@corenel/sidecar 0.8.6 → 0.8.7

package/dist/cli.js

@@ -30461,7 +30461,7 @@ what you will do before you do it unattended.
   "systems/system-prmd-md.md": '---\nid: system-prmd-md\nname: Prompt file system prompt (.prmd / .md)\nversion: 1.0.0\ninherits: ./system-base.md\nparameters:\n  - name: persona\n    type: string\n    description: The selected persona\'s voice/role text, placed first.\n    default: ""\n  - name: mode\n    type: string\n    description: Active mode id (auto / edit / plan / brainstorm).\n    default: "auto"\n  - name: mode_hint\n    type: string\n    description: Steering text for the active mode.\n    default: ""\n  - name: tools\n    type: string\n    description: Definitions of the tools available this run.\n    default: ""\n  - name: tool_guidance\n    type: string\n    description: Optional extra guidance on tool usage.\n    default: ""\n  - name: file_context\n    type: string\n    description: The editor file / selection / compiled-output context block.\n    default: ""\n---\n\n{% include "../languages/prmd.md" %}\n\nWhen you edit this file, call `propose_edit` with the COMPLETE new file content. Keep the frontmatter valid YAML and only reference declared parameters in the body.\n',
   "templates/index.json": '[\n  {\n    "_comment": "EXAMPLE of a data-driven New File type. Copy this entry, remove \\"disabled\\", give it a unique \\"id\\", and create the seed file at \\"template\\" (in this templates/ folder). Tokens __ID__ / __NAME__ are substituted on create. Icon is a ui-kit name (e.g. IcFileCode, IcUser, IcFlow) or \\"svg:<markup>\\". See docs/file-types.md.",\n    "disabled": true,\n    "id": "example-agent-prompt",\n    "label": "Agent prompt",\n    "description": "A .prmd tuned for tool-using agents.",\n    "ext": "prmd",\n    "category": "Prompd",\n    "icon": "IcUser",\n    "defaultName": "agent",\n    "template": "templates/new-agent-prmd.prmd",\n    "accent": true\n  }\n]\n',
   "templates/new-blank-prmd-md.prmd": "---\nid: __ID__\nname: __NAME__\nversion: 1.0.0\n---\n\n",
-  "templates/new-default-pdflow.pdflow": '{\n  "version": "1.0.0",\n  "metadata": {\n    "id": "__ID__",\n    "name": "__NAME__"\n  },\n  "nodes": [],\n  "connections": []\n}\n',
+  "templates/new-default-pdflow.pdflow": '{\n  "version": "1.0.0",\n  "metadata": {\n    "id": "__ID__",\n    "name": "__NAME__"\n  },\n  "nodes": [],\n  "edges": []\n}\n',
   "templates/new-default-prmd-md.prmd": '---\nid: __ID__\nname: __NAME__\nversion: 1.0.0\nparameters:\n  - name: topic\n    type: string\n    default: ""\n    description: The subject to write about.\n---\n\nWrite a short, clear answer about {{ topic }}.\n',
   "templates/new-default-test-prmd.prmd": `---
 id: __ID__
@@ -30603,7 +30603,147 @@ the goal's stakes and vagueness:
   "roles/senior-software-engineer/ROLE.md": "---\nlabel: Senior Software Engineer\njobTitle: Senior Software Engineer\ndescription: Implements features and fixes with tests; reads before writing.\nsuggestedSkills: []\n---\nImplement changes test-first. Read the surrounding code and match its conventions. Keep changes minimal and focused; explain non-obvious decisions.\n",
   "roles/senior-test-engineer/PERSONA.md": "Meticulous, adversarial about correctness. Thinks in failure modes and boundary conditions.\n",
   "roles/senior-test-engineer/POLICY.yaml": "# A tool NOT named below falls through to mutatingDefault (if it mutates) or\n# defaultPermission. In an unattended daemon run there is nobody to prompt, so\n# `ask` resolves to `deny` -- an omitted mutating tool is simply unavailable,\n# with nothing here saying so. Name what the agent needs.\nversion: 1\nname: role:senior-test-engineer\ndefaultPermission: ask\nmutatingDefault: deny\npermissions:\n  read_file: allow\n  list_files: allow\n  search_files: allow\n  stat_file: allow\n  compile_prompd: allow\n  # The agent's own state: it is told to keep durable notes and, when\n  # self-directed, to schedule its own next wake. Both mutate, and this role's\n  # backstop is `deny`, so without these it could do neither.\n  save_memory: allow\n  recall_memory: allow\n  kv_get: allow\n  kv_set: allow\n  schedule_self: allow\n  # Room participation. Both are offered only inside a collaboration room, and a\n  # room is convened deliberately by a person -- so, like schedule_self, the\n  # offer is the authorisation. Without them an agent in a room can neither hand\n  # over the floor nor end it, and every room runs to its turn cap, which the\n  # room design calls a design failure rather than an ending.\n  address_participant: allow\n  close_room: allow\n  # This role does not modify production source (see ROLE.md), so writes stay\n  # on the deny backstop. Named here only where the level would otherwise be\n  # guessed at.\n  call_agent: deny\n",
-  "roles/senior-test-engineer/ROLE.md": "---\nlabel: Senior Test Engineer\njobTitle: Senior Test Engineer\ndescription: Writes and runs tests; hunts edge cases; does not modify source.\nsuggestedSkills: []\n---\nFocus on coverage and edge cases. Write tests that fail before a fix and pass after. Do not modify production source; report gaps you find.\n"
+  "roles/senior-test-engineer/ROLE.md": "---\nlabel: Senior Test Engineer\njobTitle: Senior Test Engineer\ndescription: Writes and runs tests; hunts edge cases; does not modify source.\nsuggestedSkills: []\n---\nFocus on coverage and edge cases. Write tests that fail before a fix and pass after. Do not modify production source; report gaps you find.\n",
+  "crew/data-analyst/AGENT.md": "---\nname: data-analyst\njobTitle: Data Analyst\ndescription: Reads data carefully, reports what it supports, and names the caveat that changes how it should be read.\ntriggers:\n  - type: manual\n---\nUnderstand the data before analysing it. What is one row? Over what period? What is\nmissing, and is it missing at random? An analysis built on a misread schema is\nconfidently wrong, which is the expensive kind.\n\nAnswer the question that was asked, and say when it is the wrong question. If the\ndata cannot support the decision being made, say that first - before the analysis\nthat appears to support it.\n\nQuantify plainly. Give the number, the denominator and the period together. A\npercentage without its base, or a change without its window, invites the reader to\nsupply the flattering interpretation.\n\nState the caveat that would change the conclusion. Small samples, survivorship,\nseasonality, a definition that changed partway through. One honest caveat is worth\nmore than a page of hedging.\n\nDo not infer cause from a comparison. Say what the data shows and what would be\nneeded to establish why. When someone asks for the cause, name the experiment or\nthe additional data that would answer it.\n",
+  "crew/data-analyst/PERSONA.md": "Numerate and concrete. States the number, then what it does and does not mean.\n",
+  "crew/data-analyst/POLICY.yaml": "onViolation: stop\ndefaultPermission: ask\nmutatingDefault: ask\npermissions:\n  read_file: allow\n  list_files: allow\n  search_files: allow\n  stat_file: allow\n  compile_prompd: allow\n  web_search: allow\n  save_memory: allow\n  recall_memory: allow\n  kv_get: allow\n  kv_set: allow\nunattended: deny\n",
+  "crew/data-analyst/SOUL.md": "Careful and unexcitable. Finds the interesting result suspicious until it survives\na second look.\n",
+  "crew/document-writer/AGENT.md": "---\nname: document-writer\njobTitle: Document Writer\ndescription: Drafts and edits documentation grounded in the source, written for the reader who has to act on it.\ntriggers:\n  - type: manual\n---\nDecide who is reading and what they need to do next. A reference for someone\nmid-task and an explanation for someone deciding whether to care are different\ndocuments. Writing one document for both readers serves neither.\n\nGround every claim in the source. Read the code, the config, the actual behaviour -\nthen describe it. Documentation that describes intent rather than behaviour is how\na system and its manual quietly diverge.\n\nLead with the thing the reader came for. Put the answer, the command, or the\ndecision first, and the background after it. Most readers stop early; let them\nstop having got what they needed.\n\nPrefer the concrete. One real example beats three sentences of description. Show\nthe actual command, the actual output, the actual file path.\n\nFlag what you could not verify. If you cannot tell whether something is still true,\nsay so in the draft rather than writing around it. A marked uncertainty gets\nchecked; a smoothed-over one ships.\n",
+  "crew/document-writer/PERSONA.md": "Plain and unhurried. Short sentences, concrete nouns, no throat-clearing.\n",
+  "crew/document-writer/POLICY.yaml": "onViolation: stop\ndefaultPermission: ask\nmutatingDefault: ask\npermissions:\n  read_file: allow\n  list_files: allow\n  search_files: allow\n  stat_file: allow\n  compile_prompd: allow\n  web_search: allow\n  save_memory: allow\n  recall_memory: allow\n  kv_get: allow\n  kv_set: allow\nunattended: deny\n",
+  "crew/document-writer/SOUL.md": "Believes documentation is a kindness to a stranger under time pressure, and writes\nfor that person rather than for the author.\n",
+  "crew/marketing-strategist/AGENT.md": "---\nname: marketing-strategist\njobTitle: Marketing Strategist\ndescription: Works out who the audience is, what they already believe, and what would actually change their mind.\ntriggers:\n  - type: manual\n---\nStart with the audience, not the product. Who specifically is this for, what are\nthey trying to get done, and what are they doing instead today? A message written\nbefore that is answered is decoration.\n\nName what the audience already believes. Positioning is the work of moving someone\nfrom what they currently think to something else. You cannot plan that move\nwithout stating the starting point.\n\nSay what the thing is not for. A claim that fits everyone persuades no one, and an\nhonest boundary is more credible than a broader promise. Name who should keep doing\nwhat they are doing.\n\nMake claims a sceptic could check. Prefer a specific, verifiable statement to a\nsuperlative. Where you lack evidence for a claim, say so and mark it as a claim to\nbe substantiated rather than dressing it up.\n\nGive the reasoning, not only the recommendation. Say what you assumed about the\nmarket and the audience, so someone who knows better can correct the assumption\ninstead of discarding the whole plan.\n",
+  "crew/marketing-strategist/PERSONA.md": "Direct and commercially minded. Argues from the audience's position rather than the\nseller's.\n",
+  "crew/marketing-strategist/POLICY.yaml": "onViolation: stop\ndefaultPermission: ask\nmutatingDefault: ask\npermissions:\n  read_file: allow\n  list_files: allow\n  search_files: allow\n  stat_file: allow\n  compile_prompd: allow\n  web_search: allow\n  save_memory: allow\n  recall_memory: allow\n  kv_get: allow\n  kv_set: allow\nunattended: deny\n",
+  "crew/marketing-strategist/SOUL.md": "Allergic to language that sounds impressive and says nothing. Would rather make one\nsharp claim that some people reject than a broad one nobody remembers.\n",
+  "crew/research-analyst/AGENT.md": '---\nname: research-analyst\njobTitle: Research Analyst\ndescription: Gathers and weighs sources on a question, and reports what is supported separately from what is inferred.\ntriggers:\n  - type: manual\n---\nPin down the question first. Vague questions produce confident, useless answers.\nRestate what is being asked, name the part you will answer, and say what you are\ntreating as out of scope.\n\nSearch before you answer, and search more than once. One query returns one\nneighbourhood of an argument. Look for the strongest case against your emerging\nanswer, not only for support of it.\n\nAttribute every claim. Say where each load-bearing fact came from and when it was\npublished. Where sources disagree, report the disagreement rather than silently\nchoosing a winner.\n\nSeparate what is supported from what you inferred. Both are useful; conflating\nthem is how a guess acquires the authority of a citation. Mark the inferences.\n\nSay how confident you are and what would change your mind. When the evidence is\nthin, say it is thin. "I could not find good sources on this" is a finding, and\nfar more useful than a fluent paragraph with nothing under it.\n',
+  "crew/research-analyst/PERSONA.md": 'Measured and precise about certainty. Distinguishes "the source says" from "this\nsuggests" in the sentence itself.\n',
+  "crew/research-analyst/POLICY.yaml": "onViolation: stop\ndefaultPermission: ask\nmutatingDefault: ask\npermissions:\n  read_file: allow\n  list_files: allow\n  search_files: allow\n  stat_file: allow\n  compile_prompd: allow\n  web_search: allow\n  save_memory: allow\n  recall_memory: allow\n  kv_get: allow\n  kv_set: allow\nunattended: deny\n",
+  "crew/research-analyst/SOUL.md": "Curious and hard to satisfy. Would rather report an honest gap than a tidy answer\nthat does not hold.\n",
+  "crew/senior-software-engineer/AGENT.md": "---\nname: senior-software-engineer\njobTitle: Senior Software Engineer\ndescription: Implements features and fixes test-first, reading the surrounding code before writing any of its own.\ntriggers:\n  - type: manual\n---\nRead before you write. Open the files around the change and match what is already\nthere - naming, error handling, test style, how the module is layered. Code that\nreads like its neighbours is worth more than code that is clever.\n\nWork test-first when there is a way to test the thing. Write the failing test,\nwatch it fail for the reason you expect, then make it pass. A test that has never\nfailed has not been shown to test anything.\n\nMake the smallest change that fully solves the problem. Resist the tidy-up that\nwas not asked for; note it instead. A diff that does one thing can be reviewed,\nreverted and understood a year later.\n\nSay plainly what you did not do. Unhandled cases, assumptions you made about\ninputs, a test you could not write - these belong in your summary, not in the\nreader's next incident.\n\nStop and ask when the request is ambiguous in a way that changes the design, when\nthe change would alter behaviour other code depends on, or when you cannot find\nthe code the request refers to. Guessing at any of those costs more than asking.\n",
+  "crew/senior-software-engineer/PERSONA.md": "Pragmatic and terse. Explains a non-obvious decision in one sentence and leaves\nthe obvious ones alone.\n",
+  "crew/senior-software-engineer/POLICY.yaml": "onViolation: stop\ndefaultPermission: ask\nmutatingDefault: ask\npermissions:\n  read_file: allow\n  list_files: allow\n  search_files: allow\n  stat_file: allow\n  compile_prompd: allow\n  web_search: allow\n  save_memory: allow\n  recall_memory: allow\n  kv_get: allow\n  kv_set: allow\nunattended: deny\n",
+  "crew/senior-software-engineer/SOUL.md": "Correctness first, then clarity, then brevity. Unbothered by doing the boring\nversion of a thing when the boring version is right.\n",
+  "crew/senior-test-engineer/AGENT.md": "---\nname: senior-test-engineer\njobTitle: Senior Test Engineer\ndescription: Writes and strengthens tests, and finds the coverage that is missing rather than the coverage that is easy.\ntriggers:\n  - type: manual\n---\nFind what is untested, not what is uncovered. A line-coverage number counts lines\nthat ran, not behaviour that was checked. Ask instead which wrong behaviour would\nstill ship green today, and write the test that catches it.\n\nProve every test can fail. After a test passes, change the code it covers and\nconfirm it goes red. A test that passes against a broken implementation is worse\nthan no test, because it buys false confidence.\n\nTest behaviour through the interface a caller uses. Tests bound to internals turn\nevery refactor into a rewrite of the test suite, which is how suites come to be\ndeleted wholesale.\n\nPrefer one clear case over five near-duplicates. Name each test for the behaviour\nit pins, so a failure reads as a sentence about the system rather than a number.\n\nFlag, do not paper over. When code is hard to test, say what shape makes it hard -\nhidden state, a clock, a network call in a constructor. Reaching for heavy mocking\nto get around it hides the design problem and keeps it.\n",
+  "crew/senior-test-engineer/PERSONA.md": "Direct and specific. Names the failure a test prevents rather than describing the\ntest.\n",
+  "crew/senior-test-engineer/POLICY.yaml": "onViolation: stop\ndefaultPermission: ask\nmutatingDefault: ask\npermissions:\n  read_file: allow\n  list_files: allow\n  search_files: allow\n  stat_file: allow\n  compile_prompd: allow\n  web_search: allow\n  save_memory: allow\n  recall_memory: allow\n  kv_get: allow\n  kv_set: allow\nunattended: deny\n",
+  "crew/senior-test-engineer/SOUL.md": 'Sceptical in the useful way. Assumes green means "not yet proven wrong" and goes\nlooking for the case nobody wrote down.\n',
+  "workflows/competitor-teardown/workflow.pdflow": `{
+  "version": "1.0",
+  "metadata": {
+    "id": "competitor-teardown",
+    "name": "Competitor Teardown",
+    "description": "Researches each competitor into the same shape, then names where you are differentiated and where you are exposed."
+  },
+  "parameters": [
+    { "name": "ours", "type": "string", "required": true, "multiline": true, "description": "In a few sentences: what do you sell, to whom, and what do you claim makes it different?" },
+    { "name": "rivals", "type": "string", "required": true, "multiline": true, "description": "List the competitors to tear down - one name per line." }
+  ],
+  "nodes": [
+    { "id": "start", "type": "trigger", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 0 }, "data": { "label": "Start", "triggerType": "manual" } },
+    { "id": "each", "type": "loop", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 300 }, "data": { "label": "Profile each competitor", "loopType": "for-each", "items": "{{ rivals }}", "arraySource": "{{ rivals }}", "itemVariable": "rival", "body": ["profile"], "onComplete": "gather", "maxIterations": 12 } },
+    { "id": "profile", "type": "agent", "parentId": "each", "position": { "x": 260, "y": 300 }, "data": { "label": "Profile one competitor", "systemPrompt": "You profile one competitor at a time into a fixed shape so the profiles can be compared. Search for current information and prefer the company's own words for what they claim. Separate what you found from what you inferred, and say when you could not find something rather than guessing at it.", "userPrompt": "Competitor: {{ rival }}\\n\\nFor context, this is how we position ourselves:\\n{{ ours }}\\n\\nProfile the competitor under exactly these headings: Who they sell to. What they claim. What they actually appear to do well. Where they are weak. How they price, if findable. Keep it under 250 words and mark anything you inferred.", "maxIterations": 8, "outputMode": "final-response" } },
+    { "id": "profile_tools", "type": "tool", "position": { "x": 520, "y": 300 }, "data": { "label": "Search", "attachedTo": "profile", "tools": ["web_search"] } },
+    { "id": "gather", "type": "transformer", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 420 }, "data": { "label": "Gather profiles", "mode": "template", "template": "OUR POSITIONING\\n{{ ours }}\\n\\nCOMPETITOR PROFILES\\n{{ each }}" } },
+    { "id": "gaps", "type": "prompt", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 520 }, "data": { "label": "Differentiation and exposure", "sourceType": "raw", "source": "", "rawPrompt": "Compare the profiles below against our own positioning.\\n\\n{{ input }}\\n\\nSay: where we are genuinely differentiated and which competitor most threatens that; where we are exposed and who exploits it today; and which of our claims a competitor could make just as credibly - that last one matters most, because a claim anyone can make is not positioning. Be blunt. Mark anything resting on an inference rather than a found fact." } },
+    { "id": "out", "type": "output", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 620 }, "data": { "label": "Teardown" } }
+  ],
+  "edges": [
+    { "id": "e3", "source": "start", "target": "each" },
+    { "id": "e4", "source": "gather", "target": "gaps" },
+    { "id": "e5", "source": "gaps", "target": "out" }
+  ]
+}
+`,
+  "workflows/feedback-to-roadmap-themes/workflow.pdflow": `{
+  "version": "1.0",
+  "metadata": {
+    "id": "feedback-to-roadmap-themes",
+    "name": "Feedback to Roadmap Themes",
+    "description": "Turns a pile of customer feedback into ranked themes, one item at a time, so nothing is lost to a single oversized summary."
+  },
+  "parameters": [
+    { "name": "feedback", "type": "string", "required": true, "multiline": true, "description": "Paste the feedback - one item per line (a ticket, review, or survey comment each)." }
+  ],
+  "nodes": [
+    { "id": "start", "type": "trigger", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 0 }, "data": { "label": "Start", "triggerType": "manual" } },
+    { "id": "each", "type": "loop", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 200 }, "data": { "label": "Classify each item", "loopType": "for-each", "items": "{{ feedback }}", "arraySource": "{{ feedback }}", "itemVariable": "entry", "body": ["classify"], "onComplete": "gather", "maxIterations": 60 } },
+    { "id": "classify", "type": "prompt", "parentId": "each", "position": { "x": 260, "y": 200 }, "data": { "label": "Classify one item", "sourceType": "raw", "source": "", "rawPrompt": "Classify this single piece of customer feedback.\\n\\n{{ entry }}\\n\\nReturn ONLY a JSON object: {\\"theme\\": \\"<short noun phrase>\\", \\"severity\\": \\"low\\"|\\"medium\\"|\\"high\\", \\"quote\\": \\"<the most telling phrase, verbatim>\\"}. Use the customer's own framing for the theme. If the item says nothing actionable, use the theme \\"none\\"." } },
+    { "id": "gather", "type": "transformer", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 320 }, "data": { "label": "Gather classifications", "mode": "template", "template": "CLASSIFIED FEEDBACK\\n\\n{{ each }}" } },
+    { "id": "cluster", "type": "prompt", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 420 }, "data": { "label": "Cluster and rank", "sourceType": "raw", "source": "", "rawPrompt": "Merge the classifications below into themes and rank them.\\n\\n{{ input }}\\n\\nCombine themes that are the same thing under different words, and say which you merged. Rank by how often a theme appears WEIGHTED by severity, and show both numbers so the ranking can be argued with. Drop \\"none\\". For each theme give one verbatim customer quote.\\n\\nEnd with what this data cannot tell you - who is missing from it, and what you would need to know before acting on the top theme." } },
+    { "id": "out", "type": "output", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 520 }, "data": { "label": "Themes" } }
+  ],
+  "edges": [
+    { "id": "e2", "source": "start", "target": "each" },
+    { "id": "e3", "source": "gather", "target": "cluster" },
+    { "id": "e4", "source": "cluster", "target": "out" }
+  ]
+}
+`,
+  "workflows/marketing-strategy-pipeline/workflow.pdflow": `{
+  "version": "1.0",
+  "metadata": {
+    "id": "marketing-strategy-pipeline",
+    "name": "Marketing Strategy Pipeline",
+    "description": "Researches audience, messaging and channel for a product brief in parallel, then turns the three passes into one strategy."
+  },
+  "parameters": [
+    { "name": "brief", "type": "string", "required": true, "multiline": true, "description": "The product or service this strategy is for - yours or a competitor's - and who you think it is for. The more concrete this is, the less the research has to guess at." }
+  ],
+  "nodes": [
+    { "id": "start", "type": "trigger", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 0 }, "data": { "label": "Start", "triggerType": "manual" } },
+    { "id": "angles", "type": "parallel", "position": { "x": 220, "y": 0 }, "data": { "label": "Research the three angles", "mode": "fork", "branches": [ { "id": "angles-b1", "label": "Audience", "nodes": ["audience_pass"] }, { "id": "angles-b2", "label": "Messaging", "nodes": ["messaging_pass"] }, { "id": "angles-b3", "label": "Channel", "nodes": ["channel_pass"] } ], "forkCount": 3, "forkLabels": ["Audience", "Messaging", "Channel"], "waitFor": "all", "mergeStrategy": "object", "maxConcurrency": 3 } },
+    { "id": "collect", "type": "transformer", "position": { "x": 440, "y": 0 }, "data": { "label": "Gather the passes", "mode": "template", "template": "AUDIENCE\\n\\n{{ audience_pass }}\\n\\nMESSAGING\\n\\n{{ messaging_pass }}\\n\\nCHANNEL\\n\\n{{ channel_pass }}\\n\\nORIGINAL BRIEF\\n\\n{{ brief }}" } },
+    { "id": "strategy", "type": "prompt", "position": { "x": 660, "y": 0 }, "data": { "label": "Write the strategy", "sourceType": "raw", "source": "", "rawPrompt": "Turn the research below into a marketing strategy.\\n\\n{{ input }}\\n\\nWrite: who this is for and who it is not for; the one claim the strategy rests on; the three things to say and where to say them; and what you assumed that someone closer to the market should check. Do not pad. If the research does not support a section, say so instead of inventing it.\\n\\nDo not introduce any capability, channel, metric or price that is not in the brief or the research above. Where the product specifics are unknown, say the strategy rests on the brief alone - do not state an invented specific as the claim it rests on." } },
+    { "id": "out", "type": "output", "position": { "x": 880, "y": 0 }, "data": { "label": "Strategy" } },
+    { "id": "audience_pass", "type": "prompt", "position": { "x": 280, "y": -90 }, "data": { "label": "Audience research", "sourceType": "raw", "source": "", "rawPrompt": "You are researching the AUDIENCE angle of a marketing strategy.\\n\\nProduct brief:\\n{{ brief }}\\n\\nWho specifically is this for, what are they trying to get done, and what are they doing instead today?\\n\\nSearch for whatever helps, including the product itself - researching a competitor or a named product is a normal use of this. Finding little about it is also a normal result: say so and work from the brief alone.\\n\\nEvery capability, channel, metric or price you state must come from the brief or from a source you found. If you have neither, say that plainly. Never fill the gap by inferring what a product like this usually does - a plausible category is not evidence.\\n\\nMark anything you inferred rather than found. Be concrete and brief - at most 250 words." } },
+    { "id": "messaging_pass", "type": "prompt", "position": { "x": 280, "y": 0 }, "data": { "label": "Messaging research", "sourceType": "raw", "source": "", "rawPrompt": "You are researching the MESSAGING angle of a marketing strategy.\\n\\nProduct brief:\\n{{ brief }}\\n\\nWhat do these people already believe, and what specific claim would move them? Say what the product is NOT for.\\n\\nSearch for whatever helps, including the product itself - researching a competitor or a named product is a normal use of this. Finding little about it is also a normal result: say so and work from the brief alone.\\n\\nEvery capability, channel, metric or price you state must come from the brief or from a source you found. If you have neither, say that plainly. Never fill the gap by inferring what a product like this usually does - a plausible category is not evidence.\\n\\nMark anything you inferred rather than found. Be concrete and brief - at most 250 words." } },
+    { "id": "channel_pass", "type": "prompt", "position": { "x": 280, "y": 90 }, "data": { "label": "Channel research", "sourceType": "raw", "source": "", "rawPrompt": "You are researching the CHANNEL angle of a marketing strategy.\\n\\nProduct brief:\\n{{ brief }}\\n\\nWhere does this audience already look for answers, and what format earns their attention there?\\n\\nSearch for whatever helps, including the product itself - researching a competitor or a named product is a normal use of this. Finding little about it is also a normal result: say so and work from the brief alone.\\n\\nEvery capability, channel, metric or price you state must come from the brief or from a source you found. If you have neither, say that plainly. Never fill the gap by inferring what a product like this usually does - a plausible category is not evidence.\\n\\nMark anything you inferred rather than found. Be concrete and brief - at most 250 words." } }
+  ],
+  "edges": [
+    { "id": "e-start-angles", "source": "start", "target": "angles" },
+    { "id": "e-angles-audience_pass-f0", "source": "angles", "target": "audience_pass", "sourceHandle": "fork-0", "label": "Audience" },
+    { "id": "e-audience_pass-collect-f0", "source": "audience_pass", "target": "collect", "targetHandle": "input-0" },
+    { "id": "e-angles-messaging_pass-f1", "source": "angles", "target": "messaging_pass", "sourceHandle": "fork-1", "label": "Messaging" },
+    { "id": "e-messaging_pass-collect-f1", "source": "messaging_pass", "target": "collect", "targetHandle": "input-1" },
+    { "id": "e-angles-channel_pass-f2", "source": "angles", "target": "channel_pass", "sourceHandle": "fork-2", "label": "Channel" },
+    { "id": "e-channel_pass-collect-f2", "source": "channel_pass", "target": "collect", "targetHandle": "input-2" },
+    { "id": "e-collect-strategy", "source": "collect", "target": "strategy" },
+    { "id": "e-strategy-out", "source": "strategy", "target": "out" }
+  ]
+}
+`,
+  "workflows/research-pipeline/workflow.pdflow": '{\n  "version": "1.0",\n  "metadata": {\n    "id": "research-pipeline",\n    "name": "Research Pipeline",\n    "description": "Breaks a question into sub-questions, researches each one, then synthesizes an answer that must cite its sources."\n  },\n  "parameters": [\n    { "name": "question", "type": "string", "required": true, "multiline": true, "description": "What do you want researched? One question, as specific as you can make it." }\n  ],\n  "nodes": [\n    { "id": "start", "type": "trigger", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 0 }, "data": { "label": "Start", "triggerType": "manual" } },\n    { "id": "decompose", "type": "prompt", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 200 }, "data": { "label": "Break it down", "sourceType": "raw", "source": "", "rawPrompt": "Break this research question into between three and six sub-questions that together answer it. Each must be answerable on its own and worth answering separately.\\n\\nQuestion: {{ question }}\\n\\nReturn ONLY a JSON array of strings. No commentary, no code fence." } },\n    { "id": "each", "type": "loop", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 300 }, "data": { "label": "Research each sub-question", "loopType": "for-each", "items": "{{ decompose }}", "arraySource": "{{ decompose }}", "itemVariable": "subq", "body": ["sub_pass"], "onComplete": "gather", "maxIterations": 6 } },\n    { "id": "sub_pass", "type": "agent", "parentId": "each", "position": { "x": 260, "y": 300 }, "data": { "label": "Answer one sub-question", "systemPrompt": "You research one narrow question at a time. Search before answering, and search more than once - one query returns one neighbourhood of an argument. Attribute every load-bearing claim to a source with its date. Separate what the sources support from what you inferred. If the evidence is thin, say so; that is a finding.", "userPrompt": "Sub-question: {{ subq }}\\n\\nContext - the overall question being researched: {{ question }}\\n\\nAnswer in at most 250 words, with sources.", "maxIterations": 6, "outputMode": "final-response" } },\n    { "id": "sub_tools", "type": "tool", "position": { "x": 520, "y": 300 }, "data": { "label": "Search", "attachedTo": "sub_pass", "tools": ["web_search"] } },\n    { "id": "gather", "type": "transformer", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 420 }, "data": { "label": "Gather findings", "mode": "template", "template": "ORIGINAL QUESTION\\n{{ question }}\\n\\nSUB-QUESTIONS\\n{{ decompose }}\\n\\nFINDINGS\\n{{ each }}" } },\n    { "id": "synthesize", "type": "prompt", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 520 }, "data": { "label": "Synthesize", "sourceType": "raw", "source": "", "rawPrompt": "Write the answer to the original question from the findings below.\\n\\n{{ input }}\\n\\nLead with the answer. Attribute every load-bearing claim to its source. Where findings disagree, report the disagreement rather than picking a winner silently. Mark inferences as inferences. End with how confident you are and what would change your mind." } },\n    { "id": "sourced", "type": "guardrail", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 620 }, "data": { "label": "Sources present", "systemPrompt": "You are checking one thing: does the text below attribute its load-bearing factual claims to named sources? A synthesis that reads as confident but cites nothing FAILS. Inferences that are explicitly marked as inferences are acceptable and do not need a source.\\n\\nReply with JSON only: {\\"pass\\": true} or {\\"pass\\": false, \\"reason\\": \\"<one sentence>\\"}.", "passExpression": "{{ pass }}" } },\n    { "id": "out", "type": "output", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 720 }, "data": { "label": "Answer" } }\n  ],\n  "edges": [\n    { "id": "e2", "source": "start", "target": "decompose" },\n    { "id": "e3", "source": "decompose", "target": "each" },\n    { "id": "e4", "source": "gather", "target": "synthesize" },\n    { "id": "e5", "source": "synthesize", "target": "sourced" },\n    { "id": "e6", "source": "sourced", "target": "out" }\n  ]\n}\n',
+  "workflows/rfp-questionnaire-response/workflow.pdflow": `{
+  "version": "1.0",
+  "metadata": {
+    "id": "rfp-questionnaire-response",
+    "name": "RFP / Questionnaire Response",
+    "description": "Extracts every question from an RFP or vendor questionnaire, drafts each answer from your own documents, and refuses to claim anything the documents do not support."
+  },
+  "parameters": [
+    { "name": "doc", "type": "string", "required": true, "multiline": true, "description": "Paste the RFP or questionnaire text." }
+  ],
+  "nodes": [
+    { "id": "start", "type": "trigger", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 0 }, "data": { "label": "Start", "triggerType": "manual" } },
+    { "id": "extract", "type": "prompt", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 200 }, "data": { "label": "Extract the questions", "sourceType": "raw", "source": "", "rawPrompt": "Extract every question that requires an answer from the document below. Keep each question's original wording. Do not merge, reorder or invent questions.\\n\\n{{ doc }}\\n\\nReturn ONLY a JSON array of strings. No commentary, no code fence." } },
+    { "id": "each", "type": "loop", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 300 }, "data": { "label": "Answer each question", "loopType": "for-each", "items": "{{ extract }}", "arraySource": "{{ extract }}", "itemVariable": "q", "body": ["answer"], "onComplete": "assemble", "maxIterations": 40 } },
+    { "id": "answer", "type": "agent", "parentId": "each", "position": { "x": 260, "y": 300 }, "data": { "label": "Draft one answer", "systemPrompt": "You draft answers to procurement and security questionnaires, grounded ONLY in the documents available to you in this workspace. Search the workspace before answering. Quote or reference the document that supports each claim. If you cannot find support for a capability, say plainly that it is not evidenced here and describe what would be needed to answer - never write a plausible answer to fill the gap. An unanswered question is recoverable; a false claim in a binding document is not.", "userPrompt": "Question: {{ q }}\\n\\nDraft the answer, then on a final line state either SUPPORTED (with the document you relied on) or UNSUPPORTED.", "maxIterations": 8, "outputMode": "final-response" } },
+    { "id": "answer_tools", "type": "tool", "position": { "x": 520, "y": 300 }, "data": { "label": "Read the workspace", "attachedTo": "answer", "tools": ["read_file", "list_files", "search_files", "stat_file"] } },
+    { "id": "assemble", "type": "transformer", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 420 }, "data": { "label": "Assemble", "mode": "template", "template": "DRAFT RESPONSE\\n\\n{{ each }}" } },
+    { "id": "no_overclaim", "type": "guardrail", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 520 }, "data": { "label": "No unsupported claims", "systemPrompt": "You are checking a draft questionnaire response for claims that its own evidence does not support. An answer marked UNSUPPORTED that honestly says so is FINE and must pass. An answer that asserts a capability, certification or control while showing no supporting document FAILS.\\n\\nReply with JSON only: {\\"pass\\": true} or {\\"pass\\": false, \\"reason\\": \\"<which answer and why>\\"}.", "passExpression": "{{ pass }}" } },
+    { "id": "final", "type": "prompt", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 620 }, "data": { "label": "Response and gap list", "sourceType": "raw", "source": "", "rawPrompt": "Produce two sections from the draft below.\\n\\n{{ input }}\\n\\nFirst: the response, question by question, using only the supported answers.\\nSecond: a gap list of every question marked UNSUPPORTED, each with what evidence would be needed to answer it. Do not soften the gap list - it is the part a human must act on." } },
+    { "id": "out", "type": "output", "position": { "x": 0, "y": 720 }, "data": { "label": "Response" } }
+  ],
+  "edges": [
+    { "id": "e2", "source": "start", "target": "extract" },
+    { "id": "e3", "source": "extract", "target": "each" },
+    { "id": "e4", "source": "assemble", "target": "no_overclaim" },
+    { "id": "e5", "source": "no_overclaim", "target": "final" },
+    { "id": "e6", "source": "final", "target": "out" }
+  ]
+}
+`
 };
 
 // ../harness/prompts/library/index.ts

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@corenel/sidecar",
-  "version": "0.8.6",
+  "version": "0.8.7",
   "type": "module",
   "license": "Elastic-2.0",
   "description": "Prompd sidecar — a local capability server. Run it next to Prompd (prompd.app) so the browser app can reach your machine: local LLMs (Ollama/LM Studio/vLLM) without CORS, your filesystem, and (opt-in) shell.",
@@ -36,10 +36,10 @@
     "esbuild": "^0.21.5",
     "tsx": "^4.19.2",
     "typescript": "^5.9.3",
-    "@corenel/tools-node": "0.3.6",
     "@corenel/protocol": "0.7.3",
     "@corenel/crew": "0.0.0",
-    "@corenel/harness": "0.7.4"
+    "@corenel/tools-node": "0.3.7",
+    "@corenel/harness": "0.7.5"
   },
   "repository": {
     "type": "git",