@bendyline/gilde 0.1.38 → 0.1.39

package/data/craftbook-templates/do/documentation-drift-review/versions/1.0.2/craftbook.json

@@ -0,0 +1,165 @@
+{
+  "id": "documentation-drift-review",
+  "name": "Documentation Drift Review",
+  "description": "Review project documentation against the code, configuration, commands, API surface, and shipped behavior to find stale or misleading guidance. Uses the indexed docs and source map to verify examples and references instead of proofreading in isolation, then leaves a prioritized morning report with exact doc locations, source-of-truth evidence, corrected text, owners, and a prevention plan. Use for a weekly docs-health sweep, documentation accuracy review, stale README audit, or finding runbook and API-documentation drift.\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. Inventory documentation contracts (reviewer) — map docs to the source-of-truth surfaces they claim to describe → gated on artifact `{{workPath}}/docs/traceability.md` (markdown-notes)\n2. Verify documented behavior (reviewer) — check commands, examples, links, schemas, defaults, and architecture claims → gated on artifact `{{workPath}}/docs/evidence.md` (markdown-notes)\n3. Write the documentation drift report (reviewer) — prioritized corrections and prevention work for morning triage → gated on artifact `{{workPath}}/documentation-drift-review.md` (markdown-report)\n\nThe gates never advance with an unmet criterion, and loop back to the\nowning phase to fix named gaps.\n",
+  "entryStepId": "inventory",
+  "triggers": [
+    "documentation drift review",
+    "find stale docs",
+    "weekly docs review",
+    "check docs against code",
+    "audit the readme and runbooks",
+    "nightly documentation sweep"
+  ],
+  "toolsets": [
+    {
+      "toolsetId": "builtin.code-intel",
+      "autoAllow": true,
+      "reason": "compare documented behavior with indexed symbols, configs, routes, and entrypoints"
+    },
+    {
+      "toolsetId": "builtin.code-execution",
+      "autoAllow": true,
+      "reason": "safely verify documented package commands and examples when available"
+    }
+  ],
+  "steps": [
+    {
+      "id": "inventory",
+      "name": "Inventory documentation contracts",
+      "description": "map docs to the source-of-truth surfaces they claim to describe",
+      "prompt": "Call `map_repo`, `list_file_issues`, and `search_code` to inventory user/admin/developer docs: README and setup guides, API references, CLI help/examples, configuration/environment-variable docs, architecture/decision docs, runbooks, migration/release guides, and inline examples. Build a traceability matrix mapping each important claim to its source of truth (package script, schema, route, exported symbol, config default, CLI definition, or runtime behavior). Prioritize high-harm docs used during install, deploy, recovery, security, and API integration. Record index coverage, generated docs that should not be hand-edited, and the verification plan in `{{workPath}}/docs/traceability.md`.\n\nThe deliverable `{{workPath}}/docs/traceability.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": "reviewer",
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "{{workPath}}/docs/traceability.md",
+        "minBytes": 1,
+        "sniff": "nonempty",
+        "artifact": true
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/docs/traceability.md",
+            "bytes": 120,
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "sniff",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/docs/traceability.md",
+            "sniff": "nonempty",
+            "artifact": true
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "inventory",
+        "maxAttempts": 3
+      },
+      "next": "verify"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "verify",
+      "name": "Verify documented behavior",
+      "description": "check commands, examples, links, schemas, defaults, and architecture claims",
+      "prompt": "Verify the high-priority claims against real source. Use `outline_file`/`read_symbol` for definitions and `find_references`/`search_code` for renamed concepts. Compare documented commands to package scripts/CLI help, env vars and defaults to schemas/config readers, API examples to route schemas and status codes, file paths to the workspace, and architecture statements to current dependencies/entrypoints. Run safe documented commands or examples when practical and capture exit codes; otherwise mark them statically verified or not verified. Check internal links and code/file references. For each confirmed drift item record doc file:line, exact stale claim, source-of-truth file:line or command evidence, reader impact, severity, corrected wording, and likely owner. Record true positives, false positives, and verified-current docs in `{{workPath}}/docs/evidence.md`.\n\nThe deliverable `{{workPath}}/docs/evidence.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": "reviewer",
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "{{workPath}}/docs/evidence.md",
+        "minBytes": 1,
+        "sniff": "nonempty",
+        "artifact": true
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/docs/evidence.md",
+            "bytes": 120,
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "sniff",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/docs/evidence.md",
+            "sniff": "nonempty",
+            "artifact": true
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "verify",
+        "maxAttempts": 3
+      },
+      "next": "report"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "report",
+      "name": "Write the documentation drift report",
+      "description": "prioritized corrections and prevention work for morning triage",
+      "prompt": "Write `{{workPath}}/documentation-drift-review.md` with `## Verdict`, `## Coverage`, `## Drift findings`, `## Verified current`, `## Not verified`, `## Corrections by owner`, and `## Prevention`. Every finding must cite the doc file:line and source-of-truth evidence, explain the reader harm, and include corrected text or an exact update. Rank broken install/deploy/recovery/security/API guidance above tone or grammar. Distinguish stale docs from missing docs and generated docs. Recommend durable prevention such as tested snippets, generated reference sections, link checks, or ownership near source—only where it addresses an observed class of drift. On a loop-back, repair only named gaps.\n\nThe deliverable `{{workPath}}/documentation-drift-review.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": "reviewer",
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-drift-review.md",
+        "minBytes": 1,
+        "sniff": "nonempty",
+        "artifact": true
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-drift-review.md",
+            "bytes": 1800,
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/documentation-drift-review.md",
+            "pattern": "(?:^|\\n)#{1,3}\\s+\\S",
+            "flags": "i",
+            "label": "at least one markdown heading",
+            "artifact": true
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "report",
+        "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": "Grade `{{workPath}}/documentation-drift-review.md`: (1) high-harm doc classes are covered; (2) every drift finding cites doc file:line plus source-of-truth file:line or command evidence; (3) commands, examples, links, API/config/default claims, and architecture references were checked where relevant; (4) findings include reader impact and exact corrected text; (5) stale, missing, generated, verified-current, and not-verified docs are distinguished; (6) ownership and priority are actionable; (7) prevention recommendations address observed drift patterns. PASS all or loop back.\n\nThe deliverable lives in the project's artifacts drawer — open `{{workPath}}/documentation-drift-review.md` with `read_artifact`, not `read_file`.\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: \"report\" })` 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": "{{workPath}}/documentation-drift-review.md",
+          "artifact": true
+        }
+      ],
+      "next": "report"
+    },
+    {
+      "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/do/documentation-drift-review/versions/1.0.2/test.json

@@ -0,0 +1,135 @@
+{
+  "schemaVersion": 1,
+  "title": "Documentation Drift Review traceability eval",
+  "objective": "Measure whether the review verifies high-impact documentation claims against package scripts, config, routes, and real paths and supplies exact corrections.",
+  "tags": [
+    "corpus"
+  ],
+  "prompt": "Use the Documentation Drift Review craftbook for the weekly docs-health pass. Compare the seeded docs with the code/config and write tasks/eval/documentation-drift-review.md. Do not edit documentation.",
+  "setup": {
+    "projectName": "Documentation Maintenance Eval",
+    "about": "A small service whose README and runbook contain deliberate command, port, endpoint, path, and recovery drift.",
+    "missionObjectives": "Cite both the stale doc location and source of truth, include exact corrected wording, and rank harmful operational drift first.",
+    "files": [
+      {
+        "path": "README.md",
+        "content": "# Returns Service\n\nRun `npm start` and open http://localhost:3000. List customers with `GET /customers`. See [setup](docs/setup.md).\n"
+      },
+      {
+        "path": "docs/runbook.md",
+        "content": "# Recovery\n\nIf the queue stalls, delete `runtime.db` and restart. The service will rebuild all pending jobs from memory.\n"
+      },
+      {
+        "path": "package.json",
+        "content": "{\"name\":\"returns-service\",\"scripts\":{\"dev\":\"node src/server.js\",\"test\":\"vitest run\"}}\n"
+      },
+      {
+        "path": "src/config.ts",
+        "content": "export const port = Number(process.env.PORT ?? 8080);\nexport const stateFile = process.env.STATE_FILE ?? 'data/queue.sqlite';\n"
+      },
+      {
+        "path": "src/routes.ts",
+        "content": "app.get('/users', requireUser, async (_req, res) => res.json(await store.listUsers()));\n"
+      },
+      {
+        "path": "src/queue.ts",
+        "content": "// data/queue.sqlite is the durable source of truth; deleting it loses pending jobs.\nexport async function recover(db) { return db.pending(); }\n"
+      }
+    ],
+    "worker": {
+      "name": "Rae",
+      "role": "Reviewer"
+    },
+    "craftbookParams": {
+      "workPath": "tasks/eval"
+    }
+  },
+  "mocks": [],
+  "success": {
+    "summary": "tasks/eval/documentation-drift-review.md finds every seeded drift item, cites both sides, gives corrected wording, and prioritizes unsafe recovery guidance.",
+    "deliverables": [
+      {
+        "path": "tasks/eval/documentation-drift-review.md",
+        "kind": "markdown-report",
+        "minBytes": 1500,
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "tasks/eval/documentation-drift-review.md",
+            "pattern": "README\\.md:[0-9]+|README\\.md",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "tasks/eval/documentation-drift-review.md",
+            "pattern": "npm start[\\s\\S]{0,180}npm run dev|package\\.json",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "tasks/eval/documentation-drift-review.md",
+            "pattern": "3000[\\s\\S]{0,120}8080|src/config\\.ts",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "tasks/eval/documentation-drift-review.md",
+            "pattern": "/customers[\\s\\S]{0,120}/users|src/routes\\.ts",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "tasks/eval/documentation-drift-review.md",
+            "pattern": "docs/setup\\.md[\\s\\S]{0,120}(missing|broken|does not exist)",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "tasks/eval/documentation-drift-review.md",
+            "pattern": "runtime\\.db|queue\\.sqlite|data loss|pending jobs",
+            "flags": "i",
+            "label": "unsafe recovery drift"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "tasks/eval/documentation-drift-review.md",
+            "pattern": "corrected|replace with|should read",
+            "flags": "i",
+            "label": "exact corrections"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "tasks/eval/documentation-drift-review.md",
+            "pattern": "Prevention|tested snippet|link check|generate",
+            "flags": "i"
+          }
+        ]
+      }
+    ]
+  },
+  "rubric": {
+    "artifact": {
+      "path": "tasks/eval/documentation-drift-review.md",
+      "kind": "markdown"
+    },
+    "axes": [
+      {
+        "name": "traceability",
+        "description": "Each stale claim is tied to both its doc location and source of truth."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "harm prioritization",
+        "description": "Operationally dangerous drift is ranked above cosmetic issues."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "repairability",
+        "description": "Findings include exact corrected wording, ownership, and targeted prevention."
+      }
+    ]
+  },
+  "qualityFocus": [
+    "doc-to-source traceability",
+    "operational harm",
+    "exact corrections"
+  ]
+}

package/data/craftbook-templates/dr/drive-wrap-up/versions/1.0.2/craftbook.json

@@ -0,0 +1,152 @@
+{
+  "id": "drive-wrap-up",
+  "name": "Fundraiser Wrap-Up",
+  "description": "Close a fundraising drive properly: verify the final numbers against the donation ledger, confirm every donor was thanked (or finish the thank-yous now), and write the wrap-up story — the total, what the money does, and the people who made it happen — ready to share with the community and hand to the next organizer. Locks the wrap-up's claims and the thank-you completeness check FIRST, then verifies against the ledger, then writes the story. Use for ending a fundraiser, drive wrap-up reports, final fundraising totals, and community thank-you posts.\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. Scope the wrap-up (planner) — final claims to verify, thank-you completeness, audiences → gated on artifact `{{workPath}}/scope.md` (markdown-notes)\n2. Verify against the ledger (data-analyst) — recompute totals, close the thank-you debt → gated on artifact `{{workPath}}/verify.md` (markdown-notes)\n3. Write the wrap-up (copywriter) — the community story plus the organizer handoff → gated on artifact `{{workPath}}/report.md` (markdown-report)\n\nThe gates never advance with an unmet criterion, and loop back to the\nowning phase to fix named gaps.\n",
+  "entryStepId": "scope",
+  "triggers": [
+    "wrap up the fundraiser",
+    "close the drive",
+    "final fundraising report",
+    "fundraiser wrap up",
+    "end the campaign"
+  ],
+  "steps": [
+    {
+      "id": "scope",
+      "name": "Scope the wrap-up",
+      "description": "final claims to verify, thank-you completeness, audiences",
+      "prompt": "Define the wrap-up before writing a word of it. Step 1: read donations.json from the workspace — the goal, the entry count, and the thanked/unthanked split. Step 2: fix the claims the wrap-up will make and that must be verified — the final total, the percent of goal, the gift count, the largest gift (if the owner wants it named), and the impact statement (what the money concretely does). Step 3: set the thank-you rule — the drive does not close with unthanked donors; either the thank-yous go out during this wrap-up or each remaining one is assigned to a named person. Step 4: identify the audiences — the community post, and the handoff note for whoever runs the next drive. Step 5: write an acceptance-criteria checklist ('every number in the wrap-up recomputed from the ledger', 'zero unthanked donors or each assigned by name', 'impact stated concretely, not vaguely', 'donors thanked collectively in the story, individually in the record', 'handoff note tells the next organizer what worked'). Call write_task_note with the totals + checklist and write {{workPath}}/scope.md.\n\nThe deliverable `{{workPath}}/scope.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}}/scope.md",
+        "minBytes": 1,
+        "sniff": "nonempty",
+        "artifact": true
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/scope.md",
+            "bytes": 120,
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "sniff",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/scope.md",
+            "sniff": "nonempty",
+            "artifact": true
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "scope",
+        "maxAttempts": 3
+      },
+      "next": "verify"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "verify",
+      "name": "Verify against the ledger",
+      "description": "recompute totals, close the thank-you debt",
+      "prompt": "Verify every claim against the ledger. Step 1: recompute the total raised, the gift count, and the percent of goal directly from the donation entries — the wrap-up uses these numbers, not remembered ones. Step 2: list every unthanked donor; draft each missing thank-you for the owner to send now, and record each as thanked through the project's drive capabilities once it goes out (or assign it by name if it truly cannot go now). Step 3: pull the drive's story beats from the record — the first gift, the day the thermometer moved most, the moment the goal broke. Step 4: confirm the impact statement math (what the total actually buys) with the owner. Step 5: write the verified numbers and beats to {{workPath}}/verify.md and call write_task_note with the final total and the remaining thank-you count (target: zero).\n\nThe deliverable `{{workPath}}/verify.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": "data-analyst",
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "{{workPath}}/verify.md",
+        "minBytes": 1,
+        "sniff": "nonempty",
+        "artifact": true
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/verify.md",
+            "bytes": 120,
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "sniff",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/verify.md",
+            "sniff": "nonempty",
+            "artifact": true
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "verify",
+        "maxAttempts": 3
+      },
+      "next": "report"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "report",
+      "name": "Write the wrap-up",
+      "description": "the community story plus the organizer handoff",
+      "prompt": "Write the wrap-up from the verified record. Step 1: the community story — open with the total and what it does, in one warm sentence; tell the drive's arc through the verified beats; thank the givers and the helpers collectively and specifically enough to feel real; end with what happens next with the money. Celebration, not accounting. Step 2: the organizer handoff — the final numbers, what worked and what didn't, the timing and asks that pulled best, and the one thing to do differently — honest and short. Step 3: keep the story shareable as-is (no internal notes in it) and put the handoff under its own heading after it. Write {{workPath}}/report.md and call write_task_note with the report path and the headline total.\n\nThe deliverable `{{workPath}}/report.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": "copywriter",
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "{{workPath}}/report.md",
+        "minBytes": 1,
+        "sniff": "nonempty",
+        "artifact": true
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/report.md",
+            "bytes": 1500,
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/report.md",
+            "pattern": "(?:^|\\n)#{1,3}\\s+\\S",
+            "flags": "i",
+            "label": "at least one markdown heading",
+            "artifact": true
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "report",
+        "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": "Open {{workPath}}/report.md and {{workPath}}/verify.md and verify every criterion from {{workPath}}/scope.md: every number in the wrap-up matches the ledger recomputation (re-add the total yourself), the thank-you debt is zero or each remaining one is assigned by name, the impact statement is concrete, the community story stands alone without internal notes, and the handoff names what worked and the one change for next time. Write PASS/FAIL per criterion; on any failure, name the gap and loop back to report.\n\nThe deliverable lives in the project's artifacts drawer — open `{{workPath}}/report.md` with `read_artifact`, not `read_file`.\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: \"report\" })` 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": "{{workPath}}/report.md",
+          "artifact": true
+        }
+      ],
+      "next": "report"
+    },
+    {
+      "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/dr/drive-wrap-up/versions/1.0.2/test.json

@@ -0,0 +1,107 @@
+{
+  "schemaVersion": 1,
+  "title": "Fundraiser Wrap-Up smoke eval",
+  "objective": "Self-contained smoke eval for the Fundraiser Wrap-Up craftbook using the data generic harness.",
+  "tags": [
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "prompt": "I dropped our numbers in source/records.csv. Can you look at the data, analyze it, and put togehter some results in analysis.md?",
+  "setup": {
+    "projectName": "Fundraiser Wrap-Up Eval",
+    "about": "Self-contained eval project for drive-wrap-up. Seeded inputs are under workspace/source or workspace/fixtures; final deliverable is workspace/analysis.md.",
+    "missionObjectives": "Use the Fundraiser Wrap-Up craftbook/template, read the seeded local fixtures, and write analysis.md without network calls, real credentials, or live services.",
+    "files": [
+      {
+        "path": "source/brief.md",
+        "content": "# Fundraiser Wrap-Up 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: drive-wrap-up - Fundraiser Wrap-Up.\n"
+      },
+      {
+        "path": "source/records.csv",
+        "content": "customer,region,orders,revenue_usd,churn_risk\nAster,North,12,1440,low\nBoreal,South,8,720,medium\nCedar,West,15,2100,high\nDune,North,5,500,low\n"
+      }
+    ],
+    "worker": {
+      "name": "Jules",
+      "role": "Data Analyst"
+    },
+    "craftbookParams": {
+      "workPath": "tasks/eval"
+    }
+  },
+  "mocks": [],
+  "success": {
+    "summary": "analysis.md is a seeded-data analysis with deterministic computed facts.",
+    "deliverables": [
+      {
+        "path": "analysis.md",
+        "kind": "markdown-report",
+        "minBytes": 900,
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "analysis.md",
+            "pattern": "(?:^|\\n)#{1,3}\\s+\\S",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "analysis.md",
+            "pattern": "40\\b",
+            "flags": "i",
+            "label": "include total orders of 40"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "analysis.md",
+            "pattern": "\\$?4,?760\\b",
+            "flags": "i",
+            "label": "include total revenue of 4760"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "analysis.md",
+            "pattern": "Cedar",
+            "flags": "i",
+            "label": "identify Cedar as top revenue and high risk"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "analysis.md",
+            "pattern": "high",
+            "flags": "i",
+            "label": "include churn-risk finding"
+          }
+        ]
+      }
+    ]
+  },
+  "rubric": {
+    "artifact": {
+      "path": "analysis.md",
+      "kind": "markdown"
+    },
+    "axes": [
+      {
+        "name": "accuracy",
+        "description": "Computed figures are correct against the seeded records."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "grounding",
+        "description": "Every claim traces to the seeded data — nothing invented."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "structure",
+        "description": "Tables and sections make the analysis checkable at a glance."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "actionability",
+        "description": "Recommendations follow from the findings and are concretely doable."
+      }
+    ]
+  },
+  "qualityFocus": [
+    "seeded data reading",
+    "computed facts",
+    "recommendation grounding"
+  ]
+}