fix(kyberforge): resolve second round of PR #91 review findings

Two review passes on PR #91 (correctness + simplification) found the
prior fixup commit (d6fd9b6) left the deprecation notice it added
half-applied, cited a nonexistent ADR, and introduced/compounded a
few duplicate restatements of the same facts across apm-workflow's
skill files and apm-orchestrate's Hard rules.

- plugin-author/SKILL.md cited ADR-0016 (doesn't exist) instead of
  ADR-0006 for the version-parity invariant.
- The deprecation banner on plugin-author/marketplace-author wasn't
  reflected in their routing `description:` frontmatter, forge's
  routing table, either kyberforge README skill table, or CONTEXT.md
  — now propagated consistently; routing behavior is unchanged since
  issue #90 (repo-wide apm conversion) hasn't landed yet.
- apm-orchestrate's `configure` operation only covered scaffolding a
  new package, not editing an existing apm.yml (e.g. removing a
  marketplace.packages[] entry, which has no dedicated `apm` CLI verb
  and is just a manifest edit). Added `edit-config`, intentionally
  ungated — a local file edit isn't the same class of irreversible
  action as `apm publish`, and normal review already gates the commit.
- Deduplicated facts restated 3-4x across SKILL.md/references/ADR
  boundaries (audit semantics, reserved name prefixes, marketplace-add
  direction, registries precondition), and trimmed configure.md's
  ~55-line apm.yml schema dump — copied near-verbatim from the
  research doc — down to a compact key list with a pointer, matching
  install.md's existing terse cross-referencing style.

Deliberately left as-is: apm-orchestrate's parallel/sequential
fan-out logic stays inline rather than extracted to a shared
reference, since neither git-orchestrate nor gitea-orchestrate need
it yet — premature extraction for a single caller.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0186ERbyACLRuRxPRnqwpa4m

CONTEXT.md

@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ The provider-agnostic always-on instruction entry point. Two files:
 Contains always-on rules in plain markdown with no provider-specific syntax (no `@import`). Provider-specific files (`CLAUDE.md`) are thin adapters that import the relevant `AGENTS.md` and add only Claude Code-specific syntax. This pattern means a single source of truth can serve multiple providers without duplication. See ADR-0003.
 
 ### Skill composition
-A skill calling another skill by name to delegate a sub-task. The calling skill focuses on the orchestration decision ("when to do X"); the called skill owns the mechanics ("how to do X"). Established compositions: `grill-me` calls `write-adr` when a decision crystallises; `implement-feature` calls `tdd` as its implementation methodology; `forge` calls `grill-with-docs` to refine intent, classifies the target artifact type (skill / agent / plugin / marketplace entry), then routes to the matching `*-author` skill — which owns its own create/improve logic and, where applicable, its own inline audit closeout (`skill-author` runs `/skill-audit`, `agent-author` runs `kyberforge:agent-audit`, both in the same context as the authoring work). Reserve `forge` for genuinely undecided "which artifact type is this" questions — an already-fully-specified corrective edit (exact file, line, and fix already known) should call the target author skill directly instead (`skill-author`, `plugin-author`, `agentsmd-author`, etc.); routing a known fix through `forge`'s grill-and-classify layer adds unnecessary indirection and, in practice, has been observed to lose track of hard constraints handed down the chain (e.g. "don't commit yet," "edit in this worktree") because each hop re-derives instructions from a shorter brief. `forge` additionally runs its own independent recheck after a skill/agent route finishes: a clean-context subagent (not forked, no inherited context) re-runs the same audit skill against the finished artifact, as a distinct verification layer from the author skill's inline audit — the two can share blind spots since the inline audit runs in the same context as the work it checks. If the clean audit surfaces any unresolved finding, `forge` loops — re-invoke the author skill to resolve it, re-run the clean audit — until the clean audit comes back with nothing unresolved; only then is the route done. `plugin-author` and `marketplace-author` have no audit counterpart and get no recheck; their terminal check is `claude plugin validate`.
+A skill calling another skill by name to delegate a sub-task. The calling skill focuses on the orchestration decision ("when to do X"); the called skill owns the mechanics ("how to do X"). Established compositions: `grill-me` calls `write-adr` when a decision crystallises; `implement-feature` calls `tdd` as its implementation methodology; `forge` calls `grill-with-docs` to refine intent, classifies the target artifact type (skill / agent / plugin / marketplace entry), then routes to the matching `*-author` skill — which owns its own create/improve logic and, where applicable, its own inline audit closeout (`skill-author` runs `/skill-audit`, `agent-author` runs `kyberforge:agent-audit`, both in the same context as the authoring work). Reserve `forge` for genuinely undecided "which artifact type is this" questions — an already-fully-specified corrective edit (exact file, line, and fix already known) should call the target author skill directly instead (`skill-author`, `plugin-author`, `agentsmd-author`, etc.); routing a known fix through `forge`'s grill-and-classify layer adds unnecessary indirection and, in practice, has been observed to lose track of hard constraints handed down the chain (e.g. "don't commit yet," "edit in this worktree") because each hop re-derives instructions from a shorter brief. `forge` additionally runs its own independent recheck after a skill/agent route finishes: a clean-context subagent (not forked, no inherited context) re-runs the same audit skill against the finished artifact, as a distinct verification layer from the author skill's inline audit — the two can share blind spots since the inline audit runs in the same context as the work it checks. If the clean audit surfaces any unresolved finding, `forge` loops — re-invoke the author skill to resolve it, re-run the clean audit — until the clean audit comes back with nothing unresolved; only then is the route done. `plugin-author` and `marketplace-author` have no audit counterpart and get no recheck; their terminal check is `claude plugin validate`. Both are deprecated per ADR-0015, superseded by `apm-workflow`, pending issue #90 (not yet changed).
 
 ### Provider-agnostic issue tracker
 Skills and workflows reference "linked issue" generically rather than a specific provider. Gitea is the canonical issue tracker for this repo (see ADR-0017). "Issue" is the cross-provider term (GitHub, GitLab, Gitea all use it).