@ccoalm/ccl-skills 0.1.0

package/dist/assets/marketplace/plugins/ccl-skills/skills/tighten-doc/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,184 @@
+---
+name: tighten-doc
+description: "润色文档 / 精简文档 / 改下文档 / AI 味太重 / 废话太多 / polish / make shorter / remove AI tone → finalize wording after substance is settled: clarify, shorten, restructure lightly, preserve decisions, and keep comments safe. Proactively draft a no-owner deliverable doc（「写一份分享/给同事的文档」）. Skip while a sibling owns the substance（定稿仍回本技能）: spec/PRD/标准 → product-rd-workflow; 技术方案/架构文档 → architecture 技能; 发布文档 → release-doc-writer; 测试用例文档 → test-artifact-management."
+---
+
+# tighten-doc — 文档写作与优化
+
+Use this as the default document finalization and editing skill; new-substance authoring routes to the owner skill first. A deliverable doc is written for its reader (product / business / exec / teammate), not for the author. Default form = one-page operational/task manual: few short headings, enumerations as tables/bullets (one point per line), short sentences, no bracket piles, no template scaffolding.
+
+## When to use
+
+Use any time you rewrite, tighten, polish, or finalize a doc someone else must read, after owner and scope are clear: strategy, plan, spec, task card, runbook, release note, or collaborative doc.
+
+Three modes:
+
+- Draft: after the owner skill has settled the substance, turn rough intent, notes, meeting output, or task context into a readable first version. Route to an owner when substance is unsettled and the type matches an installed owner skill: spec/standards/guideline -> `product-rd-workflow`, test cases -> `test-artifact-management`, architecture -> architecture skill, code/correctness -> stack/review skill. For new standards/spec authoring, `product-rd-workflow` is the single entry; the hand-back marker is product-rd `owner-ready` with authority statement, doc-family layer, and enumeration evidence — after that, finish wording here. If that marker is absent for a standards/spec artifact, polish only locally and mark `pre-owner blocked` (share/publish gate below). Standalone non-spec artifacts without family references skip it. If no owner skill is installed or reachable, draft from the charter plus user/session-supplied substance — never invent substantive decisions; they stay owner/user-provided. 多轮文档先锁 charter：`references/doc-charter-first.md`
+- Rewrite: restructure an existing doc so decisions, owners, gates, and next actions are easier to scan.
+- Tighten: remove filler, duplication, AI tone, meta narration, and over-long sentences without deleting decisions.
+
+For a **technical / developer-facing** doc, classify its reader-mode — the four Diataxis documentation modes: **tutorial** (learning by doing), **how-to** (recipe for one task), **reference** (look up exact facts), **explanation** (understand why). Keep one dominant mode per doc and watch for a **muddled purpose** — a doc trying to be a full tutorial *and* a full reference at once serves neither reader; that is the failure, not a compact options/env table inside an otherwise how-to doc. Use the four modes as a *guide to spot muddle*, not a top-down plan that forces four separate docs. The one-page operational-manual default above is the how-to / reference shape; a tutorial or explanation doc legitimately differs, so don't force it into that shape. This stays within finalization scope: **flag a reader-mode split candidate, but do not create, split, or reorder sibling docs, nor route doc generation, before the substantive owner settles the doc set** (`product-rd-workflow` for spec/standards/guideline families, per its `owner-ready` gate) — a doc-generation skill is executor-only, never an owner replacement.
+
+For spec/standard/guideline artifacts, the `pre-owner blocked` marker rule applies to all three modes — do not share/publish until the owner marker exists; local wording polish must preserve the blocked label.
+
+Before sharing, syncing, committing, or publishing a concrete deliverable artifact, run Tighten mode by default. Do not ask the user whether to optimize unless the edit would change a substantive decision, remove required detail, or risk collaborative-comment loss. A request to write a template, SOP, report, checklist, Feishu/Lark doc, task card, or launch material already includes the optimization pass after the owner skill has settled the substance.
+
+After multi-round edits that added, restructured, or changed reader-facing prose or meaning, always run the Tighten mode before sharing or publishing; rounds of only exempt trivial edits (typo/link/format) may record that exemption instead. **What counts as evidence for this pass**: re-read the affected deliverable surface against the rubric (duplication — including same-content-different-face introduced by your own earlier edits in the same session — 一坨, term drift, cell-fits-column) and record: the surface, the touched blocks since the last full pass (the minimum index of scope, not the ceiling — include sections whose meaning the edits change), whether a full-card / family-wide sweep trigger below applies, the defects found or an explicit none, and the reason if scope stops at the touched blocks. Per-edit rubric compliance while writing, grep-only closeout scans (halfwidth / residual-wording checks), or a substance review do not substitute, singly or jointly — the recurring miss is accepting them as equivalent evidence and shipping a self-introduced duplication the surface re-read would have caught.
+
+**技术 / 参考文档：form 优化 ≠ 内容已核。** 当本轮**新增 / 改写 / 发布**了可对源码核验的承载性技术断言（API 签名、env 行为 / 优先级、字段 / label 名、默认值——这类文档常自述真值源），**且一手源用户已给、在当前工作区可得、或用户明确授权查证**时，form 清理之外要把这些断言对一手源码（SDK / specs / fixtures / 可跑命令）核一遍。核出不符：**仅 source-literal 的 typo / 名称 / 默认值笔误**可直接照证据改；**会改动 substantive contract / decision 的**只标 discrepancy / pending 交 owner（stack / review skill），tighten-doc 不接管纠错。源不可得、超出本轮范围、或只是轻量润色：只做 form 并声明「形式已优化、内容未核」，不得裸称「文档已优化 / 准确」（别把每次 tighten 滚成一次代码审计）。
+
+## DELETE (废话 — cut these)
+
+1. 元语自证 / doc-about-itself: "这是X不是Y文档", "本文档/本卡…", "读者是…", "别写空话". **最高频的 agent 自插入形态**：给自己新写的段落加的向导式 opener/closer —— "本节只做X", "本页/这里不维护Y", "这张表只是…", "执行时不要只按本页…", 以及自述用途的引用开场（"用于配套《X》…放引用链接"）。读着像帮读者，其实是 元语自证 + 废话；删掉让内容自己站住。发布任何**你自己写的**段落前，先扫它的开场/收尾句是否是这一类——这正是"我把信息写对了"之后还残留、要读者来挑的废话。（承载真实决策/边界/受众约束/例外/后果的开场不算，删的是只描述"本节存在/本节是什么"的句子。）
+2. 翻旧账 / blame: "没人跟全空", "证据：…当初也写过".
+3. 修辞尾巴 / 口号 used as a closer: "…= 没解决", "做得再全也…", "上线≠X" as a rallying shout.
+4. 无动作语气词: "周会点名" (doesn't say who / when / what) — replace with the real mechanism.
+5. 无谓条件前缀 / 连接: "…时", "节奏跑不动时", "总之", "换句话说", "值得一提的是".
+6. 重复: a heading restating the table's column names; a clause duplicated in another section. **Index docs especially**: define each term/role exactly once — later sections reference, never re-explain. When a line is challenged, first check if its content already appears in another section; keep only the delta. Aggregation / cross-cut / "references" sections are the prime filler suspect (they compress per-card content into slash-soup that also duplicates the cards) — collapse to a plain short gate list or delete.
+   **近义词斜杠堆 = 重复**：一行里 `A/B/C` 若各词同指一件事，收成 1 个代表词；各项确为不同事才留斜杠列表。**逻辑子集措辞 = 表面冗余**：并列两项中一项是另一项子集时读着冗余——删子集项，或点名两个不同失效机制让区分显式。**跨节正反复述 = 隐蔽 dup**：同一组判据被一节正面写（"满足 A+B = 通过"），另一节反面 / 否决形式重写（"反面 ¬A / ¬B 任一成立 = 不通过"）——内核同一份内容、换面孔。审查主动配对扫：每个"判定为 Y"句的 criteria 在别处是否以"否决 / 反证 / 不通过"形式重列；命中 pick 一处保留（通常留反向 / 否决列表，更直接 checkable），另处删。这类 dup 在"已清"二审里最易漏过，是 R1 review-completeness 的重点 watch。
+   **图↔文字双写 = 重复**：图承载流程 / 连线 / 状态迁移，文字别逐条复述。但文字要保留图说不清或**不能丢的执行信息**——判据 / 为什么 / 例外 / owner / 硬规则 / 阈值 / 后果 / 验收 / 非渲染 fallback（即 KEEP 项一律留，别当"复述图"删掉）。
+   **加图 / 表后必做配对扫**（加图时最常自引入的 dup）：是找 delete candidate **不是命中即删**——只删**纯步骤 / 节点复述**；查的范围覆盖图所在小节 + 相邻小节 + 验收 / 红线段，不只邻近 bullet。
+   **Row-granularity in an index/owner/lane table**: one row per domain/lane. A row that is actually a sub-component of another row's domain (e.g. an SDK or a gateway sub-piece listed beside whole domains) → merge it into the parent row (fold its owner/progress/goal in), renumber, update the heading count. Do NOT merge two rows with distinct owners or timelines — that loses accountability; an owner-justified split stays.
+7. 病句 / bulk-replace artifacts: e.g. "一键回退排障手册" (missing separator).
+8. 自造版本号或前缀: never invent "v7 战略文档" — verify the real title first; a `_v1` filename ≠ the doc title.
+9. 编辑性括号副标题: "（按对的赌注不折中）", "（诚实校准）", "（怎么算通过）", "（含…前置底座）".
+10. 画蛇添足的解释尾: "中途不换手", "（DoD）" tacked onto an already-clear line.
+11. 假目标: a 目标/DoD cell that is a bare verb with no object or threshold ("V1 修完 + V2 决议", "止血/打通/完善", "韧性补齐"). Not filler-to-delete but filler-to-fix → rewrite as a falsifiable DoD traced to the owning card (never invent a threshold); if the real DoD lives in that card, replace with the pointer "见〔X 域卡〕". If the cell references an undefined term (e.g. "V2"), trace it to its definition point and either inline-gloss it once so the cell is self-explanatory, or point to the card — a reader having to ask "X 是啥" means the cell failed.
+12. 会话视角泄漏：句子立足于写作会话而非文档；**必须先读 `references/session-vantage-leakage.md`，逐项走完 8 类：死会话 / PR-stack / 变更史与无锚点 / 评审编排 / 辩护 / 推导账 / hedge / 工作语言**；HEAD-reader 可解？存事实、删过程；勿删稳定版本、issue、抑制理由、反事实钉、实测。
+
+## KEEP (实质 — NOT filler; deleting them drops a decision)
+
+owner · 硬规则 · 完成标准/DoD · 里程碑 · 数值阈值 · the real build-vs-buy decision · severity/consequence rationale ("=资损法律风险 / =假安全 / =刑责风险 / 损失大" — that IS the judgment, keep it). **Word it as severity, never as "死".** The consequence label is KEEP, but the word "死" (资损法律死/刑责死/信任死/组织死) is rejected — reword to 风险高 / 损失大 / 刑责风险 / 信任崩 / 组织级风险. ("死" only stays in its non-consequence senses: 死线=deadline, 死约束=hard constraint, 死信=dead-letter, 钉死/封死=lock, 生死=critical-emphasis.) Compression ≠ deleting decisions: before compressing, extract the decided-points checklist (目标 / owner / 硬规则 / 后果论据 / build-vs-buy / DoD / 里程碑 / 最小交付) and verify each survives the rewrite.
+
+## FORM
+
+- Named hyperlinks, never bare URLs: `[真实文档名](url)`. Verify the real title before naming a reference; don't fabricate version prefixes.
+- Collaborative docs that support rich structure (Feishu/Lark Docx/wiki, Confluence-like pages) should use the platform's rich-text structure when creating or materially rewriting a document: headings, tables, bullets, and named hyperlinks should be real document nodes, not plain Markdown pasted as body text. Use Markdown only when the target surface is Markdown-native or the user explicitly asks for it.
+- In Feishu/Lark standards families, document references must be named hyperlinks, not quoted plain titles such as `《测试规范》`. If a sibling doc is referenced more than once, verify the title once and reuse the same named link across the family.
+- **断言写到证据等级为止。** 交付文档里的结论按主张状态分「来源明确陈述 / 有证据支持的推论 / 作者判断」三态，不得混写成同一种口气；「来源明确陈述」是归因不是真实性——写成「来源 X 声称」，不得因有出处就用事实定论口气；作者判断句显式带「判断 / 预计 / 我认为」类标记，证据只到推论级就用分级句式写（如「机制可证、参数不可证」）。三态管**解释性/推断性主张**；直接观测豁免只限原始计数/测量值（如「本次查询返回 N 行」按本来面目写，不强套归因句式）——工具生成的分类/评分/裁决仍须标状态并写明工具权威边界。**状态沿用实质 owner 或证据表已定的等级**：润色时不得自行升降格；owner 未定状态的断言不改文、按既有通道标 discrepancy 交还 owner——已生效的决定、门槛、验收标准不因缺状态标签而被标「待确认」降级（调研类交付物的状态产出由 `multi-perspective-research` 合成简报持有，本条管所有交付文档的表达面）。
+- **外部基线 / 标准值入文档 = 独立标注 + 命名来源 + 内部门（若有）仍权威。** 引用外部 benchmark、行业阈值、标准默认值（评测目标、性能预算、参考 SLO 等）时，放成独立的列 / 行 / 标注并配命名来源超链，别和本系统自己的验收门 / 阈值混写成同一个数。**当本系统有自己的验收门时**显式声明本系统门为准、外部值只作对标参考（反模式：把外部基线直接当验收标准，读者误以为外部数就是上线门）；**若文档本身即标准 / 评测报告 / 无内部门**，则标清来源 / 范围 / 权威，别杜撰一个内部门。**评自己的稿是这条的另一半**：对自己产出的文档评可实测呈现属性（加粗密度、句长、结构层级）前，先建同体裁实测基准——长文或系列交付物在**初稿前**建（写完被纠正后再补测，是实测过的返工形态）——按**预先声明的抽样框与纳排规则**（在实测待评稿自身指标**之前**冻结，防止看完自己的数再挑参照系）取同体裁公开样本（记录样本量、口径与局限；不得挑对自己有利的样本充数，"若干份"本身不构成充分门槛），中英文样本分开统计，把待评稿放进分布里定位；找不到可靠公开样本或体裁不可比时如实记「未对标 + 原因」；流行排版阈值逐条核到一手出处再用，核不到不用。**分布定位的合法输出是描述**（"高于/低于所选样本分布"），**不是裁决**："合适"要再结合读者任务与可用性判断；"优于同类"不得由密度类粗指标推出；无基准时该属性只能报「未对标」——自己的审美不是分布。密度居中更推不出「稿子写得好」：整体质量仍按文档目的、读者任务、事实核验与本 rubric 分轴判断，呈现分布不背书内容正确性。
+- No inline `｜` / pipe-delimited lists (RACI / 分工) — break into bullets or a table.
+- Short sentences, one point per line, enumerations as tables.
+- **表达形式匹配内容**：分支关系 / 状态迁移复杂到文字难扫时优先**图**（mermaid 等）；字段对比、分桶属性、owner/gate/证据矩阵优先**表**；线性步骤用编号列表；一两点判断一句话或 bullet。别为单个判断加**装饰性**多桶图，但桶间有不同 owner / 阈值 / 例外 / 后果时**必须结构化**（该结构别压成一句）。**目标环境不稳定渲染图时**（邮件 / 终端 / 部分 Markdown），文字版流程为准、图只作辅助。**callout / 图内文字 = 概览形态，只承一个要点**：callout 塞成多点密块（"一坨"）就拆开或降到正文 / 表；图内边标签、节点名要短到不折行（长串在渲染端会断行错位）；承载性名称留全称、必要时短别名 + 图例，详情进正文别堆进图。
+- **代码进代码块，不进段落**：**多行 / 独立执行步骤 / 长 flag 串命令 / 多命令序列**放代码块（带 lang），不写成段落里的纯文本或一长串内联 `code`。**短的随文 one-liner / 表达式、对照表单元格、「用 `func()`」式符号引用可留 inline**，只要不长到影响扫读（与上面的表格单元格 / 内联引用规则一致，别硬塞进代码块）。多语言对照两端形态对齐——一端给了代码块，另一端别写成「Go：`call(...)`」式内联段落。
+- **Enumeration sections (依赖/兜底/分工/里程碑 子项) = multi-line sub-bullets, NOT a `；`-collapsed single line.** Readability beats compactness here; a `- 依赖：A；B；C；D` run is hard to scan — split to `- 依赖：` + one `- A` sub-bullet per item. Do not collapse to one `；` line just for parity with another card; parity is not a reason to reduce scanability. Single-line `；` is only for a true 2-item short pointer where sub-bullets would be heavier than the content.
+- Table cells that list multiple skills, owners, checks, environments, or evidence items should be split into multiple lines or shorter rows. A readable table beats a compressed cell when the cell is used as an execution checklist.
+- Terms unified and glossed once in a 白话 section (e.g. 红灯 = 卡住/NO-GO 到点必升级; 排障手册 = 排障 SOP). Also catch **intra-doc term drift**: the same concept written two different ways in one doc → align to that doc's prevailing term. Drift includes **unit drift in a sequenced ladder** (a milestone list mixing 第N周 and N天 — align the lone odd unit to the ladder's prevailing one).
+- A column/section header must match what its cells actually hold (a "文档化进度" header over cells that hold 现状 is a defect — rename the header to the truth). An editorial paren in a header/heading that restates an intro rule is the same 编辑性括号 as DELETE #9 — cut it.
+- **Reader-facing published docs: the problem is unexplained or non-navigable internal references, not the names themselves**. Fix three recurring reader-blockers: ① internal repo paths used as navigation (`see README.md`) a non-author can't follow → name the human destination or link the published doc; ② opaque internal gate/code labels (`R0` / `F4`-style) → plain-name or drop the code; ③ unglossed in-house English / abbreviations (`mTLS` / `PTY` / `SLO`) → 中文化 or gloss at first use. **Keep** anything the reader actually operates on or that is a public convention / protocol / API / field / contract / standard name (`AGENTS.md`, `CODEOWNERS`, `package.json`, well-known abbrevs) — gloss if unfamiliar, don't delete.
+- **A cell must fit its column's semantic role.** A 负责人/owner column entry must be a who (person/role), a 事项/规则 column a what (a parseable clause). Over-terse text — including a value the user dictated in an earlier pass — that no longer parses as that column's type ("业务真值+ 误差" in a 负责人 column; "…必需的指标建立" as a 规则 clause) is a 病句 (DELETE #7). On re-review, read each dictated/compressed value back **in its column context**, not in isolation; flag it with the rule even if the user set it (don't silently override, but don't pass it as clean either).
+- **Title altitude + doc-family prefix.** A doc / section / reference title names the capability at goal-altitude — drop words the doc type already implies and any scope-enumeration that isn't doing distinguishing work (an SOP titled with its own gate-cases is usually over-long).
+  - Keep the capability plus whatever distinguisher(s) actually separate it from its siblings — a scope enumeration can itself be the load-bearing distinguisher, so cut by the test "does removing this still uniquely name the doc?", not by a fixed word budget.
+  - Same altitude rule as a 目标 cell, applied to titles.
+  - When docs genuinely form a set, align their titles to the family's shared prefix so they scan as a group; do not force a prefix onto a title that does not belong.
+  - Renaming then propagates per the family-wide label sweep in WORKFLOW: update every inbound reference label to the one canonical title and residual-scan the old title = 0; leftover ad-hoc short variants are cross-doc term drift.
+- **Doc-family structure before wording.** When drafting or tightening a standards/guideline family with several stack, service, or repo docs, first identify the family shape: overview/index, product Spec authority, stack/service child docs, and repo-local execution docs. Tighten the overview/index for authority, ownership, links, and sync gates before polishing child docs; otherwise the leaf docs may read well while the system lacks a source of truth. If the family shape is missing, add or request the overview/index and authority rules before claiming the child docs are optimized.
+- Process self-justification stays in chat, never in the file.
+
+## RESTRAINT
+
+- If one sentence says it, don't pile modifiers.
+- Delete only when nothing is lost (compression ≠ deleting decisions).
+- Generic process docs should carry rules, gates, owners, and acceptance logic; project evidence should live in launch notes, evaluation reports, appendices, or linked child docs. Do not make a general SOP unreadable by embedding code paths, source evidence tables, or full implementation proof unless the doc is explicitly an audit/report.
+- **Compression ≠ compressing past comprehension.** Over-tightening collapses a rule into a bare noun-pile with no verb/object (a list of nouns where each item names a thing but not what to DO with it), so the reader can't act. That noun-pile is the over-compression signal — readability > terseness. Fix by restoring verb+object (who does what to which, by when), not by compressing more. After a 干练/简化 pass, re-read each item as a stranger: if you can't tell the action from the phrase, it went too far.
+- Prefer the plainer word: "负责到完成" not "负责到完成定义"; drop jargon the audience won't parse.
+
+## 执行卡精简范式 (domain/execution cards only)
+
+For a 域卡/执行卡 (a card that sets WHAT a domain must achieve + who owns it), the converged skeleton is: **目标(决策化) · 负责人(owner+RACI) · 关键规则(红线/后果/NO-GO/0容忍) · 里程碑(动作+gate) · 验收(过关条件,brief) · 最小可交付 · 每周怎么跑/依赖/兜底 · 相关文档**.
+
+- DROP: 术语/白话 gloss section, build-vs-buy / 自营不外包 rationale walls (keep the one-line decision, cut the why-wall), 硬指标 numeric blocks, 枚举/机制 implementation detail, per-item evidence/threshold columns — **数值阈值、验证步骤、工具清单 are the owner's to decide, not the card's**. Also the 默认流程动作 (回填某表/提工单), self-referential / process-aside parens (（边界已划不重叠）（其余降独立验收）). Also **ceremony controls** — 签字/签收, 版本号戳 (v0.1/v1 stamped on every deliverable), 「列…清单」mechanism wrappers — are the owner-accountability (single-A RACI) model's job, not card substance: cut unless the user explicitly keeps them, and state the rule directly instead of wrapping it in its list/sign-off mechanism (a 红线 is "X 未到位 = 不得 Y", not "列一张写着『无 X 不得 Y』的清单").
+- KEEP verbatim: 红线、后果论据(severity不用"死")、NO-GO/0容忍、关键可证伪判定定义 (a load-bearing N-criteria pass definition), 锁定决议, owner/RACI, 砍清单. Promote a load-bearing judgment list to its own short section rather than burying it.
+- **目标/红线/验收 = a define-once ladder, never restated down the card.** 目标 stays at goal-noun altitude (don't gloss it with the concrete bar). 红线 carries the 0容忍 rule + falsifiable definition once. 验收 = "红线全部达标" **plus only the verification-specific items red lines don't state** (test method / adversarial cases / exportable / a feature-works check / rollback-rehearsed) — never a verbatim re-list of red-line field lists. A downstream gate references, never restates (公测门 = "验收全过", not a re-enumeration of the bars). When 验收 or a milestone gate repeats a red line's exact clause/field-list, that is DELETE #6 — collapse to the reference.
+- **Cross-card consistency.** When optimizing one card in a family, the owner-line format (`1 人（X 线），1 周内定，…`) and the section skeleton must not drift per-card: aggressive per-card trimming can silently regress one card below its siblings (owner loses 线+1周内定, the ## 验收 section gets dropped). On a per-card pass, diff its owner line + section list against a sibling and restore parity. When a family of cards shares the same broken framing premise, converge ONE card to the corrected skeleton first (get it reviewed + published), then re-derive each sibling to mirror that reference skeleton — do not independently re-invent each sibling.
+- **Global boilerplate-strip + retitle = per-card guarded, never a blanket `replace` fallback.** When deleting a globally-duplicated line and retitling its section across N docs: (1) check the line isn't that doc's *substance* — a line that is boilerplate in most docs may be the entire point of one doc; stripping there destroys content. (2) the new header must name **all** sub-blocks still in the section, not just the first — a blanket `replace` fallback will mis-title a doc whose section held more than the stripped part. Per-doc compute the remaining content and title to it; exclude any doc the user flagged as do-not-touch.
+- **Applicability guard — this 范式 is ONLY for 执行/域卡.** Do NOT apply it to: a **spec** (the detail IS the deliverable), an **ops runbook/playbook** (steps are the value), a **strategy doc** (WHAT/WHY/WHEN, different purpose), or an **index doc** (rule there is define-once + cross-section dedup, not altitude-strip). Blanket-applying the strip to those destroys them — stop and ask scope instead of auto-processing a different doc kind.
+- **Premise-rejection guard.** Line-tightening is the wrong tool when the user rejects the doc's *framing premise*, not a line.
+  - Signals: "这不对 / 没有 X 之分 / 什么玩意儿 / 这是什么东西" aimed at the doc's organizing concept, not one sentence.
+  - Why: the whole lower structure (红线/里程碑/验收/owner 拆分) is coherent only relative to that dead premise, so per-line edits produce compliant-but-weak output.
+  - Required flow: STOP line edits → confirm the corrected core with the user (one short question, don't guess again — this failure class recurs precisely from re-guessing) → re-derive 负责人/红线/里程碑/验收/依赖兜底 from the corrected core as a **draft for review** (not a blind blast-write) → publish on approval.
+  - Repeat signal: repeated user "这是什么/什么玩意儿" on the same card = the premise is wrong; escalate to re-derive, do not keep tightening.
+
+## 句子层（吸收 Strunk《风格的要素》，仅取适合中文交付文档的；英文语法/标点规则不适用，已剔除）
+
+> 英文文档：用完整 Strunk 规则（含被本节剔除的语法/标点条），本节只是中文交付子集。
+
+- 主动语态、点名施动者：写"谁做什么"，不写"被…/由…完成"（呼应 DELETE #4 无动作语气词）。
+- 肯定式陈述：直接说"必须 X"，不绕"不是不 X / 并非没有"。
+- 具体优于空泛：用 数字/对象/阈值，删"全面提升/大力推进/高度重视/至关重要"这类空话（呼应 KEEP 的数值阈值）。
+- 删冗词的定式：把"是否…的问题/在…的情况下/做出…的决定/关于…方面"压成 "是否…/…时/决定…/…"。
+- 相关词靠拢、少套从句：修饰语紧挨被修饰对象，长定语拆短句，避免一句里多层"的…的…"。
+- 强调位放句首或句尾：最该被记住的词别埋在句子中间。
+- 结论前置（BLUF / 倒金字塔，业内通行做法）：bullet、段落开头先放**结论 / 动作 / 信息词**，例子和非结论性背景后置——读者扫读，埋在后面的结论会被跳过。**但会改变结论的条件不算"例子"**：凡是改变结论、适用范围、红线 / NO-GO / 阈值 / 例外 / 责任边界的条件，必须与结论同句同屏，不得降级到后面或塞进括号弱化（如「满足 A、B、C 时，做 X」，不要用括号把条件视觉降级）。作用范围：bullet/段落级，区别于上一条词级"强调位"；只重排各 bullet/段落内部，不得为前置结论删除或降级 KEEP 项，执行卡仍按固定骨架排序。
+- 防分词歧义：中文动宾或多义连写串可能被切成另一个意思——「门禁止血」会读成「门 / 禁止 / 血」。加分隔、连接词或重排消歧（「门禁来止血」）。只改**真实会误读、误切后动作/对象/责任会变**的词组；通行术语、项目内已定义术语、读者熟悉的短词不为消歧而重写，避免 churn。
+
+## 中文自然表达（吸收 humanizer-cn 的交付文档子集）
+
+目标不是"更像人"，而是去掉 AI 腔/广告腔/假深度，让读者一眼看清事实、动作、边界。
+
+- 删宏大意义词：彰显、标志着、里程碑、树立标杆、重新定义、开启新篇章。改成实际变化、对象、结果。
+- 删动词堆砌：致力于、旨在、聚焦于、依托于、围绕、基于、着眼于。改成"谁为谁做什么"。
+- 删广告口吻：精心打造、匠心、领先、一站式、全链路、赋能、助力。保留能力、边界、验收条件。
+- 删模糊归因：业内认为、专家表示、相关人士透露、多方消息显示。要么给真实来源，要么改成"未验证"。
+- 删套路结尾：未来可期、任重道远、砥砺前行、让我们拭目以待。结尾只留下一步动作、风险或决定。
+- 不强行书面化：保留用户认可的短句、白话、紧凑 `/` 和 `+` 枚举；只修元语、重复、空泛、病句。
+- 不引入创作向技巧：不要为了"有人味"加入第一人称、幽默、情绪、跑题插入语；交付文档以清楚、可执行为准。
+
+## COMMENT-SAFE EDITING (hard rule)
+
+Never destroy collaborative comments. Before editing a collaborative doc, fetch its real title and count comments.
+
+- 0 team comments on a doc you own: full overwrite can be safe after title/body checks.
+- >0 team comments: do not overwrite the whole doc. Use a platform-safe targeted edit, or return a read-only audit for the user to apply.
+- **A restructure that deletes, renames, merges, or reorders a section must re-resolve every internal reference that points into the changed area.** The reference-label residual-scan verifies a pointer's *wording* (the old title/label is gone), but a Rewrite that removes or renames a target leaves an `[title](#anchor)`, a "见〔X 域卡〕", a "see the Y section", or a numbered-section cross-reference **dangling** even when its text is untouched — and a moved KEEP/decided-point a pointer no longer reaches is a silent drop. After a structural edit, list the document's internal cross-references/anchors and confirm each still resolves to a present target (repoint or remove otherwise) — the prose-navigation counterpart of the comment-anchor integrity rules below.
+
+  - **Inbound references must be re-resolved too — that half is what link checkers miss.** The re-resolve above is intra-document, but a deleted/renamed section is just as often named from *other* artifacts, including **non-Markdown files a doc linter never opens** (install/build scripts, CI configs, Makefile help, code comments); a prose pointer (`见 README 的「X」段`) is invisible to a link checker anyway, since those resolve the *file* and commonly discard the `#fragment`. So on any heading you delete or rename, run `git grep -F --untracked -- "$old_heading"` repo-wide, then repeat for its **anchor slug** (`install-and-update`) — `[x](README.md#install-and-update)` carries the slug, not the heading text, and the link checker strips the fragment, so the literal search alone misses every anchored link. `-F --` keeps a `-`-leading heading from parsing as an option; `--untracked` keeps a new unstaged file from reading as clean. Read the exit code: `0` = repoint the hits, `1` = clean, `≥2` = the scan failed and proves nothing. Neither pass sees a paraphrase — that needs a read. Failure shape: a README section is dropped, and a sibling doc plus a shell script keep telling readers to go read it — each pointer's own wording is untouched, so every residual-scan and link gate stays green until a human reads both files.
+- If changing a quoted/commented string, preserve anchors deliberately or delete/re-add only your own comment at the new text.
+- After any comment-affecting edit, re-list comments and verify anchors/count; do not infer safety from substring search alone.
+- For Feishu/Lark command mechanics, load `references/comment-safe-feishu.md` before editing.
+
+## WORKFLOW
+
+1. Extract the decided-points checklist from the current text.
+2. Apply the DELETE list; keep everything in KEEP.
+3. Rewrite to FORM; confirm every decided point still present.
+4. Dirty-scan = 0 (no internal codes / agent names / meta / Day-Week tokens, no bare-URL refs, no AI腔/广告腔/假深度, no `｜`). A keyword grep is a **fixed-token prefilter, not sufficient** — the 元语自证 / 修辞尾 / 废话-prefix / 跨节重复 classes aren't fixed tokens, so dirty-scan-0 needs the grep **plus** a human read against the DELETE/FORM rubric. "脏扫 0" claimed from grep alone is the false-clean failure.
+5. Push back, respecting the COMMENT-SAFE rule.
+
+**交付前 closeout checklist（阻断项索引，不是通过证书）。** 报「已优化」仍需跑完 Workflow 1-4 + KEEP / decided-point 保全 + 下方 closeout-sweep 全量；本清单只把高频阻断项收敛成可判定的最后一道闸，逐项标 ✓ / N-A、任一未过即不得报已优化（每项指向下方 / FORM 的 canonical 规则，不在此复述全部语义）。发布、同步、commit 前离开生成态，把改过的块当"刚被粘进来"逐行读一遍再判：
+
+1. **callout / 图内文字 = 一个要点**：无多点密块（一坨）就拆或降正文 / 表；图内标签短到不折行、承载性名称按「表达形式匹配内容」条处理。
+2. **管理 / 业务 jargon 对目标读者已 plain-name / gloss**（协议 / API / 字段 / 契约名 + 用户认可的紧凑 `/` `+` 枚举保留；保留项里读者不熟的首次解释）。
+3. **编号连续、父子号同步**；族内同义术语 / label 漂移**全族扫 = 0**。
+4. **图 ↔ 文字无双写**（图承流程、文字留 KEEP 项）；外部基线 / 标准值独立列 + 命名来源，门权威按「外部基线」条（有内部门则其为准，无则标清来源不杜撰）。
+5. **comment-safe**：协作文档先取真实评论数，> 0 则定向编辑不整篇 overwrite + 改后复核锚点 / 条数；N-A 仅限非协作 / 本地件或已取 comments = 0。
+6. **脏扫 = 0**：grep 固定 token + 逐行 standalone-paste 人读（元语 / 修辞尾 / 跨节重复 / 假目标非固定 token，grep 会漏）。
+7. **交付面逐面判定**（走枚举，不是单个 ✓）：先列出本交付物的**全部**面——远端副本 / 各附件 / 各导出件 / 历史多代产物，列不出面的清单等于没跑——再逐面标**四态之一（互斥、不叠加）**：已投放（带回读到的标志，只写「已上传 / 命令成功」不算）/ 授权不投放+理由 / blocked+补救+下一步 / **待安全处置**（命中删除要求即**替代**前三态，单独列不并进 blocked 或待投放；触发为客观命中——凭据 / 受删除请求约束的个人信息 / 已判定有害的错误说明——或有权 owner 的删除决定，拿不准按命中处理并问 owner）；多代并存另标当前版入口与退役方式；有交互源导出的另标已全展开再导并对照清点。**有 blocked 或待安全处置面即不得报已优化 / 已同步。** 三态定义、各自的绕过路径与转出规则见 `references/delivery-face-closeout.md`。
+
+本清单是可判定下限，不替代下方 closeout-sweep 全量（改后重扫早期类、长散文转 bullet / 编号等）；用户还能单 paste 挑出同类缺陷 = 清单未真跑，是 firing 失败，不是"reactive 再补一处"。
+
+- **Review-completeness gate — a reactive single-point pass is not "optimized", and "脏扫 0" from it is a false claim.** When a converged reference card already exists in the family, optimizing a sibling means a **systematic full-card audit against that reference skeleton + the entire rubric in one pass**: scan every section for the same defect classes the reference already shed (RACI/owner-枚举, 阈值机制 owner-detail, jargon/英文 token, 跨节重复, run-on `+`/`、` mega-lines, 元语/why-wall) and fix them all at once before reporting done. Do not declare 已优化/脏扫0 while the user can still point at same-class defects you didn't sweep — that recurring "你不认真看么" is the compliant-but-weak defect. Proactively de-jargon for the product/biz/exec reader; do not wait to be asked "这是什么/看不懂" line by line.
+- **A jargon term/label rename is a family-wide sweep, not per-card.** When plain-ifying a term or label that recurs across sibling cards (a gate name, a status word, an acronym), rename it across the whole card family in one pass and residual-scan the old term = 0 across all family cards; renaming only the card in hand causes intra-family term drift.
+- **Standards-family dirty scan must include cross-doc drift terms.** For R&D standards, scan all sibling docs for old jargon, plain-text doc references, and bulk-replace artifacts before reporting done. Typical Chinese team-doc cleanup terms include `owner`, `deadline`, `runbook`, `Bitable`, `lockfile 未漂移`, `有限值`, bare quoted sibling titles, and spacing artifacts like `负责人 和` or `截止时间 和`. Preserve true protocol/field names when they are part of the technical contract, but rewrite management/action wording into reader-facing Chinese.
+- **Full-pass ≠ token-pass — every audited line must be parsed as if user just pasted it standalone.** Full-card R1 / "逐行修改" / "整文档优化" 都让 attention 摊薄 across N lines → pattern-match 过快 → token-level defects 经常漏：同义词堆（"宁过度拒答不越界" + "不按比例" + "0 容忍" 三处同 threshold）、paren 重述前句（"AI 只读、只建议、只生成草稿" 第 3 项是 "只建议" 的子情况）、reorder 后 ordinal 错位（序换 "A 改为 B" → "B 不是 A" 但 "前者" 仍指 A）、单 sentence 内正反复述（"须给路径，不得只否决不给出路"）、severity paren 与 sibling rule verbatim subset（红线 L1 severity + 五前置 L2 同句）。规则：full-pass 每行必跑 standalone-paste-parse — 每 token 检 redundancy / 每 paren 与前句配对扫 echo / 每 "前者/后者/前一项" 在 reorder 后追位 / 每 sub-list 与 cross-section verbatim subset 配对查 R2 ladder。声明 "R1 clean" 而 user 单 paste 即可挑出问题 = evidence-depth overstatement；下一句 single-line paste 必破。
+- **New drafts don't escape the rubric.** Any newly-drafted content during this workflow — premise-rejection re-derive, doc split / new sub-card creation, family-wide refactor, or skeleton-from-scratch — must run steps 1–4 (decided-points → DELETE → FORM → dirty-scan = 0) before push. "User approved the split / structure / premise core" approves the *structure*, not the content; the rubric still applies to every new draft. Skipping line-by-line audit on new content lets 元语 / cross-句正反复述 / label-self dup / R2 ladder verbatim subset / 假目标 slip through, and the next message will be "有用技能优化内容么".
+  - **Cadence for added blocks**: owner decides substance → run one tighten pass each time deliverable text/structure settles → a final closeout sweep before "done".
+  - **The closeout sweep is a read separate from drafting** — leave generate-mode and re-read the changed blocks as if just pasted, swept by the defect-classes present, re-scanning an earlier class if a later edit reintroduces it. Applying the rubric inline while still drafting is the default miss (established self-editing practice: one blended sweep lowers catch rate).
+  - **What the sweep does (FORM)**: gloss reader-facing or newly-coined jargon at first use (one-stop 术语 block when terms scatter; preserve protocol/API/field/contract names, explain only if the target reader — default: a new teammate without source context — wouldn't know them); convert long prose to bullets and decision-blobs to numbered lists.
+  - **Fire on the objective edits** (add/**delete**/split/merge paragraphs or list items — deleting a paragraph or list item also fires, since it can silently drop a KEEP / decided point — new heading/callout, prose↔bullet/numbered, section reorder, introduce/rename term), not a vague "materially"; trivial already-rubriced edits stay exempt **only for same-workflow carry-over with audience and publication surface unchanged** (re-fire when an already-swept block is moved to a different reader, publish target, or a later/unrelated workflow). Leaving these for the user to surface term-by-term or 段-by-段 is the "baggage 是啥 / 这也要优化成 1,2,3" reactive-discovery failure.
+  - **A regeneration / re-sync that rebuilds or may change reader-facing prose/structure is itself a firing pass — machine re-emit is NOT exempt.** Rebuilding a deliverable from updated source and re-publishing it (re-pushing a Feishu/wiki page, regenerating a doc) feels mechanical, but each such regen re-authors prose/structure and must run the closeout sweep on the changed output — running tighten once on the first draft and skipping it across later regens is how filler/meta accretes unseen. (A byte-identical republish, metadata-only sync, or unchanged already-swept block stays exempt.) The sweep especially targets review-round artifacts that pile up across iterations: in a **non-provenance** deliverable, process/version self-narration (version-composition notes, "已过 N 方评审" review-history) and review-provenance tags (parenthetical "(per <reviewer/rule>)"-style cross-refs added during review rounds) are 元语自证 / 编辑性括号 (DELETE #1/#9) — they belong in chat or review notes, never baked in; a genuine changelog / audit / release-note may legitimately carry version content.
+
+- **终版修订不 append，每轮修订过零损核对。** 适用域：**可原位维护的 reader-facing 交付物**（本体即 changelog / 审计记录 / 发布说明 / 正式勘误，或已签发、append-only、必须保留原版的文档，走版本化或附录，不受此禁令）。对适用域内已定稿交付物的后续修订：就地整合进原结构（改正文、改表格、必要时重排节），不得在文末追加「修订 / 更新 / 补充说明」节——逐轮追加会把终版退化成过程日志。**协作文档上 comment-safe 优先于不 append**：评论锚点使安全的原位重排不可行时，允许版本化替代件或明确的勘误/附录（旧版保留并指向新版），不得为满足形式禁令破坏评论。每轮修订收尾跑零损核对：**对照的是稳定标识 + 关键值/单位/结论限定的清单，且核对应关系（哪个值/限定挂在哪个实体/系列/行上——值全在但对应关系接错同样是损），计数只是快速 sanity check**——计数不变可能是错误替换（假绿），计数变化可能是正当的合并/撤回（假红），本轮有意的增删并入预期变更清单后再判；**清单随工作版或访问受控的工作区持久化（工作记录不进 reader-facing 发布目录）并绑定修订前版本**——修订跨会话时从该基线重建 diff，不得从当前输出反推基线（丢了的实体会被当成"本来就没有"）；**派生物同查**——由本文重生成的图表 / 导出件 / 附件按同一清单比对修订前后，不凭观感扫一眼——重生成是最容易静默丢数据的一步。
+- **读者版与工作版分离：过程痕迹换归宿，不是删除。** 同一交付物既要服务外部读者、又要承载内部工作记录（全量附录、覆盖工作表、评审史、修订史）时，读者版围绕「怎么读 / 只记三件事 / 怎么用」重构，覆盖工作表、修订史、评审记录只进工作版。**拆分本身是结构决定，不归本技能自裁**：spec / standards / guideline 族按上面 When-to-use 的规则先报拆分候选、owner 确定 doc set 后执行；单体交付物的拆分也须用户或内容 owner 明确同意，拆时登记：**工作版为承重内容的唯一可编辑真值源，读者版单向派生**（承重字段——数字、限定、结论——不得在读者版单独改，发现差异回工作版改再派生；读者版的表达层调整也须回写工作版或存为可重放的派生调整，否则下次重派生会静默覆盖）、工作版的访问边界（评审史等内部内容不随读者版外发）、同步绑定的工作版版本；**读者版评论反向回流**——每次从工作版重生成读者版前，先处置读者版**全部**未解决评论：涉承重内容的登记回工作版处置完再派生，其余按 comment-safe 红线保留锚点，防止两版长期分叉或评论静默丢失。上面 regen 条删的过程自述在有工作版时不是丢弃——移过去。（调研类交付物侧的同款纪律由 `multi-perspective-research` 的"过程自省不进交付物"条持有。）
+- **交付面：改完 ≠ 交出去（投放 / 退役 / 导出保真）。** 上两条管的是文内不丢与正副本权威；交付物还有一组**文外的面**——远端副本（飞书 / wiki 页）、附件（pdf / 大图）、导出件（png / jpg），以及历史上生成过的多代同名产物。逐面判定，未判定不得报「已更新 / 已同步」：**①投放要回读远端、不认本地动作**——上传 / 推送命令返回成功不等于那一份已经变（超时后半成、权限被拒、覆盖到错误的页面、缓存仍吐旧版），本地改完、远端还是旧版是最常见的静默残缺；核到本轮的可识别标志才算已投放。「不投放」只能是经授权的排除，**推不上去是 blocked 不是「不投放」**，有 blocked 面或待安全处置面即不得报已同步。**②当前版给稳定入口，旧版退役只用归档或原位标「已过期 → 指向新版」两种可逆做法，本条不授权删除**；反过来，涉凭据 / 个人信息 / 有害错误说明这类**被要求删除**的面，可逆做法不构成处置，但判定与执行都不归本技能——单标 `待安全处置` 转出给安全 / 法务 / 内容 owner，与投放类 blocked 分开列，其结案前不得报已同步。**③交互源（可折叠节点、悬浮标签、可滚动区、分页表）导成静态图前全部展开再导**，导出后对照交互源清点承载性实体。**③的 oracle 与零损核对不同**：那条比的是重生成前后（同一路径两次输出），比不出交互 → 静态这一次性的丢失。三态定义、各自的绕过路径、退役沿革与转出规则见 `references/delivery-face-closeout.md`。
+
+When the user probes sentence-by-sentence ("这是废话么 / 什么意思 / 能精简么"), answer per this rubric, give the tightened version, and apply it — don't ask permission unless the comment-safe red line is triggered.
+
+## Reference Loading
+
+- For Feishu/Lark comment preservation, range update mechanics, overwrite pitfalls, and cross-doc rename safety, read `references/comment-safe-feishu.md`.
+- 交付面收尾（投放回读、三态定义与绕过路径、旧版退役与「被要求删除」的转出、静态导出全展开）展开在 `references/delivery-face-closeout.md`；closeout 第 7 项与「交付面」条都指向它。
+
+## CROSS-MODEL / CODEX CO-REVIEW CAVEAT
+
+Cross-model agreement is a recommendation, not a decision: take only rubric hits, reject every 口语化→书面 rewrite and any re-expansion of a deliberately terse line, present its output verbatim, state what you took/rejected and why — `references/cross-model-co-review.md`.

package/dist/assets/marketplace/plugins/ccl-skills/skills/tighten-doc/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "Tighten Doc"
+  short_description: "Tighten docs for clarity and concision"
+  default_prompt: "Use $tighten-doc to make a deliverable doc clear, concise, and reader-oriented while preserving its decisions."

package/dist/assets/marketplace/plugins/ccl-skills/skills/tighten-doc/references/comment-safe-feishu.md

@@ -0,0 +1,93 @@
+# Feishu Comment-Safe Editing
+
+Applicability: the principle is universal: never destroy collaborative comments. The `lark-cli`, `replace_range`, `selection-with-ellipsis`, and `comment_id` mechanics below are Feishu-only. On Google Docs, Notion, Confluence, or git markdown, keep the principle and use that platform's safe-edit primitive.
+
+Before editing any collaborative doc, fetch its real title and count its comments.
+
+- 0 team comments on docs you authored: full overwrite is safe after title/body checks.
+- More than 0 team comments: never overwrite the whole doc. Rebuilding blocks orphans every comment; the platform API cannot re-anchor an existing comment, cannot set a comment's original author, and table-cell blocks cannot take API comments. Use paragraph-level `replace_range` on just the target span, return a read-only audit with `原文 -> 改法 + 位置`, or export all comments first.
+- Renaming: check the real title first. Usually you only need to fix the link text in your own docs, not touch the commented doc.
+
+## Anchor Preservation
+
+- Feishu re-anchors a comment by matching its quoted text, not by block id.
+- A `replace_range` section rebuild does not orphan comments whose exact quoted substring survives byte-identical in the new content.
+- Before rebuilding a commented section, list every comment's quoted substring in it and preserve each one byte-identical.
+- A comment orphans only when you change the exact string it quotes, typically a reworded heading or exact cell text.
+- Your own comment anchored to a string you must change: delete and re-add at the new text. Do not `@mention` unless the user asks. The author field stays bot/you regardless.
+- If the quoted string is unchanged, do nothing; it auto-survives.
+- Re-fetch ids right before any delete. Never reuse ids from an earlier listing because every rebuild can regenerate them.
+
+## Verification
+
+- After any comment-affecting edit, re-list all comments and inspect anchors plus reply text.
+- Do not assume a target count. A count increase may be a teammate comment that arrived mid-edit; keep it.
+- Hunt for stale duplicates still anchored to pre-edit text.
+- If deleting a section would leave a numbering gap that cannot be safely renumbered because later heading text is comment-locked, re-add the leading section instead of renumbering.
+- Comment count is the authoritative orphan check, not substring presence. Feishu rendered text for a table cell or heading may not reproduce the stored quote verbatim because of wrapping, ordinal prefixes, spacing, or trailing spaces.
+- Treat `anchor substring not found` on table/heading content as a render-vs-quote false alarm unless the comments API count dropped or no longer lists the comment with its quote.
+- Verify a quote you actually changed by re-reading the cell, not by full-text substring search.
+- For these doc edits, a mutating-edit call's success/`ok` status is not proof the edit applied — re-read the target block/content and confirm the new text is present before reporting it done (distinct from the comment re-list above: that proves comments survived; this proves the edit itself landed). Block/anchor ids resolved under one API version, or from an earlier fetch, may silently no-op under another version while still returning success — re-fetch ids in the target version first.
+- General principle (beyond doc edits; the broader write-finality version lives with `feature-risk-router`'s `write-finality` tag): verify the authoritative postcondition, not the call's status, via a **finite ladder** — direct read if available → operation receipt / status / version / ETag / audit-event or effect id → bounded eventual-consistency retry (cap attempts/window) → if no authoritative read exists (fire-and-forget, write-only, encrypted), report `accepted-not-applied` / `unverifiable`, never `done` and never loop unbounded. The postcondition may be "durably accepted with an idempotency/effect id," not only "new content present."
+
+## Cross-Doc Rename
+
+A cross-doc term/domain rename is comment-safe work, not find/replace.
+
+1. Enumerate every referencing doc.
+2. For each doc, list every comment's quoted substring.
+3. Check whether any quote contains the token being renamed. If none does, the rename cannot orphan a comment.
+4. On any comment-bearing doc, use per-section `replace_range`; never whole-doc overwrite.
+5. Change only the renamed token and keep all other text byte-identical.
+6. Re-verify comment count unchanged after each section before moving to the next.
+7. Rename the card title with `--new-title`; the body has no H1.
+8. For `--selection-by-title`, include the `## ` prefix.
+9. Parse `lark-cli` stdout by `raw_decode` from the first `{` because the trailing version banner breaks plain `json.loads`.
+
+## Doc-Mention Cites (引用 chip)
+
+A Feishu doc-mention `<cite type="doc" doc-id="<token>">` renders a chip showing the target doc's title. The chip's `title` is a snapshot captured when that doc-id was first mentioned. It was observed not to refresh when the target was later renamed, and re-inserting an empty cite re-reads the same stale cache.
+
+- Empty cite `<cite type="doc" doc-id="<token>"></cite>` → title comes from the stale mention cache. A doc first cited while still unnamed (placeholder title) keeps showing that placeholder even after the doc is correctly named.
+- Inner-text cite `<cite type="doc" doc-id="<token>">目标标题</cite>` → Feishu copies the text into the `title` attribute AND keeps a duplicate plain-text sibling, rendering "chip + 重复标题".
+- To force a specific chip label: explicit `title` ATTRIBUTE with empty inner — `<cite type="doc" doc-id="<token>" title="目标标题"></cite>`. Clean chip, no duplicate, still a clickable doc mention.
+- An explicit `title` is a PINNED label: if the target is renamed later, the chip silently shows the old hardcoded title. A later rename means finding and rewriting every inbound cite, or chips go stale-wrong.
+- One block can hold several cites (e.g. "以 A 和 B 为准"). Fix every cite in the block, not just the first match. `block_replace` rewrites the whole block, so reconstruct the entire block content preserving all surrounding text and inline markup — only mutate the cite elements — or you drop prose like "上线评审用 X 逐项确认。".
+- The fix loop must re-fetch ids each iteration (`block_replace` assigns a new block id) and decide "already fixed?" by comparing PARSED semantics (cite `doc-id` + `title` + empty inner + no duplicate label sibling), never by raw serialized-string compare: the API re-normalizes attribute order / escaping, so a string compare never converges and the loop churns forever.
+- Verify after: each cite's `title` attribute equals the intended label and no copy of the label follows `</cite>`.
+
+## Docx Title Rename (v2)
+
+To rename a `--api-version v2` docx whose title is its title block:
+
+- `block_replace` on the title block fails; the title block is not block-replaceable.
+- `--new-title` returned `result: success` but left the title unchanged (observed no-op in v2). Do not trust it; verify the result.
+- Use `docs +update --api-version v2 --command str_replace --pattern '旧标题' --content '新标题'`: the title-block text is inline plain text, so str_replace rewrites it. `drive +inspect` then shows the new title and the wiki node-tree title syncs.
+- `str_replace` is full-doc and replaces EVERY occurrence of `--pattern`, not just the title — if the title text recurs in a heading, table, or body line it gets rewritten too. Preflight: fetch and count matches, use a pattern unique to the title, and after the edit verify only the title changed.
+- Do not change Cross-Doc Rename step 7: its `--new-title` applies only to the card-title / domain-card rename flow, not to a general v2 docx. For a general docx, verify the title actually changed.
+- Renaming the target was observed not to update cite chips pointing to it (stale snapshot, above). After a rename, rewrite each referencing chip with the explicit `title` attribute.
+
+## Range Update Mechanics
+
+- `lark-cli docs +update --mode replace_range/delete_range` locators match the doc's rendered text, not markdown syntax. Drop prefixes such as `### ` and `- `.
+- `--selection-with-ellipsis 'X...X'` with identical start and end is unreliable. Use two distinct substrings as `start...end` bounding exactly the target span.
+- A non-matching locator is a no-op and is safe to probe.
+- By-title section rebuild is more reliable than a single-cell ellipsis locator.
+- Batch many small in-section edits into one rebuild instead of one rebuild per tweak.
+
+## Full Overwrite Pitfalls
+
+For `lark-cli docs +update --mode overwrite`:
+
+- The `--markdown` value must be `@./relativefile`. The `@` means read-from-file; without it, the literal argument string is written as the doc body.
+- The file must be a relative path inside the current working directory. Write temp markdown into the working directory and reference `@./name`.
+- A Feishu docx renders its title block as the H1. If uploaded markdown also starts with `# <title>`, the title doubles. Strip the leading title line from the upload body.
+- The CLI prepends a version/update-check banner to stdout. Parse from the first `{`; hard-stop on `ok:false` or validation error.
+- Always re-fetch and grep-verify the actual changed line and title-line count.
+- Do fetch/strip/replace body surgery in Python instead of `sed`/`awk`; BSD-vs-GNU differences break these one-liners on macOS.
+
+## Renumbering
+
+- After a renumber, locate the target section by heading text, never by section number.
+- If a doc was renumbered, splitting on an ordinal prefix can grab the wrong section and silently fail.
+- A failed assert before the write means the temp file was not produced. Verify the no-op left the doc and comment count intact instead of assuming the push applied.

package/dist/assets/marketplace/plugins/ccl-skills/skills/tighten-doc/references/cross-model-co-review.md

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+# Cross-model / codex co-review caveat
+
+A second model (codex etc.) co-reviewing the doc systematically pushes toward formal/书面 register: formalizing punchy 白话, deleting user-approved compact `/`/`+` enumerations, re-expanding deliberately short lines, adding "客户/验证" corporate nouns. **Cross-model agreement is a recommendation, not a decision.** Accept only hits matching this rubric (元语 / 翻旧账 / 修辞尾 / 重复 / 结构: low-info section, subtitle 元语); reject every "口语化 → 书面" rewrite and any re-expansion of an intentionally terse line — the user's short/白话/punchy taste wins. Present its output verbatim, then state what you took, what you rejected, and why.

package/dist/assets/marketplace/plugins/ccl-skills/skills/tighten-doc/references/delivery-face-closeout.md

@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+# 交付面收尾：投放 / 退役 / 导出保真
+
+`SKILL.md` 的「交付面」条与 closeout 第 7 项的展开。文内零损由「终版修订不 append + 零损核对」持有，正副本权威由「读者版与工作版分离」持有；本文只管**文外**的那一组面：远端副本（飞书 / wiki 页）、附件（pdf / 大图）、导出件（png / jpg），以及历史上生成过的多代同名产物。
+
+逐面判定，未判定不得报「已更新 / 已同步」。
+
+## ① 投放：判定要回读，不认本地动作
+
+本轮改动是否已推到**每一个**面。
+
+- **上传 / 推送命令返回成功 ≠ 那一份已经变**：超时后半成、权限被拒、覆盖到错误的页面、缓存仍吐旧版，都会让本地看着已发、远端还是旧的。回读**远端那一份**，核到本轮的可识别标志（新增段落 / 版本号 / 修订时间）才算已投放。
+- **「不投放」只能是经授权的排除**（如「工作版不外发」这类决定）。
+- **推不上去不是「不投放」，是 blocked**——权限被拒、远端访问不了、工具不可用，一律按 blocked 记：已试的补救、残余风险、下一个解封动作。**只要还有 blocked 面就不得报「已更新 / 已同步」**，只能报「已投放 N 面 + 待投放清单」。
+- 把 blocked 写成「不投放 + 理由」勾过去，是本条的主要绕过路径，也正是它要防的那个失败。
+
+## ② 当前版可辨识 + 旧版退役
+
+多代并存时读者要能不问作者就判断「该看哪一份」。
+
+- 当前版给**稳定入口**：固定文件名 / 链接 / 置顶。
+- 旧版退役只用**可逆的两种**：归档到明确的历史目录，或原位标「已过期 → 指向新版」。受 comment-safe 或留档义务约束的，按不-append 条的版本化替代件处理。
+- **本条不授权删除。** 退役要解决的是「读者看错版本」，可逆的两种已完全达成；删除只多换来不可逆风险。确需删除属内容 owner 自己的删除授权流程，不是本清单可勾的一档，也不该由「已退役」这一步顺手做掉。
+  - 沿革：本条曾允许删除，两轮对抗评审各暴一条数据损失路径（删除被列为平级选项；「owner / 非唯一留档 / 可恢复」三条件可自证——写下三句即可勾过），故取消该档。
+
+### 当删除是被要求的：转出，不在这里判
+
+旧版含凭据 / 密钥、受删除请求约束的个人信息、或已判定有害的错误操作说明时，归档或标过期都**不构成处置**（旧链接、搜索、缓存、归档目录仍可达）。
+
+但处置**不归本技能**：「删到什么范围算干净」「缓存 / 索引 / CDN / 备份 / 他人副本怎么算」「评论该保全还是销毁」「留存义务与删除要求谁优先」全部在安全 / 法务 / 内容 owner 那边。**在这里自行判定就是又一处可自证的结论**——与被取消的删除三条件同一形态。
+
+做法是**停下并转出**：
+
+- 该面单独标 `待安全处置`，**与投放类 blocked 分开列、不并进「待投放」汇总**——两者动作与结案条件都不同，混在一起会把安全项掩盖成普通待办。
+- 写明触发它的规则或 owner 决策**来源与责任人**，交给该 owner 结案。
+- 该 owner 结案前，该面不得通过第 7 项、不得报已同步。
+- 处置周期长于本次交付时，可由该 owner 授权**单独关闭本次文档交付**，但该面仍记未结——**不得因为想收尾就把它改判成普通待投放**（防死锁诱导误分类）。
+
+## ③ 静态导出全展开
+
+交互源（可折叠节点、悬浮标签、可滚动区、分页表）导成静态图片 / pdf 时，交互态承载的信息会被静默截掉。
+
+- 导出前把这些态**全部展开**再导。
+- 导出后**对照交互源清点承载性实体**，缺就重导或改用可交互投放。
+- **这条的 oracle 与零损核对不同**：那条比的是重生成前后（同一路径两次输出），比不出交互 → 静态这一次性的丢失。
+
+## closeout 第 7 项的走法
+
+按枚举走，不是单个 ✓：
+
+1. 先列出本交付物的**全部**面——远端副本 / 各附件 / 各导出件 / 历史多代产物。列不出面的清单等于没跑。
+2. 再逐面标**四态之一——互斥且完备，不叠加**：
+   - **已投放**——带回读到的标志（新增段落 / 版本号 / 修订时间）；只写「已上传 / 命令成功」不算。
+   - **授权不投放**——+ 理由。
+   - **blocked**——+ 已试补救 + 下一步（投放侧受阻：权限、网络、工具）。
+   - **待安全处置**——该面命中删除要求（触发见第 4 条）。它**替代**前三态而不是叠加：命中的面不再标已投放 / 授权不投放 / blocked，单独列，不并进 blocked 或待投放汇总。
+3. 多代并存时另标：当前版入口、旧版退役方式（只在归档 / 原位标过期两者中选）。
+4. `待安全处置` 的触发是**客观命中或有权 owner 的决定，不是自由判断**：该面上发现凭据 / 密钥、受删除请求约束的个人信息、或已判定有害的错误操作说明；或内容 / 安全 / 法务 owner 已作出删除决定。命中即按上面「当删除是被要求的」转出——判定范围与执行都不在本技能。**拿不准是否命中时按命中处理并问 owner**：误转出的代价是多问一句，漏转出的代价是泄露内容留在可达面上。
+5. 有交互源导出的：另标已全展开再导并对照清点。
+
+有 blocked 面或 `待安全处置` 面即不得报已优化 / 已同步。

package/dist/assets/marketplace/plugins/ccl-skills/skills/tighten-doc/references/doc-charter-first.md

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+# Doc Charter First — multi-round deliverable docs
+
+For a multi-round deliverable doc (several revision rounds with the reader-owner in the loop — a share doc, a team handbook page, launch material), lock a **doc charter** BEFORE drafting:
+
+| Field | Question it answers |
+| --- | --- |
+| Audience | Who reads this, and what do they already know? Multiple reader classes → per-class reading paths, not one blended doc. |
+| Purpose | What should the reader be able to do or decide after reading? |
+| Venue | Presented (talk outline: one figure + one claim per section) vs self-read (narrative entry page)? Collaborative platform vs repo file? |
+| Length budget | A hard cap for the entry surface; overflow goes to child pages/appendices, the entry gains only a navigation line. |
+
+Rules:
+
+- **Classify each mid-stream ask against the charter instead of appending reactively.** A new request is either in-charter (edit in place), a charter change (re-confirm the charter first, then restructure once), or out-of-scope (park it). Appending every ask as a new section is how a deliverable doc accretes into an unreadable monolith.
+- **A second direction-level correction within one doc effort is the charter-not-locked signal**: stop drafting, lock the charter with the reader-owner (one short structured question), then restructure once against it. Continuing to patch per-correction after that signal produces compliant-but-shapeless output — the same failure class as the premise-rejection guard in `SKILL.md`, one level earlier.
+- The charter is a drafting gate, not a substance owner: substantive decisions still come from the user or the owning skill; the charter only fixes who/what/where/how-long so later asks can be classified.
+- Without a budget, growth restraint does not survive multi-round pressure — set the length budget at charter time and enforce it at each round's closeout, splitting overflow to child pages instead of raising the cap. Splitting stays inside the doc-set authority rule in `SKILL.md`: for a no-owner deliverable doc the reader-owner agrees the split (structure decision, not self-authorized); for spec/standards/guideline families the doc set is owner-settled — flag a split candidate, do not split.

package/dist/assets/marketplace/plugins/ccl-skills/skills/tighten-doc/references/session-vantage-leakage.md

@@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
+# 会话视角泄漏（session-vantage leakage）
+
+agent 写进**持久文档**（README、设计/架构文档、注释与 docstring、决策记录、技能文本、交付报告）的一类废话：句子的立足点是**写作时的那次会话**，而不是仓库/文档本身——它引用只有那次会话看得见的东西，叙述"改了什么"而不是"现在是什么"，或在跟一个已经离场的评审者辩论。这些句子在 HEAD 处的读者眼里要么解析不了，要么是噪音。它是 tighten-doc DELETE #1（元语自证）的近亲，但形态更隐蔽：内容像在传递信息，实际传递的是作者的工作过程。
+
+## 唯一判据
+
+对每个可疑句问：**一个只有 HEAD 处仓库/文档、没有任何会话记录、PR 讨论串或未提交草稿的读者，能否解析这句里的每个引用、核验其中每个断言？**
+
+- 不能 → 先把句中**仍然为真的事实**改写成能独立站住的现在时陈述，再删掉围绕它的过程叙述；只有一个事实都不含的句子（审计编号、控制流复述）才整句删。
+- 能 → 不算泄漏，哪怕它听起来"有历史感"。但在**现状类**页面（README、文档、docstring）里，一段能解析的"变更故事"仍是变更叙事——按第 3 类处理，搬到它的家（commit / PR / 决策记录 / postmortem）。
+
+## 分类（8 类）
+
+1. **死的设计会话引用**：`(decision 7)`、`(audit C2)`、`design §4.7`、`plan §1.4`、阶段代号（`T4` / `W3` / `P-I`）、"the design ledger"、"(B ruling)"。有已提交的 owner 就按名字+路径引用；没有就删引用、把它的事实句改写成能独立站住的话。
+2. **stack / PR 视角**："a later PR in this stack"、"this PR adds"、"the previous commit"、"上一个 MR"。写已交付的机制或扩展点；未完成的工作进 `TODO` 标记或 issue 引用。
+3. **变更叙事与指示性时间戳**："used to"、"no longer"、"the old X"、"以前 / 现在 / 不再"，以及在**现状类页面**里无锚点、只在写作那一刻有意义的指代（"this cut"、"本次改动"、"today"、与过去对比的"now"）——同样措辞出现在已点明版本/事故的变更史体裁里不算。写现在的行为；一个已修复的回归写成**现在时反事实**（"没有 X 时会 Y"），不写仓库史（"以前会 Y"）。**稳定的版本标识不在此列**：API / schema / 协议 / 产品版本号（`v1` 端点、`apiVersion: v2`、wire 版本、包版本）在 HEAD 可解析且决定客户端该用哪份契约——它们是现状事实，必须保留；本类删的是**把版本当叙事**的用法（"v1 时我们是这么做的，现在改了"）。
+4. **评审编排**："Rejected in review:"、"the reviewer confirmed"、草稿序号（"v5 of this note"）、轮次归因（"r3 accepted"）。留下决定与理由本身，删掉"谁在什么时候说的"。
+5. **对评审者辩护的注释**："the cast is safe — it simply…"、"this is correct because…"、"这里不会越界，因为…"。一条为自己正确性辩护的注释面向的是评审者，不是维护者：写出让代码安全的那个不变量；代码自己已能说明的就删。
+6. **复述与推导流水账**：控制流叙述（"first we X, then we Y"）、测试走查、显然分支的证明。删；只保留非显然的契约或不变量。
+7. **hedge 与规划残留**："probably fine for now"、"should be enough"、没有标记的"以后再说"。升级为 `TODO`/`FIXME` 并写实际界限，或直接写成那个界限；删掉 hedge。
+8. **工作语言碎片**：在整体是一种语言的段落里残留另一种工作语言的片段、分隔符（如私有分节线、未翻译的术语），或反向。翻译或删除。
+
+## 同族：现状类页面里的三种"会烂"的写法
+
+第 3 类的推广，用于 README / 架构文档 / 包说明这类**描述现状**的页面（决策记录、postmortem、changelog 除外——变更故事是它们的家）：
+
+- **变更史代替现状**："previously / now / no longer / renamed / was moved"、PR 号、commit、stack 位置。写现在的机制；变更故事放 commit / PR / 决策记录 / postmortem，需要时链过去。
+- **实现状态注记**：散文或图里的 "implemented!"、"future: …"、"TODO: 上线后…"。状态会烂；仓库布局与清单文件才是状态的家。要么写成事实，要么变成有 owner 的 `TODO`/issue。
+- **强调通胀**：到处加粗、大写、"critically / 务必 / 极其重要"。什么都强调等于什么都不强调——只给**改变行为的那个从句**保留强调。
+
+## 不是泄漏（过矫正陷阱）
+
+无辅助的引用清扫会朝两个方向犯错：删掉了耐久引用，留着死引用。以下必须保留：
+
+- **issue / ticket 引用**：`#1470`、`TODO(name):`、"issue #N owns the follow-up" 在 HEAD 可解析——任何页面都留，不搬家。
+- **决策记录与 postmortem 里对已合并 PR / issue 的引用**：这两类文档的家就是变更故事，是被允许的证据引用。
+- **抑制说明**：lint-disable 的理由、coverage-ignore 的理由、空 catch 的解释——是必需散文；理由写错要改，不能删。
+- **现在时反事实的回归钉**："没有 X 时会 Y"、"一个 naive 的 X 会…"。
+- **实测数值**："(measured: 512 nests ≈ 0.15s)" 校准常量——"measured" 这个出处词是承重的。
+- **运行时的新旧状态**："旧连接排空后新连接才接受"是运行时生命周期，不是变更史。
+- **决策记录变更故事节里的阶段名**："第一版交付了 X"在该节里是安全的。指示性指代（"this cut" / "本次改动"）在**现状类页面**里禁——那里没有锚点，读者无从知道指的是哪一次；在变更史体裁（决策记录、postmortem、changelog、发布说明）里，只要所在文档或小节已点明它指哪个版本 / 发布 / 事故 / 决定，这就是正常行文，不要删。
+- **稳定版本标识**：`v1` 路由前缀、`apiVersion`、schema/wire 版本、包版本、迁移目标版本——现状事实，任何页面都留。
+- **按设计就在仓外解析的外部引用**：标准章节号（RFC 9110 §10.1.5）、设计稿的 frame 名——§ 禁令针对未提交内部草稿，不针对外部标准或自持章节编号的已提交文档。
+- **项目口吻与体裁形式**："我们"作为项目声音；决策记录的 Alternatives considered 节。
+
+## 修法与顺序
+
+1. 要求明确 scope；不推断为全仓。冻结的历史（归档记录、录制的 fixture / snapshot、被测输出）不动——它们保留原始口吻。
+2. 先只读审计：用批量 grep（含隐藏目录）找候选，再**逐条语义判断**——批量模式只是探针不是定义；每一轮人工复核都能找到 grep 漏掉的实例，所以还要读 scope 内最密的散文（模块 docstring、README、决策记录）。
+3. 先改 owner 再改派生物：生成的目录/表 → 改源 JSDoc / 模板再重生成；模型可见的字符串 → 措辞即行为，标记为需 snapshot/eval 支撑的改动而不是顺手改词。
+4. 删任何一句之前，先枚举这句的全部命题（tighten-doc "保留完整命题"纪律），再核对上面的过矫正陷阱：把义务改成了背书、把假设写成了已交付、删了真事实、丢了出处——都是错误的清扫。
+5. 验证：重跑批量探针，只允许上面的例外与本节自身命中；确认剩余引用都能在 HEAD 解析；对触及的面跑相应文档 gate。
+
+## 与本仓其他规则的关系
+
+- 与 DELETE #1（元语自证）、#9（编辑性括号）、#3（修辞尾巴）同族，但本节按**视角**归类，便于在评审 agent 生成的持久文档时逐类扫。
+- `multi-perspective-research` 的"过程自省不进交付物"、`skill-extraction-workflow` 的"实现的决策记录写现在时、禁 spec-speak"是同一原则在各自交付物上的形态。
+- 代码评审时按 `product-rd-workflow/references/code-review-checklist.md` 的注释与文档条目引用本节。