@bendyline/gilde 0.1.38 → 0.1.39

package/data/craftbook-templates/pr/product-descriptions/versions/1.0.2/test.json

@@ -0,0 +1,113 @@
+{
+  "schemaVersion": 1,
+  "title": "Bulk Product Descriptions smoke eval",
+  "objective": "Self-contained smoke eval for the Bulk Product Descriptions craftbook using the corpus generic harness.",
+  "tags": [
+    "corpus"
+  ],
+  "prompt": "We need a bulk product descriptions for the returns-desk work. The backgound info is in source/brief.md — have a look and write it up in report.md.",
+  "setup": {
+    "projectName": "Bulk Product Descriptions Eval",
+    "about": "Self-contained eval project for product-descriptions. Seeded inputs are under workspace/source or workspace/fixtures; final deliverable is workspace/report.md.",
+    "missionObjectives": "Use the Bulk Product Descriptions craftbook/template, read the seeded local fixtures, and write report.md without network calls, real credentials, or live services.",
+    "files": [
+      {
+        "path": "source/brief.md",
+        "content": "# Bulk Product Descriptions 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: product-descriptions - Bulk Product Descriptions.\n"
+      }
+    ],
+    "worker": {
+      "name": "Jules",
+      "role": "Writer"
+    },
+    "craftbookParams": {
+      "workPath": "tasks/eval"
+    }
+  },
+  "mocks": [],
+  "success": {
+    "summary": "report.md is a source-grounded markdown artifact with required facts and actions.",
+    "deliverables": [
+      {
+        "path": "report.md",
+        "kind": "markdown-report",
+        "minBytes": 1000,
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "report.md",
+            "pattern": "(?:^|\\n)#{1,3}\\s+\\S",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "report.md",
+            "pattern": "source/brief\\.md|Brief",
+            "flags": "i",
+            "label": "cite or name the seeded source"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "report.md",
+            "pattern": "18\\b[\\s\\S]{0,30}\\bSKUs",
+            "flags": "i",
+            "label": "include the 18-SKU pilot scope"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "report.md",
+            "pattern": "18\\s*hours|6\\s*hours",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "report.md",
+            "pattern": "14\\.2%|8\\.9%",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "report.md",
+            "pattern": "status silence|photo submission",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "report.md",
+            "pattern": "automated status emails|barcode|Finance",
+            "flags": "i"
+          }
+        ]
+      }
+    ]
+  },
+  "rubric": {
+    "artifact": {
+      "path": "report.md",
+      "kind": "markdown"
+    },
+    "axes": [
+      {
+        "name": "grounding",
+        "description": "Seeded facts appear faithfully and the source is cited."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "structure",
+        "description": "Sections progress logically for the artifact class."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "completeness",
+        "description": "Required elements (risks, next actions, scope) are all present."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "tone",
+        "description": "The register fits the audience and artifact class."
+      }
+    ]
+  },
+  "qualityFocus": [
+    "source-grounded prose",
+    "section structure",
+    "next-action clarity"
+  ]
+}

package/data/craftbook-templates/pr/proposal-sow/versions/1.0.2/craftbook.json

@@ -0,0 +1,155 @@
+{
+  "id": "proposal-sow",
+  "name": "Proposal / Statement of Work",
+  "description": "Draft a client proposal or statement of work that wins the deal and prevents scope creep — covering objectives, scope, deliverables, timeline/milestones, pricing, assumptions, and acceptance criteria. Scopes the engagement and the in-scope/out-of-scope boundary FIRST (the boundary is what protects both sides), writes persuasive yet precise proposal copy, then formats it into a clean client-ready document with a structured deliverables-and-pricing table. Use for freelance/agency bids, consulting SOWs, and project proposals.\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 engagement (planner) — objectives, in/out-of-scope boundary, deliverables, milestones, price → gated on artifact `{{workPath}}/scope.md` (markdown-notes)\n2. Write the proposal (copywriter) — persuasive, precise proposal copy section by section → gated on artifact `{{workPath}}/write.md` (markdown-notes)\n3. Format the document (developer) — render proposal.html with cover, deliverables/pricing tables, sign-off → gated on `proposal.html` (html-page)\n\nThe gates never advance with an unmet criterion, and loop back to the\nowning phase to fix named gaps.\n",
+  "entryStepId": "scope",
+  "triggers": [
+    "write a proposal",
+    "statement of work",
+    "sow",
+    "client proposal",
+    "project proposal",
+    "consulting proposal"
+  ],
+  "steps": [
+    {
+      "id": "scope",
+      "name": "Scope the engagement",
+      "description": "objectives, in/out-of-scope boundary, deliverables, milestones, price",
+      "prompt": "Define the engagement precisely before any selling prose. Step 1: state the client's objective and the outcome the work delivers. Step 2: enumerate the deliverables concretely, and — critically — draw the IN-SCOPE vs OUT-OF-SCOPE boundary explicitly (the out-of-scope list is what prevents scope creep and disputes). Step 3: lay out the timeline as milestones/phases with rough durations and dependencies. Step 4: decide the pricing model (fixed, T&M, retainer), the amount or rate, and the payment schedule tied to milestones. Step 5: list assumptions and client responsibilities (access, approvals, content) and the per-deliverable acceptance criteria. Step 6: write an acceptance-criteria checklist for the document itself ('objective stated', 'explicit out-of-scope section', 'deliverables map to milestones', 'pricing tied to a payment schedule', 'assumptions + client responsibilities listed', 'acceptance criteria per deliverable'). Write all decisions + checklist via write_task_note AND to {{workPath}}/scope.md. No prose or formatting yet.\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": "write"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "write",
+      "name": "Write the proposal",
+      "description": "persuasive, precise proposal copy section by section",
+      "prompt": "Write the proposal copy from the locked scope — persuasive about value, precise about commitments. Step 1: open with a short overview that restates the client's objective in their language and frames your approach. Step 2: write the approach/methodology section showing HOW you will deliver, then a deliverables section listing each deliverable with its acceptance criterion. Step 3: write the timeline section as milestones, and a clearly worded scope section with the in-scope list AND a plainly labeled out-of-scope list. Step 4: write the investment/pricing section in client-friendly terms tied to the payment schedule, then the assumptions + client-responsibilities section, and a short next-steps/sign-off close. Step 5: keep the tone confident and specific — no vague 'best efforts' language around commitments. Do not soften or drop the out-of-scope boundary. Write the section-by-section copy via write_task_note AND to {{workPath}}/write.md.\n\nThe deliverable `{{workPath}}/write.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}}/write.md",
+        "minBytes": 1,
+        "sniff": "nonempty",
+        "artifact": true
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/write.md",
+            "bytes": 120,
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "sniff",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/write.md",
+            "sniff": "nonempty",
+            "artifact": true
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "write",
+        "maxAttempts": 3
+      },
+      "next": "format"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "format",
+      "name": "Format the document",
+      "description": "render proposal.html with cover, deliverables/pricing tables, sign-off",
+      "prompt": "Format the approved copy into a client-ready document as a single self-contained proposal.html (inline CSS with print @page rules). Step 1: build a cover/header with the project title, client name, your name/company, and date. Step 2: lay out the sections in proposal order (overview, approach, deliverables, scope incl. out-of-scope, timeline, pricing, assumptions/responsibilities, next steps). Step 3: render the deliverables and the pricing/payment schedule as clean bordered tables (deliverable | acceptance criterion; milestone | amount | due) — these must be unambiguous. Step 4: visually distinguish the out-of-scope list (e.g. its own boxed callout) so it cannot be missed. Step 5: add a sign-off block (signature lines, date) and clean print page breaks. Drop the approved copy in verbatim; do not rewrite commitments. On a loop-back, fix ONLY the named gaps. Write the path + a note confirming the tables and out-of-scope section are present via write_task_note.",
+      "suggestedRole": "developer",
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "proposal.html",
+        "minBytes": 1,
+        "sniff": "html-complete"
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "proposal.html",
+            "bytes": 800
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "htmlLint",
+            "file": "proposal.html"
+          }
+        ],
+        "scripts": [
+          {
+            "name": "checkHtmlComplete",
+            "scope": "standard",
+            "inputs": {
+              "file": "proposal.html"
+            }
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "format",
+        "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 proposal against the locked criteria. Step 1: open/render proposal.html. Step 2: check EACH acceptance criterion: the client objective is stated up front, there is an explicit and visually distinct out-of-scope section, deliverables are listed with acceptance criteria and map to the timeline milestones, pricing is shown as a table tied to a payment schedule, assumptions + client responsibilities are listed, and a sign-off block is present. Step 3: confirm the deliverables and pricing tables are unambiguous and the commitment language is specific (no vague hedging where commitments belong). Step 4: confirm it prints cleanly. Write PASS/FAIL per criterion, noting the offending section on 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: \"format\" })` 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": "proposal.html"
+        }
+      ],
+      "next": "format"
+    },
+    {
+      "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/pr/proposal-sow/versions/1.0.2/test.json

@@ -0,0 +1,113 @@
+{
+  "schemaVersion": 1,
+  "title": "Proposal / Statement of Work smoke eval",
+  "objective": "Self-contained smoke eval for the Proposal / Statement of Work craftbook using the corpus generic harness.",
+  "tags": [
+    "corpus"
+  ],
+  "prompt": "We need a proposal / statement of work for the returns-desk work. The backgound info is in source/brief.md — have a look and write it up in report.md.",
+  "setup": {
+    "projectName": "Proposal / Statement of Work Eval",
+    "about": "Self-contained eval project for proposal-sow. Seeded inputs are under workspace/source or workspace/fixtures; final deliverable is workspace/report.md.",
+    "missionObjectives": "Use the Proposal / Statement of Work craftbook/template, read the seeded local fixtures, and write report.md without network calls, real credentials, or live services.",
+    "files": [
+      {
+        "path": "source/brief.md",
+        "content": "# Proposal / Statement of Work 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: proposal-sow - Proposal / Statement of Work.\n"
+      }
+    ],
+    "worker": {
+      "name": "Jules",
+      "role": "Writer"
+    },
+    "craftbookParams": {
+      "workPath": "tasks/eval"
+    }
+  },
+  "mocks": [],
+  "success": {
+    "summary": "report.md is a source-grounded markdown artifact with required facts and actions.",
+    "deliverables": [
+      {
+        "path": "report.md",
+        "kind": "markdown-report",
+        "minBytes": 1000,
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "report.md",
+            "pattern": "(?:^|\\n)#{1,3}\\s+\\S",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "report.md",
+            "pattern": "source/brief\\.md|Brief",
+            "flags": "i",
+            "label": "cite or name the seeded source"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "report.md",
+            "pattern": "18\\b[\\s\\S]{0,30}\\bSKUs",
+            "flags": "i",
+            "label": "include the 18-SKU pilot scope"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "report.md",
+            "pattern": "18\\s*hours|6\\s*hours",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "report.md",
+            "pattern": "14\\.2%|8\\.9%",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "report.md",
+            "pattern": "status silence|photo submission",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "report.md",
+            "pattern": "automated status emails|barcode|Finance",
+            "flags": "i"
+          }
+        ]
+      }
+    ]
+  },
+  "rubric": {
+    "artifact": {
+      "path": "report.md",
+      "kind": "markdown"
+    },
+    "axes": [
+      {
+        "name": "grounding",
+        "description": "Seeded facts appear faithfully and the source is cited."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "structure",
+        "description": "Sections progress logically for the artifact class."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "completeness",
+        "description": "Required elements (risks, next actions, scope) are all present."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "tone",
+        "description": "The register fits the audience and artifact class."
+      }
+    ]
+  },
+  "qualityFocus": [
+    "source-grounded prose",
+    "section structure",
+    "next-action clarity"
+  ]
+}