@bastani/atomic 0.6.8-0 → 0.7.0-1

package/.agents/skills/impeccable/reference/audit.md

@@ -1,134 +0,0 @@
-Run systematic **technical** quality checks and generate a comprehensive report. Don't fix issues — document them for other commands to address.
-
-This is a code-level audit, not a design critique. Check what's measurable and verifiable in the implementation.
-
-## Diagnostic Scan
-
-Run comprehensive checks across 5 dimensions. Score each dimension 0-4 using the criteria below.
-
-### 1. Accessibility (A11y)
-
-**Check for**:
-- **Contrast issues**: Text contrast ratios < 4.5:1 (or 7:1 for AAA)
-- **Missing ARIA**: Interactive elements without proper roles, labels, or states
-- **Keyboard navigation**: Missing focus indicators, illogical tab order, keyboard traps
-- **Semantic HTML**: Improper heading hierarchy, missing landmarks, divs instead of buttons
-- **Alt text**: Missing or poor image descriptions
-- **Form issues**: Inputs without labels, poor error messaging, missing required indicators
-
-**Score 0-4**: 0=Inaccessible (fails WCAG A), 1=Major gaps (few ARIA labels, no keyboard nav), 2=Partial (some a11y effort, significant gaps), 3=Good (WCAG AA mostly met, minor gaps), 4=Excellent (WCAG AA fully met, approaches AAA)
-
-### 2. Performance
-
-**Check for**:
-- **Layout thrashing**: Reading/writing layout properties in loops
-- **Expensive animations**: Casual layout-property animation, unbounded blur/filter/shadow effects, or effects that visibly drop frames
-- **Missing optimization**: Images without lazy loading, unoptimized assets, missing will-change
-- **Bundle size**: Unnecessary imports, unused dependencies
-- **Render performance**: Unnecessary re-renders, missing memoization
-
-**Score 0-4**: 0=Severe issues (layout thrash, unoptimized everything), 1=Major problems (no lazy loading, expensive animations), 2=Partial (some optimization, gaps remain), 3=Good (mostly optimized, minor improvements possible), 4=Excellent (fast, lean, well-optimized)
-
-### 3. Theming
-
-**Check for**:
-- **Hard-coded colors**: Colors not using design tokens
-- **Broken dark mode**: Missing dark mode variants, poor contrast in dark theme
-- **Inconsistent tokens**: Using wrong tokens, mixing token types
-- **Theme switching issues**: Values that don't update on theme change
-
-**Score 0-4**: 0=No theming (hard-coded everything), 1=Minimal tokens (mostly hard-coded), 2=Partial (tokens exist but inconsistently used), 3=Good (tokens used, minor hard-coded values), 4=Excellent (full token system, dark mode works perfectly)
-
-### 4. Responsive Design
-
-**Check for**:
-- **Fixed widths**: Hard-coded widths that break on mobile
-- **Touch targets**: Interactive elements < 44x44px
-- **Horizontal scroll**: Content overflow on narrow viewports
-- **Text scaling**: Layouts that break when text size increases
-- **Missing breakpoints**: No mobile/tablet variants
-
-**Score 0-4**: 0=Desktop-only (breaks on mobile), 1=Major issues (some breakpoints, many failures), 2=Partial (works on mobile, rough edges), 3=Good (responsive, minor touch target or overflow issues), 4=Excellent (fluid, all viewports, proper touch targets)
-
-### 5. Anti-Patterns (CRITICAL)
-
-Check against ALL the **DON'T** guidelines from the parent impeccable skill (already loaded in this context). Look for AI slop tells (AI color palette, gradient text, glassmorphism, hero metrics, card grids, generic fonts) and general design anti-patterns (gray on color, nested cards, bounce easing, redundant copy).
-
-**Score 0-4**: 0=AI slop gallery (5+ tells), 1=Heavy AI aesthetic (3-4 tells), 2=Some tells (1-2 noticeable), 3=Mostly clean (subtle issues only), 4=No AI tells (distinctive, intentional design)
-
-## Generate Report
-
-### Audit Health Score
-
-| # | Dimension | Score | Key Finding |
-|---|-----------|-------|-------------|
-| 1 | Accessibility | ? | [most critical a11y issue or "--"] |
-| 2 | Performance | ? | |
-| 3 | Responsive Design | ? | |
-| 4 | Theming | ? | |
-| 5 | Anti-Patterns | ? | |
-| **Total** | | **??/20** | **[Rating band]** |
-
-**Rating bands**: 18-20 Excellent (minor polish), 14-17 Good (address weak dimensions), 10-13 Acceptable (significant work needed), 6-9 Poor (major overhaul), 0-5 Critical (fundamental issues)
-
-### Anti-Patterns Verdict
-**Start here.** Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells. Be brutally honest.
-
-### Executive Summary
-- Audit Health Score: **??/20** ([rating band])
-- Total issues found (count by severity: P0/P1/P2/P3)
-- Top 3-5 critical issues
-- Recommended next steps
-
-### Detailed Findings by Severity
-
-Tag every issue with **P0-P3 severity**:
-- **P0 Blocking**: Prevents task completion — fix immediately
-- **P1 Major**: Significant difficulty or WCAG AA violation — fix before release
-- **P2 Minor**: Annoyance, workaround exists — fix in next pass
-- **P3 Polish**: Nice-to-fix, no real user impact — fix if time permits
-
-For each issue, document:
-- **[P?] Issue name**
-- **Location**: Component, file, line
-- **Category**: Accessibility / Performance / Theming / Responsive / Anti-Pattern
-- **Impact**: How it affects users
-- **WCAG/Standard**: Which standard it violates (if applicable)
-- **Recommendation**: How to fix it
-- **Suggested command**: Which command to use (prefer: $impeccable adapt, $impeccable animate, $impeccable audit, $impeccable bolder, $impeccable clarify, $impeccable colorize, $impeccable critique, $impeccable delight, $impeccable distill, $impeccable document, $impeccable harden, $impeccable layout, $impeccable onboard, $impeccable optimize, $impeccable overdrive, $impeccable polish, $impeccable quieter, $impeccable shape, $impeccable typeset)
-
-### Patterns & Systemic Issues
-
-Identify recurring problems that indicate systemic gaps rather than one-off mistakes:
-- "Hard-coded colors appear in 15+ components, should use design tokens"
-- "Touch targets consistently too small (<44px) throughout mobile experience"
-
-### Positive Findings
-
-Note what's working well — good practices to maintain and replicate.
-
-## Recommended Actions
-
-List recommended commands in priority order (P0 first, then P1, then P2):
-
-1. **[P?] `$command-name`** — Brief description (specific context from audit findings)
-2. **[P?] `$command-name`** — Brief description (specific context)
-
-**Rules**: Only recommend commands from: $impeccable adapt, $impeccable animate, $impeccable audit, $impeccable bolder, $impeccable clarify, $impeccable colorize, $impeccable critique, $impeccable delight, $impeccable distill, $impeccable document, $impeccable harden, $impeccable layout, $impeccable onboard, $impeccable optimize, $impeccable overdrive, $impeccable polish, $impeccable quieter, $impeccable shape, $impeccable typeset. Map findings to the most appropriate command. End with `$impeccable polish` as the final step if any fixes were recommended.
-
-After presenting the summary, tell the user:
-
-> You can ask me to run these one at a time, all at once, or in any order you prefer.
->
-> Re-run `$impeccable audit` after fixes to see your score improve.
-
-**IMPORTANT**: Be thorough but actionable. Too many P3 issues creates noise. Focus on what actually matters.
-
-**NEVER**:
-- Report issues without explaining impact (why does this matter?)
-- Provide generic recommendations (be specific and actionable)
-- Skip positive findings (celebrate what works)
-- Forget to prioritize (everything can't be P0)
-- Report false positives without verification
-
-Remember: You're a technical quality auditor. Document systematically, prioritize ruthlessly, cite specific code locations, and provide clear paths to improvement.

package/.agents/skills/impeccable/reference/bolder.md

@@ -1,113 +0,0 @@
-Increase visual impact and personality in designs that are too safe, generic, or visually underwhelming, creating more engaging and memorable experiences.
-
----
-
-## Register
-
-Brand: "bolder" means distinctive. Extreme scale, unexpected color, typographic risk, committed POV.
-
-Product: "bolder" rarely means theatrics — those undermine trust. It means stronger hierarchy, clearer weight contrast, one sharper accent, more committed density. The amplification is in clarity, not drama.
-
----
-
-## Assess Current State
-
-Analyze what makes the design feel too safe or boring:
-
-1. **Identify weakness sources**:
-   - **Generic choices**: System fonts, basic colors, standard layouts
-   - **Timid scale**: Everything is medium-sized with no drama
-   - **Low contrast**: Everything has similar visual weight
-   - **Static**: No motion, no energy, no life
-   - **Predictable**: Standard patterns with no surprises
-   - **Flat hierarchy**: Nothing stands out or commands attention
-
-2. **Understand the context**:
-   - What's the brand personality? (How far can we push?)
-   - What's the purpose? (Marketing can be bolder than financial dashboards)
-   - Who's the audience? (What will resonate?)
-   - What are the constraints? (Brand guidelines, accessibility, performance)
-
-If any of these are unclear from the codebase, STOP and use Codex's structured user-input/question tool when available; if unavailable, ask directly in chat to clarify what you cannot infer.
-
-**CRITICAL**: "Bolder" doesn't mean chaotic or garish. It means distinctive, memorable, and confident. Think intentional drama, not random chaos.
-
-**WARNING - AI SLOP TRAP**: When making things "bolder," AI defaults to the same tired tricks: cyan/purple gradients, glassmorphism, neon accents on dark backgrounds, gradient text on metrics. These are the OPPOSITE of bold. They're generic. Review ALL the DON'T guidelines from the parent impeccable skill (already loaded in this context) before proceeding. Bold means distinctive, not "more effects."
-
-## Plan Amplification
-
-Create a strategy to increase impact while maintaining coherence:
-
-- **Focal point**: What should be the hero moment? (Pick ONE, make it amazing)
-- **Personality direction**: Maximalist chaos? Elegant drama? Playful energy? Dark moody? Choose a lane.
-- **Risk budget**: How experimental can we be? Push boundaries within constraints.
-- **Hierarchy amplification**: Make big things BIGGER, small things smaller (increase contrast)
-
-**IMPORTANT**: Bold design must still be usable. Impact without function is just decoration.
-
-## Amplify the Design
-
-Systematically increase impact across these dimensions:
-
-### Typography Amplification
-- **Replace generic fonts**: Swap system fonts for distinctive choices (see the parent skill's typography guidelines and [typography.md](typography.md) for inspiration)
-- **Extreme scale**: Create dramatic size jumps (3x-5x differences, not 1.5x)
-- **Weight contrast**: Pair 900 weights with 200 weights, not 600 with 400
-- **Unexpected choices**: Variable fonts, display fonts for headlines, condensed/extended widths, monospace as intentional accent (not as lazy "dev tool" default)
-
-### Color Intensification
-- **Increase saturation**: Shift to more vibrant, energetic colors (but not neon)
-- **Bold palette**: Introduce unexpected color combinations—avoid the purple-blue gradient AI slop
-- **Dominant color strategy**: Let one bold color own 60% of the design
-- **Sharp accents**: High-contrast accent colors that pop
-- **Tinted neutrals**: Replace pure grays with tinted grays that harmonize with your palette
-- **Rich gradients**: Intentional multi-stop gradients (not generic purple-to-blue)
-
-### Spatial Drama
-- **Extreme scale jumps**: Make important elements 3-5x larger than surroundings
-- **Break the grid**: Let hero elements escape containers and cross boundaries
-- **Asymmetric layouts**: Replace centered, balanced layouts with tension-filled asymmetry
-- **Generous space**: Use white space dramatically (100-200px gaps, not 20-40px)
-- **Overlap**: Layer elements intentionally for depth
-
-### Visual Effects
-- **Dramatic shadows**: Large, soft shadows for elevation (but not generic drop shadows on rounded rectangles)
-- **Background treatments**: Mesh patterns, noise textures, geometric patterns, intentional gradients (not purple-to-blue)
-- **Texture & depth**: Grain, halftone, duotone, layered elements—NOT glassmorphism (it's overused AI slop)
-- **Borders & frames**: Thick borders, decorative frames, custom shapes (not rounded rectangles with colored border on one side)
-- **Custom elements**: Illustrative elements, custom icons, decorative details that reinforce brand
-
-### Motion & Animation
-- **Entrance choreography**: Staggered, dramatic page load animations with 50-100ms delays
-- **Scroll effects**: Parallax, reveal animations, scroll-triggered sequences
-- **Micro-interactions**: Satisfying hover effects, click feedback, state changes
-- **Transitions**: Smooth, noticeable transitions using ease-out-quart/quint/expo (not bounce or elastic—they cheapen the effect)
-
-### Composition Boldness
-- **Hero moments**: Create clear focal points with dramatic treatment
-- **Diagonal flows**: Escape horizontal/vertical rigidity with diagonal arrangements
-- **Full-bleed elements**: Use full viewport width/height for impact
-- **Unexpected proportions**: Golden ratio? Throw it out. Try 70/30, 80/20 splits
-
-**NEVER**:
-- Add effects randomly without purpose (chaos ≠ bold)
-- Sacrifice readability for aesthetics (body text must be readable)
-- Make everything bold (then nothing is bold - need contrast)
-- Ignore accessibility (bold design must still meet WCAG standards)
-- Overwhelm with motion (animation fatigue is real)
-- Copy trendy aesthetics blindly (bold means distinctive, not derivative)
-
-## Verify Quality
-
-Ensure amplification maintains usability and coherence:
-
-- **NOT AI slop**: Does this look like every other AI-generated "bold" design? If yes, start over.
-- **Still functional**: Can users accomplish tasks without distraction?
-- **Coherent**: Does everything feel intentional and unified?
-- **Memorable**: Will users remember this experience?
-- **Performant**: Do all these effects run smoothly?
-- **Accessible**: Does it still meet accessibility standards?
-
-**The test**: If you showed this to someone and said "AI made this bolder," would they believe you immediately? If yes, you've failed. Bold means distinctive, not "more AI effects."
-
-Remember: Bold design is confident design. It takes risks, makes statements, and creates memorable experiences. But bold without strategy is just loud. Be intentional, be dramatic, be unforgettable.

package/.agents/skills/impeccable/reference/brand.md

@@ -1,114 +0,0 @@
-# Brand register
-
-When design IS the product: brand sites, landing pages, marketing surfaces, campaign pages, portfolios, long-form content, about pages. The deliverable is the design itself — a visitor's impression is the thing being made.
-
-The register spans every genre. A tech brand (Stripe, Linear, Vercel). A luxury brand (a hotel, a fashion house). A consumer product (a restaurant, a travel site, a CPG packaging page). A creative studio, an agency portfolio, a band's album page. They all share the stance — *communicate, not transact* — and diverge wildly in aesthetic. Don't collapse them into a single look.
-
-## The brand slop test
-
-If someone could look at this and say "AI made that" without hesitation, it's failed. The bar is distinctiveness — a visitor should ask "how was this made?", not "which AI made this?"
-
-Brand isn't a neutral register. AI-generated landing pages have flooded the internet, and average is no longer findable. Restraint without intent now reads as mediocre, not refined. Brand surfaces need a POV, a specific audience, a willingness to risk strangeness. Go big or go home.
-
-**The second slop test: aesthetic lane.** Before committing to moves, name the reference. A Klim-style specimen page is one lane; Stripe-minimal is another; Liquid-Death-acid-maximalism is another. Don't drift into editorial-magazine aesthetics on a brief that isn't editorial. A hiking brand with Cormorant italic drop caps has the wrong register within the register.
-
-## Typography
-
-### Font selection procedure
-
-Every project. Never skip.
-
-1. Read the brief. Write three concrete brand-voice words — not "modern" or "elegant," but "warm and mechanical and opinionated" or "calm and clinical and careful." Physical-object words.
-2. List the three fonts you'd reach for by reflex. If any appear in the reflex-reject list below, reject them — they are training-data defaults and they create monoculture.
-3. Browse a real catalog (Google Fonts, Pangram Pangram, Future Fonts, Adobe Fonts, ABC Dinamo, Klim, Velvetyne) with the three words in mind. Find the font for the brand as a *physical object* — a museum caption, a 1970s terminal manual, a fabric label, a cheap-newsprint children's book, a concert poster, a receipt from a mid-century diner. Reject the first thing that "looks designy."
-4. Cross-check. "Elegant" is not necessarily serif. "Technical" is not necessarily sans. "Warm" is not Fraunces. If the final pick lines up with the original reflex, start over.
-
-### Reflex-reject list
-
-Training-data defaults. Ban list — look further:
-
-Fraunces · Newsreader · Lora · Crimson · Crimson Pro · Crimson Text · Playfair Display · Cormorant · Cormorant Garamond · Syne · IBM Plex Mono · IBM Plex Sans · IBM Plex Serif · Space Mono · Space Grotesk · Inter · DM Sans · DM Serif Display · DM Serif Text · Outfit · Plus Jakarta Sans · Instrument Sans · Instrument Serif
-
-### Reflex-reject aesthetic lanes
-
-Parallel to the font list. Currently saturated aesthetic families that have flooded brand surfaces. If a brief lands in one of these lanes without a register reason that *requires* it (a literal magazine, a literal terminal, a literal industrial signage system), it's the second-order training reflex — the trap one tier deeper than picking a Fraunces font. Look further.
-
-- **Editorial-typographic.** Display serif (often italic) + small mono labels + ruled separators + monochromatic restraint. Klim-influenced, magazine-cover affectation. By 2026, every Stripe-adjacent and Notion-adjacent brand has landed here. The fingerprint: three rule-separated columns, an italic Fraunces / Recoleta / Newsreader headline, lowercase track-spaced metadata, no imagery.
-
-(More entries land here on the same cadence the font list updates. Brutalist-utility and acid-maximalism may join when they saturate. Removing entries when they fall back below saturation is also fine.)
-
-The reflex-reject lists apply to **new design choices**. When the existing brand has already committed to a font or a lane as part of its identity, identity-preservation wins — variants on an existing surface don't second-guess what's already shipping. The reflex-reject lists are for greenfield decisions and for departure-mode variants in [live.md](live.md).
-
-### Pairing and voice
-
-Distinctive + refined is the goal — the specific shape depends on the brand:
-
-- **Editorial / long-form / luxury**: display serif + sans body (a magazine shape).
-- **Tech / dev tools / fintech**: one committed sans, usually; custom-tight tracking, strong weight contrast inside a single family.
-- **Consumer / food / travel**: warmer pairings, often a humanist sans plus a script or display serif.
-- **Creative studios / agencies**: rule-breaking welcome — mono-only, or display-only, or custom-drawn type as voice.
-
-Two families minimum is the rule *only* when the voice needs it. A single well-chosen family with committed weight/size contrast is stronger than a timid display+body pair.
-
-Vary across projects. If the last brief was a serif-display landing page, this one isn't.
-
-### Scale
-
-Modular scale, fluid `clamp()` for headings, ≥1.25 ratio between steps. Flat scales (1.1× apart) read as uncommitted.
-
-Light text on dark backgrounds: add 0.05–0.1 to line-height. Light type reads as lighter weight and needs more breathing room.
-
-## Color
-
-Brand surfaces have permission for Committed, Full palette, and Drenched strategies. Use them. A single saturated color spread across a hero is not excess — it's voice. A beige-and-muted-slate landing page ignores the register.
-
-- Name a real reference before picking a strategy. "Klim Type Foundry #ff4500 orange drench", "Stripe purple-on-white restraint", "Liquid Death acid-green full palette", "Mailchimp yellow full palette", "Condé Nast Traveler muted navy restraint", "Vercel pure black monochrome". Unnamed ambition becomes beige.
-- Palette IS voice. A calm brand and a restless brand should not share palette mechanics.
-- When the strategy is Committed or Drenched, the color is load-bearing. Don't hedge with neutrals around the edges — commit.
-- Don't converge across projects. If the last brand surface was restrained-on-cream, this one is not.
-
-## Layout
-
-- Asymmetric compositions are one option. Break the grid intentionally for emphasis.
-- Fluid spacing with `clamp()` that breathes on larger viewports. Vary for rhythm — generous separations, tight groupings.
-- Alternative: a strict, visible grid as the voice (brutalist / Swiss / tech-spec aesthetics). Either asymmetric or rigorously-gridded can be "designed" — the failure mode is splitting the difference into a generic centered stack.
-- Don't default to centering everything. Left-aligned with asymmetric layouts feels more designed; a strict grid reads as confident structure. A centered-stack hero with icon-title-subtitle cards reads as template.
-- When cards ARE the right affordance, use `grid-template-columns: repeat(auto-fit, minmax(280px, 1fr))` — breakpoint-free responsiveness.
-
-## Imagery
-
-Brand surfaces lean on imagery. A restaurant, hotel, magazine, or product landing page without any imagery reads as incomplete, not as restrained. A solid-color rectangle where a hero image should go is worse than a representative stock photo.
-
-**When the brief implies imagery (restaurants, hotels, magazines, photography, hobbyist communities, food, travel, fashion, product), you must ship imagery.** Zero images is a bug, not a design choice. "Restraint" is not an excuse.
-
-- **For greenfield work without local assets, use stock imagery** — Unsplash is the default. The URL shape is `https://images.unsplash.com/photo-{id}?auto=format&fit=crop&w=1600&q=80`. Pick real Unsplash photo IDs you're confident exist (`photo-1559339352-11d035aa65de`, `photo-1590490360182-c33d57733427`, etc.); if unsure, pick fewer photos but don't substitute colored `<div>` placeholders.
-- **Search for the brand's physical object**, not the generic category: "handmade pasta on a scratched wooden table" beats "Italian food"; "cypress trees above a limestone hotel facade at dusk" beats "luxury hotel".
-- **One decisive photo beats five mediocre ones.** Hero imagery should commit to a mood; padding with more stock doesn't rescue an indecisive one.
-- **Alt text is part of the voice.** "Coastal fettuccine, hand-cut, served on the terrace" beats "pasta dish".
-
-Tech / dev-tool brands are the exception where zero imagery can be correct — a developer landing page often carries its voice through typography, code samples, diagrams. Know which kind of brand you're working on.
-
-## Motion
-
-- One well-orchestrated page-load with staggered reveals beats scattered micro-interactions — when the brand invites it. Tech-minimal brands often skip entrance motion entirely; the restraint is the voice.
-- For collapsing/expanding sections, transition `grid-template-rows` rather than `height`.
-
-## Brand bans (on top of the shared absolute bans)
-
-- Monospace as lazy shorthand for "technical / developer." If the brand isn't technical, mono reads as costume.
-- Large rounded-corner icons above every heading. Screams template.
-- Single-family pages that picked the family by reflex, not voice. (A single family chosen deliberately is fine.)
-- All-caps body copy. Reserve caps for short labels and headings.
-- Timid palettes and average layouts. Safe = invisible.
-- Zero imagery on a brief that implies imagery (restaurant, hotel, food, travel, fashion, photography, hobbyist). Colored blocks where a hero photo belongs.
-- Defaulting to editorial-magazine aesthetics (display serif + italic + drop caps + broadsheet grid) on briefs that aren't magazine-shaped. Editorial is ONE aesthetic lane, not the default brand aesthetic.
-
-## Brand permissions
-
-Brand can afford things product can't. Take them.
-
-- Ambitious first-load motion. Reveals, scroll-triggered transitions, typographic choreography.
-- Single-purpose viewports. One dominant idea per fold, long scroll, deliberate pacing.
-- Typographic risk. Enormous display type, unexpected italic cuts, mixed cases, hand-drawn headlines, a single oversize word as a hero.
-- Unexpected color strategies. Palette IS voice — a calm brand and a restless brand should not share palette mechanics.
-- Art direction per section. Different sections can have different visual worlds if the narrative demands it. Consistency of voice beats consistency of treatment.

package/.agents/skills/impeccable/reference/clarify.md

@@ -1,174 +0,0 @@
-> **Additional context needed**: audience technical level and users' mental state in context.
-
-Identify and improve unclear, confusing, or poorly written interface text to make the product easier to understand and use.
-
-
----
-
-## Assess Current Copy
-
-Identify what makes the text unclear or ineffective:
-
-1. **Find clarity problems**:
-   - **Jargon**: Technical terms users won't understand
-   - **Ambiguity**: Multiple interpretations possible
-   - **Passive voice**: "Your file has been uploaded" vs "We uploaded your file"
-   - **Length**: Too wordy or too terse
-   - **Assumptions**: Assuming user knowledge they don't have
-   - **Missing context**: Users don't know what to do or why
-   - **Tone mismatch**: Too formal, too casual, or inappropriate for situation
-
-2. **Understand the context**:
-   - Who's the audience? (Technical? General? First-time users?)
-   - What's the user's mental state? (Stressed during error? Confident during success?)
-   - What's the action? (What do we want users to do?)
-   - What's the constraint? (Character limits? Space limitations?)
-
-**CRITICAL**: Clear copy helps users succeed. Unclear copy creates frustration, errors, and support tickets.
-
-## Plan Copy Improvements
-
-Create a strategy for clearer communication:
-
-- **Primary message**: What's the ONE thing users need to know?
-- **Action needed**: What should users do next (if anything)?
-- **Tone**: How should this feel? (Helpful? Apologetic? Encouraging?)
-- **Constraints**: Length limits, brand voice, localization considerations
-
-**IMPORTANT**: Good UX writing is invisible. Users should understand immediately without noticing the words.
-
-## Improve Copy Systematically
-
-Refine text across these common areas:
-
-### Error Messages
-**Bad**: "Error 403: Forbidden"
-**Good**: "You don't have permission to view this page. Contact your admin for access."
-
-**Bad**: "Invalid input"
-**Good**: "Email addresses need an @ symbol. Try: name@example.com"
-
-**Principles**:
-- Explain what went wrong in plain language
-- Suggest how to fix it
-- Don't blame the user
-- Include examples when helpful
-- Link to help/support if applicable
-
-### Form Labels & Instructions
-**Bad**: "DOB (MM/DD/YYYY)"
-**Good**: "Date of birth" (with placeholder showing format)
-
-**Bad**: "Enter value here"
-**Good**: "Your email address" or "Company name"
-
-**Principles**:
-- Use clear, specific labels (not generic placeholders)
-- Show format expectations with examples
-- Explain why you're asking (when not obvious)
-- Put instructions before the field, not after
-- Keep required field indicators clear
-
-### Button & CTA Text
-**Bad**: "Click here" | "Submit" | "OK"
-**Good**: "Create account" | "Save changes" | "Got it, thanks"
-
-**Principles**:
-- Describe the action specifically
-- Use active voice (verb + noun)
-- Match user's mental model
-- Be specific ("Save" is better than "OK")
-
-### Help Text & Tooltips
-**Bad**: "This is the username field"
-**Good**: "Choose a username. You can change this later in Settings."
-
-**Principles**:
-- Add value (don't just repeat the label)
-- Answer the implicit question ("What is this?" or "Why do you need this?")
-- Keep it brief but complete
-- Link to detailed docs if needed
-
-### Empty States
-**Bad**: "No items"
-**Good**: "No projects yet. Create your first project to get started."
-
-**Principles**:
-- Explain why it's empty (if not obvious)
-- Show next action clearly
-- Make it welcoming, not dead-end
-
-### Success Messages
-**Bad**: "Success"
-**Good**: "Settings saved! Your changes will take effect immediately."
-
-**Principles**:
-- Confirm what happened
-- Explain what happens next (if relevant)
-- Be brief but complete
-- Match the user's emotional moment (celebrate big wins)
-
-### Loading States
-**Bad**: "Loading..." (for 30+ seconds)
-**Good**: "Analyzing your data... this usually takes 30-60 seconds"
-
-**Principles**:
-- Set expectations (how long?)
-- Explain what's happening (when it's not obvious)
-- Show progress when possible
-- Offer escape hatch if appropriate ("Cancel")
-
-### Confirmation Dialogs
-**Bad**: "Are you sure?"
-**Good**: "Delete 'Project Alpha'? This can't be undone."
-
-**Principles**:
-- State the specific action
-- Explain consequences (especially for destructive actions)
-- Use clear button labels ("Delete project" not "Yes")
-- Don't overuse confirmations (only for risky actions)
-
-### Navigation & Wayfinding
-**Bad**: Generic labels like "Items" | "Things" | "Stuff"
-**Good**: Specific labels like "Your projects" | "Team members" | "Settings"
-
-**Principles**:
-- Be specific and descriptive
-- Use language users understand (not internal jargon)
-- Make hierarchy clear
-- Consider information scent (breadcrumbs, current location)
-
-## Apply Clarity Principles
-
-Every piece of copy should follow these rules:
-
-1. **Be specific**: "Enter email" not "Enter value"
-2. **Be concise**: Cut unnecessary words (but don't sacrifice clarity)
-3. **Be active**: "Save changes" not "Changes will be saved"
-4. **Be human**: "Oops, something went wrong" not "System error encountered"
-5. **Be helpful**: Tell users what to do, not just what happened
-6. **Be consistent**: Use same terms throughout (don't vary for variety)
-
-**NEVER**:
-- Use jargon without explanation
-- Blame users ("You made an error" → "This field is required")
-- Be vague ("Something went wrong" without explanation)
-- Use passive voice unnecessarily
-- Write overly long explanations (be concise)
-- Use humor for errors (be empathetic instead)
-- Assume technical knowledge
-- Vary terminology (pick one term and stick with it)
-- Repeat information (headers restating intros, redundant explanations)
-- Use placeholders as the only labels (they disappear when users type)
-
-## Verify Improvements
-
-Test that copy improvements work:
-
-- **Comprehension**: Can users understand without context?
-- **Actionability**: Do users know what to do next?
-- **Brevity**: Is it as short as possible while remaining clear?
-- **Consistency**: Does it match terminology elsewhere?
-- **Tone**: Is it appropriate for the situation?
-
-Remember: You're a clarity expert with excellent communication skills. Write like you're explaining to a smart friend who's unfamiliar with the product. Be clear, be helpful, be human.

package/.agents/skills/impeccable/reference/cognitive-load.md

@@ -1,106 +0,0 @@
-# Cognitive Load Assessment
-
-Cognitive load is the total mental effort required to use an interface. Overloaded users make mistakes, get frustrated, and leave. This reference helps identify and fix cognitive overload.
-
----
-
-## Three Types of Cognitive Load
-
-### Intrinsic Load — The Task Itself
-Complexity inherent to what the user is trying to do. You can't eliminate this, but you can structure it.
-
-**Manage it by**:
-- Breaking complex tasks into discrete steps
-- Providing scaffolding (templates, defaults, examples)
-- Progressive disclosure — show what's needed now, hide the rest
-- Grouping related decisions together
-
-### Extraneous Load — Bad Design
-Mental effort caused by poor design choices. **Eliminate this ruthlessly** — it's pure waste.
-
-**Common sources**:
-- Confusing navigation that requires mental mapping
-- Unclear labels that force users to guess meaning
-- Visual clutter competing for attention
-- Inconsistent patterns that prevent learning
-- Unnecessary steps between user intent and result
-
-### Germane Load — Learning Effort
-Mental effort spent building understanding. This is *good* cognitive load — it leads to mastery.
-
-**Support it by**:
-- Progressive disclosure that reveals complexity gradually
-- Consistent patterns that reward learning
-- Feedback that confirms correct understanding
-- Onboarding that teaches through action, not walls of text
-
----
-
-## Cognitive Load Checklist
-
-Evaluate the interface against these 8 items:
-
-- [ ] **Single focus**: Can the user complete their primary task without distraction from competing elements?
-- [ ] **Chunking**: Is information presented in digestible groups (≤4 items per group)?
-- [ ] **Grouping**: Are related items visually grouped together (proximity, borders, shared background)?
-- [ ] **Visual hierarchy**: Is it immediately clear what's most important on the screen?
-- [ ] **One thing at a time**: Can the user focus on a single decision before moving to the next?
-- [ ] **Minimal choices**: Are decisions simplified (≤4 visible options at any decision point)?
-- [ ] **Working memory**: Does the user need to remember information from a previous screen to act on the current one?
-- [ ] **Progressive disclosure**: Is complexity revealed only when the user needs it?
-
-**Scoring**: Count the failed items. 0–1 failures = low cognitive load (good). 2–3 = moderate (address soon). 4+ = high cognitive load (critical fix needed).
-
----
-
-## The Working Memory Rule
-
-**Humans can hold ≤4 items in working memory at once** (Miller's Law revised by Cowan, 2001).
-
-At any decision point, count the number of distinct options, actions, or pieces of information a user must simultaneously consider:
-- **≤4 items**: Within working memory limits — manageable
-- **5–7 items**: Pushing the boundary — consider grouping or progressive disclosure
-- **8+ items**: Overloaded — users will skip, misclick, or abandon
-
-**Practical applications**:
-- Navigation menus: ≤5 top-level items (group the rest under clear categories)
-- Form sections: ≤4 fields visible per group before a visual break
-- Action buttons: 1 primary, 1–2 secondary, group the rest in a menu
-- Dashboard widgets: ≤4 key metrics visible without scrolling
-- Pricing tiers: ≤3 options (more causes analysis paralysis)
-
----
-
-## Common Cognitive Load Violations
-
-### 1. The Wall of Options
-**Problem**: Presenting 10+ choices at once with no hierarchy.
-**Fix**: Group into categories, highlight recommended, use progressive disclosure.
-
-### 2. The Memory Bridge
-**Problem**: User must remember info from step 1 to complete step 3.
-**Fix**: Keep relevant context visible, or repeat it where it's needed.
-
-### 3. The Hidden Navigation
-**Problem**: User must build a mental map of where things are.
-**Fix**: Always show current location (breadcrumbs, active states, progress indicators).
-
-### 4. The Jargon Barrier
-**Problem**: Technical or domain language forces translation effort.
-**Fix**: Use plain language. If domain terms are unavoidable, define them inline.
-
-### 5. The Visual Noise Floor
-**Problem**: Every element has the same visual weight — nothing stands out.
-**Fix**: Establish clear hierarchy: one primary element, 2–3 secondary, everything else muted.
-
-### 6. The Inconsistent Pattern
-**Problem**: Similar actions work differently in different places.
-**Fix**: Standardize interaction patterns. Same type of action = same type of UI.
-
-### 7. The Multi-Task Demand
-**Problem**: Interface requires processing multiple simultaneous inputs (reading + deciding + navigating).
-**Fix**: Sequence the steps. Let the user do one thing at a time.
-
-### 8. The Context Switch
-**Problem**: User must jump between screens/tabs/modals to gather info for a single decision.
-**Fix**: Co-locate the information needed for each decision. Reduce back-and-forth.