@bendyline/gilde 0.1.50 → 0.1.52

package/data/craftbook-templates/lo/logo-set/versions/1.0.3/craftbook.json

@@ -0,0 +1,281 @@
+{
+  "id": "logo-set",
+  "name": "Logo & Variant Set",
+  "description": "Generate a coherent logo and the full set of variants a real brand needs — primary mark, horizontal lockup, stacked lockup, icon-only/favicon, plus light-on-dark and monochrome versions — from a written brief. Lock the brief (concept, geometry, palette, typography, do/don'ts) BEFORE generating pixels so every variant shares one visual DNA instead of looking like five unrelated logos; then assemble them into a delivered folder with a contact sheet. Covers logo design, brand mark, wordmark, logo variations, and brand-asset packs.\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. Logo brief (visual-designer) — lock concept, geometry, palette, type, and the variant list → gated on artifact `{{workPath}}/brief.md` (markdown-notes)\n2. Generate the marks (image-generator) — produce every variant to the locked brief → gated on `assets` (image-set)\n3. Assemble the delivery (developer) — contact sheet + usage page tying the set together → gated on `index.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": "brief",
+  "triggers": [
+    "design a logo",
+    "make a logo set",
+    "logo variants",
+    "brand mark",
+    "logo with variations"
+  ],
+  "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}}"
+      }
+    }
+  },
+  "steps": [
+    {
+      "id": "brief",
+      "name": "Logo brief",
+      "description": "lock concept, geometry, palette, type, and the variant list",
+      "prompt": "1) Capture the brand essence in one sentence (what it is, the feeling). 2) Decide the core concept and geometry of the mark (e.g. 'abstract folded ribbon', 'monoline fox head') — concrete enough to redraw. 3) Lock the palette with exact hex values and the type treatment for any wordmark. 4) Enumerate the EXACT variant list to produce: primary, horizontal lockup, stacked lockup, icon-only, monochrome (black), and reversed (white on dark) — name each output filename. 5) Write do/don't rules (clear-space, what not to recolor). 6) Write an acceptance-criteria checklist: 'all variants share the same core mark', 'palette is exactly <hex list>', 'icon-only is legible at 32px', 'reversed version works on a dark background', 'at least 5 variant files are produced'. 7) Record everything via write_task_note AND to {{workPath}}/brief.md. No pixels yet — this is the single source of truth all variants must obey.\n\nThe deliverable `{{workPath}}/brief.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": "visual-designer",
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "{{workPath}}/brief.md",
+        "minBytes": 1,
+        "sniff": "nonempty",
+        "artifact": true
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/brief.md",
+            "bytes": 120,
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "sniff",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/brief.md",
+            "sniff": "nonempty",
+            "artifact": true
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "brief",
+        "maxAttempts": 3
+      },
+      "next": "generate",
+      "toolPolicy": {
+        "disallowBuiltinToolsets": [
+          "ai-apps",
+          "archives",
+          "audio",
+          "browser-automation",
+          "code-execution",
+          "craftbooks",
+          "data-tables",
+          "entity-intel",
+          "git",
+          "image-intel",
+          "images",
+          "role-delegation",
+          "role-delegation-escalation",
+          "security-intel",
+          "team-management",
+          "videos",
+          "web",
+          "workspace-fs-write"
+        ],
+        "outputMedium": "artifact",
+        "additionalOutputMedia": [
+          "task-note"
+        ]
+      }
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "generate",
+      "name": "Generate the marks",
+      "description": "produce every variant to the locked brief",
+      "prompt": "1) Read brief.md. 2) Using the image-generation capability (or hand-authored SVG if no image model is available), produce the PRIMARY mark first and treat it as the master. 3) Derive each remaining variant FROM the primary so geometry and proportions stay identical — horizontal lockup, stacked lockup, icon-only crop, monochrome black, reversed white-on-dark. 4) Honor the exact palette hex values; the monochrome and reversed versions are recolors of the same shape, not redesigns. 5) Save each into the assets/ directory with the filenames named in the brief (e.g. primary.svg, horizontal.svg, icon.svg, mono.svg, reversed.svg). 6) Sanity-check the icon at small size — it must read at 32px. Good looks like: 5+ files that are unmistakably the same logo in different configurations.",
+      "suggestedRole": "image-generator",
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "assets",
+        "minBytes": 1,
+        "sniff": "nonempty"
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "fileCount",
+            "ext": [
+              "png",
+              "jpg",
+              "jpeg",
+              "svg",
+              "webp"
+            ],
+            "min": 3,
+            "dir": "assets"
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "generate",
+        "maxAttempts": 3
+      },
+      "next": "assemble",
+      "toolPolicy": {
+        "disallowBuiltinToolsets": [
+          "ai-apps",
+          "archives",
+          "artifacts",
+          "audio",
+          "browser-automation",
+          "code-execution",
+          "craftbooks",
+          "data-tables",
+          "entity-intel",
+          "git",
+          "image-intel",
+          "images",
+          "role-delegation",
+          "role-delegation-escalation",
+          "security-intel",
+          "team-management",
+          "videos",
+          "web"
+        ],
+        "outputMedium": "workspace"
+      }
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "assemble",
+      "name": "Assemble the delivery",
+      "description": "contact sheet + usage page tying the set together",
+      "prompt": "1) Build a single index.html contact sheet that displays every variant on appropriate backgrounds (light variants on white, the reversed variant on a dark panel) at multiple sizes including a tiny 32px row to prove favicon legibility. 2) Include a short usage section restating the palette hex, clear-space, and the do/don'ts from the brief. 3) Reference the real files in assets/ (relative paths) so the page renders the actual marks. 4) On a loop-back, fix only the named gaps (missing variant, wrong background, broken reference). 5) write_task_note the contact-sheet path and the list of variant files. Good looks like: one page a client could approve from, showing the whole coherent set in context.",
+      "suggestedRole": "developer",
+      "consumes": [
+        {
+          "file": "assets"
+        }
+      ],
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "index.html",
+        "minBytes": 1,
+        "sniff": "html-complete"
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "index.html",
+            "bytes": 800
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "htmlLint",
+            "file": "index.html"
+          }
+        ],
+        "scripts": [
+          {
+            "name": "checkHtmlComplete",
+            "scope": "standard",
+            "inputs": {
+              "file": "index.html"
+            }
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "assemble",
+        "maxAttempts": 4
+      },
+      "next": "evaluate",
+      "toolPolicy": {
+        "disallowBuiltinToolsets": [
+          "ai-apps",
+          "archives",
+          "artifacts",
+          "audio",
+          "browser-automation",
+          "code-execution",
+          "craftbooks",
+          "data-tables",
+          "entity-intel",
+          "git",
+          "image-intel",
+          "images",
+          "role-delegation",
+          "role-delegation-escalation",
+          "security-intel",
+          "team-management",
+          "videos",
+          "web"
+        ],
+        "outputMedium": "workspace",
+        "additionalOutputMedia": [
+          "task-note"
+        ]
+      }
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "evaluate",
+      "name": "Evaluate",
+      "description": "Grade the deliverable against every acceptance criterion. All pass → finish; any fail → loop back and fix the gap.",
+      "prompt": "1) Open assets/ and confirm at least 5 variant files exist matching the brief's filenames (PASS/FAIL). 2) Open index.html and visually verify each variant renders, including the reversed mark on a dark panel and the 32px icon row. 3) Check coherence: do all variants read as the SAME mark (same geometry/concept)? 4) Check the palette matches the brief's exact hex list. 5) Confirm the icon is legible at 32px. 6) Write PASS/FAIL per criterion. Any FAIL → loop back to generate (for missing/wrong marks) or assemble (for presentation issues).\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: \"assemble\" })` 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": "index.html"
+        }
+      ],
+      "next": "assemble",
+      "toolPolicy": {
+        "disallowBuiltinToolsets": [
+          "ai-apps",
+          "archives",
+          "artifacts",
+          "audio",
+          "browser-automation",
+          "code-execution",
+          "craftbooks",
+          "data-tables",
+          "entity-intel",
+          "git",
+          "image-intel",
+          "images",
+          "role-delegation",
+          "role-delegation-escalation",
+          "security-intel",
+          "team-management",
+          "videos",
+          "web",
+          "workspace-fs-write"
+        ],
+        "outputMedium": "task-note"
+      }
+    },
+    {
+      "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,
+      "toolPolicy": {
+        "disallowBuiltinToolsets": [
+          "ai-apps",
+          "archives",
+          "artifacts",
+          "audio",
+          "browser-automation",
+          "code-execution",
+          "craftbooks",
+          "data-tables",
+          "entity-intel",
+          "git",
+          "image-intel",
+          "images",
+          "role-delegation",
+          "role-delegation-escalation",
+          "security-intel",
+          "team-management",
+          "videos",
+          "web",
+          "workspace-fs-write"
+        ],
+        "outputMedium": "task-note"
+      }
+    }
+  ],
+  "version": "1.0.3",
+  "releasedAt": "2026-09-01T20:00:00Z",
+  "minGezelVersion": "1.26233"
+}

package/data/craftbook-templates/lo/logo-set/versions/1.0.3/test.json

@@ -0,0 +1,103 @@
+{
+  "schemaVersion": 1,
+  "title": "Logo & Variant Set smoke eval",
+  "objective": "Self-contained smoke eval for the Logo & Variant Set craftbook using the media generic harness.",
+  "tags": [
+    "media"
+  ],
+  "prompt": "Our media files are all listd in source/media-index.csv. Can you put together the production plan for them as media-plan.json?",
+  "setup": {
+    "projectName": "Logo & Variant Set Eval",
+    "about": "Self-contained eval project for logo-set. Seeded inputs are under workspace/source or workspace/fixtures; final deliverable is workspace/media-plan.json.",
+    "missionObjectives": "Use the Logo & Variant Set craftbook/template, read the seeded local fixtures, and write media-plan.json without network calls, real credentials, or live services.",
+    "files": [
+      {
+        "path": "source/brief.md",
+        "content": "# Logo & Variant Set 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: logo-set - Logo & Variant Set.\n"
+      },
+      {
+        "path": "source/media-index.csv",
+        "content": "filename,type,duration_or_size,notes\npilot-interview.wav,audio,00:02:15,mentions response time and status silence\nreturns-desk.png,image,1600x900,shows intake form and photo evidence step\nlaunch-clip.mp4,video,00:01:05,shows barcode exception handling\n"
+      }
+    ],
+    "worker": {
+      "name": "Jules",
+      "role": "Producer"
+    }
+  },
+  "mocks": [],
+  "success": {
+    "summary": "media-plan.json is a valid JSON media-production manifest grounded in seeded fixture metadata.",
+    "deliverables": [
+      {
+        "path": "media-plan.json",
+        "kind": "json",
+        "minBytes": 700,
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "sniff",
+            "file": "media-plan.json",
+            "sniff": "json-valid"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "media-plan.json",
+            "pattern": "pilot-interview\\.wav|returns-desk\\.png|launch-clip\\.mp4",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "media-plan.json",
+            "pattern": "outputs|assets|steps|cues|verification",
+            "flags": "i"
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "media-plan.json",
+            "pattern": "accessibility|alt|caption|transcript|metadata",
+            "flags": "i"
+          }
+        ]
+      }
+    ]
+  },
+  "rubric": {
+    "artifact": {
+      "path": "media-plan.json",
+      "kind": "json"
+    },
+    "axes": [
+      {
+        "name": "completeness",
+        "description": "The manifest covers sources, outputs, and processing steps end to end."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "grounding",
+        "description": "Only seeded media fixtures are referenced, with faithful metadata."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "accessibility",
+        "description": "Alt text, captions, or transcripts are planned wherever the class requires."
+      },
+      {
+        "name": "precision",
+        "description": "Timestamps, crops, and cues are specific enough to execute."
+      }
+    ]
+  },
+  "qualityFocus": [
+    "media fixture handling",
+    "structured manifest",
+    "verification metadata"
+  ],
+  "extensions": {
+    "legacySimulators": [
+      {
+        "id": "logo-set-media-fixtures",
+        "kind": "data-source",
+        "status": "implemented",
+        "description": "Seeded local media index replacing real audio, video, image generation, and external media metadata services."
+      }
+    ]
+  }
+}

package/data/craftbook-templates/ma/market-scan/versions/1.0.3/craftbook.json

@@ -0,0 +1,279 @@
+{
+  "id": "market-scan",
+  "name": "Market & Landscape Scan",
+  "description": "Survey a market or landscape and write a scan that sizes it, maps the players, and surfaces trends: a planner scopes the market boundary and the lenses (size, segments, players, trends, drivers, risks), a researcher gathers sized figures and landscape facts with sources, and a copywriter writes a structured landscape report. The ordering matters because a scan without a defined boundary mixes adjacent markets and inflates numbers, and one without locked lenses skips the dimensions a decision-maker needs; fixing boundary and lenses first keeps the scan focused and comparable. Use this for market landscape scans, industry overviews, TAM/segmentation reads, trend analyses, and 'give me the lay of the land in X' requests.\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 scan (planner) — define the market boundary + analysis lenses → gated on artifact `{{workPath}}/scope.md` (markdown-notes)\n2. Gather landscape facts (researcher) — sized figures, players, and trends with sources → gated on artifact `{{workPath}}/findings.md` (markdown-notes)\n3. Write the scan (copywriter) — structured landscape report from the findings → gated on artifact `{{workPath}}/scan.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": [
+    "market scan",
+    "landscape overview",
+    "lay of the land",
+    "industry analysis",
+    "market sizing and trends"
+  ],
+  "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}}"
+      }
+    }
+  },
+  "steps": [
+    {
+      "id": "scope",
+      "name": "Scope the scan",
+      "description": "define the market boundary + analysis lenses",
+      "prompt": "1. Define the market boundary precisely: what product/service category, geography, and timeframe — and state explicitly what adjacent markets are excluded. 2. Lock the lenses the scan will cover (e.g. market size & growth, key segments, major players/share, demand drivers, trends, risks/headwinds) and what each must contain. 3. Decide the report structure and where sized figures come from (state that figures must cite a source and a date). 4. Write an acceptance-criteria checklist (e.g. 'market boundary is stated and exclusions named', 'each lens has its own section', 'every sized figure cites a source + date', 'at least N notable players are mapped', 'a trends section with 3+ named trends exists'). 5. Record decisions. Call write_task_note with the boundary, lenses, and checklist; write the same to {{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": "research",
+      "toolPolicy": {
+        "disallowBuiltinToolsets": [
+          "ai-apps",
+          "archives",
+          "audio",
+          "browser-automation",
+          "code-execution",
+          "craftbooks",
+          "data-tables",
+          "entity-intel",
+          "git",
+          "image-intel",
+          "images",
+          "role-delegation",
+          "role-delegation-escalation",
+          "security-intel",
+          "team-management",
+          "videos",
+          "web",
+          "workspace-fs-write"
+        ],
+        "outputMedium": "artifact",
+        "additionalOutputMedia": [
+          "task-note"
+        ]
+      }
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "research",
+      "name": "Gather landscape facts",
+      "description": "sized figures, players, and trends with sources",
+      "prompt": "1. For each locked lens, gather concrete facts into {{workPath}}/findings.md: market size/growth figures (with the figure, the year, and the source [n]), the key segments, the notable players with what each is known for, the demand drivers, and 3+ named trends with evidence. 2. Cite every sized figure to a dated source; prefer recent, reputable data and reconcile conflicting numbers by noting the range and which source you trust. 3. Map at least the required number of players, each with a one-line positioning. 4. Flag estimates vs hard figures, and mark anything unverifiable as UNVERIFIED. Good looks like a findings file where each lens already has its evidence. Do not write the narrative yet.\n\nThe deliverable `{{workPath}}/findings.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": "researcher",
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "{{workPath}}/findings.md",
+        "minBytes": 1,
+        "sniff": "nonempty",
+        "artifact": true
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/findings.md",
+            "bytes": 120,
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "sniff",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/findings.md",
+            "sniff": "nonempty",
+            "artifact": true
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "research",
+        "maxAttempts": 3
+      },
+      "next": "write",
+      "toolPolicy": {
+        "disallowBuiltinToolsets": [
+          "ai-apps",
+          "archives",
+          "audio",
+          "browser-automation",
+          "code-execution",
+          "craftbooks",
+          "data-tables",
+          "entity-intel",
+          "git",
+          "image-intel",
+          "images",
+          "role-delegation",
+          "role-delegation-escalation",
+          "security-intel",
+          "team-management",
+          "videos",
+          "workspace-fs-write"
+        ],
+        "outputMedium": "artifact"
+      }
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "write",
+      "name": "Write the scan",
+      "description": "structured landscape report from the findings",
+      "prompt": "1. Write {{workPath}}/scan.md with a section per locked lens: an opening that states the market boundary and exclusions, then size & growth, segments, players (a short table or list), drivers, trends, and risks. 2. Every sized figure carries its citation [n] and year; never state a number without a source. 3. Lead with the headline read of the market, then the supporting detail. 4. Close with a short 'so what' takeaway. 5. Add a References list from {{workPath}}/findings.md so every [n] resolves. 6. On a loop-back, fix only the named gaps. 7. Call write_task_note with the scan path and which criteria now pass.\n\nBefore working, open the artifact input `{{workPath}}/findings.md` with `read_artifact`; do not look for it in the workspace.\n\nThe deliverable `{{workPath}}/scan.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",
+      "consumes": [
+        {
+          "file": "{{workPath}}/findings.md",
+          "artifact": true
+        }
+      ],
+      "advanceWhen": {
+        "file": "{{workPath}}/scan.md",
+        "minBytes": 1,
+        "sniff": "nonempty",
+        "artifact": true
+      },
+      "gate": {
+        "at": "completion",
+        "checks": [
+          {
+            "kind": "minBytes",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/scan.md",
+            "bytes": 1500,
+            "artifact": true
+          },
+          {
+            "kind": "contains",
+            "file": "{{workPath}}/scan.md",
+            "pattern": "(?:^|\\n)#{1,3}\\s+\\S",
+            "flags": "i",
+            "label": "at least one markdown heading",
+            "artifact": true
+          }
+        ],
+        "onReject": "write",
+        "maxAttempts": 4
+      },
+      "next": "evaluate",
+      "toolPolicy": {
+        "disallowBuiltinToolsets": [
+          "ai-apps",
+          "archives",
+          "audio",
+          "browser-automation",
+          "code-execution",
+          "craftbooks",
+          "data-tables",
+          "entity-intel",
+          "git",
+          "image-intel",
+          "images",
+          "role-delegation",
+          "role-delegation-escalation",
+          "security-intel",
+          "team-management",
+          "videos",
+          "web",
+          "workspace-fs-write"
+        ],
+        "outputMedium": "artifact",
+        "additionalOutputMedia": [
+          "task-note"
+        ]
+      }
+    },
+    {
+      "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}}/scan.md and check EACH criterion PASS/FAIL: (1) the market boundary and exclusions are stated; (2) every locked lens has its own section; (3) every sized figure carries a source and year (spot-check 3 against {{workPath}}/findings.md); (4) at least the required number of players are mapped with positioning; (5) a trends section names 3+ trends with evidence; (6) a 'so what' takeaway exists. A scan that mixes adjacent markets or states unsourced figures FAILS.\n\nThe deliverable lives in the project's artifacts drawer — open `{{workPath}}/scan.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: \"write\" })` 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}}/scan.md",
+          "artifact": true
+        }
+      ],
+      "next": "write",
+      "toolPolicy": {
+        "disallowBuiltinToolsets": [
+          "ai-apps",
+          "archives",
+          "audio",
+          "browser-automation",
+          "code-execution",
+          "craftbooks",
+          "data-tables",
+          "entity-intel",
+          "git",
+          "image-intel",
+          "images",
+          "role-delegation",
+          "role-delegation-escalation",
+          "security-intel",
+          "team-management",
+          "videos",
+          "web",
+          "workspace-fs-write"
+        ],
+        "outputMedium": "task-note"
+      }
+    },
+    {
+      "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,
+      "toolPolicy": {
+        "disallowBuiltinToolsets": [
+          "ai-apps",
+          "archives",
+          "artifacts",
+          "audio",
+          "browser-automation",
+          "code-execution",
+          "craftbooks",
+          "data-tables",
+          "entity-intel",
+          "git",
+          "image-intel",
+          "images",
+          "role-delegation",
+          "role-delegation-escalation",
+          "security-intel",
+          "team-management",
+          "videos",
+          "web",
+          "workspace-fs-write"
+        ],
+        "outputMedium": "task-note"
+      }
+    }
+  ],
+  "version": "1.0.3",
+  "releasedAt": "2026-09-01T20:00:00Z",
+  "minGezelVersion": "1.26233"
+}