feat(kyberforge): execute plugin-to-apm marketplace conversion

Why:
ADR-0015 established that Microsoft APM (apm.yml + .apm/) should replace
this repo's hand-authored plugin.json/marketplace.json model, with those
files becoming compiled output of `apm pack` instead of files edited by
hand via the (now-retired) plugin-author/marketplace-author skills.
Issue #90 was the deferred execution of that decision, gated on #88
(apm tooling) and #89 (apm-native agent-author/skill-author routing).

Implementation notes:
- All six plugins (bin, core, git, gitea, kyberforge, lint) now carry
  apm.yml + .apm/{skills,agents,hooks} as their authoring source. Skills
  moved with a plain git mv (content-identical across targets). Agents
  were re-authored, not moved: per ADR-0016, .apm/agents/*.agent.md
  compiles verbatim to both Claude and Copilot, so plugin-scope agents
  now carry only name/description/model/source_keys -- no tools: field,
  no Claude-only knobs (isolation, maxTurns, effort, memory,
  permissionMode).
- Root apm.yml registers all 7 marketplace packages (6 local plus
  mattpocock-skills as a remote entry) under versioning: per_package,
  matching this repo's existing independent-plugin-versioning practice.
- .claude-plugin/marketplace.json and every plugin's plugin.json are now
  apm-pack-compiled output, verified against the prior hand-maintained
  content: same names/descriptions/versions/licenses/authors, only
  cosmetic serialization differences (JSON key order, owner email vs.
  url, Unicode escaping).
- plugin-author and marketplace-author are retired now that apm-based
  authoring fully replaces their job; kyberforge bumped 1.3.1 -> 1.4.0
  for that removal, and the root marketplace catalog bumped
  0.3.1 -> 0.3.2 to match, per the version-bump convention now
  documented in apm-workflow's reference docs instead of a dedicated
  script (apm has no native version-bump automation).
- Fixed hardcoded pre-.apm/ path assumptions across
  .pre-commit-config.yaml, .pre-commit-hooks.yaml,
  scripts/check-scope-walkup-sync.sh, scripts/sync-vale-styles.sh,
  scripts/check-vale-style-sync.sh, six plugins' root plugin.json
  (stale skills/hooks/agents pointer fields that check-manifests.sh
  validates), and several tests/*.bats and tests/*.sh fixtures --
  including a bats REPO_ROOT relative-path depth bug (10 files, one
  extra .apm/ directory level to walk up) and a vale probe-path
  isolation regression introduced mid-fix.
- Corrected empirically-wrong assumptions surfaced this session in
  apm-workflow/apm-install's own reference docs: `apm marketplace
  package add` does not accept local paths (only owner/repo remote
  shorthand -- local packages are registered by editing apm.yml's
  marketplace.packages[] directly); `apm compile` is a consumer-side
  AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md generator, not the plugin.json producer, and
  hard-fails on skill/agent-only packages without --clean; `apm plugin
  init <name>` nests a stray subdirectory when run with a positional
  name arg from inside a same-named directory; no native Copilot
  marketplace output profile exists; .mcp.json is merged into the
  compiled plugin.json content-aware and target-scoped, with no
  dependencies.mcp entry needed for simple passthrough; pipx is the
  correct pip fallback on externally-managed Python environments.
- Renamed agent-author's copilot.agent.md template asset to
  copilot.agent.md.template so apm compile's recursive *.agent.md glob
  stops misparsing the placeholder template as a real agent primitive.

Impact:
plugin.json and marketplace.json are compiled artifacts from here on --
editing them by hand is no longer the workflow; edit apm.yml/.apm/ and
run apm pack. CONTEXT.md's Plugin/Plugin marketplace glossary entries
reflect this. ADR-0001 is marked superseded, ADR-0006 moot, and
ADR-0010 updated for the new .apm/agents/ path (project/user scope
unaffected, per ADR-0016). Full local verification: claude plugin
validate --strict on all 6 plugins, apm audit --ci, apm marketplace
check, check-manifests.sh, and the full test suite (165/165 bats,
13/13 shell scripts) all pass clean.

Fixes: #90
Refs: #88, #89
ADR: 0015
ADR: 0016

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Ub96PyaSRD9BHPktotj1pC

plugins/gitea/.apm/skills/gitea-prs/references/reviews.md

@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+---
+topic: reviews
+source_keys:
+  - gitea-mcp-repo
+  - gitea-mcp-slim-go
+---
+
+# PR review execution detail
+
+Parameter signatures below are cross-checked live against the deployed gitea-mcp server tool schema, not copied from the plugin's research doc verbatim — same sourcing discipline as `references/pull-requests.md`.
+
+## Review state machine
+
+A review is not a single write. It moves through states:
+
+1. **`create`** — opens a review in `"PENDING"` state, optionally attaching inline comments. Nothing is visible to other users yet.
+2. **`submit`** — finalizes the pending review with a terminal `state`: `"APPROVED"`, `"REQUEST_CHANGES"`, or `"COMMENT"`. This is the point at which the review becomes visible and counts toward merge-gate requirements (see `references/merging.md`).
+3. **`dismiss`** — invalidates an already-submitted review (e.g. an approval that's no longer valid after force-push), with an optional `message` giving the reason. Dismissal does not delete the review record — it stays visible but marked dismissed.
+4. **`delete`** — removes a review outright. Use only for a review that was never submitted (e.g. abandoning a `PENDING` draft); do not use `delete` to retract a submitted review — use `dismiss` instead.
+
+## `pull_request_review_write`
+
+**Parameters:**
+- `method` (string, required) — `"create"` | `"submit"` | `"delete"` | `"dismiss"`
+- `owner` (string, required)
+- `repo` (string, required)
+- `pull_number` (number, required)
+- `review_id` (number, required for every method except `"create"`, which returns the ID to use for the follow-up `submit`/`delete`/`dismiss` call)
+- `state` (string, optional) — `"APPROVED"` | `"REQUEST_CHANGES"` | `"COMMENT"` | `"PENDING"` — set on `"create"` (typically `"PENDING"`, or a terminal state to create-and-submit in one call if the server supports it) or `"submit"` (terminal state)
+- `body` (string, optional) — overall review comment text
+- `commit_id` (string, optional, for `"create"`) — anchors inline comments to a specific commit SHA (typically the PR's current head SHA from `pull_request_read method: "get"`)
+- `message` (string, optional, for `"dismiss"`) — dismissal reason
+- `comments` (array of objects, optional, for `"create"`) — inline comments, each: `{path, body, old_line_num, new_line_num}` — `path` is the file path, `body` is the comment text, `new_line_num` anchors to a line in the new (added) side of the diff, `old_line_num` anchors to a line in the old (removed) side; use whichever side the comment applies to, not both
+
+## Reading reviews (`pull_request_read`)
+
+- `method: "get_reviews"` — array of review summaries: `id`, `state`, `body`, `user` (login), `comments_count`, `submitted_at`, `html_url`, `stale` (bool — the PR was pushed to after this review was submitted, meaning it may be outdated), `official` (bool), `dismissed` (bool).
+- `method: "get_review"` (requires `review_id`) — single review detail.
+- `method: "get_review_comments"` (requires `review_id`) — array of inline comments: `id`, `body`, `path`, `position`, `old_position`, `diff_hunk`, `user`, `html_url`, `created_at`, `updated_at`.
+
+**`review_scomments` typo:** the full PR object returned by `pull_request_read method: "get"` includes a field named `review_scomments` (a count), not `review_comments` — a source-level misspelling in gitea-mcp v1.3.0's `slim.go`. Do not write code or instructions that reference `review_comments` on that response; it will always be `undefined`. This is distinct from the `get_review_comments` method above, which is spelled correctly and returns the actual comment objects.
+
+**Inline-comment field names differ between write and read.** The `comments` array on `pull_request_review_write method: "create"` uses `old_line_num`/`new_line_num`. The `get_review_comments` read response uses different field names for the same concept — `position` (new-side line) and `old_position` (old-side line). Do not assume the same key names apply on both sides of the round trip.