, create it when the first ADR is needed.
+Create files lazily: only when you have something to write. If no `GLOSSARY.md` exists, create one when the first term is resolved. If no `docs/adr/` exists, create it when the first ADR is needed.
 
 ## During the session
 
 ### Challenge against the glossary
 
-When the user uses a term that conflicts with the existing language in `CONTEXT.md`, call it out immediately. "Your glossary defines 'cancellation' as X, but you seem to mean Y — which is it?"
+When the user uses a term that conflicts with the existing language in `GLOSSARY.md`, call it out immediately. "Your glossary defines 'cancellation' as X, but you seem to mean Y. Which is it?"
 
 ### Sharpen fuzzy language
 
-When the user uses vague or overloaded terms, propose a precise canonical term. "You're saying 'account' — do you mean the Customer or the User? Those are different things."
+When the user uses vague or overloaded terms, propose a precise canonical term. "You're saying 'account': do you mean the Customer or the User? Those are different things."
 
 ### Discuss concrete scenarios
 
@@ -55,20 +55,20 @@ When domain relationships are being discussed, stress-test them with specific sc
 
 ### Cross-reference with code
 
-When the user states how something works, check whether the code agrees. If you find a contradiction, surface it: "Your code cancels entire Orders, but you just said partial cancellation is possible — which is right?"
+When the user states how something works, check whether the code agrees. If you find a contradiction, surface it: "Your code cancels entire Orders, but you just said partial cancellation is possible. Which is right?"
 
-### Update CONTEXT.md inline
+### Update GLOSSARY.md inline
 
-When a term is resolved, update `CONTEXT.md` right there. Don't batch these up — capture them as they happen. Use the format in [CONTEXT-FORMAT.md](./CONTEXT-FORMAT.md).
+When a term is resolved, update `GLOSSARY.md` right there. Don't batch these up: capture them as they happen. Use the format in [GLOSSARY-FORMAT.md](./GLOSSARY-FORMAT.md).
 
-`CONTEXT.md` should be totally devoid of implementation details. Do not treat `CONTEXT.md` as a spec, a scratch pad, or a repository for implementation decisions. It is a glossary and nothing else.
+`GLOSSARY.md` should be totally devoid of implementation details. Do not treat `GLOSSARY.md` as a spec, a scratch pad, or a repository for implementation decisions. It is a glossary and nothing else.
 
 ### Offer ADRs sparingly
 
 Only offer to create an ADR when all three are true:
 
-1. **Hard to reverse** — the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful
-2. **Surprising without context** — a future reader will wonder "why did they do it this way?"
-3. **The result of a real trade-off** — there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons
+1. **Hard to reverse**: the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful
+2. **Surprising without context**: a future reader will wonder "why did they do it this way?"
+3. **The result of a real trade-off**: there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons
 
 If any of the three is missing, skip the ADR. Use the format in [ADR-FORMAT.md](./ADR-FORMAT.md).

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

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

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

@@ -4,4 +4,4 @@ description: A relentless interview to sharpen a plan or design, which also crea
 disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
-Run a `/grilling` session, using the `/domain-modeling` skill.
+Call the Skill tool twice, for "grilling" and "domain-modeling".

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

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

skills/engineering/implement-spec/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+---
+name: implement-spec
+description: "Implement the result of /to-spec and /to-tickets in code."
+disable-model-invocation: true
+---
+
+You have been provided a spec. This spec should have tickets associated with it, describing how to implement the spec.
+
+The issue tracker should have been provided to you. If not, tell the user to run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills`.
+
+The goal is the entire spec implemented on a single **integration branch**, with every ticket resolved the way the issue tracker closes work.
+
+The tickets are not a list of steps. They are a **task graph** with blocking relationships between them. This means there is always a **frontier** of tickets which are ready to be grabbed.
+
+Communication to and from subagents should be sparse. Communicate primarily through **context pointers**: to the spec, tickets, research notes, and previous commits. Don't duplicate information already available via pointers.
+
+**Implementer subagents** should be run in the background where possible for maximum concurrency.
+
+## Steps
+
+1. Read the spec and tickets to understand the task graph.
+
+2. (optional) Use an **exploration subagent** to conduct any exploration required by the tickets - relevant codebase files or external documentation. Ensure the exploration subagent can save files - it should save its markdown notes in a directory outside the repo, accessible by all future subagents. This lets **implementer subagents** focus on implementation rather than exploration.
+
+3. Create the integration branch. If the issue tracker closes work through PRs, or the user asks for one, open a draft PR after the first merge in step 5 (a branch with no commits ahead of main can't open one), marked as closing the spec and tickets.
+
+4. Use **implementer subagents** to implement each ticket, each in its own worktree on its own branch. Each implementer subagent:
+   - confirms its worktree is based on the integration branch before starting, and resets onto it if not;
+   - calls the Skill tool with `tdd` to build the ticket;
+   - merges the integration branch tip into its own branch before reporting done
+
+5. Once an **implementer subagent** completes, merge its work to the integration branch with a **merger subagent**.
+
+6. If this changes the **frontier** of available tickets, kick off more **implementer subagents** to work on the new tickets. This allows for maximum concurrency.
+
+7. Once all tickets are complete, call the Skill tool with `code-review` on the integration branch. Fix all issues raised by the code review in a single **implementer subagent**.
+
+8. If a draft PR exists, mark it ready for review. Otherwise, resolve each ticket the way the issue tracker closes work, and report the integration branch.
+
+9. Clean up all **implementer subagent** worktrees.

skills/engineering/implement-spec/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Implement Spec"
+  short_description: "Implement the result of /to-spec and /to-tickets in code."
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

skills/engineering/implement/SKILL.md

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

skills/engineering/implement/agents/openai.yaml

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

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

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # HTML Report Format
 
-The architectural review is rendered as a single self-contained HTML file in the OS temp directory. Tailwind and Mermaid both come from CDNs. Mermaid handles graph-shaped diagrams reliably; hand-built divs and inline SVG handle the more editorial visuals (mass diagrams, cross-sections). Mix the two — don't lean on Mermaid for everything, it'll start to look generic.
+The architectural review is rendered as a single self-contained HTML file in the OS temp directory. Tailwind and Mermaid both come from CDNs. Mermaid handles graph-shaped diagrams reliably; hand-built divs and inline SVG handle the more editorial visuals (mass diagrams, cross-sections). Mix the two: don't lean on Mermaid for everything, it'll start to look generic.
 
 ## Scaffold
 
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ The architectural review is rendered as a single self-contained HTML file in the
 <html lang="en">
   <head>
     <meta charset="utf-8" />
-    <title>Architecture review — {{repo name}}</title>
+    <title>Architecture review for {{repo name}}</title>
     <script src="https://cdn.tailwindcss.com"></script>
     <script type="module">
       import mermaid from "https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/mermaid@11/dist/mermaid.esm.min.mjs";
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ The architectural review is rendered as a single self-contained HTML file in the
 
 ## Header
 
-Repo name, date, and a compact legend: solid box = module, dashed line = seam, red arrow = leakage, thick dark box = deep module. No introduction paragraph — straight into the candidates.
+Repo name, date, and a compact legend: solid box = module, dashed line = seam, red arrow = leakage, thick dark box = deep module. No introduction paragraph. Straight into the candidates.
 
 ## Candidate card
 
@@ -43,20 +43,20 @@ The diagrams carry the weight. Prose is sparse, plain, and uses the glossary ter
 
 Each candidate is one `<article>`:
 
-- **Title** — short, names the deepening (e.g. "Collapse the Order intake pipeline").
-- **Badge row** — recommendation strength (`Strong` = emerald, `Worth exploring` = amber, `Speculative` = slate), plus a tag for the dependency category (`in-process`, `local-substitutable`, `ports & adapters`, `mock`).
-- **Files** — monospaced list, `font-mono text-sm`.
-- **Before / After diagram** — the centrepiece. Two columns, side by side. See patterns below.
-- **Problem** — one sentence. What hurts.
-- **Solution** — one sentence. What changes.
-- **Wins** — bullets, ≤6 words each. e.g. "Tests hit one interface", "Pricing logic stops leaking", "Delete 4 shallow wrappers".
-- **ADR callout** (if applicable) — one line in an amber-tinted box.
+- **Title**: short, names the deepening (e.g. "Collapse the Order intake pipeline").
+- **Badge row**: recommendation strength (`Strong` = emerald, `Worth exploring` = amber, `Speculative` = slate), plus a tag for the dependency category (`in-process`, `local-substitutable`, `ports & adapters`, `mock`).
+- **Files**: monospaced list, `font-mono text-sm`.
+- **Before / After diagram**: the centrepiece. Two columns, side by side. See patterns below.
+- **Problem**: one sentence. What hurts.
+- **Solution**: one sentence. What changes.
+- **Wins**: bullets, ≤6 words each. e.g. "Tests hit one interface", "Pricing logic stops leaking", "Delete 4 shallow wrappers".
+- **ADR callout** (if applicable): one line in an amber-tinted box.
 
 No paragraphs of explanation. If the diagram needs a paragraph to be understood, redraw the diagram.
 
 ## Diagram patterns
 
-Pick the pattern that fits the candidate. Mix them. Don't make every diagram look the same — variety is part of the point.
+Pick the pattern that fits the candidate. Mix them. Don't make every diagram look the same. Variety is part of the point.
 
 ### Mermaid graph (the workhorse for dependencies / call flow)
 
@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ Use a Mermaid `flowchart` or `graph` when the point is "X calls Y calls Z, and l
 
 ### Hand-built boxes-and-arrows (when Mermaid's layout fights you)
 
-Modules as `<div>`s with borders and labels. Arrows as inline SVG `<line>` or `<path>` elements positioned absolutely over a relative container. Reach for this when you want the "after" diagram to feel like one thick-bordered deep module with greyed-out internals — Mermaid won't render that with the right weight.
+Modules as `<div>`s with borders and labels. Arrows as inline SVG `<line>` or `<path>` elements positioned absolutely over a relative container. Reach for this when you want the "after" diagram to feel like one thick-bordered deep module with greyed-out internals, since Mermaid won't render that with the right weight.
 
 ### Cross-section (good for layered shallowness)
 
@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ Stack horizontal bands (`h-12 border-l-4`) to show layers a call passes through.
 
 ### Mass diagram (good for "interface as wide as implementation")
 
-Two rectangles per module — one for interface surface area, one for implementation. Before: interface rectangle is nearly as tall as the implementation rectangle (shallow). After: interface rectangle is short, implementation rectangle is tall (deep).
+Two rectangles per module: one for interface surface area, one for implementation. Before: interface rectangle is nearly as tall as the implementation rectangle (shallow). After: interface rectangle is short, implementation rectangle is tall (deep).
 
 ### Call-graph collapse
 
@@ -96,8 +96,8 @@ Before: a tree of function calls rendered as nested boxes. After: the same tree
 - Lean editorial, not corporate-dashboard. Generous whitespace. Serif optional for headings (`font-serif` works well with stone/slate).
 - Colour sparingly: one accent (emerald or indigo) plus red for leakage and amber for warnings.
 - Keep diagrams ~320px tall so before/after sits comfortably side by side without scrolling.
-- Use `text-xs uppercase tracking-wider` for module labels inside diagrams — they should read as schematic, not as UI.
-- The only scripts are the Tailwind CDN and the Mermaid ESM import. The report is otherwise static — no app code, no interactivity beyond Mermaid's own rendering.
+- Use `text-xs uppercase tracking-wider` for module labels inside diagrams, so they read as schematic, not as UI.
+- The only scripts are the Tailwind CDN and the Mermaid ESM import. The report is otherwise static: no app code, no interactivity beyond Mermaid's own rendering.
 
 ## Top recommendation section
 
@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ One larger card. Candidate name, one sentence on why, anchor link to its card. T
 
 ## Tone
 
-Plain English, concise — but the architectural nouns and verbs come straight from the `/codebase-design` skill. Concision is not an excuse to drift.
+Plain English, concise, but the architectural nouns and verbs come straight from the `/codebase-design` skill. Concision is not an excuse to drift.
 
 **Use exactly:** module, interface, implementation, depth, deep, shallow, seam, adapter, leverage, locality.
 
@@ -113,11 +113,11 @@ Plain English, concise — but the architectural nouns and verbs come straight f
 
 **Phrasings that fit the style:**
 
-- "Order intake module is shallow — interface nearly matches the implementation."
+- "Order intake module is shallow: interface nearly matches the implementation."
 - "Pricing leaks across the seam."
 - "Deepen: one interface, one place to test."
 - "Two adapters justify the seam: HTTP in prod, in-memory in tests."
 
-**Wins bullets** name the gain in glossary terms: *"locality: bugs concentrate in one module"*, *"leverage: one interface, N call sites"*, *"interface shrinks; implementation absorbs the wrappers"*. Don't write *"easier to maintain"* or *"cleaner code"* — those terms aren't in the glossary and don't earn their place.
+**Wins bullets** name the gain in glossary terms: *"locality: bugs concentrate in one module"*, *"leverage: one interface, N call sites"*, *"interface shrinks; implementation absorbs the wrappers"*. Don't write *"easier to maintain"* or *"cleaner code"*, because those terms aren't in the glossary and don't earn their place.
 
 No hedging, no throat-clearing, no "it's worth noting that…". If a sentence could be a bullet, make it a bullet. If a bullet could be cut, cut it. If a term isn't in the `/codebase-design` glossary, reach for one that is before inventing a new one.

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

@@ -6,23 +6,28 @@ disable-model-invocation: true
 
 # Improve Codebase Architecture
 
-Surface architectural friction and propose **deepening opportunities** — refactors that turn shallow modules into deep ones. The aim is testability and AI-navigability.
+Surface architectural friction and propose **deepening opportunities**: refactors that turn shallow modules into deep ones. The aim is testability and AI-navigability.
 
 This command is _informed_ by the project's domain model and built on a shared design vocabulary:
 
-- Run the `/codebase-design` skill for the architecture vocabulary (**module**, **interface**, **depth**, **seam**, **adapter**, **leverage**, **locality**) and its principles (the deletion test, "the interface is the test surface", "one adapter = hypothetical seam, two = real"). Use these terms exactly in every suggestion — don't drift into "component," "service," "API," or "boundary."
-- The domain language in `CONTEXT.md` gives names to good seams; ADRs in `docs/adr/` record decisions this command should not re-litigate.
+- Call the Skill tool with "codebase-design" for the architecture vocabulary (**module**, **interface**, **depth**, **seam**, **adapter**, **leverage**, **locality**) and its principles (the deletion test, "the interface is the test surface", "one adapter = hypothetical seam, two = real"). Use these terms exactly in every suggestion, and don't drift into "component," "service," "API," or "boundary."
+- The domain language in `GLOSSARY.md` gives names to good seams; ADRs in `docs/adr/` record decisions this command should not re-litigate.
 
 ## Process
 
 ### 1. Explore
 
-Read the project's domain glossary (`CONTEXT.md`) and any ADRs in the area you're touching first.
+**Scope before you scan: YAGNI.** Deepening a module pays off by making future changes to it easier, so put extra weight on the parts of the codebase that have recently changed. Decide *where* to look before you look:
 
-Then use the Agent tool with `subagent_type=Explore` to walk the codebase. Don't follow rigid heuristics — explore organically and note where you experience friction:
+- If the user named a direction (a module, a subsystem, a pain point), take it, and skip the inference below.
+- Otherwise, walk back a good stretch of the commit history (`git log --oneline`) to find the codebase's hot spots, the files and areas that keep coming up, and let those paths pull your attention first. If the changes are scattered with no clear hot spot, widen the net.
+
+Read the project's domain glossary (`GLOSSARY.md`) and any ADRs in the area you're touching first.
+
+Then spawn a sub-agent to walk the codebase. Don't follow rigid heuristics; explore organically and note where you experience friction:
 
 - Where does understanding one concept require bouncing between many small modules?
-- Where are modules **shallow** — interface nearly as complex as the implementation?
+- Where are modules **shallow**, with an interface nearly as complex as the implementation?
 - Where have pure functions been extracted just for testability, but the real bugs hide in how they're called (no **locality**)?
 - Where do tightly-coupled modules leak across their seams?
 - Which parts of the codebase are untested, or hard to test through their current interface?
@@ -31,24 +36,24 @@ Apply the **deletion test** to anything you suspect is shallow: would deleting i
 
 ### 2. Present candidates as an HTML report
 
-Write a self-contained HTML file to the OS temp directory so nothing lands in the repo. Resolve the temp dir from `$TMPDIR`, falling back to `/tmp` (or `%TEMP%` on Windows), and write to `<tmpdir>/architecture-review-<timestamp>.html` so each run gets a fresh file. Open it for the user — `xdg-open <path>` on Linux, `open <path>` on macOS, `start <path>` on Windows — and tell them the absolute path.
+Write a self-contained HTML file to the OS temp directory so nothing lands in the repo. Resolve the temp dir from `$TMPDIR`, falling back to `/tmp` (or `%TEMP%` on Windows), and write to `<tmpdir>/architecture-review-<timestamp>.html` so each run gets a fresh file. Open it for the user (`xdg-open <path>` on Linux, `open <path>` on macOS, `start <path>` on Windows) and tell them the absolute path.
 
-The report uses **Tailwind via CDN** for layout and styling, and **Mermaid via CDN** for diagrams where a graph/flow/sequence reliably communicates the structure. Mix Mermaid with hand-crafted CSS/SVG visuals — use Mermaid when relationships are graph-shaped (call graphs, dependencies, sequences), and hand-built divs/SVG when you want something more editorial (mass diagrams, cross-sections, collapse animations). Each candidate gets a **before/after visualisation**. Be visual.
+The report uses **Tailwind via CDN** for layout and styling, and **Mermaid via CDN** for diagrams where a graph/flow/sequence reliably communicates the structure. Mix Mermaid with hand-crafted CSS/SVG visuals: use Mermaid when relationships are graph-shaped (call graphs, dependencies, sequences), and hand-built divs/SVG when you want something more editorial (mass diagrams, cross-sections, collapse animations). Each candidate gets a **before/after visualisation**. Be visual.
 
 For each candidate, render a card with:
 
-- **Files** — which files/modules are involved
-- **Problem** — why the current architecture is causing friction
-- **Solution** — plain English description of what would change
-- **Benefits** — explained in terms of locality and leverage, and how tests would improve
-- **Before / After diagram** — side-by-side, custom-drawn, illustrating the shallowness and the deepening
-- **Recommendation strength** — one of `Strong`, `Worth exploring`, `Speculative`, rendered as a badge
+- **Files**: which files/modules are involved
+- **Problem**: why the current architecture is causing friction
+- **Solution**: plain English description of what would change
+- **Benefits**: explained in terms of locality and leverage, and how tests would improve
+- **Before / After diagram**: side-by-side, custom-drawn, illustrating the shallowness and the deepening
+- **Recommendation strength**: one of `Strong`, `Worth exploring`, `Speculative`, rendered as a badge
 
 End the report with a **Top recommendation** section: which candidate you'd tackle first and why.
 
-**Use CONTEXT.md vocabulary for the domain, and the `/codebase-design` vocabulary for the architecture.** If `CONTEXT.md` defines "Order," talk about "the Order intake module" — not "the FooBarHandler," and not "the Order service."
+**Use GLOSSARY.md vocabulary for the domain, and the `/codebase-design` vocabulary for the architecture.** If `GLOSSARY.md` defines "Order," talk about "the Order intake module," not "the FooBarHandler," and not "the Order service."
 
-**ADR conflicts**: if a candidate contradicts an existing ADR, only surface it when the friction is real enough to warrant revisiting the ADR. Mark it clearly in the card (e.g. a warning callout: _"contradicts ADR-0007 — but worth reopening because…"_). Don't list every theoretical refactor an ADR forbids.
+**ADR conflicts**: if a candidate contradicts an existing ADR, only surface it when the friction is real enough to warrant revisiting the ADR. Mark it clearly in the card (e.g. a warning callout: _"contradicts ADR-0007, but worth reopening because…"_). Don't list every theoretical refactor an ADR forbids.
 
 See [HTML-REPORT.md](HTML-REPORT.md) for the full HTML scaffold, diagram patterns, and styling guidance.
 
@@ -56,11 +61,11 @@ Do NOT propose interfaces yet. After the file is written, ask the user: "Which o
 
 ### 3. Grilling loop
 
-Once the user picks a candidate, run the `/grilling` skill to walk the design tree with them — constraints, dependencies, the shape of the deepened module, what sits behind the seam, what tests survive.
+Once the user picks a candidate, call the Skill tool with "grilling" to walk the decision tree with them: constraints, dependencies, the shape of the deepened module, what sits behind the seam, what tests survive.
 
-Side effects happen inline as decisions crystallize — run the `/domain-modeling` skill to keep the domain model current as you go:
+Side effects happen inline as decisions crystallize; call the Skill tool with "domain-modeling" to keep the domain model current as you go:
 
-- **Naming a deepened module after a concept not in `CONTEXT.md`?** Add the term to `CONTEXT.md`. Create the file lazily if it doesn't exist.
-- **Sharpening a fuzzy term during the conversation?** Update `CONTEXT.md` right there.
-- **User rejects the candidate with a load-bearing reason?** Offer an ADR, framed as: _"Want me to record this as an ADR so future architecture reviews don't re-suggest it?"_ Only offer when the reason would actually be needed by a future explorer to avoid re-suggesting the same thing — skip ephemeral reasons ("not worth it right now") and self-evident ones.
-- **Want to explore alternative interfaces for the deepened module?** Run the `/codebase-design` skill and use its design-it-twice parallel sub-agent pattern.
+- **Naming a deepened module after a concept not in `GLOSSARY.md`?** Add the term to `GLOSSARY.md`. Create the file lazily if it doesn't exist.
+- **Sharpening a fuzzy term during the conversation?** Update `GLOSSARY.md` right there.
+- **User rejects the candidate with a load-bearing reason?** Offer an ADR, framed as: _"Want me to record this as an ADR so future architecture reviews don't re-suggest it?"_ Only offer when the reason would actually be needed by a future explorer to avoid re-suggesting the same thing; skip ephemeral reasons ("not worth it right now") and self-evident ones.
+- **Want to explore alternative interfaces for the deepened module?** Call the Skill tool with "codebase-design" and use its design-it-twice parallel sub-agent pattern.

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

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

skills/engineering/pr/CREDITS.md

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+# Credits
+
+The **Summary** section's menu of visuals (pseudocode, call trees, component trees, file trees, Mermaid, diffs) and its placement guidance come from [Dex Horthy](https://github.com/dexhorthy)'s [`show-me`](https://github.com/humanlayer/humanlayer) skill, reproduced almost word for word and aimed at a diff instead of a live conversation. `pr` does not depend on `show-me` as a skill (it isn't part of this repo, and a hard dependency would break standalone installs), so the content is copied in rather than pointed at; this file is the attribution a dependency would otherwise have carried.

skills/engineering/pr/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,170 @@
+---
+name: pr
+description: "Use when writing a PR body."
+metadata:
+  credits:
+    skill: show-me
+    author: Dex Horthy
+    organisation: Humanlayer
+    url: "https://github.com/humanlayer/skills/blob/main/plugins/show-me/skills/show-me/SKILL.md"
+---
+
+Use this template for writing the PR body:
+
+```markdown
+## Summary
+
+<diagram, diff-sketch, or tree>
+
+## Evidence
+
+- **Before:** <screenshot/output/failing test run>
+  **After:** <screenshot/output/passing test run>
+
+## Merge Danger
+
+**Door:** <one-way or two-way>
+
+<optional: description>
+
+**Blast Radius:** <one-word description>
+
+<optional: potential ramifications of merge>
+```
+
+## Sections
+
+Skip all preambles and keep prose brief. Use the user's domain language from `GLOSSARY.md`.
+
+### Summary
+
+Pick the smallest view that makes the key point clear.
+
+- Show logic or an algorithm as pseudocode:
+
+```text
+on(save)
+  if content is unchanged
+    return cached result
+  write new content
+  return fresh result
+```
+
+- Show runtime control flow as a call tree:
+
+```text
+submitForm
+  createSession
+    persistPrompt
+    launchAgent
+  navigateToSession
+```
+
+- Show UI structure as a component tree, including state and module boundaries that matter:
+
+```text
+<SessionPage> (apps/example/src/routes/session.tsx)
+  useSessionEvents()
+  <SessionToolbar>
+    <RunSkillButton> (packages/ui)
+```
+
+- Show file responsibility or a broad refactor as a shallow file tree:
+
+```text
+src/
+├── commands/       # parses user actions
+├── sessions/       # owns session state
+└── transport/      # sends API requests
+```
+
+- Show component interaction, control flow, or data flow with Mermaid:
+
+```mermaid
+sequenceDiagram
+    participant User
+    participant UI
+    participant Daemon
+    User->>UI: choose command
+    UI->>Daemon: send expanded prompt
+    Daemon-->>UI: stream result
+```
+
+- Use `diff` when the point is what changes and the surrounding shape already exists. Match the diff shape to the topic.
+
+For a component change:
+
+```diff
+ <SessionPage>
+   useSessionEvents()
+   <SessionToolbar>
++    <RunSkillButton />
+   <SessionTimeline>
++    <SkillResultCard />
+```
+
+For a file-layout change:
+
+```diff
+ src/
+ ├── commands/
++│   └── show-me.ts       # expands the slash command
+ ├── sessions/
+-└── transport.ts
++└── transport/
++    ├── client.ts
++    └── stream.ts
+```
+
+For a call-tree or call-stack change:
+
+```diff
+ submitForm
+   createSession
+     persistPrompt
++    expandSkillMention
+     launchAgent
+-  navigateToSession
++  navigateToSession
++    subscribeToEvents
+```
+
+For a state or control-flow change:
+
+```diff
+ on(save)
+-  write content
++  if content is unchanged
++    return cached result
++  write new content
++  invalidate cache
+```
+
+- Show the whole block when most of it is new, when omitted context would hide ownership or order, or when the user needs a copyable target shape:
+
+```ts
+function expandSkill(command: string): string {
+  const skillName = command.slice(1);
+  return `use the ${skillName} skill`;
+}
+```
+
+#### Guidance
+
+Place each visual next to the short text it supports. Keep only the calls, files, props, states, and boundaries needed to answer the user's current question or the options to resolve the current discussion point.
+
+You may use one of these, you may use several, it is unlikely you will use all of them. Use your judgement and don't overwhelm the user.
+
+### Evidence
+
+Concrete evidence that the change works. Show a before and after.
+
+Screenshots are S-tier - when the environment is set up for it and the change is visual.
+
+Execution-based evidence is A-tier. Test results, console output. Show the exact test that now fails and passes, using pseudocode.
+
+### Merge Danger
+
+Describe whether it's a one-way or two-way door. You can walk back through two-way doors, but not one-way doors. A PR that is cheap to roll back is lower risk. Changes that involve destructive actions or hard-to-reverse decisions are one-way doors.
+
+The blast radius is the potential impact or scope of the changes introduced by this PR. Consider all possibilities. Examples are layout shift, breakages for consumers, mobile responsiveness, etc.

skills/engineering/pr/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "PR"
+  short_description: "Write a PR body that's fast to review"

skills/engineering/prototype/LOGIC.md

@@ -1,79 +1,67 @@
 # Logic Prototype
 
-A tiny interactive terminal app that lets the user drive a state model by hand. Use this when the question is about **business logic, state transitions, or data shape** — the kind of thing that looks reasonable on paper but only feels wrong once you push it through real cases.
+A single, self-contained HTML file (a **shareable demo**) that lets anyone drive a state model by clicking buttons. Use this when the question is about **business logic, state transitions, or data shape**: the kind of thing that looks reasonable on paper but only feels wrong once you push it through real cases.
+
+Because it's one file with nothing to install, you can hand it to a non-developer (a designer, a PM, a domain expert) and let them feel the model for themselves. So it speaks their language, not the code's.
 
 ## When this is the right shape
 
 - "I'm not sure if this state machine handles the edge case where X then Y."
 - "Does this data model actually let me represent the case where..."
 - "I want to feel out what the API should look like before writing it."
-- Anything where the user wants to **press buttons and watch state change**.
+- Anything where someone wants to **press buttons and watch state change**.
 
-If the question is "what should this look like" — wrong branch. Use [UI.md](UI.md).
+If the question is "what should this look like," this is the wrong branch. Use [UI.md](UI.md).
 
 ## Process
 
 ### 1. State the question
 
-Before writing code, write down what state model and what question you're prototyping. One paragraph, in the prototype's README or a comment at the top of the file. A logic prototype that answers the wrong question is pure waste — make the question explicit so it can be checked later, whether the user is watching now or returning to it AFK.
+Before writing code, write down what state model and what question you're prototyping. One paragraph, at the top of the demo (in a visible intro, not just a comment). A logic prototype that answers the wrong question is pure waste, so make the question explicit so it can be checked later, whether the user is watching now or returning to it AFK.
 
-### 2. Pick the language
+### 2. Isolate the logic in a portable module
 
-Use whatever the host project uses. If the project has no obvious runtime (e.g. a docs repo), ask.
-
-Match the project's existing conventions for tooling — don't add a new package manager or runtime just for the prototype.
-
-### 3. Isolate the logic in a portable module
-
-Put the actual logic — the bit that's answering the question — behind a small, pure interface that could be lifted out and dropped into the real codebase later. The TUI around it is throwaway; the logic module shouldn't be.
+Put the actual logic (the bit that's answering the question) in a single `<script>` block written as a small, pure module that could be lifted out and dropped into the real codebase later. The page around it is throwaway; this module isn't.
 
 The right shape depends on the question:
 
-- **A pure reducer** — `(state, action) => state`. Good when actions are discrete events and state is a single value.
-- **A state machine** — explicit states and transitions. Good when "which actions are even legal right now" is part of the question.
-- **A small set of pure functions** over a plain data type. Good when there's no implicit current state — just transformations.
+- **A pure reducer**: `(state, action) => state`. Good when actions are discrete events and state is a single value.
+- **A state machine**: explicit states and transitions. Good when "which actions are even legal right now" is part of the question.
+- **A small set of pure functions** over a plain data type. Good when there's no implicit current state, just transformations.
 - **A class or module with a clear method surface** when the logic genuinely owns ongoing internal state.
 
-Pick whichever shape best fits the question being asked, *not* whichever is easiest to wire to a TUI. Keep it pure: no I/O, no terminal code, no `console.log` for control flow. The TUI imports it and calls into it; nothing flows the other direction.
+Pick whichever shape best fits the question being asked, *not* whichever is easiest to wire to a page. Keep it pure: no DOM, no `document`, no button handlers reaching inside it. The page calls into it; nothing flows the other direction. This is what makes the prototype useful past its own lifetime: once the question's answered, the validated reducer / machine / function set lifts into the real module on its own.
 
-This is what makes the prototype useful past its own lifetime. When the question's been answered, the validated reducer / machine / function set can be lifted into the real module — the TUI shell gets deleted.
+### 3. Build the shareable HTML file
 
-### 4. Build the smallest TUI that exposes the state
+One file, plain HTML/CSS/JS: no framework, no bundler, no server, everything inline so it opens by double-click and survives being emailed around. Anyone should be able to run it by opening it.
 
-Build it as a **lightweight TUI** — on every tick, clear the screen (`console.clear()` / `print("\033[2J\033[H")` / equivalent) and re-render the whole frame. The user should always see one stable view, not an ever-growing scrollback.
+Write it for a non-developer. Every label is in **domain language**, not code: buttons and state read like the business, not the reducer. Explain in plain words what's happening.
 
-Each frame has two parts, in this order:
+Lay it out with a clean hierarchy, top to bottom:
 
-1. **Current state**, pretty-printed and diff-friendly (one field per line, or formatted JSON). Use **bold** for field names or section headers and **dim** for less important context (timestamps, IDs, derived values). Native ANSI escape codes are fine — `\x1b[1m` bold, `\x1b[2m` dim, `\x1b[0m` reset. No need to pull in a styling library unless one is already in the project.
-2. **Keyboard shortcuts**, listed at the bottom: `[a] add user  [d] delete user  [t] tick clock  [q] quit`. Bold the key, dim the description, or vice-versa — whatever reads cleanly.
+1. **Title and one-line explanation** of what this demo lets you explore (the question from step 1).
+2. **Current state**: the full relevant state, rendered as a readable panel (labelled fields, not a raw JSON dump), re-rendered after every click so the change is visible. Where it helps a non-developer follow, call out what just changed.
+3. **Free-play buttons**: one button per action, always available, so anyone can poke at the model in any order. Each click dispatches its action and re-renders the state.
+4. **Guided walkthroughs**: a set of **scenarios**, one per tab. Each tab holds a short plain-language description of the scenario (the situation it sets up and what to watch for) and underneath it, the ordered **buttons to press** for that scenario. Each step is a real button: clicking it performs that action and moves to the next step. Starting a walkthrough resets to a known initial state so the scenario runs the same way every time.
 
-Behaviour:
+Choose scenarios that demonstrate the awkward cases, the ones hard to reason about on paper: the happy path, a tricky edge case, an attempt at something that should be illegal.
 
-1. **Initialise state** — a single in-memory object/struct. Render the first frame on start.
-2. **Read one keystroke (or one line)** at a time, dispatch to a handler that mutates state.
-3. **Re-render** the full frame after every action — don't append, replace.
-4. **Loop until quit.**
+Keep it beautiful but restrained: clean typography, generous spacing, one accent colour. No animations, no gimmicks: nothing that competes with the state and the buttons.
 
-The whole frame should fit on one screen.
+### 4. Hand it over
 
-### 5. Make it runnable in one command
+Send them the file, or open it for them. They'll click through the walkthroughs and free-play whenever they get to it; the interesting moments are when they say "wait, that shouldn't be possible" or "huh, I assumed X would be different"; those are the bugs in the _idea_, which is the whole point. If they want new actions or a new scenario, add them. Prototypes evolve.
 
-Add a script to the project's existing task runner (`package.json` scripts, `Makefile`, `justfile`, `pyproject.toml`). The user should run `pnpm run <prototype-name>` or equivalent — never need to remember a path.
+### 5. Capture the answer and the prototype
 
-If the host project has no task runner, just put the command at the top of the prototype's README.
-
-### 6. Hand it over
-
-Give the user the run command. They'll drive it themselves; the interesting moments are when they say "wait, that shouldn't be possible" or "huh, I assumed X would be different" — those are the bugs in the _idea_, which is the whole point. If they want new actions added, add them. Prototypes evolve.
-
-### 7. Capture the answer
-
-When the prototype has done its job, the answer to the question is the only thing worth keeping. If the user is around, ask what it taught them. If not, leave a `NOTES.md` next to the prototype so the answer can be filled in (or filled in by you, if you've watched the session) before the prototype gets deleted.
+Once the prototype has answered its question, capture the answer, then capture the prototype the way the [SKILL](SKILL.md) describes. The logic-specific mapping: the validated reducer / machine / function set lifts into the real module (the decision, absorbed); the HTML shell rides along to the throwaway branch that keeps the prototype as a primary source, and being one self-contained file, it stays trivially re-runnable there.
 
 ## Anti-patterns
 
 - **Don't add tests.** A prototype that needs tests is no longer a prototype.
-- **Don't wire it to the real database.** Use an in-memory store unless the question is specifically about persistence.
+- **Don't wire it to the real database.** Use in-memory state unless the question is specifically about persistence.
 - **Don't generalise.** No "what if we wanted to support X later." The prototype answers one question.
-- **Don't blur the logic and the TUI together.** If the reducer / state machine references `console.log`, prompts, or terminal escape codes, it's no longer portable. Keep the TUI as a thin shell over a pure module.
-- **Don't ship the TUI shell into production.** The shell is optimised for being driven by hand from a terminal. The logic module behind it is the bit worth keeping.
+- **Don't blur the logic and the page together.** If the pure module references the DOM, `document`, or button handlers, it's no longer liftable. Keep the page as a thin shell over a pure module.
+- **Don't reach for a framework, bundler, or server.** One file the recipient double-clicks; a React app or a dev server defeats "shareable".
+- **Don't ship the HTML shell into production.** The page is optimised for being clicked through by hand. The logic module behind it is the bit worth keeping.

skills/engineering/prototype/SKILL.md

@@ -1,7 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: prototype
-description: Build a throwaway prototype to flesh out a design — a runnable terminal app for state/business-logic questions, or several radically different UI variations toggleable from one route.
-disable-model-invocation: true
+description: Build a throwaway prototype to answer a design question. Use when the user wants to sanity-check whether a state model or logic feels right, or explore what a UI should look like.
 ---
 
 # Prototype
@@ -10,22 +9,18 @@ A prototype is **throwaway code that answers a question**. The question decides
 
 ## Pick a branch
 
-Identify which question is being answered — from the user's prompt, the surrounding code, or by asking if the user is around:
+Identify which question is being answered, using the user's prompt, the surrounding code, or by asking if the user is around:
 
-- **"Does this logic / state model feel right?"** → [LOGIC.md](LOGIC.md). Build a tiny interactive terminal app that pushes the state machine through cases that are hard to reason about on paper.
+- **"Does this logic / state model feel right?"** → [LOGIC.md](LOGIC.md). Build a single shareable HTML file (free-play buttons plus tabbed guided walkthroughs) that pushes the state machine through cases that are hard to reason about on paper, and that a non-developer can drive.
 - **"What should this look like?"** → [UI.md](UI.md). Generate several radically different UI variations on a single route, switchable via a URL search param and a floating bottom bar.
 
-The two branches produce very different artifacts — getting this wrong wastes the whole prototype. If the question is genuinely ambiguous and the user isn't reachable, default to whichever branch better matches the surrounding code (a backend module → logic; a page or component → UI) and state the assumption at the top of the prototype.
+The two branches produce very different artifacts, so getting this wrong wastes the whole prototype. If the question is genuinely ambiguous and the user isn't reachable, default to whichever branch better matches the surrounding code (a backend module → logic; a page or component → UI) and state the assumption at the top of the prototype.
 
 ## Rules that apply to both
 
-1. **Throwaway from day one, and clearly marked as such.** Locate the prototype code close to where it will actually be used (next to the module or page it's prototyping for) so context is obvious — but name it so a casual reader can see it's a prototype, not production. For throwaway UI routes, obey whatever routing convention the project already uses; don't invent a new top-level structure.
-2. **One command to run.** Whatever the project's existing task runner supports — `pnpm <name>`, `python <path>`, `bun <path>`, etc. The user must be able to start it without thinking.
-3. **No persistence by default.** State lives in memory. Persistence is the thing the prototype is _checking_, not something it should depend on. If the question explicitly involves a database, hit a scratch DB or a local file with a clear "PROTOTYPE — wipe me" name.
-4. **Skip the polish.** No tests, no error handling beyond what makes the prototype _runnable_, no abstractions. The point is to learn something fast and then delete it.
+1. **Throwaway from day one, and clearly marked as such.** Locate the prototype code close to where it will actually be used (next to the module or page it's prototyping for) so context is obvious, but name it so a casual reader can see it's a prototype, not production. For throwaway UI routes, obey whatever routing convention the project already uses; don't invent a new top-level structure.
+2. **Trivial to run.** A UI prototype starts from one command in the project's task runner: `pnpm <name>`, `python <path>`, `bun <path>`, etc. A logic demo is a single HTML file the user double-clicks. Either way, no thinking required to start it.
+3. **No persistence by default.** State lives in memory. Persistence is the thing the prototype is _checking_, not something it should depend on. If the question explicitly involves a database, hit a scratch DB or a local file with a clear "PROTOTYPE, wipe me" name.
+4. **Skip the polish.** No tests, no error handling beyond what makes the prototype _runnable_, no abstractions. The point is to learn something fast.
 5. **Surface the state.** After every action (logic) or on every variant switch (UI), print or render the full relevant state so the user can see what changed.
-6. **Delete or absorb when done.** When the prototype has answered its question, either delete it or fold the validated decision into the real code — don't leave it rotting in the repo.
-
-## When done
-
-The _answer_ is the only thing worth keeping from a prototype. Capture it somewhere durable (commit message, ADR, issue, or a `NOTES.md` next to the prototype) along with the question it was answering. If the user is around, that capture is a quick conversation; if not, leave the placeholder so they (or you, on the next pass) can fill in the verdict before deleting the prototype.
+6. **Capture it when done.** Fold any validated decision into the real code, then capture the prototype itself as a **primary source**: commit it to a throwaway branch, out of main, and leave a context pointer to that branch on the implementation issue. Capture the answer too (the verdict and the question it settled) in the issue or a commit. The main branch keeps only the validated decision.

skills/engineering/prototype/UI.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 Generate **several radically different UI variations** on a single route, switchable from a floating bottom bar. The user flips between variants in the browser, picks one (or steals bits from each), then throws the rest away.
 
-If the question is about logic/state rather than what something looks like — wrong branch. Use [LOGIC.md](LOGIC.md).
+If the question is about logic/state rather than what something looks like, this is the wrong branch. Use [LOGIC.md](LOGIC.md).
 
 ## When this is the right shape
 
@@ -11,21 +11,21 @@ If the question is about logic/state rather than what something looks like — w
 - "Try a different layout for the settings screen."
 - Any time the user would otherwise spend a day picking between three vague mockups in their head.
 
-## Two sub-shapes — strongly prefer sub-shape A
+## Two sub-shapes: strongly prefer sub-shape A
 
-A UI prototype is much easier to judge when it's **butting up against the rest of the app** — real header, real sidebar, real data, real density. A throwaway route on its own is a vacuum: every variant looks fine in isolation. Default to sub-shape A whenever there's a plausible existing page to host the variants. Only reach for sub-shape B if the prototype genuinely has no nearby home.
+A UI prototype is much easier to judge when it's **butting up against the rest of the app**: real header, real sidebar, real data, real density. A throwaway route on its own is a vacuum: every variant looks fine in isolation. Default to sub-shape A whenever there's a plausible existing page to host the variants. Only reach for sub-shape B if the prototype genuinely has no nearby home.
 
-### Sub-shape A — adjustment to an existing page (preferred)
+### Sub-shape A: adjustment to an existing page (preferred)
 
-The route already exists. Variants are rendered **on the same route**, gated by a `?variant=` URL search param. The existing data fetching, params, and auth all stay — only the rendering swaps. This is the default; pick it unless there's a specific reason not to.
+The route already exists. Variants are rendered **on the same route**, gated by a `?variant=` URL search param. The existing data fetching, params, and auth all stay. Only the rendering swaps. This is the default; pick it unless there's a specific reason not to.
 
-If the prototype is for something that doesn't yet have a page but *would naturally live inside one* (a new section of the dashboard, a new card on the settings screen, a new step in an existing flow) — that's still sub-shape A. Mount the variants inside the host page.
+If the prototype is for something that doesn't yet have a page but *would naturally live inside one* (a new section of the dashboard, a new card on the settings screen, a new step in an existing flow), it's still sub-shape A. Mount the variants inside the host page.
 
-### Sub-shape B — a new page (last resort)
+### Sub-shape B: a new page (last resort)
 
-Only use this when the thing being prototyped genuinely has no existing page to live inside — e.g. an entirely new top-level surface, or a flow that can't be embedded anywhere sensible.
+Only use this when the thing being prototyped genuinely has no existing page to live inside (e.g. an entirely new top-level surface, or a flow that can't be embedded anywhere sensible).
 
-Create a **throwaway route** following whatever routing convention the project already uses — don't invent a new top-level structure. Name it so it's obviously a prototype (e.g. include the word `prototype` in the path or filename). Same `?variant=` pattern.
+Create a **throwaway route** following whatever routing convention the project already uses. Don't invent a new top-level structure. Name it so it's obviously a prototype (e.g. include the word `prototype` in the path or filename). Same `?variant=` pattern.
 
 Before committing to sub-shape B, sanity-check: is there really no existing page this could be embedded in? An empty route hides design problems that a populated one would expose.
 
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ In both sub-shapes the floating bottom bar is identical.
 
 ### 1. State the question and pick N
 
-Default to **3 variants**. More than 5 stops being radically different and starts being noise — cap there.
+Default to **3 variants**. More than 5 stops being radically different and starts being noise, so cap there.
 
 Write down the plan in one line, in the prototype's location or a top-of-file comment:
 
@@ -51,14 +51,14 @@ Draft each variant. Hold each one to:
 - The project's component library / styling system (TailwindCSS, shadcn, MUI, plain CSS, whatever).
 - A clear exported component name, e.g. `VariantA`, `VariantB`, `VariantC`.
 
-Variants must be **structurally different** — different layout, different information hierarchy, different primary affordance, not just different colours. Three slightly-tweaked card grids isn't a UI prototype, it's wallpaper. If two drafts come out too similar, redo one with explicit "do not use a card grid" guidance.
+Variants must be **structurally different**: different layout, different information hierarchy, different primary affordance, not just different colours. Three slightly-tweaked card grids isn't a UI prototype, it's wallpaper. If two drafts come out too similar, redo one with explicit "do not use a card grid" guidance.
 
 ### 3. Wire them together
 
 Create a single switcher component on the route:
 
 ```tsx
-// pseudo-code — adapt to the project's framework
+// pseudo-code, adapt to the project's framework
 const variant = searchParams.get('variant') ?? 'A';
 return (
   <>
@@ -78,35 +78,35 @@ For sub-shape B (new page): the throwaway route under `/prototype/<name>` mounts
 
 A small fixed-position bar at the bottom-centre of the screen with three pieces:
 
-- **Left arrow** — cycles to the previous variant (wraps around).
-- **Variant label** — shows the current variant key and, if the variant exports a name, that name too. e.g. `B — Sidebar layout`.
-- **Right arrow** — cycles forward (wraps around).
+- **Left arrow**: cycles to the previous variant (wraps around).
+- **Variant label**: shows the current variant key and, if the variant exports a name, that name too. e.g. `B (Sidebar layout)`.
+- **Right arrow**: cycles forward (wraps around).
 
 Behaviour:
 
-- Clicking an arrow updates the URL search param (use the framework's router — `router.replace` on Next, `navigate` on React Router, etc) so the variant is shareable and reload-stable.
+- Clicking an arrow updates the URL search param (use the framework's router, e.g. `router.replace` on Next, `navigate` on React Router, etc) so the variant is shareable and reload-stable.
 - Keyboard: `←` and `→` arrow keys also cycle. Don't intercept arrow keys when an `<input>`, `<textarea>`, or `[contenteditable]` is focused.
 - Visually distinct from the page (e.g. high-contrast pill, subtle shadow) so it's obviously not part of the design being evaluated.
-- Hidden in production builds — gate on `process.env.NODE_ENV !== 'production'` or an equivalent check, so a stray prototype merge can't ship the bar to users.
+- Hidden in production builds: gate on `process.env.NODE_ENV !== 'production'` or an equivalent check, so a stray prototype merge can't ship the bar to users.
 
 Put the switcher in a single shared component so both sub-shapes can reuse it. Locate it wherever shared UI lives in the project.
 
 ### 5. Hand it over
 
-Surface the URL (and the `?variant=` keys). The user will flip through whenever they get to it. The interesting feedback is usually **"I want the header from B with the sidebar from C"** — that's the actual design they want.
+Surface the URL (and the `?variant=` keys). The user will flip through whenever they get to it. The interesting feedback is usually **"I want the header from B with the sidebar from C"**, which is the actual design they want.
 
 ### 6. Capture the answer and clean up
 
-Once a variant has won, write down which one and why (commit message, ADR, issue, or a `NOTES.md` next to the prototype if running AFK and the user hasn't responded yet). Then:
+Once a variant has won, capture the answer (which variant and why), then capture the prototype the way the [SKILL](SKILL.md) describes. Fold the winner into the real code and move the rest onto the throwaway branch, not into main:
 
-- **Sub-shape A** — delete the losing variants and the switcher; fold the winner into the existing page.
-- **Sub-shape B** — promote the winning variant to a real route, delete the throwaway route and the switcher.
+- **Sub-shape A**: fold the winner into the existing page; drop the losing variants and the switcher from main.
+- **Sub-shape B**: promote the winning variant to a real route; drop the throwaway route and the switcher from main.
 
-Don't leave variant components or the switcher lying around. They rot fast and confuse the next reader.
+The full set of variants is the primary source, so it lands on the throwaway branch, not the bin, since variant components and the switcher left in the main branch rot fast and confuse the next reader.
 
 ## Anti-patterns
 
 - **Variants that differ only in colour or copy.** That's a tweak, not a prototype. Real variants disagree about structure.
 - **Sharing too much code between variants.** A shared `<Header>` is fine; a shared `<Layout>` defeats the point. Each variant should be free to throw out the layout.
-- **Wiring variants to real mutations.** Read-only prototypes are fine. If a variant needs to mutate, point it at a stub — the question is "what should this look like", not "does the backend work".
+- **Wiring variants to real mutations.** Read-only prototypes are fine. If a variant needs to mutate, point it at a stub: the question is "what should this look like", not "does the backend work".
 - **Promoting the prototype directly to production.** The variant code was written under prototype constraints (no tests, minimal error handling). Rewrite it properly when you fold it in.

skills/engineering/prototype/agents/openai.yaml

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

skills/engineering/research/SKILL.md

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

skills/engineering/research/agents/openai.yaml

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

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

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

skills/engineering/retro/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+---
+name: retro
+description: "Conduct a retrospective on a coding session."
+disable-model-invocation: true
+---
+
+The user has asked for a **retrospective**. You are suggesting improvements to the coding agent's **environment** to improve future runs.
+
+## Steps
+
+1. Call the Skill tool with `writing-for-agents` for the writing style guide.
+
+2. Read the primary sources for the session the user specifies. This may mean searching through session logs on this machine. If the user doesn't specify a session, default to the current one.
+
+3. Look for candidates for improvement in these categories.
+
+- **Navigation**: how easy was it for the agent to find the right files? Are there hidden dependencies between files? Would a **navigation pointer** make it easier? _Use when_ the session took a long time to find a piece of information.
+- **Automated checks**: are there automated checks that could catch errors the agent made? Linting, typing, tests, filesystem linters? Read the repo's own check command first (its `package.json`/build-tool `lint`/`check` scripts, its CI workflow), so a check that already exists but sits unwired or silently broken is the finding, not a reinvention. A repo with no **guardrail** (no pre-commit hook and no CI job running its lint/typecheck/test command) is itself a finding: an un-linted repo is a standing missed opportunity, not a neutral default. _Use when_ the agent made a mistake an automated check could have caught, or the repo has no guardrail at all.
+- **Coding standards**: should the **reviewer agent** be given a new rule to enforce? Should an existing rule be removed or clarified? Classify the violation first: a **mechanical** one (a fixed syntactic pattern, a banned API, an import shape, a file-location rule) gets a deterministic check, full stop: a custom rule in the repo's own linter, a new pre-commit hook, or a new CI job, whichever the repo's language and existing guardrail make cheapest. Default to building the check over writing the rule. Reserve `CODING_STANDARDS.md` for genuine **judgement calls** (cross-file consistency, "matches the surrounding style," anything no guardrail could ever substitute for). _Use when_ the reviewer agent failed to catch a mistake.
+- **Global AGENTS.md**: are there any steering instructions that should be moved to coding standards (or automated checks) instead? _Use when_ the AGENTS.md file is particularly large - in the repo OR the user's global scope.
+- **Tool economy**: did the agent make expensive tool calls that could be streamlined? Is there any custom tooling (CLI's, MCP's) that is particularly token-inefficient? _Use when_ the agent made an expensive tool call.
+- **No-ops**: look for instructions in steering files that don't modify the agent's behavior. _Use when_ the steering files are large and unwieldy.
+- **Information access**: look for opportunities to increase the agent's access to information. Teeing dev server logs, readonly access to third-party services. _Use when_ a crucial piece of information was not available to the agent.
+
+4. Present these candidates to the user, in order of severity.
+
+## Reference
+
+### Implementation vs Review
+
+Remember that all work goes through two stages: implementation and review. The implementation agent has the most **context pressure**. They are responsible for exploration, writing code, and debugging failures.
+
+The review agent has the least context pressure - it receives a diff, so no exploration needed. It often does not need to write code or debug.
+
+This means that the review agent should be responsible for imposing coding standards, not the implementation agent.
+
+### Files
+
+You have access to several files in the repo:
+
+- `CLAUDE.md`/`AGENTS.md`: these files are pushed to the context window of any agent working in this repo. They should be used incredibly sparingly, usually only for **navigation pointers** to other files.
+- `CODING_STANDARDS.md`: this file is read during review, not implementation. Add **navigation pointers** to docs folders if the standards file gets more than 1,000 lines long.
+- Docs: use docs as references files, pointed to by other files. Look for existing docs before writing new ones.
+- Skills: use skills for docs (since their description goes into the agent's context window), or for user-invoked commands. Follow the advice in the `writing-for-agents` skill.

skills/engineering/retro/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Retro"
+  short_description: "Conduct a retrospective on a coding session."
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: false

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

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: setup-matt-pocock-skills
-description: Configure this repo for the engineering skills — set up its issue tracker, triage label vocabulary, and domain doc layout. Run once before first use of the other engineering skills.
+description: "Configure this repo for the engineering skills: set up its issue tracker, triage label vocabulary, and domain doc layout. Run once before first use of the other engineering skills."
 disable-model-invocation: true
 ---
 
@@ -8,9 +8,9 @@ disable-model-invocation: true
 
 Scaffold the per-repo configuration that the engineering skills assume:
 
-- **Issue tracker** — where issues live (GitHub by default; local markdown is also supported out of the box)
-- **Triage labels** — the strings used for the five canonical triage roles
-- **Domain docs** — where `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs live, and the consumer rules for reading them
+- **Issue tracker**: where issues live (GitHub by default; local markdown is also supported out of the box)
+- **Triage labels**: the strings used for the five canonical triage roles
+- **Domain docs**: where `GLOSSARY.md` and ADRs live, and the consumer rules for reading them
 
 This is a prompt-driven skill, not a deterministic script. Explore, present what you found, confirm with the user, then write.
 
@@ -20,59 +20,52 @@ This is a prompt-driven skill, not a deterministic script. Explore, present what
 
 Look at the current repo to understand its starting state. Read whatever exists; don't assume:
 
-- `git remote -v` and `.git/config` — is this a GitHub repo? Which one?
-- `AGENTS.md` and `CLAUDE.md` at the repo root — does either exist? Is there already an `## Agent skills` section in either?
-- `CONTEXT.md` and `CONTEXT-MAP.md` at the repo root
+- `git remote -v` and `.git/config`: is this a GitHub repo? Which one?
+- `AGENTS.md` and `CLAUDE.md` at the repo root: does either exist? Is there already an `## Agent skills` section in either?
+- `GLOSSARY.md` and `GLOSSARY-MAP.md` at the repo root
 - `docs/adr/` and any `src/*/docs/adr/` directories
-- `docs/agents/` — does this skill's prior output already exist?
-- `.scratch/` — sign that a local-markdown issue tracker convention is already in use
+- `docs/agents/`: does this skill's prior output already exist?
+- `.scratch/`: a sign that a local-markdown issue tracker convention is already in use
+- Is the `triage` skill installed? (a `triage` skill folder alongside this one, or `triage` in your available skills.) This decides whether Section B runs at all.
+- Monorepo signals: a `pnpm-workspace.yaml`, a `workspaces` field in `package.json`, or a populated `packages/*` with its own `src/`. These are present only in a genuinely large multi-package repo; their absence means single-context, which is almost every repo.
 
 ### 2. Present findings and ask
 
-Summarise what's present and what's missing. Then walk the user through the three decisions **one at a time** — present a section, get the user's answer, then move to the next. Don't dump all three at once.
+Summarise what's present and what's missing. Then take the sections in order. One section, one answer, then the next.
 
-Assume the user does not know what these terms mean. Each section starts with a short explainer (what it is, why these skills need it, what changes if they pick differently). Then show the choices and the default.
+Lead each section with the recommended answer so the user can accept it in a word. Give a one-line explainer only when the choice genuinely branches; skip the section entirely when exploration already settled it (Section B when `triage` isn't installed, Section C when there's no monorepo).
 
-**Section A — Issue tracker.**
+**Section A: Issue tracker.**
 
-> Explainer: The "issue tracker" is where issues live for this repo. Skills like `to-issues`, `triage`, `to-prd`, and `qa` read from and write to it — they need to know whether to call `gh issue create`, write a markdown file under `.scratch/`, or follow some other workflow you describe. Pick the place you actually track work for this repo.
+> Explainer: The "issue tracker" is where issues live for this repo. Skills like `to-tickets`, `triage`, and `to-spec` read from and write to it. They need to know whether to call `gh issue create`, write a markdown file under `.scratch/`, or follow some other workflow you describe. Pick the place you actually track work for this repo.
 
 Default posture: these skills were designed for GitHub. If a `git remote` points at GitHub, propose that. If a `git remote` points at GitLab (`gitlab.com` or a self-hosted host), propose GitLab. Otherwise (or if the user prefers), offer:
 
-- **GitHub** — issues live in the repo's GitHub Issues (uses the `gh` CLI)
-- **GitLab** — issues live in the repo's GitLab Issues (uses the [`glab`](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/cli) CLI)
-- **Local markdown** — issues live as files under `.scratch/<feature>/` in this repo (good for solo projects or repos without a remote)
-- **Other** (Jira, Linear, etc.) — ask the user to describe the workflow in one paragraph; the skill will record it as freeform prose
+- **GitHub**: issues live in the repo's GitHub Issues (uses the `gh` CLI)
+- **GitLab**: issues live in the repo's GitLab Issues (uses the [`glab`](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/cli) CLI)
+- **Local markdown**: issues live as files under `.scratch/<feature>/` in this repo (good for solo projects or repos without a remote)
+- **Other** (Jira, Linear, etc.): ask the user to describe the workflow in one paragraph; the skill will record it as freeform prose
 
-**Section B — Triage label vocabulary.**
+Record the choice in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`. The GitHub and GitLab templates carry a "PRs as a request surface" flag, defaulted **off**. Leave it off and don't raise it: a user who wants external PRs in the triage queue can flip the flag in the file later.
 
-> Explainer: When the `triage` skill processes an incoming issue, it moves it through a state machine — needs evaluation, waiting on reporter, ready for an AFK agent to pick up, ready for a human, or won't fix. To do that, it needs to apply labels (or the equivalent in your issue tracker) that match strings *you've actually configured*. If your repo already uses different label names (e.g. `bug:triage` instead of `needs-triage`), map them here so the skill applies the right ones instead of creating duplicates.
+**Section B: Triage label vocabulary.** Skip this section entirely if the `triage` skill isn't installed (exploration told you), since an uninstalled skill needs no labels.
 
-The five canonical roles:
+If it is installed, ask exactly one question:
 
-- `needs-triage` — maintainer needs to evaluate
-- `needs-info` — waiting on reporter
-- `ready-for-agent` — fully specified, AFK-ready (an agent can pick it up with no human context)
-- `ready-for-human` — needs human implementation
-- `wontfix` — will not be actioned
+> Do you want to keep the default triage labels? (recommended: **yes**)
 
-Default: each role's string equals its name. Ask the user if they want to override any. If their issue tracker has no existing labels, the defaults are fine.
+The defaults are the five canonical roles, each label string equal to its name: `needs-triage`, `needs-info`, `ready-for-agent`, `ready-for-human`, `wontfix`. On **yes**, write them as-is. Only if the user says no, usually because their tracker already uses other names (e.g. `bug:triage` for `needs-triage`), collect the overrides so `triage` applies existing labels instead of creating duplicates.
 
-**Section C — Domain docs.**
+**Section C: Domain docs.** Default to **single-context** (one `GLOSSARY.md` + `docs/adr/` at the repo root). This fits almost every repo; write it without asking.
 
-> Explainer: Some skills (`improve-codebase-architecture`, `diagnosing-bugs`, `tdd`) read a `CONTEXT.md` file to learn the project's domain language, and `docs/adr/` for past architectural decisions. They need to know whether the repo has one global context or multiple (e.g. a monorepo with separate frontend/backend contexts) so they look in the right place.
-
-Confirm the layout:
-
-- **Single-context** — one `CONTEXT.md` + `docs/adr/` at the repo root. Most repos are this.
-- **Multi-context** — `CONTEXT-MAP.md` at the root pointing to per-context `CONTEXT.md` files (typically a monorepo).
+Offer **multi-context** (a root `GLOSSARY-MAP.md` pointing to per-context `GLOSSARY.md` files) only when exploration found monorepo signals. Then confirm which layout they want.
 
 ### 3. Confirm and edit
 
 Show the user a draft of:
 
 - The `## Agent skills` block to add to whichever of `CLAUDE.md` / `AGENTS.md` is being edited (see step 4 for selection rules)
-- The contents of `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`, `docs/agents/triage-labels.md`, `docs/agents/domain.md`
+- The contents of `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`, `docs/agents/domain.md`, and `docs/agents/triage-labels.md` (the last only when `triage` is installed)
 
 Let them edit before writing.
 
@@ -82,9 +75,9 @@ Let them edit before writing.
 
 - If `CLAUDE.md` exists, edit it.
 - Else if `AGENTS.md` exists, edit it.
-- If neither exists, ask the user which one to create — don't pick for them.
+- If neither exists, ask the user which one to create; don't pick for them.
 
-Never create `AGENTS.md` when `CLAUDE.md` already exists (or vice versa) — always edit the one that's already there.
+Never create `AGENTS.md` when `CLAUDE.md` already exists (or vice versa); always edit the one that's already there.
 
 If an `## Agent skills` block already exists in the chosen file, update its contents in-place rather than appending a duplicate. Don't overwrite user edits to the surrounding sections.
 
@@ -103,19 +96,21 @@ The block:
 
 ### Domain docs
 
-[one-line summary of layout — "single-context" or "multi-context"]. See `docs/agents/domain.md`.
+[one-line summary of layout: "single-context" or "multi-context"]. See `docs/agents/domain.md`.
 ```
 
-Then write the three docs files using the seed templates in this skill folder as a starting point:
+Include the `### Triage labels` sub-block, and write `docs/agents/triage-labels.md`, only when `triage` is installed and Section B ran. When it isn't, both are omitted.
 
-- [issue-tracker-github.md](./issue-tracker-github.md) — GitHub issue tracker
-- [issue-tracker-gitlab.md](./issue-tracker-gitlab.md) — GitLab issue tracker
-- [issue-tracker-local.md](./issue-tracker-local.md) — local-markdown issue tracker
-- [triage-labels.md](./triage-labels.md) — label mapping
-- [domain.md](./domain.md) — domain doc consumer rules + layout
+Then write the docs files using the seed templates in this skill folder as a starting point:
+
+- [issue-tracker-github.md](./issue-tracker-github.md): GitHub issue tracker
+- [issue-tracker-gitlab.md](./issue-tracker-gitlab.md): GitLab issue tracker
+- [issue-tracker-local.md](./issue-tracker-local.md): local-markdown issue tracker
+- [triage-labels.md](./triage-labels.md): label mapping (only if `triage` is installed)
+- [domain.md](./domain.md): domain doc consumer rules + layout
 
 For "other" issue trackers, write `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` from scratch using the user's description.
 
 ### 5. Done
 
-Tell the user the setup is complete and which engineering skills will now read from these files. Mention they can edit `docs/agents/*.md` directly later — re-running this skill is only necessary if they want to switch issue trackers or restart from scratch.
+Tell the user the setup is complete and which engineering skills will now read from these files. Mention they can edit `docs/agents/*.md` directly later; re-running this skill is only necessary if they want to switch issue trackers or restart from scratch.

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

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

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

@@ -4,9 +4,9 @@ How the engineering skills should consume this repo's domain documentation when
 
 ## Before exploring, read these
 
-- **`CONTEXT.md`** at the repo root, or
-- **`CONTEXT-MAP.md`** at the repo root if it exists — it points at one `CONTEXT.md` per context. Read each one relevant to the topic.
-- **`docs/adr/`** — read ADRs that touch the area you're about to work in. In multi-context repos, also check `src/<context>/docs/adr/` for context-scoped decisions.
+- **`GLOSSARY.md`** at the repo root, or
+- **`GLOSSARY-MAP.md`** at the repo root if it exists: it points at one `GLOSSARY.md` per context. Read each one relevant to the topic.
+- **`docs/adr/`**: read ADRs that touch the area you're about to work in. In multi-context repos, also check `src/<context>/docs/adr/` for context-scoped decisions.
 
 If any of these files don't exist, **proceed silently**. Don't flag their absence; don't suggest creating them upfront. The `/domain-modeling` skill (reached via `/grill-with-docs` and `/improve-codebase-architecture`) creates them lazily when terms or decisions actually get resolved.
 
@@ -16,36 +16,36 @@ Single-context repo (most repos):
 
 ```
 /
-├── CONTEXT.md
+├── GLOSSARY.md
 ├── docs/adr/
 │   ├── 0001-event-sourced-orders.md
 │   └── 0002-postgres-for-write-model.md
 └── src/
 ```
 
-Multi-context repo (presence of `CONTEXT-MAP.md` at the root):
+Multi-context repo (presence of `GLOSSARY-MAP.md` at the root):
 
 ```
 /
-├── CONTEXT-MAP.md
+├── GLOSSARY-MAP.md
 ├── docs/adr/                          ← system-wide decisions
 └── src/
     ├── ordering/
-    │   ├── CONTEXT.md
+    │   ├── GLOSSARY.md
     │   └── docs/adr/                  ← context-specific decisions
     └── billing/
-        ├── CONTEXT.md
+        ├── GLOSSARY.md
         └── docs/adr/
 ```
 
 ## Use the glossary's vocabulary
 
-When your output names a domain concept (in an issue title, a refactor proposal, a hypothesis, a test name), use the term as defined in `CONTEXT.md`. Don't drift to synonyms the glossary explicitly avoids.
+When your output names a domain concept (in an issue title, a refactor proposal, a hypothesis, a test name), use the term as defined in `GLOSSARY.md`. Don't drift to synonyms the glossary explicitly avoids.
 
-If the concept you need isn't in the glossary yet, that's a signal — either you're inventing language the project doesn't use (reconsider) or there's a real gap (note it for `/domain-modeling`).
+If the concept you need isn't in the glossary yet, that's a signal: either you're inventing language the project doesn't use (reconsider) or there's a real gap (note it for `/domain-modeling`).
 
 ## Flag ADR conflicts
 
 If your output contradicts an existing ADR, surface it explicitly rather than silently overriding:
 
-> _Contradicts ADR-0007 (event-sourced orders) — but worth reopening because…_
+> _Contradicts ADR-0007 (event-sourced orders), but worth reopening because…_

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

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Issue tracker: GitHub
 
-Issues and PRDs for this repo live as GitHub issues. Use the `gh` CLI for all operations.
+Issues and specs for this repo live as GitHub issues. Use the `gh` CLI for all operations.
 
 ## Conventions
 
@@ -11,7 +11,19 @@ Issues and PRDs for this repo live as GitHub issues. Use the `gh` CLI for all op
 - **Apply / remove labels**: `gh issue edit <number> --add-label "..."` / `--remove-label "..."`
 - **Close**: `gh issue close <number> --comment "..."`
 
-Infer the repo from `git remote -v` — `gh` does this automatically when run inside a clone.
+Infer the repo from `git remote -v`; `gh` does this automatically when run inside a clone.
+
+## Pull requests as a triage surface
+
+**PRs as a request surface: no.** _(Set to `yes` if this repo treats external PRs as feature requests; `/triage` reads this flag.)_
+
+When set to `yes`, PRs run through the same labels and states as issues, using the `gh pr` equivalents:
+
+- **Read a PR**: `gh pr view <number> --comments` and `gh pr diff <number>` for the diff.
+- **List external PRs for triage**: `gh pr list --state open --json number,title,body,labels,author,authorAssociation,comments` then keep only `authorAssociation` of `CONTRIBUTOR`, `FIRST_TIME_CONTRIBUTOR`, or `NONE` (drop `OWNER`/`MEMBER`/`COLLABORATOR`).
+- **Comment / label / close**: `gh pr comment`, `gh pr edit --add-label`/`--remove-label`, `gh pr close`.
+
+GitHub shares one number space across issues and PRs, so a bare `#42` may be either: resolve with `gh pr view 42` and fall back to `gh issue view 42`.
 
 ## When a skill says "publish to the issue tracker"
 
@@ -20,3 +32,14 @@ Create a GitHub issue.
 ## When a skill says "fetch the relevant ticket"
 
 Run `gh issue view <number> --comments`.
+
+## Wayfinding operations
+
+Used by `/wayfinder`. The **map** is a single issue with **child** issues as tickets.
+
+- **Map**: a single issue labelled `wayfinder:map`, holding the Notes / Decisions-so-far / Fog body. `gh issue create --label wayfinder:map`.
+- **Child ticket**: an issue linked to the map as a GitHub sub-issue (`gh api` on the sub-issues endpoint). Where sub-issues aren't enabled, add the child to a task list in the map body and put `Part of #<map>` at the top of the child body. Labels: `wayfinder:<type>` (`research`/`prototype`/`grilling`/`task`). Once claimed, the ticket is assigned to the driving dev.
+- **Blocking**: GitHub's **native issue dependencies**, the canonical, UI-visible representation. Add an edge with `gh api --method POST repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<child>/dependencies/blocked_by -F issue_id=<blocker-db-id>`, where `<blocker-db-id>` is the blocker's numeric **database id** (`gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<n> --jq .id`, _not_ the `#number` or `node_id`). GitHub reports `issue_dependencies_summary.blocked_by` (open blockers only, the live gate). Where dependencies aren't available, fall back to a `Blocked by: #<n>, #<n>` line at the top of the child body. A ticket is unblocked when every blocker is closed.
+- **Frontier query**: list the map's open children (`gh issue list --state open`, scoped to the map's sub-issues / task list), drop any with an open blocker (`issue_dependencies_summary.blocked_by > 0`, or an open issue in the `Blocked by` line) or an assignee; first in map order wins.
+- **Claim**: `gh issue edit <n> --add-assignee @me`, the session's first write.
+- **Resolve**: `gh issue comment <n> --body "<answer>"`, then `gh issue close <n>`, then append a context pointer (gist + link) to the map's Decisions-so-far.