refactor(kyberforge): retrofit forge to the ADR-0020 contract

Description 648 -> 387 chars, body 1093 -> 541 words. This was the last
body FAIL in the 39-skill corpus.

The body was not trimmed to fit. forge routes four artifact types that a
single invocation classifies between, so the contract requires a dispatch
table plus the gates common to every route, with each route self-contained
in references/. Adds references/author-routes.md (skill and agent),
references/apm-routes.md (plugin and marketplace entry) and
references/version-bump.md. Skill and agent share one file: they differ on
one axis only, which audit skill verifies the result.

Fixes three defects the first pass introduced or relocated:

- references/apm-routes.md claimed `apm audit` "already runs inside
  apm-workflow's own flow" and told the agent to confirm it ran clean.
  apm-workflow dispatches audit as its own row; the configure and
  marketplace rows never reach it. That was the only completion check
  these routes had, and it could never be satisfied. Replaced with a
  manual read-back the agent performs itself.
- "Read only the reference file" forbade the multi-artifact case the same
  body documents two lines later, and ADR-0011 records eight artifacts
  authored in one pass.
- The announce gate became a closing gate, reachable only after the
  invocation it was meant to precede. Moved to the end of Step 2.

Also restores the artifact enumeration to the plugin row, normalises to
bare unnamespaced skill names per AGENTS.md, adds a dispatch fallback for
artifacts matching no row, and corrects three provenance entries -- one
asserted a contribution that did not happen.

Refs #99

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01MWb5RQgCL1ye7cGp2RPb2u

plugins/kyberforge/skills/forge/references/author-routes.md

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+---
+source_keys:
+  - claude-code-subagents-docs
+---
+
+# Routing a skill or agent to its author skill
+
+Reached from `SKILL.md` Step 2 when the classified artifact is a skill or an agent/subagent
+definition. Route a skill to `skill-author` and an agent to `agent-author`. The two branches
+differ on one axis only — which audit skill verifies the result — and everything below applies to
+both.
+
+## Choose fork or inline
+
+Default to a **fork subagent**. It inherits the full grilled-intent conversation, so the author
+skill does not need re-briefing on what the user asked for or what the grill settled.
+
+Fall back to an **inline invocation** — same conversation, no subagent — when either holds:
+
+- **Fork is technically unavailable.** You are already running inside a fork (a fork cannot spawn
+  another fork), a nesting-depth cap is reached, or the environment does not support forking.
+- **The routed flow needs live user interaction mid-run** that a backgrounded fork cannot surface
+  in real time: clarifying questions, confirmation checkpoints, or a HITL gate. Judge this from
+  context — if nothing about the flow signals a live checkpoint, prefer the fork.
+
+## Two-tier verification
+
+Both author skills already close out with their own inline audit, in the same context as the
+authoring work: `skill-author` runs `/skill-audit`, `agent-author` invokes
+`agent-audit`. That is tier one, and forge does not change it.
+
+Tier two belongs to forge. Once the author skill's run has finished, spin up a separate
+**clean-context subagent** — fresh, not forked, no inherited context — to independently re-run the
+same audit skill against the finished artifact. This is a distinct verification layer, not a
+duplicate: the inline audit shares context with the work it is checking and can share its blind
+spots, while the clean rerun has no stake in the result.
+
+If the clean audit surfaces any unresolved finding — not only a disagreement with the inline pass,
+any actionable finding on its own — loop: re-invoke the author skill (same fork-versus-inline
+judgment as the first invocation) to resolve it, then re-run the clean audit. Repeat until the
+clean audit comes back with nothing unresolved. Only then is the route done. This is the same
+resolve-before-close discipline the author skills already apply to their own inline audit.
+
+Return to `SKILL.md` Step 3 for the closing gates common to every route once the loop closes.