@ai-content-space/loopx 0.1.3 → 0.1.5

package/skills/RESOLVER.md

@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+# loopx Skill Resolver
+
+Central routing map for loopx bundled skills. Keep this file in sync with every bundled `skills/<name>/SKILL.md` and `plugins/loopx/skills/<name>/SKILL.md`.
+
+Read the selected skill file before acting. If multiple skills match, read every likely candidate and use the disambiguation rules below.
+
+## Public Workflow Skills
+
+| Trigger | Skill |
+|---|---|
+| Ambiguous request, unclear scope, non-goals, decision boundaries, requirements interview | `skills/clarify/SKILL.md` |
+| Approved clarify spec, direct requirements artifact, PRD/test/architecture planning, consensus planning | `skills/plan/SKILL.md` |
+| Approved plan execution, implementation persistence, review-requested implementation fixes | `skills/build/SKILL.md` |
+| Independent acceptance, code review, architecture-smell review, go/no-go after build | `skills/review/SKILL.md` |
+| Completed workflow needs long-lived spec sync and ADR candidate | `skills/archive/SKILL.md` |
+| User wants one bounded end-to-end loopx run over clarify/plan/build/review | `skills/autopilot/SKILL.md` |
+
+## Support Skills
+
+| Trigger | Skill |
+|---|---|
+| Bug, test failure, build failure, regression, unexpected behavior, root-cause investigation | `skills/debug/SKILL.md` |
+| Feature or bugfix implementation where behavior should be covered by a failing test first | `skills/tdd/SKILL.md` |
+| Completion, fixed, passing, review-ready, commit, or handoff claims need fresh evidence | `skills/verify/SKILL.md` |
+| Editing `.go` files or reviewing Go style inside build/review | `skills/go-style/SKILL.md` |
+| Go-Kratos proto, service, biz, data, middleware, auth, config, or Kratos troubleshooting | `skills/kratos/SKILL.md` |
+
+## Disambiguation
+
+1. If intent, scope, non-goals, or decision boundaries are unresolved, use `clarify` before `plan`.
+2. If requirements are approved but execution has not started, use `plan` before `build`.
+3. If implementation is broken or tests fail during build, use `debug` as the diagnostic lens before patching.
+4. If code is already implemented and needs acceptance, use `review`; do not run new build work from review.
+5. If review requests implementation-only fixes, route to `build --from-review`; route to `plan` only when the plan itself is wrong.
+6. If the user asks for autonomous execution, use `autopilot` only when requirements are bounded enough to run without new human decisions.
+7. Treat `tdd`, `verify`, `go-style`, and `kratos` as support lenses unless the user explicitly invokes them directly.
+8. `archive` is only valid after `review -> done`.
+
+## Deterministic Guard
+
+Run this before release or when changing bundled skills:
+
+```bash
+node scripts/verify-skills.mjs
+```

package/skills/archive/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,9 @@
 ---
 name: archive
-description: Sync an approved loopx change delta into long-lived specs after review is done.
+description: "Archives an approved loopx change delta into long-lived specs and writes an ADR candidate after done approval. Not for active builds or unapproved reviews."
+when_to_use: "archive, done workflow, spec delta, long-lived specs, ADR candidate, review approved, 归档, 同步规格"
+metadata:
+  version: "0.1.5"
 argument-hint: "<workflow slug>"
 ---
 
@@ -10,6 +13,15 @@ argument-hint: "<workflow slug>"
 
 Use `archive` after a loopx workflow has reached `done`. It syncs the accepted change delta into long-lived `.loopx/specs/` files, archives the change staging directory, and writes an advisory ADR candidate.
 
+The accepted delta is requirement-based, not a changelog block. Archive applies:
+
+- `## ADDED Requirements`
+- `## MODIFIED Requirements`
+- `## REMOVED Requirements`
+- `## RENAMED Requirements`
+
+into the current long-lived `## Requirements` state for each target domain.
+
 ## Inputs
 
 - `<workflow slug>` for a completed loopx workflow
@@ -33,6 +45,7 @@ Then report in Chinese:
 ## Boundaries
 
 - Do not run archive before `review -> done` has been approved.
+- Do not archive malformed requirement deltas. ADDED and MODIFIED entries must use `### Requirement:`, SHALL/MUST language, and at least one `#### Scenario:`.
 - Do not archive when `execution-record.md` declares non-empty `remaining_scope`, `completion_claim` other than `full`, or a mismatch between `planned_scope` and `implemented_scope`; route back to build/plan instead.
 - Do not edit implementation code.
 - Do not promote ADR candidates into `docs/adr/` automatically; report the candidate path for human follow-up.

package/skills/autopilot/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,9 @@
 ---
 name: autopilot
-description: Richer internal-phase loopx autonomous orchestration over the public clarify/plan/build/review flow.
+description: "Runs one bounded autonomous loopx orchestration over clarify, plan, build, and review while preserving canonical artifacts. Not for manual gate-by-gate control."
+when_to_use: "autopilot, autonomous loopx run, end-to-end workflow, run all stages, bounded orchestration, 自动执行, 全流程"
+metadata:
+  version: "0.1.5"
 argument-hint: "<workflow slug>"
 ---
 

package/skills/build/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,9 @@
 ---
 name: build
-description: Ralph-style loopx execution runtime under the public build stage.
+description: "Executes an approved loopx plan or review rework contract with evidence, verification, deslop, and regression gates. Not for unclear requirements or independent review."
+when_to_use: "build, implement approved plan, execute PRD, --from-review, review rework, implementation fixes, 执行, 实现, 修改"
+metadata:
+  version: "0.1.5"
 argument-hint: "[--no-deslop] <approved PRD path or workflow slug> | --from-review <review artifact path>"
 ---
 
@@ -30,6 +33,7 @@ By default, `build` is not a one-shot draft writer. It is a persistence loop wit
 - Execution may parallelize internally without exposing a public `team` stage.
 - `build` does not replace `review`.
 - `execution-record.md` remains the sole canonical execution and verification artifact.
+- `.loopx/config.json` is supporting context for existing project AI rules, existing spec sources, and discovered verification commands; use it to preserve local sources of truth, not to skip loopx stages.
 - Feature work and bug fixes should use `tdd`: write a failing test, confirm it fails for the intended reason, then implement the smallest passing change.
 - Bug, test-failure, build-failure, and unexpected-behavior work should use `debug` before proposing fixes.
 - Completion and review-ready claims should use `verify` before they are stated.
@@ -72,6 +76,8 @@ Compatible skill / CLI input:
 When invoked with a PRD path, derive `<slug>` from `prd-<slug>.md` and still use the matching workflow-local plan package and test spec.
 
 When invoked with `--from-review`, derive `<slug>` from the workflow directory, treat the review artifact as the implementation-fix contract, and load the matching PRD, test spec, previous `execution-record.md`, and workflow-local plan package as supporting context. This Codex skill invocation consumes the `review -> build` rework intent; users should not need a separate bash `loopx approve ... --from review --to build` step for the normal Codex-facing flow.
+
+Also load `.loopx/config.json` when present. Its `project_conventions` entries identify existing project rule/spec files that should be preserved, and its `verification_commands` entries are the first project-native commands to consider for fresh evidence.
 </Inputs>
 
 <Execution_Model>

package/skills/clarify/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,9 @@
 ---
 name: clarify
-description: Comprehensive loopx clarify skill for requirements, boundaries, and design-ready specs.
+description: "Clarifies ambiguous loopx work into requirements, non-goals, decision boundaries, and design-ready specs before planning. Not for already-approved plans or concrete implementation tasks."
+when_to_use: "clarify, requirements, ambiguous request, unclear scope, non-goals, decision boundaries, acceptance criteria, 需求澄清, 范围不清"
+metadata:
+  version: "0.1.5"
 ---
 
 # loopx Clarify
@@ -23,7 +26,7 @@ Its job is not just to ask questions. Its job is to turn a vague or overloaded r
 - The request is broad, ambiguous, or mixes problem, solution, and implementation detail.
 - The user needs help defining scope, non-goals, acceptance criteria, or tradeoffs before planning.
 - A design direction exists only implicitly and would otherwise be invented during implementation.
-- The task will later be handed to `plan`, `build`, or `autopilot`, and you want a high-signal spec first.
+- The task will later be handed to `plan`, and you want a high-signal spec first.
 </Use_When>
 
 <Do_Not_Use_When>
@@ -33,7 +36,7 @@ Its job is not just to ask questions. Its job is to turn a vague or overloaded r
 </Do_Not_Use_When>
 
 <Why_This_Exists>
-Most implementation drift happens before coding begins. Teams often think they need “more planning,” when the real problem is weaker intent clarity, hidden assumptions, fuzzy boundaries, or a design shape that was never made explicit. `clarify` exists to solve those upstream failures before `plan` or `build` magnifies them.
+Most implementation drift happens before coding begins. Teams often think they need “more planning,” when the real problem is weaker intent clarity, hidden assumptions, fuzzy boundaries, or a design shape that was never made explicit. `clarify` exists to solve those upstream failures before `plan` turns the clarified intent into an execution contract.
 </Why_This_Exists>
 
 <Core_Principles>
@@ -268,7 +271,7 @@ Before marking a clarify spec handoff-ready, perform a self-review pass:
 
 Write the output to the loopx runtime namespace:
 
-- `.loopx/specs/clarify-<slug>-<timestamp>.md`
+- `.loopx/intake/clarify-<slug>-<timestamp>.md`
 
 The clarify spec should include:
 
@@ -299,17 +302,17 @@ The clarify spec should include:
 
 After the clarify spec is ready:
 
-- hand off to `plan` by default
-- hand off to `build` only if the user explicitly wants direct execution and the task is already concrete enough
-- hand off to `autopilot` only when the scope is sufficiently tight for a bounded end-to-end run
+- hand off to `plan`; do not start implementation, TDD, `build`, or `autopilot` from `clarify`
+- if the user asks to execute immediately, explain that loopx requires the `plan` gate first and provide the plan invocation
+- if a task is too small to justify planning, do not use `clarify`; handle that request outside the clarify workflow from the start
 
 Preferred explicit handoff contract:
 
 - Recommended invocation: `$plan <slug>`
-- Artifact-pinned invocation when needed: `$plan --direct .loopx/specs/clarify-<slug>-<timestamp>.md`
+- Artifact-pinned invocation when needed: `$plan --direct .loopx/intake/clarify-<slug>-<timestamp>.md`
 - Consumer behavior: treat the clarify spec as the source of truth for intent, non-goals, decision boundaries, constraints, and design direction; do not reopen clarification by default
 
-`clarify` itself does not implement the feature.
+`clarify` itself does not implement the feature. The handoff recommendation must name `plan` as the next workflow step.
 
 </Process>
 
@@ -328,6 +331,7 @@ Preferred explicit handoff contract:
 
 <Must_Not_Decide_Automatically>
 - approval to move from clarify into plan
+- skipping `plan` after producing a clarify spec
 - implementation details that were never clarified or grounded
 - widening the task because a broader redesign sounds cleaner
 </Must_Not_Decide_Automatically>

package/skills/debug/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,9 @@
 ---
 name: debug
-description: Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes
+description: "Finds root cause for bugs, failing tests, build failures, regressions, and unexpected behavior before fixes. Not for new feature planning or routine code review."
+when_to_use: "debug, bug, test failure, build failure, regression, unexpected behavior, root cause, 报错, 失败, 回归, 排查"
+metadata:
+  version: "0.1.5"
 ---
 
 # Systematic Debugging

package/skills/go-style/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,9 @@
 ---
 name: go-style
-description: Go language style support for loopx. Use before creating or editing Go (.go) files, especially inside build execution lanes.
+description: "Applies loopx Go coding style for .go edits, tests, errors, context, naming, and interface boundaries. Not for non-Go code or Kratos-specific architecture by itself."
+when_to_use: "go-style, Go, golang, .go files, go tests, gofmt, idiomatic Go, Go style, Go 代码"
+metadata:
+  version: "0.1.5"
 ---
 
 # Go Style

package/skills/kratos/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,9 @@
 ---
 name: kratos
-description: Go-Kratos framework support for loopx. Use for Kratos microservices, proto/buf API work, service/biz/data layering, Kratos middleware, auth, configuration, and troubleshooting.
+description: "Supports Go-Kratos microservices, proto/buf APIs, service/biz/data layers, middleware, auth, config, and troubleshooting. Not for generic Go style alone."
+when_to_use: "kratos, Go-Kratos, proto, buf, service layer, biz layer, data layer, middleware, auth, config, Kratos 微服务"
+metadata:
+  version: "0.1.5"
 ---
 
 # Kratos

package/skills/plan/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,9 @@
 ---
 name: plan
-description: Consensus-first loopx planning skill with Planner, Architect, and Critic review.
+description: "Creates a consensus-first loopx plan package with Planner, Architect, and Critic review from an approved spec. Not for unresolved requirements or direct implementation."
+when_to_use: "plan, planning, consensus planning, PRD, architecture plan, test plan, approved clarify spec, 规划, 方案, 架构评审"
+metadata:
+  version: "0.1.5"
 argument-hint: "[--interactive] [--deliberate] [--direct <spec-path>] <clarified task or spec path>"
 ---
 
@@ -40,7 +43,7 @@ By default, `plan` includes the full consensus review loop formerly documented u
 Accepted inputs:
 
 - an approved loopx clarify workflow slug
-- `.loopx/specs/clarify-*.md`
+- `.loopx/intake/clarify-*.md`
 - `.omx/specs/deep-interview-*.md`
 - a direct task description when enough context is already present
 - `--direct <spec-path>` to force a specific requirements artifact
@@ -174,7 +177,7 @@ The final plan must include:
 
 - ADR: Decision, Drivers, Alternatives considered, Why chosen, Consequences, Follow-ups
 - concrete implementation steps sized to the actual task
-- target long-lived spec domains and the requirements delta for archive
+- target long-lived spec domains and an OpenSpec-style requirements delta for archive
 - vertical slices sized as independently verifiable tracer bullets, not horizontal layer-only task groups
 - execution inputs mapped to concrete sources before build starts
 - available execution lanes and recommended lane
@@ -220,7 +223,8 @@ The plan gate is blocked until:
 
 - plan package artifacts exist
 - change proposal, spec delta, design, tasks, vertical slices, and artifact graph exist
-- spec delta declares target domains and added or modified requirements
+- spec delta declares target domains and `## ADDED|MODIFIED|REMOVED|RENAMED Requirements` blocks
+- every ADDED or MODIFIED requirement uses `### Requirement:`, contains SHALL or MUST text, and includes at least one `#### Scenario:`
 - vertical slices contain at least one `AFK` or `HITL` end-to-end slice with acceptance criteria and verification signal
 - Architect review is complete
 - Critic verdict is `approve`

package/skills/review/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,9 @@
 ---
 name: review
-description: Repo-local acceptance surface for loopx.
+description: "Reviews a loopx build execution record for acceptance, code risks, evidence quality, and architecture smells. Not for doing implementation work or replanning."
+when_to_use: "review, code review, acceptance, go no-go, execution-record, architecture smell, build complete, 审查, 验收"
+metadata:
+  version: "0.1.5"
 argument-hint: "<execution-record path or workflow slug>"
 ---
 
@@ -22,6 +25,8 @@ Compatible skill / CLI input:
 
 When invoked with an execution record path, derive `<slug>` from the workflow directory and evaluate the matching active run.
 
+When present, use `.loopx/config.json` as supporting context for project-native verification commands, existing AI rule files, and existing spec sources. Do not treat those external or pre-existing sources as replacements for the loopx execution record and review artifact.
+
 ## Expected Outputs
 
 - a review artifact tied to the run being evaluated
@@ -42,6 +47,7 @@ Use stable machine values only where they are commands, file paths, JSON/state f
 - Use this only after build has produced execution and verification evidence for a specific run.
 - Stop here if review evidence is incomplete. `review` remains an independent gate and does not auto-complete the workflow.
 - Review must include code review of the build-owned implementation diff. Do not limit review to artifact/schema checks.
+- Review should compare verification evidence against project-native commands recorded in `.loopx/config.json` when available, while still accepting stronger task-specific verification from the approved plan.
 - Review must include the architecture-smell lane as part of review evidence. This is not a new workflow stage and must not create extra user steps.
 - Review must compare the execution scope against the approved workflow scope. If `execution-record.md` declares non-empty `remaining_scope`, `completion_claim` other than `full`, or a mismatch between `planned_scope` and `implemented_scope`, review must return no-go and route to build or plan. A partial slice may be accepted as useful work, but it must not be approved as full workflow completion.
 - Code review findings should focus on real bugs, regressions, missing tests, broken contracts, security/data-integrity risks, and user-visible behavior gaps.

package/skills/tdd/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,9 @@
 ---
 name: tdd
-description: Use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code
+description: "Guides feature and bugfix implementation through a failing test before production code and red-green-refactor discipline. Not for generated files or throwaway prototypes."
+when_to_use: "tdd, failing test first, feature implementation, bugfix, regression test, red green refactor, 测试先行"
+metadata:
+  version: "0.1.5"
 ---
 
 # Test-Driven Development (TDD)

package/skills/verify/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,9 @@
 ---
 name: verify
-description: Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always
+description: "Requires fresh verification evidence before claiming work is complete, fixed, passing, review-ready, or ready to commit. Not for speculative confidence or stale results."
+when_to_use: "verify, completion claim, fixed claim, tests pass, review-ready, commit, fresh evidence, 验证, 完成前检查"
+metadata:
+  version: "0.1.5"
 ---
 
 # Verification Before Completion

package/src/build-runtime.mjs

@@ -135,6 +135,7 @@ function buildIterationData({ slug, iteration, noDeslop = false }, scriptEntry =
       `deslop=${deslopStatus}`,
       `regression=${regressionStatus}`,
     ],
+    changedFiles: normalizeArray(scriptEntry.changedFiles),
     delegations: normalizeDelegations(scriptEntry.delegations),
     architectFindings: scriptEntry.architectFindings || (
       architectVerdict === 'approve'
@@ -222,6 +223,7 @@ function lanePrompt(context, laneName) {
     '  "summary": string,',
     '  "evidence": [{"id": string, "kind": string, "summary": string, "ref": string}],',
     '  "delegations": [{"id": string, "role": string, "status": "active" | "complete" | "failed" | "blocked" | "pending" | "skipped", "blocking": boolean, "scope": string[], "evidence_path": string | null, "summary": string}],',
+    '  "changedFiles": string[],',
     '  "executionEvidence": string[],',
     '  "verificationEvidence": string[],',
     '  "limitations": string[]',
@@ -262,6 +264,7 @@ function deslopPrompt(context, changedEvidence) {
     '  "status": "complete" | "failed" | "pending" | "skipped",',
     '  "summary": string,',
     '  "evidence": [{"id": string, "kind": string, "summary": string, "ref": string}],',
+    '  "changedFiles": string[],',
     '  "limitations": string[]',
     '}',
     '',
@@ -396,6 +399,11 @@ export function createRealBuildAdapter({ model, codexExecJson = runCodexExecJson
           ...normalizeEvidence(regressionReport.evidence).map((item) => `${item.kind}:${item.summary}:${item.ref}`),
         ],
         architectFindings: normalizeArray(architectReport.findings, ['Architect gate returned no findings.']),
+        changedFiles: normalizeArray([
+          ...normalizeArray(executionLane.changedFiles),
+          ...normalizeArray(evidenceLane.changedFiles),
+          ...normalizeArray(deslopReport.changedFiles),
+        ]),
         delegations: lanes.flatMap((lane) => normalizeDelegations(lane.delegations)),
         limitations: [
           ...normalizeArray(executionLane.limitations),

package/src/cli.mjs

@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 #!/usr/bin/env node
 
 import { archiveStage, autopilotStage, approveStage, buildStage, clarifyStage, initWorkspace, planStage, reviewStage, statusSummary } from './workflow.mjs';
+import { renderHtmlViews } from './html-views.mjs';
 import { installBundledSkills } from './install-discovery.mjs';
 import { nextSkillCommand, withNextSkill } from './next-skill.mjs';
 import { doctorRuntime, migrateLegacyRuntime } from './runtime-maintenance.mjs';
@@ -18,6 +19,7 @@ function usage() {
     '  loopx review <slug> [--reviewer <name>]',
     '  loopx archive <slug>',
     '  loopx autopilot <slug> [--reviewer <name>]',
+    '  loopx render [slug|--all]',
     '  loopx status [slug] [--json]',
     '  loopx setup-context',
     '  loopx doctor',
@@ -202,6 +204,14 @@ async function main() {
         console.log(JSON.stringify({ ok: true, command, root: result.root, state: result.state, runPath: result.runPath }, null, 2));
         return;
       }
+      case 'render': {
+        const result = await renderHtmlViews(process.cwd(), {
+          slug: positionals[0],
+          all: Boolean(options.get('--all')),
+        });
+        console.log(JSON.stringify({ ok: true, command, ...result }, null, 2));
+        return;
+      }
       case 'status': {
         const result = await statusSummary(process.cwd(), positionals[0]);
         if (options.get('--json')) {

package/src/context-manifest.mjs

@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ export const CONTEXT_MANIFEST_SCHEMA_VERSION = 1;
 const MAX_MANIFEST_ROWS = 80;
 
 function normalizePath(cwd, path) {
-  const resolved = resolve(path);
+  const resolved = resolve(cwd, path);
   const rel = relative(cwd, resolved);
   return rel && !rel.startsWith('..') ? rel : resolved;
 }
@@ -138,6 +138,7 @@ export async function generateBuildContextManifest({ cwd, root, state, slug }) {
     row(cwd, { stage: 'build', kind: 'review-rework', path: reviewReworkPath, reason: 'review_requested_implementation_fixes', priority: 33, required: requiresReviewRework }),
     row(cwd, { stage: 'build', kind: 'domain-context', path: contextPaths.domainGlossary, reason: 'domain_vocabulary', priority: 34, required: contextSetup.status !== 'missing' }),
     row(cwd, { stage: 'build', kind: 'agent-domain', path: contextPaths.agentDomain, reason: 'agent_context_rules', priority: 35, required: false }),
+    row(cwd, { stage: 'build', kind: 'workspace-config', path: join(cwd, '.loopx', 'config.json'), reason: 'project_rules_spec_sources_and_verification_commands', priority: 36, required: false }),
   ];
   const manifestPath = buildContextManifestPath(root);
   await writeContextManifest(manifestPath, rows);
@@ -157,6 +158,7 @@ export async function generateReviewContextManifest({ cwd, root, state, slug })
     row(cwd, { stage: 'review', kind: 'residual-risks', path: join(root, 'execution-record.md'), reason: 'residual_risk_reference', priority: 26, required: false }),
     row(cwd, { stage: 'review', kind: 'build-support', path: join(root, 'build-support'), reason: 'build_gate_evidence', priority: 30, required: false }),
     row(cwd, { stage: 'review', kind: 'agent-domain', path: contextPaths.agentDomain, reason: 'agent_context_rules', priority: 31, required: false }),
+    row(cwd, { stage: 'review', kind: 'workspace-config', path: join(cwd, '.loopx', 'config.json'), reason: 'project_rules_spec_sources_and_verification_commands', priority: 32, required: false }),
     row(cwd, { stage: 'review', kind: 'state', path: join(root, 'state.json'), reason: 'workflow_state', priority: 40 }),
   ];
   const manifestPath = reviewContextManifestPath(root);