@codyswann/lisa 2.349.1 → 2.351.0

package/plugins/lisa-expo-cursor/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-expo",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Expo/React Native-specific skills, agents, rules, and MCP servers",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-harper-fabric/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-harper-fabric",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Harper/Fabric-specific rules for TypeScript component apps",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-harper-fabric/.codex-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-harper-fabric",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Harper/Fabric-specific Lisa rules for TypeScript component apps.",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-harper-fabric-agy/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-harper-fabric",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Harper/Fabric-specific rules for TypeScript component apps",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-harper-fabric-copilot/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-harper-fabric",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Harper/Fabric-specific rules for TypeScript component apps",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-harper-fabric-cursor/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-harper-fabric",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Harper/Fabric-specific rules for TypeScript component apps",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-nestjs/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-nestjs",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "NestJS-specific skills (GraphQL, TypeORM) and hooks (migration write-protection)",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-nestjs/.codex-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-nestjs",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "NestJS-specific skills and migration write-protection hooks.",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-nestjs-agy/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-nestjs",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "NestJS-specific skills (GraphQL, TypeORM) and hooks (migration write-protection)",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-nestjs-copilot/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-nestjs",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "NestJS-specific skills (GraphQL, TypeORM) and hooks (migration write-protection)",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-nestjs-cursor/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-nestjs",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "NestJS-specific skills (GraphQL, TypeORM) and hooks (migration write-protection)",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-openclaw/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-openclaw",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Connect staff roles to Telegram or Slack via OpenClaw — facilitator/specialist hub-and-spoke routing and repo-coding topics, for Claude Code and Codex",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-openclaw/.codex-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-openclaw",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Connect staff roles to Telegram or Slack via OpenClaw — facilitator/specialist hub-and-spoke routing and repo-coding topics, across Claude and Codex.",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-openclaw-agy/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-openclaw",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Connect staff roles to Telegram or Slack via OpenClaw — facilitator/specialist hub-and-spoke routing and repo-coding topics, for Claude Code and Codex",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-openclaw-copilot/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-openclaw",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Connect staff roles to Telegram or Slack via OpenClaw — facilitator/specialist hub-and-spoke routing and repo-coding topics, for Claude Code and Codex",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-openclaw-cursor/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-openclaw",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Connect staff roles to Telegram or Slack via OpenClaw — facilitator/specialist hub-and-spoke routing and repo-coding topics, for Claude Code and Codex",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-phaser/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-phaser",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Phaser 4 game-development rules for TypeScript projects",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-phaser/.codex-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-phaser",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Phaser 4 game-development rules for TypeScript projects",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-phaser-agy/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-phaser",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Phaser 4 game-development rules for TypeScript projects",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-phaser-copilot/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-phaser",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Phaser 4 game-development rules for TypeScript projects",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-phaser-cursor/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-phaser",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Phaser 4 game-development rules for TypeScript projects",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-rails/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-rails",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Ruby on Rails-specific hooks — RuboCop linting/formatting and ast-grep scanning on edit",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-rails/.codex-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-rails",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Ruby on Rails-specific skills and hooks for RuboCop and ast-grep scanning on edit.",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-rails-agy/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-rails",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Ruby on Rails-specific hooks — RuboCop linting/formatting and ast-grep scanning on edit",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-rails-copilot/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-rails",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Ruby on Rails-specific hooks — RuboCop linting/formatting and ast-grep scanning on edit",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-rails-cursor/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-rails",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Ruby on Rails-specific hooks — RuboCop linting/formatting and ast-grep scanning on edit",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-typescript/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-typescript",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "TypeScript-specific hooks — Prettier formatting, ESLint linting, ast-grep scanning, and error-suppression blocking on edit",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-typescript/.codex-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-typescript",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "TypeScript-specific hooks for formatting, linting, and ast-grep scanning on edit.",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-typescript-agy/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-typescript",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "TypeScript-specific hooks — Prettier formatting, ESLint linting, ast-grep scanning, and error-suppression blocking on edit",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-typescript-copilot/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-typescript",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "TypeScript-specific hooks — Prettier formatting, ESLint linting, ast-grep scanning, and error-suppression blocking on edit",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-typescript-cursor/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-typescript",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "TypeScript-specific hooks — Prettier formatting, ESLint linting, ast-grep scanning, and error-suppression blocking on edit",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-wiki/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-wiki",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "LLM Wiki — a distributable, git-native markdown knowledge base for Claude Code and Codex",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-wiki/.codex-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-wiki",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "Distributable LLM Wiki kernel — ingest, query, lint, and maintain a git-native markdown knowledge base across Claude and Codex.",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-wiki-agy/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-wiki",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "LLM Wiki — a distributable, git-native markdown knowledge base for Claude Code and Codex",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-wiki-copilot/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-wiki",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "LLM Wiki — a distributable, git-native markdown knowledge base for Claude Code and Codex",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/lisa-wiki-cursor/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "lisa-wiki",
-  "version": "2.349.1",
+  "version": "2.351.0",
   "description": "LLM Wiki — a distributable, git-native markdown knowledge base for Claude Code and Codex",
   "author": {
     "name": "Cody Swann"

package/plugins/src/base/rules/eager/derived-branch-plan.md

@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+# Derived Branch Plan (load-bearing)
+
+**Every applicable leaf work item shows the branch it will be built from and the branch its PR lands in, as a generated `Branch Plan` section — and that section is derived data, not a second authority.** The authority is `## Target Backend Environment` resolved forward through `.lisa.config.json` `deploy.branches`. A work item that displays branches nobody can trace back to that mapping, or a flow that reads the displayed branches instead of recomputing them, is a contract violation.
+
+**One vendor-neutral contract, cited by** `lisa-jira-write-ticket`, `lisa-github-write-issue`, `lisa-linear-write-issue`, `lisa-jira-validate-ticket`, `lisa-github-validate-issue`, `lisa-linear-validate-issue`, and `lisa-implement` (the `leaf-only-lifecycle` / `repo-scope-split` precedent: one shared slug, never divergent per-vendor prose).
+
+## Why derived, and not two branch fields
+
+The operator need is real: reading a ticket should not require resolving a config file to learn where the work starts and where it lands. But Lisa already owns that fact. Adding independent literal branch fields would create **a second source of truth that can drift** — and the failure mode of that drift is not a cosmetic mismatch, it is code silently shipped to the wrong environment. So the branches are rendered for humans and recomputed for machines. The rendered branches are **never read as input** by any flow, at any phase — a surface that needs the base branch derives it again from the environment.
+
+## The rendered section
+
+Exactly three lines, identical across vendors (`h2. Branch Plan` in JIRA wiki markup, `## Branch Plan` in GitHub/Linear markdown):
+
+```
+Branch from: <branch>
+PR into: <branch>
+Derived from: Target Backend Environment <env> via .lisa.config.json deploy.branches
+```
+
+The third line is the **derivation provenance line**. It is what marks the section machine-authored: a `Branch Plan` without it is treated as hand-authored, and hand-authored branches are never obeyed.
+
+`Branch from` and `PR into` name the **same branch by construction** — implementation checks the feature branch out of `origin/<base>` and targets the PR back into `<base>`. A plan naming two different branches is malformed and fails validation. (A fix that genuinely lands on one branch and must reach another travels as a linked follow-up work item with its own branch plan, never as a divergence inside one plan.)
+
+## Derivation
+
+1. Resolve the environment under the existing `Target Backend Environment` grammar (`config-resolution`, `pre-flight-autofill`) — human-confirmed wins, then validated `Inferred:`, then `Assumption:`.
+2. Map that exact configured key forward through `deploy.branches`. The key must map uniquely and the mapped branch must exist on the remote.
+3. Render both fields to that branch plus the provenance line.
+
+A missing or **ambiguous** mapping, a key that is **not unique**, or a branch absent from the remote **stops** the flow — exactly as `lisa-implement` already stops. **Never default independently to `main`, to the remote default branch, or to any other branch** to keep a write from failing. The remote default is a legitimate input only through the `Assumption:` fallback the environment grammar already defines, and it must be recorded as such.
+
+## Exemption
+
+Work that declares no runtime behavior change — `runtime_behavior_change = false`, i.e. doc-only, config-only, and type-only items — carries **no `Target Backend Environment`**, therefore has nothing to derive from and **requires no branch plan**. Its **absence is correct**, not a missing section, and no gate may demand one. Containers (an Epic, or a Story/Spike still holding child work) are exempt for the same reason: they are not built directly.
+
+The exemption is one-way. Exempt work that *carries* a branch plan fails validation — branches asserted for work that declared it has no runtime target are hand-authored by definition, which is the second-authority failure this rule exists to prevent.
+
+## Conflict, legacy, and drift
+
+- **Conflict** — a present plan that disagrees with the recomputed plan **fails**; the flow never silently picks a side. The remediation is always to correct the environment, never to edit the branches.
+- **Legacy** — an item written before this rule has no plan. At claim time the implementing agent derives it, **writes the assumption onto the item as a comment**, and proceeds. Never a silent guess.
+- **Drift** — config changed after the plan was rendered. Current config wins; the stale plan is re-rendered and never followed.
+
+Full derivation table, gate S19 semantics, the claim-time arms, and the vendor rendering details: [reference/derived-branch-plan.md](../reference/derived-branch-plan.md).

package/plugins/src/base/rules/reference/config-resolution.md

@@ -847,6 +847,22 @@ read_notion_token() {
   local slug=$(echo "$workspace" | tr '[:upper:]-' '[:lower:]_')
   local varname="NOTION_API_TOKEN_${slug}"
   [ -n "${!varname}" ] && { echo "${!varname}"; return; }
+  # Preferred path: the single secrets chokepoint, which owns the one-store rule
+  # and the surface ladder. An agent following this reference must try it before
+  # any keychain — a second reader is how one credential ends up in two places.
+  local resolver
+  for resolver in .claude/skills/lisa-secrets-access/scripts/resolve-secret.mjs \
+                  .agents/skills/lisa-secrets-access/scripts/resolve-secret.mjs; do
+    if [ -f "$resolver" ]; then
+      local via_lisa
+      via_lisa=$(node "$resolver" get NOTION_API_TOKEN 2>/dev/null) \
+        && [ -n "$via_lisa" ] && { echo "$via_lisa"; return; }
+      break
+    fi
+  done
+  # Legacy fallback: the OS keychain written by the guided setup flow, for
+  # projects with no credentials provider. Reached only when the chokepoint is
+  # absent or has no entry.
   case "$(uname -s)" in
     Darwin)  security find-generic-password -s lisa-notion -a "$workspace" -w 2>/dev/null ;;
     Linux)   command -v secret-tool >/dev/null && \

package/plugins/src/base/rules/reference/derived-branch-plan.md

@@ -0,0 +1,112 @@
+# Derived Branch Plan — reference
+
+The full body behind the `derived-branch-plan` eager head. It defines one vendor-neutral contract consumed by the three tracker writers (`lisa-jira-write-ticket`, `lisa-github-write-issue`, `lisa-linear-write-issue`), the three validators (`lisa-jira-validate-ticket`, `lisa-github-validate-issue`, `lisa-linear-validate-issue`) via gate **S19**, and `lisa-implement` at claim time. Each surface cites this slug rather than growing its own prose, exactly as the vendor arms cite `leaf-only-lifecycle` and `repo-scope-split`. One slug is what keeps a branch plan rejected on JIRA from being accepted on Linear.
+
+## The problem this solves, and the one it must not create
+
+An operator reading a work item cannot see which branch the work starts from or which branch the PR lands in. Both facts are knowable, but only by resolving `.lisa.config.json` — which is exactly the kind of engineering step the factory model says a non-technical operator standing at the gate should not have to take.
+
+The obvious fix — add a "source branch" field and a "PR target" field to the ticket template — is wrong, and it is worth being explicit about why, because it will look like the simple answer every time someone revisits this. Those fields would be **a second source of truth** for a fact Lisa already derives authoritatively from `## Target Backend Environment` + `deploy.branches`. Two authorities do not stay equal. They drift the first time an environment is corrected on a ticket whose branch fields nobody updated, or the first time `deploy.branches` is remapped. And the consequence of that drift is not a stale label: it is an agent branching from, and merging into, the wrong environment's branch — shipping unreviewed code to production, or shipping a production fix into a staging branch where nobody sees it.
+
+So the contract renders the branches **for humans** and recomputes them **for machines**. The rendered section is output. It is never input.
+
+Precedence is therefore not a negotiation: whenever a rendered plan and the resolved environment disagree, **the environment wins** — the authority wins, in every phase, on every vendor, with no exception for a plan a human edited by hand. The only question a disagreement raises is whether to re-render silently (staleness) or stop for a human (a conflict with a confirmed environment or an open PR base). It is never "which branch did they mean?"
+
+## The rendered section
+
+| Vendor | Heading form |
+|---|---|
+| JIRA | `h2. Branch Plan` (ADF heading in live JIRA) |
+| GitHub | `## Branch Plan` |
+| Linear | `## Branch Plan` |
+
+Body, identical on all three:
+
+```
+Branch from: <branch>
+PR into: <branch>
+Derived from: Target Backend Environment <env> via .lisa.config.json deploy.branches
+```
+
+### The derivation provenance line
+
+The third line is load-bearing. It is the discriminator between a section this contract produced and one a human typed, and it is deliberately visible prose rather than an HTML comment — the same reason the `Target Backend Environment` grammar uses visible `Inferred:` / `Assumption:` annotations: JIRA's ADF has no comment node, so a marker that only exists in markdown cannot be a vendor-neutral discriminator.
+
+A `Branch Plan` **without the provenance line is treated as hand-authored**, and hand-authored branches are never obeyed — they are compared against the recomputed plan and, on any disagreement, fail. A provenance line naming an `<env>` that is not an exact configured `deploy.branches` key is itself malformed and fails.
+
+### One branch, two labels
+
+`Branch from` and `PR into` always name the **same branch**. That is not a simplification, it is the invariant `lisa-implement` already implements: the feature branch is cut from `origin/<base>` and the PR targets `<base>`. Both labels exist because operators asked to see both questions answered, and because naming them separately gives the contract somewhere to say they are equal instead of leaving it implicit.
+
+A plan whose two fields name **two different branches** is malformed and fails validation. The case that looks like a counter-example — a bug fixed on a non-integration environment branch that must also reach the integration branch — is handled the way `lisa-implement` already handles it: as a **linked forward cherry-pick follow-up item**, which is its own work item with its own single-branch plan. It is never a divergence inside one plan.
+
+## Derivation algorithm
+
+1. **Resolve the environment.** Use the existing grammar and precedence defined in `config-resolution` and `pre-flight-autofill`: a human-confirmed bare configured key or `Confirmed: <env>` wins; then a validated `Inferred: <env> — evidence: <title|body|reproduction|hostname>`; then `Assumption: <env> — remote default branch <branch>`, or the branch-only `Assumption: remote default branch <branch>` when the reverse-map is not unique. This rule adds no new resolution logic and no new aliases.
+2. **Map forward.** Look the exact configured key up in `deploy.branches`. The key must resolve to exactly one branch.
+3. **Prove the branch.** The mapped branch must exist on the remote.
+4. **Render.** Both fields to that branch, plus the provenance line naming the `<env>` used.
+
+### Stop conditions
+
+| Condition | Behavior |
+|---|---|
+| No environment resolvable and the item is not exempt | Stop — the `Target Backend Environment` gate (S8) already owns this |
+| Environment key absent from `deploy.branches` | Stop |
+| Mapping ambiguous / not unique | Stop |
+| Mapped branch missing on the remote | Stop |
+
+**Never guess.** There is no fallback that quietly substitutes `main`, the remote default branch, or the branch of a sibling environment to keep a write from failing — a silent guess here is the exact failure this contract exists to prevent, and a stopped write is cheap next to a wrong-branch merge. The remote default branch enters only through the `Assumption:` form the environment grammar already defines, and only recorded as an assumption.
+
+## Gate S19 — Branch Plan derivation
+
+Registered in all three validators as `| S19 Branch Plan derivation | technical | false |`. The gate **recomputes** the plan from current config and compares; it never reads the rendered branches as input.
+
+| Case | Verdict |
+|---|---|
+| Exempt work (`runtime_behavior_change = false`, or a container) with no plan | `N/A` |
+| Exempt work **carrying** a plan | **FAIL** — hand-authored branches on work that declared no runtime target |
+| Applicable work, plan present, matches recomputed plan | PASS |
+| Applicable work, plan present, disagrees with recomputed plan | **FAIL** |
+| Applicable work, plan present, missing the provenance line and disagreeing | **FAIL** (hand-authored) |
+| Applicable work, two fields naming different branches | **FAIL** — malformed |
+| Applicable work, derivation hits a stop condition | **FAIL** — same stop as implement |
+| Applicable work, **proposed spec** (pre-write) with no plan | **FAIL** — the writer must render it before the write |
+| Applicable work, **live legacy item** with no plan | `N/A` with a repair note routed to claim time |
+
+The last two rows are the asymmetry that matters. Failing a *proposed* spec is free — the writer just renders the section. Failing every *existing* item would turn a whole legacy queue red overnight for a section no human ever had a way to add, so those are repaired at claim time instead, where the derivation is written onto the item as evidence.
+
+### Failure remediation
+
+Every S19 failure names both plans (rendered and recomputed) and points the fix at **the environment, never the branches**:
+
+> Branch Plan conflicts with the environment mapping. Rendered `Branch from: release/staging`; recomputed from `Target Backend Environment: production` via `deploy.branches` → `main`. Correct the environment, not the branch — the branches are derived. Then re-render.
+
+The gate never silently chooses between the two. Picking one would be a guess wearing a verdict.
+
+## Claim-time behavior (`lisa-implement`)
+
+At claim time the plan is recomputed against **current config and the remote** — never trusted from the item — and one of four arms runs:
+
+- **Match** — proceed. The already-existing base-branch validation, feature-branch sync, and `target_branch=<base>` handoff are unchanged.
+- **Legacy (no plan)** — derive it, **write the assumption onto the item as a comment**, then proceed. The comment carries a visible prose line plus a dedupe marker so a re-claim produces no duplicate:
+
+  ```
+  Branch plan derived for this item: branch from `main`, PR into `main` (Target Backend
+  Environment: production via .lisa.config.json deploy.branches).
+  <!-- [lisa-branch-plan] key=<work-item-ref>::<branch> -->
+  ```
+
+  Marker-dedupe is on `<work-item-ref>::<branch>`, so the comment reappears only if the derived branch actually changes. Where a vendor cannot host an HTML comment, the visible line alone carries it. If the comment cannot be written, that is a stop, not a shrug — proceeding would make it exactly the silent guess this rule forbids.
+- **Conflict with a human-confirmed environment, or with an existing open PR's base** — **stop under the existing confirmation rules**. `lisa-implement` already surfaces a PR-base mismatch and re-targets only with confirmation, on the stated grounds that the ticket's environment is the source of truth; a branch plan never overrides that, and never supplies the confirmation itself.
+- **Stale (config changed since the plan was rendered)** — **current config wins**. Re-render the section onto the item, record the change, and never follow the stale plan. A stale plan is not a conflict to escalate; it is output that fell behind its input.
+
+## Why the gate is `technical` / not product-relevant
+
+S19 is categorized `technical`, `product_relevant: false`, matching S8 — the fact it checks is a deployment-topology fact, and a PRD-intake comment aimed at a product author cannot act on it. The operator-facing value of the section is that it is *visible on the item*, not that its failures are routed to product.
+
+## What this rule deliberately does not do
+
+- It defines **no new environment resolution**, no new aliases, and no new provenance grammar. All of that stays in `config-resolution` / `pre-flight-autofill`, and this rule reads the result.
+- It does **not** let a branch plan influence which environment is chosen, in any direction, at any phase.
+- It does **not** introduce branch fields on PRDs. PRDs are not built directly; their generated leaves carry the plan.

package/plugins/src/base/skills/lisa-github-read-issue/SKILL.md

@@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ Walk the markdown body and capture each top-level `## ` section by name. Standar
 - `Acceptance Criteria` (preserve the Gherkin code-fence verbatim)
 - `Out of Scope`
 - `Target Backend Environment`
+- `Branch Plan` (derived output per `derived-branch-plan` — parsed so callers can *compare* it against a recomputation, never so they can use it as the base branch)
 - `Sign-in Required`
 - `Repository`
 - `Source Artifacts`

package/plugins/src/base/skills/lisa-github-validate-issue/SKILL.md

@@ -98,6 +98,7 @@ Per-type content requirements are defined once in the vendor-neutral `work-item-
 | S16 Source Requirement traceability | `product-clarity` | true |
 | S17 Improvement measurability | `acceptance-criteria` | true |
 | S18 Stateless-pickup dry-run | `product-clarity` | true |
+| S19 Branch Plan derivation | `technical` | false |
 | F1 Issue type label exists in repo | `structural` | false |
 | F2 Parent sub-issue exists and is the right type | `structural` | false |
 | F3 Linked issues exist | `structural` | false |
@@ -299,6 +300,26 @@ The autonomy gate, run last, on every build-ready leaf (use the S15 classificati
 
 Zero questions → PASS. Any question → FAIL, with each question listed verbatim as its own remediation line — these are exactly the clarifying comments the caller posts to the source. The structure gates are proxies; this gate checks the readiness property itself: `ready` means a stateless agent can drive this item to its terminal state with zero human clarification (see `work-item-definition-of-ready`).
 
+#### S19 — Branch Plan derivation
+
+Enforces the `derived-branch-plan` rule: the `## Branch Plan` section is **derived only** — recompute it from current config and compare; never trust the rendered branches or read them as input. Resolve the environment under the S8 grammar, map that exact configured key forward through `.lisa.config.json` `deploy.branches`, and require the mapped branch on the remote.
+
+| Case | Verdict |
+|---|---|
+| `runtime_behavior_change = false` (doc-only / config-only / type-only) or an Epic/container, with no plan | `N/A` — absence is correct; never demand one |
+| Exempt work **carrying** a `## Branch Plan` | **FAIL** — hand-authored branches on work that declared no runtime target |
+| Plan matches the recomputed plan | PASS |
+| Plan conflicts with the recomputed plan | **FAIL** |
+| Plan missing the `Derived from:` provenance line and disagreeing | **FAIL** — treated as hand-authored |
+| `Branch from` and `PR into` name two different branches | **FAIL** — malformed; they are the same branch by construction |
+| Derivation hits a stop condition (env absent from `deploy.branches`, ambiguous / non-unique mapping, branch missing on the remote) | **FAIL** — the same stop `lisa-implement` takes; never default to `main` or the remote default |
+| Proposed spec (pre-write) for applicable work with no plan | **FAIL** — `lisa-github-write-issue` must render it before the write |
+| Live **legacy** issue for applicable work with no plan | `N/A` with a repair note — routed to claim time, where `lisa-implement` writes the derived assumption as a comment and proceeds |
+
+Failing a proposed spec is free; failing every existing issue would turn a legacy queue red for a section no human had a way to add, so legacy absence is repaired at claim time instead.
+
+FAIL names both plans (rendered and recomputed) and points the remediation at **the environment, never the branch** — e.g. `"Branch Plan conflicts with the environment mapping. Rendered 'Branch from: release/staging'; recomputed from Target Backend Environment 'production' via deploy.branches → 'main'. Correct the environment, not the branch — the branches are derived. Then re-render."` Never silently choose between the two plans.
+
 ### Feasibility Gates (require GitHub lookups; skip in `--spec-only`)
 
 #### F1 — Issue type label exists in repo
@@ -455,6 +476,7 @@ Output is a single fenced text block. Callers parse it; do not add free-form pro
 - [PASS|FAIL|N/A] S16 Source Requirement traceability — <one-line reason>
 - [PASS|FAIL|N/A] S17 Improvement measurability — <one-line reason>
 - [PASS|FAIL|N/A] S18 Stateless-pickup dry-run — <one-line reason>
+- [PASS|FAIL|N/A] S19 Branch Plan derivation — <one-line reason>
 
 ### Feasibility Gates  (omit this section when --spec-only)
 - [PASS|FAIL|N/A] F1 Issue type label exists in repo — <one-line reason>

package/plugins/src/base/skills/lisa-github-write-issue/SKILL.md

@@ -100,6 +100,21 @@ Scenario: <name>
  Human confirmation replaces the automated annotation with a bare key or
  `Confirmed: <env>`. Skip only for doc/config/type-only issues.]
 
+## Branch Plan
+[GENERATED, never hand-authored. Render only when the issue has a Target
+ Backend Environment; omit entirely when `runtime_behavior_change = false`
+ (doc-only / config-only / type-only) or for an Epic/container — absence is
+ correct there. Derive per the `derived-branch-plan` rule: resolve the
+ environment, map it forward through `.lisa.config.json` `deploy.branches`,
+ and prove the branch exists on the remote. Do not accept caller-supplied
+ branches; recompute them. Exactly three lines:
+   Branch from: <branch>
+   PR into: <branch>
+   Derived from: Target Backend Environment <env> via .lisa.config.json deploy.branches
+ Both fields name the same branch by construction. A missing, ambiguous, or
+ non-unique mapping, or a branch absent from the remote, STOPS the write —
+ never default to `main` or the remote default to keep the write alive.]
+
 ## Sign-in Required
 [Include this section ONLY if the work touches authenticated surfaces.
  Specify: the account/role, where to get the credentials (1Password item,

package/plugins/src/base/skills/lisa-implement/SKILL.md

@@ -107,6 +107,12 @@ Using the general-purpose agent in Team Lead session, **determine the base branc
    - The only normalization is built-in `prod` ↔ `production`, and only when exactly one of those keys exists in `deploy.branches`; normalize to that configured key. No other aliases exist.
    - Never infer from arbitrary branch text, URL paths or query strings, or substrings inside other words or hostname labels. Multiple conflicting signals after normalization **stop** the flow. If there are no signals, resolve the remote default branch (`gh repo view --json defaultBranchRef -q .defaultBranchRef.name`, or `git remote set-head origin -a` then `origin/HEAD`). When it reverse-maps uniquely, write the env-bearing `Assumption:` form; when the reverse-map is not unique, write the branch-only form and continue on the remote default without inventing an environment or blocking solely for that ambiguity. Record the fallback assumption in the plan/tracker artifact.
 2. **Map the resolved environment to a base branch** through `.lisa.config.json` `deploy.branches` — the forward direction of the env-keyed `done` resolution. The selected exact configured key must map uniquely, and the mapped branch must exist on the remote. A missing/ambiguous mapping or remote branch **stops** the flow; never guess or silently fall back.
+   - **Reconcile the ticket's `## Branch Plan` (`derived-branch-plan` rule).** The rendered plan is derived output, never input: **recompute** it here from current config and the remote — the mapping you just resolved — and compare. Four arms, no fifth:
+     - **Match** → proceed.
+     - **Legacy (no plan)** → derive it, **write the assumption onto the ticket as a comment**, then proceed. Visible prose plus a dedupe marker, e.g. ``Branch plan derived for this item: branch from `main`, PR into `main` (Target Backend Environment: production via .lisa.config.json deploy.branches).`` followed by `<!-- [lisa-branch-plan] key=<work-item-ref>::<branch> -->` (marker-dedupe on `<work-item-ref>::<branch>`, so a re-claim adds no duplicate; where a vendor cannot host an HTML comment the visible line alone carries it). **No silent guess** — if the comment cannot be written, that is a stop, because proceeding would make the inference invisible.
+     - **Conflict with a human-confirmed environment, or with an existing open PR's base** → **stop under the existing confirmation rules** below. A branch plan never overrides the environment and never supplies the confirmation itself.
+     - **Stale (config changed since the plan was rendered)** → current config wins: re-render the section onto the ticket, record the change, and never follow the stale plan. Staleness is output falling behind its input, not a conflict to escalate.
+   - Exempt work carries no plan and needs none: `runtime_behavior_change = false` (doc-only / config-only / type-only) and containers have no `## Target Backend Environment` to derive from, so **absence is correct** — never demand or invent one.
 3. **Establish the feature branch off the latest base, conflict-free:**
    - `git fetch origin`.
    - Already on a feature branch with an **open PR** → reuse it. If the PR's base ≠ the resolved base branch, surface the mismatch and re-target only with confirmation — the ticket's environment is the source of truth.