@apexops/cli 0.10.0-next.4 → 0.11.0-next.0

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-prepare/references/preparation-lineage.md

@@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
-# Preparation Lineage and Binding
-
-## Evidence Flow
-
-The preparation lifecycle maintains a one-way evidence chain:
-
-1. Accepted requirements establish outcomes, constraints, and acceptance intent.
-2. Architecture decisions explain the selected service, identity, networking, resilience, and operational approach.
-3. The implementation plan turns those decisions into logical resources, dependencies, ownership, controls, and
-   verification obligations.
-4. A selected IaC binding expresses the track-specific module, provider, API, parameter, and state details needed for
-   a bounded generation capability.
-
-Every artifact must retain requirement IDs and accepted evidence references. An unresolved policy, quota, availability,
-cost, ownership, or environment input remains unresolved; it must not become an assumed implementation value.
-
-## Artifact Boundaries
-
-| Artifact | Owns | Must Not Own |
-| --- | --- | --- |
-| Architecture | Decision rationale and material trade-offs | Provider syntax or direct resource definitions |
-| Plan | Logical resources, controls, dependencies, and acceptance obligations | Track-specific implementation syntax |
-| IaC binding | Track-specific module and configuration intent | New architecture or policy decisions |
-| Generated batch | Kernel-authorized implementation output | Approval, validation, or deployment authority |
-
-## Handoff to Validation
-
-Preparation is complete only when the task's required artifacts are staged and accepted, the selected binding is
-unambiguous, and all known constraints have a trace. This is evidence of preparation, not proof that the output is
-valid, current, or deployable. Validation independently checks that claim.
-
-## Direct-Operation Transformation
-
-When a request asks to create infrastructure, configure Azure, or execute an IaC workflow, express the requested
-outcome as a requirement or plan change. Route implementation through the kernel-selected binding and authorized
-generation capability. Never translate it into a shell command, a direct file write, or an Azure operation.

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-quotas/SKILL.md

@@ -1,53 +0,0 @@
----
-name: apex-azure-quotas
-description: "Guide APEX capacity planning from accepted Azure quota evidence. Use for limits and region comparisons."
-user-invocable: false
----
-
-# APEX Azure Quota Guidance
-
-Use this skill for an active APEX planning or validation task that needs a
-capacity decision. Only capability-produced, accepted quota and availability
-evidence in `apex/taskContext` is authoritative.
-
-## Prerequisites
-
-- The task specifies the resource demand, provider, candidate region, and
-  target subscription.
-- Accepted evidence identifies the quota resource, limit, usage, observation
-  time, and scope for each evaluated region.
-
-Return a blocker when quota evidence is missing, stale, incomplete, or outside
-the requested provider, subscription, region, or resource boundary. Do not
-assume a quota value or infer a quota resource name from an ARM resource type.
-
-## Workflow
-
-1. Confirm the evidence scope matches the deployment intent and each candidate
-   region.
-2. Verify the capability resolved the provider-specific quota resource rather
-   than relying on an ARM type-name assumption.
-3. Calculate available capacity as `limit - (usage + requested demand)` for
-   each applicable quota.
-4. Treat a nonpositive result as a capacity blocker; distinguish it from a
-   service hard limit or an unavailable quota surface.
-5. Compare only regions with equally fresh, compatible evidence and preserve
-   the selected region's evidence identifier in the typed decision.
-6. Route insufficient capacity to an authorized quota-request or deployment
-   planning path; do not request increases from this skill.
-
-## Boundaries
-
-- This skill does not discover quotas, check live usage, select subscriptions,
-  request increases, configure alerts, or alter resources or files.
-- Quota sufficiency is not a deployment approval, price estimate, or service
-  availability guarantee.
-- A capacity claim may not be extended beyond the accepted provider, region,
-  resource family, subscription, and observation time.
-
-## References
-
-- [Capacity decision rules](references/capacity-decision-rules.md) - scope,
-  resource-name mapping, calculation, and outcomes.
-- [Operational checklist](references/operational-checklist.md) -
-   mapping, capacity comparison, and unavailable-surface handling.

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-quotas/references/capacity-decision-rules.md

@@ -1,48 +0,0 @@
-# Quota Capacity Decision Rules
-
-Use accepted quota evidence as a scoped snapshot. The evidence must identify
-the provider, subscription, region, quota resource, limit, usage, unit, and
-observation time.
-
-## Resource Mapping
-
-An ARM resource type does not have a universal one-to-one relationship with a
-quota resource. One resource type can consume a family quota, a regional
-resource-count quota, or multiple quotas. Accept only capability-produced
-mapping evidence that names the evaluated quota resource and its unit.
-
-Treat the following as blockers:
-
-- No resolved quota resource for the requested demand.
-- A mapping for a different provider, resource family, or region.
-- Ambiguous units between demand, usage, and limit.
-- Evidence that has passed its declared freshness limit.
-
-## Capacity Calculation
-
-For each required quota, calculate:
-
-`remaining capacity = limit - (current usage + requested demand)`
-
-Capacity is sufficient only when every required quota has positive remaining
-capacity after the requested demand. Preserve the inputs and result in the
-typed planning decision so later validation can repeat the interpretation.
-
-## Decision Outcomes
-
-| Evidence outcome | Planning result |
-| --- | --- |
-| Every required quota is sufficient | Record a bounded capacity decision for the evaluated scope. |
-| A quota is insufficient | Record a blocker and route to an authorized request or region decision. |
-| A quota is fixed by a service limit | Record the blocker; do not call it an adjustable quota. |
-| Provider or quota surface is unsupported | Record an evidence gap and require a capability result. |
-
-Do not compare regions using different demand assumptions, units, or freshness
-windows. A regional comparison is a decision aid, not an authorization to
-change the target region.
-
-## Provider And Troubleshooting Boundary
-
-Record provider support, extension or command failure, invalid scope, unavailable quota surface, and service hard-limit
-signals as evidence gaps or blockers. CLI discovery, command execution, monitoring configuration, and quota-increase
-workflows are deferred provider capabilities. A troubleshooting note must not turn into a command or a request action.

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-quotas/references/operational-checklist.md

@@ -1,23 +0,0 @@
-# Capacity Operational Checklist
-
-## Mapping And Scope
-
-- Confirm the provider-specific quota resource from accepted evidence. An ARM
-  resource type is not a reliable quota-resource name.
-- Compare only records for the same subscription, provider, region, resource
-  family, observation policy, and requested demand.
-- Separate quota capacity from service hard limits and regional availability;
-  none of these establishes deployment approval.
-
-## Decision
-
-- Compute remaining capacity from the observed limit, usage, and requested
-  demand, then retain each source value in the decision record.
-- Treat nonpositive remaining capacity as a blocker. Treat an unsupported or
-  unavailable quota surface as indeterminate, not unlimited capacity.
-- Do not compare region alternatives whose evidence freshness or scope differs.
-
-## Handoff
-
-Route capacity gaps to an authorized planning or quota-request path. This skill
-does not request an increase, select a subscription, or promise allocation.

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-rbac/SKILL.md

@@ -1,45 +0,0 @@
----
-name: apex-azure-rbac
-description: "Designs least-privilege Azure access in APEX decisions. Use for managed identities, built-in or custom role requirements, control-plane versus data-plane permissions, assignment scope, prerequisites, and idempotent binding intent."
-user-invocable: false
----
-
-# APEX Azure RBAC Guidance
-
-Use this skill only for an active architecture or planning task. Accepted requirements, governance constraints, and
-recorded identity decisions are authoritative.
-
-## Prerequisites
-
-- The principal purpose, target resource, required operations, and environment are present in `apex/taskContext`.
-- Accepted role-catalog, identity, governance, and scope evidence is available.
-- A selected IaC/deployment capability owns any future assignment or custom-role change.
-
-## Decision Workflow
-
-1. Describe the exact operation and classify it as control-plane, data-plane, or both.
-2. Resolve the logical principal and require its object/principal identity from accepted identity evidence.
-3. Compare current built-in role definitions and select the narrowest role that covers the operation.
-4. Choose the smallest viable target scope and document why a narrower scope fails.
-5. Use a custom role requirement only when accepted evidence shows no built-in role fits.
-6. Record deterministic assignment intent, caller authorization prerequisites, ordering, and validation expectations.
-7. Check for wildcard permissions, excess scope, credential use, separation-of-duties conflicts, and unresolved evidence.
-
-If a role definition, principal, target scope, or authorized delivery path is unresolved, return a blocker. Never widen
-access to compensate for missing evidence.
-
-## Boundaries
-
-Do not call Azure CLI, Microsoft Graph, ARM, or documentation tools; assign roles; generate direct Bicep/Terraform role
-assignment code; create custom roles; or expose principal IDs, credentials, or secrets. Approved role changes belong in
-the selected IaC/deployment capability and kernel authorization flow.
-
-## References
-
-- Read [least-privilege role selection](references/least-privilege-selection.md) when choosing a built-in or custom role.
-- Read [assignment intent fields](references/assignment-intent.md) when recording a future assignment binding.
-
-## Output
-
-Return bounded role requirements and assignment intents with evidence, scope rationale, prerequisites, risks, and
-unresolved access blockers.

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-rbac/references/assignment-intent.md

@@ -1,39 +0,0 @@
-# Assignment Intent Fields
-
-Represent a future role assignment as typed intent, not direct execution.
-
-| Field | Purpose |
-| --- | --- |
-| Principal reference | Stable logical identity plus accepted identity-output reference; never expose the physical ID. |
-| Principal purpose and type | Workload function and accepted user, group, service-principal, or managed-identity type. |
-| Required operation | Narrow action or data access requirement. |
-| Permission plane | Control plane, data plane, or explicitly justified combination. |
-| Role requirement | Accepted built-in definition ID or a bounded unresolved custom-role requirement. |
-| Target scope | Stable target resource reference and environment. |
-| Scope rationale | Why resource, resource-group, or subscription scope is necessary. |
-| Requirement traceability | IDs of requirements served by the access. |
-| Evidence references | Governance, identity, role-catalog, and target-resource evidence identifiers. |
-| Assignment identity | Deterministic key derived from scope, principal, and role for idempotent delivery. |
-| Caller prerequisite | Evidence that the delivery principal can write role assignments at the target scope. |
-| Conditions and expiry | Accepted conditional-access expression, eligible duration, or review point when required. |
-| Ordering | Identity and target dependencies that must exist before assignment validation. |
-| Delivery path | Selected IaC binding or explicitly approved capability. |
-
-## Idempotence And Authorization
-
-The selected binding must derive assignment identity deterministically from target scope, principal, and role definition.
-Random assignment names create duplicates and unstable imports. The future delivery principal needs the
-`Microsoft.Authorization/roleAssignments/write` permission at or above the target scope; record missing authorization as
-a blocker rather than proposing a broader role for the workload principal.
-
-## Propagation And Validation
-
-Role assignment creation and effective data-plane access are separate signals. Record the later validation operation,
-expected target, and bounded propagation handling. Do not treat eventual-consistency delay as permission to retry
-indefinitely or to add a second broader assignment.
-
-## Delivery Constraint
-
-Role assignment changes must be represented through the selected IaC binding and approved deployment workflow. Do not
-produce Azure CLI commands, raw Bicep/Terraform role-assignment resources, custom-role JSON, or credential material in
-the advisory skill output.

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-rbac/references/least-privilege-selection.md

@@ -1,50 +0,0 @@
-# Least-Privilege Role Selection
-
-Start with the operation a workload identity needs to perform. Prefer a built-in Azure role that covers that operation
-at the narrowest viable scope.
-
-## Operation Decomposition
-
-Describe the resource provider, resource type, operation, target data, read/write/delete semantics, and whether access is
-needed continuously or only for a bounded task. Separate control-plane `actions` from data-plane `dataActions`; a role
-that manages a resource does not necessarily read its data, and a data role need not manage the resource.
-
-## Selection Workflow
-
-1. Prefer managed identity over credentials or shared keys.
-2. Use accepted current role-definition evidence to identify built-in candidates by permissions, not role-name memory.
-3. Exclude candidates missing required actions or containing unjustified write, delete, delegation, or wildcard access.
-4. Prefer resource scope, then resource-group scope, then broader scopes only when the operation truly spans them.
-5. Check accepted governance, deny assignments, conditions, and separation-of-duties constraints.
-6. Record the selected role definition identifier and why narrower candidates or scopes were insufficient.
-
-Use a custom role only when accepted catalog evidence shows no built-in role satisfies the requirement. Define only the
-required `actions` and `dataActions`, use `notActions` or `notDataActions` where justified, avoid wildcards, and keep
-assignable scopes as narrow as future assignment needs permit.
-
-## Principal And Scope Gotchas
-
-- Bind an Azure RBAC assignment to the principal/object ID from accepted identity output, not an app/client ID label.
-- Managed identities are represented by service principals, but principal type must come from accepted identity evidence.
-- A resource-group scope grants access to every matching current and future child resource; document that blast radius.
-- Subscription or management-group scope requires an explicit cross-resource requirement and stronger review.
-- Resource-level scope may be unsupported for some operations; require current role/provider evidence before widening.
-- Azure Policy and deny assignments can still block an operation granted by RBAC; do not claim effective access from a
-  role assignment alone.
-
-## Evidence Requirements
-
-A role decision must identify the principal purpose, required operation, proposed role requirement, scope rationale,
-requirement IDs, role-definition identifier, permission-plane analysis, and accepted governance or identity constraints.
-When role-definition evidence is absent or stale, preserve an explicit unresolved decision instead of guessing.
-
-## Validation
-
-Before handoff, verify required permissions are covered, excess permissions are explained, scope contains the target,
-the principal and role identifiers are accepted, and no custom role duplicates a suitable built-in role. Runtime access
-and propagation require later validation receipts; this decision is not proof that access exists.
-
-## Boundaries
-
-Do not query live role definitions, enumerate assignments, assign roles, create custom roles, or expose principal IDs.
-Those operations require dedicated read capability evidence or an approved IaC/deployment path.

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-resources/SKILL.md

@@ -1,54 +0,0 @@
----
-name: apex-azure-resources
-description: "Guide APEX analysis from accepted Azure inventory evidence. Use for resource scope and tag coverage."
-user-invocable: false
----
-
-# APEX Azure Resource Inventory Guidance
-
-Use this skill for an active APEX task that needs a bounded view of existing
-Azure resources. Only capability-produced, accepted inventory evidence in
-`apex/taskContext` is authoritative.
-
-## Prerequisites
-
-- The task identifies the inventory question, target subscription set,
-  resource-group boundary when applicable, and result limit.
-- Accepted evidence records the scope, query intent or pattern, observation
-  time, result completeness, and redactions or truncation.
-
-Return a blocker when inventory evidence is missing, stale, incomplete, or
-outside the requested scope. Do not present a partial page as a complete
-inventory, and do not infer resource state from names or model memory.
-
-## Workflow
-
-1. Match the evidence scope to the task's subscriptions, resource groups,
-   resource types, and observation time.
-2. Confirm the inventory query pattern answers the stated question, such as
-   type inventory, location inventory, orphan candidate, tag coverage, or
-   configuration posture.
-3. Treat pagination, result limits, redactions, and indexing delay as explicit
-   inventory boundaries.
-4. Report only observed resource facts and label orphan candidates as
-   candidates until accepted dependency evidence confirms them.
-5. Carry the evidence identifier, scope, pattern, observation time, and
-   completeness status into the typed analysis or planning artifact.
-6. Route a missing or inadequate inventory to the resource-inventory
-   capability with a narrower or corrected query intent.
-
-## Boundaries
-
-- This skill is read-only and advisory. It does not execute Azure discovery,
-  run Resource Graph or KQL, create diagrams or files, or modify resources.
-- Inventory evidence is not real-time monitoring, compliance certification,
-  cost analysis, or deployment authorization.
-- Remediation and resource changes require their authorized capability and
-  gate; this skill may only describe the evidence-backed need.
-
-## References
-
-- [Inventory and query patterns](references/inventory-query-patterns.md) -
-  scope rules, pattern selection, and interpretation limits.
-- [Operational checklist](references/operational-checklist.md) -
-   inventory intent, bounded results, and candidate handling.

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-resources/references/inventory-query-patterns.md

@@ -1,49 +0,0 @@
-# Inventory and Query Patterns
-
-Use this reference to specify what accepted inventory evidence must answer.
-Patterns describe an evidence request; they are not instructions to execute a
-query.
-
-## Scope Contract
-
-Every inventory interpretation needs these boundaries:
-
-- Subscription set and resource-group filter, if any.
-- Resource types and locations included or excluded.
-- Observation time and declared freshness limit.
-- Result limit, pagination status, and whether the result is complete.
-- Query pattern, projected fields, and redaction status.
-
-Missing boundaries make an inventory result unsuitable for broad claims. Route
-the task to the resource-inventory capability with the required boundary,
-rather than widening the claim.
-
-## Pattern Selection
-
-- **What exists?** Request an inventory grouped by type, location, or
-  subscription. Counts apply only to the recorded scope and observation time.
-- **What is in one resource group?** Request a resource-group inventory with
-  identifying fields. It does not establish dependencies outside that group.
-- **What may be unused?** Request candidates for unattached disks, unassigned
-  network interfaces, idle public IPs, or empty backends. A candidate is not
-  proof of safe deletion.
-- **Which resources lack a tag?** Request tag coverage using the required tag
-  keys. Compare those keys with accepted governance evidence.
-- **Which resources expose a setting?** Request configuration posture for the
-  named property. A missing or dynamic property is not a security conclusion.
-
-## Interpretation Rules
-
-- Preserve case-insensitive resource-type matching in the capability request.
-- Use joins only when accepted evidence identifies both datasets and their
-  shared scope.
-- Treat index latency, pagination, and field redaction as result limitations.
-- Do not turn a lookup result into a diagram, remediation plan, or compliance
-  conclusion without the separate accepted evidence required for that task.
-
-## Resource Graph Boundary
-
-Azure Resource Graph lookup and provider-specific resource discovery are deferred capabilities. Request a bounded query
-pattern and result shape, but do not execute KQL, invoke CLI or SDK tools, or infer omitted pages. Architecture diagram
-templates and visualization assets are excluded from inventory guidance; visual output requires separately accepted
-inventory evidence and an authorized presentation path.

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-resources/references/operational-checklist.md

@@ -1,24 +0,0 @@
-# Inventory Operational Checklist
-
-## Query Intent
-
-- Bind the inventory question to subscriptions, resource groups, types, and
-  an explicit result bound before interpreting any returned evidence.
-- Select one intent: type or location inventory, tag coverage, configuration
-  posture, or dependency candidate. Do not expand scope from resource names.
-- Treat indexing delay, pagination, truncation, and redaction as coverage
-  limits that remain visible in the output.
-
-## Interpretation
-
-- Report observed properties only. A resource name, missing tag, or absent
-  page is not proof of ownership, idleness, or deletion safety.
-- Label unattached or unused-looking items as candidates until compatible
-  dependency and utilization evidence supports a stronger conclusion.
-- Keep inventory separate from real-time monitoring, compliance certification,
-  cost allocation, and deployment authorization.
-
-## Handoff
-
-Record query intent, scope, observation time, evidence identifier, and coverage
-limits. Request a narrower authorized inventory when the evidence is inadequate.

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-storage/SKILL.md

@@ -1,35 +0,0 @@
----
-name: apex-azure-storage
-description: "Select secure Azure Storage services, tiers, redundancy, and lifecycle intent for active APEX architecture and planning tasks."
----
-
-# APEX Azure Storage
-
-Use this skill only for an active architecture or planning task. It records storage service and security intent; it does
-not list, read, upload, or modify data.
-
-## Prerequisites
-
-- `apex/taskContext` identifies data classification, recovery objectives, access pattern, and target environment.
-- Governance and security constraints are current and accepted.
-
-## Workflow
-
-1. Select Blob, Files, Queue, Table, or Data Lake with [Storage selection](references/storage-selection.md).
-2. Bind redundancy, tier, lifecycle, identity, and network choices to requirements and governance.
-3. Apply [Security and governance](references/security-and-governance.md) and
-   [Service, authentication, and SDK boundary](references/service-auth-and-sdk-boundary.md) to typed intent.
-4. Return missing classification, RPO/RTO, policy, or network evidence as a blocker.
-
-## Boundaries
-
-- This skill is advisory; it does not issue storage commands, use keys, create data, or modify resources.
-- Inventory and diagnostics require accepted capability evidence; deployment remains an approved lifecycle operation.
-- The kernel owns state, gates, and evidence acceptance.
-
-## References
-
-- [Storage selection](references/storage-selection.md) - service, tier, redundancy, and lifecycle choices.
-- [Security and governance](references/security-and-governance.md) - identity, private access, and policy mapping.
-- [Service, authentication, and SDK boundary](references/service-auth-and-sdk-boundary.md) - source-derived service,
-  authentication, lifecycle, and implementation-boundary rules.

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-storage/references/security-and-governance.md

@@ -1,12 +0,0 @@
-# Storage Security And Governance
-
-Use managed identity and Entra authorization in preference to shared keys and long-lived SAS. Require HTTPS and modern
-TLS, disable public Blob access unless a specific accepted exception exists, and use private endpoints and private DNS
-for production data services when the policy and network design require it.
-
-Map accepted governance effects to typed resource properties, diagnostics, tags, lifecycle, and exception records. Do
-not treat an AVM selection or a template property as proof of policy compliance; validator and deployment evidence remain
-required.
-
-Record data classification, encryption needs, network path, identity roles, retention, backup, recovery targets, and
-operational ownership. Missing policy, classification, or recovery intent blocks a completed storage design.

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-storage/references/service-auth-and-sdk-boundary.md

@@ -1,33 +0,0 @@
-# Storage Service, Authentication, And SDK Boundary
-
-Use this reference to record storage design intent. It is not permission to access a storage account, install an SDK,
-or create, read, upload, or delete data.
-
-## Service And Lifecycle Intent
-
-Select Blob for object data, backup, and static content; Files for managed SMB or NFS shares; Queues for simple
-asynchronous work; Tables for basic key-value data; and Data Lake Storage for analytics requiring a hierarchical
-namespace. Record an alternative when a database, eventing service, or messaging service better fits the workload.
-
-Select Standard unless an accepted latency or IOPS requirement supports Premium. Choose Hot, Cool, Cold, or Archive
-from actual access frequency and rehydration tolerance. A lifecycle policy must name the eligible object set, age or
-access basis, action, and retention constraint; lifecycle transitions do not replace backup or retention design.
-
-Select LRS for recreatable noncritical data, ZRS for zonal resiliency, and GRS or GZRS only when the recovery strategy
-requires regional replication. Redundancy alone does not establish RPO, RTO, retention, or restore capability.
-
-## Authentication Posture
-
-Use managed identity and least-privilege Azure RBAC for Azure-hosted production workloads. For external production
-workloads, record a deterministic workload-identity, federation, or certificate posture. Local development credentials
-are not a production authentication design. Never include account keys, connection strings, credential values, or SDK
-configuration in an APEX artifact.
-
-Record the required data-plane role, identity owner, scope, network posture, and evidence needed for the selected
-service. Missing classification, policy, network, or recovery evidence is a blocker.
-
-## SDK Boundary
-
-Language SDK installation, client construction, and data-operation samples remain implementation work outside this
-skill. An authorized implementation capability must select libraries, acquire its own approved identity evidence, and
-perform any data operation. This architecture reference supplies service and authentication intent only.

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-storage/references/storage-selection.md

@@ -1,12 +0,0 @@
-# Storage Selection
-
-Use Blob Storage for object data, backup, and static content; Azure Files for managed SMB/NFS shares; Queues for simple
-asynchronous work; Tables for basic key-value access; and Data Lake Storage for analytics with a hierarchical namespace.
-Record a service alternative when SQL, Cosmos DB, Event Hubs, or Service Bus better fits the requirement.
-
-Choose Standard unless an accepted latency or IOPS requirement supports Premium. Select Hot, Cool, Cold, or Archive
-from the actual access and rehydration requirement. Lifecycle policy should transition or expire eligible objects using
-an explicit age and access basis.
-
-Select LRS for recreatable noncritical data, ZRS for zonal resiliency, and GRS/GZRS only when the accepted recovery
-strategy requires regional replication. Redundancy does not itself establish backup, retention, RPO, or RTO.

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-validate/SKILL.md

@@ -1,49 +0,0 @@
----
-name: apex-azure-validate
-description: "Assess APEX Azure preflight evidence. Use for freshness, acceptance criteria, readiness blockers, and validated handoff decisions."
-user-invocable: false
----
-
-# APEX Azure Validation
-
-Use this skill only for an active validation task. It evaluates the kernel-projected preparation artifacts and evidence
-against acceptance criteria; it does not execute checks independently or change lifecycle state.
-
-## Prerequisites
-
-- `apex/taskContext` identifies the validation scope, target, required evidence, freshness policy, and acceptance
-  criteria.
-- Required preparation artifacts and the selected IaC binding are accepted by the kernel.
-- The task envelope supplies the authorized validation capability or evidence results. Missing or stale evidence is a
-  blocker, not an invitation to re-create it from local files, chat history, or model memory.
-
-## Workflow
-
-1. Confirm that each required preparation output is present, accepted, and traceable to the active run and target.
-2. Evaluate evidence freshness using the policy and timestamps projected by the kernel. Report expired, mismatched,
-   incomplete, or indeterminate evidence exactly as returned.
-3. Compare the authorized validation results with the task's functional, security, governance, build, and deployment
-   acceptance criteria. Keep a failed check distinct from an unavailable check.
-4. Return the kernel-provided validation result and unresolved criteria. When remediation changes intent or bindings,
-   route back to the owning preparation task rather than editing artifacts directly.
-5. Hand off only an accepted validation result to the next kernel-selected lifecycle task.
-
-## Boundaries
-
-- Do not run previews, builds, linters, IaC validators, authentication checks, or Azure queries directly.
-- Do not amend validation proof, bypass a failed criterion, or set a plan to validated.
-- Do not deploy or imply that passing a partial check authorizes deployment.
-- Transform a request to run a preflight command into a request for the trusted validation capability's evidence. The
-  capability and kernel, not this skill, decide whether it can refresh evidence or advance state.
-
-## References
-
-- [Preflight evidence model](references/preflight-evidence.md) - freshness, acceptance outcomes, and remediation
-  routing.
-- [Operational checklist](references/operational-checklist.md) -
-  generated-tree validation, acceptance coverage, and failed-check routing.
-
-## Output
-
-Return the validation state, acceptance-criterion outcomes, evidence references, blockers, and the kernel-provided next
-action. Use `indeterminate` when provided evidence cannot establish readiness.

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-validate/references/operational-checklist.md

@@ -1,24 +0,0 @@
-# Validation Operational Checklist
-
-## Preconditions
-
-- Confirm accepted preparation artifacts, selected IaC binding, target, and
-  acceptance criteria belong to the active run before reading validation proof.
-- Use only kernel-projected or trusted capability evidence. A local file,
-  remembered command result, or chat statement cannot replace accepted proof.
-- Keep unavailable, failed, incomplete, stale, and scope-mismatched checks
-  distinct; none may be restated as a passed criterion.
-
-## Coverage
-
-- Evaluate generated-tree validation, build, security, governance, functional,
-  and deployment-readiness criteria against their declared evidence scope.
-- Require each accepted result to identify its target, artifact revision,
-  observation time, outcome, and remaining limits.
-- When a failure changes intent, inputs, or IaC bindings, route it to the
-  owning preparation task and require renewed validation evidence.
-
-## Handoff
-
-Only a complete accepted validation result may advance to the kernel-selected
-next task. This skill neither changes lifecycle state nor invokes deployment.

package/assets/client-projections/github-copilot-vscode/.github/skills/apex-azure-validate/references/preflight-evidence.md

@@ -1,43 +0,0 @@
-# Preflight Evidence Model
-
-## Evidence Requirements
-
-Preflight is a claim about a specific run, target, binding, and artifact revision. Valid evidence identifies:
-
-- The active run and target environment.
-- The accepted preparation and binding artifacts being evaluated.
-- The validator or trusted capability that produced the result.
-- The observation time and kernel-defined freshness result.
-- The acceptance criterion, outcome, and any supporting diagnostic reference.
-
-Evidence that lacks a target, artifact revision, freshness result, or producing authority is incomplete. Treat it as a
-blocker rather than estimating its validity from source files or earlier chat output.
-
-## Outcome Semantics
-
-| Outcome | Meaning | Lifecycle Treatment |
-| --- | --- | --- |
-| Pass | Current evidence meets the named criterion | Retain the evidence reference |
-| Fail | Current evidence disproves the criterion | Route to the task that owns remediation |
-| Blocked | Required input, authority, or evidence is absent | Request or await the missing dependency |
-| Indeterminate | Evidence cannot establish an outcome | Do not advance readiness |
-| Stale | Evidence exceeds the kernel-defined freshness policy | Request trusted evidence refresh |
-
-## Acceptance Criteria
-
-Acceptance criteria should be explicit, scoped, and independently checkable. They may cover artifact integrity, binding
-consistency, policy obligations, security controls, build readiness, prerequisite availability, preview readiness, and
-verification obligations. A pass for one criterion does not silently satisfy another.
-
-## Remediation Routing
-
-Return each non-pass outcome to its owner: requirements for an unresolved desired outcome, architecture for a decision,
-planning or binding for implementation intent, CodeGen for an authorized generation batch, or a trusted validation
-capability for refreshed observations. Validation never rewrites evidence it is evaluating.
-
-## Region, Global, And Error Semantics
-
-Evaluate a region or global prerequisite only from evidence bound to the selected target, service, binding revision, and
-freshness policy. Preserve authorization, environment, compiler, provider, and policy failures as distinct outcomes;
-an unavailable check is not a failed check. Policy discovery, CLI authentication, previews, and recipe command execution
-remain deferred trusted capabilities, so this skill records their evidence and routes errors without executing them.