@codyswann/lisa 2.353.0 → 3.0.0

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/rules/reference/bdd-e2e-coverage.md

@@ -68,16 +68,43 @@ platforms it requires and that each named platform has a configured runner.
       "level": "behavioral"
     }
   ],
+  "testDiscovery": {
+    "<runner>": {
+      "roots": ["<repo-relative directory>", "..."],
+      "extensions": [".<suffix>", "..."],
+      "ignore": ["<optional repo-relative path prefix>"],
+      "evidence": { "kind": "call-title", "functions": ["test", "it"] }
+    }
+  },
   "exclusions": [
-    { "file": "<path>", "reason": "why this test aligns to no product behavior" }
+    {
+      "file": "<path>",
+      "evidence": "<optional exact title; omit to excuse the whole file>",
+      "reason": "why this test aligns to no product behavior"
+    }
   ]
 }
 ```
 
 `evidence` is what makes a mapping falsifiable: the gate reads the mapped file and confirms the
 string is still there, so renaming or deleting a test breaks the map loudly instead of leaving a
-scenario silently unguarded. `exclusions` records tests that deliberately map to nothing — starter
-templates, source-level corroboration — so "unmapped test" stays a meaningful signal.
+scenario silently unguarded.
+
+`testDiscovery` closes the other direction. Validating only what the map DECLARES can never see a
+test file nobody declared, so the gate walks the project's own roots and requires **every test it
+finds to be named by a mapping or excused by an exclusion**. Roots and the evidence grammar are
+per-runner configuration — list every directory, including subflow and helper directories, because
+a directory omitted here is structurally invisible to the gate. Evidence grammars are an allowlist
+of two (`call-title` reads `test("…")`-style declarations; `line-field` reads a leading `name:`
+field), never a project-supplied regular expression, and a template-literal title is used verbatim
+from the source rather than rewritten. A missing block is a defect in enforced mode
+(`discovery-missing`); a malformed one is refused in **every** state (`discovery-invalid`), because
+discovery that silently finds nothing looks exactly like a clean repo.
+
+`exclusions` records tests that deliberately map to nothing — starter templates, source-level
+corroboration — so "unmapped test" stays a meaningful signal. Each entry states a `reason`, and an
+exclusion whose file is gone, whose title was renamed, or that no discovery root covers is
+`exclusion-stale`: a standing claim about nothing, never a permanent excuse.
 
 ## The gate
 
@@ -94,8 +121,14 @@ Two commands, wired into the project's script surface and into CI:
    - an invalid waiver (nonexistent scenario, undeclared platform, already-excluded scenario, a
      `runner` that does not cover the waived platform under `runnerPlatforms`, or one that masks an
      existing mapping);
+   - a discovered test named by no mapping and no exclusion, or an exclusion that no longer excuses
+     anything;
    - a regression against the project's committed `coverageFloor` per platform.
 
+   Regeneration is never blocked by the check: `--write` rewrites the report and burndown whenever a
+   report can be built at all, so a stale evidence string can never hold hostage the paperwork that
+   documents it.
+
 The percentage measures **aligned automation inventory, not the latest run result**. A mapped test
 that currently fails is a red CI check, a separate signal; the map only asserts the automation
 exists and still says what it claimed. Both facts are required — a green gate over a red suite is
@@ -157,9 +190,12 @@ A repo with no contract yet, taking its first frontend work item:
 
 1. **Detect runners.** Find the e2e harnesses the project actually has, per the Tool Discovery
    Process in `verification-lifecycle`. Record which platforms each covers.
-2. **Scaffold the minimum** — `bdd/features/`, `bdd/coverage-map.json` (with `runnerPlatforms` from
-   step 1 and a coverage floor of the current, honest number), the regenerate + check scripts wired
-   into the project's script surface, and the CI invocation of the check.
+2. **Scaffold the minimum** — `bdd/features/`, `bdd/coverage-map.json` (with `runnerPlatforms` and
+   `testDiscovery` from step 1 — every root each runner's tests actually live in, subflow and helper
+   directories included — and a coverage floor of the current, honest number), the regenerate +
+   check scripts wired into the project's script surface, and the CI invocation of the check.
+   Pre-existing tests that align to no product behavior are recorded as `exclusions` with reasons
+   during this step, never left undisclosed.
 3. **Write only this item's scenarios.** The first item is not a backfill project. Pre-existing
    uncovered behavior becomes burndown in `docs/e2e-bdd-coverage.md`, and the floor starts where the
    repo actually is.

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/rules/reference/claim-time-guards.md

@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+# Claim-Time Guards
+
+Two guards that run when build-intake claims a ready item. Both come from geminisportsai's hand-rolled `sprint-loop` and both address failures actually observed there — an item built twice because it had already shipped, and a loop burning cycles re-attempting an item that was never going to succeed.
+
+It is a **single vendor-neutral contract** consumed by all three build-intake skills (`lisa-github-build-intake`, `lisa-jira-build-intake`, `lisa-linear-build-intake`). Each arm cites this slug in its claim step rather than growing its own copy, exactly as the arms cite `leaf-only-lifecycle`, `repo-scope-split`, `rejection-detection`, and `claim-archaeology`. One slug is what keeps a guard that fires on GitHub from being absent on Linear.
+
+## Sequencing
+
+The shared claim phase is `3a.0` repo-scope gate → `3a` leaf-only claim gate → `3b` Claim → `3c` run lifecycle → `3d` transition to done. Inside `3b`, the pre-transition window now runs four passes in a fixed order:
+
+1. **`rejection-detection`** — needs the current-lane signal the relabel destroys.
+2. **`claim-archaeology`** — consumes the rejection classification.
+3. **`two-failed-attempts` valve** (this rule) — may end the cycle before any claim happens.
+4. **`already-implemented` check** (this rule) — decides whether `3c` implements or verifies.
+
+The valve runs before the already-implemented probe because it is cheaper and it is the only one of the four that can stop the claim outright: there is no point spending git and PR queries on an item that is about to be blocked.
+
+## Guard 1 — already-implemented → verify-and-close
+
+**Why it exists.** A ready item may already be implemented. Agents ship without transitioning: the PR merges, the work is done, and the item sits in the ready lane looking untouched. Claiming it normally means building the same change a second time — at best a no-op PR, at worst a conflicting reimplementation of work that already landed.
+
+**The probe.** Two deterministic searches for the item's **own** canonical key (the ref carried by the `Work-Item:` trailer), bounded and never interactive:
+
+```bash
+# Commits anywhere in history — branches and merged work included — that carry the key.
+git log --all --grep "<key>" --format='%H %aI %s' -n 10
+
+# Open and merged PRs referencing the key (GitHub shown; JIRA and Linear use the
+# equivalent search through their access layers, never a direct vendor API call).
+gh pr list --repo <org>/<repo> --state all --search "<key>" --json number,state,mergedAt,url
+```
+
+A hit counts only when it names **this** key. Branch-name coincidence, a similar title, or a reference from an unrelated item is not a hit — that is `claim-archaeology`'s job, not this one.
+
+**The outcome.** On a hit, do not implement. Switch `3c` to **verify-and-close**:
+
+1. Read the referenced commits/PR and establish what actually shipped.
+2. Verify the shipped change against this item's acceptance criteria — the ordinary verification path, not a fresh build.
+3. On a pass: post evidence naming the shipping PR/commit, then run the normal `3d` transition (which still gates on the PR being merged) and the `3d.1` rollup.
+4. On a fail — the shipped change does not satisfy the criteria — record that the item is only **partially** implemented, and proceed with the ordinary implement path for the remaining gap. A partial hit must never close an item whose criteria are unmet.
+
+**What this is not.** Three nearby behaviors it must not be conflated with:
+
+- **`claim-archaeology`** answers "is this item round 2 of a *different* past failure?" — it looks for an **ancestor** issue. This guard looks for **this same item** already having shipped. Different question, different key, different outcome.
+- **`DUPLICATE_ALREADY_FIXED`** (from `lisa-ticket-triage`) is about a **different canonical issue** whose fix covers this one; it closes as a duplicate. This guard finds work done **under this item's own key** and closes it as completed, not as a duplicate.
+- **Rejection reclaim** is about work that shipped and was pushed back. Verify-and-close applies to work that shipped and nobody noticed.
+
+**Never block.** An unreadable history, an absent `gh`, or a failed search degrades to "no hit" and the ordinary implement path proceeds. A speculative probe must never strand a ready item.
+
+## Guard 2 — two-failed-attempts → blocked
+
+**Why it exists.** Without a valve, a scheduled loop re-claims the same failing item every cycle forever. Each attempt costs a full build flow, and the third attempt is not more likely to succeed than the second — what changed between them was nothing.
+
+**The counter.** Attempts are counted from durable markers on the item itself, not from session memory (a cron process holds no state between cycles). On every **non-success terminal outcome** for a claimed item — errored, blocked by a gate, PR abandoned unmerged — the intake arm records a visible comment plus a marker:
+
+```text
+Build attempt <N> did not complete: <one-line operator-readable reason>.
+<!-- [lisa-build-attempt] n=<N> outcome=<outcome> -->
+```
+
+The marker line is verbatim; the count is the number of `[lisa-build-attempt]` markers on the item. Match on the **marker, never the title**. A successful build records no marker, so an item that shipped after one bad attempt starts clean if it is ever re-filed.
+
+**The threshold is two.** At the top of the claim, count existing markers. With **two or more**, do not claim:
+
+1. Move the item to the configured `blocked` role (`build.blocked` / `workflow.blocked`, resolved per `config-resolution` — never a hardcoded lane).
+2. Post an operator-readable comment naming both prior attempts, what each one hit, and what a human would need to decide or supply. Written for a non-technical operator, per `report-actionability`.
+3. **Stop the loop** — end the cycle without claiming anything else. Stopping is the point: the next scheduled invocation should not immediately pick up the next item as though nothing happened.
+
+**Recovery is deliberate.** A blocked item returns to the queue only when a human (or `lisa-repair-intake`, once the named blocker is provably cleared) moves it back. The attempt markers stay on the item as history; re-entering the ready lane after a real fix is a fresh claim whose markers describe why it was hard, not a silent reset of the counter.

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/rules/reference/ready-role-filing.md

@@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
+# Ready-Role Filing
+
+A work item that is filed but never given the ready role is an **incomplete handoff**. No other agent will ever pick it up: build-intake scans the ready lane and nothing else. The originating failure is small and entirely typical — an agent closed a ticket it could not reproduce, filed the real defect it found beside it, and left the new ticket sitting. The defect was correct, the write succeeded, and the work still died.
+
+This rule makes the ready role an **explicit claim** at every filing site, and makes omission mean the same thing on every tracker.
+
+## The one normalization
+
+**An omitted `build_ready` means NOT build-ready — on JIRA, on GitHub, and on Linear alike.**
+
+Before this rule the three writers disagreed, and the disagreement was invisible at the call site:
+
+| Tracker | Omitted `build_ready` (before) | Omitted `build_ready` (now) |
+|---|---|---|
+| JIRA | project's default created status — **not ready** | unchanged — **not ready** |
+| GitHub | `status:ready` applied — **ready** | **not ready** |
+| Linear | created in the configured `ready` state — **ready** | **not ready** |
+
+So the same vendor-neutral `lisa-tracker-write` call produced a different lifecycle outcome depending on which tracker a project had configured. That is a leak in the abstraction the shim exists to provide: switching trackers must not change behavior.
+
+**This is a breaking change for GitHub and Linear callers.** Any caller that omitted `build_ready` and relied on implicit ready must now pass it explicitly. That is the point rather than a cost of it: the only paths affected are ones that were silently depending on a provider-specific default, which is exactly the class of bug this rule exists to eliminate. `lisa-github-validate-issue` F4's compensating normalization (omitted → `true`) is removed with it — a validator that re-introduces the old default would simply move the leak.
+
+The safe direction is the implicit one. A ticket that reaches a build queue by accident is worse than one that waits, because the queue is what agents act on autonomously.
+
+## Every filing declares one of two things
+
+A writer accepts a filing only when it carries **one** of:
+
+- **`build_ready: true`** — the item is complete enough to build and enters the ready lane for auto-pickup. This is the correct answer for a complete defect found during other work.
+- **`human_gate: "<why a human must judge this first>"`** — the item is deliberately held outside the queue because a human product call is pending. The writer stamps a visible marker on the item so the hold is auditable rather than indistinguishable from an accident:
+
+  ```text
+  Held for a human product call: <reason>.
+  <!-- [lisa-human-gate] reason=<short-slug> -->
+  ```
+
+Filed, not ready, and no `human_gate` is the **incomplete handoff** case: the writer rejects it and names the two ways to resolve it. `build_ready: false` without a `human_gate` reason is the same failure spelled differently — it is not a gate, it is an omission with a value attached.
+
+`build_ready` remains strictly subordinate to `leaf-only-lifecycle`: a container is never build-ready regardless of what a caller passes, and a container needs no `human_gate` because its state rolls up from its children rather than being claimed.
+
+## Complete defects found during other work are filed build-ready
+
+Any defect discovered while doing something else, which is complete enough to build, is filed through `lisa-track` / `lisa-tracker-write` with **explicit `build_ready: true`**. It must be claimable by build-intake on the next cycle with no human flipping status. "Complete enough to build" is the `work-item-definition-of-ready` bar — reproduction, observed-versus-expected, and Gherkin acceptance criteria — not a placeholder to be fleshed out later.
+
+The same explicitness applies in the other direction. A filing that is genuinely a human product call declares `human_gate`; it does not simply omit the flag and hope the tracker default is the merciful one.
+
+## The named exception: `lisa-exploratory-qa`
+
+`lisa-exploratory-qa` files its findings **not** build-ready by default, and that is **correct** — it is the named human-gate exception under this rule, not drift to be repaired.
+
+Exploratory QA is a first-time-user experience pass. Its findings are *candidate* defects and usability observations whose product significance a human should judge; auto-readying them would push judgment work into the build queue, which is precisely the failure the gate model exists to prevent. Its `ready=false` is therefore paired with an explicit `human_gate` reason and stamped with `[lisa-human-gate]` — an explicit human-gate marker, never a bare omission.
+
+The sibling `e2e-coverage-gaps` skills are the contrast: a missing automated test is not a product question, so they file `build_ready: true` by default.
+
+Other legitimate human-gate filings follow the same shape — `lisa-learnings-audit` promotion/demotion tickets, `lisa-improve-harness` intervention proposals, automation-retirement proposals, and provisioning tickets for access a human must grant. Each declares its `human_gate` reason rather than relying on a default.
+
+## Recovery
+
+`lisa-repair-intake` sweeps for the failure this rule prevents: recently filed items that are open, not in the configured ready role, and carrying **no** `[lisa-human-gate]` marker. Each is an incomplete handoff — surfaced with its filing context so an operator can promote it or gate it deliberately. The sweep reports rather than guesses: it never silently promotes an item into the queue, because a filing whose readiness nobody declared is exactly the input the gate model says a human should see.
+
+## Related
+
+- **`leaf-only-lifecycle`** — the prohibition `build_ready` is always subordinate to. Containers are never build-ready.
+- **`work-item-definition-of-ready`** — what "complete enough to build" means.
+- **`tracked-work`** — the filing entry point (`lisa-track`) this rule governs the readiness of.
+- **`factory-model`** — why the ready flip is a gate standing outside the factory rather than a field inside it.

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/skills/lisa-agent-ready/SKILL.md

@@ -217,9 +217,11 @@ vocabulary; it consumes it.
 
 3. **File each standing blocker as a tracker work item — never an in-session question.** For every
    standing ship blocker, create **one** Lisa work item through the vendor-neutral `lisa-tracker-write`
-   skill (never a vendor write skill directly), carrying the five finding fields in the body. Label it
-   **build-ready** when the correction is mechanical; mark it **human-needed** when it is a genuine
-   human decision. This is the skill's **only tracker write**, and it creates Lisa's *own* work item —
+   skill (never a vendor write skill directly), carrying the five finding fields in the body. Per the `ready-role-filing` rule each
+   create declares its readiness explicitly: pass **`build_ready: true`** when the correction is
+   mechanical (an omitted flag is NOT build-ready on any tracker, so the mechanical branch would
+   otherwise file work nothing ever claims), and pass **`human_gate: "<the decision only a human can
+   make>"`** plus the `human-needed` marker when it is a genuine human decision. This is the skill's **only tracker write**, and it creates Lisa's *own* work item —
    it **never edits, comments on, transitions, or otherwise mutates any ingested source** (see the
    connected-source safety boundary above). The shipped never-ask posture is preserved: a blocker
    becomes a filed ticket, **never** a prompt, and the session **never pauses to ask a human anything**,

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/skills/lisa-confluence-to-tracker/SKILL.md

@@ -356,7 +356,7 @@ Each sub-task MUST:
 2. **Include an Empirical Verification Plan** — real user-like verification, NOT unit tests, linting, or typechecking
 3. **Carry its own `## Source Requirement` section** (shared format above) with the full verbatim quote(s) from the Phase 1.4 register — a leaf claimed by build-intake in isolation must be self-explanatory. When a sub-task is split per-repo, every split child inherits the same requirement quote(s).
 
-**Leaf-only build-ready (`leaf-only-lifecycle`)**: Sub-tasks are the **leaf work units** of the decomposition — they are the ONLY items in the hierarchy that receive the build-ready role. `lisa-tracker-write` applies the build-ready role here so downstream build intake (`lisa-tracker-build-intake`) claims the leaves and never the Epic or Stories. Apply the build-ready role to each Sub-task; never to its parent Story or Epic (Phases 3–4). `lisa-tracker-write` enforces the same invariant on the write side, so a Sub-task split into per-repo children (the cross-repo case above) carries build-ready on the children, not on any intermediate parent that gains child work.
+**Leaf-only build-ready (`leaf-only-lifecycle`)**: Sub-tasks are the **leaf work units** of the decomposition — they are the ONLY items in the hierarchy that receive the build-ready role. `lisa-tracker-write` applies the build-ready role here so downstream build intake (`lisa-tracker-build-intake`) claims the leaves and never the Epic or Stories. **Pass `build_ready: true` explicitly on every Sub-task create** — per the `ready-role-filing` rule an omitted `build_ready` is NOT build-ready on any tracker, so a decomposition that relies on a vendor default silently produces a queue nothing ever claims. Apply the build-ready role to each Sub-task; never to its parent Story or Epic (Phases 3–4). `lisa-tracker-write` enforces the same invariant on the write side, so a Sub-task split into per-repo children (the cross-repo case above) carries build-ready on the children, not on any intermediate parent that gains child work.
 
 Sub-tasks inherit their parent story's artifacts by reference (the parent link). Do not pass the same artifact list to every sub-task.
 
@@ -425,6 +425,7 @@ tickets that downstream skills (triage, journey, evidence) cannot use.
 
 For each sub-task, invoke `lisa-tracker-write` with:
 - issue_type: "Sub-task"
+- build_ready: true  # explicit per `ready-role-filing`; omitted is NOT build-ready on any tracker
 - prd_source: [the originating PRD URL — mandatory; arms the S16 traceability gate]
 - parent: the parent story key
 - project_key: [PROJECT]

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/skills/lisa-debrief-apply/SKILL.md

@@ -29,11 +29,11 @@ For every row marked **Accept**:
 | Edge case | Edge Case Brainstorm checklist in `intent-routing.md` | Append the new pattern + question to the matching group (Navigation, Data, Failure, Input, Auth, or a new group if none fit). Use the row's `Summary` and `Evidence` link as a citation comment. |
 | Recurring gotcha | Committed learnings ledger (via contract) | Persist a ledger entry per [Ledger persistence](#ledger-persistence-knowledge-categories). The `rule` is the recurring gotcha and the guard against it; `why` is the causal claim. |
 | Process friction | Committed learnings ledger (via contract) | Persist a ledger entry per [Ledger persistence](#ledger-persistence-knowledge-categories). The `rule` is the friction-avoiding guideline; `why` names the friction it prevents. |
-| Tooling gap | Configured tracker — or upstream Lisa when harness-level | **Split by level.** Project-level (a missing project script, hook, or automation) → create a ticket via `lisa-tracker-write` with `issue_type: Task`, summary derived from the row's `Summary`, description citing the evidence and the originating debrief doc, labeled `type:tooling` / `lifecycle-improvement`. Harness-level (a Lisa skill/gate/agent that should have caught the issue but didn't) → file an upstream Lisa issue exactly per the "Filing upstream" procedure in `lisa-rework-triage` (dedupe search first, three-audience description, evidence chain, `self-hardening` label; repo from `.lisa.config.json` `hardening.upstreamRepo`, default `CodySwannGT/lisa`). |
+| Tooling gap | Configured tracker — or upstream Lisa when harness-level | **Split by level.** Project-level (a missing project script, hook, or automation) → create a ticket via `lisa-tracker-write` with `issue_type: Task`, summary derived from the row's `Summary`, description citing the evidence and the originating debrief doc, labeled `type:tooling` / `lifecycle-improvement`, and explicit `build_ready: true` per `ready-role-filing` (a tooling gap the factory can close itself is queue work, and an omitted flag is NOT build-ready on any tracker). Harness-level (a Lisa skill/gate/agent that should have caught the issue but didn't) → file an upstream Lisa issue exactly per the "Filing upstream" procedure in `lisa-rework-triage` (dedupe search first, three-audience description, evidence chain, `self-hardening` label; repo from `.lisa.config.json` `hardening.upstreamRepo`, default `CodySwannGT/lisa`). |
 | Convention drift | Committed learnings ledger (via contract) | Persist a ledger entry per [Ledger persistence](#ledger-persistence-knowledge-categories). The `rule` is the correct convention; `why` records the drift it corrects. |
 | Decomposition infidelity | Upstream Lisa repo | File an upstream Lisa issue per the "Filing upstream" procedure in `lisa-rework-triage`, citing the PRD text vs. the distorted ticket AC and naming the gate that passed it. |
 | PRD defect | Source PRD | Comment on the PRD via the `lisa-prd-backlink` lineage quoting the defective requirement and the failure it missed; flag for product review. Never silently edit the spec. |
-| Missing tool access | Configured tracker | Create a provisioning ticket via `lisa-tracker-write` (`issue_type: Task`, `type:tooling`) describing the missing tool/credential/environment and which flow needs it. |
+| Missing tool access | Configured tracker | Create a provisioning ticket via `lisa-tracker-write` (`issue_type: Task`, `type:tooling`) describing the missing tool/credential/environment and which flow needs it. Pass `human_gate: "a human must grant the missing access"` per `ready-role-filing` — the factory cannot provision its own credentials. |
 | Uncategorized | **No route — requires reclassification** | `Uncategorized` records that the synthesizer could not fit the finding to a category; it is not itself a destination. Do NOT guess a route and do NOT silently skip the row. Leave the row unapplied, mark it `[!] Needs reclassification — <the synthesizer's "why no category fit" note>`, and list it under its own heading in the run summary so the human can retag it to one of the eight and re-run `apply`. A row that stays `Uncategorized` across runs is a signal the category set itself is missing a case — worth an upstream Lisa issue, not a forced fit. |
 
 For every row marked **Reject** or **Defer**: no action. Defer is a no-op for `apply` but worth surfacing in the run summary — the human may want to revisit at the next debrief.

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/skills/lisa-exploratory-qa/SKILL.md

@@ -70,7 +70,13 @@ Kane never files the work item itself. Even when it marks a failure as a confirm
 | User-visible **bug** (broken behavior) | `Bug` | the `ready` flag (default `false`) |
 | **Usability / UX / clarity issue** | `Improvement` | the `ready` flag (default `false`) |
 
-Each finding is a flat leaf, so `build_ready` applies directly — pass it explicitly on every create. Each ticket MUST be a complete spec (the validator rejects thin tickets): a **three-audience description**; for a **bug**, exact reproduction steps, observed-vs-expected, the env / account / interface it occurred at, and evidence; for a **usability issue**, the observed friction, who it affects, **where**, and the proposed improvement; and **Gherkin acceptance criteria** for the fixed behavior.
+Each finding is a flat leaf, so `build_ready` applies directly — pass it explicitly on every create.
+
+**This skill is the named human-gate exception under `ready-role-filing`.** Everywhere else in Lisa, a complete defect found during other work is filed with explicit `build_ready: true` so build-intake claims it next cycle. Exploratory QA is deliberately different, and that difference is ratified rather than drift: its findings are *candidate* defects and usability observations whose **product significance is a human call**, so auto-readying them would push judgment work into the build queue — precisely the failure the gate model exists to prevent. Its default `ready=false` is therefore an **explicit human-gate marker, never a bare omission**: every not-ready create passes `human_gate: "exploratory finding — product significance is a human product call"` alongside `build_ready: false`, and the writer stamps the auditable `[lisa-human-gate]` marker. An operator who wants a pass to feed the queue directly opts in with `ready=true`.
+
+(The sibling `e2e-coverage-gaps` skills are the contrast: a missing automated test is not a product question, so they file `build_ready: true` by default.)
+
+Each ticket MUST be a complete spec (the validator rejects thin tickets): a **three-audience description**; for a **bug**, exact reproduction steps, observed-vs-expected, the env / account / interface it occurred at, and evidence; for a **usability issue**, the observed friction, who it affects, **where**, and the proposed improvement; and **Gherkin acceptance criteria** for the fixed behavior.
 
 ### Idempotency — don't spam duplicates
 

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/skills/lisa-github-build-intake/SKILL.md

@@ -258,6 +258,11 @@ A blocker is active if it is open and has no cleared status label. Treat `status
 
 **Claim-time archaeology runs second — after rejection detection, still before the relabel below.** Classify this item per the vendor-neutral `claim-archaeology` rule, with the rejection classification above as its input. All shared semantics — ancestry signals, classification, learning-loop exclusion, cost budget, candidate derivation, marker dedupe, and the never-block degrade — live in that one slug; change them there, never here. GitHub wiring only: the typed relations and `closingIssuesReferences` are already in the read bundle; text-similarity searches use `gh search issues` over recently-closed issues; the fallback candidate comment is posted with `gh issue comment`.
 
+**The two `claim-time-guards` run third and fourth — still before the relabel below.** Both semantics live in that one vendor-neutral slug; do not restate them here. GitHub wiring only:
+
+1. **`two-failed-attempts` valve.** Count `[lisa-build-attempt]` markers on the issue from the read bundle's comments (match on the marker, never the title). With two or more, do **not** claim: relabel to the configured blocked role (`gh issue edit <number> --repo <org>/<repo> --remove-label "$READY" --add-label "$BLOCKED"`, resolved from `github.labels.build.blocked` per `config-resolution`), post the operator-readable comment naming both attempts, and **stop the cycle** at Phase 3e. Every non-success terminal outcome recorded in 3c/3d also appends a fresh `<!-- [lisa-build-attempt] n=<N> outcome=<outcome> -->` marker so the next cycle can count it.
+2. **`already-implemented` check.** Probe for this issue's own key — `git log --all --grep "<org>/<repo>#<number>"` and `gh pr list --repo <org>/<repo> --state all --search "<org>/<repo>#<number>" --json number,state,mergedAt,url`. On a hit, claim as normal but route 3c to **verify-and-close** instead of `lisa-implement`: verify what shipped against the issue's acceptance criteria, post evidence via `lisa-github-evidence` naming the shipping PR/commit, then run the ordinary 3d transition and 3d.1 rollup. A partial hit implements only the remaining gap. An unreadable history degrades to "no hit" and the ordinary path proceeds — the guard never blocks the claim. This is not `DUPLICATE_ALREADY_FIXED` (a *different* canonical issue) and not `claim-archaeology` (a *different* ancestor issue); it is this issue's own work already having shipped without a transition.
+
 ```bash
 gh issue edit <number> --repo <org>/<repo> --remove-label "$READY" --add-label "$CLAIMED"
 # Assign to the authenticated user ONLY when the issue is currently unassigned (attributable claim;

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/skills/lisa-github-create/SKILL.md

@@ -80,7 +80,9 @@ Issues must be created in parent-before-child order:
 
 1. Invoke `lisa-github-write-issue` for the Epic. Capture the returned issue number.
 2. For each Story, invoke `lisa-github-write-issue` with the Epic ref as `parent_ref`. Capture each Story number.
-3. For each Sub-task, invoke `lisa-github-write-issue` with the Story ref as `parent_ref`.
+3. For each Sub-task, invoke `lisa-github-write-issue` with the Story ref as `parent_ref` and explicit `build_ready: true`.
+
+- **Declare readiness on every leaf write.** Per the `ready-role-filing` rule an omitted `build_ready` is **not build-ready** on any tracker, so pass `build_ready: true` on each Sub-task (the leaf work units this skill plans) and never on the Epic or Stories, which are containers per `leaf-only-lifecycle`. A leaf that is deliberately held instead passes `human_gate: "<why a human must judge this first>"`. Filing a leaf with neither is an incomplete handoff and `lisa-github-write-issue` rejects it.
 
 ### What to pass to each invocation
 

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/skills/lisa-github-to-tracker/SKILL.md

@@ -343,7 +343,7 @@ Each sub-task MUST:
 2. **Include an Empirical Verification Plan** — real user-like verification, NOT unit tests, linting, or typechecking.
 3. **Carry its own `## Source Requirement` section** (shared format above) with the full verbatim quote(s) from the Phase 1.4 register — a leaf claimed by build-intake in isolation must be self-explanatory. When a sub-task is split per-repo, every split child inherits the same requirement quote(s).
 
-**Leaf-only build-ready (`leaf-only-lifecycle`)**: Sub-tasks are the **leaf work units** of the decomposition — they are the ONLY items in the hierarchy that receive the build-ready label. `lisa-tracker-write` applies `status:ready` here so downstream build intake (`lisa-github-build-intake`) claims the leaves and never the Epic or Stories. Apply `status:ready` to each Sub-task; never to its parent Story or Epic (Phases 3–4). `lisa-github-write-issue` enforces the same invariant on the write side, so a Sub-task split into per-repo children (the cross-repo case above) carries build-ready on the children, not on any intermediate parent that gains child work.
+**Leaf-only build-ready (`leaf-only-lifecycle`)**: Sub-tasks are the **leaf work units** of the decomposition — they are the ONLY items in the hierarchy that receive the build-ready label. `lisa-tracker-write` applies `status:ready` here so downstream build intake (`lisa-github-build-intake`) claims the leaves and never the Epic or Stories. **Pass `build_ready: true` explicitly on every Sub-task create** — per the `ready-role-filing` rule an omitted `build_ready` is NOT build-ready on any tracker, so a decomposition that relies on a vendor default silently produces a queue nothing ever claims. Apply `status:ready` to each Sub-task; never to its parent Story or Epic (Phases 3–4). `lisa-github-write-issue` enforces the same invariant on the write side, so a Sub-task split into per-repo children (the cross-repo case above) carries build-ready on the children, not on any intermediate parent that gains child work.
 
 Sub-tasks inherit their parent Story's artifacts by reference (the parent link). Do not pass the same artifact list to every sub-task.
 
@@ -412,6 +412,7 @@ that downstream skills (triage, journey, evidence) cannot use.
 
 For each sub-task, invoke `lisa-tracker-write` with:
 - issue_type: "Sub-task"
+- build_ready: true  # explicit per `ready-role-filing`; omitted is NOT build-ready on any tracker
 - prd_source: [the originating PRD URL — mandatory; arms the S16 traceability gate]
 - parent_ref: the parent story ref
 - summary: prefixed with the repo in brackets, e.g. "[backend-api] Add audit log table"

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

@@ -382,13 +382,17 @@ Per `Phase 5` of `lisa-github-write-issue`, every issue MUST carry
 missing from the proposed spec or live issue, FAIL with the missing label name.
 
 The `status:*` requirement uses this validator's S15 leaf/container classification while preserving
-the writer's documented `build_ready` control-input defaults:
+the writer's documented `build_ready` control-input defaults, which the `ready-role-filing` rule
+fixes at "omitted is NOT build-ready" for every vendor:
 
 1. Classify the issue structurally using the S15 child-resolution rules. A container (any issue
    with child work, plus a childless `Epic`) may omit `status:*`; its state rolls up rather than
    being assigned directly.
-2. For a proposed leaf spec, normalize omitted `build_ready` to `true`, preserving the writer's
-   backward-compatible default-ready behavior. Explicit `build_ready: false` means backlog mode.
+2. For a proposed leaf spec, normalize omitted `build_ready` to `false`, per `ready-role-filing`:
+   ready is an explicit claim, so only `build_ready: true` asserts it. Explicit `build_ready: false`
+   means the same backlog mode. (This validator previously normalized omitted → `true` to mirror
+   GitHub's implicit-ready writer default; both were removed together, and re-introducing either
+   here would just move the leak.)
 3. For a live issue ref, derive `build_ready` from the labels (`true` exactly when the S15-resolved
    `READY_ROLE` from `github.labels.build.ready`, default `status:ready`, is present). A live backlog leaf without a status label
    therefore validates as `build_ready: false`; live data cannot distinguish an explicit false from

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

@@ -253,12 +253,21 @@ For non-build-ready issues created fresh (Epics, Stories, and other containers),
 
 ### Build-ready control input (`build_ready`)
 
-`build_ready` is an optional write-control input (default: **omitted**). It governs whether a **leaf** work unit is stamped with the build-ready role on create. It never overrides `leaf-only-lifecycle` — a container is never stamped build-ready regardless of `build_ready`. "Not build-ready" is not a special status: it simply means the issue is created in its natural default (a plain open issue with **no `status:ready` label**), which a human can promote later.
+`build_ready` is a write-control input governed by the `ready-role-filing` rule — cite that slug for the full contract; do not restate its per-vendor normalization table here. It decides whether a **leaf** work unit is stamped with the build-ready role on create. It never overrides `leaf-only-lifecycle` — a container is never stamped build-ready regardless of `build_ready`. "Not build-ready" is not a special status: it simply means the issue is created in its natural default (a plain open issue with **no `status:ready` label**), which a human can promote later.
 
-- **Omitted** → current behavior: a leaf work unit receives `status:ready`. Preserves what every existing caller (`lisa-plan`, the `*-to-tracker` skills) relies on.
+- **Omitted** → **not build-ready**: the leaf is created without `status:ready`. Ready is an explicit claim, never a vendor default. **This is a breaking change** — GitHub previously applied `status:ready` on omission, so a caller that relied on that must now pass `build_ready: true`.
 - **`build_ready: false`** → create the leaf **without** `status:ready`, so it sits in the backlog for a human to review and promote into the queue.
 - **`build_ready: true`** → ensure the leaf carries `status:ready` so `lisa-intake` / `lisa-github-build-intake` auto-picks it up.
 
+**A filing with neither is an incomplete handoff.** A leaf that is not build-ready must carry an explicit `human_gate: "<why a human must judge this first>"`; nothing in the ready lane means nothing ever claims it. When `human_gate` is supplied, stamp the hold on the issue so it is auditable — a visible line plus the verbatim marker:
+
+```text
+Held for a human product call: <reason>.
+<!-- [lisa-human-gate] reason=<short-slug> -->
+```
+
+If a leaf arrives with `build_ready` omitted or `false` **and** no `human_gate`, do not create it: report the incomplete handoff and name both ways to resolve it (`build_ready: true`, or a `human_gate` reason). Containers are exempt — their state rolls up from children, so they need neither.
+
 ## Phase 5.5 — Validate (Pre-write Gate)
 
 Before any write, invoke `lisa-github-validate-issue` with the full proposed spec assembled from Phases 2 / 3 / 4 / 5. Pass it as a YAML block per the `lisa-github-validate-issue` schema, including `runtime_behavior_change`, `authenticated_surface`, and `artifacts_attached` flags so the right gates run.
@@ -271,9 +280,9 @@ If the validator reports `FAIL`, do NOT proceed to Phase 6. Fix the spec and re-
 
 ### CREATE
 
-1. Compose the body markdown from Phases 2/3/4 in a temp file (avoid quoting hell). Apply `status:ready` **only for a leaf work unit** per the Phase 5 leaf-only rule (`leaf-only-lifecycle`) — omit it for `Epic` / `Story` / `Spike` and any issue that has child work, **and** only when `build_ready` is not `false` (a leaf with `build_ready: false` is created without `status:ready`; see the Build-ready control input):
+1. Compose the body markdown from Phases 2/3/4 in a temp file (avoid quoting hell). Apply `status:ready` **only for a leaf work unit** per the Phase 5 leaf-only rule (`leaf-only-lifecycle`) — omit it for `Epic` / `Story` / `Spike` and any issue that has child work, **and** only when `build_ready` is explicitly `true` (a leaf with `build_ready` omitted or `false` is created without `status:ready`; see the Build-ready control input):
    ```bash
-   # Leaf work unit (Bug / Task / Sub-task / Improvement with no children), build_ready not false:
+   # Leaf work unit (Bug / Task / Sub-task / Improvement with no children), build_ready: true:
    gh issue create \
      --repo <org>/<repo> \
      --title "<summary>" \
@@ -282,9 +291,10 @@ If the validator reports `FAIL`, do NOT proceed to Phase 6. Fix the spec and re-
      [--label "component:<name>" ...] [--milestone "<milestone>"] \
      [--assignee "<login>"]
 
-   # Container (Epic / Story / Spike / any issue with child work), OR a leaf with build_ready: false:
+   # Container (Epic / Story / Spike / any issue with child work), OR a leaf whose build_ready is
+   # omitted or false (and which therefore carries an explicit human_gate):
    # identical, but WITHOUT --label "status:ready" — a container's state rolls up from children;
-   # a build_ready: false leaf waits in the backlog for a human to promote it.
+   # a human-gated leaf waits in the backlog for a human to promote it.
    gh issue create \
      --repo <org>/<repo> \
      --title "<summary>" \

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/skills/lisa-improve-harness/SKILL.md

@@ -191,7 +191,7 @@ authority — if any of these hold:
 **On any of those: file a proposed-intervention ticket via `lisa-tracker-write` and STOP.** The
 ticket carries the job contract, the earliest failed handoff, the gap classification with
 evidence, and the proposed change with its expected mechanism; labels `type:harness`,
-`status:blocked` (human-flipped to `status:ready` when approved). Post the result record with
+`status:blocked` plus an explicit `human_gate: "a human approves the proposed harness intervention"` per `ready-role-filing` (human-flipped to `status:ready` when approved). Post the result record with
 `Verdict: bounded-authority-stop`, `Decision: n/a (proposed-intervention, <url>)`, and
 terminate. Implementing it anyway is the failure mode this phase exists to prevent.
 

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/skills/lisa-jira-build-intake/SKILL.md

@@ -202,6 +202,11 @@ This gate never blocks a legitimate flat Task/Bug: those have no open children a
 
 **Claim-time archaeology runs second — after rejection detection, still before the transition below.** Classify this ticket per the vendor-neutral `claim-archaeology` rule, with the rejection classification above as its input. All shared semantics — ancestry signals, classification, learning-loop exclusion, cost budget, candidate derivation, marker dedupe, and the never-block degrade — live in that one slug; change them there, never here. JIRA wiring only: the typed relations are already in the read bundle; text-similarity searches run through `lisa-atlassian-access operation: search-issues jql:` over recently-closed tickets; the fallback candidate comment is posted via `lisa-atlassian-access operation: comment`.
 
+**The two `claim-time-guards` run third and fourth — still before the transition below.** Both semantics live in that one vendor-neutral slug; do not restate them here. JIRA wiring only:
+
+1. **`two-failed-attempts` valve.** Count `[lisa-build-attempt]` markers on the ticket from the read bundle's comments (match on the marker, never the summary). With two or more, do **not** claim: transition to the configured blocked status (`lisa-atlassian-access operation: transition to: "$BLOCKED"`, resolved from `jira.workflow.blocked` per `config-resolution`), post the operator-readable comment naming both attempts, and **stop the cycle** at Phase 3e. Every non-success terminal outcome recorded in 3c/3d also appends a fresh `<!-- [lisa-build-attempt] n=<N> outcome=<outcome> -->` marker so the next cycle can count it.
+2. **`already-implemented` check.** Probe for this ticket's own key — `git log --all --grep "<TICKET>"` and the merged/open PRs referencing `<TICKET>` (`gh pr list --state all --search "<TICKET>"` in the bound repo). On a hit, claim as normal but route 3c to **verify-and-close** instead of `lisa-implement`: verify what shipped against the ticket's acceptance criteria, post evidence via `lisa-jira-evidence` naming the shipping PR/commit, then run the ordinary 3d transition and rollup. A partial hit implements only the remaining gap. An unreadable history degrades to "no hit" and the ordinary path proceeds — the guard never blocks the claim. This is not `DUPLICATE_ALREADY_FIXED` (a *different* canonical ticket) and not `claim-archaeology` (a *different* ancestor ticket); it is this ticket's own work already having shipped without a transition.
+
 Transition the ticket from `$READY` to `$CLAIMED` by invoking `lisa-atlassian-access` `operation: transition key: <TICKET> to: "$CLAIMED"`.
 - **Assign to the authenticated user when the ticket is unassigned.** A claim must be attributable. If the ticket has no assignee, assign it to the authenticated account — prefer acli `--assignee @me` (resolves server-side to the authenticated user, which avoids the federated-`accountId` mis-assignment), or `write-ticket` with the `accountId` from the `/rest/api/3/myself` identity probe the access skill already documents. Leave an already-assigned ticket's assignee untouched — never reassign work that already has an owner.
 - Post a `[claude-build-intake]` comment via `lisa-atlassian-access` `operation: comment key: <TICKET> body: "Claimed by Claude. Starting build."`

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/skills/lisa-jira-create/SKILL.md

@@ -125,6 +125,8 @@ Exclude unless requested: migration plans, performance tests
 - Sign-in account and target environment recorded in description
 - Post-create verification
 
+**Declare readiness on every leaf write.** Per the `ready-role-filing` rule an omitted `build_ready` is **not build-ready** on any tracker, so pass `build_ready: true` on each Sub-task (the leaf work units this skill plans) and never on the Epic or Stories, which are containers per `leaf-only-lifecycle`. A leaf that is deliberately held instead passes `human_gate: "<why a human must judge this first>"`. Filing a leaf with neither is an incomplete handoff and `lisa-jira-write-ticket` rejects it.
+
 ### Invocation order
 
 Tickets must be created in parent-before-child order so each child can be passed its parent key:

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/skills/lisa-jira-write-ticket/SKILL.md

@@ -238,11 +238,21 @@ Before create/update, verify each field is populated where applicable:
 
 ### Build-ready control input (`build_ready`)
 
-`build_ready` is an optional write-control input (default: **omitted**). It governs whether a **leaf** work unit is promoted to the build-ready role on create. It never overrides `leaf-only-lifecycle` — a container is never promoted regardless of `build_ready`. Unlike the label-based trackers, JIRA tickets are **already created not-ready** (in the project's default initial status, e.g. `TODO`/`Backlog`); the build-ready role is the configured `ready` status (`jira.workflow.ready`, default `Ready`), reached by an explicit transition.
+`build_ready` is a write-control input governed by the `ready-role-filing` rule — cite that slug for the full contract; do not restate its per-vendor normalization table here. It decides whether a **leaf** work unit is promoted to the build-ready role on create. It never overrides `leaf-only-lifecycle` — a container is never promoted regardless of `build_ready`. Unlike the label-based trackers, JIRA tickets are **already created not-ready** (in the project's default initial status, e.g. `TODO`/`Backlog`); the build-ready role is the configured `ready` status (`jira.workflow.ready`, default `Ready`), reached by an explicit transition. JIRA is the vendor whose behavior the other two converged onto — this arm is unchanged by that normalization.
 
-- **Omitted** or **`build_ready: false`** → current behavior: leave the ticket in the project's default created status. No transition. A human (or `build_ready: true`) promotes it to the `ready` status later.
+- **Omitted** → **not build-ready**: leave the ticket in the project's default created status. No transition. Ready is an explicit claim, never a vendor default.
+- **`build_ready: false`** → same outcome as omitted, stated deliberately: the ticket waits in the project's default status for a human to promote it.
 - **`build_ready: true`** → after create, transition the **leaf** to the resolved `ready` role so `lisa-intake` / `lisa-jira-build-intake` auto-picks it up (see Phase 6 CREATE step). Resolve the role name with the standard pattern (`.jira.workflow.ready` // `Ready`, local overrides global). Best-effort: if the transition is unreachable, record it and leave the ticket in its default status rather than failing the write.
 
+**A filing with neither is an incomplete handoff.** A leaf that is not build-ready must carry an explicit `human_gate: "<why a human must judge this first>"`; nothing in the ready status means nothing ever claims it. When `human_gate` is supplied, stamp the hold on the ticket so it is auditable — a visible line plus the verbatim marker:
+
+```text
+Held for a human product call: <reason>.
+<!-- [lisa-human-gate] reason=<short-slug> -->
+```
+
+If a leaf arrives with `build_ready` omitted or `false` **and** no `human_gate`, do not create it: report the incomplete handoff and name both ways to resolve it (`build_ready: true`, or a `human_gate` reason). Containers are exempt — their status rolls up from children, so they need neither.
+
 ## Phase 5.5 — Validate (Pre-write Gate)
 
 Before any write, invoke `lisa-jira-validate-ticket` with the full proposed spec assembled from Phases 2 / 3 / 4 / 5. Pass it as a YAML block per the `lisa-jira-validate-ticket` schema, including `runtime_behavior_change`, `authenticated_surface`, and `artifacts_attached` flags so the right gates run.

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/skills/lisa-learnings-audit/SKILL.md

@@ -172,7 +172,12 @@ audits the auditor without re-running it.
 
 All project-tracker writes go through **`lisa-tracker-write`** so gardener
 tickets pass the same validation gates as all factory work. Nothing is created
-`status:ready` — the human flips.
+`status:ready` — the human flips. Per `ready-role-filing` that hold is
+**declared, not implied**: every gardener ticket passes
+`human_gate: "a human decides whether this knowledge is promoted, demoted, or
+retired"` so the writer stamps the auditable `[lisa-human-gate]` marker. An
+omitted flag would be indistinguishable from the accidental non-ready filing
+the rule exists to catch.
 
 **Per-item tickets — PROMOTE / DEMOTE** (`issue_type: Task`; GitHub trackers
 carry the `type:Task` label) — one ticket per recommendation, capped by

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/skills/lisa-linear-build-intake/SKILL.md

@@ -203,6 +203,11 @@ This gate never blocks a legitimate flat Task/Bug: those have no open children a
 
 **Claim-time archaeology runs second — after rejection detection, still before the transition below.** Classify this Issue per the vendor-neutral `claim-archaeology` rule, with the rejection classification above as its input. All shared semantics — ancestry signals, classification, learning-loop exclusion, cost budget, candidate derivation, marker dedupe, and the never-block degrade — live in that one slug; change them there, never here. Linear wiring only: the native relations are already in the read bundle; text-similarity searches run through `lisa-linear-access operation: list-issues` filtered to recently-closed Issues; the fallback candidate comment is posted via `lisa-linear-access operation: save-comment`.
 
+**The two `claim-time-guards` run third and fourth — still before the transition below.** Both semantics live in that one vendor-neutral slug; do not restate them here. Linear wiring only:
+
+1. **`two-failed-attempts` valve.** Count `[lisa-build-attempt]` markers on the Issue from the read bundle's comments (match on the marker, never the title). With two or more, do **not** claim: set `stateId` to the configured blocked state via `lisa-linear-access operation: save-issue` (resolved from `linear.workflow.blocked` per `config-resolution`), post the operator-readable comment naming both attempts via `save-comment`, and **stop the cycle** at Phase 3e. Every non-success terminal outcome recorded in 3c/3d also appends a fresh `<!-- [lisa-build-attempt] n=<N> outcome=<outcome> -->` marker so the next cycle can count it.
+2. **`already-implemented` check.** Probe for this Issue's own key — `git log --all --grep "<IDENTIFIER>"` and the merged/open PRs referencing `<IDENTIFIER>` (`gh pr list --state all --search "<IDENTIFIER>"` in the bound repo; Linear's own GitHub attachments in the read bundle are the cheaper first look). On a hit, claim as normal but route 3c to **verify-and-close** instead of `lisa-implement`: verify what shipped against the Issue's acceptance criteria, post evidence via `lisa-linear-evidence` naming the shipping PR/commit, then run the ordinary 3d transition and rollup. A partial hit implements only the remaining gap. An unreadable history degrades to "no hit" and the ordinary path proceeds — the guard never blocks the claim. This is not `DUPLICATE_ALREADY_FIXED` (a *different* canonical Issue) and not `claim-archaeology` (a *different* ancestor Issue); it is this Issue's own work already having shipped without a transition.
+
 Transition the Issue via `lisa-linear-access operation: save-issue` by setting `stateId` to the `$CLAIMED` state. Resolve state IDs via `list-workflow-states`; a missing `$CLAIMED` state is a setup defect (see the pre-flight check) — never create one here.
 
 **Assign to the authenticated user when the Issue is unassigned.** A claim must be attributable. If the Issue has no assignee, set its `assigneeId` to the authenticated viewer (resolve the viewer's id via the Linear MCP identity — e.g. `get_user` for the current actor) through `lisa-linear-access operation: save-issue`. Leave an already-assigned Issue's assignee untouched — never reassign work that already has an owner.

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/skills/lisa-linear-create/SKILL.md

@@ -124,7 +124,9 @@ Items must be created in parent-before-child order so each child can be passed i
 
 1. Invoke `lisa-linear-write-issue` for the Epic (Project). Capture the returned Project ID.
 2. For each Story, invoke `lisa-linear-write-issue` with the Project ID as `parent_project_id`. Capture each Issue identifier.
-3. For each Sub-task, invoke `lisa-linear-write-issue` with the Story Issue ID as `parent_issue_id`.
+3. For each Sub-task, invoke `lisa-linear-write-issue` with the Story Issue ID as `parent_issue_id` and explicit `build_ready: true`.
+
+- **Declare readiness on every leaf write.** Per the `ready-role-filing` rule an omitted `build_ready` is **not build-ready** on any tracker, so pass `build_ready: true` on each Sub-task (the leaf work units this skill plans) and never on the Epic or Stories, which are containers per `leaf-only-lifecycle`. A leaf that is deliberately held instead passes `human_gate: "<why a human must judge this first>"`. Filing a leaf with neither is an incomplete handoff and `lisa-linear-write-issue` rejects it.
 
 ### What to pass to each invocation
 

package/plugins/lisa-copilot/skills/lisa-linear-to-tracker/SKILL.md

@@ -340,7 +340,7 @@ Each sub-task MUST:
 2. **Include an Empirical Verification Plan** — real user-like verification, NOT unit tests, linting, or typechecking
 3. **Carry its own `## Source Requirement` section** (shared format above) with the full verbatim quote(s) from the Phase 1.4 register — a leaf claimed by build-intake in isolation must be self-explanatory. When a sub-task is split per-repo, every split child inherits the same requirement quote(s).
 
-**Leaf-only build-ready (`leaf-only-lifecycle`)**: Sub-tasks are the **leaf work units** of the decomposition — they are the ONLY items in the hierarchy that receive the build-ready role. `lisa-tracker-write` applies the build-ready role here so downstream build intake (`lisa-tracker-build-intake`) claims the leaves and never the Epic or Stories. Apply the build-ready role to each Sub-task; never to its parent Story or Epic (Phases 3–4). `lisa-tracker-write` enforces the same invariant on the write side, so a Sub-task split into per-repo children (the cross-repo case above) carries build-ready on the children, not on any intermediate parent that gains child work.
+**Leaf-only build-ready (`leaf-only-lifecycle`)**: Sub-tasks are the **leaf work units** of the decomposition — they are the ONLY items in the hierarchy that receive the build-ready role. `lisa-tracker-write` applies the build-ready role here so downstream build intake (`lisa-tracker-build-intake`) claims the leaves and never the Epic or Stories. **Pass `build_ready: true` explicitly on every Sub-task create** — per the `ready-role-filing` rule an omitted `build_ready` is NOT build-ready on any tracker, so a decomposition that relies on a vendor default silently produces a queue nothing ever claims. Apply the build-ready role to each Sub-task; never to its parent Story or Epic (Phases 3–4). `lisa-tracker-write` enforces the same invariant on the write side, so a Sub-task split into per-repo children (the cross-repo case above) carries build-ready on the children, not on any intermediate parent that gains child work.
 
 Sub-tasks inherit their parent story's artifacts by reference (the parent link). Do not pass the same artifact list to every sub-task.
 
@@ -408,6 +408,7 @@ produces broken tickets that downstream skills (triage, journey, evidence) canno
 
 For each sub-task, invoke `lisa-tracker-write` with:
 - issue_type: "Sub-task"
+- build_ready: true  # explicit per `ready-role-filing`; omitted is NOT build-ready on any tracker
 - prd_source: [the originating PRD URL — mandatory; arms the S16 traceability gate]
 - parent: the parent story key
 - project_key: [PROJECT]