Three related half-applied changes from #130, each leaving the corpus in a state its own documentation contradicts. Why: - `assets/templates/SKILL.md` shipped `metadata:` fully commented out, and `new-skill.sh` only substitutes SKILL_NAME. Every scaffolded skill therefore lacked the `metadata.version` ADR-0022 made mandatory and was blocked at first commit by the very hook this PR added. The commented example also read `"1.0"` — neither the `0.1.0` new-skill seed nor valid semver. - `agent-audit/references/scope-project-user.md` still joined `disable-model-invocation` and `user-invocable` with a slash — #125's defect verbatim — while pointing the reader at the file this PR had just corrected to say the opposite. - ADR-0022 required the "when present" bump conditional dropped and `metadata.version` moved into create.md's required list. It was dropped from SKILL.md but left in README.md, and the field was edited in place under a heading that still authorises removing it entirely. Implementation notes: - The template emits `metadata: version: "0.1.0"` live, captioned as required, with the optional keys left commented. `new-skill.bats` gains a case asserting a live key and three-part semver, so this cannot regress. - `description-quality.md` now asserts only what the vendored Copilot research supports: two fields with opposite defaults, and the retired `infer` replaced by the pair rather than by either alone. The unsupported negative it previously stated as fact is gone. - The `1.0.0` retrofit seed is stated in improve.md and retrofit.md, which the retrofit flow actually reads — create.md, where it lived, is unreachable from that path. The compression item moved out of the file-churn checklist, whose preamble excluded the wording-only change it covers. - Executable git commands in these three skills now carry the ADR-0023 rtk prefix. Refs: #125, #127 ADR: 0022, 0023 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01EeH8SCbcrCAQrtymkNuhKP
2.9 KiB
source_keys
| source_keys | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Project and User Scope Contract
Read this when the agent file is not under .apm/agents/ — a Claude Code .md and Copilot CLI
.agent.md pair, at project scope (<repo>/.claude/agents/ and <repo>/.github/agents/) or
user scope (~/.claude/agents/ and ~/.copilot/agents/). validate.sh derives the counterpart
from whichever half it was handed; audit both.
The pair is a house convention
Neither platform requires a counterpart file. The pair is a kyberforge convention (ADR-0005), so a missing counterpart is a FAIL against this repo's convention and must be labelled that way in the finding, not presented as a platform spec failure.
Dimension routing
validate.sh findings land as follows at these scopes:
| Finding | Dimension |
|---|---|
| a Claude-Code-only field in the Copilot file, a Copilot-only field in the CC file, a tool the runtime withholds from subagents, body over the 30,000-character Copilot limit | Provider safety |
| counterpart file not found | Pair consistency |
| everything else — missing or malformed field, name format, empty body, absent frontmatter, description length | Structure |
The two field lists are the claude-code-only-fields and copilot-only-fields sections of
references/field-inventory.md. Read them from there rather than from memory; validate.sh parses
those same sections, so any restatement is a copy that can disagree with the check (ADR-0009).
Field and naming rules that differ by provider
namemust match the filename stem in a Copilot CLI.agent.md. Claude Code imposes no such rule, so a CC file whosenamediffers from its filename is not a finding.- A Copilot cloud/IDE agent — one under
.github/copilot/agents/— may omitnameentirely. If it carries one, it still has to be kebab-case. Use proactivelyis meaningful in a CC description and steers the runtime to offer the agent unprompted. In a Copilot description it does nothing;KyberforgeCopilot.ProactivePhraseflags it. The Copilot equivalent isdisable-model-invocation, which changes the description contract entirely — seereferences/description-quality.md, Step 0.
Pair consistency
Check that:
- Both files exist.
- Both system prompt bodies are non-empty (
validate.shcovers this; do it by hand only when the script could not run). - The two files describe the same job. Divergent capability claims across the pair mean one half was edited and the other was not, which is the defect this dimension exists to catch.
- Descriptions may legitimately differ in shape when the Copilot half is hand-invoked — that is
the Step 0 case in
references/description-quality.md, not a pair-consistency finding.
Keep pair-consistency in the Step 4 coverage line at these scopes.