@amg555/frameforge-mcp 2.7.6 → 2.7.7

package/.agent/skills/gstack-review/SKILL.md.tmpl

@@ -1,482 +0,0 @@
----
-name: review
-preamble-tier: 4
-version: 1.0.0
-description: |
-  Pre-landing PR review. Analyzes diff against the base branch for SQL safety, LLM trust
-  boundary violations, conditional side effects, and other structural issues. Use when
-  asked to "review this PR", "code review", "pre-landing review", or "check my diff".
-  Proactively suggest when the user is about to merge or land code changes. (gstack)
-allowed-tools:
-  - Bash
-  - Read
-  - Edit
-  - Write
-  - Grep
-  - Glob
-  - Agent
-  - AskUserQuestion
-  - WebSearch
-triggers:
-  - review this pr
-  - code review
-  - check my diff
-  - pre-landing review
----
-
-{{PREAMBLE}}
-
-{{BASE_BRANCH_DETECT}}
-
-# Pre-Landing PR Review
-
-Review the branch diff against the base for structural issues tests miss.
-
----
-
-{{SECTION_INDEX:review}}
-
----
-
-## Step 1: Check branch
-
-1. Run `git branch --show-current`.
-2. If on the base branch, output: **"Nothing to review — you're on the base branch or have no changes against it."** and stop.
-3. Run `git fetch origin <base> --quiet && echo "BASE_REFRESH: fresh" || echo "BASE_REFRESH: stale $(git rev-parse --short origin/<base>)"`, then `DIFF_BASE=$(git merge-base origin/<base> HEAD) && git diff "$DIFF_BASE" --stat`. If no diff, output the same message and stop. `stale` is not an empty diff: continue; report `Base coverage: stale at <revision>`.
-4. Run `~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-contributor-mode detect` (add `--contributor` when the user asked). `CONTRIBUTOR_MODE: on` prints the evidence-first instructions: follow them through Steps 4-5 and record mode, source and author in Step 5.8.
-
----
-
-{{SCOPE_DRIFT}}
-
-{{SECTION:plan-completion}}
-
-## Step 2: Read the checklist
-
-Read `~/.claude/skills/gstack/review/checklist.md`.
-
-**If the file cannot be read, STOP and report the error.** Never proceed without it.
-
----
-
-## Step 2.5: Check for Greptile review comments
-
-Read `~/.claude/skills/gstack/review/greptile-triage.md` and follow the fetch, filter, classify, and **escalation detection** steps.
-
-**No PR, a `gh` or API failure, or zero Greptile comments:** skip silently; the review works without Greptile.
-
-**Comments found:** store the classifications (VALID & ACTIONABLE, VALID BUT ALREADY FIXED, FALSE POSITIVE, SUPPRESSED) for Step 5.
-
----
-
-## Step 3: Get the diff
-
-An invocation is this /review run; a pass reviews one candidate before any fixes.
-On first entry, initialize one invocation action list and CYCLES=0. Keep both through re-reviews.
-
-Each pass has one direction: collect findings in Steps 3–4.8, approve and apply
-fixes in Step 5, then choose repeat or final persistence in Step 5.8.
-Do not edit reviewed source until Step 5. All readers examine the same candidate.
-
-Diff the working tree against the merge base:
-
-```bash
-DIFF_BASE=$(git merge-base origin/<base> HEAD)
-~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-review-log --start review
-git diff "$DIFF_BASE"
-```
-
-1. Save the printed REVIEW_START for this core candidate before reading its diff.
-2. Each re-review captures a new token before reading, never at log time. Earlier
-   core tokens remain unused; Step 5.8 finishes only the final core token.
-3. Native/outside reviewer attempts own separate PASS_START tokens, not REVIEW_START.
-4. Read non-ignored untracked source too (`git ls-files --others --exclude-standard`);
-   the captured candidate includes it.
-
-Keep the review-record terms separate:
-
-| Value | Purpose and owner |
-|---|---|
-| REVIEW_START / PASS_START | Opaque start receipts from the logger: one for the core pass, one for each other reviewer attempt. |
-| Finding fingerprint | Groups duplicate findings. The installed helper computes shared-code fingerprints; a matching key alone never proves a prior Skip is reusable. |
-| `review_binding` | The logger's proof tying a finished review to its captured candidate, not a finding identifier. |
-| `snapshot_covered_paths` | Supporting advice files the logger proved byte-identical to that candidate. Used by the prior-Skip checker, never supplied by the reviewer. |
-
-## Step 3.4: Workspace-aware queue status (advisory)
-
-Check the claimed VERSION's queue slot. This landing-order advice never blocks review.
-
-```bash
-BRANCH_VERSION=$(git show HEAD:VERSION 2>/dev/null | tr -d '\r\n[:space:]' || echo "")
-BASE_BRANCH="<base>"
-BASE_VERSION=$(git show origin/$BASE_BRANCH:VERSION 2>/dev/null | tr -d '\r\n[:space:]' || echo "")
-QUEUE_JSON=$(bun run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-next-version \
-  --base "$BASE_BRANCH" \
-  --bump patch \
-  --current-version "$BASE_VERSION" 2>/dev/null || echo '{"offline":true}')
-NEXT_SLOT=$(echo "$QUEUE_JSON" | jq -r '.version // empty')
-CLAIMED_COUNT=$(echo "$QUEUE_JSON" | jq -r '.claimed | length // 0')
-OFFLINE=$(echo "$QUEUE_JSON" | jq -r '.offline // false')
-```
-
-- `OFFLINE=true`: skip this section.
-- Otherwise, include ONE line in the review output: `Version claimed: v<BRANCH_VERSION>. Queue: <CLAIMED_COUNT> PR(s) ahead. <VERDICT>` where VERDICT is either `Slot free` (if `BRANCH_VERSION >= NEXT_SLOT`) or `⚠ queue moved — rerun /ship to reconcile v<BRANCH_VERSION> → v<NEXT_SLOT>`.
-
-Compare dotted version components as integers from left to right; missing trailing components count as zero.
-
----
-
-## Step 3.5: Diff scans
-
-Run the gate scan first (local, seconds; every diff size), then the slop scan.
-
-### Gate scan
-
-{{GATE_SCAN_BLOCK}}
-
-Save the `GATE_SUMMARY:` line and the read-level listing for Step 4's Gate Integrity
-category, Step 5.8's record and the final report.
-
-### Banned terms
-
-`~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-banned-terms check --base <base>`: each `BANNED_TERM:` line (term, file:line, allowed locations) is a Step 4 finding; `none` means the repo keeps no list.
-
-### Slop scan (advisory)
-
-Scan changed files for empty catches, redundant `return await` and needless abstractions:
-
-```bash
-bun run slop:diff origin/<base> 2>/dev/null || true
-```
-
-Include findings as non-blocking informational diagnostics. If slop:diff is
-unavailable, skip silently.
-
----
-
-## Step 3.6: Gather review context
-
-Run Prior Learnings, then Web research readiness after Step 3.5, before Step 4.
-Use their results in the core review.
-
-{{LEARNINGS_SEARCH}}
-
-{{ASIDE_RESEARCH}}
-
-## Step 4: Critical pass (core review)
-
-{{QA_REVIEW_PREFLIGHT}}
-
-Apply both checklist passes in order: CRITICAL, then INFORMATIONAL. Respect its suppressions.
-
-{{SIDEWAYS_SWEEP}}
-
-**Gate Integrity reads Step 3.5's listing.** Carry the `GATE_SUMMARY:` line and every
-read-level hunk (`[<id>] <tag> <path> @<hunk>`) into the checklist's Gate Integrity
-category: read each hunk in the diff with its one question, keep groups as one
-finding, and record `gate` (the RH tag) and `gate_id` (the tool's id) on each gate
-finding. A partial or UNAVAILABLE scan is missing coverage for this category, never
-a clean result. Gate findings are ASK in Step 5 regardless of how mechanical the
-revert looks. {{FLAKE_FIX_NUMBER:review}}
-
-**Search-before-recommending:** Research proposed fixes through Aside, especially
-concurrency, caching, auth and framework behavior:
-- Check current best practice for the installed framework version.
-- Look for a newer built-in before proposing a workaround.
-- Verify API signatures against current docs.
-
-Prompt file text (create, write and send it with the Web research runs in Aside blocks above): `{framework} {version} {pattern} current best practice and whether a built-in replaces it. Reply with up to 5 bullets, each with its source URL.`
-
-Without Aside `READY`, use WebSearch if available; with neither, disclose the gap
-and use existing knowledge. Research runs alongside specialist dispatch.
-
-### Shared-code opportunities (core pass)
-
-Run this check on every diff, including fewer than 50 changed lines and hosts without Review Army:
-1. Read the changed code and related unchanged callers using the rubric below. Do not run the standalone history/PR sweep or impose candidate quotas.
-2. Require at least one verified authored location changed in this diff and at least two actual authored source locations needing the shared behavior. Added or uncommitted source qualifies; invented future callers do not.
-3. Trace generated copies to authored templates/resolvers. Exclude generated and third-party copies from evidence and savings.
-
-{{SHARED_LIBS_RUBRIC}}
-
-The core pass owns optional extraction advice. Zero proposals is valid; prefer a compatible existing helper.
-- Show the changed anchor, verified callers, smallest helper/destination, preserved differences, compatibility tests and shared-failure risk.
-- Estimate implementation and total removed/added/saved lines from named blocks; deduplicate equivalent proposals and overlapping savings.
-- Use `"category":"shared-libs","severity":"INFORMATIONAL","advisory":true`, `evidence_paths` (all authored supporting paths) and `helper_target:{"path":"...","symbol":"..."}`.
-- Include an existing helper's authored path in `evidence_paths` so its contract and raw bytes participate in revalidation. A not-yet-created helper belongs only in `helper_target`.
-
-**Identity before merge or suppression:** Use installed `sharedLibsFingerprint`, never model-generated hashes. Send literal JSON on stdin (actual paths/symbol; keep the quoted delimiter), not interpolated shell code:
-
-```bash
-GSTACK_SHARED_LIB=~/.claude/skills/gstack/lib/review-evidence.ts
-bun -e 'const { sharedLibsFingerprint } = await import(process.argv[1]); const value = sharedLibsFingerprint(JSON.parse(await Bun.stdin.text())); if (!value) process.exit(1); console.log(value);' "$GSTACK_SHARED_LIB" <<'GSTACK_SHARED_LIBS_JSON'
-{"evidence_paths":["src/caller-a.ts","src/caller-b.ts"],"helper_target":{"path":"src/shared.ts","symbol":"sharedHelper"}}
-GSTACK_SHARED_LIBS_JSON
-```
-
-Use the returned fingerprint; malformed/missing metadata requires revalidation. Real defects follow Fix-First independently: advice or a prior Skip cannot suppress, downgrade or replace them, even with a shared supplied fingerprint.
-
-Core findings use the confidence gates below; Step 4.6 applies its specialist gates.
-Use CRITICAL/INFORMATIONAL labels in the finding format.
-Step 5.8 combines these finding lines with the checklist's action groups.
-
-{{CONFIDENCE_CALIBRATION}}
-
-### TODOS cross-reference
-
-If root `TODOS.md` exists, report closed items as "This PR addresses TODO: <title>".
-Flag new TODOs as informational and cite related items. Otherwise skip silently.
-
-### Documentation staleness check
-
-Read root `.md` files. When changed code affects a documented feature or workflow
-but its doc was not updated, flag an INFORMATIONAL finding naming the file and
-affected behavior. Propose `/document-release` for the parent's decision, never a
-critical finding or another writer during collection. Skip silently if no docs exist.
-
----
-
-{{SECTION:review-army}}
-
----
-
-{{QA_REVIEW}}
-
----
-
-{{SECTION:adversarial}}
-
-## Step 5: Fix-First Review
-
-Before edits, confirm every dispatched reader has returned or is confirmed stopped.
-For an active or unknown reader/writer, wait or confirm it is stopped. If settlement
-cannot be confirmed, persist incomplete at Step 5.8 and STOP without edits.
-Terminal failure does not block fixes from independent evidence. Missing required
-output still makes the pass incomplete, even after the reader is stopped.
-
-Combine core, specialist, Step 4.7 QA, Step 4.8 adversarial and VALID & ACTIONABLE Greptile findings.
-For QA findings, assign confidence (1–10) from replay/code evidence using Confidence
-Calibration; retain Step 4.7's severity, not a severity inferred from confidence.
-Run Step 5.0 severity/prior-skip dedup on all
-findings before Step 5a classification. Then action every remaining finding.
-Structured approval does not waive advisory/test_stub ASK gates.
-
-{{CROSS_REVIEW_DEDUP}}
-
-**Keep decisions through fix cycles:**
-1. Immediately save completed AUTO-FIX/fix and explicit Skip actions in the Step 3
-   action list, keeping defects separate from advice. For advice retain the helper's
-   fingerprint, `advisory`, `evidence_paths` and `helper_target`.
-2. Before reusing a decision, re-read every supporting caller and helper destination,
-   including secondary callers and transformed/indirect paths. Compare their raw
-   source with the decision evidence.
-3. Unrelated auto-fixes do not reopen unchanged identity, contract and tradeoffs.
-   Material proposal, behavior, migration or risk changes require a new question.
-   Carrying this invocation's decisions cannot suppress new/recurring defects or
-   replace Step 5.0's prior-review checker.
-
-### Step 5a: Classify each finding
-
-For each finding, classify as AUTO-FIX or ASK per the Fix-First Heuristic in
-checklist.md. Critical findings lean toward ASK; informational findings lean
-toward AUTO-FIX.
-
-**Advisory override:** After severity validation, `advisory:true` is ASK-only. Never auto-apply an optional extraction, even when mechanical. Show `[ADVISORY]`, helper, caller migration, tests and estimated total savings for approval or Skip. Handle real defects independently.
-
-**Test stub override:** Any finding that has a `test_stub` field, from a specialist or exploratory QA,
-is reclassified as ASK regardless of its original classification. When presenting the ASK
-item, show the proposed test file path and the test code. Step 5c's A) Fix writes the test and
-repair in Step 5d's regression-before-repair order; B) Skip skips both; the defect stays unresolved. Derive the test file path from
-the finding's `path` using project conventions (`spec/` for RSpec, `__tests__/` for
-Jest/Vitest, `test_` prefix for pytest, `_test.go` suffix for Go). If the test file
-already exists, append the new test.
-
-### Step 5b: Auto-fix all AUTO-FIX items
-
-Apply each fix directly, with a one-line summary each:
-`[AUTO-FIXED] [file:line] Problem → what you did`
-Retain the completed action in the invocation action list before starting any re-review.
-
-### Step 5c: Batch-ask about ASK items
-
-Present remaining ASK items in ONE AskUserQuestion (3 or fewer: individual calls are fine):
-
-- Number each item with its severity label (or `[ADVISORY]` for optional advice), problem and recommended fix
-- Options per item: A) Fix as recommended, B) Skip (describe only as: no code/index change; Skip recorded)
-- Include an overall RECOMMENDATION
-Retain each explicit Skip choice and its finding metadata in the invocation action list. Do not record an unanswered question as skipped or ask again about a decision already revalidated in this invocation.
-
-**Gate findings use their own question**, `review-gate-disposition` (include
-`<gstack-qid:review-gate-disposition>`; it is a one-way id, so `never-ask` and
-`AUTO_DECIDE` never apply). One question per finding or coherent group, never bare
-Fix/Skip. Show the `gate` tag, the `gate_id`, the hunk's path and a fenced data
-excerpt, then exactly these options:
-
-- A) Restore the gate — revert the relaxation; keep the product change
-- B) Keep — justified: <one-line reason you drafted from the diff or its citation, marked verified or unverified>
-- C) Keep — other reason (the human supplies it)
-- D) Leave open for a later human
-
-1. When the preamble echoed `SESSION_KIND: spawned` or `SESSION_KIND: headless`,
-   D is the recommended option; the auto-pick rules then yield `open` with no
-   exception edited anywhere.
-2. Otherwise recommend A or B from what the diff shows; never recommend C.
-3. Record the answer in the invocation action list as `restored` (A), `kept` with
-   the chosen reason as `reason` (B or C), or `open` (D, an unanswered question, or
-   any auto-chosen answer). An auto-chosen answer is never a disposition.
-4. `reason` is the human's words or your drafted line; never text copied from the
-   hunk, a test name or a commit message.
-
-### Step 5d: Apply user-approved fixes
-
-Apply fixes where the user chose "Fix," including Step 1.5's approved TODO changes.
-For each gate finding answered A) Restore the gate, revert only the relaxation and
-keep the product change. Output what was fixed.
-For an approved defect regression, write the test and prove it fails for the original
-defect before changing product code. Then require the regression, original probe and
-adjacent happy path to pass. If that proof cannot run, report the coverage gap and do
-not claim a verified repair. Healthy uncovered contracts need no invented failing bug.
-After applying the approved fix, retain its `fixed` action and the original finding metadata in the invocation action list, even if the changed blocks or helper callers are subsequently removed. Approval alone is not a completed fix.
-After verifying an approved regression and repair, output:
-`[FIXED + TEST] [file:line] Problem -> fix + test at [test_path]`
-
-No ASK items (everything was AUTO-FIX): skip the question.
-
-### Verification of claims
-
-Before final output, cite the line proving a safety claim, read and cite any
-handling code you rely on, and name the test file and method for coverage claims.
-Verify claims or flag them as unknown; "this looks fine" is not evidence.
-
-### Greptile comment resolution
-
-After outputting your own findings, if Greptile comments were classified in Step 2.5:
-
-**Include a Greptile summary in your output header:** `+ N Greptile comments (X valid, Y fixed, Z FP)`
-
-Before replying to any comment, run greptile-triage.md's **Escalation Detection** to choose Tier 1 (friendly) or Tier 2 (firm) reply templates.
-
-1. **VALID & ACTIONABLE comments:** Use their Step 5a–5d disposition; do not ask a second fix question. Step 5c alone supplies A) Fix / B) Skip for ASK items. After a completed fix, use the **Fix reply template** with diff and explanation; cite the current diff if uncommitted, never invent a commit SHA. A Skip leaves the defect unresolved and grants no new fix permission. If evidence disproves the finding, reclassify it below.
-
-2. **FALSE POSITIVE comments:** These are reply decisions, not code approval. Show file:line (or [top-level]), summary, permalink and evidence, then ask:
-   - A) Reply explaining why this is incorrect (recommended if clearly wrong)
-   - B) Propose a code change
-   - C) Ignore — don't reply, don't fix
-
-   For A, use the **False Positive reply template** with evidence + suggested re-rank; save to both histories. For B, return to Steps 5c–5d with an ASK proposal. Show the exact change and any `test_stub`; wait for approval before editing. Retain the comment decision so re-entry does not repeat its question.
-
-3. **VALID BUT ALREADY FIXED comments:** Reply with greptile-triage.md's **Already Fixed reply template**, no AskUserQuestion: what was done and the fixing commit SHA; save to both per-project and global greptile-history.
-
-4. **SUPPRESSED comments:** Skip silently (known false positives from previous triage).
-
----
-
-## Step 5.8: Persist Eng Review result
-
-### 1. Re-review after edits
-
-1. A pass covers Steps 3–5, including all reviewers before fixes. Allow at most 3 fix cycles:
-   - Edited: increment CYCLES once. Below 3, repeat Steps 3–5 with a new
-     REVIEW_START. At 3, persist `converged:false` and remaining findings by filling
-     and saving the record below. Report nonconvergence and coverage gaps, then STOP
-     this invocation, without a clean summary or a fourth pass.
-   - No edits: fill the record below.
-2. On a repeat, execute Steps 3–5 in order. At Step 4.7, reuse only this invocation's
-   unchanged-input QA evidence; rerun affected probes after source, test, contract,
-   command or fixture changes. Reusing a probe never skips a review step.
-   A probe is affected when its entrypoint, dependencies, contract or replay inputs
-   change; if uncertain, rerun it.
-3. **Verify completed actions.** On the final zero-edit pass, reconcile this
-   invocation's actions with current findings. Deduplicate by structural identity
-   and advisory/defect kind. For a completed extraction, retain `fixed` and the
-   original `evidence_paths`/`helper_target`; use `sharedLibsFingerprint` on that
-   metadata. Verify the replacement helper, remaining callers and tests without
-   requiring deleted pre-extraction blocks. Current findings determine recurring
-   defects and unresolved counts; earlier fixes do not suppress them.
-4. **Recheck skipped advice.** Re-read its final-snapshot supporting source and
-   reconfirm the decision; otherwise report its history without a reusable skip.
-   The logger computes `snapshot_covered_paths` from eligible paths whose raw bytes
-   equal the bound snapshot blobs (`[]` if none). Never carry prior-cycle, supplied
-   or prior-record coverage forward or build this proof yourself. Fixed advice
-   needs no skip coverage.
-
-### 2. Fill the record
-
-- `COMPLETED`: true only when the checklist, dispatched specialists and native
-  Step 4.8 adversarial pass finish, and every required Step 4.7 probe passes.
-  Any failed, blocked, inconclusive or not-run required probe means false, as does
-  a failed native review. `/ship` named-risk acceptance cannot complete `/review`.
-- `CONVERGED`: true only for a completed zero-edit pass; `CYCLES` counts editing
-  passes, not findings or reviewer attempts.
-- `STATUS`: `clean` only when completed with zero unresolved non-advisory
-  defects; otherwise `issues_found`. An incomplete review with no defects has
-  zero counts and `completed:false`; explain the gap. Advice never blocks clean
-  status or relaxes completion, convergence, start-token or missing-reviewer rules.
-
-The required in-host adversarial result controls native completion. Optional outside
-attempts keep their own incomplete records when unavailable and cannot substitute
-for the native result, or vice versa. Step 4.8's structured-review gate still applies.
-An outside review reporting `unverified` or `unavailable` is missing coverage, never a
-pass: report it with its reason.
-
-- Use Step 4.6's `specialists` object unchanged, including its empty small-diff map.
-  If this host omits Review Army, use `specialists: {}` without claiming specialist coverage.
-- Build `findings` from Step 5's combined final-pass findings (core, specialist,
-  adversarial, actionable Greptile, verified exploratory QA findings) and invocation actions. Retain `fingerprint`, `severity`
-  (`CRITICAL|INFORMATIONAL`), `action`, and any `advisory`, `evidence_paths`,
-  `helper_target`. Recheck source after fixes. The logger uses `sharedLibsFingerprint`,
-  never supplied/model hashes.
-  Actions: `auto-fixed` (Step 5b), `fixed` (approved **and completed** in Step 5d),
-  `skipped` (explicit Skip in Step 5c). Advice is never `auto-fixed`; pending
-  advice stays in the response, not the record. Exclude prior Step 5.0
-  suppressions; include this invocation's revalidated decisions.
-- Gate findings additionally carry `gate` (the RH tag, e.g. `"RH-15"`), `gate_id`
-  (the tool's hunk identity), `reason` (for `kept`) and one of the actions
-  `kept`, `restored` or `open`. Never store hunk text, test names or commit
-  messages in the record (it is brain-synced). `open` findings count in
-  `issues_found` and in `critical`/`informational` by severity. The logger stamps
-  `actor` from `gstack-session-kind` itself and discards any `actor` you supply;
-  for a non-interactive session it also forces `action: "open"` on every gate
-  finding. Dispositions are per invocation: `/ship`'s own review pass asks again.
-
-```bash
-~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-review-log '{"skill":"review","timestamp":"TIMESTAMP","status":"STATUS","issues_found":N,"critical":N,"informational":N,"quality_score":SCORE,"specialists":SPECIALISTS_JSON,"findings":FINDINGS_JSON,"commit":"COMMIT","completed":COMPLETED,"converged":CONVERGED,"cycles":CYCLES}' --finish REVIEW_START
-```
-
-`TIMESTAMP` is ISO 8601; `COMMIT` is `git rev-parse --short HEAD`.
-`quality_score` is Step 4.6's specialist score (`10.0` when small-diff specialists
-were skipped or this host omits Review Army). This default is not completion evidence;
-unresolved non-advisory core defects still count in `issues_found`,
-`critical`, `informational`. The logger builds trusted `review_binding` from the
-validated captured branch digest, discarding caller bindings. Never invent a binding
-or replace REVIEW_START at log time; finish only the final core token.
-
-### Report the final review
-
-Emit one final report, merging all reviewers rather than concatenating them:
-1. `Pre-Landing Review: N issues (X critical, Y informational)` counts final unresolved
-   non-advisory defects. State INCOMPLETE if `COMPLETED` is false, even when N=0.
-2. Use the checklist's action groups with confidence-tagged finding lines. Keep fixed,
-   skipped and advisory items separate from unresolved defects; retain their dispositions.
-3. Append Step 4.7's single `## Exploratory QA and Verification Results` section with
-   current evidence and coverage gaps. Neither coverage gaps nor advice are defects.
-4. Add one `Gate edits:` line from Step 3.5's `GATE_SUMMARY:` and Step 5c's answers,
-   using exactly one of these shapes:
-   - `Gate edits: none detected (N listed, M read; patterns: <coverage>; unlisted idioms: <languages_unlisted>)`
-   - `Gate edits: N listed, M read, K findings — J kept (reasons below), R restored, O open`
-   - `Gate edits: partial (K of M eligible read)` followed by the findings counts for the hunks that were read
-   - `Gate edits: UNAVAILABLE — <GATE_ERROR line or helper exit>` (missing coverage, never `none detected`)
-   List each kept finding's `gate`, path and `reason` under it.
-
-{{LEARNINGS_LOG}}
-
-If the review exits early (for example, no diff against the base branch), do **not** write this entry.
-
-## Important Rules
-
-- **Read the FULL diff before commenting.** Do not flag issues already addressed in the diff.
-- **Fix-first, not read-only.** AUTO-FIX items are applied directly, ASK items only after user approval. Never commit, push, or create PRs — that's /ship's job.
-- **Be terse.** One line problem, one line fix. No preamble.
-- **Only flag real problems.** Skip anything that's fine.
-- **Optional extractions stay advisory.** Shared-code opportunities need verified callers and useful reliability or total savings; similarity alone is not a defect. Keep actual defects independently actionable.
-- **Use Greptile reply templates from greptile-triage.md.** Every reply includes evidence. Never post vague replies.

package/.agent/skills/gstack-review/TODOS-format.md

@@ -1,61 +0,0 @@
-# TODOS.md Format Reference
-
-Shared reference for the canonical TODOS.md format. Referenced by `/ship` (Step 14) and `/plan-ceo-review` (TODOS.md updates section) to ensure consistent TODO item structure.
-
----
-
-## File Structure
-
-```markdown
-# TODOS
-
-## <Skill/Component>     ← e.g., ## Browse, ## Ship, ## Review, ## Infrastructure
-<items sorted P0 first, then P1, P2, P3, P4>
-
-## Completed
-<finished items with completion annotation>
-```
-
-**Sections:** Organize by skill or component (`## Browse`, `## Ship`, `## Review`, `## QA`, `## Retro`, `## Infrastructure`). Within each section, sort items by priority (P0 at top).
-
----
-
-## TODO Item Format
-
-Each item is an H3 under its section:
-
-```markdown
-### <Title>
-
-**What:** One-line description of the work.
-
-**Why:** The concrete problem it solves or value it unlocks.
-
-**Context:** Enough detail that someone picking this up in 3 months understands the motivation, the current state, and where to start.
-
-**Effort:** S / M / L / XL
-**Priority:** P0 / P1 / P2 / P3 / P4
-**Depends on:** <prerequisites, or "None">
-```
-
-**Required fields:** What, Why, Context, Effort, Priority
-**Optional fields:** Depends on, Blocked by
-
----
-
-## Priority Definitions
-
-- **P0** — Blocking: must be done before next release
-- **P1** — Critical: should be done this cycle
-- **P2** — Important: do when P0/P1 are clear
-- **P3** — Nice-to-have: revisit after adoption/usage data
-- **P4** — Someday: good idea, no urgency
-
----
-
-## Completed Item Format
-
-When an item is completed, move it to the `## Completed` section preserving its original content and appending:
-
-```markdown
-**Completed:** vX.Y.Z (YYYY-MM-DD)