311e7cd22c803d725f7f4be215a32afcc8440be9
Six defects, each one a place where two files that an author reads in the same sitting told them different things — or where the trim dropped a rule and nothing noticed because no gate covers prose. **"Use proactively" contradicted itself across the pair.** All three agent templates said to add it where the runtime should delegate unprompted, while `agent-audit`'s `KyberforgeCopilot.ProactivePhrase` rule grades it a hard FAIL in any `*.agent.md` — which is the Copilot half of every project/user pair *and* the vendor-neutral plugin-scope file, since that compiles to a real Copilot agent downstream. Following the template produced a file the repo's own gate rejects. The phrase is now permitted in exactly one place, the Claude Code `.md`, and `references/contract.md` carries the per-file table plus the consequence authors ask about next: a pair whose CC half has it and whose Copilot half does not is correct, because `agent-audit` checks that both halves describe the same job, not that they match word for word. **The output-schema rule contradicted itself inside one file.** `contract.md` said any content only one branch reaches moves to `references/`, and then offered an "Output format template" body pattern with no qualification. Stated once now, so it is not re-litigated: an output schema stays in the body only when every flow produces it and it is roughly 50 words or less. No third option. **Gotchas tiers disagreed with the script.** `validate.sh` emits the entry count through `suggest()` and exits 0, while `skill-author` and `skill-audit` both called more than five entries a FAIL. Whether a given gotcha earns its place is judgment, so the prose moves to the script's tier rather than the reverse. The paraphrase rule stays a FAIL and is explicitly marked as the auditor's call — no script detects it. **The dispatch exemplar was cited at the wrong number.** `apm-workflow`'s body is 421 words; 554 is its whole-file count. Both `contract.md` and `body-discipline.md` cited 554 while describing a body budget, so an author calibrating against the exemplar overshot by ~30% — the exact whole-file/body-only conflation those two sections exist to warn against, reproduced inside the warning. **"Error handling" came back as a required body element.** It was one of four and is the one that gets dropped, and dropping it is not neutral: an agent handed malformed input with no instruction invents a recovery, and a subagent's invented recovery is invisible to its caller until the output is wrong. Restored in `agent-audit`'s rubric as a SUGGESTION, in `agent-author`'s contract and both scope checklists as a required element, and as an `## Errors` section in all three templates. **`skill-author` Step 4 gains the one check the audit misses.** An empty body reports `PASS SKILL.md body word count 0` — a word gate cannot tell "concise" from "absent". Step 4 now hand-checks for a non-empty section, and its commit verification is conditioned on actually being inside a git worktree, which a skill under `~/.claude/skills/` is not. Also here: absolute repo paths removed from `skill-author`'s SKILL.md and contract.md in favour of naming the skill (`zoom-out`'s description is quoted inline instead of pointed at), the boundary-target universe documented to match the resolver, a two-hops-from-SKILL.md limit on reference chains, and `new-agent.sh`'s next-steps output naming the description budget and the deliberate absence of an agent body gate. Refs: ADR-0020
Description
AI development skills for Claude Code and GitHub Copilot CLI — factory, design, implement, review, and cross-cutting workflows.
Releases
3
Languages
Shell
89.7%
Python
6.3%
HTML
3.7%
JavaScript
0.3%