@bhargavvc/sdd-cc 1.30.1 → 1.42.3

package/sdd/workflows/import.md

@@ -0,0 +1,253 @@
+# Import Workflow
+
+External plan ingestion with conflict detection and agent delegation.
+
+- **--from**: Import external plan → conflict detection → write PLAN.md → validate via sdd-plan-checker
+
+Future: `--prd` mode (PRD extraction into PROJECT.md + REQUIREMENTS.md + ROADMAP.md) is planned for a follow-up PR.
+
+---
+
+<step name="banner">
+
+Display the stage banner:
+
+```
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+ SDD ► IMPORT
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+```
+
+</step>
+
+<step name="parse_arguments">
+
+Parse `$ARGUMENTS` to determine the execution mode:
+
+- If `--from` is present: extract FILEPATH (the next token after `--from`), set MODE=plan
+- If `--prd` is present: display message that `--prd` is not yet implemented and exit:
+  ```
+  SDD > --prd mode is planned for a future release. Use --from to import plan files.
+  ```
+- If neither flag is found: display usage and exit:
+
+```
+Usage: /sdd:import --from <path>
+
+  --from <path>   Import an external plan file into SDD format
+```
+
+**Validate the file path:**
+
+Verify the path does not contain traversal sequences and the file exists:
+
+```bash
+case "{FILEPATH}" in
+  *..* ) echo "SECURITY_ERROR: path contains traversal sequence"; exit 1 ;;
+esac
+test -f "{FILEPATH}" || echo "FILE_NOT_FOUND"
+```
+
+If FILE_NOT_FOUND: display error and exit:
+
+```
+╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
+║  ERROR                                                       ║
+╚══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝
+
+File not found: {FILEPATH}
+
+**To fix:** Verify the file path and try again.
+```
+
+</step>
+
+---
+
+## Path A: MODE=plan (--from)
+
+<step name="plan_load_context">
+
+Load project context for conflict detection:
+
+1. Read `.planning/ROADMAP.md` — extract phase structure, phase numbers, dependencies
+2. Read `.planning/PROJECT.md` — extract project constraints, tech stack, scope boundaries.
+   **If PROJECT.md does not exist:** skip constraint checks that rely on it and display:
+   ```
+   SDD > Note: No PROJECT.md found. Conflict checks against project constraints will be skipped.
+   ```
+3. Read `.planning/REQUIREMENTS.md` — extract existing requirements for overlap and contradiction checks.
+   **If REQUIREMENTS.md does not exist:** skip requirement conflict checks and continue.
+4. Glob for all CONTEXT.md files across phase directories:
+   ```bash
+   find .planning/phases/ -name "*-CONTEXT.md" -o -name "CONTEXT.md" 2>/dev/null
+   ```
+   Read each CONTEXT.md found — extract locked decisions (any decision in a `<decisions>` block)
+
+Store loaded context for conflict detection in the next step.
+
+</step>
+
+<step name="plan_read_input">
+
+Read the imported file at FILEPATH.
+
+Determine the format:
+- **SDD PLAN.md format**: Has YAML frontmatter with `phase:`, `plan:`, `type:` fields
+- **Freeform document**: Any other format (markdown spec, design doc, task list, etc.)
+
+Extract from the imported content:
+- **Phase target**: Which phase this plan belongs to (from frontmatter or inferred from content)
+- **Plan objectives**: What the plan aims to accomplish
+- **Tasks listed**: Individual work items described in the plan
+- **Files modified**: Any files mentioned as targets
+- **Dependencies**: Any referenced prerequisites
+
+</step>
+
+<step name="plan_conflict_detection">
+
+Run conflict checks against the loaded project context. The report format, severity semantics, and safety-gate behavior are defined by `references/doc-conflict-engine.md` — read it and apply it here. Operation noun: `import`.
+
+### BLOCKER checks (any one prevents import):
+
+- Plan targets a phase number that does not exist in ROADMAP.md → [BLOCKER]
+- Plan specifies a tech stack that contradicts PROJECT.md constraints → [BLOCKER]
+- Plan contradicts a locked decision in any CONTEXT.md `<decisions>` block → [BLOCKER]
+- Plan contradicts an existing requirement in REQUIREMENTS.md → [BLOCKER]
+
+### WARNING checks (user confirmation required):
+
+- Plan partially overlaps existing requirement coverage in REQUIREMENTS.md → [WARNING]
+- Plan has `depends_on` referencing plans that are not yet complete → [WARNING]
+- Plan modifies files that overlap with existing incomplete plans → [WARNING]
+- Plan phase number conflicts with existing phase numbering in ROADMAP.md → [WARNING]
+
+### INFO checks (informational, no action needed):
+
+- Plan uses a library not currently in the project tech stack → [INFO]
+- Plan adds a new phase to the ROADMAP.md structure → [INFO]
+
+Render the full Conflict Detection Report using the format in `references/doc-conflict-engine.md`.
+
+**If any [BLOCKER] exists:** apply the safety gate from the reference — exit WITHOUT writing any files. No PLAN.md is written when blockers exist.
+
+**If only WARNINGS and/or INFO (no blockers):**
+
+**Text mode (`workflow.text_mode: true` in config or `--text` flag):** Set `TEXT_MODE=true` if `--text` is present in `$ARGUMENTS` OR `text_mode` from init JSON is `true`. When TEXT_MODE is active, replace every `AskUserQuestion` call with a plain-text numbered list and ask the user to type their choice number. This is required for non-Claude runtimes (OpenAI Codex, Gemini CLI, etc.) where `AskUserQuestion` is not available.
+
+Ask via AskUserQuestion using the approve-revise-abort pattern (see `references/gate-prompts.md`):
+- question: "Review the warnings above. Proceed with import?"
+- header: "Approve?"
+- options: Approve | Abort
+
+If user selects "Abort": exit cleanly with message "Import cancelled."
+
+</step>
+
+<step name="plan_convert">
+
+Convert the imported content to SDD PLAN.md format.
+
+Ensure the PLAN.md has all required frontmatter fields:
+```yaml
+---
+phase: "{NN}-{slug}"
+plan: "{NN}-{MM}"
+type: "feature|refactor|config|test|docs"
+wave: 1
+depends_on: []
+files_modified: []
+autonomous: true
+must_haves:
+  truths: []
+  artifacts: []
+---
+```
+
+**Reject PBR naming conventions in source content:**
+If the imported plan references PBR plan naming (e.g., `PLAN-01.md`, `plan-01.md`), rename all references to SDD `{NN}-{MM}-PLAN.md` convention during conversion.
+
+Apply SDD naming convention for the output filename:
+- Format: `{NN}-{MM}-PLAN.md` (e.g., `04-01-PLAN.md`)
+- NEVER use `PLAN-01.md`, `plan-01.md`, or any other format
+- NN = phase number (zero-padded), MM = plan number within the phase (zero-padded)
+
+Determine the target directory by querying `init.phase-op` for the phase number extracted in `plan_read_input`. This ensures the `project_code` prefix from `.planning/config.json` is applied:
+
+```bash
+INIT=$(sdd-sdk query init.phase-op "{NN}")
+if [[ "$INIT" == @file:* ]]; then INIT=$(cat "${INIT#@file:}"); fi
+expected_phase_dir=$(echo "$INIT" | node -e "process.stdout.write(JSON.parse(require('fs').readFileSync('/dev/stdin','utf8')).expected_phase_dir)")
+```
+
+If the directory does not exist, create it:
+```bash
+mkdir -p "${expected_phase_dir}"
+```
+
+Set `phase_dir="${expected_phase_dir}"` for use in subsequent steps.
+
+Write the PLAN.md file to the target directory.
+
+</step>
+
+<step name="plan_validate">
+
+Delegate validation to sdd-plan-checker:
+
+```
+Agent({
+  subagent_type: "sdd-plan-checker",
+  prompt: "Validate: .planning/phases/{phase}/{plan}-PLAN.md — check frontmatter completeness, task structure, and SDD conventions. Report any issues."
+})
+```
+
+> **ORCHESTRATOR RULE — CODEX RUNTIME**: After calling Agent() above, stop working on this task immediately. Do not read more files, edit code, or run tests related to this task while the subagent is active. Wait for the subagent to return its result. This prevents duplicate work, conflicting edits, and wasted context. Only resume when the subagent result is available.
+
+If the checker returns errors:
+- Display the errors to the user
+- Ask the user to resolve issues before the plan is considered imported
+- Do not delete the written file — the user can fix and re-validate manually
+
+If the checker returns clean:
+- Display: "Plan validation passed"
+
+</step>
+
+<step name="plan_finalize">
+
+Update `.planning/ROADMAP.md` to reflect the new plan:
+- Add the plan to the Plans list under the correct phase section
+- Include the plan name and description
+
+Update `.planning/STATE.md` if appropriate (e.g., increment total plan count).
+
+Commit the imported plan and updated files:
+```bash
+sdd-sdk query commit "docs({phase}): import plan from {basename FILEPATH}" --files .planning/phases/{phase}/{plan}-PLAN.md .planning/ROADMAP.md
+```
+
+Display completion:
+```
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+ SDD ► IMPORT COMPLETE
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+```
+
+Show: plan filename written, phase directory, validation result, next steps.
+
+</step>
+
+---
+
+## Anti-Patterns
+
+Do NOT:
+- Violate the shared conflict-engine contract in `references/doc-conflict-engine.md` (no markdown tables, no new severity labels, no bypass of the BLOCKER gate)
+- Write PLAN.md files as `PLAN-01.md` or `plan-01.md` — always use `{NN}-{MM}-PLAN.md`
+- Use `pbr:plan-checker` or `pbr:planner` — use `sdd-plan-checker` and `sdd-planner`
+- Write `.planning/.active-skill` — this is a PBR pattern with no SDD equivalent
+- Reference `pbr-tools`, `pbr:`, or `PLAN-BUILD-RUN` anywhere
+- Write any PLAN.md file when blockers exist — the safety gate must hold
+- Skip path validation on the --from file argument

package/sdd/workflows/inbox.md

@@ -0,0 +1,387 @@
+<purpose>
+Triage and review all open GitHub issues and PRs against project contribution templates.
+Produces a structured report showing compliance status for each item, flags missing
+required fields, identifies label gaps, and optionally takes action (label, comment, close).
+</purpose>
+
+<required_reading>
+Before starting, read these project files to understand the review criteria:
+- `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.yml` — required fields for feature issues
+- `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/enhancement.yml` — required fields for enhancement issues
+- `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/chore.yml` — required fields for chore issues
+- `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml` — required fields for bug reports
+- `.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE/feature.md` — required checklist for feature PRs
+- `.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE/enhancement.md` — required checklist for enhancement PRs
+- `.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE/fix.md` — required checklist for fix PRs
+- `CONTRIBUTING.md` — the issue-first rule and approval gates
+</required_reading>
+
+<process>
+
+<step name="preflight">
+Verify prerequisites:
+
+1. **`gh` CLI available and authenticated?**
+   ```bash
+   which gh && gh auth status 2>&1
+   ```
+   If not available: print setup instructions and exit.
+
+2. **Detect repository:**
+   If `--repo` flag provided, use that. Otherwise:
+   ```bash
+   gh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q '.nameWithOwner' 2>/dev/null
+   ```
+   If no repo detected: error — must be in a git repo with a GitHub remote.
+
+3. **Parse flags:**
+   - `--issues` → set REVIEW_ISSUES=true, REVIEW_PRS=false
+   - `--prs` → set REVIEW_ISSUES=false, REVIEW_PRS=true
+   - `--label` → set AUTO_LABEL=true
+   - `--close-incomplete` → set AUTO_CLOSE=true
+   - Default (no flags): review both issues and PRs, report only (no auto-actions)
+</step>
+
+<step name="fetch_issues">
+Skip if REVIEW_ISSUES=false.
+
+Fetch all open issues:
+```bash
+gh issue list --state open --json number,title,labels,body,author,createdAt,updatedAt --limit 100
+```
+
+For each issue, classify by labels and body content:
+
+| Label/Pattern | Type | Template |
+|---|---|---|
+| `feature-request` | Feature | feature_request.yml |
+| `enhancement` | Enhancement | enhancement.yml |
+| `bug` | Bug | bug_report.yml |
+| `type: chore` | Chore | chore.yml |
+| No matching label | Unknown | Flag for manual triage |
+
+If an issue has no type label, attempt to classify from the body content:
+- Contains "### Feature name" → likely Feature
+- Contains "### What existing feature" → likely Enhancement
+- Contains "### What happened?" → likely Bug
+- Contains "### What is the maintenance task?" → likely Chore
+- Cannot determine → mark as `needs-triage`
+</step>
+
+<step name="review_issues">
+Skip if REVIEW_ISSUES=false.
+
+For each classified issue, review against its template requirements.
+
+**Feature Request Review Checklist:**
+- [ ] Pre-submission checklist present (4 checkboxes)
+- [ ] Feature name provided
+- [ ] Type of addition selected
+- [ ] Problem statement filled (not placeholder text)
+- [ ] What is being added described with examples
+- [ ] Full scope of changes listed (files created/modified/systems)
+- [ ] User stories present (minimum 2)
+- [ ] Acceptance criteria present (testable conditions)
+- [ ] Applicable runtimes selected
+- [ ] Breaking changes assessment present
+- [ ] Maintenance burden described
+- [ ] Alternatives considered (not empty)
+- **Label check:** Has `needs-review` label? Has `approved-feature` label?
+- **Gate check:** If PR exists linking this issue, does issue have `approved-feature`?
+
+**Enhancement Review Checklist:**
+- [ ] Pre-submission checklist present (4 checkboxes)
+- [ ] What is being improved identified
+- [ ] Current behavior described with examples
+- [ ] Proposed behavior described with examples
+- [ ] Reason and benefit articulated (not vague)
+- [ ] Scope of changes listed
+- [ ] Breaking changes assessed
+- [ ] Alternatives considered
+- [ ] Area affected selected
+- **Label check:** Has `needs-review` label? Has `approved-enhancement` label?
+- **Gate check:** If PR exists linking this issue, does issue have `approved-enhancement`?
+
+**Bug Report Review Checklist:**
+- [ ] SDD Version provided
+- [ ] Runtime selected
+- [ ] OS selected
+- [ ] Node.js version provided
+- [ ] Description of what happened
+- [ ] Expected behavior described
+- [ ] Steps to reproduce provided
+- [ ] Frequency selected
+- [ ] Severity/impact selected
+- [ ] PII checklist confirmed
+- **Label check:** Has `needs-triage` or `confirmed-bug` label?
+
+**Chore Review Checklist:**
+- [ ] Pre-submission checklist confirmed (no user-facing changes)
+- [ ] Maintenance task described
+- [ ] Type of maintenance selected
+- [ ] Current state described with specifics
+- [ ] Proposed work listed
+- [ ] Acceptance criteria present
+- [ ] Area affected selected
+- **Label check:** Has `needs-triage` label?
+
+**Scoring:** For each issue, calculate a completeness percentage:
+- Count required fields present vs. total required fields
+- Score = (present / total) * 100
+- Status: COMPLETE (100%), MOSTLY COMPLETE (75-99%), INCOMPLETE (50-74%), REJECT (<50%)
+</step>
+
+<step name="fetch_prs">
+Skip if REVIEW_PRS=false.
+
+Fetch all open PRs:
+```bash
+gh pr list --state open --json number,title,labels,body,author,headRefName,baseRefName,isDraft,createdAt,reviewDecision,statusCheckRollup --limit 100
+```
+
+For each PR, classify by body content and linked issue:
+
+| Body Pattern | Type | Template |
+|---|---|---|
+| Contains "## Feature PR" or "## Feature summary" | Feature PR | feature.md |
+| Contains "## Enhancement PR" or "## What this enhancement improves" | Enhancement PR | enhancement.md |
+| Contains "## Fix PR" or "## What was broken" | Fix PR | fix.md |
+| Uses default template | Wrong Template | Flag — must use typed template |
+| Cannot determine | Unknown | Flag for manual review |
+
+Also check for linked issues:
+```bash
+gh pr view {number} --json body -q '.body' | grep -oE '(Closes|Fixes|Resolves) #[0-9]+'
+```
+</step>
+
+<step name="review_prs">
+Skip if REVIEW_PRS=false.
+
+For each classified PR, review against its template requirements.
+
+**Feature PR Review Checklist:**
+- [ ] Uses feature PR template (not default)
+- [ ] Issue linked with `Closes #NNN`
+- [ ] Linked issue exists and has `approved-feature` label
+- [ ] Feature summary present
+- [ ] New files table filled
+- [ ] Modified files table filled
+- [ ] Implementation notes present
+- [ ] Spec compliance checklist present (acceptance criteria from issue)
+- [ ] Test coverage described
+- [ ] Platforms tested checked (macOS, Windows, Linux)
+- [ ] Runtimes tested checked
+- [ ] Scope confirmation checked
+- [ ] Full checklist completed
+- [ ] Breaking changes section filled
+- **CI check:** All status checks passing?
+- **Review check:** Has review approval?
+
+**Enhancement PR Review Checklist:**
+- [ ] Uses enhancement PR template (not default)
+- [ ] Issue linked with `Closes #NNN`
+- [ ] Linked issue exists and has `approved-enhancement` label
+- [ ] What is improved described
+- [ ] Before/after provided
+- [ ] Implementation approach described
+- [ ] Verification method described
+- [ ] Platforms tested checked
+- [ ] Runtimes tested checked
+- [ ] Scope confirmation checked
+- [ ] Full checklist completed
+- [ ] Breaking changes section filled
+- **CI check:** All status checks passing?
+
+**Fix PR Review Checklist:**
+- [ ] Uses fix PR template (not default)
+- [ ] Issue linked with `Fixes #NNN`
+- [ ] Linked issue exists and has `confirmed-bug` label
+- [ ] What was broken described
+- [ ] What the fix does described
+- [ ] Root cause explained
+- [ ] Verification method described
+- [ ] Regression test added (or explained why not)
+- [ ] Platforms tested checked
+- [ ] Runtimes tested checked
+- [ ] Full checklist completed
+- [ ] Breaking changes section filled
+- **CI check:** All status checks passing?
+
+**Cross-cutting PR Checks (all types):**
+- [ ] PR title is descriptive (not just "fix" or "update")
+- [ ] One concern per PR (not mixing fix + enhancement)
+- [ ] No unrelated formatting changes visible in diff
+- [ ] `.changeset/*.md` fragment added for user-facing changes (or `no-changelog` label applied)
+- [ ] Not using `--no-verify` or skipping hooks
+
+**Scoring:** Same as issues — completeness percentage per PR.
+</step>
+
+<step name="check_gates">
+Cross-reference issues and PRs to enforce the issue-first rule:
+
+For each open PR:
+1. Extract linked issue number from body
+2. If no linked issue: **GATE VIOLATION** — PR has no issue
+3. If linked issue exists, check its labels:
+   - Feature PR → issue must have `approved-feature`
+   - Enhancement PR → issue must have `approved-enhancement`
+   - Fix PR → issue must have `confirmed-bug`
+4. If label is missing: **GATE VIOLATION** — PR opened before approval
+
+Report gate violations prominently — these are the most important findings because
+the project auto-closes PRs without proper approval gates.
+</step>
+
+<step name="generate_report">
+Produce a structured triage report:
+
+```
+===================================================================
+  SDD INBOX TRIAGE — {repo} — {date}
+===================================================================
+
+SUMMARY
+-------
+Open issues: {count}    Open PRs: {count}
+  Features:    {n}        Feature PRs:      {n}
+  Enhancements:{n}        Enhancement PRs:  {n}
+  Bugs:        {n}        Fix PRs:          {n}
+  Chores:      {n}        Wrong template:   {n}
+  Unclassified:{n}        No linked issue:  {n}
+
+GATE VIOLATIONS (action required)
+---------------------------------
+{For each violation:}
+  PR #{number}: {title}
+    Problem: {description — e.g., "No approved-feature label on linked issue #45"}
+    Action:  {what to do — e.g., "Close PR or approve issue #45 first"}
+
+ISSUES NEEDING ATTENTION
+------------------------
+{For each issue sorted by completeness score, lowest first:}
+  #{number} [{type}] {title}
+    Score: {percentage}% complete
+    Missing: {list of missing required fields}
+    Labels: {current labels} → Suggested: {recommended labels}
+    Age: {days since created}
+
+PRS NEEDING ATTENTION
+---------------------
+{For each PR sorted by completeness score, lowest first:}
+  #{number} [{type}] {title}
+    Score: {percentage}% complete
+    Missing: {list of missing checklist items}
+    CI: {passing/failing/pending}
+    Review: {approved/changes_requested/none}
+    Linked issue: #{issue_number} ({issue_status})
+    Age: {days since created}
+
+READY TO MERGE
+--------------
+{PRs that are 100% complete, CI passing, approved:}
+  #{number} {title} — ready
+
+STALE ITEMS (>30 days, no activity)
+------------------------------------
+{Issues and PRs with no updates in 30+ days}
+
+===================================================================
+```
+
+Write this report to `.planning/INBOX-TRIAGE.md` if a `.planning/` directory exists,
+otherwise print to console only.
+</step>
+
+<step name="auto_actions">
+Only execute if `--label` or `--close-incomplete` flags were set.
+
+**If --label:**
+For each issue/PR where labels are missing or incorrect:
+```bash
+gh issue edit {number} --add-label "{label}"
+```
+Or:
+```bash
+gh pr edit {number} --add-label "{label}"
+```
+
+Label recommendations:
+- Unclassified issues → add `needs-triage`
+- Feature issues without review → add `needs-review`
+- Enhancement issues without review → add `needs-review`
+- Bug reports without triage → add `needs-triage`
+- PRs with gate violations → add `gate-violation`
+
+**If --close-incomplete:**
+For issues scoring below 50% completeness:
+```bash
+gh issue close {number} --comment "Closed by SDD inbox triage: this issue is missing required fields per the issue template. Missing: {list}. Please reopen with a complete submission. See CONTRIBUTING.md for requirements."
+```
+
+For PRs with gate violations:
+```bash
+gh pr close {number} --comment "Closed by SDD inbox triage: this PR does not meet the issue-first requirement. {specific violation}. See CONTRIBUTING.md for the correct process."
+```
+
+Always confirm with the user before closing anything:
+
+**Text mode (`workflow.text_mode: true` in config or `--text` flag):** Set `TEXT_MODE=true` if `--text` is present in `$ARGUMENTS` OR `text_mode` from init JSON is `true`. When TEXT_MODE is active, replace every `AskUserQuestion` call with a plain-text numbered list and ask the user to type their choice number. This is required for non-Claude runtimes (OpenAI Codex, Gemini CLI, etc.) where `AskUserQuestion` is not available.
+
+```
+AskUserQuestion:
+  question: "Found {N} items to close. Review the list above — proceed with closing?"
+  options:
+    - label: "Close all"
+      description: "Close all {N} non-compliant items with explanation comments"
+    - label: "Let me pick"
+      description: "I'll choose which ones to close"
+    - label: "Skip"
+      description: "Don't close anything — report only"
+```
+</step>
+
+<step name="report">
+```
+───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+
+## Inbox Triage Complete
+
+Reviewed: {issue_count} issues, {pr_count} PRs
+Gate violations: {violation_count}
+Ready to merge: {ready_count}
+Needing attention: {attention_count}
+Stale (30+ days): {stale_count}
+{If report saved: "Report saved to .planning/INBOX-TRIAGE.md"}
+
+Next steps:
+- Review gate violations first — these block the contribution pipeline
+- Address incomplete submissions (comment or close)
+- Merge ready PRs
+- Triage unclassified issues
+
+───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+```
+</step>
+
+</process>
+
+<offer_next>
+After triage:
+
+- /sdd:review — Run cross-AI peer review on a specific phase plan
+- /sdd:ship — Create a PR from completed work
+- /sdd:progress — See overall project state
+- /sdd:inbox --label — Re-run with auto-labeling enabled
+</offer_next>
+
+<success_criteria>
+- [ ] All open issues fetched and classified by type
+- [ ] Each issue reviewed against its template requirements
+- [ ] All open PRs fetched and classified by type
+- [ ] Each PR reviewed against its template checklist
+- [ ] Issue-first gate violations identified
+- [ ] Structured report generated with scores and action items
+- [ ] Auto-actions executed only when flagged and user-confirmed
+</success_criteria>