@bendyline/gilde 0.1.38 → 0.1.39

package/data/craftbook-templates/ta/tailor-resume/versions/1.0.2/craftbook.json

@@ -0,0 +1,126 @@
+{
+  "id": "tailor-resume",
+  "name": "Tailor Résumé to a Posting",
+  "description": "Adapt an EXISTING résumé to a specific job posting — a fit map of must-hit requirements first, then a tailored variant that re-orders and re-words real experience without inventing any. Distinct from building a résumé from scratch (see Résumé / CV): this book starts from a base résumé plus a posting and produces the targeted variant along with honest gap notes for the cover letter and interview. Use per serious application in a job search.\n\nA gallery craftbook generated from an archetype spec. It runs\n`phase → (per-phase gate) → … → evaluate → (loop) → finish`. Each build\nphase that produces a checkable artifact is followed by a **runtime\ngate-checkpoint** — the runtime verifies the artifact and routes with no\nmodel turn, looping back to redo the phase on a miss. The final `evaluate`\nstep holds a static deliverable gate plus a reviewer QA pass. What it adds\nover the generic `build-loop`: a specialist role per phase, a\ndomain-correct ordering, and a concrete per-phase quality bar.\n\nDeliverables marked \"artifact\" land in the project's artifacts drawer (`write_artifact` / `read_artifact`), not the shipped workspace — review output is not product source.\n\nPhases:\n\n1. Map the fit (planner) — must-hit requirements classified strong / partial / gap against the base résumé → gated on artifact `{{workPath}}/fit-map.md` (markdown-notes)\n2. Tailor the résumé (copywriter) — the tailored variant — re-ordered, re-worded, nothing invented → gated on `resume-tailored.md` (markdown-doc)\n\nThe gates never advance with an unmet criterion, and loop back to the\nowning phase to fix named gaps.\n",
+  "entryStepId": "fit-map",
+  "triggers": [
+    "tailor my resume",
+    "adapt my resume to this job",
+    "resume for this posting",
+    "tailor cv to a posting"
+  ],
+  "steps": [
+    {
+      "id": "fit-map",
+      "name": "Map the fit",
+      "description": "must-hit requirements classified strong / partial / gap against the base résumé",
+      "prompt": "Map the posting against the real résumé before touching a word. Step 1: locate the base résumé and the job posting in the workspace or project documents; if either is missing, ask for it briefly and stop until provided. Step 2: extract the posting's must-hit requirements and keywords — the skills, experience markers, and phrases a screener will scan for. Step 3: classify EVERY must-hit item against the base résumé: strong-match (already evidenced), partial (evidenced but buried or under-worded), or GAP (not evidenced — and it stays a gap; inventing experience is forbidden). Step 4: decide the tailoring moves for each strong/partial item — which bullet moves up, which summary line changes, which keyword gets woven where. Step 5: write an explicit '## Gaps' section listing every unmet requirement with how to address it honestly in the cover letter or interview instead. Step 6: close with an acceptance-criteria checklist ('every must-hit addressed or consciously in Gaps', 'no invented experience', 'page count unchanged or lower', 'summary rewritten for THIS role'). Write the fit map + checklist via write_task_note AND to {{workPath}}/fit-map.md.\n\nThe deliverable `{{workPath}}/fit-map.md` lands in the project's artifacts drawer — write it with `write_artifact` and read it back with `read_artifact`; the shipped workspace stays untouched.",
+      "suggestedRole": "planner",
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "{{workPath}}/fit-map.md",
+        "minBytes": 1,
+        "sniff": "nonempty",
+        "artifact": true
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/fit-map.md",
+            "bytes": 120,
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "sniff",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/fit-map.md",
+            "sniff": "nonempty",
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/fit-map.md",
+            "pattern": "(?i)^#+\\s.*gap",
+            "flags": "m",
+            "label": "has an explicit Gaps section",
+            "artifact": true
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "fit-map",
+        "maxAttempts": 3
+      },
+      "next": "tailor"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "tailor",
+      "name": "Tailor the résumé",
+      "description": "the tailored variant — re-ordered, re-worded, nothing invented",
+      "prompt": "Produce the tailored variant as resume-tailored.md, working strictly from the base résumé and the fit map. Step 1: rewrite the professional summary to target this posting, weaving must-hit keywords naturally. Step 2: re-order experience bullets so the most relevant impact leads each role; re-word partial matches to surface the evidence the posting asks for — same facts, sharper framing. Step 3: cut or compress roles and bullets irrelevant to this posting rather than exceeding the base résumé's page count. Step 4: NEVER invent experience, titles, dates, or metrics — a gap identified in the fit map stays a gap. Step 5: keep the base résumé's format conventions (headings, date style) so the variant is drop-in. On a loop-back, fix ONLY the named issues. Write a short note confirming keyword coverage and page parity via write_task_note.",
+      "suggestedRole": "copywriter",
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "resume-tailored.md",
+        "minBytes": 1,
+        "sniff": "nonempty"
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "resume-tailored.md",
+            "bytes": 500
+          }
+        ],
+        "scripts": [
+          {
+            "name": "checkContains",
+            "scope": "standard",
+            "inputs": {
+              "file": "resume-tailored.md",
+              "pattern": "(?:^|\\n)#{1,3}\\s+\\S",
+              "flags": "i"
+            }
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "tailor",
+        "maxAttempts": 4
+      },
+      "next": "evaluate"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "evaluate",
+      "name": "Evaluate",
+      "description": "Grade the deliverable against every acceptance criterion. All pass → finish; any fail → loop back and fix the gap.",
+      "prompt": "QA the tailored résumé against the base and the fit map. Step 1: diff-read resume-tailored.md against the base résumé — FAIL immediately on any claim, title, date, or metric that the base does not support. Step 2: check keyword coverage — every strong/partial must-hit from the fit map appears naturally in the variant. Step 3: confirm the page count did not grow and the summary targets the posting's role. Step 4: confirm the Gaps section items were NOT smuggled into the résumé. Write PASS/FAIL per criterion with the specific line for any FAIL.\n\nThen route — this is the whole point of the loop:\n\n- **Every criterion PASSES →** call `advance_task_step({ ref, stepId: \"evaluate\", next: \"finish\" })`.\n- **Any criterion FAILS →** write the specific gaps to notes, then call `advance_task_step({ ref, stepId: \"evaluate\", next: \"tailor\" })` to loop back. The builder fixes exactly those gaps.\n\nNever route to `finish` while any criterion is unmet. The build phase's completion gate already blocked a grossly-incomplete deliverable; your job is the judgment an automated check cannot make (does it actually work, read well, look right). After ~3 unproductive loops, stop and report DONE_WITH_CONCERNS so the user can step in.",
+      "suggestedRole": "reviewer",
+      "consumes": [
+        {
+          "file": "resume-tailored.md"
+        }
+      ],
+      "next": "tailor"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "finish",
+      "name": "Finish",
+      "description": "All acceptance criteria met. Stamp a short summary and report DONE.",
+      "prompt": "Every acceptance criterion passed. Write a one-paragraph DONE summary to task notes via `write_task_note`: what was built, the deliverable path(s), and a one-line confirmation that each criterion is met. Then report DONE.",
+      "suggestedRole": "developer",
+      "terminal": true
+    }
+  ],
+  "version": "1.0.2",
+  "releasedAt": "2026-08-21T00:00:00Z",
+  "paramSchema": {
+    "type": "object",
+    "properties": {
+      "workPath": {
+        "type": "string",
+        "title": "Working folder",
+        "description": "Per-task working folder in the artifacts drawer. Defaults to this task's own folder so runs never collide; override with a stable name when you deliberately want runs to share files.",
+        "default": "{{task.dir}}"
+      }
+    }
+  },
+  "minGezelVersion": "1.26233"
+}

package/data/craftbook-templates/ta/tailor-resume/versions/1.0.2/test.json

@@ -0,0 +1,100 @@
+{
+  "schemaVersion": 1,
+  "title": "Tailor Résumé to a Posting smoke eval",
+  "objective": "Self-contained smoke eval for the Tailor Résumé to a Posting craftbook using the html-page generic harness.",
+  "tags": [
+    "html-page"
+  ],
+  "prompt": "Can you biuld us a little page for this? The content notes are in source/page-content.md. Save it as index.html — one file, nothing fancy needed on our end.",
+  "setup": {
+    "projectName": "Tailor Résumé to a Posting Eval",
+    "about": "Self-contained eval project for tailor-resume. Seeded inputs are under workspace/source or workspace/fixtures; final deliverable is workspace/index.html.",
+    "missionObjectives": "Use the Tailor Résumé to a Posting craftbook/template, read the seeded local fixtures, and write index.html without network calls, real credentials, or live services.",
+    "files": [
+      {
+        "path": "source/brief.md",
+        "content": "# Tailor Résumé to a Posting Eval Brief\n\nClient: Boreal Desk, a home-office accessories company.\nAudience: operations leads who need an artifact they can use this week.\n\nFixed source facts for grounding:\n- The returns desk pilot covered 18 SKUs.\n- Median first response improved from 18 hours to 6 hours.\n- Preventable refund leakage fell from 14.2% to 8.9%.\n- The top unresolved complaint is status silence after photo submission.\n- Required next actions are automated status emails, barcode-exception training, and a weekly Finance exception export.\n\nUse these facts when the task asks for prose, analysis, copy, UI content, or test data. Do not use live web services, real credentials, or current outside data.\n\nCraftbook under test: tailor-resume - Tailor Résumé to a Posting.\n"
+      },
+      {
+        "path": "source/page-content.md",
+        "content": "# Boreal Desk Support Board\n\nBuild content around a support operations board. Required labels: Open issues, Status silence, Response time, Refund leakage, Next action. Required metric text: 18 hours to 6 hours and 14.2% to 8.9%.\n"
+      }
+    ],
+    "worker": {
+      "name": "Jules",
+      "role": "Developer"
+    },
+    "craftbookParams": {
+      "workPath": "tasks/eval"
+    }
+  },
+  "mocks": [],
+  "success": {
+    "summary": "index.html is a source-grounded self-contained HTML page/tool.",
+    "deliverables": [
+      {
+        "path": "index.html",
+        "kind": "html-page",
+        "minBytes": 3000,
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "cssMinBytes",
+            "bytes": 650,
+            "file": "index.html"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "jsParses",
+            "file": "index.html"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "index.html",
+            "pattern": "Boreal|Support Board|returns",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "index.html",
+            "pattern": "18\\s*hours|6\\s*hours|14\\.2%|8\\.9%",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "index.html",
+            "pattern": "button|input|filter|tab|card|section|nav",
+            "flags": "i"
+          }
+        ]
+      }
+    ]
+  },
+  "rubric": {
+    "artifact": {
+      "path": "index.html",
+      "kind": "html"
+    },
+    "axes": [
+      {
+        "name": "structure",
+        "description": "Layout and hierarchy fit the content; sections are scannable and coherent."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "grounding",
+        "description": "Seeded source content is used faithfully — no invented facts or dropped requirements."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "interactivity",
+        "description": "Controls and states the page claims to offer actually work."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "polish",
+        "description": "Styling is intentional and responsive rather than unstyled or broken."
+      }
+    ]
+  },
+  "qualityFocus": [
+    "self-contained UI",
+    "source grounding",
+    "responsive structure"
+  ]
+}

package/data/craftbook-templates/te/technical-documentation/versions/2.0.4/craftbook.json

@@ -0,0 +1,420 @@
+{
+  "id": "technical-documentation",
+  "name": "Technical Documentation",
+  "description": "Generate a coherent documentation set from a codebase, organized by the Diataxis model (tutorials, how-to guides, reference, explanation), with cross-links and a coverage pass.",
+  "basedOn": {
+    "name": "gstack",
+    "url": "https://github.com/garrytan/gstack"
+  },
+  "plan": "Treat documentation as a tested product surface. Research implementation, tests, configuration, and existing prose before writing. Separate learning-oriented tutorials, task-oriented how-to guides, factual reference, and explanatory rationale. Every public claim must trace to a workspace source, every example must be verified when the environment permits, and every produced page must be reachable from the documentation index.",
+  "entryStepId": "inventory",
+  "triggers": [
+    "write docs for this",
+    "generate documentation",
+    "document this feature",
+    "create a tutorial",
+    "write a how-to",
+    "explain this module",
+    "docs for this project"
+  ],
+  "command": "technical-documentation",
+  "steps": [
+    {
+      "id": "inventory",
+      "name": "Inventory the documentation surface",
+      "description": "Map readers, public interfaces, source evidence, existing coverage, and gaps.",
+      "prompt": "Confirm the requested scope from the task and project context. Inspect the project guide, package or build metadata, entry points, public interfaces, configuration, examples, tests, and current docs with workspace tools. Build an exact inventory of the entities in scope, their source paths, intended readers, existing documentation, missing coverage, and risky claims that need verification. Do not start polished prose yet.\n\nObservable handoff: write the completed result to `{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md` in the project's artifacts drawer with `write_artifact`. Do not merely describe what the file would contain. Re-read it with `read_artifact` before finishing this phase and repair any incomplete sections.",
+      "suggestedRole": "technical researcher",
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md",
+        "minBytes": 900,
+        "sniff": "nonempty",
+        "requireChange": true,
+        "artifact": true,
+        "goto": "plan-docs"
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md",
+            "bytes": 900,
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "sniff",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md",
+            "sniff": "nonempty",
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Scope",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Scope section",
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Readers",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Readers section",
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Public surface",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Public surface section",
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Source map",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Source map section",
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Coverage gaps",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Coverage gaps section",
+            "artifact": true
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "inventory",
+        "maxAttempts": 3
+      },
+      "next": "plan-docs"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "plan-docs",
+      "name": "Design the documentation set",
+      "description": "Choose the right document type for each reader need and lock verification criteria.",
+      "prompt": "Turn `{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md` into a document plan. For each proposed page, state its reader, job, quadrant, destination path, evidence sources, prerequisites, cross-links, and pass/fail checks. Reuse existing conventions and update existing pages when that is clearer than duplication. Keep the set proportional to the scope, but cover every public item in the inventory or explicitly defer it with a reason. Before working, open `{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md` with `read_artifact`.\n\nObservable handoff: write the completed result to `{{workPath}}/documentation-plan.md` in the project's artifacts drawer with `write_artifact`. Do not merely describe what the file would contain. Re-read it with `read_artifact` before finishing this phase and repair any incomplete sections.",
+      "suggestedRole": "documentation architect",
+      "consumes": [
+        {
+          "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md",
+          "artifact": true
+        }
+      ],
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-plan.md",
+        "minBytes": 900,
+        "sniff": "nonempty",
+        "requireChange": true,
+        "artifact": true,
+        "goto": "author-and-verify"
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-plan.md",
+            "bytes": 900,
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "sniff",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-plan.md",
+            "sniff": "nonempty",
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-plan.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Document matrix",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Document matrix section",
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-plan.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Information architecture",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Information architecture section",
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-plan.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Verification plan",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Verification plan section",
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-plan.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Deferred coverage",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Deferred coverage section",
+            "artifact": true
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "plan-docs",
+        "maxAttempts": 3
+      },
+      "next": "author-and-verify"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "author-and-verify",
+      "name": "Author, link, and verify the docs",
+      "description": "Write the planned pages, validate examples and links, and expose the complete set through one index.",
+      "prompt": "Implement the approved document plan in the workspace. Keep reference factual, how-to steps actionable, tutorials quick to first result, and explanations explicit about trade-offs. Verify commands, code examples, option names, defaults, and constraints against implementation and tests; run safe examples where possible and label anything not executed. Add troubleshooting based on real failure paths. Cross-link related pages and write an index that lists every created or updated document, its reader job, quadrant, source evidence, and verification status.\n\nObservable handoff: write the completed result to `docs/documentation-index.md` in the workspace with `write_file`. Do not merely describe what the file would contain. Re-read it with `read_file` before finishing this phase and repair any incomplete sections.",
+      "suggestedRole": "technical writer",
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+        "minBytes": 1200,
+        "sniff": "nonempty",
+        "requireChange": true,
+        "goto": "evaluate"
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+            "bytes": 1200
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "sniff",
+            "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+            "sniff": "nonempty"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Documentation map",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Documentation map section"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Tutorials",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Tutorials section"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+How-to guides",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "How-to guides section"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Reference",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Reference section"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Explanation",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Explanation section"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Verification",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Verification section"
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "author-and-verify",
+        "maxAttempts": 3
+      },
+      "next": "evaluate"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "evaluate",
+      "name": "Evaluate the deliverable",
+      "description": "Independently grade the observable deliverable and route it to finish, repair, or user escalation.",
+      "prompt": "Review `docs/documentation-index.md`, `{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md`, `{{workPath}}/documentation-plan.md` against every criterion below. Inspect the underlying evidence files named by the workflow; do not grade from the author's summary alone.\n\n1. Every in-scope public item is documented or explicitly deferred with a reason.\n2. Claims, types, defaults, constraints, and examples agree with the cited implementation or tests.\n3. Tutorial, how-to, reference, and explanation content serve distinct reader jobs without needless duplication.\n4. Commands and examples have credible verification results or are clearly marked unexecuted.\n5. Every produced page is linked from the index and all internal links resolve.\n6. The prose is concrete, readable, and includes real troubleshooting and trade-offs where relevant.\n\nOpen `{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md`, `{{workPath}}/documentation-plan.md` with `read_artifact`. Open `docs/documentation-index.md` with `read_file`. Write the evidence-backed review to `{{workPath}}/reviews/technical-documentation-review.md` in the artifacts drawer with `write_artifact`. Give each criterion a PASS or FAIL with a concrete path, excerpt, measurement, or observed behavior. End with exactly `Verdict: PASS` or `Verdict: REVISE`. Then use `advance_task_step` for the active task: PASS routes to `finish`; REVISE routes to `repair` for review rounds 1 through 2, and the 3th REVISE routes to `needs-user`. Never route to finish while a criterion is unmet.",
+      "suggestedRole": "technical editor",
+      "consumes": [
+        {
+          "file": "docs/documentation-index.md"
+        },
+        {
+          "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md",
+          "artifact": true
+        },
+        {
+          "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-plan.md",
+          "artifact": true
+        }
+      ],
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/reviews/technical-documentation-review.md",
+            "bytes": 400,
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/reviews/technical-documentation-review.md",
+            "pattern": "Verdict:\\s*(?:PASS|REVISE)",
+            "flags": "i",
+            "label": "explicit PASS or REVISE verdict",
+            "artifact": true
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "evaluate",
+        "maxAttempts": 3
+      },
+      "next": "repair"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "repair",
+      "name": "Repair the deliverable",
+      "description": "Fix only the concrete gaps from the latest independent review.",
+      "prompt": "Read `{{workPath}}/reviews/technical-documentation-review.md` with `read_artifact` and repair every failed criterion in `docs/documentation-index.md`, `{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md`, `{{workPath}}/documentation-plan.md`. Make changes on each file's declared surface (`write_artifact` for artifact inputs, `write_file` for workspace inputs), not in task notes or a reply. Preserve evidence that already passed. Re-run or re-check anything the reviewer found unproven. Ensure `docs/documentation-index.md` is genuinely updated this turn so the repair is observable, then hand it back for independent evaluation.",
+      "suggestedRole": "technical writer",
+      "consumes": [
+        {
+          "file": "{{workPath}}/reviews/technical-documentation-review.md",
+          "artifact": true
+        },
+        {
+          "file": "docs/documentation-index.md"
+        },
+        {
+          "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md",
+          "artifact": true
+        },
+        {
+          "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-plan.md",
+          "artifact": true
+        }
+      ],
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+        "minBytes": 1200,
+        "sniff": "nonempty",
+        "requireChange": true,
+        "goto": "evaluate"
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+            "bytes": 1200
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "sniff",
+            "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+            "sniff": "nonempty"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Documentation map",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Documentation map section"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Tutorials",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Tutorials section"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+How-to guides",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "How-to guides section"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Reference",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Reference section"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Explanation",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Explanation section"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "docs/documentation-index.md",
+            "pattern": "^##\\s+Verification",
+            "flags": "im",
+            "label": "Verification section"
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "repair",
+        "maxAttempts": 3
+      },
+      "next": "evaluate"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "finish",
+      "name": "Finish",
+      "description": "All deterministic and reviewer criteria passed.",
+      "prompt": "The independent review passed. Read `{{workPath}}/reviews/technical-documentation-review.md` with `read_artifact`, then use `write_task_note` to record a concise DONE summary with the final deliverable paths (`docs/documentation-index.md`, `{{workPath}}/documentation-inventory.md`, `{{workPath}}/documentation-plan.md`) and the evidence that each acceptance criterion passed. Report DONE without starting new work.",
+      "suggestedRole": "project lead",
+      "consumes": [
+        {
+          "file": "{{workPath}}/reviews/technical-documentation-review.md",
+          "artifact": true
+        }
+      ],
+      "terminal": true
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "needs-user",
+      "name": "Escalate unresolved concerns",
+      "description": "The bounded repair loop ended without a defensible pass.",
+      "prompt": "The deliverable did not pass after 3 review rounds. Do not claim success. Read `{{workPath}}/reviews/technical-documentation-review.md` with `read_artifact`, then use `write_task_note` to record DONE_WITH_CONCERNS: the unmet criteria, what was attempted, the affected paths, and the smallest user decision or missing input needed to continue.",
+      "suggestedRole": "project lead",
+      "consumes": [
+        {
+          "file": "{{workPath}}/reviews/technical-documentation-review.md",
+          "artifact": true
+        }
+      ],
+      "terminal": true
+    }
+  ],
+  "version": "2.0.4",
+  "releasedAt": "2026-08-21T00:00:00Z",
+  "paramSchema": {
+    "type": "object",
+    "properties": {
+      "workPath": {
+        "type": "string",
+        "title": "Working folder",
+        "description": "Per-task working folder in the artifacts drawer. Defaults to this task's own folder so runs never collide; override with a stable name when you deliberately want runs to share files.",
+        "default": "{{task.dir}}"
+      }
+    }
+  },
+  "minGezelVersion": "1.26233"
+}