@boyingliu01/xp-gate 0.18.5 → 0.19.0

package/plugins/claude-code/skills/clipboard-vision/scripts/clipboard-vision.sh

@@ -0,0 +1,137 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env bash
+set -euo pipefail
+
+api_base="${CLIPBOARD_VISION_API_BASE:-http://127.0.0.1:11434/v1}"
+model="${CLIPBOARD_VISION_MODEL:-}"
+api_key="${CLIPBOARD_VISION_API_KEY:-}"
+max_bytes="${CLIPBOARD_VISION_MAX_BYTES:-10485760}"
+allow_remote=false
+confirm_remote=""
+while [ "$#" -gt 0 ]; do
+  case "$1" in
+    --allow-remote) allow_remote=true; shift ;;
+    --confirm-remote)
+      [ "$#" -ge 2 ] || { printf '%s\n' 'Error: --confirm-remote requires the disclosed token' >&2; exit 2; }
+      confirm_remote="$2"
+      shift 2
+      ;;
+    --help)
+      printf '%s\n' 'Usage: clipboard-vision.sh [--allow-remote --confirm-remote TOKEN]'
+      exit 0
+      ;;
+    *) printf 'Error: unknown option: %s\n' "$1" >&2; exit 2 ;;
+  esac
+done
+
+[ -n "$model" ] || { printf '%s\n' 'Error: CLIPBOARD_VISION_MODEL is required' >&2; exit 2; }
+case "$max_bytes" in *[!0-9]*|'') printf '%s\n' 'Error: CLIPBOARD_VISION_MAX_BYTES must be a positive integer' >&2; exit 2 ;; esac
+[ "$max_bytes" -gt 0 ] || { printf '%s\n' 'Error: CLIPBOARD_VISION_MAX_BYTES must be positive' >&2; exit 2; }
+
+endpoint_info=$(python3 - "$api_base" "$model" <<'PY'
+import hashlib
+import ipaddress
+import sys
+import urllib.parse
+
+url = urllib.parse.urlparse(sys.argv[1])
+if url.scheme not in {"http", "https"} or not url.hostname or url.username or url.password or url.query or url.fragment:
+    raise SystemExit(2)
+try:
+    loopback = ipaddress.ip_address(url.hostname).is_loopback
+except ValueError:
+    loopback = False
+try:
+    port = url.port or (443 if url.scheme == "https" else 80)
+except ValueError:
+    raise SystemExit(2)
+print("local" if loopback else "remote")
+hostname = url.hostname.lower()
+print(hostname)
+display_host = f"[{hostname}]" if ":" in hostname else hostname
+base_path = url.path.rstrip("/")
+effective = f"{url.scheme.lower()}://{display_host}:{port}{base_path}/chat/completions"
+print(effective)
+print(hashlib.sha256(f"{effective}\n{sys.argv[2]}".encode()).hexdigest())
+PY
+) || { printf '%s\n' 'Error: invalid CLIPBOARD_VISION_API_BASE' >&2; exit 2; }
+endpoint_kind=$(printf '%s\n' "$endpoint_info" | sed -n '1p')
+effective_endpoint=$(printf '%s\n' "$endpoint_info" | sed -n '3p')
+expected_confirmation=$(printf '%s\n' "$endpoint_info" | sed -n '4p')
+
+if [ "$endpoint_kind" = remote ]; then
+  printf 'Remote disclosure: clipboard image data will be sent to %s using model %s.\n' "$effective_endpoint" "$model" >&2
+  printf 'Confirmation token for this canonical endpoint and model: %s\n' "$expected_confirmation" >&2
+  if [ "$allow_remote" != true ] || [ "$confirm_remote" != "$expected_confirmation" ]; then
+    printf '%s\n' 'Error: remote endpoint requires --allow-remote and the disclosed --confirm-remote token' >&2
+    exit 2
+  fi
+fi
+
+work_dir=$(mktemp -d "${TMPDIR:-/tmp}/clipboard-vision.XXXXXX")
+image_file="$work_dir/clipboard.png"
+request_file="$work_dir/request.json"
+response_file="$work_dir/response.json"
+auth_file="$work_dir/auth-header"
+cleanup() { rm -rf -- "$work_dir"; }
+trap cleanup EXIT HUP INT TERM
+
+if command -v pngpaste >/dev/null 2>&1; then
+  pngpaste "$image_file"
+elif command -v wl-paste >/dev/null 2>&1; then
+  wl-paste --no-newline --type image/png > "$image_file"
+elif command -v import >/dev/null 2>&1; then
+  import clipboard: "$image_file"
+else
+  printf '%s\n' 'Error: install pngpaste, wl-paste, or ImageMagick import' >&2
+  exit 2
+fi
+
+[ -s "$image_file" ] || { printf '%s\n' 'Error: clipboard does not contain an image' >&2; exit 2; }
+image_bytes=$(wc -c < "$image_file" | tr -d '[:space:]')
+[ "$image_bytes" -le "$max_bytes" ] || { printf 'Error: clipboard image exceeds %s bytes\n' "$max_bytes" >&2; exit 2; }
+
+python3 - "$image_file" "$request_file" "$model" <<'PY'
+import base64
+import json
+import pathlib
+import sys
+
+image = base64.b64encode(pathlib.Path(sys.argv[1]).read_bytes()).decode("ascii")
+request = {
+    "model": sys.argv[3],
+    "messages": [{"role": "user", "content": [
+        {"type": "text", "text": "Describe this clipboard image."},
+        {"type": "image_url", "image_url": {"url": "data:image/png;base64," + image}},
+    ]}],
+}
+pathlib.Path(sys.argv[2]).write_text(json.dumps(request), encoding="utf-8")
+PY
+
+curl_args=(--silent --show-error --max-redirs 0 --output "$response_file" --write-out '%{http_code}' --header 'Content-Type: application/json' --data-binary "@$request_file")
+if [ -n "$api_key" ]; then
+  case "$api_key" in *$'\n'*|*$'\r'*) printf '%s\n' 'Error: invalid CLIPBOARD_VISION_API_KEY' >&2; exit 2 ;; esac
+  umask 077
+  printf 'Authorization: Bearer %s\n' "$api_key" > "$auth_file"
+  chmod 600 "$auth_file"
+  curl_args+=(--header "@$auth_file")
+fi
+status=$(curl "${curl_args[@]}" "$effective_endpoint") || { printf '%s\n' 'Error: vision API request failed' >&2; exit 1; }
+case "$status" in 2??) ;; *) printf 'Error: vision API returned HTTP %s (body redacted)\n' "$status" >&2; exit 1 ;; esac
+
+result=$(python3 - "$response_file" <<'PY'
+import json
+import pathlib
+import sys
+
+try:
+    data = json.loads(pathlib.Path(sys.argv[1]).read_text(encoding="utf-8"))
+    value = data["choices"][0]["message"]["content"]
+    if not isinstance(value, str):
+        raise ValueError
+except (KeyError, IndexError, TypeError, ValueError, json.JSONDecodeError):
+    raise SystemExit(2)
+print(value)
+PY
+) || { printf '%s\n' 'Error: invalid vision API response (body redacted)' >&2; exit 1; }
+
+printf '%s\n' "$result"

package/plugins/claude-code/skills/delphi-review/.delphi-config.json.example

@@ -4,9 +4,10 @@
     "======================================",
     "Copy this file to .delphi-config.json and fill in your API keys.",
     "Place this file alongside SKILL.md in the delphi-review skill directory.",
-    "At least 2 of the 3 experts should use different providers for cross-bias protection.",
+    "Exactly three roles are required, with distinct trimmed executable model IDs.",
     "",
-    "Provider field: set provider to \"local\" to use the orchestrator model (mixed mode)."
+    "Provider and vendor are unrestricted. provider=local is a fallback and cannot count as a successful expert execution.",
+    "cross_provider_required is deprecated and ignored with warning code cross_provider_required_ignored."
   ],
 
   "active_profile": "default",
@@ -14,53 +15,47 @@
   "profiles": {
     "default": {
       "providers": {
-        "deepseek": {
-          "base_url": "https://api.deepseek.com/v1",
-          "api_key": "YOUR_DEEPSEEK_API_KEY"
-        },
-        "zhipu": {
-          "base_url": "https://open.bigmodel.cn/api/paas/v4",
-          "api_key": "YOUR_ZHIPU_API_KEY"
-        },
-        "dashscope": {
+        "bailian-tp": {
           "base_url": "https://dashscope.aliyuncs.com/compatible-mode/v1",
-          "api_key": "YOUR_DASHSCOPE_API_KEY"
+          "api_key": "YOUR_API_KEY"
         }
       },
       "experts": {
         "architecture": {
-          "provider": "deepseek",
-          "model": "deepseek-chat"
+          "provider": "bailian-tp",
+          "model": "qwen-plus"
         },
         "technical": {
-          "provider": "zhipu",
-          "model": "glm-5.2"
+          "provider": "bailian-tp",
+          "model": "deepseek-v3"
         },
         "feasibility": {
-          "provider": "dashscope",
-          "model": "qwen-3.8-plus"
+          "provider": "bailian-tp",
+          "model": "glm-4.5"
         }
       }
     },
 
     "starter": {
-      "$comment": "Mixed mode: only 1 external API, others use orchestrator model",
+      "$comment": "One provider and token plan serving three distinct models",
       "providers": {
-        "deepseek": {
-          "base_url": "https://api.deepseek.com/v1",
-          "api_key": "YOUR_DEEPSEEK_API_KEY"
+        "bailian-tp": {
+          "base_url": "https://dashscope.aliyuncs.com/compatible-mode/v1",
+          "api_key": "YOUR_API_KEY"
         }
       },
       "experts": {
         "architecture": {
-          "provider": "deepseek",
-          "model": "deepseek-chat"
+          "provider": "bailian-tp",
+          "model": "qwen-plus"
         },
         "technical": {
-          "provider": "local"
+          "provider": "bailian-tp",
+          "model": "deepseek-v3"
         },
         "feasibility": {
-          "provider": "local"
+          "provider": "bailian-tp",
+          "model": "glm-4.5"
         }
       }
     }
@@ -68,6 +63,8 @@
 
   "consensus": {
     "threshold_percent": 90,
-    "max_review_rounds": 5
+    "max_review_rounds": 5,
+    "distinct_models_required": true,
+    "cross_provider_required": true
   }
 }

package/plugins/claude-code/skills/delphi-review/AGENTS.md

@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
 # SKILLS/DELPHI-REVIEW KNOWLEDGE BASE
 
-**Generated:** 2026-07-29
-**Commit:** 05d23ae
-**Branch:** main
-**Version:** 0.18.5.0
+**Generated:** 2026-08-24
+**Commit:** a1a4683
+**Branch:** dsh-plugin
+**Version:** 0.19.0.0
 
 ## OVERVIEW
-Delphi Consensus Review — multi-round anonymous expert review (≥90% threshold, 3 experts from ≥2 providers, domestic models only). Supports design + code-walkthrough modes.
+Delphi Consensus Review — multi-round anonymous expert review (≥90% threshold, exactly 3 experts with distinct executable model IDs). Supports design, requirements, and code-walkthrough modes.
 
 ## STRUCTURE
 ```
@@ -25,14 +25,14 @@ skills/delphi-review/
 | Task | Location | Notes |
 |------|----------|-------|
 | Core methodology | SKILL.md | Delphi process, expert roles, consensus rules |
-| Code-walkthrough | references/code-walkthrough.md | Pre-push mode: 20 files/500 LOC limit |
-| Config example | .delphi-config.json.example | 3 experts, domestic models |
+| Code-walkthrough | references/code-walkthrough.md | Pre-push mode: complete review evidence with no hard file/LOC threshold |
+| Config example | .delphi-config.json.example | 3 experts, distinct models |
 
 ## CONVENTIONS
 - 3 experts anonymous in Round 1 (no cross-expert bias)
 - ≥90% consensus threshold (was 95%, now unified to 90%)
 - Max 5 rounds before forcing decision
-- Cross-provider required: experts from ≥2 different providers (model list read from `opencode.json` agent config, not hardcoded)
+- Provider/vendor/nationality unrestricted; exactly three distinct trimmed requested model IDs are required
 - Model selection: reads `delphi-reviewer-*` agent `model` fields from `opencode.json`
 - No hardcoded model lists — models defined by user's `opencode.json` configuration
 - Code-walkthrough mode: triggered on git push, stores result in .code-walkthrough-result.json
@@ -42,25 +42,26 @@ skills/delphi-review/
 - Do NOT terminate before achieving true consensus (≥90%)
 - Do NOT reveal other experts' opinions during Round 1
 - Do NOT accept partial agreement without resolution
-- Do NOT skip code-walkthrough when over thresholds (BLOCK + user decision)
+- Do NOT auto-skip or bypass code-walkthrough based on change size; review large diffs completely or split them by user choice
 - Do NOT degrade to single model on API errors (BLOCK)
 - Do NOT declare complete without writing .code-walkthrough-result.json
-- Do NOT use foreign models (Anthropic/GPT/Gemini)
+- Do NOT treat `provider: local` fallback as an executed expert
 
 ## UNIQUE STYLES
 - Anonymous expert reviews (Round 1)
 - Statistical consensus measurement (≥90% threshold)
-- Two modes: design review + code-walkthrough
+- Three modes: requirements review + design review + code-walkthrough
 - Pre-push integration: .code-walkthrough-result.json stores commit hash + verdict
 - Delphi guard in claude-code plugin: blocks Edit/Write before APPROVAL
 
 ## COMMANDS
 ```bash
 /delphi-review                              # Design review mode
+/delphi-review --mode requirements          # Phase 2 R1 requirements review
 /delphi-review --mode code-walkthrough      # Pre-push code walkthrough
 ```
 
 ## NOTES
 - Used by pre-push hook for code-walkthrough validation
 - Delphi guard (claude-code plugin) reads .sprint-state/delphi-reviewed.json
-- Code-walkthrough result must match commit hash for verification
+- Code-walkthrough result must match commit hash for verification

package/plugins/claude-code/skills/delphi-review/INSTALL.md

@@ -5,10 +5,10 @@ This guide walks you through setting up the Delphi consensus review skill in you
 ## Prerequisites
 
 - OpenCode installed and configured
-- At least **2 different model providers** available (cross-provider requirement prevents homogenized blind spots)
-- Access to at least 3 different models (for 3-expert mode) or 2 models (for 2-expert mode)
+- Exactly **3 callable expert model configurations** are required.
+- The three configurations must use distinct trimmed executable model IDs. They may share one provider and token plan.
 
-> **Why cross-provider?** Using models from the same vendor (e.g., all OpenAI) means they share training data and biases, defeating the purpose of multi-expert consensus.
+> Provider, vendor, gateway, and model nationality are unrestricted. The enforced diversity boundary is three distinct requested model IDs, not provider diversity.
 
 ## Quick Setup (3 steps)
 
@@ -32,11 +32,8 @@ Then replace the provider/model placeholders:
 "model": "YOUR_PROVIDER/YOUR_MODEL_A"
 
 // After (your config):
-"model": "openai/gpt-4o"
-// or
-"model": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-20250514"
-// or
-"model": "bailian-coding-plan/qwen3.6-plus"
+"model": "bailian-tp/qwen-plus"
+// The other two role model fields must be different trimmed IDs.
 ```
 
 ### Step 3: Ensure provider configuration exists
@@ -73,7 +70,7 @@ For custom providers (like Ali Bailian), add a provider entry:
 
 ## Model Recommendations
 
-The skill requires at least 2 experts for code changes, 3 for architecture decisions. Here are recommended model selections:
+The skill requires exactly three experts for every mode. Choose three models that are callable through your configured provider.
 
 | Expert Role | Recommended | Alternatives |
 |-------------|-------------|-------------|
@@ -81,10 +78,11 @@ The skill requires at least 2 experts for code changes, 3 for architecture decis
 | **Technical (Expert B)** | Claude Haiku | Qwen-Coder, DeepSeek-Coder, GPT-4o-mini |
 | **Feasibility (Expert C)** | Claude Opus | GPT-4, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Qwen-Max |
 
-**Minimum viable setup** (2-expert mode):
-- Expert A: Any reasoning-strong model
-- Expert B: Any code-understanding-strong model
-- **Must be from different providers**
+**Minimum viable setup**:
+- Expert A: architecture model
+- Expert B: technical model
+- Expert C: feasibility model
+- All three requested model IDs must be distinct. A `provider: local` fallback does not count.
 
 ## Configuration File Reference
 
@@ -92,13 +90,13 @@ The skill requires at least 2 experts for code changes, 3 for architecture decis
 
 | Field | Description | Default |
 |-------|-------------|---------|
-| `num_experts` | Number of experts to use (2 or 3) | 3 |
+| `num_experts` | Number of experts to use | 3, fixed |
 | `experts.architecture` | Architecture reviewer configuration | Required |
 | `experts.technical` | Technical reviewer configuration | Required |
 | `experts.feasibility` | Feasibility reviewer configuration | Required for 3-expert mode |
     | `consensus.threshold_percent` | Agreement threshold | 90 |
 | `consensus.max_review_rounds` | Maximum review rounds | 5 |
-| `consensus.cross_provider_required` | Require different providers | true |
+| `consensus.cross_provider_required` | Deprecated and ignored; emits `cross_provider_required_ignored` | false or omitted |
 
 ### `opencode.json` agent block
 
@@ -133,11 +131,11 @@ You forgot to replace the placeholder. Search for `YOUR_PROVIDER` in your openco
 
 ### Both experts gave identical feedback
 
-Your models are from the same provider. Configure agents to use different providers.
+Shared providers are allowed. Configure three distinct executable model IDs and verify all three calls succeed.
 
 ### Review takes too long / costs too much
 
-Reduce to 2-expert mode in `.delphi-config.json`: set `num_experts: 2`.
+Do not reduce the expert count. Use three callable models and keep the threshold and round bounds unchanged.
 
 ## Advanced: JSON Schema Validation
 

package/plugins/claude-code/skills/delphi-review/SKILL.md

@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@ version: 1.1.0
 description: >
   Performs multi-round anonymous expert consensus review using the Delphi method. Supports
   design review (default), code-walkthrough (--mode code-walkthrough), and requirements
-  (lightweight, --mode requirements) modes. Uses 2-3 experts from at least 2 different domestic
-  model providers with a >=90% statistical consensus threshold.
+  (lightweight, --mode requirements) modes. Uses exactly three experts with distinct executable
+  model IDs and a >=90% statistical consensus threshold.
   Outputs structured verdict (APPROVED/PASS_WITH_CAVEATS/REQUEST_CHANGES/BLOCKED).
 
   WHAT: Anonymous multi-expert review with iterative consensus building for designs, plans,
@@ -187,9 +187,9 @@ tools_denied:
 
 **In Scope:**
 - Multi-round anonymous expert consensus review (design + code-walkthrough modes)
-- 2-3 experts from different providers with statistical consensus (>= 90%)
+- Exactly three experts with distinct normalized executable model IDs and statistical consensus (>= 90%)
 - Structured verdict: APPROVED / PASS_WITH_CAVEATS / REQUEST_CHANGES
-- Domestic models only (no Anthropic/OpenAI/Google)
+- Model nationality, vendor, provider, and gateway are unrestricted.
 
 **Out of Scope:**
 - Does NOT implement code changes (review only, implementation is separate)
@@ -248,12 +248,12 @@ tools_denied:
 ## Workflow
 
 1. **Step 0: Input Validation** — Check input contains reviewable content (design doc/code/spec/diff). Empty input → `[DelphiReview:BLOCKED]`.
-2. **Round 1: Anonymous Independent Review** — Experts review without seeing each other's opinions. Output individual verdict JSON.
-3. **Consensus Check** — Consensus >=90% AND all APPROVED → complete.
-4. **Round 2: Exchange Opinions** — Experts see others' opinions, re-evaluate.
-5. **Round 3: Final Positions** — Final stance, output disagreements if any.
-6. **Fix & Re-Review** — REQUEST_CHANGES → fix Critical+Major → restart from Round 2.
-7. **Generate Output** — Consensus report + specification.yaml (design) or `.code-walkthrough-result.json` (walkthrough) + `delphi-reviewed.json`.
+2. **Round 1: Anonymous Independent Review** — Invoke architecture, technical, and feasibility independently without exposing their opinions to one another. Every successful result must use `result_type=delphi_expert_result`.
+3. **Execution Verification** — Verify that all three results succeeded and that their `requested_model` values are three distinct trimmed IDs. A local fallback (`provider: local`) is not an executed expert and cannot satisfy this check; a local hosted endpoint configured as an ordinary callable provider can.
+4. **Consensus Check** — Aggregate all three successful expert results. Consensus >=90% AND all APPROVED → complete. One expert result is never global approval.
+5. **Rounds 2-5: Exchange and Final Positions** — If needed, expose prior aggregate evidence, re-evaluate, and stop at the first approved consensus or after five rounds.
+6. **Failure Handling** — Any expert failure, missing result, duplicate model ID, or unverifiable execution blocks the review. Do not substitute a local fallback or silently reduce the expert count.
+7. **Generate Output** — Write the consensus report and mode-specific evidence only after aggregation. For code walkthrough, bind the exact-HEAD result after aggregation.
 
 ## Activation (MANDATORY for L1 Trigger Detection)
 
@@ -277,7 +277,7 @@ Each round MUST output a structured round marker:
 
 **Rules**:
 - Every round marker MUST appear as a separate, identifiable line
-- Round numbering MUST be sequential (1, 2, 3)
+- Round numbering MUST be sequential (1 through at most 5)
 - After each round, output consensus summary: `consensus_ratio=N/N`, `verdict_status: converging | stable | diverging`
 - Final round MUST output verdict: `APPROVED | PASS_WITH_CAVEATS | REQUEST_CHANGES | PROCESS_BLOCK`
 
@@ -316,16 +316,16 @@ Each round MUST output a structured round marker:
 
 | 配置 | 专家 | 适用场景 |
 |------|------|---------|
-| 2 专家（默认） | A(架构) + B(实现) | 代码变更、小型设计 |
-| 3 专家 | A(架构) + B(实现) + C(可行性) | 架构决策、需求文档 |
+| 3 专家（固定） | A(架构) + B(实现) + C(可行性) | 所有评审模式 |
 
 ### 模型选择策略（强制 — 平台适配）
 
 **关键原则**：
-- ✅ 三个专家必须来自 **至少 2 家不同 provider**
-- ❌ 禁止 hardcode 模型名称
-- ❌ 禁止三个专家全部使用同一 provider 的模型
-- ❌ 禁止使用 Anthropic/OpenAI/Google 等国外模型
+- ✅ 必须配置 architecture、technical、feasibility 三个专家角色
+- ✅ 三个角色必须使用三个不同的 trimmed、可执行模型 ID
+- ✅ 模型国籍、厂商、provider 和 gateway 不受限制
+- ✅ 三个角色可以共享一个 provider 和 token 计划
+- ❌ `provider: local` 的特殊 fallback 不能计为一次成功执行
 
 #### Qoder 平台（推荐 — Custom Agent 模式）
 
@@ -345,7 +345,7 @@ Qoder 环境下使用 **Custom Agent** 机制，每个专家是一个独立的 c
 
 OpenCode 环境下通过 `opencode.json` 的 agent 配置 + `.delphi-config.json` 调用外部 API：
 - **MUST 从 `opencode.json` 的 agent 配置中读取模型**
-- 通过 `scripts/delphi-external-review.cjs` 调用各 provider 的 OpenAI 兼容 API
+- 通过 `scripts/delphi-external-review.cjs` 调用各 provider 的兼容 API
 - 需要用户自行配置 API key（环境变量注入）
 
 ### 共识阈值
@@ -418,10 +418,7 @@ Phase 0: 准备 → Round 1: 匿名独立评审 → 共识检查
 
 ## Output Format (MANDATORY for L3)
 
-**⚠️ Single vs Multi-Expert Output**:
-- **Multi-Expert Mode (default)**: MUST use the full JSON schema below. Each expert outputs independently; the orchestrator aggregates into `consensus_report`.
-- **Single Reviewer Mode** (explicit `--single`): MAY use simplified text template: `[DelphiReview] verdict=APPROVED|REQUEST_CHANGES|BLOCKED confidence=N/10 issues=[critical:N, major:N, minor:N] summary: [1-2 sentences]`.
-- **Never mix formats**.
+Every Delphi mode MUST use the full JSON schema below. Architecture, technical, and feasibility each output independently; the orchestrator verifies all three executions before aggregating `consensus_report`. There is no single-reviewer Delphi approval path.
 
 ```json
 {
@@ -451,13 +448,15 @@ Phase 0: 准备 → Round 1: 匿名独立评审 → 共识检查
   "mode": "requirements",
   "verdict": "APPROVED|GAPS_FOUND",
   "timestamp": "2026-07-25T10:30:00Z",
+  "consensus_ratio": 1.0,
   "requirements_hash": "<SHA-256 hex digest>",
   "head_commit": "<git rev-parse HEAD>",
   "context_file_used": "CONTEXT.md",
   "round": 1,
   "expert_verdicts": [
-    { "role": "architecture", "verdict": "APPROVED", "confidence": 9 },
-    { "role": "feasibility", "verdict": "APPROVED", "confidence": 8 }
+    { "role": "architecture", "verdict": "APPROVED", "confidence": 9, "result_type": "delphi_expert_result", "requested_model": "provider/model-a" },
+    { "role": "technical", "verdict": "APPROVED", "confidence": 8, "result_type": "delphi_expert_result", "requested_model": "provider/model-b" },
+    { "role": "feasibility", "verdict": "APPROVED", "confidence": 8, "result_type": "delphi_expert_result", "requested_model": "provider/model-c" }
   ],
   "requirements_statement": "<short summary of what was reviewed>",
   "gaps_found": [],
@@ -466,6 +465,8 @@ Phase 0: 准备 → Round 1: 匿名独立评审 → 共识检查
 }
 ```
 
+Schema-v2 Phase 2 requires `requirements_statement`, `timestamp`, `consensus_ratio`, `expert_verdicts`, `head_commit`, and `requirements_hash`. The hash is SHA-256 of the exact concatenation `requirements_statement + project-relative context file UTF-8 content if used + timestamp YYYY-MM-DD`; context paths must remain inside the project after realpath resolution.
+
 **Anti-patterns mapping:**
 - `Round 1 → "评审完成"` → MUST NOT have `verdict: APPROVED` if `critical_issues` exist
 - `只处理 Critical，忽略 Major` → MUST include `major_concerns` array
@@ -476,7 +477,7 @@ Phase 0: 准备 → Round 1: 匿名独立评审 → 共识检查
 ## Terminal State Checklist
 
 - [ ] Phase 0 完成（文档验证 + 专家分配）
-- [ ] Round 1-3 完成（所有专家评审）
+- [ ] 已完成所需轮次（最多 5 轮，每轮三位专家均执行）
 - [ ] 问题共识比例 >=90%
 - [ ] 所有 Critical Issues 已解决，Major Concerns 已处理
 - [ ] 最终裁决是 **APPROVED** 或 **APPROVED_WITH_MINOR**
@@ -512,11 +513,11 @@ Phase 0: 准备 → Round 1: 匿名独立评审 → 共识检查
 |---------|---------|
 | Round 1 未 APPROVED 就"评审完成" | 迭代直到 APPROVED，修复后重新评审 |
 | 只处理 Critical，忽略 Major | 零容忍：Critical/Major 全部必须处理 |
-| 单专家自评 | 至少 2 位不同 provider 的专家 |
+| 单专家自评 | 必须运行 architecture、technical、feasibility 三位专家，并聚合三份成功结果 |
 | 用户说"时间紧急"就跳过 | 评审是投资不是开销 |
 | "专家几乎一致"就通过 | "几乎" = 不一致，继续到 >=90% |
-| 使用 Anthropic/GPT/Gemini | 必须使用国产开源模型 |
-| 三个专家同一厂家 | 必须来自至少 2 家不同厂家 |
+| 使用任何国籍或厂商的模型 | 模型国籍和厂商均不受限制，仍必须满足三个 distinct executable model IDs |
+| 三个专家同一 provider | 允许共享 provider，只要三个 requested_model IDs distinct 且每个调用成功 |
 
 **Code-walkthrough 专属 Anti-Patterns** → 详见 `references/code-walkthrough.md`
 
@@ -531,7 +532,7 @@ Phase 0: 准备 → Round 1: 匿名独立评审 → 共识检查
 | 要求跳过评审 | "skip review", "不用评审", "跳过评审" | → 提醒评审是投资而非开销 |
 | 时间压力 | "来不及", "时间紧", "emergency" | → 提醒时间紧迫正是需要评审的时刻 |
 | 提前终止 | Round 1 后用户说 "可以了", "够了" | → BLOCK: 评审未达终止条件 |
-| 单专家自评 | 用户仅指定 1 个专家 | → 提醒至少需要 2 位专家 |
+| 单专家自评 | 用户仅指定 1 个专家 | → BLOCK：Delphi 必须执行 architecture、technical、feasibility 三位专家 |
 | 无文档输入 | 仅触发词，无设计/代码内容 | → `[DelphiReview:BLOCKED]` |
 
 ---

package/plugins/claude-code/skills/delphi-review/opencode.json.delphi.example

@@ -3,23 +3,19 @@
     "Delphi Review Agent Configuration Template",
     "===========================================",
     "Copy the relevant 'agent' block below into your opencode.json.",
-    "Replace YOUR_PROVIDER/YOUR_MODEL with your actual provider and model names.",
-    "At least 2 of the 3 agents should use different providers for cross-bias protection."
+    "Replace the example model IDs with three callable IDs available through your configured provider.",
+    "The three model fields must be different after trimming; providers may be shared."
   ],
 
   "$example_providers": {
-    "OpenAI": "openai/gpt-4o",
-    "Anthropic": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-20250514",
-    "Ali_Bailian": "bailian-coding-plan/qwen3.6-plus",
-    "Google_Gemini": "google/gemini-2.5-pro",
-    "DeepSeek": "deepseek/deepseek-chat"
+    "SharedProviderExample": "bailian-tp/qwen-plus"
   },
 
   "agent": {
     "delphi-reviewer-architecture": {
       "description": "Delphi expert reviewer for architecture perspective. Focuses on requirements alignment, system design, and high-level coherence.",
       "mode": "subagent",
-      "model": "YOUR_PROVIDER/YOUR_MODEL_A",
+      "model": "bailian-tp/qwen-plus",
       "prompt": "You are a Delphi expert reviewer specializing in architecture and requirements alignment. Review the input for: 1) Alignment with stated goals 2) Architectural coherence 3) System-level implications 4) Trade-offs and alternatives. Output structured review with verdict (APPROVED/REQUEST_CHANGES/REJECTED) and confidence level.",
       "tools": {
         "read": true,
@@ -31,7 +27,7 @@
     "delphi-reviewer-technical": {
       "description": "Delphi expert reviewer for technical depth. Focuses on implementation details, code correctness, and edge cases. Used in delphi-review.",
       "mode": "subagent",
-      "model": "YOUR_PROVIDER/YOUR_MODEL_B",
+      "model": "bailian-tp/deepseek-v3",
       "prompt": "You are a Delphi expert reviewer specializing in technical implementation. Review the input for: 1) Implementation correctness 2) Code quality and patterns 3) Edge cases and error handling 4) Performance implications. Output structured review with verdict (APPROVED/REQUEST_CHANGES/REJECTED) and confidence level.",
       "tools": {
         "read": true,
@@ -43,7 +39,7 @@
     "delphi-reviewer-feasibility": {
       "description": "Delphi expert reviewer for feasibility analysis. Focuses on practical constraints, risks, and execution viability. Used in delphi-review.",
       "mode": "subagent",
-      "model": "YOUR_PROVIDER/YOUR_MODEL_C",
+      "model": "bailian-tp/glm-4.5",
       "prompt": "You are a Delphi expert reviewer specializing in feasibility and risk analysis. Review the input for: 1) Practical constraints (time, resources, dependencies) 2) Risk identification and mitigation 3) Execution complexity 4) Alternative approaches. Output structured review with verdict (APPROVED/REQUEST_CHANGES/REJECTED) and confidence level.",
       "tools": {
         "read": true,